There we go

killacross
Posts: 607
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:00 am
Location: NC, USA

Re: There we go

Post by killacross » Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:01 pm

said like a true bigot

HAoh IS LiterALLly HitLER!! Let's punch that Nazi in the face!!

...but don't listen to me...I identify as super straight
..which btw, watching Community with my wife -- that show is hilarious because their satire has become reality (the latest episode we watched...the dean has to come out as openly gay. The dean says that gay is only like 2/7ths of how he identifies)

..so I told my wife that he would be called Pansexual today. She didn't believe me. I told her she's a bigot and is literally worst than hitler...

Digital Masta
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta » Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:24 pm

Haohmaru wrote:
Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:25 pm
Who gives a fuck who or what they like to fuck. People are so obsessed with owning a title. Like who gives a fuck.
People are really going nuts over this.
As if they've been living under communist law their whole life with no identity.
No I want to be addressed as her/that/him/slut. Come the fuck on. You're either a male or female. I can somewhat understand transsexuals wanting to be called the gender they changed into, but the rest is just so unnecessarily confusing.
Image


I kid people...I kid.
killacross wrote:
Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:24 pm


**EDIT**

So now Sophie Turner is bi? The girl who just got married like a year ago...and just had a child?
...Hollywood and all it's virtue signaling
Sophie just giving lesbians all over the world hope and she's letting everyone know that Joe Jonas maybe isn't getting the job done...if ya know what I mean. Though the timing is really bad and can only really be seen as virtual signaling.

Pride month is always quite the month mainly because of all the damn pandering. Companies be super gay for a month.

killacross
Posts: 607
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:00 am
Location: NC, USA

Re: There we go

Post by killacross » Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:32 pm

THAT explains my LinkedIn profile with all the damn rainbows
... I'm out of the loop

Digital Masta
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta » Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:05 am

killacross wrote:
Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:32 pm
THAT explains my LinkedIn profile with all the damn rainbows
... I'm out of the loop
Image

xandorxerxes
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes » Sat Jun 05, 2021 5:14 am

killacross wrote:
Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:01 pm
said like a true bigot

HAoh IS LiterALLly HitLER!! Let's punch that Nazi in the face!!

...but don't listen to me...I identify as super straight
..which btw, watching Community with my wife -- that show is hilarious because their satire has become reality (the latest episode we watched...the dean has to come out as openly gay. The dean says that gay is only like 2/7ths of how he identifies)

..so I told my wife that he would be called Pansexual today. She didn't believe me. I told her she's a bigot and is literally worst than hitler...
I mean... that's literally what the "pan" prefix means. Why would she not believe that? Pan-American, Pangaea, pandemic...

Colep924
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:41 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Colep924 » Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:31 pm

killacross wrote:
Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:24 pm
Colep924 wrote:
Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:24 pm
You see, I know so little about stocks/investing that I have no idea what that sentence means. Lol

I actually recently hopped on the Dogecoin wave, nothing crazy $500, but that seems like it won’t end up being anything.
well...if you know nothing about stocks/investing...it perfectly explains why you would buy Dogecoin (or any cryptocurrency really) in the first place

...he's asking if you want to know about the different types of investing...different methodologies of investing...or if you are interested in a particular company's stock

**EDIT**

So now Sophie Turner is bi? The girl who just got married like a year ago...and just had a child?
...Hollywood and all it's virtue signaling
Like I said I hopped on the trend. And the way I saw it, if I lose $500 it means nothing, but if Doge does even an 8th of what Bitcoins done I’ll be sitting on a small fortune. I didn’t dump my savings so I thought of it as a calculated risk.

And I see, I guess for me right now the most important thing would understanding the different types of investment. I’ve bought into a Pharmaceutical company but haven’t seen much from that. And my method is as amateur as it gets I use Robinhood. I wanna learn how to read the market so I can stop taking advice from Youtubers, but I don’t have the time to take a class right now

Digital Masta
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta » Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:43 pm

Check out Chris Johnson's courses, they're cheap and my brothers are the ones that got me onto his stuff.

https://linktr.ee/chrissssjohnson

Haohmaru
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 4:13 am

Re: There we go

Post by Haohmaru » Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:14 pm

killacross wrote:
Fri Jun 04, 2021 7:01 pm
said like a true bigot

HAoh IS LiterALLly HitLER!! Let's punch that Nazi in the face!!

