Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


StraightJ last won the day on February 19

StraightJ had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

9,872 Excellent


About StraightJ


  • How long have you been a Buffalo fan?
    Longer than I care to admit right now

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You may remember during the Doug Whaley era some people had a DWDS shtick. Sure he deserved criticism, but he wasn't Joseph Stalin and didnt deserve the number of posts a few real zealots were bombarding the board with dailty like a few are with Trump now.. Trump is basically the Doug Whaley here right now.
  2. Where did i say that? You in the last 12 hours youve said a bunch of stuff I did not say. I spoke mostly about people who can not afford to bite the hand that feeds them, the methodology and funding, which is integral. Now I am not arguing, just doing what I did last night and restating what I saod after you put words in my mouth.(I also got excited at the best shots landed, before I knew who you huy was, but it wasnt with the intention to trigger you. We can discuss that elsewhere). So yes, you are arguing, and trying to defame me. I said I did not want to talk about this at this time, how many times do I have to keep asking you to leave me be? I'll talk about other stuff if you want to argue, but at the moment this is not that interesting to me. How many times must I say so? Sack will be here soon, I have faith that you can make it. Please do not reply. I will talk in other threads if you don't reply here. Ok? I dont want trouble, lol.
  3. Were you not impressed by those punches though? That's important in these things, evem though I am not claiming what's more important, just asking if you thought she knew what she was doing here. I found this by chance, and you can see the title, so I found it well worth the click.
  4. Being this involves an NBA legend, any chances I could have tagged this otherwise? I decided to play it safe. but thing some sports fans that dont do politics might be interested in this. I get that some on here aren't fans of rap, but we all need to work together, and Lil Boosie is spitting the truth here, even more straight fire than that Warren Highlight video I stumbled upon. Is anyone going to be "brave" enough to stand up and defend this degeneracy? Bravery by Boosie, the folks that run the entertainment industry don't like when you stand up against their projects. Boosie is tellin’ it like it is. Published Feb 18, 2020 By Shane Trejo Iconic rapper Boosie BadAzz, formally known as Lil Boosie, went hard on NBA star Dwayne Wade in an Instagram video today posted from a Planet Fitness gym. Boosie called out Wade for promoting his transgender kid, who the NBA legend claims is a girl. Wade has gone on publicity junkets recently claiming that he accepts that his birth son is now a girl and urges other parents to harbor their child’s delusions even if it may put them in extreme danger. “I gotta say something about this s**t, brah. Dwayne Wade, you gone too f**kin far, dog,” he said to start his spirited rant. “That is a male, a 12-year-old, at 12 they don’t even know… they don’t even know what they next meal gonna be!” Boosie exclaimed. take our poll - story continues below Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump? Boosie was just getting warmed up from there as he continued to let loose on the former NBA Finals MVP who has been seduced and indoctrinated by the LGBT agenda. He added: “He might meet a woman, anything, at 16, and fall in love with her, but his d*ck be gone, how he gonna.. like, bruh, you going too far, dog. Don’t cut his d*ck off, bruh. Like, bruh. For real. If he gonna be gay, let him be gay, but don’t cut his d*ck off, bruh.” “Don’t cut his f**kin d*ck off, Dwayne Wade, bruh. You f**kin trippin, dog. You trippin, dog,” Boosie said to capstone his traditionalist appeal to Wade. Big League Politics has reported on Wade’s disgraceful media campaign to defend his 12-year-old boy’s transition: So far, Boosie is one of the few with the courage to speak out against the transgender plague that is sweeping through the African-American community. Perhaps his bold words will inspire others to take a stand. https://bigleaguepolitics.com/boosie-badazz-goes-h-a-m-on-dwayne-wade-and-his-trans-kid-you-gone-too-fkin-far-that-is-a-male/
  5. As a matter of trivia, does anyone know how many times the Bills would have made the playoffs under this new format? I imagine we must have someone on the board good with those kind of facts.
  6. Definitely some EPIC moments in this. I must have missed enough and/or was continually harrased. Video editor did a fine job too in my opinion, though I dont often watch these). Again, no horse in the race, so I can enjoy the best from enyone, and ran into this without seeking it. She lands a HARD hit right at the openining, though not the hardest he took last night!
