DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads

If DW got in front of the media and simply stated "I have to play better."

"I will continue to work as hard as I can to improve."

People might respect that. But to say that expectations of the media are out of line. It pisses me off.

He was given the largest contract in history at that time guaranteed. The trade cost more than three first round picks.

Right DW there were expectations. 400 yards 4 tds? Please nobody expects that when you have never come closer to 300 yards.

Wake up DW look at what you have done in 4 years. How can this guy be in that kind of denial?

The end is near and no teams are going to be calling.

Well, that's some b.s.

And thanks a lot, Willie... couldn't you have just waited til 0-3 when full apathy set in before you told us that??

:-(

DW acts like he is living in a vacuum.

For him to address the media with a smirk on his face and say what he has said in two press conferences.

Demonstrates a complete lack of awareness.

He does not see what everyone else sees in 4k technicolor. Emotionally he is so insecure that he has built a defense mechanism where he feels unjustly persecuted.

I will feel much better once he is benched because it is not likely he will play again.

FYI: It appears that there is no insurance that covers 2026.

And Bone is spot on (again)...DW thinks he's practicing and playing well. Remarkable.

It isn't "anyone who ever used the term".

It was "contemptible to you". Well good for you.


While your superiority complex has never waned from the start.

You claim I lie with nothing to back that up. Your typical shtick.

I do care about finding cheap entertainment. I mean why pay for what you can find for free? And you certainly step up to the plate and provide it.


That's a great idea. In the past it has shown not to be good for your mental health. Taking good care of yourself is the most important thing you can do. I wish you well. See you next time around.

And you call things I write word salad.

If using a term means you are tied to everything said or committed by anyone else who ever used the term, you can essentially connect anything to any topic. Trying to tie the sexual predation to me was a contemptible act.

When I mentioned "Trump Derangement Syndrome," I explicitly stated that I find the term annoying. Yet, your actions tend to fit a semblance of that idea.

Unfortunately, you do seem to care because otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to lie so much. Your Dunning-Kruger also seems to be flaring up again because you don't actually "know exactly who and what you [we] are."

Projecting your meltdown doesn't really bother me. People have eyes, though most of them don't bother reading your words, so they're not going to see them anyways. I probably should stop quoting you so others don't have to be subjected to them when they've got you on ignore. I suppose that's rather inconsiderate of me.

Enjoy your imagined petty fiefdom. I'm gonna take a break from the boards for awhile. I don't think continuing to interact with you is worth my time, and I find too many of the posts here are yours.

Let him play until the wheel falls off the wagon.

The fact you and a few others spend more time on here coming after a random poster with no power or influence rather than the POTUS who says far more damaging things on a daily basis, wields his power and influence to rule by decree while circumventing congress, attacks, does anything in his power to damage and seek revenge against his political opponents and is attacking societal norms says more about you and those others than any reply I could use in response.

You priorities seem to be misguided.

That's a statement that someone with a severe case of Dunning-Kruger would say.


No, you do seem to fairly often be the one projecting things that you imagine to be certain while actually largely speculating.


Please do leave it up to me because then there'd be a lot fewer of your posts to try to wade through. I don't confuse my speculation with facts.

So you think who the very term you used was used by and tried to introduce it as a diagnosis into law is "unrelated to the topic"?

I understand. You seem to think you can just create made up scenarios with no basis in facts in topics to create some false sense of doubt that as of now doesn't even exist but something that actually involves a term you used in this discussion isn't. Brilliant!

But when I post a factual account concerning the very term you yourself used it's not related and contemptible.

I don't care what you and the trumpians on this board think because I know exactly who and what you are. Since you're the one who brought up being a contemptible hypocrite.

Your meltdown has officially left the launching pad. I hope it doesn't explode like a Space X Rocket the same way it has done in the past.

Yes, I find your intentionally "exaggerating" to create drama to be "pushing a narrative." Child sexual abuse is a term normal people don't use to push their agendas when it's clearly unrelated to the topic, yet that was your choice. There's nothing humorous about it.

To me, you're a contemptible hypocrite. I don't think I'm alone in that belief.

You do understand that the definition of the word "drivel" isn't things you can not defend, right?

I do at least have a coupe of vertebrae left.

See. This is how it works. I have no interest in dissecting you dissection of my post. I skimmed that crap and I'm moving on with my day.

And just so you know, I have a few people "on ignore". One in particular, just because they're so dumb I usually can't even make sense of their posts. That case is a "time vampire" ignore. Another would blame Trump if an asteroid hit the moon. That's an "off his rocker" ignore.

In your case, it's a necessary tool for navigating this space. I can easily see...

BullDawg

*ignore*

BullDawg

*ignore*

BullDawg

*ignore*

BullDawg

*ignore*

BullDawg

*ignore*

BullDawg

*ignore*

And know that is a waste of my time. I can be like "yep, he's reeling in another, glad I don't partake in that b.s. anymore".


In any case, I can decide whether the drivel is worth my attention before I take the time to even read it. When it's the usual b.s., it's not worth a glance.


But the fact that you post here 300 times a day and have some grand illusion that everyone is obligated to read your posts or you're more of a man than them pretty much says it all.

Now be a good dawg and get your last word. In fact, if you don't, you're a "spinless coward".

Trump Plans to Place Warning Signs Outside Smithsonian Accusing Museum of Biased View of U.S. History: Report

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum’s letter says visitors should be given additional context about the museum’s exhibits about the nation’s past

The Trump administration is moving forward with plans to place temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, adding a new chapter to the White House’s dispute with the institution over how American history should be portrayed.

