DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads

Nothing about you could ever make me feel inferior. You are actually cheap entertainment for me at this point.

Having some grandiose delusion that you are superior doesn't make it so.

And you're the one that brought the example of Jesus into the discussion. Not me. But then again this isn't the first time and I doubt it will be the last that you tried to use examples and points to bolster your position that you yourself don't even believe are true.

Gas Lighting 101 - Just in case you don't already know, it's possible to identify someone's superiority complex without feeling inferior. In fact the very fact that you can spot it probably infers that one doesn't feel inferior.

Yet that has been in no way what I have done or are doing. What I have shown you, unless you're totally ignoring it, is that trump did in fact try to strong arm Georgia Secretary of State into changing the election results. What I have shown you is the states this administration has targeted are only states trump has made baseless claims of election fraud in. That isn't saying you should trust anyone. It showing you why you shouldn't trust someone. That's a distinct difference.

And yes, everyone including the Heritage Foundation have failed to produce any evidence to even suggest any mass voter fraud is taking place. It's not some "random set of numbers" it's a cumulative totality of numbers from different sources. I realize that lacks DNA results but it's at least a very strong indication. Far more than you have seen anywhere else.

But the overall point in all of this isn't complicated. No matter which party is in charge of the federal government at any given point in time, what you're suggesting is that they should be trusted to oversee elections in all 50 states. That they should have the power, thus the ability to manipulate, control and set the parameters which could upset the balance of power over our entire nation.

And here's another point. I have never seen you advocate for allowing the federal government to have such control over the states before. Never have I see you think that power should be concentrated by one side to open the door wide to impact the will of the people as a whole.

You somehow seem to advocate that our entire election process be controlled by one central power. The power of the federal government. That's so far out of character for you it makes it obvious to me you are dong this out of being a contrarian rather than being based on anything close to your sincere or your honest beliefs.

Which isn't an accurate reflection of the conversation at all. But you're good at framing your response to try to make it look the way you want as opposed to how it is.


I agree with this completely.

How many participation trophies have you handed out in your lifetime?

Pro sports are ALL about winning. There is no other perceived value to the franchise, coaches, players or fans. That is all that matters.

Of course Joe is a winner, the person, which he got his personal super bowl trophy in the form of induction into the HOF. That is the individual form of winning... along with the other accolades he accumulated like All-Pro etc...

I was raised on traditional Irish music and I still enjoy and am moved by some of the fantastic,fantastic performers,that are mostly gone now.Lately I've been listening to Scottish groups.This is one of my favorites,wish to hell I could got my old ass to this show.

It's hard to have an honest conversation when one side is unwilling to reconsider their beliefs because they think those beliefs are facts.

Sometimes one has to try to say the same thing 4 or 5 different ways before it gets through to someone that doesn't want to accept a possibility. Uncertainty is uncomfortable, but it can be more honest than a hard held feeling of certainty.

I don't really see the humor in your attempt, but I'll grant the possibility that it is your intention.

I agree with the headline of the article. I just think overly focusing on Trump is the wrong approach to fixing it. I think the problems go deeper.

Liars do tend to get angry when called out for their lies.

You're the one that claims to believe in Jesus. I'm aware of his alleged actions, but no longer claim to be a follower/believer. My life would be much easier if I were still capable of that belief.

I can't help that I make you feel inferior.

Your problem seems to be that you don't recognize the truth. You only believe you do. I don't claim to know the truth of most things, but I can see your blatant lies.

I'm not the one saying I trust anything. I'm the one saying I don't blindly trust something else because someone else says they are trustworthy and threw together some numbers.

My problem is that you don't actually know what "this" is. You've got a bunch of lousy assumptions about data with its own questionable assumptions.

You're the one that keeps trying to misdirect by keeping your "nose" and attention permanently tied behind Trump while ignoring anyone that doesn't want to keep sniffing the foulness you seem to need to roll in to the exclusion of all else.

I left that thread after my last post, there is no real honest attempt at a conversation there, each party has said the same thing 4 or 5 times at least... possibly a whole lot more. Dead horse beaten savagely to death.

