Minnesota Sports Forum

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:Abe- Just to be clear, the "news" is much more fictional then you could imagine, your brain would explode if you knew what I did. lol

We're not even in the same argument right now.

I'm not even talking about whether "news" is real or fake... as much as the disingenuous arguments constantly posted by those who are pushing the "fake news" narrative.

And as Q noted... whether you're discussing the merits of Andrew Wiggins or media cabals... getting the facts right is very important -- especially if you're the one making the incendiary claim.

For example, if you want to claim Andrew Wiggins is a great passer and cite his 7 apg average... it's important to ensure that you're being accurate with that.

Sure. I was a little confused with respect to FOX News and CNN because of course I always heard Murdoch owned it, (same with CNN prior to Turner selling his stake), in a sense he does own it but so do shareholders and it's also a part of a conglomerate as well. Under a giant Corporate umbrella. So I was wrong in that sense and I apologize, I should have done more research on that part beforehand.

Still their job is to make money. It's not to provide people with accurate information or be moral. Making money often times isn't morally right. I worked in sales for years and I felt wrong about lying to people to make more money off them. One example in my own life.

With all due respect, you're too late.

Fool me once, fool me twice... eventually, I can't take them seriously anymore. Know what I mean? Even this guy understands...

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Ironically, it's often the people belying fake news or promoting conspiracy theories who selectively use "fake" mainstream media sources to substantiate their claims.

"They were lying when I didn't like what they said. But you know they're telling the truth if it supports my take."

Rinse. Repeat.

The level of disingenuous online discussions is mind-boggling. The world is not nearly as black-and-white as many people want it to be. It's ok to live in the gray area -- that's how the real world operates.

Gallup could be legitimate. Can the CIA afford to pay everyone? I don't think so. They do have a very large billion++++ budget but still. What do you think the CIA does with all that money? Shift propaganda mostly. Here and overseas. Didn't I post here how the CIA creates news stories to achieve GOV objectives? I think I did.

I'm not saying it's illegitimate. I'm simply pointing out the type of person who only believes MSM when it fits their own personal narrative.

And you're doing it here.

Again.

Because of motive. It goes completely against what they should do. Do you trust Gallup or do you only trust CNN or FOX News? Now you are in a predicament, how can you trust one but not the other. Then why would you? Oh Gallup is just lying that the media is crap or more specifically most people know it's crap.

What do you know about Gallup?

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:Abe- Just to be clear, the "news" is much more fictional then you could imagine, your brain would explode if you knew what I did. lol

We're not even in the same argument right now.

I'm not even talking about whether "news" is real or fake... as much as the disingenuous arguments constantly posted by those who are pushing the "fake news" narrative.

And as Q noted... whether you're discussing the merits of Andrew Wiggins or media cabals... getting the facts right is very important -- especially if you're the one making the incendiary claim.

For example, if you want to claim Andrew Wiggins is a great passer and cite his 7 apg average... it's important to ensure that you're being accurate with that.

Sure. I was a little confused with respect to FOX News and CNN because of course I always heard Murdoch owned it, (same with CNN prior to Turner selling his stake), in a sense he does own it but so do shareholders and it's also a part of a conglomerate as well. Under a giant Corporate umbrella. So I was wrong in that sense and I apologize, I should have done more research on that part beforehand.

Still their job is to make money. It's not to provide people with accurate information or be moral. Making money often times isn't morally right. I worked in sales for years and I felt wrong about lying to people to make more money off them. One example in my own life.

With all due respect, you're too late.

Fool me once, fool me twice... eventually, I can't take them seriously anymore. Know what I mean? Even this guy understands...

That dude is a terrorist.

monsterpile wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Ironically, it's often the people belying fake news or promoting conspiracy theories who selectively use "fake" mainstream media sources to substantiate their claims.

"They were lying when I didn't like what they said. But you know they're telling the truth if it supports my take."

Rinse. Repeat.

The level of disingenuous online discussions is mind-boggling. The world is not nearly as black-and-white as many people want it to be. It's ok to live in the gray area -- that's how the real world operates.

Gallup could be legitimate. Can the CIA afford to pay everyone? I don't think so. They do have a very large billion++++ budget but still. What do you think the CIA does with all that money? Shift propaganda mostly. Here and overseas. Didn't I post here how the CIA creates news stories to achieve GOV objectives? I think I did.