  7. By Eric Felten, RealClearInvestigationsFebruary 14, 2020 A month before the 2016 presidential election, the FBI met Christopher Steele in Rome and apparently unlawfully shared with the foreign opposition researcher some of the bureau’s most closely held secrets, according to unpublicized disclosures in the recent Justice Department Inspector General report on abuses of federal surveillance powers. What’s more, Steele, the former British spy who compiled the “dossier” of conspiracy theories for the Hillary Clinton campaign, was promised $15,000 to attend the briefing by FBI agents eager to maintain his cooperation in their Trump-Russia collusion investigation codenamed Crossfire Hurricane. That investigation was so closely guarded that only a handful of top officials and agents at the FBI were allowed to know about it. Michael Gaeta, right, one of the FBI agents who met with Christopher Steele, top photo, in Rome on Oct. 3, 2016. Gaeta is shown later the same month at a university discussion in Rome on transnational organized crime. John Cabot University The report by Inspector General Michael Horowitz details how a team of FBI agents in early October 2016 shared with Steele extensive classified materials, just weeks before the bureau cut off ties with him for leaking his own research to the media. The secrets included foreign intelligence information still considered so sensitive that the IG’s report refers to it even now only as coming from a “Friendly Foreign Government.” In fact, this is a reference to Australia. That country’s ambassador to Britain sent the United States a tip about loose talk by junior Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos. The FBI has described that as the predicate for its Trump-Russia investigation (Much)MORE: https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/02/13/buried_in_ig_report_fbi_gave_steele_highly_protected_secrets_122394.html?utm_campaign=ora_player&utm_medium=ora-video-widget&utm_source=polls
  8. name calling, and claiming a conspiracy theory by definition. Your boy fraud here was just ripping assange a new one, go check the SB or his thread,....but you dont say sh*t because he is a TDSer. I call what i see. Its a little early in the day to get into a bitter argument about this nonsense. if you want to argue, i am asking you to do it with someone else, and am asking politely so that you cant use wild accusations. Goodness. Sack enjoys this nonsense more than me, so dont worry you will have someone to argue with soon enough. I'm leaving this thread peacefully if that's ok.
  9. lol at "denial". How much did I even get to say on the subject? It was mostly reacting to you insults and asking you to leave me alone until after the debates and that we could argue abiout this stupidity then. I asked several times, you refused and kept laying out insults....50s sink full of dishes, etc...though i coulld go on. But yes, dude took major hits....racism, sexism, (and more than one of each), GWB support....more wealth than the bottom 125 million residents. Picture that... can you?!?! Like I said, you know some of the debates have live trackers where they measure the reactions throughout, I am pretty darn sure those would be epic. No? Maybe he recovered, time will tell(which I said then too! lol) Not a big deal, but I had no idea you would go apeshit over something so small or of course I wouldnt have done it. I'm not bleeping frawk lol. Anyhow, I dont want to argue now. I bid you good day, yoi can argue global warming with Sack! You dont mind him as much as you do me. :-)
  10. Maybe thats what you were referring to, but you REPLIED in the SB to me speaking of this thread BY TITLE(the 16 years should be up there, and I said a thread. I brought it up. orginally, possibly later you went on about whatever when danny appeared). You can scroll up and see it. Want to bet money that I did not mention this thread by title, at least the 16 years part, saying that I saw a thread today? It's all up there.