I find your rush to judgement and your attempt to pigeonhole others in this instance to be little more than an effort to score points — more of a "gotcha" statement than an argument of substance. (this is intended to be light hearted humor rather than starting a fight)

"beholden to "crazed" liberal interests" = THE CONSTITUTION

I don't have to paint anything. You admitted it. Or did you forget? That's why you're being so defensive.


It it is hard not to get angry when you do that.


To turn a phrase of Lloyd Bentsen.... "I know Jesus. Jesus is a friend of mine. Sir, you are no Jesus."


No, just your superiority complex.


I agree 100%. You really need to stop doing that. It isn't attractive.

Step back off the ledge. I'm becoming more worried for you by the hour.

I watched the interview with Ms. Beatty.

Trump is such a punk.

His behavior is like a child brat. Astounding that someone like him is president.

I find your complaining about not paying attention to what people say because of who they are ironic. I posted this in the mail in ballot thread not very long ago: link

Trump lashes out at Supreme Court justices, saying his appointees ‘are not the people I interviewed’

President Donald Trump upbraided Supreme Court justices as "shells" beholden to "crazed" liberal interests in a lengthy online screed a day after the court blocked his plan to execute dramatic changes to mail-in voting ahead of the midterms.

"These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves," Trump wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday.

None of the justices Trump appointed to the court during his first term — Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch or Amy Coney Barrett — noted disagreement with the majority opinion blocking the mail-voting changes.

Two justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, said they would have allowed the rules to go into place.

Trump, furious at the decision, decried a number of other rulings handed down by the court that blocked aspects of his agenda. That includes rejections of his plans to limit birthright citizenship and enact sweeping tariffs.

He said the court was "costing the United States Trillions of Dollars with shockingly bad rulings that are of such magnitude that it won't be easily possible for our Country to recover or heal."

"It is a Court that will go down as having rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country's history," he wrote. "It is not easy for me to write this criticism of the United States Supreme Court - it will likely cost me dearly for years to come - but I feel it my obligation and duty, as President, to do so for the America we love!"

The Supreme Court did not respond to a request for comment on Trump's post.

Later Tuesday, Attorney General Todd Blanche said the administration would comply with the latest Supreme Court order, though didn't rule out trying to pursue changes to mail voting in the years before the 2028 presidential election.

"President Trump's efforts to make sure that we have free and fair elections are not going to stop just in November or after or thereafter. So I expect you're going to see that work continue," he said.

Blanche defended Trump's harsh criticism of the justices, describing the president as "very frustrated" by the ruling.

"He has every right, and indeed he should communicate his concerns with the Supreme Court whenever he has them. This isn't the first time that he's done it, and it won't be the last," Blanche said.

Despite Trump's protestations, the Supreme Court has handed him significant wins, including a 2024 ruling that found presidents have broad criminal immunity for official acts.

The court also recently allowed construction to continue on Trump's White House ballroom project after preservationists sued to have the work halted.

Still, Trump has grown disillusioned with the conservative justices he appointed that have not ruled in his favor during his second term.

"The Supreme Court has really let our Country down!" he wrote Tuesday. "Certain Justices are petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats, and are totally unable to show the courage necessary to save our America."

By comparison, he praised Alito and Thomas — the two most reliable votes for upholding his agenda — as "legends."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/trump-lashes-supreme-court-justices-140142780.html

As per usual we have trump throwing his typical temper tantrum because the SCOTUS didn't bow at his feet and follow his demands and in this case he has his AG Todd Blanche supporting his temper tantrum and attacking the highest court in the land. Let me guess, it's the people who point such things out that's the problem?

Righteous anger towards a pathetic liar isn't a melt down. I'm sure you'll feel free to keep trying to paint things as you will. Even Jesus flipped tables on moneychangers at the temple. Some actions of people deserve to be castigated vigorously. I consider yours frequently to be those sorts of situations.

I suppose, to you, that's my god complex showing

Not everyone should be a sniveling lickspittle that tries to twist the truth, nor be willing to ignore it when someone else does.

You are creating an example that doesn't exist here. On January 2, 2021, President Donald Trump called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to pressure him to overturn the state's 2020 election results. The only states targeted in all of this are states where trump himself has accused them of cheating because he lost in those states.

None of this is anything close to what you're making it out to be. Misdirection can be a thing of beauty when applied correctly, but not here.

Saying you trust a single party whose leader has already shown he is willing to go to almost any length to change the election results makes no sense.

