Derby Trail Forums
Page 3 of 3 < 12 3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Chief Douche Bag (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37440)

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 10:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675860)
Stop using facts, it flusters them, they'd much rather stick with their spoonfed "news" from FoxNews.
yeah okay Mr "Redskins are gonna have a better record than the Eagles". ;)

I cant wait to see Kolb in action.

SniperSB23 07-30-2010 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675861)
yeah okay Mr "Redskins are gonna have a better record than the Eagles". ;)

I cant wait to see Kolb in action.
In six months this quote will look about as silly as Scav's one where he told me I must not watch the NFL if I thought the Packers would have a better record than the Bears last season.

SniperSB23 07-30-2010 10:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675861)
yeah okay Mr "Redskins are gonna have a better record than the Eagles". ;)

I cant wait to see Kolb in action.
Really though I think it is pretty sad that the far right has gotten so ridiculous that we've reached the point that you and Coach Pants are now defending Obama when you both were critics of him from the beginning. I still haven't got an adequate answer from anyone as to what Obama was supposed to do about the oil spill. How is that his fault and if the biggest experts in the world were unable to stop it then how was he supposed to? And don't give me the he should have nuked it response. Amazing how in two years the right has forgotten about "drill baby drill" and now the BP situation is suddenly the fault of a Democrat.

brianwspencer 07-30-2010 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675867)
Really though I think it is pretty sad that the far right has gotten so ridiculous that we've reached the point that you and Coach Pants are now defending Obama when you both were critics of him from the beginning.
And they still are critics -- but I think that there is some ability to be level-headed and say, "look, he's doing a pretty awful job and I don't like what he's doing," while still retaining the ability to avoid hyperbole, lies, and intellectual dishonesty.

And really, there are plenty of things to be pissed off at Obama for from both the Right and Left right now, so the need to jump to those dishonest attacks (which are standard fare around here) should be entirely unnecessary because there's plenty to criticize by actually just talking about the facts -- and that's what you've seen Coach and Lori do when criticizing him and complaining about things they don't like, but they apparently still have the ability to maintain some integrity and not fly off the deep end like some others who shall remain unnamed.

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675865)
In six months this quote will look about as silly as Scav's one where he told me I must not watch the NFL if I thought the Packers would have a better record than the Bears last season.
Not only are the Eagles going to have a much better record, but they will also beat the Skins twice this year.

You guys have McNabb hyped way too much. Even the players in Philly wanted Kolb over McNabb. D-Jax didnt even like McNabb much.

Kolb has twice the accuracy that McNabb does. McNabb lost his luster after he lost the superbowl and kept getting injured. He is so 2004!

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675867)
Really though I think it is pretty sad that the far right has gotten so ridiculous that we've reached the point that you and Coach Pants are now defending Obama when you both were critics of him from the beginning. I still haven't got an adequate answer from anyone as to what Obama was supposed to do about the oil spill. How is that his fault and if the biggest experts in the world were unable to stop it then how was he supposed to? And don't give me the he should have nuked it response. Amazing how in two years the right has forgotten about "drill baby drill" and now the BP situation is suddenly the fault of a Democrat.
Yeah I'm definately not impressed by Obama, but I try to base reality in my judgements.

Its pretty sad what the far right latches onto, when there are legitimate arguements to be made. I mean the birth certificate? Really??

SniperSB23 07-30-2010 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675872)
Not only are the Eagles going to have a much better record, but they will also beat the Skins twice this year.

You guys have McNabb hyped way too much. Even the players in Philly wanted Kolb over McNabb. D-Jax didnt even like McNabb much.

Kolb has twice the accuracy that McNabb does. McNabb lost his luster after he lost the superbowl and kept getting injured. He is so 2004!
Desean Jackson won't even get 1,000 yards this year without McNabb, he'll be crying for Vick to start by Week 8.

Danzig 07-30-2010 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer (Post 675871)
And they still are critics -- but I think that there is some ability to be level-headed and say, "look, he's doing a pretty awful job and I don't like what he's doing," while still retaining the ability to avoid hyperbole, lies, and intellectual dishonesty.

