587 replies to this topic

[TWC]

3.) This all started because douchey Cubbies Blues, is one of those politically-correct, false-outraged, cunt balls.

Lemme tell you something about "Cubbie Blues": he's not. But does he have an issue with that horrid person Marge Schott? Sure. Does he have reason? Sure. Schott was pretty reprehensible. You want to defend someone who insisted upon referring to her black players as "niggers"? Have at it, kid. There's plenty of room for you on that train. It's fucking great and all that you're impressed with her giving a shit about dogs and cats and whatevers.

But folks WILL judge you on what you DO. And when what you DO involves saying shitty stuff, like calling black folks "niggers", or referring to people who disagree with you -- just disagree with you -- as "passive-aggressive, moronic and pussylicious", well both you and Marge Schott can go fuck off.

[fromthemitten]

Somebody call a coroner cuz TWC just killed Morken's shit

[Cubbie Blues]

I have been called many things in the past, including douche, but, politically correct has never been one of them. (Side note, what is a cunt ball by the way? I must have my anatomy all screwed up.) Mork, you can get into your egg and fly back to space where you apparently came from.

It's great that you can put on rose colored glasses and see only the good she did for dogs and kids. Meanwhile ignoring the racist remarks about over 43 million Americans. No, it's not OK too call her cute or eccentric for being a racist. You have only been proving your ignorance by continuing this. If you think someone shouldn't be judged by what they say, then why be offended when I call shit stains, shit stains? Honestly the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views.

"I slimply stated that Marge Schott did some positive things as owner of the Reds"
Yeah, like fire most of the Scout's because all they do is sit around and watch baseball. Or, take down the out of town games because why would anyone want to know what is going on in another game while watching the one they were at? She wasn't banned from baseball because she was a good person. Quite the opposite.

I have no more use for you sir.

nanoo nanoo

[Tommy]

nanoo nanoo

That made me spit up.

[hansman1982]

I'm gonna guess that Morken is a faithful listener to Jim Rome and Cigar Dave.

[Morken]

I'm gonna guess that Morken is a faithful listener to Jim Rome and Cigar Dave.

I'm gonna guess that you eat a lot of hamburgers.

[Morken]

3.) This all started because douchey Cubbies Blues, is one of those politically-correct, false-outraged, cunt balls.

Lemme tell you something about "Cubbie Blues": he's not. But does he have an issue with that horrid person Marge Schott? Sure. Does he have reason? Sure. Schott was pretty reprehensible. You want to defend someone who insisted upon referring to her black players as "niggers"? Have at it, kid. There's plenty of room for you on that train. It's fucking great and all that you're impressed with her giving a shit about dogs and cats and whatevers.

But folks WILL judge you on what you DO. And when what you DO involves saying shitty stuff, like calling black folks "niggers", or referring to people who disagree with you -- just disagree with you -- as "passive-aggressive, moronic and pussylicious", well both you and Marge Schott can go fuck off.

Another emotional dumbass...

Why are you unable to separate a person's character, from their effectiveness in their area of work? Why are you so dense?

Is Ty Cobb a bad baseball player, because he was a racist asshole?

You're going to avoid the question, because it pretty much wraps things up.

Learn to think with logic, not emotion, cuntlips.

[Morken]

I have been called many things in the past, including douche, but, politically correct has never been one of them. (Side note, what is a cunt ball by the way? I must have my anatomy all screwed up.) Mork, you can get into your egg and fly back to space where you apparently came from.

It's great that you can put on rose colored glasses and see only the good she did for dogs and kids. Meanwhile ignoring the racist remarks about over 43 million Americans. No, it's not OK too call her cute or eccentric for being a racist. You have only been proving your ignorance by continuing this. If you think someone shouldn't be judged by what they say, then why be offended when I call shit stains, shit stains? Honestly the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views.

"I slimply stated that Marge Schott did some positive things as owner of the Reds"
Yeah, like fire most of the Scout's because all they do is sit around and watch baseball. Or, take down the out of town games because why would anyone want to know what is going on in another game while watching the one they were at? She wasn't banned from baseball because she was a good person. Quite the opposite.

I have no more use for you sir.

nanoo nanoo

Winning a World Series, keeping ticket and concession prices extremely low and supporting various child, poor, and animal charities.

