Steinbrenner: " We don't live in a socialist society"
Axtell
Posts: 10,037 ✭✭
in Sports Talk
edit: forgot to add comments 
"George Steinbrenner slowly put his hands behind his head, sat back in the big leather chair and, after thinking about the question for a few moments, said, "I'd like to see everybody competing, but we're not a socialist state."
Truth of the matter is, Georgie poo, you need the royals as much as they need you.
Please tell me where it's financially responsible for a team like the devil rays, who have received the most amount of revenue sharing money, dumps every dollar they receive into payroll. A perfect point was heard on the radio today. What, so they can win 78 games instead of 60? I heard the term 'payoff', and that's exactly what Steinbrenner is doing: paying these other owners NOT to field competitive teams, so his team can win 100 games a year and the small market ones will lose 100.
If Steinbrenner truly cared about competitive balance 'everybody competing', then he'd have no problem agreeing to a salary cap, to true revenue sharing, and everyone on equal footing. As it is, he's in a great situation (one I don't fault him for), but he comes off as less than genuine to complain about having to pay luxury taxes.
"George Steinbrenner slowly put his hands behind his head, sat back in the big leather chair and, after thinking about the question for a few moments, said, "I'd like to see everybody competing, but we're not a socialist state."
Truth of the matter is, Georgie poo, you need the royals as much as they need you.
Please tell me where it's financially responsible for a team like the devil rays, who have received the most amount of revenue sharing money, dumps every dollar they receive into payroll. A perfect point was heard on the radio today. What, so they can win 78 games instead of 60? I heard the term 'payoff', and that's exactly what Steinbrenner is doing: paying these other owners NOT to field competitive teams, so his team can win 100 games a year and the small market ones will lose 100.
If Steinbrenner truly cared about competitive balance 'everybody competing', then he'd have no problem agreeing to a salary cap, to true revenue sharing, and everyone on equal footing. As it is, he's in a great situation (one I don't fault him for), but he comes off as less than genuine to complain about having to pay luxury taxes.
0
Comments
And yet another Yankee related thread started by .... of course a hater. Here you have AGAIN on display why this forum has so many Yankee threads.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
Steve
<< <i>Talk about being a crybaby, Axhole do you ever write about the Mariners?
Steve >>
WP-
Do you ever contribute anything positive, or are you always a whining bit*h?
It's simple and clear - sporting events are more entertaining when they are competitive, and leagues benefit from that. The NFL is proof of this. MLB should have and needs a salary cap.
1) First and foremost the NFL's popularity stems from the gambling aspect that goes with it. This is far and away the number one reason for its popularity. The ease of which to gamble on it makes it even fun and enjoyable for the morons to partake in that aspect of the sport.
2) The second reason is the violent nature of it. People are drawn to it.
3) Is the ease of which to follow an NFL team/season. It is convenient. The drunk dopes who roll out of bed at noon on Sunday, hey time to sit on the couch and get fatter. Even the casual sports fan sees the convenience. It is once a week, doesn't take up much time. It doesn't interfere with work or family business. Following it is a breeze. It simply doesn't take much effort to follow an NFL team for the season. Just 16 times for the whole year is needed.
This is the reason why most NFL fans couldn't even name a single offensive lineman for THEIR OWN TEAM! I see a lot of people, and I see them wearing their favorite NFL team. I often take my own small surveys to check on things like this...try it and you will see. They can usually name the QB, and maybe another player. Sure the sports nuts will know(but even if quizzed by surprise they still won't name the entire offensive line).
Those are the primary reasons for the NFL's popularity. Parity is not a reason, in fact, parity su*cks for sports leagues. Why?...
This has been looked at by sports economists, sociologists etc...and when a sport has a 'goliath' team it makes and creates passion and feelings about the sport! Sports needs the 'evil empire', it needs the 'measuring stick'. To check to see the passion it creates, just read these message boards about how people feel about the Yankees.
The funny thing about the Yankees and baseball, is that people always wish baseball harkened back to the 'glory days', but they don't realize that it was even more GOLIATH back then! The Yankees have been this way since Ruth.
As for KC or the Devil Rays being bad all the time? Nobody is stopping them from spending more money, or being wiser at baseball decisions. There are other markets just as small that were able to do it and not lose money. It makes knocking the evil empire off the hill even more satisfying then, and that is what makes it enjoyable!
I agree
Steve
Please tell me when the NFL was more popular. During the 80s of the 49ers dominance, the 90s of the Cowboys dominance (both of which occured without a salary cap), or the present day?Gambling has been available during all of those times, so it surely can't be the only reason.
The NFL is just going to become more and more dominant, and baseball will continue to relinquish it's position as america's pasttime to the NFL.
