Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ZooeyModeratorApril 15, 2016 at 9:23 pm in reply to: Goff or Wentz? Wentz or Goff? Der Wentz oder Goff entscheidung #42036
ZooeyModeratorI think they take Goff. California QB for the LA market. Can you imagine the the LA fans getting excited about a QB from North Dakota? No way.
Nobody cares where the QB went to college. And if they did, southern california isn’t friendly to UC Berkeley. So Goff gets zero points for that no matter how you slice it.
ZooeyModeratorI believe the QB they take, will be NFL-proficient at a minimum, and that gives us a chance. If you are going to hold out for NFL-elite, you may have a 20-30 year wait on your hands, and who is willing to wait that long?
You used this argument in an earlier thread. I don’t think anybody has said that the Rams shouldn’t trade up to #1 unless Andrew Luck is there. That’s a straw man. The dissenters, of whom I am one, say that moving up for a QB who poses the risk of being worthless is too expensive. Sanchez, Leinart, Leaf, the list goes on and on. The Rams traded 3 starters for a guy whose high water mark apparently is that he can win when other people carry the load.
I think people who are suggesting that this is owner-dictated or a publicity stunt are being lazy or sensationalists.
Isiah 58
I agree with that.
These guys think they are a QB away from playing the big game, and I think so, too. Apparently they believe that guy is in this draft. That I’m not so sure of.
ZooeyModeratorHorrible trade. Here’s why…
1. They gut the better part of two drafts to take one unproven rookie and if it’s Wentz, a rookie that for all intents and purposes played against minor league college competition. He also ran the read option in college and, I’m guessing here, was not trained to read a defense. Most QBs coming out of college these days are similarly challenged.
2. The future…they’ll be paying the price for up to six years. Players taken this year and next would be the nucleus of the team five years down the road. This team will be dependent on expensive free agents or other teams cast offs to fill out the roster in the coming years. And we’ve seen that scenario play out in the recent past. Didn’t work out too well.
3.There is no one on Fisher’s staff that can up-coach this kid and have him ready to play in Game one, or build a game plan where he can succeed right away, in my opinion. And this QB WILL start no matter what.And what of Mannion? They never even gave that kid a chance.
This is a fucking disaster of epic proportions. A desperation move if I ever saw one.
Yes, if they draft a QB that doesn’t work out, they are screwed. For years.
ZooeyModeratorI don’t believe this has anything to do with the move to LA, and Kronkey didn’t become a billionaire by making short term business decisions. The Rams are not going to have any difficulty selling tickets for a long time.
I do believe they want a QB because this team needs a QB. I think they think that they have a playoff defense and a playoff rushing game. They do not have a playoff passing game.
I don’t believe that they are undecided on what QB they want. I don’t believe that for a second.
I do not rule out the possibility that this is a stunning poker play, and that the Rams just deliberately created panic in order to turn around and sell this pick for more than they paid for it. For all we know, the report that they really liked Cook is true, and they still like Cook, and think they can get him later. I don’t believe that’s what they are doing, but Les Snead is not a predictable GM.
ZooeyModeratorThey just gave up three starters, though.
I dunno. I was warming up to Lynch at 15.
In any event, this tells us that they aren’t in love with Mannion.
ZooeyModeratorToo steep a price, imo. I don’t like it.
It’s a huge roll of the dice.
ZooeyModeratorYet unlike everyone else running he doesn’t want your money.
If by that you mean he is funding his own campaign, you are only partially right. Trump has spent more of his own money on his candidacy than any other candidate has on his/her own, but he still has raised and spent more of other people’s money than he has spent of his own. So he isn’t being honest about that.
In any event, this issue has nothing whatsoever to do with the article I posted, and when you try to play a trump card in an argument, it’s best to know what the argument is before playing that card.
ZooeyModeratorand this belongs on the Rams Huddle because?
Cheerleader tryouts.
It’s no use.
Some people just don’t understand football.
ZooeyModeratorAs far as MT goes, I’m sure she wasn’t a saint, and I imagine someone else could have been more compassionate and accomplished more. OTOH, she must have helped a lot of people, and whatever her financial shenanigans, at least she wasn’t taking advantage of her clientele. She cannot be equated with Pat Robertson and all those assholes.
