massraider
Footballguy
Did Biden pummel rally attendees with the harrowing tale of him falling off a bike, and include 4 or 5 different excuses, while mentioning how handsome he is?
No.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Consistency - hypocrisy (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
No.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
That is not a question that we should be even asking,” Jean-Pierre said. “Oh, my gosh, he’s the president of the United States, you know, he … I can’t even keep up with him.”
She continued: “We just got back from New Mexico, we just got back from California … just look at the work that he does, and look what he’s, how he’s delivering for the American public.”
She continued: “We just got back from New Mexico, we just got back from California … just look at the work that he does, and look what he’s, how he’s delivering for the American public.”
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
"You Wanna Go Outside With Me?"
(Joe Biden Tries to Fight Union Worker)
Also this gem...
"They asked me if I'd like to debate this gentleman, and I said 'no.' I said, 'If we were in high school, I'd take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him.'"
(Joe Biden Tries to Fight Union Worker)
Also this gem...
"They asked me if I'd like to debate this gentleman, and I said 'no.' I said, 'If we were in high school, I'd take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him.'"
Last edited by a moderator:
You're right that he didn't lie about the weather, I got that wrong. But his insecurity about the incident is what made it a headline. Just like the "stable genius" stuff.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
This one is easy.
<In Jeff Foxworthy voice>
"If you are agitated by Joe Biden's handlers trying to make him look fit and able but weren't disgusted when Sean Spicer explained away "covfefe"......you might be a hypocrite."
(Not saying you in particular, NB)
Thanks. I think that's exactly the issue. The people who thought covefe was something want to minimize the Biden gaffes. And vice versa.. It's all so tiring.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Yes and no. Often the issue with the previous guy was that they would try to explain that he meant to do it…rather than just say he misspoke. Hence…we have some awful excuse for what he meant bu Covfefe. So the issue was as much about the excuses and poor explanations as the gaffes or misspeaking. And yes that is an issue with Biden too. He is a poor speaker…they can easily just just say that rather than some excuses we do get.
Coach Beard
Footballguy
And yet you’re comfortable contributing to the problem by consistently pointing out hypocrisy of liberals while barely acknowledging conservatives ever make mistakes.
When was the last time you started a topic using an example of a conservative making an error instead of a liberal? You have this deep library of topics where liberals have done things wrong (even when the facts don’t support the claim, like when you tried to pass off a 2017 quote about Trump as a 2022 quote about Elon Musk, or a different topic when you failed to acknowledge the source of a quote you found so awful it warranting its own topic knew when she said was wrong and gave a specific apology for it an hour after saying it, long before you started the topic). You’ve made some vague references that conservatives also do things wrong but hardly ever cite a specific example of conservative wrongdoing, nothing bad enough to start a topic over.
It is a coincidence that the factual errors and omissions you make in topics you start always make liberals look worse and make conservatives look like blameless victims?
It’s possible you’re not consciously doing this. It’s possible you’re just repeating grievances you hear from your conservative friends and media sources with biases towards conservative viewpoints. But it’s so tiring seeing you say this is a problem we all need to work on when the available evidence says you clearly believe the problem is almost exclusively the domain of liberals.
And a general note about hyperfocus on hypocrisy like the kind you demonstrated here and across other topics… when you crusade against hypocrisy in the fashion that you do, you don’t give people the opportunity to change their minds about things, or acknowledge their own mistakes, or grow, or receive forgiveness. Hypocrisy is bad and wrong and people should try to avoid it, but it’s one piece of a much larger puzzle.
You’ve consistently brushed off people bringing up things you said a year+ ago, saying it’s unfair to expect you to remember something from so long ago, yet here you are crushing some journalist you probably hadn’t heard of until some conservative paired two of their actions two years apart. It’s precisely the standard you’ve claimed is unfair to hold yourself to, yet here we are. What isn’t hypocritical about that?
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Hypocrisy sucks. Pointing out hypocrisy without considering the context is extremely misleading and also sucks.
You know what sucks more than hypocrisy? Bothsides-ism. It discourages good faith behavior and rewards bad actors. Yet perversely it's a popular tactic that has somehow become a badge of honor in our political environment. My Dad is a card carrying both-sideser, and it's infuriating.
You know what sucks more than hypocrisy? Bothsides-ism. It discourages good faith behavior and rewards bad actors. Yet perversely it's a popular tactic that has somehow become a badge of honor in our political environment. My Dad is a card carrying both-sideser, and it's infuriating.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
BladeRunner
Footballguy
What's even worse is the incessant "It Ain't My Fault" argument.
Let me ask you this: Do you guys ever accept ANY responsibility for anything?