The National Park Service is expected to install roughly a dozen signs outside the museum at an estimated cost of about $84,000, according to a Sept. 3 letter from Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to Sen. Jeff Merkley, obtained by The Atlantic.

The project follows President Donald Trump’s July executive order directing the administration to install temporary signage and exhibits connected to the museum.

In another letter to Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Burgum addressed questions surrounding Trump’s March 2025 executive order, titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.”

The order accused a nationwide “revisionist movement” of portraying the United States’ founding principles and major historical achievements in a negative way, arguing that such efforts diminish the country’s accomplishments, according to The New York Times.

The signs have not been finalized, and their exact wording remains unclear, the Times reported.

Burgum’s letter offers a preview of the administration’s intended approach. It says visitors should receive additional information about the exhibits before entering the museum, including context about the perspectives of Smithsonian officials and curators.

The administration has repeatedly accused the museum of presenting American history through an ideological lens. A White House report released earlier this year made similar allegations, arguing that certain exhibits and educational materials reflect political viewpoints rather than what the administration considers a straightforward account of the nation’s history.

The Smithsonian, for its part, has defended its approach as grounded in scholarship, accuracy and nonpartisanship.

National Museum of American History Director Anthea Hartig has told lawmakers that the museum does not take sides in contemporary political debates and instead seeks to preserve evidence of American life so visitors can form their own conclusions.

Burgum’s letter specifically highlights statements made by Hartig and former Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch. It also references museum exhibits and educational materials dealing with subjects including race, immigration and transgender Americans.

The administration’s criticism comes as Trump and his allies have pushed for broader changes across the Smithsonian.

If the plans proceed, visitors approaching the National Museum of American History could soon encounter government-funded signs offering a critical perspective on the museum before entering.

https://people.com/trump-plans-to-place-warning-signs-outside-smithsonian-museum-report-12124293

I wonder if a court stops the posting of these signs if he'll threaten to demolish the Smithsonian Institute as well?

I'm certain about the facts that are known. I'm not the one projecting anything and everything regardless of substance about anything I can imagine to create based solely on speculation.

I'll leave that part up to you since that seems to be your specialty.

I hope you don't give up your day job for a career in stand up comedy.

I posted what moved me and made a comment about it.

This is a discussion board. Where it goes is fair game and not up to me.

In life and in sports you can give everything you have to give and it may not be enough to impact the outcome. No matter if what you give is the very best.

Yes, that's the Dunning-Kruger effect. I'm not the one that constantly expresses certainty. Expressing doubt is admitting limited knowledge. On the other hand, expressing certainty with limited knowledge indicates overestimating one's competence.

I'm not the one that refuses to see things. I choose not to fixate on things that you want to focus on because there are other things to see and consider. I look at things from the perspective of what don't I know. You seem to always operate from the perspective of believing that you know all that you need to know.

Don't get me wrong, I have my biases. But this one isn't my modus operandi.

Most normal people call that having an opposing opinion until they wish to make the opposing opinion a target to blame the messenger. What you really mean is "people who share my politics" see it that way. It's pretty simple. Either you engage with people who have differing political views or you don't. You either participate in that or you don't. Your method seems to be ignore it all until the moment you wish to jump an and make insults then block me again. I'm not sure what the hell you call that. Does that even qualify for a participation trophy?


And then there are people who claim to have me blocked but somehow can't resist jumping into the foray to throw your own insults while pointing the finger at me for doing that. The fact of the matter is there is no defense for the things trump and this administration says or does. People such as yourself ignore it, refuse to comment on it and instead you even compared much of it as the same as "blowing your nose". But somehow you try to blame people like me for it. It's not my fault you refuse to step up to the plate and own it.


Once again, people on your side of politics aren't everyone. As long as we have posted on this board I had no idea you had a psychology degree or the qualifications to diagnose someone's thought process. I guess it really is true that you learn something new every day. So what do you call your refusal to call trump out for anything? What do you call trying to normalize his behavior by either ignoring it or shooting the messenger for posting it? I would certainly like your "expert diagnosis" on that one.

But I will give you one thing. Claiming it takes a spine to engage with those on which you disagree with is a huge overstatement. Just a couple of vertebrae would do the trick.

j/c...

I fail to see how a conversation about a beloved member of the team you root for...

Who is often mentioned as Mt Rushmore type talent...

Who is a first-ballot HOFer...

Who cried after playing what he saw as a "perfect game" because his team still got curb-stomped...

Wouldn't include subject matter about the philosophy of sports.

Maybe that's just me.

Or maybe it's really non of my business what people want to talk about or how the choose to participate.

So, I digress. Let this conversation get "back on topic" lol

The ramifications I feel you need to be concerned about...

GTHOH!

What is the infatuation with all the people that run around screaming "TRRRUMMMP!" all day constantly saying others are "upset"? It's weird.

I couldn't give to shizzles and a giggle.

You seem pretty upset though.

So, tell me, Mac. Could I bribe you for $24? Assuming you're already a millionaire, of course.

Fate...you seem to be upset by the fact that Donny Jr accepted the bribe from Putin via his favorite Oligarch...not a smart move by Jr..!

...the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, does it..?

He just makes it so easy to point out his hypocrisy that I find him at least mildly entertaining. It's cheap entertainment for sure but entertaining none the less. But that's generally the way things turn out when someone convinces themselves that they're the smartest guy in the room.