ZooeyModerator“There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ’s Passion. The world gains much from their suffering,” was her reply to criticism,
It’s a catholic nun’s version of Snowpiercer.
I felt that way when Kaepernik fumbled on the one yard-line.
There was something beautiful in the 49er fans’ suffering.
The world gains much from such things.
w
vI am with you there.
Man, I forgot about that game. I wonder if that game will linger for the 49er fans, the way that MNF game with the two long TDs did for Rams fans. Of course, that game was between two good teams whereas the Kap fumble didn’t really matter much, so I dunno.
But I should go find a recap of that game. Schaudenfreude is definitely a weakness of mine in sports.
ZooeyModeratorSeriously. Best wishes. Sounds undesirable.
I wouldn’t want to go through it, but, what I have learned talking to a lot of people and going to a seminar is that hip replacements are lightyears ahead of where they had been. It used to be you didn’t leave the hospital for weeks and then took a while to get up to speed again. Now you go home the 2nd day and with the new rehab techniques are functional again within 3-4 weeks.
Yeah, but I’m just thinking, you and your knee, Margo and her hip, there just comes a time when you look around the room, and ya think, “My dream of playing in the NFL has passed me by.”
At least you don’t have CTE, though. Not that you would get that from playing football, but…you know.
ZooeyModeratorAnd why should only humanoids win? Should the gelatinous blob-like beings of Alpha Centauri be excluded from a beauty contest simply because they are translucent so you can see their food being digested or because their sensory tendrils continuously exude a sulphurous gas that can clear a room like nobody’s business? Should that disqualify them from a contest that claims to represent the entire universe?
To be fair, they are really, really ugly.
Dude, you make it sound like the contest is based on the superficial qualities of beauty and attractiveness. I can’t believe you would be so shallow.
ZooeyModeratorIs this your dog?

Seriously. Best wishes. Sounds undesirable.
March 28, 2016 at 10:44 am in reply to: Wagoner: New kickoff rule could alter Rams' kicker search #41137
ZooeyModeratorWhich also will mean more runbacks in diametric opposition to the NFL’s claim of trying to reduce concussions on kickoff returns.
March 24, 2016 at 7:40 pm in reply to: Feel the Bernie… Stories You Won’t See On HBO’s “Hard Knocks” With the LA Rams #41006
ZooeyModeratorI won’t miss Bernie, either. That piece was actually pretty good comparatively, but I haven’t found him to bring a lot of substance to the table, and I am pretty bored of his Victim routine. I don’t hate him like some people do. I just equate him with posters rather than journalists.
March 24, 2016 at 10:59 am in reply to: Balzer:"Rams drafted Michael Sam in 2014 to avoid being on "Hard Knocks" #40988
ZooeyModeratorI assume the powers that be are gonna deny it outright,
or say, that the deal was
NOT “if you draft Sam, we wont put u on hardknocks”
but instead was simply the assurance that
if the Rams decided to draft Sam ON THEIR OWN,
the league would respect that problem enough to
Not put them on hardknocks.Big difference tween the two.
w
vExactly what went through my mind while reading that. It is a big difference.
And we will never know for sure.
However, I don’t think I care. Even in the worst possible light, it’s not really a bad thing.
A barrier was broken after all, and it would have been bad for everybody – not just the NFL – if there was suspicion that he wasn’t drafted because he was gay. He got drafted, he got a chance, and there was no negative fallout. And it didn’t hurt him any.
ZooeyModeratorThe Republicans will do whatever they think is in their best interest. If polling shows their blockade is hurting them in the general, they will approve the guy sooner, but my guess is that they will wait to approve him in the lame duck session.
March 22, 2016 at 11:08 am in reply to: Keenum remains starter for now (there's controversy around this) #40899
ZooeyModeratorHow is it controversial? Are there people out there arguing that it should be Foles?
Or do they just believe that if Keenum is the official starter, that means that the Rams are not going to look for another QB as long as Keenum is alive?
ZooeyModeratorI’m having an existential crisis over
the new facts on the ground about Jerry Jones.I mean I’ve based my whole entire life on
a fine-hatred of Jones. And now, its apparent
he’s fallen in love with the Rams.How do we process such a bizarre situation?
w
vIt may help if you recognize that he isn’t in love with the Rams. He’s in love with Stan.
ZooeyModeratorThe classified stuff on the emails? ugh. Now they want to make Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell collateral damage in this witch hunt.
