?
I 'flicked the television off' years ago.
To be unaware that news exists and how the media operate would be very ignorant though.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
?
Not sure I understand this?Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:08am
Why the obsession with Newcorp & main stream media BarryGrogan?
Think for yourself Man!
I wrote: A Fair days work for a fair days pay, that is all any employer or employee should expect and respect.BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:14amJoffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 12:42pm
Rightly or wrongly depending upon individual opinion, my view on Unionism in Australia is very left wing...So clarify this for me...you're strongly anti-Left, but you describe the concept of a "Fair days work for a fair days pay" being "very left wing"?Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 12:42pm
Fair days work for a fair days pay, that is all any employer or employee should expect and respect.
If that mentality is "very left wing", are you able to explain what exactly makes you anti-left wing?
I'd have thought that if everyone carried that same attitude through all aspects of life, the world would be a pretty decent place.
My mistake, I misinterpreted your post.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:41am
I cannot answer questions where you are misquoting my posts.
You are constantly quoting on this thread Fox News, Newscorp, main stream media etc to the point of obsession.BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:27amNot sure I understand this?Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:08am
Why the obsession with Newcorp & main stream media BarryGrogan?
Think for yourself Man!
?Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:44amYou are constantly quoting on this thread Fox News, Newscorp, main stream media etc to the point of obsession.BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:27amNot sure I understand this?Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 10:08am
Why the obsession with Newcorp & main stream media BarryGrogan?
Think for yourself Man!
For your own well-being, I think you should stop forming opinions based on these services and think for yourself.
Not half as pathetic as your response(s).Spinner wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 10:55pmYou must be kidding, I called you all out. But hide behind your tough mates all you want. Pathetic really.saynta wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 7:48pmWhat utter rubbish. Really, can't you do better than that.?.Spinner wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 7:23pmWow, such outrage when someone disagrees.saynta wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 7:03pmYour posts are in breach of the rules. You will be lucky if no one reports you.Spinner wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 6:38pmExhibit A. Hope he returned the favour.saynta wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 6:27pmYeah, a great poster. NotJoffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 5:00pm This is gold, was reading through the thread and each poster is debating their opinion, then this guy chimes in with these classic pot shots.
Hilarious
Pulling each other off? f***. How old are you?
Ps. What would you calll someone who hols up a pregnant back woman with a gun and then robs her?
And it’s a very common analogy. It means you are all giving yourselves a very generous pat on the back. But you’ll know this.
And disagree. You should threaten yourself with your own post. A post that entirely played the ‘poster’.
Your posts were disgusting and J b called you out. Tough s***.
Think for yourself he says.Spinner wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 11:03pmAhh it all comes out. Nice effort for trying to forcible drive these perspectives down my throat with such aggression and outrage.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 8:22pmI thought your posts were very hilarious, still do!Spinner wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 6:48pmSo a poster called someone recently passing ‘a lowlife scum’ is debating? Pathetic really and not worth the time.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 25 Jun 2020 5:00pm This is gold, was reading through the thread and each poster is debating their opinion, then this guy chimes in with these classic pot shots.
Hilarious
Keep the posts I quoted in there if you had any substance.
Queue response from handbook.
The pulling each other off part is pure 12 year old naugnhty schoolboy Kelvin Cunnington genius, love it.
Its the most immature & homophobic thing I've read here in years, classic comedy.
George Floyd was a low life scum piece of s*** while he was alive, his record proves that.
Does it give police the right to kill him, of course not.
I'm interested how this piece of s*** goes from low life scum to an African American male mother Teresa overnight because he was killed by Police.
What about the scum who then use this as an excuse to loot, pillage and act in a violent manner in protest.
How dignified.
Oh the irony, black lives matter and one has been killed wrongfully by Police so lets rampage and destroy everything we can get our hands on.
But in reality it is very clear to see the clear hatred driving these perspectives. Problem that you will always fail to see is that while one person wrongfully killed is already too many, there have been many many more incidents - so not just ‘one’ as you wrongfully purposely state.
It is very little worth trying to convince you otherwise given this clear underlying and extreme hatred you possess but trying to justify the murder of any person is bottom level.
Great question!roskilde wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 11:26am I've always found that the people who are most given to conformism, motivated reasoning and similar ways of thinking are the ones who are always -- almost compulsively -- telling others that they are in fact the ones who are just followers and biased.
