Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

BigJim®

Members
  • Content Count

    5,647
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

747 Excellent

About BigJim®

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Eden Prairie

Recent Profile Visitors

14,544 profile views
  1. One twitter account seemed big enough to become subject of a tweet by the president's own son. That seems pretty significant, and frightening, given the narrative being created by the White House.
  2. Well, to be fair I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about given your one liners. The dialogue I'm involved with is about curfews. You said peaceful protestors were complicit with anarchists, and should go home. I thought the response to your post posed an interesting analogy asking how you would feel about covid carriers/spreaders being interspersed with non-carriers in violation of a possible future covid curfew... would you feel that curfew should be policed in a similarly forceful manner? Someone else then posted that was not analogous, as societal harm is resulting from these protests - but it's actually no different for the covid scenario posed, other than the societal harm is not as visible/tangible/immediate. I thought it was an interesting question, but not interesting enough to get further into a back/forth on it. It's a fair/unanswered question... life goes on.
  3. The initial question asked why should we use tear gas and force to police this curfew, but other curfew is an encroachment on freedom? Your reply was this conduct is different because it causes harm to others, which JMHO misses the point of the covid curfew. Both curfews sought to protect society from a threat. It's not as complicated of a question as you're making it.
  4. I didn't realize there were covid curfews active. Can you provide more info?
  5. Nah, they are more subtle... just spreading a plague that can lead to hospitalizations or death to people trying to protect their livelihoods.
  6. This sort of confuses me. Doesn't it presume no one (or hundreds, or thousands) fly to the US from elsewhere as an asymptomatic spreader? Seems like a country would need to close its boarders to travelers for this not to be a pausing/delay to national spread.
  7. Yes, in the same way I root for a hail mary when my team has been soundly outplayed for 59 minutes. I actually don't think there is as much shadow between your perspective and others on this board. I could be wrong, but I've seen few taking a position that we must remained closed under any circumstances. Speaking for myself - and this sentiment is not directed at you at all - I'm frustrated pivoting immediately from downplaying the threat to 'cure is worse than the disease.' I mean, there was an option to take it seriously from the start and use time to get re-opening right. Without that, we're really just relying on dumb luck, and the narratives of precautions = lib frenzy is a significant headwind undermining the objective we all share.
  8. More likely, the reason for reluctance to put energy behind testing. Really no different from not wanting to save citizens on a cruise ship because adding those numbers is unfair.
  9. Ok, just pointing out I do not think the people lining up at a restaurant are reflective of me (without knowing more). Their approach (e.g. taking mask wearing, distancing seriously) could make me more confident in re-entry. OTOH, seeing them not doing those things undermines engaging the public I'm part of, and that matters in a macro economic sense.
  10. I think it depends how you perceive "public." Is "public" the relatively small sample of patrons to that restaurant, or those like me who read about the lack of universal awareness/concern and decide to be even more guarded?
  11. I get it, but the fact that the DOJ was (as the charging party) seeking outright dismissal on the basis that it was unjustified was never part of "the case."
  12. Makes sense. Seems the end result is known (either Sullivan accepts, or his refusal gives cover to a Trump pardon). Would be great to have Sullivan force Barr/DOJ to do some very public tap dancing before the inevitable, though.
  13. I must have missed some of the underlying facts of the dispute being heard. I'd thought the argument was absolute immunity but much of this debate seems to be whether there should be a heightened standard (short of absolute immunity), which seems like a different debate.
  14. Vikes were 0-4 vs Pack/Bears last year. I'm not going to say way too much homer love (homer love keeps me optimistic) but would be interested to read how you see the Vikes overcoming the LOS debacles that sealed their fate against Bears/Pack in 2019? Being at that home game vs the Pack on 12/23 left a bad taste in my mouth that I just can't shake.
  15. Nick... he's going to cringe rewatching. I had to chuckle when he commented to Michelle that Ben has to go, almost immediately after his own choice not to do that made it impossible. He could have been playing the swing position like a champ voting out Ben first and then riding the wake to get Jeremy out next. Just such an unbelievably bad reading of the room, and his place in it. Also agree with the masses this is way too late to re-insert EoE with an idol.