At issue is the practice of retroactive classification, which is an asinine practice. AT THE TIME an email was sent, the material wasn’t classified. There was no reason to believe it would ever BE classified. Much of the material is classified for trivial reasons that would NOT withstand a full review and the Republicans on the Committee know this as do BOTH former Republican Secretaries of State.
Had Secretary Clinton broken the law, I’d be first in line to insist she answer for it. I’m no fan. But these knuckleheads like Trey Goudy and Darrell Issa are constantly moving the goal posts in an effort to try to politically ensare Secretary Clinton.
As I saw on twitter recently, not releasing the transcripts is also asinine. The notion that those transcripts aren’t already out there is absurd, so if there’s something that can be used against her…. it’s waiting and will be used against her in the court of public opinion.
So you don’t think Hillary is in line for any indictments? I read somewhere just yesterday that she is the target of THREE FBI investigations. But I don’t follow this level of political nonsense, so I don’t have any idea what she did or is being accused of. Something like she used a personal email account for public business, or something.
ZooeyModeratorThis is the trailer for a documentary “The Brainwashing Of My Dad” I
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3771626/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl
Jen Senko, a documentary filmmaker, looks at the rise of right-wing media through the lens of her WWII vet father who changed from a life-long, nonpolitical Democrat to an angry, right-wing fanatic after his discovery of talk radio on a lengthened commute to work. In trying to understand how this happened, she not only finds this to be a phenomenon, but also uncovers some of the forces behind it: a plan by Roger Ailes under Nixon to create a media for the GOP; the Lewis Powell Memo, urging business leaders to influence institutions of public opinion – especially the universities – the media and the courts; and under Reagan, the dismantling of the Fairness Doctrine – all of which helped to change the entire country’s direction and culture, misinformed millions, divided families and even the country itself.
And nothing can get better until them there laws get rewritten, and no way do those laws get rewritten until corporate dollars are removed from our “democracy,” and no way those dollars get removed until sheets of paper no longer have first amendment rights (i.e. are no long legally human).
March 11, 2016 at 9:41 pm in reply to: Man Who Assaulted Black Woman At Trump Rally Learns It Ruined His Life #40465
ZooeyModeratorIf indeed Trump is in favor of single-payer universal health insurance…2 things about that.
1. He’s running on his own money. He is therefore not beholden, like virtually everyone else is, to money from the pharms and private insurers.
2. I also would never be persuaded to vote for him, even with that. His overt racism is too much for me and having a Putin in office who thinks and talks that way for 4 years would be bad. I’ll wait until a progressive shakes free of the pharms and insurers and vote for them some day.
Well…on #1. I saw somewhere that he isn’t running on his own money. That’s complete Trumpian spin. He has spent a couple of million. The rest has come from fundraising. The sources…I do not know.
But we should find out.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/
Over 90% of Trump’s $ is from outsiders, not his own.
The totals he has raised are not close to Rubio or Cruz, let alone Bush and Clinton, but the claim he is running on his own money is a lie.
ZooeyModeratorThe Washington Post, btw, is owned by Jeff Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon, who was one of the people at the How Are We Going to Stop Trump? meeting on that island off Georgia. The WaPo is loaded with negative articles about Trump at the moment, and I just heard a story on NPR about this exact same thing.
Doesn’t make it untrue, obviously.
ZooeyModerator
ZooeyModeratorTrump not only condones, but encourages bad behavior.
And “bad behavior” is a soft way of putting it.
Note that his followers, on different occasions and locations, have committed assault on people who are “other.” Assault.
I think a lot of people are just having trouble believing their eyes and ears with Trump, and deluding themselves into thinking he is something different than the image he projects because nobody can quite wrap their heads around all his negative behavior, and how it’s resonating with a sizable group of people.
ZooeyModeratorThe liberal retreat on single-payer is in line with a long history of centrist Democratic thinking that haplessly confuses rearguard action with political vision. Passing a federal single-payer bill would, no doubt, necessitate key electoral victories, a powerful campaign at the governmental level, and a formidable grassroots struggle. Useful initial steps in this direction might include the election of a president determined to pass single-payer, the restoration of single-payer to the platform of the Democratic Party, and vigorous support for such reform by pundits and scholars in high places. That none of these things may wind up happening is a cause of the alleged political “impossibility” of single-payer—not its result.
