JJ Husker

This is about the victim complex spurring on the 'war on Christmas' narrative, and the weak arguments that feed into it. It's about the obstinate suspicion that surrounds the usage of "happy holidays" and how the superciliousness towards those who consider that important is justified.Perhaps this is the best way to understand it for those who don't: Christmas, the religious holiday, isn't under attack. But the non-religious celebration of this time of year, that's no less special to people like me than Christmas is to you. This celebration is under attack, IMO, with every insistence that it's not part of the season at all, and every expression of hostility towards stores or schools or whatever that make an effort to be inclusive.Again, I don't believe most posters here actually share in any of that. But a number do seem to buy into all the arguments that are used to prop it up, and those are certainly worth dissecting, IMO. Now we may be getting somewhere. I certainly don't want to take anything from you or others and I feel you have as much right to enjoy the season as anyone does. But I am struggling to understand exactly what it is you feel is under attack. There is Christmas (Christian-religous), Hannakuh (Jewish-religious), Kwanzaa (African American-secular) and New Years (secular). I apologize if I have left any off the list. I understand celebrating one or more of these individual holidays but I don't quite understand not observing any of the individual holidays but wanting to instead claim "Happy Holidays" as an all inclusive greeting that somehow transcends any of the individual holidays. If we eliminate the 4 holidays mentioned, is there still a "Happy Holidays" to be concerned about? I really, really, really don't care what stores do or what people choose to say as a greeting. But how does "Happy Holidays" exist if not on the basis of these other 4 holidays? Can or would it even exist without Christmas.....without Hannakuh? I'm trying to see this from a secular viewpoint and I'm struggling with it.

The defense was called the Blackshirts long before the run in the 90's started. It was even called the Blackshirts when our defense had years that weren't all that great. That's exactly what I said, is it not?

I also would agree with 84.......if I cared anymore what they called the defense. The only applicable words are soft and non-aggressive. I just cringe when game announcers use the term "blackshirts" and then we proceed to get 40 or 50+ hung on us. I've made the argument numerous times that Blackshirts simply refers to our defensive starters and that it does not only refer to the type of defense our best mid 90's teams played. They were the Blackshirts long before that and they were not always that dominant. But anymore I just don't care what they are called and would prefer it wasn't the Blackshirts as it doesn't seem they are worthy of any type of special name that doesn't involve the color pink. I don't blame the players themselves as much as I do the scheme.

I like bourbons and ryes. Also like Jameson and some other Irish whiskeys. Never have been a fan of scotch but Ive only had good scotch once and it didn't overly impress me. Got sh#t face drunk many, many years ago on cheap bar scotch & soda. Just haven't ever had the desire to fix that mistake and give scotch a fair chance. When I think of "regular" whiskey, I think of Canadian whiskey like CC or Windsor. Not a fan of those. I really like bourbon though. I don't drink whiskey very often but lately, when I do, I've been having either Bulleit Bourbon or Bulleit Rye. Those are both really good and the bottles are pretty cool looking too.

I'm really lost. What strawman did I heft up? I didn't request a private forum. I agree that Trump has piss poor character but I will stand by my statement that many hereabouts have not and do not acknowledge the appeal he did have to enough voters to get elected. The more typical response is to somehow cast those who did vote for him as being racist or a woman hater or an idiot or any of the other similar poor attributes of Trump himself. You and I may not have voted for him for those reasons but it does not mean his supporters like those things about him. They just deemed him slightly better than the alternative....a position that will get you castigated around here. You went to the trouble of posting that awesome (I do like it btw) strawman pic. Please explain how that applies to what I've said here cuz I'm not getting it.

And that isn't a personal attack? Maybe you should join Count.