...but don't listen to me...I identify as super straight
..which btw, watching Community with my wife -- that show is hilarious because their satire has become reality (the latest episode we watched...the dean has to come out as openly gay. The dean says that gay is only like 2/7ths of how he identifies)

..so I told my wife that he would be called Pansexual today. She didn't believe me. I told her she's a bigot and is literally worst than hitler...
Hahahah what the hell is a pansexual? You get horny when you see see chefs cook the hot pan?

Bruh I'm just confused more than anything.

Cane_The9lives
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Cane_The9lives » Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:47 pm

The Daily Wire literally raised over a $100,000 just to troll AOC.

DW may be full of partisan hacks, but damn I can't help but tip my hat to that one. It's just too bad she didn't take the money, would have been hilarious if she had turned around and donated it to Trans Women of Color Collective or something.(although I think that might qualify as a misappropriation of funds).

Ultimately this was a stunt, and a stupid one at that. I don't feel sorry for that congressional dunce and the virtue signaling tweet that started this whole mess in the slightest, I feel sorry of the people who willingly forked over their money just to spite her.(then again, they're being refunded so I guess I don't)

Digital Masta
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta » Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:10 am

Cane_The9lives wrote:
Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:47 pm
The Daily Wire literally raised over a $100,000 just to troll AOC.

DW may be full of partisan hacks, but damn I can't help but tip my hat to that one. It's just too bad she didn't take the money, would have been hilarious if she had turned around and donated it to Trans Women of Color Collective or something.(although I think that might qualify as a misappropriation of funds).

Ultimately this was a stunt, and a stupid one at that. I don't feel sorry for that congressional dunce and the virtue signaling tweet that started this whole mess in the slightest, I feel sorry of the people who willingly forked over their money just to spite her.(then again, they're being refunded so I guess I don't)
I read this and just thought, why are you throwing shade at them?

I only listen to Ben's podcast and don't really look at their articles anymore but they are living by the principles of what they consider to be conservatism. That company doesn't try to pretend to be something it's not, they are openly conservative and you chose to use the pejorative of "hack" for what reason? Everything they do is through their conservative lens. I'll be the first to tell you that DW (and Ben Shapiro by extension) have some of the worst foreign policy views in you ask me. Especially when it comes to Israel which apparently can do no wrong whatsoever but anyway. The people in that company I'm sure make up varying levels of what is considered conservatism but that doesn't necessarily mean big R republican.

Yes, part of this looks to clearly be a stunt because who doesn't love to make the political genius AOC look ridiculous. But at the same time, it also allows them to help prove the fact that conservatives are more charitable than progressives plus show their own principles which is that when it comes to helping you go from your smallest group to the largest. Meaning family>community>local government>etc.

Assuming AOC was telling the truth about her grandmother it is indeed ridiculous for her to say that stuff while being in a position to help her and others. So DW reached out to their community and decided to not only troll AOC and make her and her kind look foolish but also get her grandmother some help if she really needs it. They proved one of their own principles, that you don't need the government to help. The minute this situation with her grandmother happened she could have raised the money herself to help grandma and others affected. It's even worse if what she said was true and she rejected the money because she'd rather not soil her image by taking money from those evil, racist Republicans. And you're insulting them and the people that donated?

That doesn't exactly make you look like the good guy.

Cane_The9lives
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Cane_The9lives » Sun Jun 06, 2021 3:44 am

Digital Masta wrote: I read this and just thought, why are you throwing shade at them?
Because conditional altruism is a warm blanket sprinkled with abrasive glass. It's petty, childish, smug, ill motivated and purposefully intended to antagonize and shame for purely political reasons.