I'm not saying it's illegitimate. I'm simply pointing out the type of person who only believes MSM when it fits their own personal narrative.

And you're doing it here.

Again.

Because of motive. It goes completely against what they should do. Do you trust Gallup or do you only trust CNN or FOX News? Now you are in a predicament, how can you trust one but not the other. Then why would you? Oh Gallup is just lying that the media is crap or more specifically most people know it's crap.

What do you know about Gallup?

That they have been around forever and even the MSM has promoted them. Which makes this poll even more credible. If the MSM itself will say they are full of crap, I'll believe them. lol

WolvesFan21 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Ironically, it's often the people belying fake news or promoting conspiracy theories who selectively use "fake" mainstream media sources to substantiate their claims.

"They were lying when I didn't like what they said. But you know they're telling the truth if it supports my take."

Rinse. Repeat.

The level of disingenuous online discussions is mind-boggling. The world is not nearly as black-and-white as many people want it to be. It's ok to live in the gray area -- that's how the real world operates.

Gallup could be legitimate. Can the CIA afford to pay everyone? I don't think so. They do have a very large billion++++ budget but still. What do you think the CIA does with all that money? Shift propaganda mostly. Here and overseas. Didn't I post here how the CIA creates news stories to achieve GOV objectives? I think I did.

I'm not saying it's illegitimate. I'm simply pointing out the type of person who only believes MSM when it fits their own personal narrative.

And you're doing it here.

Again.

Because of motive. It goes completely against what they should do. Do you trust Gallup or do you only trust CNN or FOX News? Now you are in a predicament, how can you trust one but not the other. Then why would you? Oh Gallup is just lying that the media is crap or more specifically most people know it's crap.

What do you know about Gallup?

That they have been around forever and even the MSM has promoted them. Which makes this poll even more credible. If the MSM itself will say they are full of crap, I'll believe them. lol

So you don't know how Gallup makes their money?

I have been following Malik Beasley on social media for a while now, and I'm blown away by his work ethic. I know he's had that recent off the court drama but that dude is literally in the gym at 6:00 to 7:00 a.m. every single day, even on the weekend. Every morning he's posting Instagram videos of him working out in the gym for hours going all out, even having one-on-one battles with his dad who is sucking wind when trying to keep up with his son Malik.

Even now today he is in the gym at 6:00 a.m. and he was giving Jake layman and some other people shit because they didn't show up, they must have some kind of competition board because one of the slots was who showed up at the facility the most consecutive days and Beasley just wiped out layman's name and put his in.

He's obviously a bit of a dumbass in his personal life but it looks like he is every bit as obsessed with the game as we've heard, he can't be that big of a partier either if he is in the gym for 4 hours that early virtually every single day!

First of all, let me offer my condolences to Q and Drew for your losses.

Second of all, let me offer my condolences to anyone else on this board who suffered losses due to COVID-19. Whatever differences we may or may not have had about the Wolves/Twins/Vikings/Wild, you didn't deserve that and I wish you the best.

I do not know of a loss I have suffered in the truest sense of the word, but both of my parents were scheduled to have "pain-alleviating" procedures that were put on hold because the hospital said they needed "all hands on deck" to battle the COVID cases. I am in FL and they are in Hennepin County, so I don't get to see them much. They tell me they are not taking opioids, but even some of those OTC painkillers are really bad for you.

My experience with COVID-19 was not horrible. I may have had a weaker strain, or I have a good constitution, but it was just 4 days of sleep and distilled water (very slimming).

Now down to business. WolvesFan, you and I need to talk.

First of all, whether you want to believe it or not, Ted Turner is very much your kind of guy. And I have two stories that will illustrate that.
1) The first year he owned the Braves (1977), he fired the manager and appointed...himself. When Commissioner Bowie Kuhn caught wind of this, he told him to knock it off or he would withhold TV revenue and draft picks (You see, sports commissioners used to care, instead of functioning as the "31st owner"), so he rehired that manager, fired him at the end of the year, replaced him with Bobby Cox, who promptly decided to stop wasting future 2-time MVP Dale Murphy at C and moved him to RF (imagine that), and the rest is history that is easily researched and doesn't require doctored video on youtube at all.
2) Ted Turner used his cable holdings to absorb TIME magazine, a republican bastion just to left of the New Republic. He then used all that to acquire half of AOL. When Turner found out that AOL CEO Gerald Levin fudged the revenue numbers (which had never happened before, just ask the Bible), he called Levin an "Effin K-word" at a board meeting. (Yes, Levin is a hebrew last name. And that Bald Garden-Gnome named Levin you listen to everyday on your AM radio? Exactly)