It is more than a little, you don't notice it because 95% of the people who post in this forum favor the left. lol Perhaps you don't notice it's moderate left because you're not used to interacting with people who aren't on the far Right. That's the only explanation I can think of. Being vehemently anti-Trump is not the same as bring far Left. LMAO, I have interacted with people of all walks of life in several states with different demographics all over the world while not only traveling to other countries, but living there, as it is my job to do so. So that comment is laughable. I am anything but far right. I started as a registered Dem who voted for Bill, but over time the party has gotten so out of touch that it doesn't represent what I believe anymore. So I am more in the middle, leaning to the right with the agenda that they rolled out this year along with what has happened over the past 8 years. Trump isn't a real Republican, so you are right about that part. But that has nothing to do with how far left the majority is on here. That is why a lot of the non progressives have stopped posting here because it does no good to post here. All of the lib's on here will gang up whoever dared to post anything non progressive using liberal sources like Vox, NBC, CNN while chastising any use of "Faux" as a source. When the truth is that all of them are biased and skew any "facts" to fit their agenda. If anything this board is far left which is called being "progressive." The moderators even moderate it that way. Remember when I was banned for saying that someone couldn't comprehend what I was saying? Which you and a few others defended me and said that it wasn't ban worthy, thanks again by the way for speaking up as I still appreciate it. Then I saw you and a few others say the exact same thing that I did and didn't get banned. IMO none of us should have gotten banned for it, but these "rules" are only enforced on those who are not "progressive." I have nothing against anyone on here, but these are apparently the rules, unfair or not, that is the way it is. Which is why I don't post much in this section anymore. Excellent post! I wish there was a section of this board devoted to conservative ideas and thoughts. I would enjoy discussing current events with some like minded people. JJ has on his last several posts done nothing but give a possible explanation as to why Count blew up and both times he was told his opinion was "ridiculous" and "no point in going over the reasons Count made that post". It really is not worth it to have and express an opinion that is not the "moderate" view. Thank you. I was beginning to think I had no grasp of how to get my point across. I should be used to it, it seems to happen a lot particularly when a person posts something that falls anywhere short of accusing Trump of being the devil himself. Any attempt to explain why Trump has supporters is treated as if that person tacitly endorses everything about the man. The obvious problems he has blinds many to any possible reasons why a person would/could support him. It really stifles a lot of honest conversation because you know that you are going to be up against it.

And that was my point. Count chose to support Trump and the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. Probably contributed to his increased hostility. It could get somewhat annoying witnessing the incessant dog piling on Trump. Heck I don't like him and it amazes me at times that some spend so much time beating that dead horse. It may all be well deserved but it still adds up.This is ridiculous, sorry. People did this with Obama for years. How many people came on here and called Republican leaders a bunch of b****es and p***ies? He just couldn't control himself because his little feelings were hurt by people who don't like Trump? He could have made posts supporting/defending Trump without doing that, very easily. To borrow some overused Right phrasing, apparently triggered snowflake Trump fans who have their safe spaces violated can't do anything but lash out. Not sure how this is ridiculous. I'm simply stating what he did. I'm not endorsing it. This is a common problem I see in this type of venue, people assume any comments made are somehow in favor of some position. I'm simply commenting on what he did and postulating as to why. Sure he could've acted differently. I don't see the point in going over the reasons Count made that post if you don't consider them to be excuses for it. I don't see any point in continuing this any further either.

And that was my point. Count chose to support Trump and the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. Probably contributed to his increased hostility. It could get somewhat annoying witnessing the incessant dog piling on Trump. Heck I don't like him and it amazes me at times that some spend so much time beating that dead horse. It may all be well deserved but it still adds up.This is ridiculous, sorry. People did this with Obama for years. How many people came on here and called Republican leaders a bunch of b****es and p***ies? He just couldn't control himself because his little feelings were hurt by people who don't like Trump? He could have made posts supporting/defending Trump without doing that, very easily. To borrow some overused Right phrasing, apparently triggered snowflake Trump fans who have their safe spaces violated can't do anything but lash out. Not sure how this is ridiculous. I'm simply stating what he did. I'm not endorsing it. This is a common problem I see in this type of venue, people assume any comments made are somehow in favor of some position. I'm simply commenting on what he did and postulating as to why. Sure he could've acted differently.