  11. (if you appreciate being alerted to this, the thanks will be for the effort, not seen as an endorsement of these 2 women) Anything in the title can be found in the article here. I highlighted portions for you, if you just want to skim, though I had the stomach to read it all. This is from a MAINSTREAM publication(TheGuardian, from GB, though the story happenens here in the US! Denver for this one, but they travel the country), it's actually rather favorable to the 2 women who do this, though it does briefly in the small section that's entirely highlighted tell of the the attendees complaints against these abusive women. One of the 2 women uses Frawk's "gaslighting" term to insult an attendee at one point, I highlighted it for you. :) Seems these leftist extemists enjoy their pet words! One rich white woman hosts, invits 7 guests, cooks dinner and feeds these abusive indoctrinatatos and gives them $2500 to fish around inside their minds, interrogating them to find somethng they can twist to call racist.....I'm certain dont have the worst examples of these womens behavior when they have people there to do this interview, yet enough is still listed. This There is a very dark(no pun intended, seriously) and insidious nature about this. These women are well trained at what they do. I won't suggest that the story of meeting randomly was not true and that they were trained, but what is apparent is that the people who developed these methods of indoctrination that they picked up from books or wherever are the same usual suspects behind the constant race baiting. If you read just the highlights, it wll be enough, and a couple parts(if you have a keen eye to notice what goes beyond just psychological) will help you recognize this is a WARFARE, in multiple forms. The people(cough cough) who developed these techniques are very clever, and also very evil. (the editing is messed up at the beginning but corrrects quickly) Poppy Noor @PoppyNoor Mon 3 Feb 2020 09.51 ESTFirst published on Mon 3 Feb 2020 01.00 EST Saira Rao and Regina Jackson. ‘Wealthy white women have been taught never to leave the dinner table.’ Photograph: Rebecca Stumpf/The Guardian Freshly made pasta is drying on the wooden bannisters lining the hall of a beautiful home in Denver, Colorado. Fox-hunting photos decorate the walls in a room full of books. A fire is burning. And downstairs, a group of liberal white women have gathered around a long wooden table to admit how racist they are. I fear the growing nastiness that Brexit is ushering in Musa Okwonga Read more “Recently, I have been driving around, seeing a black person, and having an assumption that they are up to no good,” says Alison Gubser. “Immediately after I am like, that’s no good! This is a human, just doing their thing. Why do I think that?” This is Race to Dinner. A white woman volunteers to host a dinner in her home for seven other white women – often strangers, perhaps acquaintances. (Each dinner costs $2,500, which can be covered by a generous host or divided among guests.) A frank discussion is led by co-founders Regina Jackson, who is black, and Saira Rao, who identifies as Indian American. They started Race to Dinner to challenge liberal white women to accept their racism, however subconscious. “If you did this in a conference room, they’d leave,” Rao says. “But wealthy white women have been taught never to leave the dinner table.” Rao and Jackson believe white, liberal women are the most receptive audience because they are open to changing their behavior. They don’t bother with the 53% of white women who voted for Trump. White men, they feel, are similarly a lost cause. “White men are never going to change anything. If they were, they would have done it by now,” Jackson says. FacebookTwitterPinterest Dinner guests listen to Regina Jackson. Photograph: Rebecca Stumpf/The Guardian White women, on the other hand, are uniquely placed to challenge racism because of their proximity to power and wealth, Jackson says. “If they don’t hold these positions themselves, the white men in power are often their family, friends and partners.” It seems unlikely anyone would voluntarily go to a dinner party in which they’d be asked, one by one, “What was a racist thing you did recently?” by two women of color, before appetizers are served. But Jackson and Rao have hardly been able to take a break since they started these dinners in the spring of 2019. So far, 15 dinners have been held in big cities across the US. If you did this in a conference room, they’d leave...But wealthy white women have been taught never to leave the dinner table. The women who sign up for these dinners are not who most would see as racist. They are well-read and well-meaning. They are mostly Democrats. Some have adopted black children, many have partners who are people of color, some have been doing work towards inclusivity and diversity for decades. But they acknowledge they also have unchecked biases. They are there because they “know [they] are part of the problem, and want to be part of the solution,” as host Jess Campbell-Swanson says before dinner starts. Campbell-Swanson comes across as an overly keen college student applying for a prestigious internship. She can go on for days about her work as a political consultant, but when it comes to talking about racism, she chokes. “I want to hire people of color. Not because I want to be … a white savior. I have explored my need for validation … I’m working through that … Yeah. Um … I’m struggling,” she stutters, before finally giving up. Women listen to Rao and Jackson during dinner. Photographs by Rebecca Stumpf/The Guardian Across from Campbell-Swanson, Morgan Richards