Now to the part that involves your effort to perform cross-country fellatio on Rupert Murdoch.
In 1997, Murdoch began negotiations to buy the Los Angeles Dodgers. Then somebody thought "I know. I'll ask wallflower Ted Turner what he thinks". Turner gave a very measured response: "Look, I'll be fine because the Braves are on TBS. But these other teams who have games on FoxSports(Whatever) need to think about what they are creating." You see doctor, I don't know if word reached your holler, but the "Fox" in "Foxnews" is also the "Fox" in "Foxsports". And if you put your theenking cap on, you'll realize it makes zero sense for the owner of the San Fransisco Giants to try to get more local TV revenue from....the owner of the Los Angeles Dodger.

Murdoch's response to this was 3-Fold
1. I'm not a monster - Well, I know some analog cell phone users from England who would like a word.
2. "Turner snuck around" - Bullshit. Say what you want about Turner, but he doesn't do "sneak around". He told everyone from ESPN to CatFancy exactly how he felt.
3. He's just upset about my super-neato new cable "news" network and my new heart throb Bill O'Reilly - Possibly. But you have to give Turner credit. He at least used his brain instead of cutting and pasting Wikipedia pages, am I right?

Well, whatever Murdoch told the other owners worked and he was allowed to buy the Dodgers. He owned them 6 years and they didn't make the playoffs any of those years. To put that into context, CARL POHLAD'S TEAM made the playoffs twice, and would have made the World Series if someone besides Cory Koskie had showed up (Never got the credit he deserved. I mean Koskie, not Pohlad.) Turns out there is more to winning baseball games than making up stories about the other team.

He then sold the team. I seem to remember him needing the money to buy Manchester United (I don't know if word has reached your holler there Captain America, but Manchester United is a SOCCER TEAM FROM ENGLAND). I could research this, but I just realized something: In the last 10 minutes, I have posted more undisputed facts than you have your whole life, so I'm going to wrap this up.

To sum up, you "Bore False Witness" against complete stranger Ted Turner, which had zero effect on his life, to curry favor and/or cash (as if) from Rupert Murdoch, who wouldn't cross the street to pee in your mouth if you were dying of thirst AND he could find your holler on a map, all because Murdoch is head cheerleader for a President who would gladly use his "University" to steal all your money if you had any to steal, but instead hurt the feelings of a bunch of people who didn't deserve it. Nice work. And while we're on the subject: NICE AVATAR! So tell me something. If your guy is president, and your guys are in charge of the Senate, but the country is in "distress", what does that say exactly about your guys? And what's your plan two months from now? Openly weeping at the Veterans of Popular Wars?

The thing is, you are god-awful enough at sports that you don't need your crap politics. Your "Elite QB" post was inspired....by Jagrmeister. So what you're saying is the Vikes can pay Cousins $30m a year to throw the ball to the other jersey if they have an Elite RB (check), Elite coach (...Eh), and THREE-TO-FIVE HOF'S ON D (good players, not HOF's). And great Doug Williams reference. I can't speak to the TV reception in your holler in January 1988, but mine was crystal clear as a I watched Darrin Nelson drop a game tying touchdown pass on the game's final play, or you could have had Wade Wilson on your list. And yes, the NFL is 2020 is just like is was in 1980. Just ask New Orleans and Dallas.

This ends now, or you'll have (at least) one sworn enemy.

Now I know what you're thinking: "Of the 15 guys who get in drunk every Friday Night in the parking lot of my holler's Pizza Ranch, I have like the 5th coolest mullet and 8th coolest truck, so I'll be fine." Maybe. But is it worth the risk?

This thread needs a new name now.

Camden0916 wrote:This thread needs a new name now.

Yes. Haha. Can we start one called "Dark web data mining?" Or something of the sort. Maybe we can put stuff like grainy videos of prospects taking jumpers in unknown gyms in there too.

thedoper wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:This thread needs a new name now.

Yes. Haha. Can we start one called "Dark web data mining?" Or something of the sort. Maybe we can put stuff like grainy videos of prospects taking jumpers in unknown gyms in there too.

"The Globalists don't want you to know about this prospects shooting motion"