And that was my point. Count chose to support Trump and the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. Probably contributed to his increased hostility. It could get somewhat annoying witnessing the incessant dog piling on Trump. Heck I don't like him and it amazes me at times that some spend so much time beating that dead horse. It may all be well deserved but it still adds up.

There's a problem with terminology here. Nobody should be arguing "for" any particular president. We need to be in favor of what is right. This, precisely this, is why Trump got elected. Not some line about dissatisfaction or disaffectation, but because people chose teams. That happened way before this election when people decided they were Liberal or Conservative, Republican or Democrat. There's truth and there's BS. What most of us are doing here, most have been for years, are arguing for truth. A lot of lies and misinformation has come out about Obama, and many of us have gone to great lengths to disprove those lies, and that's viewed as being pro-Obama. It's pro-Truth. I did the same thing with Bush. Same thing with Clinton. Same thing with Trump. Where people think this is pro-Obama or anti-Conservative is where they deviate from truth. TonyStalloni talked about it on this very page - "Many of you also say you need evidence from some study funded by any Tom, Dick and Harry to prove a point. Most of you are probably more internet savvy than me. I know what I see on the streets." Yes, evidence is key to a knowledgeable conversation. No, facts are not optional. Tony's "what I see on the streets" is factually inaccurate when applied to Trump as some panacea to what ails the Common Man. He'll find that out over the Trump presidency, but the truth of it, the facts of it, were there WAY before the election took place. That problem, post-factualisim, is what Trump's America is all about. That's what we're up against. We can fight it by not being pro-Trump, pro-Republican, pro-Democrat, but by being pro-facts. Do that, focus on that, and you'll find out you're on a much bigger team on this site than you think you are now. Good post. I don't disagree with any of this. I don't feel particularly outnumbered or on some other team. However I do feel I have moved slightly left of where I used to be and I do feel the general slant in this forum is still left of me. It's not a big deal and I'm not crying about it. It's just the way I perceive it. I only brought it up as an attempt to explain Count's recent behavior. I think we all noticed that his posting changed and got a bit more aggressive. I just hate to see long time posters get the boot. It's sort of like a family member moved away.

Sorry JJ. I like your posts...but this one is BS.Which part of it specifically is BS?I threw one shot in there (the last sentence) meant to stimulate (trolling a bit) the discussion. And the 98-2 may have been a little hyperbolic but, other than that I don't believe anything I said was inaccurate. Besides that it was basically my opinion based on what I've seen over the years on this board. I guess my opinion may be considered BS, wouldn't be the first time and it certainly won't be the last. It's pretty much all BS. As has been pointed out, there are way more than 2-4 conservatives I this site that "speak out about the left" and nothing ever happens to them. Then, when you add the last sentence it falls into the category of BS. Fine, that is your opinion. If you don't recognize that the general lean in the P&R forum and the administration of this board tends toward the left, I won't be able to convince you otherwise. I'm not claiming a person can't speak out against the left without getting banned (I've done it and I'm still here) but I do belive it makes a person more susceptible to that outcome. Just my opinion, maybe it is BS. The bigger point, that I'm not going to press, is the use of that one word as a contributing factor. We'll just leave that one alone but I think there is enough of a track record to back it up.

I get it LOMS. There are some who tend to lean to the right. But when it comes to Trump, there are quite a few less arguing for him. I certainly haven't, BRB hasn't, TG hasn't..... My point wasn't that it is correct to support Trump or that a person should. I don't because of his many problems. But some of us can and will acknowledge there are issues where a person like Trump may be considered desirable. It just seems that most spend their time vilifying him (usually justified BTW) for his bad points. My point was that it can become overwhelming and place a person in a defensive posture. I was only trying to place myself in Count's shoes and explain the behavior. Not saying it's right but, even for a guy like me that doesn't like Trump, I can recognize how lopsided most of these discussions are. Maybe that's inevitable considering Trump's many downsides but, if you are fed up with the status quo and the general trend to move left in this country and find yourself as one of the few willing to speak out in favor of the alternate direction, it easily could lead to this outcome. BTW,I didn't vote for Trump and I no longer identify as republican. I do still lean conservative though. I also didn't vote for HRC and will likely never identify as a Democrat and I won't ever be in the liberal camp. Laughably though, I have been accused of being a liberal lefty on this board....might have been cornstar, I don't recall.