I agree with everything you posted with one exception. That's about talking to a college players coach. I've never heard of a college coach who does not support and heavily pimp his players going into the draft. I'm sure there are probably some cases to the contrary but it would certainly be very rare.

There are different reasons for that but mainly it involves recruiting. Players who have NFL aspirations want to know their coaches will promote them. They want to know that doesn't end as they go into the NFL draft. Players want to know if you give your all to your coach he will give his all back to you. There is also the angle that having your players drafted higher in the draft is a feather in your cap and lends itself to recruiting better players if you can show them just how successful your players are in being drafted into the NFL. I feel talking to a players college coach may be the least valuable tool in scouting a college player due to those factors.

I have concerns about this federal government interfering. Yet, I also feel we should have a better government that should be able to look for malfeasance. Instead of a blanket ruling that the federal government can't look, I think setting a framework where this and future (hopefully, as unlikely as it may seem) better governments can look with guardrails in place to prevent their manipulation would be a better precedent to set.

Trusting the States/Courts because you don't trust the Feds seems a bad basis for trust to me. The whole "no" evidence argument bothers me because it seems to assume that criminals are stupid and just purposefully leave a plethora of evidence out in the open. Unfortunately, our government institutions appear to be full of sophisticated criminals that are good, to varying degrees, at hiding their tracks. If instead of assuming those creating the records/"evidence" with regards to voting are good you allow the possibility that they are creating the records dishonestly in the first place, it would make the difficulty of finding evidence of fraud expected.

Sports in and of itself is predicated on winners and losers. That's the subject matter.

It's not a topic about life in general or some philosophical discussion. Focus.

On one hand, I sympathize with Joe. On the other, it reminds me what a messed up outlook modern society has towards winning. Some things can't be won no matter what an individual does. Yet, "winning" is how too many things are measured. We put too much emphasis on an end result that is out of anyone's control instead of focusing on how people act while trying to get there. Some groups start with more resources and are more likely to be able to win. The illusion of parity, and the, perhaps, not quite wholesale lie that anyone can win if they are just willing to sacrifice everything, is a terrible burden people allow themselves to carry. Sometimes there simply is no winning because factors outside your control are stacked against you. Just the underlying assumptions we have about what winning is at times seem problematic.

Living the best you can is the only "winning" you have any control over. Unfortunately, I think how we define that best can be flawed, and what we consider winning certainly can have its own issues.

Joe's a winner in my book.

His dedication and sense of honor is becoming more and more rare these days. The world could use a lot more people like Joe Thomas and a lot less people like Deshaun Watson.

Football was a lot more to Joe Thomas than just a paycheck. Thanks for posting this bone.

I certainly agree with this...............


If there were perfect examples and air tight methods to identify the best QB's in every draft there wouldn't be nearly as many first round QB busts. All you can do is look at how they preform under pressure and their skill set then try to decide how that will transfer in the NFL.

I agree Floquinho, it is nearly impossible to know who has leadership qualities and who doesn't. The only thing they can go on is interviews in most cases, both with the coaches and when doing background. Being a part of multiple successful teams though, would be a more positive view from the outside looking in, than say someone who calls out their team publicly, calls out ownership publicly and refuses to play publicly until his contract status changes... That is Watson's background. I wouldn't use him as any type of example of possessing any leadership qualities. I have seen him blame outside sources for failure.

There are no guarantees that a player even remains a leader when taking them from one environment of winning and planting them in the middle of a losing environment.

Leadership is typically a trait that is instilled in someone and follows them from program to program. It isn't usually difficult to find the quality discussed by coaches and peers. By all accounts, all the players that I listed have had great reports of being a part of the success, not just someone hanging around and enjoying the success. I don't know a lot about the coaches, admittedly, but the players were pretty easy to find positive praise on.

I apologize, I don't understand the Lex Watson reference. I also don't understand if you are saying Berry is on the podium as a leader or if you don't think he has shown any qualities to this point to justify having faith in him. I'm a little confused there.


The naked eye test shows that Monken was not able to get a team ready for their week 1 contest. That to me shows a lack of leadership. Can he redeem himself? Obviously, but all I can go on is what I see in the games played and as of right now, the first shovel has been thrust into the ground.