Yes to all that.
i think Trump might destroy the Rep
Party, which would be good in the long-termThat’s what I am praying for. Though my prayer includes the wish that it happens at the convention in July, rather than in the White House.
ZooeyModeratorLooking at yesterday’s election results I’m struck by how much both the far left and the far right have in common. Seems to me that we are becoming a country of angry “statement” makers. The Trump supporters are angry and want to make a statement. The Sanders supporters are angry and need to make a statement. Neither give much consideration as to how to get actual “stuff” done. So why are we so angry ? And how can the far right be angry and the far left be angry at the same time? Seems to me that the Republicans are moving further and further and further to the right and the Democrats are moving further and further and further to the left.
At some point in time we need to stop making “statements” and get stuff done. And that’s called pragmatism.
I need a drink.
================================
You always say that, W. Not that there’s anything wrong with that
Those of us who simply believe in Sanders/Stein’s POLICIES
dont see supporting him/her as “making statements.”Its real simple — we think Sanders/Stein’s POLICIES
are better for the poor, and the biosphere, than
the Pro-Corporate Candidates.Anger is a different subject. Are a lot of the Sanders and Stein and Trump folks “angry” ? Sure. A lot are fed up with all kinds of things.
I think you make a mistake conflating the Trump supporters and the Sanders/Stein supporters simply because you see a lot of ‘anger’
in both sides. They seem to be angry about much different
policies and issues, when I talk to both groups…Personally, just speaking for me, I’m very angry
about three things in a nutshell:
1) Inequality (Ie, poverty and all the myriad ways the poor
are degraded, dehumanized, and destroyed, by corporate power)
2) The destruction of the Biosphere (corporate power)
3) The destruction of meaningful democracy by corporate power. (Citizens United, corporate personhood, media owned by the rich, etc, etc)The ‘pragmatic’ candidates wont work to change
those three things, in my view.So, ya know, i respectfully disagree. …there was a time
i would have ‘gone off’ on you, btw, as you know.I’ve mellowed

I just ‘sigh’ now.
w
vI think voters ARE making a statement. Just not in the way W puts it. I think dismissing it as a “statement” comes from a Fixed mindset, rather that a Growth mindset. A Fixed mindset believes that everything is basically the way it is, and there isn’t much one can do about it. A Growth mindset thinks that improvements can be made through dedication and effort.
You know, I read somewhere that Hillary basically said last week that Bernie should drop out … you know, “Thank you for coming,” … so that she could get on with the Real Business of aiming to defeat Trump/Whoever.
It’s just so condescending and entitled. Like, “Molly, will you take the children to the kitchen and give them some tea with honey before putting them to bed, so we adults can carry on with the actual job of governing, please.”
This is more than a “statement.” There is one of them there tidal shifts in the political spectrum going on here, and the Elites in both parties are completely missing what is happening because they are misdiagnosing this as a temper tantrum from the Low Information voters on one side, and Impractical Ideological voters on the other. They are saying out loud that this little statement just needs to be Handled, and order restored. But I think they are underestimating this move. The fault lines of politics may possibly be realigned this year. I think we are moving from cultural issues towards economic issues as the fault line politically.
I think WV pretty much nailed the Sanders supporters’ point of view:
Personally, just speaking for me, I’m very angry
about three things in a nutshell:
1) Inequality (Ie, poverty and all the myriad ways the poor
are degraded, dehumanized, and destroyed, by corporate power)
2) The destruction of the Biosphere (corporate power)
3) The destruction of meaningful democracy by corporate power. (Citizens United, corporate personhood, media owned by the rich, etc, etc)Furthermore, they believe that neither party is tackling these issues in a serious way. In fact, there is a strong belief that the party system has been completely bought by Wall Street. The Sanders democrats think they get lip service from the Clintons et al.
Now, interestingly, I think the Trump supporters have a lot in common with the Sanders supporters. I think they largely agree with points 1 and 3, though their frame is slightly different.
1) Inequality. They see the same thing The money is going upwards. The jobs are going overseas, or being taken by immigrants. Now, they aren’t against inequality IN PRINCIPLE (i.e. they don’t care that minorities suffer inequality, or that other parts of the world suffer; they care only that THEY suffer inequality). But there is an alignment here. I believe that some Trump supporters could be moved back to the Democrat party of their fathers under the right conditions. (And that those conditions are materializing right now – though I am making no prediction that they will continue to materialize).