[Tommy]

Yeah, you're just too smart for the rest of us, Mork.

[Morken]

Yeah, you're just too smart for the rest of us, Mork.

Answer the question.

Is Ty Cobb a bad baseball player, because he was a racist asshole?

[Morken]

It's great that you can put on rose colored glasses and see only the good she did for dogs and kids. Meanwhile ignoring the racist remarks about over 43 million Americans. No, it's not OK too call her cute or eccentric for being a racist. You have only been proving your ignorance by continuing this. If you think someone shouldn't be judged by what they say, then why be offended when I call shit stains, shit stains? Honestly the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views.

I'm going to ignore your corny 80's reference, and focus solely on this paragraph. I'm going to break it down, and call you out on your inconsistencies and passive-aggressive intentions.

1.) "No, it's not OK to call her cute or eccentric for being racist".

This is an example of you lying in order to further your accusations against me. I've never referred to Marge Schott as anything closely resembling "eccentric" or "cute". What a cowardly, passive-aggressive attempt to debate. The words I used to describe Schott's comments were "Bitter" and "illogical", amongst others. I also clearly stated that she deserved all the criticism she got for the statements she made.

2.) "Honesty the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views".

Another 'smear' statement. Passive-aggressiveness is your thing. You've basically called me a bigot. Awesome! I've made no statements that would be offensive to any race, sexual preference, or specific group, period. Yet you call me a bigot for 1 reason. Simple ignorance. You're unable to identify the basis of my sentiment. I very simply stated that Marge Schott did some good things as an owner, in an attempt to provide an example of female contributions to baseball, providing to the spirit of this thread. I gave very clear examples of Schott's positive contributions(World Series, charitable causes, low ticket prices). That's all. I didn't say that Schoot was a ''great" owner. Shit, I didn't even say she was a "good" owner. I simply stated that she did some good things as owner of the Reds. That's all.

But you're false outrage blinded you from any logic. While being out debated, you resorted to accusing me of being a bigot. Honestly, it makes me feel bad for you. You're simple too fucking stupid to understand the very simple point I made.

[Cubbie Blues]

I'm going to ignore your corny 80's reference, and focus solely on this paragraph. I'm going to break it down, and call you out on your inconsistencies and passive-aggressive intentions.

1.) "No, it's not OK to call her cute or eccentric for being racist".

This is an example of you lying in order to further your accusations against me. I've never referred to Marge Schott as anything closely resembling "eccentric" or "cute". What a cowardly, passive-aggressive attempt to debate. The words I used to describe Schott's comments were "Bitter" and "illogical", amongst others. I also clearly stated that she deserved all the criticism she got for the statements she made.

2.) "Honesty the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views".

Another 'smear' statement. Passive-aggressiveness is your thing. You've basically called me a bigot. Awesome! I've made no statements that would be offensive to any race, sexual preference, or specific group, period. Yet you call me a bigot for 1 reason. Simple ignorance. You're unable to identify the basis of my sentiment. I very simply stated that Marge Schott did some good things as an owner, in an attempt to provide an example of female contributions to baseball, providing to the spirit of this thread. I gave very clear examples of Schott's positive contributions(World Series, charitable causes, low ticket prices). That's all. I didn't say that Schoot was a ''great" owner. Shit, I didn't even say she was a "good" owner. I simply stated that she did some good things as owner of the Reds. That's all.

But you're false outrage blinded you from any logic. While being out debated, you resorted to accusing me of being a bigot. Honestly, it makes me feel bad for you. You're simple too fucking stupid to understand the very simple point I made.

I have no more use for you sir.

nanoo nanoo

[hansman1982]

I don't think anyone would ever debate you that Ty Cobb was a terrible baseball player because he was dirty or a horrible racist.

However, noone will ever bring him up in a discussion that is taking place about getting more people into baseball. This discussion has been based on why there are no female baseball players, why there are few women in the front office and who can we look for in the future. We want fewer Ty Cobb's and Marge Schott's in baseball.

Under no circumstances should Marge Schott be held up as an example in this discussion.

To put it another way. 50 years ago this discussion would have been very relevant if you replace women with blacks. Now imagine that Jackie Robinson was the black male version of Marge Schott and Ty Cobb. Would you want to mention him in a discussion about getting more minorities in baseball?