Please don't mistake this is as supporting Trump but, of course he owns more stuff outside of this country than any other President has. How many billionaire (with a B) presidents have we had? I bet he owns more stuff in this country than any other also. That's what happens when you have that much money....you own stuff. But I guess we can crucify him for that too.

Sorry JJ. I like your posts...but this one is BS. Which part of it specifically is BS? I threw one shot in there (the last sentence) meant to stimulate (trolling a bit) the discussion. And the 98-2 may have been a little hyperbolic but, other than that I don't believe anything I said was inaccurate. Besides that it was basically my opinion based on what I've seen over the years on this board. I guess my opinion may be considered BS, wouldn't be the first time and it certainly won't be the last.

I will agree that Count's posting changed significantly over the past months. He did become more aggressive and seemed to not want to engage in conversation as much as he wanted to incite a reaction. We don't really know what all goes into forming others opinions and actions here on HB. All we can do is hazard some guesses and make some assumptions based on what they do post. I picture Count as being one of the millions that voted for Trump because he was fed up with working harder and having less to show for that effort. I've tried to make that point countless (no pun intended) times previously on this board, that Trump was elected because of dissatisfaction with the status quo and not because anyone particularly liked what he stood for. The majority hereabouts routinely would igore that narrative and focus on the worst aspects of Trump and some of his supporters. I imagine that, at some point, if a person decides Trump is their best option that they will out of necessity begin to support him. Considering the vast majority of active posters on this board deemed him the Antichrist and ceaselessly condemn everything about him, it isn't hard to see how a person who feels he was their best option can feel like they are being attacked from all sides by virtually everyone. I can easily imagine why and how Count's posting style changed. It doesn't really matter if these other posters are liberal left or moderates as knapp claims most are. If a person leans right at all, and they are constantly being ridiculed, attacked and shot down by large numbers of others, I think it is easy to see how a person can lump them into some catagory and give it a name. Maybe left isn't the correct term however, I don't think constant support of the dems, Obama, Hillary etc. and constant renunciation of Repubs, Bush, and conservative values can fairly be considered a moderate position either. I think all these terms are relative to where each person finds themselves on the scale. I've got no persecution complex but I may have a much different opinion of the political leanings of the majority of this board. Doesn't mean I'm right or anybody else is wrong, it just means we all see things a bit differently. I just think maybe Count started seeing it as him against the world and it affected his postings. Totally understandable IMO. And FWIW, I agree with what dudeguyy just posted.

There have only been about 3 posters actively supportive of Trump on this board. Count was one of them. The language and demeanor in which he has been posting the last few months provided the opportunity some had been waiting for to get things rebalanced to 98-2 instead of the unacceptable 97-3 odds. Plus he did use that one word that shall not be mentioned. Voldemort has nothing on that one. Not saying I agree at all but that is how it appears to me. Tread lightly if you want to speak out against the left.

Yep. Our CBs are 10 yards off and concede any pass 5-6 yards. I do not understand why our corners play off so much. It's brilliant. That's how you prevent giving up huge gains, don't challenge the short ones. Plus, it helps keep your offense off the field because the opponent is constantly driving on you. With the way our O line plays....I tells ya, it really is brilliance at work.

This says it all. I've got nothing to add.

He kind of looks the part and says interesting things. That's about it.

The law of averages prevents them from sucking that bad for a whole game.

Going with extra spicy bloody marys. They chase well with a nice stout. Thinking Deschutes Obsidian....

You lucky sonofa....

I think the name you're looking for rhymes with Wanker.