Digital Masta wrote: Assuming AOC was telling the truth about her grandmother it is indeed ridiculous for her to say that stuff while being in a position to help her. So DW reached out to their community and decided to not only troll AOC and make her and her kind look foolish but also get her grandmother some help if she really needs it. They proved one of their own principles, that you don't need the government to help.
I don't quite remember this level of deep compassion exhibited by the charitable paragons over at the daily wire when Maria actually hit, but I could be wrong. AOC didn't give a shit either, she only uses it as a political bludgeon and I'm not criticizing the Daily wire for calling her out on her performative sympathies. But you're fooling yourself if you believe this wasn't primarily motivated by seething contempt and the indefatigable pursuit of the "Own the libs" philosophy. This is just my personal opinion(I do not expect nor demand anyone else to comport themselves similarly) but my first thought when I make the decision to help another person in need is not :How clever will this make me look? What slanted lesson can I impart upon the recipient? How much gratitude can I solicit from this person? etc...

If this sounds cynical, that's because this whole thing(sans the initial humor of it all) pretty much is; to its core.
Remove AOC from the equation and replace her with average Puerto Rican joe desolated by tragedy and let's see that Gofundme sprout the same wings. I have no doubt in the Daily Wire's ability to marshal its subscribers into action for good causes, they have an extremely loyal following and are continuing to grow at an exponential rate, and conservatives are indeed more generous than the so called "Libs" on an average per capita scale.

But bad faith is still bad faith, and this by my estimation was a prime example of it.
Don't misunderstand me, AOC comes out looking worse than anyone in this whole drama by being too proud to even accept the money(the comment about donating it to a Trans charity was a joke). She could have easily accepted the funds and allocated it to whatever cause she wanted related to the still ravaged country of Puerto Rico. Her desperate attempt to save face is as transparent as purified air and to reiterate--I have no sympathy for her other than perhaps her poor grandmother, who I'm sure is being fed all kinds of propagandized garbage about the people who raised money for her, albeit for intellectually dishonest reasons.
Digital Masta wrote: The minute this situation with her grandmother happened she could have raised the money herself to help grandma and others affected. It's even worse if what she said was true and she rejected the money because she'd rather not soil her image by taking money from those evil, racist Republicans. And you're insulting them and the people that donated?

That doesn't exactly make you look like the good guy.
Agree to the first, as to the second; I don't care how it makes me look I'm just being honest.

If you want, I can enumerate for you every hack on the left who elicits my annoyance on a daily basis as well, starting with Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, and Brian Stelter(the Trifecta of stupid). But honestly, I don't watch/listen enough of them to fully immerse myself in their inanity(and I think I'm happier for it). When I moved more towards the center, I started to gravitate to the right and expanded my horizons to conservatives, those who professed higher standards and principles and whose virtue supposedly spoke for itself. Unfortunately the people I like:Jonah Goldberg, David French, Noah Rothman, Coleman Hughes(A stretch, but noteworthy), George F. Will, Seth Mandel, Robby Soave(Libertarian-conservative), to name just a few..., don't always toe the party line, and are(to many of the Hardliners and Paleo-conservatives) utterly abhorrent(especially the first two).

Naturally this only amplifies my desire to listen to them more, a sort of Knee-jerk contrarian reaction, but the point is I have a preference for clear headed thinkers who don't default to a binary "Us VS Them" mentality, who try(But don't always succeed) not to impugn the motivations of those they disagree with(as I'm failing to do this very moment, but not entirely devoid of reasons mind you), and more specifically; don't get off on being mean, nasty, spiteful and egocentric. For fuck's sake, Greg Gutfield(funnier than the left says, but not nearly as much as he thinks) calls Tucker Carlson's show "Tucker Porn".

I understand completely what the Daily wire is, just as I understand fully what Vox is.
They cater to one select group, and that's fine, but it's not for me.
The primary difference however is Vox is toothless, they don't move the needle quite as effectively as the latter because the opinion sphere is owned completely by conservatives and it's not even close. And right now, grift is the course most widely consumed and contributes in no small part to the same division being perpetrated by the left.

