Tommy Tainant
Diamond Member
- Jan 20, 2016
- 48,154
- 20,906
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Blacks' Abundance In Pro Sports: Affirmative Action ?
- Thread starter protectionist
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Nov 25, 2012
- 13,154
- 7,685
Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.I am not a "Lib" and I do not live to politicize every life scenario as you do. I have no political loyalty to any party.
You cannot find any post in this forum or on the internet where I have ever stated that ANY race is inferior on ANY level.
There are white people in my family. A sister in law and two brothers in law, and they are cared for just as much as everyone else in my family.
And that being said, I will NOT quietly accept being categorized as "racially inferior" by anyone.
And for your information professional sports is one of the few professions where individual personality, nepotism, cronyism, favoritism and especially DISCRIMINATION are not a factor. Maybe so in the front office, but definitely not on the field.
Rewards are purely performance based.
Why do you think so many pro athletes risk their health with performance enhancing substances? if something can give them an edge physically, many are willing to take the risk.
If you are not a lib, do you not see the point I am making about the standard lib way of looking at "discrimination"?
Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
You should stop attempting to lecture people about "liberals", and you should also stop attempting to apply political logic to a topic where politics are not even remotely applicable.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 83,670
- 50,540
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.If you are not a lib, do you not see the point I am making about the standard lib way of looking at "discrimination"?
Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
Not in player selection.
- Nov 25, 2012
- 13,154
- 7,685
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.If you are not a lib, do you not see the point I am making about the standard lib way of looking at "discrimination"?
Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
It does not Tommy. I have friends and relatives who played and coached in the NFL. The closest semblance of AA is the "Rooney Rule", which applies only to interviews for coaching positions.
Players are recruited and placed based on performance only.
He is bringing his personal disdain for so called "liberals" into a topic that his political agenda is not even relevant to. It makes no sense.....at all.
He is silent for he has nothing to answer when the sun goes down.Dude. i like responded to you two or three times, and you're playing the "obsession" card?
LOL!!! You lose, lefty racist.
This obsession of yours is not a new thing. You have been up my ass since day one.
Get therapy.
Seriously.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Only a picture.
Get therapy.
Seriously.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The picture made my point just fine. It is not credible that you did not understand it.
That part where you pretended that you did not understand it?
That was cowardice and lying.
I never said I didn’t understand the picture, liar.
Get therapy.
Seriously.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You said, that I had nothing to say. And now you say you understood the picture.
Do you even have a clue about the meanings of the words you post, or did someone put a keyboard and a case a beer in the monkey cage at the zoo?
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.If you are not a lib, do you not see the point I am making about the standard lib way of looking at "discrimination"?
Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
Anytime I try to talk about stated policies regarding unequal outcomes with liberals, they ignore what I say, restate their complaints about the unequal outcomes and call me a racist.
By your standards, you are a racist.
Are you getting any of this? CAN YOU HEAR ME?
Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.If you are not a lib, do you not see the point I am making about the standard lib way of looking at "discrimination"?
Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
You should stop attempting to lecture people about "liberals", and you should also stop attempting to apply political logic to a topic where politics are not even remotely applicable.
The behavior I describe is visible CONSTANTLY on this site, and regularly in discussion about race in the larger world.
And it is the basis of policy in this country, policy and law.
As such, it is a valid topic of discussion.
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
Not in player selection.
The unequal outcome proves discrimination. Why are you defending the racists of the NFL?
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
It does not Tommy. I have friends and relatives who played and coached in the NFL. The closest semblance of AA is the "Rooney Rule", which applies only to interviews for coaching positions.
Players are recruited and placed based on performance only.
He is bringing his personal disdain for so called "liberals" into a topic that his political agenda is not even relevant to. It makes no sense.....at all.
LIberals constantly refer to unequal outcomes as though that is all you need to "prove" discrimination.
That is a political matter.
Your denial of this fact is irrational.
Tommy Tainant
Diamond Member
- Jan 20, 2016
- 48,154
- 20,906
Where are the victims ?
Name just one ?
Name just one ?
Where are the victims ?
Name just one ?
The lack of a list of names of white athletes that would be there, if not for the obvious discrimination that caused the unequal outcomes,
is not a good excuse for unequal outcomes.
By your own standards, for defending unequal outcomes you are a vile racist.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 83,670
- 50,540
Where are the victims ?
Name just one ?
He can't.
- Nov 25, 2012
- 13,154
- 7,685
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
It does not Tommy. I have friends and relatives who played and coached in the NFL. The closest semblance of AA is the "Rooney Rule", which applies only to interviews for coaching positions.
Players are recruited and placed based on performance only.
He is bringing his personal disdain for so called "liberals" into a topic that his political agenda is not even relevant to. It makes no sense.....at all.
