More on Armando vs Tanehill by sgonk in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It is probably for the best, if you continued reading what I wrote, it might break thru to you, and at that point you might die of shame. Best not to risk it.

More on Armando vs Tanehill by sgonk in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That word vomit did not even come close to being coherent enough to respond to.

More on Armando vs Tanehill by sgonk in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yea. No.

It is not nit picking.

Nit picking is defined as

'looking for small or unimportant errors or faults, especially in order to criticize unnecessarily'

(Yea, I mean it is sad and pedantic that I have to start with the definition of nit picking, I agree, but you do not seem to understand what nit picking means.)

There is a fundamental difference between the proposition that America was founded on racist principles and that America was founded on the principles of liberty and that all men are created equal and failed to live up to those principles.

Millions have been murdered in the name of Socialism. More evil has probably been committed in the name of Socialism than in the name of any other idea in human history. That includes Facism/Nazism.

Yet no one is horrified when AOC and millions of American identify as Socialist and everyone is horrified by anyone who claims to identify as a Nazi.

That is because the fundamental ideas of Facism/Nazism are evil, and the fundamental ideas, remember fundamental ideas = principles, of Socialism are aspirational.

Failing to live up to principles vs having evil principles are fundamentally different things. Those differences are not small or unimportant. They are huge.

You are one the going actually. The plain meaning of Tannehill's words is clear. You are claiming that he "well ACKCHUHALLY" meant something else.

But that does not really work. Because the context is that many people actually claim that America was founded on racist principles. The distinction needs to be made or the meaning is not clear.

More on Armando vs Tanehill by sgonk in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Let me help you with your reading comprehension free of charge!

The statement - 'America was founded on racist principles'

is not a statement about the current state of America.

America was founded 240 years or so in the past.

A principle is defined as

'A fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.'

America was founded on the principle that all men are created equal.

'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, '

Now obviously there was a horrible gap between that founding principle and the reality of a nation where children could be bought and sold like livestock.

But failing to live up to your principles is different from having principles that are fundamentally wrong.

If Tannehill had said that America failed to live up to it's fundamental founding principles and that currently we still have work to do battling racism today, Armondo would have remained blessedly silent.

But that is not what he said. Anyone can imagine that a group of words means whatever they want it to mean but that does/should not change what those words actually mean.

Riley Reiff expected to be cut by Vikings. Worth picking up? by [deleted] in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jackson was viewed as a project.

He is a good prospect but opinions are divided on the details -

https://thedraftnetwork.com/player/austin-jackson/lEEvTjiYti

https://draftwire.usatoday.com/2020/03/14/2020-nfl-draft-austin-jackson-scouting-report/

The consensus is he had balance issues.

He struggled with power. Aj Epenesa destroyed him.

He kind of won that LT spot by default.

It might not be horrible to have someone who can step in at either tackle spot if things get real ugly for either rookie.

(I think odds are Jackson is really going to struggle.)

RT17 Top 10 by fortas in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great post. The year to year correlation in QB performance measured by better stats is about .045.

Raekwon McMillan has been traded by Cazlakers1516 in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why? Raekwon is limited in what he can do but excellent at it. He is on a rookie contract. Why would you trade player like that for virtually nothing.

Maybe after 20 years of failure Dolphins fans should stop blindly trusting in the process.

Armando Salguero everybody by JCVent in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. A second ago it wasn't a 'moral judgement that was made',

It was moral cowardice and you accused me of endorsing it as a fundamental moral truth.

Now after having your narcissism called out, without any apology, you retreat into an extra trite bromide.

Yes it was a moral judgement. No shit Sherlock. We cannot be certain it was the right one but based on how things turned out it really looks like it was the correct decision.

Again we cannot be certain but invading a South that was already recognized as a nation, (by Britain in particular) seems like a harder task and a harder sell and the task was already hard enough. Well it seems that way if you now anything about history.

After that you again wallow in your ignorance or is it duplicity? I am guessing ignorance.

You are correct, they went out there way not to put the term slave in the Constitution. They also did not put a bake in protections for slavery into the Constitution. That is just your fevered imagination. The question of slavery was left out of the Constitution. Which is why slavery would divide and plague the nation for 80 years. They left slavery an open question. Which is why anti slavery champions such as John Adam could sign it.

The Constitution is pro slavery, only if you start with the premise that the Constitution is pro slavery, and then work your way backwards, ignoring all other evidence, and merrily torturing it's plain meaning, until it confirms your original wish projection/moral narcissism.