And really, there are plenty of things to be pissed off at Obama for from both the Right and Left right now, so the need to jump to those dishonest attacks (which are standard fare around here) should be entirely unnecessary because there's plenty to criticize by actually just talking about the facts -- and that's what you've seen Coach and Lori do when criticizing him and complaining about things they don't like, but they apparently still have the ability to maintain some integrity and not fly off the deep end like some others who shall remain unnamed.
:tro:

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675874)
Desean Jackson won't even get 1,000 yards this year without McNabb, he'll be crying for Vick to start by Week 8.
I would not at all be surprised to see two 1000 yard recievers on the team this year. I think Maclin is going to thrive.

Tell me, you've played football so you understand:

Is it easier to catch a pass that is thrown in your hands while you are still in full stride?

Or

Is it easier to catch a pass that is thrown behind you, so you have to slow down or stop your stride, or thrown too low so you have to dive for said catch?

Thats the main difference between #5 & #4.

Another big difference is attitude. Kolb is all business and camp with him at the leadership position is much more focused and intense. McNabb is a joker and a non-leader.

Danzig 07-30-2010 11:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675867)
Really though I think it is pretty sad that the far right has gotten so ridiculous that we've reached the point that you and Coach Pants are now defending Obama when you both were critics of him from the beginning. I still haven't got an adequate answer from anyone as to what Obama was supposed to do about the oil spill. How is that his fault and if the biggest experts in the world were unable to stop it then how was he supposed to? And don't give me the he should have nuked it response. Amazing how in two years the right has forgotten about "drill baby drill" and now the BP situation is suddenly the fault of a Democrat.
i don't think criticism about the oil spill is valid. criticism of him and things he has control over are valid, and there are seemingly plenty of things to fault him for in that regard. what coach is saying is that the problems obama took over were huge, and that it will take huge effort to overcome them. eight years of mistakes can't be undone in a year and a half. but at this point, i think, and others do as well, that there hasn't been enough of a move made. we'll see how things go moving forward, but right now it seems we're treading water, not moving up or down.

Danzig 07-30-2010 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675872)
Not only are the Eagles going to have a much better record, but they will also beat the Skins twice this year.

You guys have McNabb hyped way too much. Even the players in Philly wanted Kolb over McNabb. D-Jax didnt even like McNabb much.

Kolb has twice the accuracy that McNabb does. McNabb lost his luster after he lost the superbowl and kept getting injured. He is so 2004!

i really, really hope you're wrong!! :D

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675874)
Desean Jackson won't even get 1,000 yards this year without McNabb, he'll be crying for Vick to start by Week 8.
I'm sure Jackson was very disappointed with the 10 catches, 250 yards and 2 touchdowns he had last year in the 2 starts Kolb had.

Also Celek had 3 100 yard performances last year.. 2 of them came in Kolbs 2 games.

Kolb > McNabb or the eagles would not have traded McNabb to a division rival. Its really that simple.

miraja2 07-30-2010 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675877)
I would not at all be surprised to see two 1000 yard recievers on the team this year. I think Maclin is going to thrive.

Tell me, you've played football so you understand:

Is it easier to catch a pass that is thrown in your hands while you are still in full stride?

Or

Is it easier to catch a pass that is thrown behind you, so you have to slow down or stop your stride, or thrown too low so you have to dive for said catch?

Thats the main difference between #5 & #4.

Another big difference is attitude. Kolb is all business and camp with him at the leadership position is much more focused and intense. McNabb is a joker and a non-leader.
:tro::):tro:

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 11:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 675881)
i really, really hope you're wrong!! :D
well you have a good coach. McNabb may not be much more than Cambell was to be honest. Lack of O-line will be really interesting for a QB who gets injured often. & Dont expect any 4th quarter comebacks & effective 2 minute drills.

Haynesworth is causing too much of a distraction. & Dan Snyder still does own the team.

Good luck, but it might be wiser to travel for Caps games instead of Skins games!