Sure Marge Schott did some good things. I am sure I could find a hundred 19th century slave owners who did nice things to groups they gave a crap about. Should anyone EVER bring them up in a discussion about what we should look for in employers?

Edit: Furthermore, her positive actions as an owner are drug down by her "personality". I am sure minorities just LOVED going to work every day knowing that someone who hated them was their boss.

Again, did some nice things, sure. Should be held up as a role model. No.

[Morken]

I'm going to ignore your corny 80's reference, and focus solely on this paragraph. I'm going to break it down, and call you out on your inconsistencies and passive-aggressive intentions.

1.) "No, it's not OK to call her cute or eccentric for being racist".

This is an example of you lying in order to further your accusations against me. I've never referred to Marge Schott as anything closely resembling "eccentric" or "cute". What a cowardly, passive-aggressive attempt to debate. The words I used to describe Schott's comments were "Bitter" and "illogical", amongst others. I also clearly stated that she deserved all the criticism she got for the statements she made.

2.) "Honesty the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views".

Another 'smear' statement. Passive-aggressiveness is your thing. You've basically called me a bigot. Awesome! I've made no statements that would be offensive to any race, sexual preference, or specific group, period. Yet you call me a bigot for 1 reason. Simple ignorance. You're unable to identify the basis of my sentiment. I very simply stated that Marge Schott did some good things as an owner, in an attempt to provide an example of female contributions to baseball, providing to the spirit of this thread. I gave very clear examples of Schott's positive contributions(World Series, charitable causes, low ticket prices). That's all. I didn't say that Schoot was a ''great" owner. Shit, I didn't even say she was a "good" owner. I simply stated that she did some good things as owner of the Reds. That's all.

But you're false outrage blinded you from any logic. While being out debated, you resorted to accusing me of being a bigot. Honestly, it makes me feel bad for you. You're simple too fucking stupid to understand the very simple point I made.

I have no more use for you sir.

nanoo nanoo

Exactly the response I expected from you.

[Cubbie Blues]

It's great that you can put on rose colored glasses and see only the good she did for dogs and kids. Meanwhile ignoring the racist remarks about over 43 million Americans. No, it's not OK too call her cute or eccentric for being a racist. You have only been proving your ignorance by continuing this. If you think someone shouldn't be judged by what they say, then why be offended when I call shit stains, shit stains? Honestly the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views.

I'm going to ignore your corny 80's reference, and focus solely on this paragraph. I'm going to break it down, and call you out on your inconsistencies and passive-aggressive intentions.

1.) "No, it's not OK to call her cute or eccentric for being racist".

This is an example of you lying in order to further your accusations against me. I've never referred to Marge Schott as anything closely resembling "eccentric" or "cute". What a cowardly, passive-aggressive attempt to debate. The words I used to describe Schott's comments were "Bitter" and "illogical", amongst others. I also clearly stated that she deserved all the criticism she got for the statements she made.

2.) "Honesty the more someone defends a bigot the more that person appears to have the same views".

Another 'smear' statement. Passive-aggressiveness is your thing. You've basically called me a bigot. Awesome! I've made no statements that would be offensive to any race, sexual preference, or specific group, period. Yet you call me a bigot for 1 reason. Simple ignorance. You're unable to identify the basis of my sentiment. I very simply stated that Marge Schott did some good things as an owner, in an attempt to provide an example of female contributions to baseball, providing to the spirit of this thread. I gave very clear examples of Schott's positive contributions(World Series, charitable causes, low ticket prices). That's all. I didn't say that Schoot was a ''great" owner. Shit, I didn't even say she was a "good" owner. I simply stated that she did some good things as owner of the Reds. That's all.

But you're false outrage blinded you from any logic. While being out debated, you resorted to accusing me of being a bigot. Honestly, it makes me feel bad for you. You're simple too fucking stupid to understand the very simple point I made.

• "Like many old people, she hyperbolized her feelings, while exaggerating her statements."
  - yeah that could never be construed as eccentric
  - you say hyperbolize and I say racist
• I was in no way passive-aggressive. I said it pretty clearly. If you continue to defend a racist as being a good person you will eventually be thought to have the same views.

There are probably a lot of racists that have donated money. That does not make them someone who we should commend in any way. She was a despicable human being that was banned by MLB. That in no way should be someone that deserves anything even remotely resembling praise.