46 thoughts on “Super Bowl weekend Open Thread

  1. I think the quality of posts and discussions has really dropped off considerably. I figured a lot of it was with passions & ideology ratcheting up with the elections – things got more blindly partisan & more gotcha’ stuff and less off the good discussions that I’ve really enjoyed reading and taking part in here in the past. I’d hoped it would get better, but at least to me, it hasn’t.

    I even took about a month off – I was really frustrated and to be honest, just ashamed of a lot of the stuff that was said here immediately after the Arizona shooting and wanted nothing to do with any of it.

    I know I’ve wished both Jason & Ed well in their races. I meant it – though part of me almost wishes they lose so they have time to post here again. Though I frequently disagreed with them, both were thoughtful, considerate and respectful and perhaps best of all, thought provoking. Though I’m sure they’ll be able to do more good if elected, selfishly, I miss reading their comments here.

    While I certainly respond to posts that I just disagree with and think are just plain wrong, I prefer the give & take and making and reading “that’s interesting, but then what about…” type of comments. More and more, I’m trying to stop & think, “to what end?” “Is it really worth my time? Is the person I’m responding to going bother considering – or even reading my response?”

    If I want to have a discussion with a brick wall, why settle for an imitation when I have the real thing on the side of my house. 🙂

    1. Locke, while I get your point about having a discussion with a brick wall, let’s not forget that the folks who visit this blog – or any other for that matter – aren’t typically folks who haven’t already made up their minds about a specific issue or who haven’t already developed a very set political ideology.

      Speaking for myself, I appreciate the contributions you’ve made to the blog as a commenter, as I appreciate the contributions of nearly all the moderate/conservative commenters who visit Blogging Blue. Sure, the point of the blog is to give me and others an outlet for what’s on our minds, but I always wanted to see lively/spirited/heated discussions.

    2. Hi Locke,

      Say, thanks for your kind remarks. I’ve been pretty busy the past few months with campaigning. My devotion to the blog scene has periodically fluctuated, though since I started knocking on voters’ doors, or even slightly before, it’s really waned. Still, I make this blog one of my first online visits. I’ve always thought your comments to be of a higher class; whether or not we agreed on a matter was secondary to me.

      I do have a three candidate primary a week from Tuesday (*#@$@!!), but I’ll try to write a little about my experience after that. Till then!

      Jason.

  2. Zach, the Siren would like to take a moment during the lull to praise you and thank you for a great quality blog each and every day.

    Please feel free to check out my corner of the woods down in Racine. The Siren spends her days luring area Republicans to the rocky shore of Lake Michigan. I also keep a close eye the the doins’ of those pesky tea partiers…you know we’re quite seriously overrun lately!

    Always happy to link back to you and your cadre of thoughtful commenters!

    Cheers!

  3. Thanks to you all for commenting. Locke sorry your so upset with me, although I disagree with some of your perception. I enjoy when you and other republicans/conservatives comment, because as I have always said I dont like just preaching to the choir. I know we have real differing opinions especially when it comes to the commons(which I think is where you got most upset with me) but I do like to hear yours. You also accused me of NOT reading others posts, and that’s just not true. If someone takes the time to post on a topic i respect them enough to read it thoroughly(even notalibs posts).

    And for Anon, sorry you think I am a sexist because I said good job to Jake whose post I agreed with about 90 percent of (which in grading would be an A). As for your question to Steve, I can answer that – YES i do have the scars.

    Have a great day all and congrats to all the packer fans!

    1. PP…you need to go back and read Jake’s comment…and your “well said” didn’t say “90 percent well said”. Maybe you should say what you mean right away…not after someone calls you out on what you actually said.

      I don’t want you to answer the question I asked Steve. I much rather you explain what the hell is so funny about sexist comments? You seem to get such a hoot out of them…clue us all in on what’s so funny.

      1. Jake formerly of the LP
        January 21, 2011 at 7:36 pm · Reply · Edit

        Oh please, don’t start with the “women don’t deserve these kind of putdowns.” Kleefisch earned the sex chat rips, because that’s how she got her current gig. C’mon, it wasn’t her great command of issues or reality that made middle-age suburban men vote for her in the GOP primary. Let’s be honest about that, and after her lack of gratitude for having easy access to cancer treatments that most of us wouldn’t be able to get nor afford, she deserves to get criticism anywhere she goes. * JAKE IS CORRECT HERE IN THAT SHE DID NOT GET HER GIG BY HER GREAT COMMAND OF THE ISSUES OR HER GRASSROOTS CAMPAIGN, SHE GOT IT BY RUNNING TO THE RIGHT WING RADIO TRIUMVERATE AND GETTING THE SUBURBAN WHITE MALES TO VOTE FOR HER BECAUSE SHE IS PRETTY. I ALSO AGREE 100%(I WAS ONE OF THE FIRST TO BRING IT UP) ABOUT HOW DESPICABLE IT IS THAT SHE SPENDS SO MUCH EFFORT TO MAKE SURE OTHERS DO NOT GET THE SAME ACCESS TO CURING THEIR OWN CANCER AS SHE HAS.