Coach Pants 07-30-2010 11:28 AM
I would like to see Obama bring back the draft. If he's going to be a war monger then he needs to wake the American people up to what's going on around them.

Plus it would slash the unemployment numbers. :D

joeydb 07-30-2010 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675889)
well you have a good coach. McNabb may not be much more than Cambell was to be honest. Lack of O-line will be really interesting for a QB who gets injured often. & Dont expect any 4th quarter comebacks & effective 2 minute drills.

Haynesworth is causing too much of a distraction. & Dan Snyder still does own the team.

Good luck, but it might be wiser to travel for Caps games instead of Skins games!

GO EAGLES!! :D

SniperSB23 07-30-2010 12:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675877)
I would not at all be surprised to see two 1000 yard recievers on the team this year. I think Maclin is going to thrive.

Tell me, you've played football so you understand:

Is it easier to catch a pass that is thrown in your hands while you are still in full stride?

Or

Is it easier to catch a pass that is thrown behind you, so you have to slow down or stop your stride, or thrown too low so you have to dive for said catch?

Thats the main difference between #5 & #4.

Another big difference is attitude. Kolb is all business and camp with him at the leadership position is much more focused and intense. McNabb is a joker and a non-leader.
You don't even know how badly you are underrating McNabb and overrating Kolb. 4 TDs to 7 INTs in his career is pretty super. Kolb has had one good game ever and it was home against a horrendous Chiefs team that would have struggled to win the UFL.

GBBob 07-30-2010 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675886)
I'm sure Jackson was very disappointed with the 10 catches, 250 yards and 2 touchdowns he had last year in the 2 starts Kolb had.

Also Celek had 3 100 yard performances last year.. 2 of them came in Kolbs 2 games.

Kolb > McNabb or the eagles would not have traded McNabb to a division rival. Its really that simple.
Opening Day..Packers-Eagles...I smell a bet Lori

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675908)
You don't even know how badly you are underrating McNabb and overrating Kolb. 4 TDs to 7 INTs in his career is pretty super. Kolb has had one good game ever and it was home against a horrendous Chiefs team that would have struggled to win the UFL.
Honestly I could be overrating Kolb. But I am definately not underrating McNabb. I've watched basically every single one of McNabbs starts, except one year when I was in Ireland & had to read about them. McNabb from 99-2005 was a completely different QB than he has been since. He is a shell of his formal self, and that occured because of his injuries and decision to become a pocked QB & not a mobile QB. I trust my opinion of him, which happens to be the same opinion his former teammates have of him, over your's buddy. :)

I'm very excited about Kolb and I believe he will be an Aaron Rodgers type. Even if he's not outstanding his first year (which I think he can be), he will show lots of promise and he's our future.

Antitrust32 07-30-2010 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GBBob (Post 675916)
Opening Day..Packers-Eagles...I smell a bet Lori
no doubt Bob!

I cant wait for that game...

Eagles will be wearing their throwback Kelly Green uniforms too!

Nascar1966 07-30-2010 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675822)
You are pretty wrong there buddy.
At least you weren't deceived by the imbecile. I commend you on that.

gales0678 07-30-2010 04:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 675879)
i don't think criticism about the oil spill is valid. criticism of him and things he has control over are valid, and there are seemingly plenty of things to fault him for in that regard. what coach is saying is that the problems obama took over were huge, and that it will take huge effort to overcome them. eight years of mistakes can't be undone in a year and a half. but at this point, i think, and others do as well, that there hasn't been enough of a move made. we'll see how things go moving forward, but right now it seems we're treading water, not moving up or down.
again 8 yrs of mistakes in innacurate

bush/greenspan continued the same economic policies as clinton / greenspan

the bush tax cuts created more revenue than ever before for the country

to say 8 yrs of mistakes in innacuart

Iraq was not invaded until 2003

The Senate and House were controlled by the Democrats for 2 yrs of the 6 that Bush was in office 07 and 08

Bush won re-election in '04 , up to that point things weren't as bad as people make them out to be.