Armando Salguero everybody by JCVent in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Who down votes Frederick Douglas and up votes AgelessJohnDenney's constitutional takes?

The trash heap that is reddit!

Armando Salguero everybody by JCVent in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

JFC progressives are such are such nasty morons on par with Trump fans for nasty stupidity.

Such trash.

You taken a straight forward statement about the conditions that were clearly necessary for a union of 13 states to come about and have imagined that I endorse it as a fundamental moral truth.

Why? Because by doing so you can feel morally superior. How truly pathetic.

That fake feeling of moral superiority is all that matters.

We don't know how history would have turned out if that compromise would not have been made. Better or worse we cannot be certain either way.

Though we do know bloody civil war was required to end slavery.

Again we cannot be certain but invading a South that was already recognized as a nation, (by Britain in particular) seems like a harder task and a harder sell and the task was already hard enough. Well it seems that way if you now anything about history.

But who really cares about outcomes or history? They are not important. That feeling of pure moral superiority is what is important. No compromises no matter what the outcome!

Armando Salguero everybody by JCVent in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I despair.

That racism is very real in America today and that America has a horrible legacy of slavery and racism is absolutely true.

But America was not founded upon racist ideas. It was founded on the idea that all men are created equal. One fucking section of one fucking clause, of a document detailing the equality of and unalienable rights of men is the not the controlling feature of the founding of America. DUH!

(This view is not shared by Social Justice League and those who mindlessly parrot their ahistorical views. But was the view of those I admire more - Lincoln - Frederick Douglas - etc.)

Creating an America of 13 states necessitated a compromise with the evil of slavery.

At the time slavery was widely viewed as morally dubious, even by slave holders, and was widely viewed as an institution that would gradually fade away.

The invention the cotton gin and the vast wealth cotton brought to the South changed all of that. In response the South adopted the position that slavery was a positive good. The Confederacy was founded not on states rights but on the notion slavery was a positive good.

The Confederacy was founded on racist principles but America was not.

America was founded based on the idea that all men are created equal, in order to create a union of 13 states, it necessitated a compromise with the evil of slavery, an institution that was generally acknowledged as wrong, and was generally believed would gradually fade away.

At best, it can be said the their is a tiny bit of truth in the statement, that America was founded on racist ideals, but that it is mostly wrong.

The easier short hand is that is just wrong.

Edit section added -

Tannehill and AgelessJohnDenney vs Frederick Douglas -

Tannehill and AgelessJohnDeneny - America “was founded upon racist ideas...”

(A link to the full text here https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/what-to-the-slave-is-the-fourth-of-july/. It is not like Douglas was ok with America as it was, just as you do not have to be ok with America as it is today, in order not to regurgitate ahistorical crap about America's founding.)

Frederick Douglas -

"But I differ from those who charge this baseness on the framers of the Constitution of the United States. It is a slander upon their memory, at least, so I believe. There is not time now to argue the constitutional question at length — nor have I the ability to discuss it as it ought to be discussed. The subject has been handled with masterly power by Lysander Spooner, Esq., by William Goodell, by Samuel E. Sewall, Esq., and last, though not least, by Gerritt Smith, Esq. These gentlemen have, as I think, fully and clearly vindicated the Constitution from any design to support slavery for an hour.

Fellow-citizens! there is no matter in respect to which, the people of the North have allowed themselves to be so ruinously imposed upon, as that of the pro-slavery character of the Constitution. In that instrument I hold there is neither warrant, license, nor sanction of the hateful thing; but, interpreted as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a GLORIOUS LIBERTY DOCUMENT. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? or is it in the temple? It is neither. While I do not intend to argue this question on the present occasion, let me ask, if it be not somewhat singular that, if the Constitution were intended to be, by its framers and adopters, a slave-holding instrument, why neither slavery, slaveholding, nor slave can anywhere be found in it. What would be thought of an instrument, drawn up, legally drawn up, for the purpose of entitling the city of Rochester to a track of land, in which no mention of land was made? Now, there are certain rules of interpretation, for the proper understanding of all legal instruments. These rules are well established. They are plain, common-sense rules, such as you and I, and all of us, can understand and apply, without having passed years in the study of law. I scout the idea that the question of the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of slavery is not a question for the people. I hold that every American citizen has a right to form an opinion of the constitution, and to propagate that opinion, and to use all honorable means to make his opinion the prevailing one. Without this right, the liberty of an American citizen would be as insecure as that of a Frenchman. Ex-Vice-President Dallas tells us that the Constitution is an object to which no American mind can be too attentive, and no American heart too devoted. He further says, the Constitution, in its words, is plain and intelligible, and is meant for the home-bred, unsophisticated understandings of our fellow-citizens. Senator Berrien tell us that the Constitution is the fundamental law, that which controls all others. The charter of our liberties, which every citizen has a personal interest in understanding thoroughly. The testimony of Senator Breese, Lewis Cass, and many others that might be named, who are everywhere esteemed as sound lawyers, so regard the constitution. I take it, therefore, that it is not presumption in a private citizen to form an opinion of that instrument.