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Of course you do - I would to because it completely absolves me of having to take any responsibility at all. Win-Win.
timschochet
Footballguy
Good question. Some people here have criticized me for responding to your posts, and others. By answering nonsense, the argument goes, I am contributing to that nonsense. It’s a fair criticism. So yeah I take some responsibility for that.What's even worse is the incessant "It Ain't My Fault" argument.
Let me ask you this: Do you guys ever accept ANY responsibility for anything?
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
When was the last time you took responsibility for something? Genuine question because, at least to me, you don't portray yourself as the objective mind you're suggesting you are.Of course you do - I would to because it completely absolves me of having to take any responsibility at all. Win-Win.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Thanks for answering my question with a firm, "No, I don't.". I appreciate the honesty.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Doug B
Footballguy
From what I can see, Joe Bryant is a fair-minded person, for sure. I believe he earnestly seeks to understand the issues that he brings up.
What you point out is important all the same. Every one of us -- you, me, Joe, everyone -- carries around our life experiences and our home-grown ways of making sense of the world. This is the soul of bias -- to make a decision or distinction of any kind requires being able to draw upon bias. Indeed, to have a mind is to have bias. No one escapes that.
And yes, Joe's influences are plainly laid out. He does not and has not hidden them -- indeed, he has been open about how certain things get on his radar and the political persuasions of those he speaks with about these things in meatspace.
I can agree that the apparent one-sidedness is not always easy to stomach -- but it should help to recognize that in Joe's case, it comes from a good place. Good faith is being applied even in cases where you can tell that those speaking with Joe have not done so. At least how I see it.
Doug B
Footballguy
Whenever I read an online political debate, or an opinion piece in the media, the first instance of "both sides" represents an auto-fail. The debate is immediately lost.
If something is wrong, it's wrong on its own merits. The right/wrong distinction cannot be contingent on another wholly unrelated thing.
As for hypocrisy ... that's an essential element of the human condition. Calling out hypocrisy to score points in a debate is like accusing someone of being an oxygen-breather. "Because that's hypocritical" does not make a certain thing right or wrong -- again, that right/wrong status of a concept must stand or fall on its own merits.
Real human beings are inconsistent and real human beings are hypocritical. Not just here and there, but with great frequency. Just part of the package.
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993
Footballguy
As a charter member card carrying both-sideser I can unequivocally attest that hypocrisy runs rampant everywhere. It’s infuriating to me how intelligent well-meaning people like yourself can’t see how both red and blue teams are fundamentally playing the same game. Are there differences, of course, but they’re in the margins. The tribalism and lack of compromise from either side is killing this country. Do I have an opinion on which side is 5/10% worse than the other, sure, but I’m not gonna die on a hill for that small percentage.
Until we start holding accountable people from either side of the aisle and demanding compromise we will never move this country forward. And that certainly doesn’t start by standing on one side pointing your fingers over at the other.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks @Doug B I'm almost always talking to myself first here when I talk about how I hope we can be better. I make lots of mistakes and have lots of faults, but try really hard to apply good faith in how I discuss things. Thanks for the kind words.
I also see the hypocrisy - consistency thing a little different than I think maybe some are understanding my words. It's less for me about criticizing or dismissing the people doing it. And more about wanting us all to do better. Me included.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks GB. I know you're a thoughtful and kind person and I'm interested if you can unpack this more on you see both-sidesism as so negative.
I'm not disagreeing with you as I do see a good bit of it done (by both sides LOL) where people deflect the thing their side is doing with a "whatabout" the other side doing a similar thing. I agree things should stand on their own. But I also acknowledge how other people are treated or what they get to do in comparison to others is a fundamental part of society and how we perceive fairness and equality.
Would be interested in you elaborating on that more.
dkp993
Footballguy
I know you didn’t ask me but as a both sides charter member (lol) I feel compelled to address this. The both sides argument for me is basically never in defense or used as a whataboutism for a specific action, but almost always as a what is happening fundamentally isn’t exclusive to one party and both need to get better. The tribalism of wanting to blame one teams actions almost exclusively while ignoring your own teams behavior is decisive by nature and not something I subscribe too. Assigning blame and pointing fingers is a wasted exercise imo. Being solution based, learning from our mistakes and understanding we all need to work together to solve problems is my default setting (though I am human and sometimes ignore this setting, often to my own regret). Maybe this comes from 25 years of being a leader and overseeing large teams or maybe being wired this way helped me be successful at doing that. I don’t know. But if do I know anything it’s that blame never the solution.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks. I agree. But this also I think brings up an interesting point.
I think I'm in the minority on this but I do know quite a few people who are like me in I'm more likely to criticize my own side than the other.
I think it's somehow related to thinking I can create change with my own "side" more easily than those not on my side.
I also think it comes from having more a solution orientated view.
I find it super interesting that doing this seems to have caused feelings that I only criticize one side. Even to the point where I criticize the other side and prove that wrong in the same thread and it's ignored. That's fascinating.