The housing market crashed in the summer of '06 and that was the end of the easy credit bubble for the american consumer and we are now going on 4 yrs of tough economic times

gales0678 07-30-2010 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23 (Post 675867)
Really though I think it is pretty sad that the far right has gotten so ridiculous that we've reached the point that you and Coach Pants are now defending Obama when you both were critics of him from the beginning. I still haven't got an adequate answer from anyone as to what Obama was supposed to do about the oil spill. How is that his fault and if the biggest experts in the world were unable to stop it then how was he supposed to? And don't give me the he should have nuked it response. Amazing how in two years the right has forgotten about "drill baby drill" and now the BP situation is suddenly the fault of a Democrat.

obama should have had the dutch in on week #1 of this spill and the disaster would have been a lot less , plain and simple scott

timmgirvan 07-30-2010 05:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 675826)
you mentioned gulf one....no one was against it. iraq brought that on themself when they invaded kuwait. that was probably the highest point for the u.s. in years-that coalition was quite an achievement. you might want to go back to all that happened during that time, and see the reaction when bush sr suggested taking down hussein then. and why we didn't invade iraq then. what changed in the years since then, i don't know (nothing did)? bush jr ignored everything in his rush to connect iraq to 9/11, or to something, and invade. it was an astronomical blunder. the reason the senate bit is that bush and his minions sold everyone hook, line and sinker on why to invade. it was a huge lie. we elect these people to make crucial decisions. they may not always be the most popular decision. but they should be the right one.
question: when in history has a president of this country asked for a war vote and not gotten it?

before you go to war, you're supposed to make sure that it's a righteous war, also that it's a winnable war, and that it will leave you in a better position than you were before. can you say any of those fit iraq or afganistan?
Iraq yes: Afghanistan no!

Danzig 07-30-2010 06:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 675889)
well you have a good coach. McNabb may not be much more than Cambell was to be honest. Lack of O-line will be really interesting for a QB who gets injured often. & Dont expect any 4th quarter comebacks & effective 2 minute drills.

Haynesworth is causing too much of a distraction. & Dan Snyder still does own the team.

Good luck, but it might be wiser to travel for Caps games instead of Skins games!
i haven't gone to a skins game in years, since i lived up there. honestly, i'm more anxious for hockey to start back then i am football....

haynesworth isn't worth all the bs, i hope they get rid of him. i do think mcnabbs best days are behind him.

i can guarantee something to you tho, i will root for the eagles at least twice this year!

Danzig 07-30-2010 06:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by timmgirvan (Post 676061)
Iraq yes: Afghanistan no!
iraq was not a righteous war. nor are we better off than we were before we went in.

Coach Pants 07-30-2010 06:22 PM
Afghanistan is a waste of time as well.

If you can't do what you please in Pakistan then what's the point?

trackrat59 07-30-2010 06:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Pants (Post 675654)
Well you have to be a little off to appear on a show with 5 yentas.
:tro::tro::tro:

timmgirvan 07-30-2010 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 676076)
iraq was not a righteous war. nor are we better off than we were before we went in.
Well...I'd feel better about it if we could find the 8.7 billion missing from the Defense dept!

Danzig 07-30-2010 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by timmgirvan (Post 676094)
Well...I'd feel better about it if we could find the 8.7 billion missing from the Defense dept!
that's only a part of the problem. iran wouldn't be such a thorn in our side right now if we'd stayed out of there to begin with. afganistan would have gotten all our time and attention when it was needed. maybe instead of still being involved in two wars, we'd be in none right now. now, wouldn't that be nice? if we hadn't gone into iraq, we wouldn't be missing all that money right now, would we?

afganistan is fubar. history showed the difficulties that were to be found there. pakistan doesn't help. taking men, material and money from afganistan to go into iraq, which was completely unnecessary, only has drawn out the bs in afganistan.

being in those two regions right now restricts us elsewhere.

Cannon Shell 07-30-2010 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 676097)
that's only a part of the problem. iran wouldn't be such a thorn in our side right now if we'd stayed out of there to begin with.
What in the world would lead you to believe this?