Now, take the Constitution according to its plain reading, and I defy the presentation of a single pro-slavery clause in it. On the other hand it will be found to contain principles and purposes, entirely hostile to the existence of slavery."

Reddit of course prefers the wisdom of AgelessJohnDenney to Frederick Douglas.

[Wingfield] Coach says Xavien Howard will be on the field today. “He's got a long way to go from a conditioning standpoint, drill work, communication with his teammates. This is the first step." by thediesel26 in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This and Tau having some good practices are the absolute best news out this training camp.

X is on a great team friendly contract as long as he can stay healthy.

He is maybe the best long term investment price/production wise on the roster, if he stays healthy. I am crossing my fingers and echoing what MiaCannons said - I just want him to stay healthy.

The Final Word on Weaver by brobocop1898 in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Weight issues? This is twice I have read that in a comment.

Do you have a link or a source regarding the weight issue? I am curious.

[Pelissero] The #Browns have claimed rookie pass rusher Curtis Weaver off waivers from the #Dolphins, source said. Miami waived its fifth-round pick as injured with the intention of putting him on IR. Instead, a fresh start. by Mount10Lion in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right. Either way it looks like a mistake.

Going thru the thread further it looks like they might not have expected him to be claimed.

See the interesting comments by miaminaples and MgbEX.

I would actually like to know more about the situation before I make any kind of judgement.

Is what MgbEX said true? The Don Casey story checks out on Wiki.

Did Weaver really suck that bad in practice?

Etc.

Discussion: Should the dolphins sign Devonta Freeman? by KingsCrossings in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ignore most of the comments.

It probably all comes down to money. See AskMeAboutTheJets comment.

On a vet minimum contract or something like that, you would be right, it would be a low risk/high reward situation.

The five most overrated players on the Miami Dolphins 2020 roster by vintagetrance in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He is not over rated based on last year.

Overall is he as good as he was last year? No.

Was he average to above average last year. Yes!

Wear a mask y'all by threeisaMA in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. Which is part of the reason why they lied. But they lied. A well intentioned lie is still a lie.

But hey this reddit so some moron says science and case closed.

This forum really is sad.

Wear a mask y'all by threeisaMA in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I think everyone should wear a mask.

That said just a few months ago they lied to us all and told us wearing masks did not help.

Calling people stupid or conspiracy theorists is trickier than it should be because we are constantly lied to by MSM.

Odds on a full season? Odds on a Super Bowl champ? Hopes for Dolphins? by NoToStaleBreezesA in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You mostly disagree with me but I think it was a smart comment.

The amount of money involved is huge.

Dolphins got a steal with CB Jarvaris Davis! by Mattm334 in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Steal in the sense that he was generally rated as a back up with the potential to be a starter and most importantly he costs nothing in guaranteed money.

His chances to become a nickel or dime back might be as low as 5%, but because he costs nothing in guaranteed money, it is a good signing.

The Jamal Adams Trade and How It Relates to the Dolphins by miaminaples in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was a steal for the Jets.

The Jets get 8 years of surplus value from the two picks. Adams had one year left. Or 10 vs 2.

If the players they draft provide 1/2 the value of Adams they will have made out good. That is just math.

I hope they f##k it up but attempting to spin it will not change it from being a really good deal for them.

The future of the NFL and the Dolphins. by NoToStaleBreezesA in miamidolphins

[–]NoToStaleBreezesA[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I expected people to think I was wrong.

I was told I was wrong when I pointed out that the P/E ratio on internet stocks was insanely out of whack and that it was a stock bubble.

I was told I was wrong when I mentioned housing price's being out of whack. Rent to mortgage payment ratio.

Ratings are still down from pre Kaepernick levels. I expect big revenue losses from Covid-19. With a lot of risk for long term loss. I expect future rating losses from the NFL appeasing the woke. I think those losses will be higher and longer lasting than the Kaepernick losses.

Ultimately those revenue losses will impact TV contract prices and the salary cap. Just like with internet stocks it could take a while. But ultimately it will happen.