I do this in lots of areas of my real life. I'm critical of Christians often with my Christian friends. I do the same thing with our business. I rarely if ever criticize our competition. There's no upside. But I'll be critical of how we do things at Footballguys.com. For the sole reason I want us to be better.
dkp993
Footballguy
100%. I never look at our competition (other the obviously to understand what they are doing), the lens for improvement always is pointed at within. I do this as a person/leader as well. Whenever something goes wrong or fails the very first question I ask myself is how could I have been better or done something differently.
massraider
Footballguy
It reads like lip service. Oh by the way, conservatives do this too. Not your intention? Fair enough. I doubt I'm the only one that reads it that way. In fact, I know I'm not.
Someone asked earlier when you started a thread criticizing conservatives. This isn't our imagination.
It's not your responsibility to be King Solomon, perfectly down the middle, showing no bias. I don't think that's a role anyone should be forced to take on.
But if someone points out that you only seem to find fault with liberals, I think that's fair. Should be easy to disprove.
Coach Beard
Footballguy
I would guess if we followed Joe around over the whole of his life, what you say here would hold true.
If all you knew of Joe was from his contributions to this political forum, it doesn’t hold up.
For example, the only times Joe brings up women of color in the PSF is to criticize them. I doubt people who know Joe personally would say he’s racist or misogynist, and compared to other middle aged straight white Christian males from the American south, he likely grades out really well in that category over the whole of his self. And yet, the evidence within the confines of this section of the board isn’t flattering.
And while moderation is a thankless job and I encourage anyone complaining about to try it themselves for a while and see how difficult it truly is, referring to Marsha Blackburn’s Home Economics degree as evidence of her lack of qualifications for the Senate Judiciary Committee is a bridge too far for Joe, but he’s super lenient about some truly mean-spirited content here about AOC and other liberal women of color in politics.
Again, that might be a subconscious act. Conservative media as a whole is pretty hostile towards women and frequently uses women of color in office as punching bags. So if that’s the consideration set for topic selection, then the results aren’t that surprising. And in Blackburn’s case in particular, there’s a chance Joe is probably more sensitive about protecting her because so many of his conservative friends voted for her and will again.
And none of this excuses Joe’s lack of effort to get the facts right in topics he starts, which is a rough pattern for someone who overall probably does really well to get facts correct and in proper context.
The hyperfocus on hypocrisy also comes off as the opposite of empathy and assumes the worst of people, while having empathy and assuming the best are two principles I presume Joe holds in high regard and lives out well.
It should be. But clearly it's not that easy.
It was posted:
I had literally just pointed out the hypocrisy of Conservatives and reminded folks I'd just said:
And there will be people today whoat the Trump tripping and will be up in arms over Biden falling.
We all can be better.
Which got a response of:
If people see and then ignore a post that does what they say I don't do, there's not a lot I can do.
With that said, I think I likely do point things out among Democrats more often. I wrote about why I do that above.
Last edited by a moderator:
Speaking of hypocrisy and moderation, when I got banned last week for insinuating someone was a POS, the "FBG Moderator" called me a POS in the ban note
Not true.
You made a post that said,
You were given a warning. People have asked over the years many times that we let them know why they were suspended. We try to do that and usually try to include the thing they said that caused the suspension.
We did that. The message in the moderator log shows it was sent to you and said:
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
I agreed to a great extent with your earlier criticism of @Joe Bryant but I think this goes too far and makes an implication which is, IMO, both repellent and completely unwarranted.
massraider
Footballguy
My first post agreed with you.
Honestly, I shouldn't have posted it, because your overall point is valid, and I single-handedly turned this into a "is Joe biased" thread, which is pointless and dumb, I apologize for that.
@massraider let's back to the really important stuff - I'm going to need help likely with the Footballguys Contest Query thing. 
General Malaise
Footballguy
Why do you think Joe only brings up women of color to criticize them? Is there some evidence of this? That's a really mean thing to say about a person unless it's verifiable.
We are all flawed and we have all said some regrettable things but my goodness, you are making a very strong accusation about a friend of mine who is kind, loving, caring, compassionate and not the least bit racist (unless he hid that from me, which - if he did - well played).
If somebody said that to me I'd be devastated. Especially if it weren't true or how I felt.
Joe should just shut these boards down and live his life. Tell us all to get lost. I would. I don't know he puts up with it.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
General Malaise
Footballguy
Well said, GM.
That was a baseless attack with no footing in reality.
Thanks BR. I know we don't agree on many things, but I think you're a good dude and this kind of attack on Joe takes a toll. How could it not?
Thanks GB. It's fine. It's unfortunately just part of it sometimes. No worries. You guys that know me know. And that's enough for me.