        Was Sly out of line to say what he did on the air? Probably with the phone sex references, but unlike the Sykes/ Bellings of the world, he admitted it and apologized. The next Milltown hate jock that does the same will be the first, and the double-standard is disgusting. ** YES SLY WAS OUT OF LINE TO SAY WHAT HE DID ABOUT GIVING FELLATIO AND HE APOLOGIZED AND SHE ACCEPTED. ACTUALLY SHE WAS FOR THE APOLOGY BEFORE SHE WAS AGAINST IT. THE WHOLE POINT OF MY POST WAS “FAKE OUTRAGE” WHO IS CHARLIE SYKES AND THE REST OF THE RIGHT WING TO BE UPSET ABOUT THIS? WHEN HAVE THEY EVER APOLOGIZED?

        Speaking of double-standards, remind me how the right-wing radio hosts have treated strong-willed Dem women like Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton? * CAN YOU REMIND US HOW THE RIGHT WING RADIO HOSTS HAVE TREATED HILLARY AND NANCY PELOSI? HOW ABOUT JANET RENO?

        * LOOKING BACK ON WHAT JAKE SAID I AGREE WITH MORE THAN 90%. NO WONDER I SAID WELL SAID.

        OK ANON here it is with my comments!

        As for the caribou barbie moniker, it was given to her by many people throughout the campaign and I think it fit the image she was trying to portray well. She also tries to play off her sexuality and her “strong willed” i will shoot any animal outdoorswoman. So I do not think its sexist(but obviously you do) so sorry about that.

        1. She (Palin) plays off her “sexuality”? Really. How does she do that? By wearing makeup? Dressing nicely? Staying fit and healthy? Please explain.

        2. I really cannot believe the so called liberals on here are allowing PP to get away with being a sexist. Granted…you may not be so upset because he’s attacking republican women…but regardless of who the target is it should never be acceptable. This is equal to attacking black republicans with racism. Would you stand for that?

          PP…you bald ugly little man (that’s acceptable right Zach…attacking people based on their looks as long as it’s factual?)…how did Palin use her “sexuality” in the election that makes you think it’s okay to be sexist towards her?

          1. Anon,

            I have explained where I am coming from, its as simple as that. I do not think caribou barbie is sexist.

            Why was the biggest selling button at the Repub convention “the hottest VP from the coolest state” ? because they respected her brains? was it her talk of death panels that helped her gain respect? Or maybe the way she nailed the katie couric interview that showed her credentials.

            http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/148512/conservatives_big_hypocrisy_turning_women_candidates_who_are_antisex_and_antiwoman_into_sex_symbols_

            I am now looking for anytime you got upset about something that mattered to women. Any problems with any of the republican agenda that is so anti women? ever vote for a republican who has voted against women’s rights? You are starting to prove the term “fake outrage”.

              1. Holy Cow…how does whether or not I voted for Van Hollen matter? This isn’t about Van Hollen. Why is it so hard for you to stick to one topic at a time? Besides…voting is private…who I voted for is none of your business.

                1. Its private if you are ashamed of it. JB Van hollen allowed his buddy ken kratz to continue to prey on women even after he knew he was busted doing it once. So I am just curious if you have such hatred and vitriol towards someone who actually preyed on women or just me because I think caribou barbie is clever.

                  1. Only an idiot would say that. Voting is private for a reason…and it has nothing to do with being ashamed of who you voted for. But…hey…keep digging.

            1. So…you are using the excuse someone else said it so I can say it…(again). How intellectual of you.

              PP…you claimed Palin herself used her “sexuality” during the election therefore earned the sexist remarks and labeling from you…so now prove it.

            2. PP…perhaps had you spent a little time reading and comprehending what other people are saying on here…instead of droning on and on with your fake outrage…you wouldn’t even need to ask me those questions. I have been very clear and real about my beliefs on here.

              And again…who I vote/voted for is none of your business. The nerve of you to think I have to give *you* my voting history because I voiced my opinions on your sexism.

              1. I just am trying to get the level of your seriousness or hypocrisy thats all. I read and comprehend just fine. Your pissed at me for no reason and you wont let it go. I get it.

                Ask me any election and I can and will tell you who I voted for.

                1. Do you really think I care who you voted for?

                  Hypocrisy is a sexist who calls himself a liberal…and a liberal who lets a sexist post on his blog.

                  Don’t think I haven’t noticed you have not given an example of Palin’s “sexuality” that you feel earned her your sexist labels and comments.

          2. Anon, I’ve wasted enough time and energy arguing with you about this. You believe that PP and I are sexists, and I’m willing to bet nothing I write on this blog is going to convince you otherwise, because you’ve made up your mind.

            1. Zach…you’re wrong. I’ve been waiting for you to write something on PP comments. Either you agree with PP’s comments or you don’t?