Steve
The NFL has always been violent, and one could argue the violent nature is actually being lowered, not raised (no more horse collar tackles, lots of reductions on defense to promote offense). The NFL in recent history has had it's violent content dramatically reduced. Ronnie Lott has said as such that he wouldn't likely be able to play effectively if the rules were in place when he played as they are today. Could you imagine Jack Tatum playing in today's game?
As far as the ease of schedule. I'll give you that one. It's far easier to watch one game a week than have to try to see when your team is playing in baseball. But again, this is the way it's always been, the games have always been played on Sundays (and the monday nighter).
So of the three reasons, 2 of them have been the same since the league came into being (gambling allowed and games on sunday). The violence has been reduced.
Again, I don't think any of these three are reasons why the NFL is America's pasttime now.
Look at the Super Bowl. Yeah, it may continue to get superb ratings, but only for the reasons I stated. In fact, this epitomizes what I am saying. Just look at all the dopes you run across, or the people who join pools(yet couldn't even name four players in the entire Super Bowl). It is a party. It is violence. It is gambling. It is socializing. It is easy. If the Super Bowl were a seven game series do you think there would be Super Bowl parties for all seven games?? Would there be office pools for all seven games? No. Why? Because all those casual fans join the pools to make watching the game interesting for them. Without it, it simply would not be interesting, plain and simple. They wouldn't watch it. Yes, it is simple. Sometimes things are simple.
With our society, and the lives most people live, the conveniece certainly plays a factor in following a football team, say as opposed to a baseball team.
As for the Goliaths? Actually, YES Ax, the 70's steelers, 80's 49ers, and 90's Cowboys are much more beloved by their fans, and much more remembered and known by ALL the fans of the times. In fact, that is what created the NFL that we know today!!! The 70's was the catalyst for the NFL's popularity(add Miami and Oakland too).
Do you think anybody knows or cares about the the Ravesn Super Bowl team, the Rams, Tampa Bay's? Those teams don't bring new fans to the league! But the one team that does bring people in are teams like the PATRIOTS! Go ahead and measure 15 years from now. Compare the famous teams I mentioned and compare them to all the one and done teams of recent ilk and see which is more remembered or embraced OR HATED!
The point is, a league isn't loved and followed because it has a bunch of teams hovering around .500. It is loved and followed when it produces greatness, and loved even more when their is sustained greatness, especially when that greatness is easily identified with certain franchises. Then when that weak franchise all of a sudden pops up and punches a great one in the nose, then you have a true underdog story!
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A TRUE UNDERDOG STORY IN THE NFL ANYMORE! Crappy teams turn to SB contenders within a year now, and vice versa. To me, and to many, the sport su*ks that way.
<< <i>
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A TRUE UNDERDOG STORY IN THE NFL ANYMORE! Crappy teams turn to SB contenders within a year now, and vice versa. To me, and to many, the sport su*ks that way. >>
Thank you. That is EXACTLY why the NFL has overtaken MLB as the #1 sport in America.
And your personal opinion is what's coloring your normally objective viewpoint.
In fact, the 1975 World Series is known to get baseball back on the radar screen as it was almost considered a dying game for a bit. People had already flocked to the NFL for NONE of the reasons of which you are stating.
It is the glitz, the glamour, the violence, the gambling, you name it. It was the Steelers, the Cowboys AND THEIR CHEERLEADERS, the Raiders and their meannes.
Ax, it is my opinion on the parity no doubt, but it is not my opinion on the reasons why. They are reasons to explain, and it all happened well before the salary cap was around in football.
P.S. In fact, to characterize the feeling of basebal being a dying game, I belive int he movie "Bang the drum slowly" the doctor actually had a quote about baseball being a dying game. This isn't something I am making up. The change occured in the 70's.
It's clear that competitiveness in sports attracts fans in most circumstances. Yes, "goliaths" are entertaining but they do more harm than good in the long-run. Yes, a KC Royals fan may go to the ballpark or watch the games on TV when their team is playing the Yankees, but what about all the other games? Most fans want to see their team win whether they want to admit that or not. Knowing that their team has almost no chance to win, doesn't give a fan much incentive to support the team. I was a Phillies fan in years when they weren't competitive and the results were clear with low attendance and TV ratings, and those same results are found in other sports towns as well. Competitiveness doesn't exactly make for a successful league, but for an established league I believe it is vital for the overall long term health of the league. A salary cap there is no question helps competitiveness or more importantly gives the impression of competitiveness which each year gives the fans hope that their team could win a championship now or possibly in the near future.