admits she recently did nothing when someone patronizingly commended her for adopting her two black children, as though she had saved them. “What I went through to be a mother, I didn’t care if they were black,” she says, opening a window for Rao to challenge her: “So, you admit it is stooping low to adopt a black child?” And Richards accepts that the undertone of her statement is racist. As more confessions like this are revealed, Rao and Jackson seem to press those they think can take it, while empathizing with those who can’t. “Well done for recognizing that,” Jackson says, to soothe one woman. “We are all part of the problem. We have to get comfortable with that to become part of the solution.” Carbonara is heaped on to plates, and a sense of self-righteousness seems to wash over the eight white women. They’ve shown up, admitted their wrongdoing and are willing to change. Don’t they deserve a little pat on the back? FacebookTwitterPinterest A copy of the book White Fragility. The participants are required to read it before attending the dinner. Photograph: Rebecca Stumpf/The Guardian Erika Righter raises her tattooed forearm to her face, in despair of all of the racism she’s witnessed as a social worker, then laments how a white friend always ends phone calls with “Love you long time”. “And what is your racism, Erika?” Rao interrupts, refusing to let her off the hook. The mood becomes tense. Another woman adds: “I don’t know you, Erika. But you strike me as being really in your head. Everything I’m hearing is from the neck up.” Righter, a single mother, retreats before defending herself: “I haven’t read all the books. I’m new to this.” A lot of people hate Saira Rao. “The American flag makes me sick,” read a recent tweet of hers. Another: “White folks – before telling me that your Indian husband or wife or friend or colleague doesn’t agree with anything I say about racism or thinks I’m crazy, please Google ‘token,’ ‘internalized oppression’ and ‘gaslighting’.” She wasn’t always this confrontational, she says. Her “awakening” began recently. After Rao’s mother died unexpectedly a few years ago, she moved to Denver from New York to be around her best friends – a group of mostly white women from college. She wasn’t new to being the only person of color, but she was surprised to notice how they would distance themselves whenever she’d talk frankly about race. Then, fuelled by anger at Trump’s election after she’d campaigned tirelessly for Hillary Clinton, Rao ran for Congress in 2018 against a Democratic incumbent on an anti-racist manifesto, and criticized the “pink-pussy-hat-wearing” women of the Democratic party. It was during this campaign Rao met Jackson, who works in real estate. Jackson recalls her initial impressions of Rao as “honest, and willing to call a thing a thing”. It’s that brashness that led to Race for Dinner. Rao is done with affability. “I’d spent years trying to get through to white women with coffees and teas – massaging them, dealing with their tears, and I got nowhere. I thought, if nothing is going to work, let’s try to shake them awake.” FacebookTwitterPinterest Saira Rao and Regina Jackson talk before the start of the dinner. Photograph: Rebecca Stumpf/The Guardian The genesis of Race to Dinner wasn’t straightforward. Months after a dinner discussion about race with a white friend of Jackson’s went south, Rao bumped into that friend, who had started reading Reni Eddo-Lodge’s Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race. “She told me that the dinner had changed everything for her, and asked if we could do another,” says Rao. The friend invited other guests, Rao reluctantly agreed, then hated that second dinner, too. But then white women began flooding her inbox asking her to do it again. In the beginning, Rao’s dinner-party tone was much more argumentative. But it left her looking less like a human and more like some kind of real-life trolling bot. Women at the dinners were always crying. Some of those dinners got out of hand – attendees have tried to place their hands on Jackson and Rao, and racial slurs have been thrown around. “My blood pressure went up. I’d work myself up into a frenzy at every dinner. I realized [that] if I walk away feeling I am going to have a stroke, we should try a different tactic,” Rao says. I’d work myself into a frenzy. I realized: if I walk away feeling I'm going to have a stroke, we should try a different tactic Saira Rao Susan Brown attended one of those earlier dinners. She says she felt like Rao and Jackson were angry at her the whole time, without ever learning why. She found Rao needlessly provocative and mean-spirited, unaware of her own class privilege, and divisive. She felt the dinner set her up to fail. Another previous attendee, who did not want to be named, says she found Rao to be dogmatic, and presented a distorted depiction of history, leaving out facts that do not fit her narrative. At one point, she referred to Rao as “the Trump of the alt-left”. But even for those who complained, something has changed. Brown read White Fragility – a book released last year that posits every person partakes to some degree in racism and needs to confront that – and realized many of the things she was commending herself for needed to be re-evaluated. The book is now assigned reading for women before they can attend a dinner. The woman who compared Rao to Trump went to a city council meeting to speak up about the death of a young black man in her area. She attributes that specifically to Jackson’s call for solidarity. FacebookTwitterPinterest Erika Righter and host, Jessica Campbell-Swanson debrief at the end of the night. Photograph: Rebecca