              And…YOU…should not be trying to paint the picture that I’m unreasonable.

              1. I’ve made it clear PP’s opinions are his and his alone, but you keep insisting that despite my statements, I must agree with him because I allow him to post here. If I censored everything I didn’t agree with, there wouldn’t be much commentary here from conservatives.

                And for what it’s worth, I don’t recall writing anywhere that you’re unreasonable. As I wrote earlier, you’re entitled to your opinion of PP and yours truly, and whether I agree with it or not, you’re certainly entitled to believe what you want.

                You think I’m a sexist and a hypocrite, and I’m okay with that, because folks who’ve met me outside of this blog know me and know who I am and what I stand for.

                And now I’m done with this.

                1. Commentary is different than posting.

                  But…you completely dodged the question. Wow…why can’t you just say whether or not you agree with PP comments about Kleefisch and Palin?

                  You’d think you’d stand for the same things ON this blog as you do outside of this blog. ??? Would you allow someone to make sexist comments in front of you without standing up and saying something??

                  1. What part of me writing, “PP’s opinions are his and his alone” would lead you to think I agree with what he said? However, since I need to break it down into simpler terms, here you go: I don’t agree with what PP said.

                    I hope that helps clear things up for you, and have a great evening!

                    1. Thank YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. Locke,

    I don’t get around here much anymore, even as a reader. I have always appreciated your replies to my posts and comments. They have indeed been a bright spot on this site. And thank you for thinking I’ve been an asset. I haven’t always felt like I’ve been a worthwhile contributor. But the experience here was a good way to learn to keep my tendency toward sarcasm in check or at least labelling it as such when I succumbed to the urge. This new found skill has paid off in the campaign.

    Like Jason I have two opponents on February 15th…I haven’t even met one of them yet and hope to do so tonight a the Coffee with the Candidates event at Holler Park.

    Whether I win or lose I do intend to return after the general election…how much time I have to devote to blogging will remain to be seen if I win.

    So thanks for the encouragement and I’ll be back (said in my best Ahnold accent)!

    1. Ed,

      Maybe some time you can give me some lessons on how to keep sarcasm in check. I have a hard time with that!

      Good luck on the 15th to you and Jason.

      And root- welcome the more progressive voices the better.

  5. In looking over my predictions for both the NFC championship game and the Superbowl I find the following.

    Steve picks Packers over Bears, 24 to 14. Packers win 21 to 14.
    Steve picks Packers over Steelers, 27 to 17, Packers win 31 to 25.

    This is strong evidence that I have psychic powers, and so I’m going to make my prediction for next years Superbowl now.

    Packers over Jets, 35 to 21.

    Unless, of course, the owners shut down the season. Then I predict:

    Owners, millions of dollars in guaranteed TV revenue no matter what happens; players, fans and local economies, a great big fat zero.

    http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2011/02/07/nfl-labor/

    1. I just wanted to remind everyone that I’ve predicted the Packers will win the 2012 Superbowl defeating the Jets 35 to 21. See my comment above for more detail.

        1. I saw your prediction, but I just don’t see the New York football Jets making it to the Super Bowl next year.

          With a healthy Jimmy Leonhardt, all things are possible. 🙂

          I actually read an interview with Ryan (yes the guy who hyped up the Jets vs. Pats as a mono a mono battle between him and Belichick) where he actually gave Leonhardt a ton of credit for coming up with large portions of the scheme they used to beat Indy and New England in the playoffs. My favorite Badger ever. Every level he’s ever played at – including high school – he was told he was too small and couldn’t compete.

          Just saw, his little brother is walking on at UW. 🙂

          BTW, I should post a snapshot of my winning ticket. I placed a bet on the Packers to win the Super Bowl back in August. Unfortunately, at that point (before all the injuries) I only got +700. Should’ve bought another one – later in the season.

          1. Don’t get me wrong…I think the Jets are a heck of a team with a heck of a coach, but they’ve still got some big holes to fill and they need their quarterback to become more consistent.

    1. And at least you can spell his name right (#$@# keyboard & auto-correct in Android).

      “He’s one of the best safeties in football,” said defensive tackle Trevor Pryce, who also played with Leonhard in Baltimore. “He is, by far, one of the most talented players. I would stop to say he’s probably the best player on this team with the amount of stuff he can do. He lines up everybody, he tackles and he plays like his hair is on fire.”
      ESPN

      I had posted that quote in a sports discussion about him when he was injured. It amused me because of the idea that he’s the ultimate overachiever almost seems like a backhanded compliment at times. His athleticism is so under rated – and it’s so pervasive…I’m sure part of it is small-town guy, and in part, because he’s short. But it also seems pretty clear that many discount his ability because he’s white. The “he’s crafty” or “gets by with his wit and guile” come from same place as referring to an African American as “articulate” or “well-spoken.”

  6. I just wanted to remind everyone that I’ve picked the Packers over the Jets in next years Superbowl, 35 to 21. I hope I won’t have to repeat this again.

Comments are closed.