Curt Schilling - not a future ESPN Courage award recipient

#152
#152
ReaderVol said:
Faubus, Conner and Wallace and Byrd etc. The recordings of LBJ and JFK having his brother and Hoover spy on MLK. What was the vote count per party on the civil rights act? Now Rob, let's not paint a small part of the picture,,,
Click to expand...
Some of the children on VN only know what they have been taught.

I am old enough to remember the race baiting Dem politicians in the South: Governors like John Bell Williams from Mississippi, George Corley Wallace from Alabama, Orville Faubus from Arkansas, Lester Maddox from Georgia.

Senators like Richard Russell and Theodore Bilbo from Georgia, John Sparkman from Alabama, John Stennis and James Eastland from Mississippi, "Cotton Ed" Smith from South Carolina, .....I could go on. Every one of them was born a Democrat and died a racist Democrat. That is just a few I remember off the top of my head. There were many more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#153
#153
RobsPics said:
Your response does not dispute the fact that many Dixiecrats became Republicans.
Click to expand...

But even more did NOT. The assumption that the dixicrats became the modern day republican party is asinine. The Republican party is far FAR from a racist party. Only a true full blown idiot would really thinl otherwise. Hyperbole is one thing but if you truly think so then your an idiot of the highest order.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#154
#154
1972 Grad said:
Some of the children on VN only know what they have been taught.

I am old enough to remember the race baiting Dem politicians in the South: Governors like John Bell Williams from Mississippi, George Corley Wallace from Alabama, Orville Faubus from Arkansas, Lester Maddox from Georgia.

Senators like Richard Russell and Theodore Bilbo from Georgia, John Sparkman from Alabama, John Stennis and James Eastland from Mississippi, "Cotton Ed" Smith from South Carolina, .....I could go on. Every one of them was born a Democrat and died a racist Democrat. That is just a few I remember off the top of my head. There were many more.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And those things are not taught in school in order to promote an agenda of painting (wrongly) one party (dems) as a party of pureness and the other party (repubs) as a party of mean racists.
 
#155
#155
Roustabout said:
You really think racism was confined to a political party in the 60s and 70s?
You sir are a damn fool.
Click to expand...

Hell no I don't but I also don't think it was only one specific political party that rejected soldiers coming back from Vietnam. Which is exactly why I brought this up
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#156
#156
ReaderVol said:
But even more did NOT. The assumption that the dixicrats became the modern day republican party is asinine. The Republican party is far FAR from a racist party. Only a true full blown idiot would really thinl otherwise. Hyperbole is one thing but if you truly think so then your an idiot of the highest order.
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself this if it makes you sleep better at night. You're an idiot
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#157
#157
Michael Sam got a ton of media converge for a guy who got cut in training camp... Joke.. We are told to just judge people on their abilities only... When it fits an agenda..that does not matter..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#158
#158
Biopsyman said:
Michael Sam got a ton of media converge for a guy who got cut in training camp... Joke.. We are told to just judge people on their abilities only... When it fits an agenda..that does not matter..
Click to expand...

Ding, ding ,ding, winner.
You nailed it!
Amazing the brain washing that's occurred over the past 8 years. People hear these stories and think they're organic, when in reality it's been pushing a coordinated agenda.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#159
#159
Sin City Vol said:
Keep telling yourself this if it makes you sleep better at night. You're an idiot
Click to expand...

So you think the Republican party is a racist parry and you call me an idiot? LOL
And I suppose in your world cops go out on patrol just looking for a chance to shoot young black males? And also that the purpose of a company is to cheat poor people? LOL
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#160
#160
Sin City Vol said:
Hell no I don't but I also don't think it was only one specific political party that rejected soldiers coming back from Vietnam. Which is exactly why I brought this up
Click to expand...

It wasn't a party but it damned sure was a philosophy that led the attack on the returning soldiers. To deny that the liberal movement wasn't the driving force is denying facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#161
#161
ReaderVol said:
It wasn't a party but it damned sure was a philosophy that led the attack on the returning soldiers. To deny that the liberal movement wasn't the driving force is denying facts.
Click to expand...
I remember it very well, and it was a bunch of left wing radical hippies. Conservatives had jobs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#165
#165
Biopsyman said:
Michael Sam got a ton of media converge for a guy who got cut in training camp... Joke.. We are told to just judge people on their abilities only... When it fits an agenda..that does not matter..
Click to expand...

I got sick of the Sam story, but in all fairness a rookie coming into the the nfl as a gay man is a story. You ever been in a locker room? Guys who aren't gay are chided for being gay. I wouldn't envy Sam
 
#169
#169
So now that we know ESPN will direct a documentary on outside social issues, can we take any documentary with an attached ESPN logo seriously? They are directly changing an account of history based on their unrelated social stances. Revisionism is not a good look.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#170
#170
utvols88 said:
So now that we know ESPN will direct a documentary on outside social issues, can we take any documentary with an attached ESPN logo seriously? They are directly changing an account of history based on their unrelated social stances. Revisionism is not a good look.
Click to expand...

No they aren't. They are ignoring a part of the story. When you make a 90 minute documentary, you inevitably have to ignore parts of the story. It doesn't hurt the credibility of the parts they cover. It's all still factual.

That being said, they are ****ing idiots.
 
#172
#172
n_huffhines said:
No they aren't. They are ignoring a part of the story. When you make a 90 minute documentary, you inevitably have to ignore parts of the story. It doesn't hurt the credibility of the parts they cover. It's all still factual.

That being said, they are ****ing idiots.
Click to expand...

Its significant IMO. Its not a minor detail. They also didn't leave it out because it's minor. They left it out because of his views. Thats what makes it less credible IMO
 
#173
#173
utvols88 said:
Its significant IMO. Its not a minor detail. They also didn't leave it out because it's minor. They left it out because of his views. Thats what makes it less credible IMO
Click to expand...

It's significant, I'm just responding to your claim that an omission is a change, when it's not.

The documentary isn't intended to convince you of anything, so there is no credibility to risk.
 
#174
#174
Is there any chance Schilling could sue them for firing him, then making money off his story? That would be the only good reason for ESPN to do this, IMO.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top