It's uncanny how often this tends to be true. What I'd really like to understand is why this is the case.
motivated reasoningroskilde wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 11:26am I've always found that the people who are most given to conformism, motivated reasoning and similar ways of thinking are the ones who are always -- almost compulsively -- telling others that they are in fact the ones who are just followers and biased.
It's uncanny how often this tends to be true. What I'd really like to understand is why this is the case.
I used to carry around a drink and confectionery tray at Glenferrie Oval when I was around 14 /15 years of age. I can still remember Kennedy's voice bellowing out across the ground both as a player and later coach . Loudest voice you would ever wish to hear.Yorkeys wrote: ↑Fri 26 Jun 2020 2:35pm In the footy context didn't the late great John Kennedy reach legend status by expounding the don't think, do message. Michael Moncrieff, who nearly joined us I understand, must be riven with doubt if he is reading some of this thread. What if there is a statue of the Thinker placed next to Mr Kennedy's, but so as to not invite graffiti of course.
Heard this today, just a follow up regarding the Washington Redskins.The_Dud wrote: ↑Wed 24 Jun 2020 10:29pmI think we need to back up a bit.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Wed 24 Jun 2020 9:31pmI wouldn't walk up to group of Asians and say hi yellow skins, I wouldn't walk up to a white group and say hey white skins, I wouldn't walk up to an Indigenous Australian group and say hey black skins as it would be plain weird, so of course I wouldn't do it with a Native American group, nor would I walk up to them and say hello native Americans, In my opinion that is a very odd thing for you to write as the rationale to support your position as it bears no logic to how you would interact with another human or to the confectionery and whether the term is acceptable or racist.The_Dud wrote: ↑Wed 24 Jun 2020 5:38pmI don't think I saw any lobbying to change Red Skins or Chicos (which btw should probably just be ditched as they taste horrendous), seems like maybe Allen's is trying to get on the front foot? I know Red Skins took the 'red Indian' cartoon character off them a while ago, but the connection is obviously there. As you noted they took the N word off products in the passed, but where do you draw the line? I think 'red skins' is obviously not a great term (I doubt you'd say it to a group of Native Americans) so it makes sense to me people aren't thrilled about it.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Wed 24 Jun 2020 4:04pmCan't say I agree dud.The_Dud wrote: ↑Wed 24 Jun 2020 1:38pmFunny, isn't it?BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Wed 24 Jun 2020 12:14pmIt's a Chiko Roll.
But really, who cares if these things change their name?
My life moved on relatively unchanged when Fags changed their name to Fads.
The outrage from some people about these proposed changes, is worse than the outrage that causes the changes.
The crowd who love to spout "PC gone mad", "snowflakes", "ridiculous cancel culture" are the very same crowd who get all upset and offended if a lollie wants to change it's name, and threaten to boycott it if it does!
But irony is lost on some people I guess
In one hand you have PC apologists lobbying companies and social media demanding change and on the other old boomers like me who point it out with a shake of the head but little more.
I like to ridicule and point out the stupidity, but don't care enough to do anything more.
Classic boomer behavior!
If the term is "not a great term" how do you explain the Washington Redskins baseball team name and mascot? https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ne ... story.html
What's next, Indian motorcycles and their Classic Chieftain, will Boeing rename the Apache helicopter?
I have also had the opportunity to live and work in the mid-west and still have family there and have met and befriended many native Americans over that period.
I have found the native Americans I have met to be the least political people I have met and least offended by terms such as the one that offends you.
Never said I was offended by the name, never said I think the name should change. I said I can understand why people wouldn’t be thrilled about it.
I probably used a lazy example, a better one might be if someone were talking to a third party about a group of native Americans, I doubt they’d say “those red skins over there”.
And unlike ‘red skins’, I don’t think ‘black/white/yellow skins’ are a used term, so obviously that would be weird, but there are plenty of terms for those groups which were used in the past but clearly aren’t nowadays.
I think you mean the NFL team Washington Redskins, and I know there has been calls to change their name. The article you cited is interesting, though the poll has a fairly small sample size.
Well kit started out about that fat f*** who we are still paying for but now dons blue and white hoops down in sleepy hollow.
I've no idea but has been amusing reading. I'm unsure whether I've learnt too much but I've laughed a lot.
'Sinclair rumour'.whiskers3614 wrote: ↑Wed 15 Jul 2020 6:45pm The name is fat cat!
If any of you have been to jail or knock around people that have you'll recognize the cat reference.(Hint .. Sinclair rumour).The fat part is self explanatory!!