2) Well, they don’t care about the environment. What I’d place here is that they are angry about the erosion of their culture by other cultures: gay Mexican Muslims, basically.
3) They wouldn’t cite Citizens United, or corporate personhood, or media owned by the rich – since they probably don’t know anything about these things – but they do recognize that their Republican politicians have been promising them all kinds of cultural victories, and trickled down prosperity, and they see that they have waited 35 years for this, and not only has it not been delivered, their circumstances are worse. They see that Wall Street got bailed out and Middle America didn’t. They see that the game is rigged, and they are being abused not only by foreigners, but by their ostensible leaders.Now, I THINK that the Trump supporters are growing more ticked off about their jobs/future than they are about gay rights. So you have Trump pulling in 40% of the Republican party, and Sanders pulling close to 50% of the Democrat party, and both factions are discontent with the financial elites. That is important common ground, and represents a LOT of American voters. This isn’t Nader’s 7%. This is MUCH bigger than that, and the mainstream apologists are missing the scope of this “statement.” Note, for example, that Trump is in favor of some kind of universal health care. Trump + Sanders on this issue represents a LOT of support. So if you are telling me progress on this is not practical, and not pragmatic, I tell you that you aren’t paying attention to what is happening. These are not 7% sandcastle movements that are going to get washed away with the inevitable high tide. This is different. And Hillary and Rove and Kristol are imperiled by their blindness. Which is great as far as I’m concerned.
I also am among those who believe that the Republicans are headed to even greater trauma before this thing is over, and that the strange bedfellows within that party may split. You’ve got all those corporatists meeting on that island off of Georgia trying to figure out how they are going to keep the party together, and they so far are not showing signs that they understand what the problem is, so I’m not sure they are going to come up with a plan that will keep their hold on the party.
ZooeyModerator“Pragmatic,” to me, is just marketing. It’s a positive-sounding label for basically sticking with the status quo while making baby steps towards progress.
Hillary isn’t “pragmatic.” She’s a sell-out. She will certainly make baby steps in the right direction, like Obama did, but you cannot reasonably expect her to change the way business is done. In banking. In campaign finance. In gerrymandering. In corporate personhood.
In foreign policy, she’s an imperialist. Straightforward, dominate the globe militarily.
I don’t know why Bernie’s platform is impractical. Universal Health Care seems to be pragmatic in every other advanced country, as well as several countries one could not call “advanced.” So is paid maternity leave.
Every single progressive achievement has been “not pragmatic” at some point: abolition, women’s suffrage, civil rights, desegregation, 40-hour work week, everything.
Besides which – and here is the kicker – nobody has yet even bothered to explain why “reaching too far” means that one will end up with less than if one “reaches nearby.” It’s just stated as Fact by Hillary supporters.
We didn’t abolish slavery by reaching for a six-day work week. We didn’t achieve women’s suffrage by pushing to have women’s votes count for 3/5 of a man’s vote. We didn’t get desegregation by asking for African Americans to get 2% of the student population. I am supposed to believe that Hillary is going to make more progress that Sanders? Really?
No fucking way.
Screw Hillary. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for her under any circumstances.
Her victory will only serve to reinforce the Business-as-Usual conduct of this government, and that just is not acceptable to me at all. You can take your Clintons, Obamas, your Gary Harts, and just shove them. I am having none of it.
March 9, 2016 at 11:52 pm in reply to: Man Who Assaulted Black Woman At Trump Rally Learns It Ruined His Life #40330
ZooeyModeratorIf indeed Trump is in favor of single-payer universal health insurance…2 things about that.
1. He’s running on his own money. He is therefore not beholden, like virtually everyone else is, to money from the pharms and private insurers.
2. I also would never be persuaded to vote for him, even with that. His overt racism is too much for me and having a Putin in office who thinks and talks that way for 4 years would be bad. I’ll wait until a progressive shakes free of the pharms and insurers and vote for them some day.
Well…on #1. I saw somewhere that he isn’t running on his own money. That’s complete Trumpian spin. He has spent a couple of million. The rest has come from fundraising. The sources…I do not know.
But we should find out.
-
AuthorPosts


