ESPN leftist Kellerman says NFL (and all sports) inject politics into sports
- Thread starter 11NCs
- Start date
I'm surprised by the number of people who complain about ESPN but who still seem to always find themselves watching ESPN.
I'm surprised anyone actually cared about what she said.
Yeah..... hard to not see when she was holding the severed bloody head of the President during a staged photop.
Yeah..... hard to not see when she was holding the severed bloody head of the President during a staged photop.
I guess I don't go out of my way to see what Kathy Griffin is doing. Maybe you can update me next time.
ESPN didn't make anyone stand, but the whole country was going to know if you didn't. Funny how that impacted some player's resolve.
One doesn't need to watch ESPN to hear about what one their leftists did or said. If there's a game on that station, I'll watch, if not, no thanks. It's become an unwatchable station and even the games are tough to take when the commentators inject their liberal, blowhard opinions. What used to be an amazing station has turned into the sports arm of the liberal media. F ESPN!
Why would you care about what is said on a network that you rarely watch?
Did you also notice they hired Will Cain, a conservative? I think they were trying to make a move to appease the right leaning crowd.....
http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/espn-retains-will-cain-contributor-tv-radio.html
Why do I care? Dumb question. I guess you have to be a regular watcher of a channel to have an opinion on what one of the channel's commentators said? Am I only allowed to opine on commentators of stations that I watch? Ftr, I didn't see the piece where Kellerman said what he said, since I don't watch ESPN other than games they broadcast, but there's this remarkable thing called social media that made me aware of it & I commented on it. Like I said before, dumb question.
Not a dumb question at all. I'm just surprised that people let something that they don't watch affect them enough to bitch about it.
I would say, however, that if you are going to opine on what a commentator says, you probably should watch it just to make sure you get the quote in full context and understand what he's saying.
No, it's a dumb question w/o a doubt. W/ your logic, you can only opine on something that you watch or listen to regularly. If you saw or heard what was said but don't watch the station where it was said, then you can't form an opinion? That's stupid. Par for the course w/ you.
I didn't say "regularly"--though I am surprised that so many people are bothered by something they don't watch or hear personally. Furthermore, as I noted earlier, if you're going to be bothered by a snippet of a quote, you probably should hear the entire thing in its full context to make sure you're aware of why it was said.
When Scalia died, for example, I heard from the left plenty of snippets of things he said in opinions that - taken by themselves - sounded terrible, but if you took them in the context of the full paragraph or opinion, weren't intended the way they were taken. Our 140-character way of speaking does too much of that.
If you're aggravated enough by something to call someone "stupid", maybe you should spend some time away from the computer.
Those poor white men. When will they ever catch a break?
Aggravated? Who's aggravated? I just responded to a post you made about not being able to form an opinion because a person doesn't tune into the station where it was said. That's dumb. If you wanna see aggravated, just take a look at the left since the election. Aggravated doesn't begin to tell the story. They're unhinged, like you.
What is surprising is she continues to get a platform for her hate.
So why do we play the national anthem before sporting events? I think it dates to the McCarthy era when there was also pressure on the Cincinnati Reds to change their names. Why do we have fighter jets flying over football stadiums before games? Why do football teams wear camouflage uniforms? It's a great military recruiting tool, that's why.
Why do you give flying f--- if someone one stands or sits or lies down or the national anthem. It's still a free country -- at least until the right wing completes its coup.
For what it's worth - and candidly - I do plenty of bitching myself; I just generally (and often unsuccessfully) try to avoid bitching about things that I feel I can control.
It seems to be a recurring theme on this board to complain about what 'some guy' said, whether it's Colin Cowherd, Paul Finebaum, or someone else. When there are so many options available to people for consumption of media (including the option to refrain from consuming), I'm surprised that people ever care about things they can easily avoid and that really have no influence on anything.
Because its a network that many used to enjoy watching....and now what's being said has ruined it, and thus taken away something that many people enjoy.