Stumpf/The Guardian In recent months, Jackson and Rao changed the model. They didn’t want to just have women rely on them to shout at them for being racist and then go home. “We began to expect more of them,” says Rao. That meant asking the women to speak up. To own their racism. It meant getting them to do the required reading, as well as follow-up discussions, where they decide how to do better anti-racist work. In the conversation that followed the dinner, Campbell-Swanson, who couldn’t get her racist thoughts out, committed to writing a journal, jotting down daily decisions or thoughts that could be considered racist, and think about how to approach them differently. Lisa Bond, who was hired because Rao and Jackson thought there would be instances when participants would feel more comfortable expressing their feelings to another white woman, says this will help her see how unmonitored thoughts can lead to systemic racism. “If our ability to spot these things increases, our ability to challenge it will increase,” says Bond. Bond says about 65% of participants engage meaningfully in post-dinner conversations with her. But weren’t these women already doing the work? Don’t they want to speak to those women who have no intention of challenging themselves? “There are so many people worse than us,” says Bond. “I have gotten to the point where I no longer try to pay attention to what someone else is doing. I don’t talk about the 53% [who voted for Trump] because I’m not one of them.” What is in her power, she says, is forcing herself to talk to her sister, who did vote for Trump, even when it gets difficult. She emphasizes this work has to continue, no matter who is president. “If Trump were impeached tomorrow and we got a new president, a lot of white liberal people will go back to living their lives just as before, and that’s what we have to prevent,” she says. “All that’s happened is we can see racism now, while before we could cover it up. That’s why we need these dinners. So when we get a new person in and racism is not as obvious, we won’t just crawl back to being comfortable.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/03/race-to-dinner-party-racism-women
  12. <--------------Schefter has "Insider" in his title like me, it earns trust, as well as builds rapport through commonality for me. *VOTE* on whethere you like the 7th playoff spot ot not by hitting the positive OR negatives(some will love that! lol) below! Yeah, I am rooting for the positive to win, but am ready for whatever from years of Range conditioning! lol A thread of mine that may finally get some thanks!! I knew if I continued with the training, the prayers, and the vitamins, it would finally happen for me, and I believe that day is here!! CBA!!! (Lit's Jesus thread told me to live it, and as the only serious respondent, I believe I did!) . . . . . By Michael Walton February 19, 2020 6:05 PM According to NFL Insider Adam Schefter, the NFL is working towards finalizing a new collective bargaining agreement—possibly as soon as next week—that could include big-time changes for the NFL postseason format. 3,134 people are talking about this As currently constructed, the NFL postseason features six teams, four division winners and two wild card teams. The wild card teams play on Wild Card Weekend while the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds receive a first-round bye. Under the possible new system, which Schefter reported could take place as soon as next season, there will be seven teams making the playoffs from each conference rather than six and there will only be a single first round bye given to the top teams in each conference rather than two byes per conference. Players on a team receiving a first round bye would receive postseason pay for that week, something that is also different from the previous CBA and certainly got players behind the changes. The change of the overall NFL playoff field to 14 teams would mean instead six wild card round games rather than the current total of four. 1,875 people are talking about this If the new, proposed playoff format was in effect last season, the Pittsburgh Steelers and Los Angeles Rams would've been the last two teams in, while the Bears would've been a mere one game back of a postseason berth. While the playoff changes would take place swiftly, there are additional items that could be added to take place at a later date, including a 17-game regular season. According to Schefter's report, there was little-to-no disagreement among NFL folks when it came to expanding the postseason and seeing how last season went for the Bears, there certainly won't be many complaints about the playoff field expanding in Chicago either. https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bears/report-nfl-expected-expand-playoff-field-14-teams
  13. Sometimes it takes balls to be different. I added extra from the original title to the thread title, because both fans of Josh Allen and JADS-sufferers might find it interesting to see Kiper using Josh as a favorable comparison for the QB he mocks at #5, besides just having access to an article they'd otherwise have to pay for with Mel's pick and others. I wonder.......any chance even a portion of his reason for doing so is self-promotion/getting back at the chodes who mocked him? I know from experience the latter can be quite enjoyable, though I try to keep it rare.
  14. Maybe my longest post ever, but for the lucky SOBs who do this online at work and are hardcore Josh Allen fans, I'm guessing you'd like it. And perpperidge farms rememembers those who jumped off the bandwagon this season and stated so on here, :-D Josh Allen!!!
  • Create New...