Jump to content

quigley

Full Members
  • Posts

    1440
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by quigley

  1. EJNO is supposedly really smart and had the potential to be a leader. Wilkins, at least physically, appears ideal for at OT. It he leaves, it would be a loss. Both were passed on the depth chart by true freshman. I wonder if this isn't a Covid-related lack of conditioning thing.
  2. I don't like their rulings, but the judges themselves aren't dumb. They're even worse. They are goons who allow themselves to be useful idiots to maintain a decrepit ruling class.
  3. He was a curious take based on recent OU DB recruiting strategy. The Sooners had favored taller, stouter DBs. Wonder if this is a sign for Bowman? (I know that the buzz is about him playing offense)
  4. 1. Agree with Buckley being an ass. 2. Agree with incremental change as a fallacy. I'm commenting on their propositions, not their practice. We agree that they don't live up to their word (see above).
  5. He's a populist in the European tradition with his severe xenophobia. American populism has been more economic generally (Wallace would be an exception to this). Populists in America want class rebellion, not race war. He's definitely reactionary.
  6. I agree about this being ideological. The values you're espousing are Libertarian. Conservatism is different. Conservatism is about maintaining the status quo with incremental change. It supports gun rights because they're part of the American tradition (at least the spaghetti Western version). Conservatism supports free market philosophy for the same reason (ignoring history also). It doesn't support accountability/responsibility for marijuana use because it isn't part of White American history. Libertarianism focuses on rights/responsibilities and free markets for the sake of these individual principles. In practice, the Republican Party has housed both strains of American political thought. Now, it's focused on preventing any meaningful change and reverting to a nostalgic past.
  7. Agree with hobbes2702 in a sense. The Wm F Buckley-ish version of the term described incremental change to the society. The rationale for slow change was that society was functioning pretty well and that changes have unintended consequences. In practice, things weren't good for all. And "slow change," for those who benefited from the status quo, wasn't desired at all. Ego, the current Republicans want to block everything because things are okay in the eyes of their supporters.
  8. Accountability, free market theory, individual freedoms would best be described as "Libertarian." There is a Libertarian wing to the Republican party, but, in as governing practice, that has been squeezed out. Republican administrations have been adept give Federal subsides to favored industries to allow them to win a governing coalition (fossil fuels, agribusiness, eg), contrary to free market theory. Republicans focus on certain freedoms for individuals (guns) over others (drugs, reproductive rights) in illogical ways. They favor rights of business, especially big, lobbyist-supported business, without recognizing there responsibilities of these businesses.
  9. In theory, because "Conservatives" want to protect the society from outside invaders. See Eisenhower. In practice, because "Conservatives" use the military-industrial complex to enrich themselves at the cost of American soldiers lives and money from American taxpayers.
  10. Gerrymandering is one of the "original sins" of American politics. The GOP Supreme Court's denial of this shows that they have no problem being complicit to voter suppression. Corporations have political voice (Citizens United), but people no longer do (Common Cause).
  11. If you're referring to BearSchlong's post, I agree.
  12. I did something similar in MoCo.
  13. I'm guessing your referring to Dusty Dvoracek, who I'd view a positive example of can be done with a second chance. Dvoracek was addicted to alcohol and did almost kill a friend. Stoops made him sit out a year and get clean had a zero tolerance policy. Dusty graduated, got drafted, and is calling the UT-Baylor game today. If he'd been thrown into the trash heap, his recovery would undoubtedly been harder.
  14. Your words of derision hurt the discourse and yourself. People are multidimensional. I'm better at some things than others, and I'm better one day than the next. Using the extreme example, Mixon wasn't at his worst one day and at one instance. Do you deny that he can improve beyond it? If you carry your simplistic view beyond your internet bluster into your real life, most people will eventually disappoint you. They have and will make severe mistakes. Those people won't be famous and they won't be caught on camera, but those instances have and will occur. Hopefully, in the real world, you'll be able to find a way to use your ability and position to help them succeed beyond it. RE: the Mixon situation. I didn't support his return to OU. I'd have like to have seen him transfer. It would have afforded him an opportunity to more definitively state he'd paid a price and learned from the incident. I was also baffled and disappointed by OU giving Green-Beckham a roster spot.
  15. You'll have to remind me when I said I supported it. I didn't, and I don't. I also don't think that a person should be define by his single worse action if there is contrition and advancement. And definitely don't support language that makes him subhuman.
  16. The first step to getting out of a hole is to stop digging. If your trying to show you're superior, using language that would make 5th graders laugh at you isn't the helping. My goal isn't to get you to lay off criticizing OU, it's allow you to do better.
  17. Sure, define the actions as despicable, even define them as despicable. Defining them as inanimate objects or sub-human coarsens the discourse without aiding your point.
  18. I agree, and what you're talking about is "close game luck." OU's certainly had it during the Riley tenure. OU regular season record under Riley in one score games (final less than 7 pts) 2017: 3-1 2018: 4-1 2019: 4-1 One score games trend to W-L that are ~ 50%, so OU record of 79% is unsustainable. This year, with a first year QB, the Sooners may have a reckoning (already they're 1-2 in such games). Schnellenberger is poor example. He was a reactionary hire based on severely flawed logic. OU wanted to throw the ball (true), and his Miami teams had beaten OU (true), because they threw the ball (not true!), ergo he'd turn OU into a school that could throw the ball and win. This ignored the fact that he'd gone 26-23 in his last four years at Louisville and that his passing attack was no longer cutting edge.
  19. OU and Texas are different jobs, and this is probably reflected in the coaches who've been successful at these schools. OU has a dedication to winning (including pushing beyond the boundaries of the rules) like other schools with similar histories and resource bases (eg, Neb and Tenn). The Sooners don't have the financial or, more importantly, recruiting resources that other elite schools like UT or USC do. Coaches who've been successful at OU, Wilkinson (split-T), Switzer (wishbone), and Stoops (air raid), have all installed innovative offensive systems and recruited to those systems. OU needs that innovation because of their relative lack of cache vs other elite college football programs (UT, USC) with built in recruiting advantages. Without innovative coaching, OU can easily slide into the morass that they were in during the 1990s or become perennial also-rans like Neb or Tenn.
  20. Please chose a derision that doesn't dehumanize, or better yet, describe the objectionable behavior specifically. For example, "They’ve taken a lot of players we wouldn’t have, and they’ve kept around a lot of players who've committed crimes or gotten into trouble." And yeah, I'm the thought police if those thoughts minimize the humanity of others because it seeps into the way people treat others.
  21. If OU can hold on to them, they're going to have a historic skill position class for '22, possibly without a QB.
  22. Unfortunately, not so fast. A Democrat from Michigan should have no trouble this cycle, but here we are. If the Dems don't control the Senate in 2021, Peters in Michigan may share blame with Cunningham. Peters will hopefully hang on this time but needs to announce his retirement in 2025.
  23. I understand and agree with the sentiment overall. Here, the point of leading with it is to emphasize that, despite disagreement with Biden on these issues, he's still clearly preferred to the alternative. This licenses others with similar views either to vote for Biden or at least stay home.
×
×
  • Create New...