I agree with what you say however, even these small market teams can pay for stars. they have the money but choose not to spend it. and as for the superstar, many want to play with larger market teams and thus they gravitate there.
the players are the ones that do not want a salary cap. they want a free market where they can move to whatever team that will meet their demands.
steve
What about a team like KC, who could give a guy $10 million a year. What happens when the rest of his teammates hate him because they earn 1/10th of his pay? What happens when that player goes down a season ending injury?
The players may not want a cap, but the owners who don't want a cap are the big market teams, as they have absolutely nothing to gain by being on a level playing field with everyone else.
So what are you saying? that MLB should create more divisions?
say, put teams like the mariners and devil rays and pirates together? all the so called losers? that way they then could be motivated to spend some dough?
steve
ve already answered that with:
the players won't go for it. they struck over it
perhaps MLB could do what you implied. put losers like the mariners in a seoearte division with other losers so they can be competitive. perhaps MLB could allow them to play triple a teams and award them a PO berth each yr based on that. that way losers like the mariners could play some meaningful games come october.
jmo
it could work.
Steve
In terms of love and true following of the sport by die hards, I don't know if the NFL is or has ever been more popular than MLB.
Almost everybody played baseball on a team during their life, and that is not nearly the case for football, so I think the bond is stronger in baseball in many aspects, as opposed to football.
The bottom line is that the NFL exploded in popularity well before any salary cap was invented, and it sustained quite well for a long time like that. The heydey of the NFL may very well be the time of the 70's Steelers and Cowboys.
The NBA exploded in popularity before salary caps. Now it is a garbage product.
MLB exploded in popularity as it is currently constituted, and believe it or not, it is still pretty popular, don't you think?
however I like the holes idea of putting losers like the mariners with other losers so the losers could play meaningful games all season long.
instead of the superbowl they could call it the toiletbowl.............oooppps wrong sport, but i hope you inderstand my point.
steve
<< <i>Stevek
I agree with what you say however, even these small market teams can pay for stars. they have the money but choose not to spend it. and as for the superstar, many want to play with larger market teams and thus they gravitate there.
the players are the ones that do not want a salary cap. they want a free market where they can move to whatever team that will meet their demands.
steve >>
I hear ya Steve. In a nutshell though, I just don't think it's fair or good for any league with any team to lose their superstars over money. Yes in the NFL a team can lose some superstars, but get to keep most if not sometimes all of their other superstars depending on how many they have. Seeing small market teams lose their superstars over money I just don't think does the league any good in the long-run especially with fans who like to identify with their teams players a bit. For example I can't even fathom the contempt I would have had if Mike Schmidt would have had to leave my Phils because of money. Yes, there was no salary cap in MLB then or now, but MLB owners back then didn't just blatantly steal other team's players like they do now, and of course for the most part Steinbrenner started that trend which seems to keep getting worse...and of course the fans windup paying for it all with higher ticket prices, etc.
The Yanks aren't goliath any more either. They are an aging group of superstars who will be lucky to make it to playoffs. If they do make it, expect another first round KO.
Of course I've been telling myself this for a few years now.
I agree. that would be fair. But would the teams that are being defined as small market use this money to pay players? or at the least use it to strenghten farm systems? or would the owners pocket it?
Steve
I know it was said tongue-in-cheek, but that would be interesting. Create divisions based on salary, something like 0-75M, 75-125M and 125M+ or whatever $ amount would create 3 divisions for each league with an equal number of teams. Sort of like weight classes for boxing, wrestling, etc., only done for money. A little guy always makes the playoffs from each league...
I must be blind as I never realized the NL has 2 more teams than the AL (16 to 14), does anyone know why?
<< <i>say, put teams like the mariners and devil rays and pirates together? all the so called losers? that way they then could be motivated to spend some dough?
I know it was said tongue-in-cheek, but that would be interesting. Create divisions based on salary, something like 0-75M, 75-125M and 125M+ or whatever $ amount would create 3 divisions for each league with an equal number of teams. Sort of like weight classes for boxing, wrestling, etc., only done for money. A little guy always makes the playoffs from each league...
I must be blind as I never realized the NL has 2 more teams than the AL (16 to 14), does anyone know why? >>
The National League is older.
Your attempts at being funny simply highlight the arrogance that fans of big market teams have. People like YOU don't see the need for other teams...but listen up smart guy, who would you play if there weren't other teams in the league?
It will get to a point where enough people just won't give a damn anymore and you will lose franchises. Is that what you want, where we regress back to, oh, say 16 teams? Where once proud franchises like the Pirates and Royals are forced to attrition because of the greed of big market owners?
the reason the NL has more teams is for scheduling.
when each league had 15 they were having a hard time. The brewers moved from the AL to the NL for that reason.