So in summation, yes they're hacks, but that doesn't mean I don't agree with views they espouse, there's plenty of agreement in fact.
But when the left broke themselves, so did the right in response. Their hate fuels them now more than any higher loyalty to principle or cause, and that's practically indisputable at this point.

/End Rant.

xandorxerxes
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes » Sun Jun 06, 2021 5:53 am

Cane_The9lives wrote:
Sun Jun 06, 2021 3:44 am
If you want, I can enumerate for you every hack on the left who elicits my annoyance on a daily basis as well, starting with Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, and Brian Stelter(the Trifecta of stupid). But honestly, I don't watch/listen enough of them to fully immerse myself in their inanity(and I think I'm happier for it). When I moved more towards the center, I started to gravitate to the right and expanded my horizons to conservatives, those who professed higher standards and principles and whose virtue supposedly spoke for itself. Unfortunately the people I like:Jonah Goldberg, David French, Noah Rothman, Coleman Hughes(A stretch, but noteworthy), George F. Will, Seth Mandel, Robby Soave(Libertarian-conservative), to name just a few..., don't always toe the party line, and are(to many of the Hardliners and Paleo-conservatives) utterly abhorrent(especially the first two).

Naturally this only amplifies my desire to listen to them more, a sort of Knee-jerk contrarian reaction, but the point is I have a preference for clear headed thinkers who don't default to a binary "Us VS Them" mentality, who try(But don't always succeed) not to impugn the motivations of those they disagree with(as I'm failing to do this very moment, but not entirely devoid of reasons mind you), and more specifically; don't get off on being mean, nasty, spiteful and egocentric. For fuck's sake, Greg Gutfield(funnier than the left says, but not nearly as much as he thinks) calls Tucker Carlson's show "Tucker Porn".

I understand completely what the Daily wire is, just as I understand fully what Vox is.
They cater to one select group, and that's fine, but it's not for me.
The primary difference however is Vox is toothless, they don't move the needle quite as effectively as the latter because the opinion sphere is owned completely by and it's not even close. And right now, grift is the course most widely consumed and contributes in no small part to the same division being perpetrated by the left.

So in summation, yes they're hacks, but that doesn't mean I don't agree with views they espouse, there's plenty of agreement in fact.
But when the left broke themselves, so did the right in response. Their hate fuels them now more than any higher loyalty to principle or cause, and that's practically indisputable at this point.

/End Rant.
I don't get calling out the daily wire then supporting editors of the examiner and NR. Those aren't as bad as DW is, but they also distort reality to meet their bend (NR much more than WE). I'm talking beyond just partisan spin.

Maybe one day we as a country can achieve fact-based dialogue.

Cane_The9lives
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Cane_The9lives » Sun Jun 06, 2021 11:36 am

XanderXerxes wrote: I don't get calling out the daily wire then supporting editors of the examiner and NR. Those aren't as bad as DW is, but they also distort reality to meet their bend (NR much more than WE). I'm talking beyond just partisan spin.

Maybe one day we as a country can achieve fact-based dialogue.
I'm not some unique individual bereft of preference or bias, I have them like everyone else.

For me it's a matter of fairness and style, or more specifically the principle of "Fair willingness", because of course there's no such thing as absolute objectivity or impartiality. No one worth listening to or reading(from an editorial standpoint) is a strict "Just the facts ma'am" disinterested mono-pundit. "Fact based dialogue" is the ideal, but it will never rid itself completely from the specter of perspective, so I tend to prefer those who employ intellectual practices that meet the criteria of good faith punditry. I often differentiate between "Partisans", loosely defined as someone with bias (which we are all guilty of being on some level) and "Partisan hacks", a phase beyond ordinary natural bias that's both narrow and inflexible.

My metric for identifying these people is simple but far from scientific, more of a personal method than anything else.
It's represented by two questions the answers of which will determine(again by my preferences) which category you fall under I.e. "Partisan" or "Partisan hack":

1.Who do you piss off?
2. Do you criticize your preferred president?