Your argument is "who cares if we destroyed something great, now that it's destroyed you won't use it anymore....so you shouldn't care what state it's in since you're no longer using it"
Basically, your logic is incredibly circular making your point monumentally stupid
So we can use condescending tone to dismiss racism/sexism now?
Interesting...
Although, I'm pretty sure your dismissal of racism actually makes you racist/sexist......and as we've learned from the left, that means we can now ignore everything you ever say and shout nothingness at you.
Sorry in advance for your loss of a voice/opinion, due to your racism/sexism.
No one has tried to say that people don't have the legal right to sit/kneel during the anthem (at least no one credible).
People have simply used their own right to free speech to critize the mind-numbing stupidity of multi-millionaires doing so as a criticism that the system that made them multi-millionaires (despite minimal useful contributions to society) is so "unfair"
There is no legal discussion here, or "free country" (1st Amendment) issue.....just a debate on whether some types of actions are morally/socially acceptable.
The fact that Kapernick and ESPN are both losing MASSIVE amounts of money, at least partly due to their ridiculous political beliefs/expressions, is not a legal issue.
Oh no, I would never dismiss racism or sexism! Particularly when it's directed toward white men. Those poor white men have suffered enough! When will it stop?!
*Shrug*. Things change. I'm guessing people find themselves watching less ESPN not necessarily for political reasons, but (i) because shows such as First Take have very little, if any, value besides 'entertainment' (which is questionable), (ii) SportsCenter's monopoly on sports news and highlights has been broken due to the many different avenues people can get news and highlights now, and (iii) more people are cutting the cord on cable.
Gotcha.
So it is in fact cool to dismiss racism and sexism. Interesting.
And even further, we can now pick which races/sexes are protected and which ones aren't. Even more interesting. (and more racist/sexist)
Is the entire left as racist/sexist as you?
Or are you some kind of outlier?
It's due to a large number of factors, just like all other major corporate free-falls.
But the attempt to force-feed leftist BS to an audience that largely doesn't want to hear it has certainly played a part in ESPN's financial bloodbath
(for example, it was a major part of the reason I personally no longer wanted to watch much ESPN and thus chose to cut the cord)
You can try to dismiss it now with "shrug" and "it was probably mainly other issues".......but your argument has been thoroughly debunked.
Many people who don't currently watch much ESPN care about ESPN's sprint left and force-feeding of leftist views because it ruined a channel that they would otherwise watch (and used to do so), and that has played a major role in ESPN's financial downturn.
Just accept your circular argument was BS and stupid, retract it....and then continue on with whatever non-BS/stupid points you may have (if any)
I have no idea why you're so angry and confrontational, but whatever. I don't think I've said anything personally offensive to you, but I suppose everyone now feels empowered to have a lack of civility online. Congrats, bud.
No way, no how! But you know what IS cool?
You know what's interesting from your last post? You assume I am liberal simply because I implied white men weren't oppressed. Does that mean that ALL conservatives believe white men are discriminated against, or were you just taking a guess?
He's an angry little fella. And an oppressed victim, to boot. Hell of a combination.
I'm not angry.
Sorry that my dismantling of your BS hurt your feelings....though that seems to be a common problem with libs today.
But I like how you're attempting to switch the topic away from your debunked BS.
Solid effort.
In the future, try to stay on topic, otherwise you make the fact that you're way out of your depth too obvious.
No way, no how! But you know what IS cool?
You know what's interesting from your last post? You assume I am liberal simply because I implied white men weren't oppressed. Does that mean that ALL conservatives believe white men are discriminated against, or were you just taking a guess?
Where are you getting that I assume you're liberal based on that?
(because in reality, I've based it on the totality of your posting over the years)
Sorry to have to debunk another one of your BS claims...though I'm sure you're used to it by now.
I do like how you're sneaking a little of your racism into every post though. Pretty pathetic on your part (racist), but also amusing