Danzig 07-30-2010 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 676098)
What in the world would lead you to believe this?

because iran and iraq kept each other in check. removing half that equation left the other half, iran, with a power vacuum to fill. they happily have done so. who over there can convince iran to behave now? saudi arabia? us? note the move to nukes since we took out saddam. remember the iran/iraq war? who backed iraq, since we used the 'enemy of our enemy is our friend' line of foreign policy for years?

dellinger63 07-30-2010 08:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 676113)
because iran and iraq kept each other in check. removing half that equation left the other half, iran, with a power vacuum to fill. they happily have done so. who over there can convince iran to behave now? saudi arabia? us? note the move to nukes since we took out saddam. remember the iran/iraq war? who backed iraq, since we used the 'enemy of our enemy is our friend' line of foreign policy for years?
you do remember the Hussein family? We cried foul on ourselves when we water boarded. This guy and sons were killing people for fun.

BTW Israel is and will keep Iran in check.

Cannon Shell 07-30-2010 08:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 676113)
because iran and iraq kept each other in check. removing half that equation left the other half, iran, with a power vacuum to fill. they happily have done so. who over there can convince iran to behave now? saudi arabia? us? note the move to nukes since we took out saddam. remember the iran/iraq war? who backed iraq, since we used the 'enemy of our enemy is our friend' line of foreign policy for years?
This was true 20 years ago but just isn't relevant anymore. Iran is a "thorn" because they are developing nukes which has no relevance to Iraq. Iraq had no control over Iran nor would the presense of Saddam prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Danzig 07-30-2010 09:09 PM
amadinejad has said for several years now that he's only waiting for us to leave to step in this vacuum...but it doesn't exist?

and yes, dell, i know full well about hussein and his sons. just one of many leaders out there who abuse their citizens. we'll be dead broke if we invade every country that has that issue. i didn't realize that was our problem, to fix that.

Cannon Shell 07-30-2010 10:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 676149)
amadinejad has said for several years now that he's only waiting for us to leave to step in this vacuum...but it doesn't exist?

and yes, dell, i know full well about hussein and his sons. just one of many leaders out there who abuse their citizens. we'll be dead broke if we invade every country that has that issue. i didn't realize that was our problem, to fix that.
So are you trying to say that if we had never invaded Iraq that iran wouldn't be trying to become a nuclear power and as such a huge threat to the region? I think you are being a little naive in this regard. Iran was going to be a problem regardless of who was in charge in iraq. Let's face facts, Israel is the boss in that neighborhood because they not only have nukes but the propensity to actually use them. Iraq has been a paper tiger for many years prior to us invading.

And that nut job has also said that the holocaust was made up, blames the US and Israel for just about every issue worldwide and maintains that his nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful so forgive me for taking anything he says with a grain of salt.

Danzig 07-30-2010 11:17 PM
i know he's a nut. i also know that eventually they may have become a nuclear power. i also know that we can't stay in iraq forever, that iran is now the biggest power in that area, that their traditional enemy, iraq, is incredibly weak now. just what do you suppose is going to happen when we leave there? assuming, that is, we are ever able to leave.

besides, as i said, a war should be right, should leave us better off, and should be winnable. is iraq all three? i say, no. if it isn't all three, then what was the point?

Cannon Shell 07-31-2010 12:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 676198)
i know he's a nut. i also know that eventually they may have become a nuclear power. i also know that we can't stay in iraq forever, that iran is now the biggest power in that area, that their traditional enemy, iraq, is incredibly weak now. just what do you suppose is going to happen when we leave there? assuming, that is, we are ever able to leave.

besides, as i said, a war should be right, should leave us better off, and should be winnable. is iraq all three? i say, no. if it isn't all three, then what was the point?
I don't think that Iran has any intention of messing with iraq anymore than they already do. Too much trouble for too little gain. They were ascending to be the strongest power in the region anyway. I am not defedning our invading Iraq but i dont think that it has made Iran more of a threat or pain in the ass. If anything the way the world has looked down on the entire debacle has emboldened Iran as they would be cast in the rare role of sympathetic figure if the US were to consider invading them.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:32 AM.
Page 3 of 3 < 12 3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.