Coach Beard
Footballguy
You are misrepresenting what others have said here.
Massraider said you consistently point out the hypocrisy of liberals. That’s true. A single instance of you criticizing conservatives doesn’t prove that wrong, and certainly isn’t ignoring that point.
I was specific and careful about the words I chose, took great care to avoid saying you only criticize one side. A single data point isn’t proof of consistent behavior in either direction.
Last edited by a moderator:
Coach Beard
Footballguy
I don’t think Joe is racist or misogynist and I wasn’t accusing him of being either. There’s a bit of casual misogyny in his writing - it would be prudent for him to retire his use of phrases like “panties in a bunch” - but he doesn’t feature that nor does it stand out compared to the misogyny you see in some other sportswriting or other online commentary. Also, I’ve given Joe a lot of grief about the time he baselessly told his conservative friends that his message board guys think Trump supporters are racists who like to inflict pain upon minorities, and it would be irresponsible and hypocritical of me to do the same about him.
What Joe posts in the PSF is just a small sliver of the full person he is. I doubt he was aware of that pattern about women of color and I don’t think he was consciously doing it.
If I had to guess, I’d say it’s more of a reflection of what media sources or conversations inspired him to start topics in an already narrow range of discussion than who he is as a person. Much like how if a person limited their scope of topic-starting ideas to liberal-biased media sources or conversations they had at advocacy groups related to the Progressive Caucus, the sample would skew heavily towards why boomer white males suck so much. Wouldn’t necessarily mean that person hates men even if there was a pattern within that narrow scope.
Last edited by a moderator:
GordonGekko
Footballguy
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" - Ricky Gervais
Dealing with practical political reality here - Modern American politics is seeing a hard push from both sides of the aisle to get more minority women into elected office. They become more valuable to their Party apparatus as the "Cancel Culture" becomes more and more prevalent as they operate with a different level of general immunity.
The value of being a white heterosexual woman in American politics is basically zero now. When Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein got in, it was entirely different, but the world was entirely different too.
Winsome Sears gets more media time than Elise Stefanik. From a practical political discussion standpoint, that makes zero sense. However in terms of media optics and audience/voter engagement, it's practically a requirement now.
This is a section that talks about politics. Things are going to get said that offend people. You are going have to learn to live with it or leave. Every "community" has a tone and culture, online or real life or anywhere else. If this isn't the community for you, the Internet is a vast and wondrous place.
Here's the litmus test on "offense" though
1) Is the person attempting to provoke thought? (Good faith actor)
Or
2) Is the person attempting to just provoke other people for sport? (Bad faith actor)
Sometimes they look the same, but they are not. When one provokes thought, it triggers a lot of cognitive dissonance in others. Political viewpoints are a partial identity issue. Meaning when someone questions your political viewpoints, it can trigger some to feel as if their core identity and values are being judged. It's why talking politics is often taboo and creates such a visceral reaction in many.
In situation 1, being offended is a cost of doing business for free speech.
In situation 2, being offended is because someone decided to jump into a swimming pool full of other people and then use it as a personal toilet.
I've been in this community for 16 years and I call things as I see it. I call everyone out. Everyone. Both good and bad. Sometimes even Staff members. Sometimes I compliment people. Many times I criticize them.
I assess Joe Bryant as someone attempting to provoke thought. I don't see him as someone who is attempting to provoke others for sport. If I thought the latter was true, I would have demonetized the entire site and brand on general principle long ago.
Here's something you aren't addressing - Did these "women of color" do anything on a merit level to warrant criticism? You are ignoring the merit issue involved. Which makes it a purity test.
Lots of elected officials are just fully broken narcissists that want to be shielded from consequences of their own actions and have the rank and file subsidize the lion's share of the implied shame. So from within this overall category, you want to be angry about criticizing women of color when modern politics is phasing out mostly everyone else except women of color?
Are you provoked? Ask yourself if it's about thought or about sport.
“The more easily you get offended, the less developed you are as a human being.” - Robert Celner
GordonGekko
Footballguy
“Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics, and it is degrading to make the attempt.” - Christopher Hitchens
*******
Pointing out hypocrisy only matters to the ones that already largely agree with you. The pathology at work here is clearly you don't even agree with you.
Joe Bryant makes an effort to generate practical discussion in this community. I recognize that. It's unfortunate that you don't. I'm not defending him, I'm defending actual diversity of thought and diversity of opinion. If you are offended, it's usually an indicator that those things still exist.
Believe what you wish. I'll say this much, when you get to a point where you understand how to even begin to agree with you, you'll probably find less perceived harm inflicted on you from the world around you.
#FemaleUnderwearCompressedInASmallSurfaceArea
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
I must be missing a lot of your posts because this has clearly not been the case in the ones I have read in the past. Even ITT it was a gesture after the OP.
