THIS! He was lukewarm at best in his support of Kap.

Yep, Russell, Cam should have spoken up. They were the top "black" QB's at the time. They didn't and history will judge that. Asking Eli, Rothlesbeger to comment would have been weird.
I'd like to think he would of but I doubt it. He avoids controversy up to this point in his career like the plague. He can talk to the press for 30 minutes and not say a bad thing about another team/player/coach or anything controversial. I'm sure he's been asked about race issues or some Trump tweet/comment before and I'm sure he's deflected it to I'm focused on the Raiders this week.


I'm not knocking him for that skill. It's an essential skill for a QB in 2020. I'd rather my potential GOAT QB stay away from controversies as a general rule. So maybe he was worried about being judged by history?
[Reply]

6 years ago BLM the organization started. And in the site it used cases of justified shootings as part of the “movement”. Often associated with the criminal element of the rioters and looters.

So now during this go around, I can only speak for me; but I associate the comment “black lives matter” to the organizational support, and not just the free idea that black lives do in fact matter. Because of course they do, all lives do.

And conversely, just typing that, I’m imagining some of you read “All Lives Matter” as a movement you find inaccurate, instead of just the idea; that yes all lives do matter.


So somebody explained to me, saying all lives matter is like saying all parents die after hearing a friend say they just lost their mom or dad. I found that interesting. Because, and again I’m only speaking for myself, saying all parents die sounds pretty insensitive, on just one level, it was meant to be insensitive.

If we both lost a parent around the same time and we just looked at each other with sadness, and intent of compassion, all parents die, Im sorry you’re going through this. Would that still be insensitive?

Intent always means something. And it can be hard to tell between good or bad intention when there’s just emotional outbursts and name calling
[Reply]

My favorite metaphor I've heard so far is that "'Save the rainforest' doesn't mean 'fuck all of the other forests.'" It's not that "all lives don't matter;" it's that "black lives are the ones that are being disproportionately impacted by this situation."

Agree with you that people get worked up about the movements associated with BLM/ALM more so than the underlying concepts.
[Reply]

Yeah but if I've dedicated my life to Deciduous trees and respond with "Yeah, I like Maples!!" I shouldn't get "Fuck you, Treeist!! - you're part of the problem and clearly enjoy the deforestation of the amazon!!"

Let's not act like those poor withering daisies are just out there absorbing blows left and right from people who think Law Enforcement is getting a pretty shitty shake in this thing.

It's remarkable hypocrisy in that regard. The BLM crowd is disregarding and demeaning ideas just as badly in their own right.
[Reply]

It’s perceived that way at least..... and now it’s everywhere. Almost the new church of Latter Day Saints. So I also fear it’s causing more separation from people who are getting tired of hearing the same emotional outcry from 6 years ago, and still no conversations about viable solutions.
[Reply]

It doesn't make you a treeist just incredibly insensitive. Someone is talking about saving the rainforest and your response is basically dismissing their point to talk about maples. Just like anyone that walks up to a conversation and immediately changes the topic to something else.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
[Reply]

Agree with that, and it's my biggest issue with all of this. I'm on board with raising awareness of the issues, but I haven't heard a clear "so what?" from anyone.

Police brutality? Clearly there's some work to be done there. 99% of cops are great at what they do, but how can we help them to deescalate situations more effectively and weed out the assholes? Policies can at least help that, though it's not at all easy.

Racial biases? Man, it's hard. As has been pointed out, police ARE biased against people of color. But people of color are also more likely to be dangerous to cops, so at some level the bias is justified. I just don't know what the solution there is other than to continue to support social programs aimed at reducing poverty, particularly among people of color.

I suppose there's an argument to be made that reducing the number of minor crimes that people get arrested for is the way to go since they tend to disproportionately impact POC (e.g., drugs), but that's about the only concrete solution I've really heard that truly seems like it will help.
[Reply]

How about the fact that a group called BLM chooses to focus on .1% of black homicides?

My biggest problem with BLM is they only seem to care when a white person takes a black life. That’s why my argument against them isn’t “All Lives Matter”, it’s “All Black Lives Matter”.

BLM hasn’t once spoken out about the deaths caused by riots which have led to more blacks being killed than unarmed blacks that have been killed by cops this year.
[Reply]

The systems are fine (not perfect and more training is never bad though) and all people are equal under the law. Individuals within the system are not fine (no matter how much training they get) and do not always treat everyone equally under the law. This is why there is no clear messaging or sane changes coming because the problems are not ones that can be protested or legislated away.
[Reply]

The systems are not fine. We ask the police to do too much. We need to decrease police, increase people who work with mental health and substance abuse, even homelessness. We currently ask the police to do all of this. Let people specialize and let the police focus on where they are most needed.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
[Reply]

Being on the losing end of a very public and contentious debate /= persecution.
[Reply]

Yeah, the defund police is really about moving resourses around. At least the rational ones.

I'm sure most cops dont want to be dealing with calls to remove the homeless, unarmed or non-threatening mentally unstable people, addicts who have overdosed etc. Why not let some other more qualified group/people deal with stuff like that and let the cops focus on getting the hardened criminals, dangerous people off the streets?
[Reply]

Like I told cdcox in DC last night, sounds good on paper but let’s see it work in the real world

Unless the gov squashes it, Minneapolis will be the guinea pig... I’m betting they change their tune PDQ when a few of these unarmed social workers end up dead or in the hospital
[Reply]

Yep. This will be the big litmus test. When I worked at Argentine, the health care workers, teachers, and social workers I knew had no issues in the community and were welcomed. There was never a moment where me, a derpy white kid from Lawrence, ever felt unsafe working in Urban KCK.

In the past, white liberal folk really love community solutions on paper but then call the cops the moment they feel unsafe. Hell, a few of the most liberal KU students who you best believe would share every liberal hashtag and cause they could on social media flat out told me (without a shred of irony) that I was putting myself in danger by choosing to student teach for a year at J.C. Harmon (they said the car I drove would make me a target). These were the liberal kids who chose to student teach at Blue Valley North or Lawrence Free State.

If these solutions are going to work, the cocktail white liberal crowd is going to have to do a hell of a lot more than give some vapid lip service over a hashtag. One interesting thing I’ve seen on the educator side is that black educators are (rightly) asking white liberal teachers to now speak up on modern segregation in schools. The silence from a lot of that white liberal teacher crowd (many who teach at wealthy suburban schools) is definitely getting noticed.
[Reply]

You had replied to Chiefzilla about his good job posting some story about the numbers conservatives use to confuse the issue. I was saying you should ignore any and all of that shit from both sides of the isle and just look at the numbers yourself. So no, I was replying to you.
[Reply]