LIberals constantly refer to unequal outcomes as though that is all you need to "prove" discrimination.
That is a political matter.
Your denial of this fact is irrational.
Your incessant and irrational attempt to continue to push your disdain for "liberals" into this thread is off topic and actually quite immature.
My position to not engage you in your tantrum is what a normal person would do.
- Nov 25, 2012
- 13,154
- 7,685
Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
You should stop attempting to lecture people about "liberals", and you should also stop attempting to apply political logic to a topic where politics are not even remotely applicable.
The behavior I describe is visible CONSTANTLY on this site, and regularly in discussion about race in the larger world.
And it is the basis of policy in this country, policy and law.
As such, it is a valid topic of discussion.
No it is not. Your psychosis regarding "liberals" is beyond abnormal and appears to border on being an obsessive disorder.
You endlessly seek for examples of white people being neverending victims of everything, and everything is caused by someone else, who has no authority or power to victimize anyone.
Wealthy white males own the NFL, NBA and MLB. The players are selected based upon their ability to perform in one of the few environments in America where ability and performance is all that matters. If that offends your tender sensibilities, then you could always start a grassroots movement pushing for "Owners to produce equal outcome, based on relative population size".
And you would promptly be publically labled as a loon.
- Nov 25, 2012
- 13,154
- 7,685
You are inventing your own facts. Do you believe that the NFL has an AA policy ?Well there are reasons that things work out the way they do. So you look behind the outcome to see how it happened. The OP asked a question based on the outcomes and suggested that AA might be the cause. It patently isnt. There is not one shred of evidence to support that.Nope. Because you are attempting to, and epically failing at looking at professional sports PLAYERS in a sensible manner.
NFL players are judged and placed soley based upon performance, and stats, which validates their ABILITY, and thusly determines their value to the franchise.
Not a "Lib" or "conservative" issue.
PERIOD.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
If you support that, as you seem to be doing....
So it just looks like the usual underclass whine.
LIberals never attempt to look at unequal outcomes in a sensible manner. That is the point.
Their rule is the unequal outcome is proof of discrimination and anyone that argues against it, is a "racist".
Anytime I try to talk about stated policies regarding unequal outcomes with liberals, they ignore what I say, restate their complaints about the unequal outcomes and call me a racist.
By your standards, you are a racist.
Are you getting any of this? CAN YOU HEAR ME?
View attachment 245352
Do you hear yourself? The sane people here do.
protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 57,175
- 18,365
- Thread starter
- #296
Hundreds of them, you moron. And hundreds more in UFC and MMA. You're a laughingstock.Can you name a great black boxer in the last 50 years (who was in his prime) who lost to a white fighter ?
The Only Boxing Champions in History to Retire Undefeated
Chris Weidman knocking out Anderson Silva at UFC 162
And all this is OFF TOPIC.
Last edited:
Tommy Tainant
Diamond Member
- Jan 20, 2016
- 48,154
- 20,906
Its a shame for him isnt it ? he is claiming that there is a form of discrimination but cant name anyone who has suffered from it. He really hates black folks.Where are the victims ?
Name just one ?
He can't.
protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 57,175
- 18,365
- Thread starter
- #298
Sp basically your not saying anything.
You just don't like to see groups of young black men earning a lot more money, banging hotter women than you (if your old ass can still get it up at seventy two) and having more shine on them than you.
Too dumb to warrant a response. 
protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 57,175
- 18,365
- Thread starter
- #299
NOT said, and NOT true. Stop being racist.White Men Can’t Jump
Sad, but true
Were you saying white men can't jump ? >>>
Derek Drouin (born March 6, 1990) is a Canadian track and field athlete who competes in the high jump. He is the reigning Olympic Champion, having won gold in 2016, and was the 2015 World Champion.[4] He also won gold at the 2014 Commonwealth Games and the 2015 Pan American Games,
Last edited:
Paul Essien
Platinum Member
- Jun 9, 2017
- 5,654
- 2,985
I did not say MMA or UFC.Hundreds of them, you moron. And hundreds more in UFC and MMA. You're a laughingstock.Can you name a great black boxer in the last 50 years (who was in his prime) who lost to a white fighter ?
The Only Boxing Champions in History to Retire Undefeated
Chris Weidman knocking out Anderson Silva at UFC 162
And all this is OFF TOPIC.
You knew exactly what I meant.
I said
Can you name a black boxer (who was in his prime) who has lost to a white fighter in the last 50 years ?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 54
- Views
- 898
- Replies
- 41
- Views
- 681
- Replies
- 65
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 13
- Views
- 260
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 10
- Views
- 27
- Replies
- 176
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 13
- Replies
- 42
- Views
- 221
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8516
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 484
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-