If the answer to #1 is those opposite of your politics, you probably rarely if ever say anything provocative or critical of your own tribe(the Sean Hannitys and Rachel maddows of the world). No political ideology is perfect and infallible, and if you design your commentary to coddle only those who agree with you and annoy those who don't, you're probably not interested in stepping outside your own bubble, and this bleeds over to #2; if you develop such a noxious reverence for the man or woman you voted for that you ignore their foibles and engage in idol worship, you're a hack( Obama worship, Clinton worship, Trump worship, its all cut from the same cloth).

Conversely, if you regularly or at the bare minimum occasionally elicit the ire of your so called "Brethren", are unafraid to do it even though its unpalatable and more importantly, unprofitable, and you don't "Love your guy" but rather support the fundamental principles he serves as an unofficial avatar for(Presidents, like it or not, serve this purpose for their respective parties and affiliations) and drag him when he deviates, then you're at least attempting to maintain a sensible level of intellectual honesty.

I elevate these people above the lot but have no illusions, none are without their faults and I do disagree with them, but I appreciate their facility for honest good faith engagement.

And one quick correction, Jonah is no longer an editor for National Review and Seth employs an admirable(and practically unheard of in this political climate) hands off approach to his editorial duties.

That in my book is grounds for bonus points.

xandorxerxes
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes » Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:53 pm

Cane_The9lives wrote:
Sun Jun 06, 2021 11:36 am
For me it's a matter of fairness and style, or more specifically the principle of "Fair willingness", because of course there's no such thing as absolute objectivity or impartiality. No one worth listening to or reading(from an editorial standpoint) is a strict "Just the facts ma'am" disinterested mono-pundit. "Fact based dialogue" is the ideal, but it will never rid itself completely from the specter of perspective, so I tend to prefer those who employ intellectual practices that meet the criteria of good faith punditry. I often differentiate between "Partisans", loosely defined as someone with bias (which we are all guilty of being on some level) and "Partisan hacks", a phase beyond ordinary natural bias that's both narrow and inflexible.
I agree on the "mono-pundit," but it's more that any commentary has to be factually grounded. If we say that "X is bad because Y" when X does not in fact do Y we have done a disservice to anyone with ears. Our middle school debate clubs understand that the way to approach things is to target the negative impacts of something instead of making things up, I'd like to think our adult pundits could do something similar.

That's not to say that any of the individuals you listed have done so, but their associates certainly have. Facts don't drive profits or clicks though, so while I will 100% hate said publication I fully understand it from a business/power model.
And one quick correction, Jonah is no longer an editor for National Review and Seth employs an admirable(and practically unheard of in this political climate) hands off approach to his editorial duties.
Yet another time I get scolded for going off the cuff instead of actually looking stuff up. You'd think I'd learn.

San Goku
Posts: 799
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku » Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:22 am

The fight game is real and Logan Paul is lucky Floyd was nice enough not to give him a permanent reconstructive facial surgery lol. There are levels to this! I enjoyed the fight even though Floyd Mayweather was clearly toying with him. Logan has a chin though and can fight, I'll give him that.

xandorxerxes
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes » Mon Jun 07, 2021 4:10 pm

Those two got millions for that "fight." People paid $50 to watch. Oof.

San Goku
Posts: 799
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku » Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:47 pm

xandorxerxes wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 4:10 pm
Those two got millions for that "fight." People paid $50 to watch. Oof.
Personally it was entertaining, Logan Paul was taking it serious which made it interesting. He REALLY wanted to go the mile even though it was obvious (except to him) that he was inferior in boxing to Floyd.

