When will "Mister" speak?

[Davidson Deac II]

Don't care if he says anything.  At this point, it really doesn't matter.  It seems fairly certain he is guilty of some inappropriate behavior.  Probably nothing that could be prosecuted, but inappropriate almost definitely.  Nothing he says will make much of a difference.  Those that want to roast him will still do so, those that want to defend him will still do so, and those that don't really care still won't care.  Best thing he can do is sell the team and fade away.   

[Cary Kollins]

3 minutes ago, GOOGLE JIM BOB COOTER said:

i dont think this is true. there's this quirky, little-known law against touching a woman's breasts without her consent

 

meh, it's also illegal to carry a duck across the street on a Tuesday in Rural Hall

some laws are just dumb

[Paa Langfart]

op ed in the WashPo today is  so appropriate here

 

Quote

No, the centerpiece addiction of this year, widespread and growing, is to outrage itself — to the state of being perpetually offended, to the need not only to be angry at someone or something, or many people and issues, but also to always and everywhere be, well, hating. We are all trapped in this ongoing carnival of venom, a national gathering of unpleasant souls like that assembled in C.S. Lewis’s 1959 essay “Screwtape Proposes a Toast” in the Saturday Evening Post (written two decades after Lewis’s famed “Screwtape Letters”). Google and read it. It is remarkably resonant with the times.

This outrage isn’t a current that is always on full strength, like Boston’s Citgo sign. But it never quite turns off either, as once upon a time the television stations did with a ritual playing of the national anthem. (Quaint, especially this year.)

Outrage, rather, pulses, sometimes quicker and sometimes slower, like the human pulse. And like the human pulse, it is nowadays a sign of life. Not to be outraged is to be almost disqualified in the eyes of many from being a participant in politics, even though the perpetually outraged fall across the political spectrum. Not only can they not imagine anyone not being outraged, but also they can’t imagine any kind of outrage save their own.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2017-launched-our-addiction-to-outrage/2017/12/27/e3324a1c-ea7d-11e7-b698-91d4e35920a3_story.html?utm_term=.197b1fb30f76

 

[Zaximus]

Just now, Cary Kollins said:

 

meh, it's also illegal to carry a duck across the street on a Tuesday in Rural Hall

some laws are just dumb

Wait..... so a law saying you can't touch someone's breasts without their consent is..... dumb?

[Cary Kollins]

1 minute ago, Zaximus said:

Wait..... so a law saying you can't touch someone's breasts without their consent is..... dumb?

 

issa joke

[KendrickPanther]

27 minutes ago, frash.exe said:

while i wasn’t particularly pleased that donald trump was elected, i think it had a positive effect on society where ppl basically woke up and created a movement against institutionalized sexism. a movement that JR has become a casualty to, since he abused his authority to commit sexual assault. he does that, and he relinquishes his right to the throne he so proudly sat on for years.

Sexual assault? If he commited sexual assault why isnt this investigation being run by law enforcement? You cant swap words and present them as facts.

[Zaximus]

Just now, Cary Kollins said:

 

issa joke

Crap, I had you confused with another poster that would legit believe that lol.   My bad

[AggieLean]

2 minutes ago, Paa Langfart said:

op ed in the WashPo today is  so appropriate here

 

 

Didn’t read all of that...

but what are you trying to say? Are you saying the allegations against JR aren’t a big deal? Being disrespectful and crude to women in the work force isn’t a big deal? Or the outrage is uncalled for?

[TheRed]

4 minutes ago, Paa Langfart said:

op ed in the WashPo today is  so appropriate here

 

 

Ironic you run to post something like this within mere minutes of demanding someone be silenced for having the nerve to discuss racism.

[KendrickPanther]

36 minutes ago, Montsta said:

 

This x10. 

I get the point about Jerry but the Cam situation is different.

Everything was public and Jourdan IMMEDIATELY took it public. Local media wasnt waiting for a chance to bash Cam, they had to put their 2 cents in as it was a current hot topic they were involved in. 

In the case of Jerry and Cam, they handled things with theie careers in mind. This isnt Rich White guy being treated better than rich Black guy. It was just reporters making business decisions.

[KendrickPanther]

3 minutes ago, TheRed said:

Ironic you run to post something like this within mere minutes of demanding someone be silenced for having the nerve to discuss racism.

Pretty sure you were calling people white trash Donald Trump supporters for defending Jerry who is involved in a sexual harrassment investigation. Other than race shaming there was little racial context at all. He probably just doesnt like you.

[Cookie Lyon]

7 minutes ago, GOOGLE JIM BOB COOTER said:

why do people keep saying he "probably did nothing illegal"

i mean if you're just going to toss out the part of the story that highlights his ~alleged~ illegal behavior as made up bullshit then why not toss out the rest too?

They continue to say that to make themselves feel better about defending an old pervert.

[CosmoGirl]

42 minutes ago, PanthersBigD said:

OR MAYBE the married business owner should instead stop touring his office space to comment on the tightness of his female employees' clothing. That's some straight up creeper poo. 

Edit: We've had a casual Friday at every place I've worked. It's supposed to be a day people can relax the dress code and be comfortable, not a day people dread because they wore jeans and their creeper boss is going to comment on them, or they try not wearing jeans and catch hell for that instead. 

Well, if they're tight enough to warrant comments about how they wiggled into them, they are not appropriate to wear into a professional environment. 

[beastson]

Mister smh