Haohmaru
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 4:13 am

Re: There we go

Post by Haohmaru » Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:28 pm

San Goku wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:22 am
The fight game is real and Logan Paul is lucky Floyd was nice enough not to give him a permanent reconstructive facial surgery lol. There are levels to this! I enjoyed the fight even though Floyd Mayweather was clearly toying with him. Logan has a chin though and can fight, I'll give him that.
I must've seen another match cause this shit was weak as hell.
Logan is a shitty fighter and Mayweather should be ashamed he even accepted the fight let alone not win it.
Fucking disgrace if you tell me. He could've went down as a non defeated champion instead he chose to fight a fucking nobody.
As if this motherfucker needed the money.

San Goku
Posts: 799
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku » Mon Jun 07, 2021 10:38 pm

Haohmaru wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:28 pm
San Goku wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:22 am
The fight game is real and Logan Paul is lucky Floyd was nice enough not to give him a permanent reconstructive facial surgery lol. There are levels to this! I enjoyed the fight even though Floyd Mayweather was clearly toying with him. Logan has a chin though and can fight, I'll give him that.
I must've seen another match cause this shit was weak as hell.
Logan is a shitty fighter and Mayweather should be ashamed he even accepted the fight let alone not win it.
Fucking disgrace if you tell me. He could've went down as a non defeated champion instead he chose to fight a fucking nobody.
As if this motherfucker needed the money.
Floyd went into great detail on why he did it and it's pretty simple, he loves money! I was actually impressed because Logan is like what 50 lbs heavier, 20+ years younger, athletic and can fight. He's definitely not a boxer but he has a strong chin and if is really serious he could have a career based on what I saw.

Floyd clearly won and it wasn't even close. I honestly thought that Floyd could lose cause anyone that's strong should have a punchers chance (I was wrong). Also, prior to the match you never know when father time creeps in. Floyd Mayweather continued to stay in shape after retirement. Floyd's strength surprised me because Logan was smart enough to use his weight and try to wear Floyd down (it's all tactics when you are outmatched). Unfortunately for Logan, Floyd barely broke a sweat.

Digital Masta
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta » Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:15 pm

San Goku wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 10:38 pm
Haohmaru wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:28 pm
San Goku wrote:
Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:22 am
The fight game is real and Logan Paul is lucky Floyd was nice enough not to give him a permanent reconstructive facial surgery lol. There are levels to this! I enjoyed the fight even though Floyd Mayweather was clearly toying with him. Logan has a chin though and can fight, I'll give him that.
I must've seen another match cause this shit was weak as hell.
Logan is a shitty fighter and Mayweather should be ashamed he even accepted the fight let alone not win it.
Fucking disgrace if you tell me. He could've went down as a non defeated champion instead he chose to fight a fucking nobody.
As if this motherfucker needed the money.
Floyd went into great detail on why he did it and it's pretty simple, he loves money! I was actually impressed because Logan is like what 50 lbs heavier, 20+ years younger, athletic and can fight. He's definitely not a boxer but he has a strong chin and if is really serious he could have a career based on what I saw.

Floyd clearly won and it wasn't even close. I honestly thought that Floyd could lose cause anyone that's strong should have a punchers chance (I was wrong). Also, prior to the match you never know when father time creeps in. Floyd Mayweather continued to stay in shape after retirement. Floyd's strength surprised me because Logan was smart enough to use his weight and try to wear Floyd down (it's all tactics when you are outmatched). Unfortunately for Logan, Floyd barely broke a sweat.
We talked about this before, this meant nothing. Paul never had a chance, it was all just a goofy game for Floyd.

On another note, can we finally put to bed any debate about LeBron being anywhere near Jordan's level? This sore loser bitch walked off the court (AGAIN) with over 5 minutes left in the game! Yes, he is an amazing basketball player and is one of its greatest talents but he has a shit personality when it comes to competition and being on a team. He flops, he bitches n' moans, he's a sore loser, and (not related to basketball) he's not very intelligent but doesn't have the wisdom to know not to speak on things he's ignorant on (politics).

Jordan would've scored 20 in 4:30 seconds.

LeBron never had his dad around to tell him not to do bitch ass moves like that. Everyone on the Lakers from star to bench warmer has the right to tell LeBron to fuck off.

Post Reply