Steve
Didn't I already slap your stupid face around on this subject in another thread? Yes I did. I already tried to educate you in the fact that you are a moron for comparing World Series and Super Bowl TV ratings. I lectured you on how the Super Bowl is a one day extravaganza with TONS of eating, drinking, partying, gambling. A MUCH different animal then the World Series. I then knocked your few teeth that you have left out by admonishing you on being a ignorant little fool becuase you still had not realized that baseball is selling more tickets to its venues then it ever has before. While football is obviously a more popular sport in general, baseball is AS healthy as it has EVER been. Even in spite of its self.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
It was nice of me to leave you a few teeth for you to knock out?
Steve
<< <i>say, put teams like the mariners and devil rays and pirates together? all the so called losers? that way they then could be motivated to spend some dough?
I know it was said tongue-in-cheek, but that would be interesting. Create divisions based on salary, something like 0-75M, 75-125M and 125M+ or whatever $ amount would create 3 divisions for each league with an equal number of teams. Sort of like weight classes for boxing, wrestling, etc., only done for money. A little guy always makes the playoffs from each league...
I must be blind as I never realized the NL has 2 more teams than the AL (16 to 14), does anyone know why? >>
The NL actually has a 3 team advantage.
The Mariners don't count.
Are you 2 that desperate to feel like 'men' that you have to equate your debates on a stupid messageboard to knocking someone's teeth out?
Look, as long as people have differing opinions, there will never be any teeth 'knocked out'. For you to continue to use fighting terms over a ridiculous topic just shows how insecure you are in your own masculinity.
But if it makes you feel better about your pathetic little lives, go for it. You just look ridiculous (which, being yankee fans, I am sure you are used to).
<< <i>softy and WP-
Are you 2 that desperate to feel like 'men' that you have to equate your debates on a stupid messageboard to knocking someone's teeth out?
Look, as long as people have differing opinions, there will never be any teeth 'knocked out'. For you to continue to use fighting terms over a ridiculous topic just shows how insecure you are in your own masculinity.
But if it makes you feel better about your pathetic little lives, go for it. You just look ridiculous (which, being yankee fans, I am sure you are used to). >>
"Marquis de Pussbury Rules for Message Board Posting or How to Sport Your Princess Plates While Wearing Pink, Invariably"
- a tome by Axtell aka Sparky ya Dope
you really took that pink s**t to heart, didn't ya? What, does your girl wear pink with every outfit, has a pink razr phone, and has that retarded 'princess' license plate frame you bought her?
No wonder you are so pissed about it.
<< <i>SoFL:
you really took that pink s**t to heart, didn't ya? What, does your girl wear pink with every outfit, has a pink razr phone, and has that retarded 'princess' license plate frame you bought her?
No wonder you are so pissed about it. >>
Sparky -
The wife with whom I have just celebrated 5 years of wonderful wedded bliss is a 16 year law enforcement employee.
She is an avid sports fan, Yankees of course since she was born in Northern NJ. Here is a list of a few things I have bought her recently. I travel a lot and bring her something whenever I return.
A Derek Jeter / Reggie Jackson autographed Yankees World Series ticket w/ a corresponding copy of Sports Illustrated, both of which came from the Charlie Sheen collection. She came close to tears on that one.
A tight little Eagles shirt in black and a little white Eagles shorts and tank top set.
Did buy her a couple of tank tops last week, one in pink.
Her favorite shirt is one I bought her last year. It says, "yeah I have an attitude."
Of course she is proficient with a firearm which is pretty attractive to me.
You see I have no problem with women. They are the best thing that ever happened to us. If she wanted to wear pink (invariably) and required me to have "princess" tatooed on my a$$ she might have a taker because luckily I have found the perfect woman with which to spend life.
Keep reading. One day your testicles will descend and you'll understand.
Owned again.
Axhole has no testies.............she has a vagina.
as for the teeth remarks, boy you really are a hipocrit. It was you that first remarked here about kicking in someones teeth.
do EVERYONE a favor and go away.
Steve
<< <i>
Sparky -
>>
Please, I have that trademarked. You owe me $5.
<< <i>The wife with whom I have just celebrated 5 years of wonderful wedded bliss is a 16 year law enforcement employee.
She is an avid sports fan, Yankees of course since she was born in Northern NJ. Here is a list of a few things I have bought her recently. I travel a lot and bring her something whenever I return.
A Derek Jeter / Reggie Jackson autographed Yankees World Series ticket w/ a corresponding copy of Sports Illustrated, both of which came from the Charlie Sheen collection. She came close to tears on that one.
>>
Ahh no wonder you're so pissy over my badgering the yankee 'fans' here, you've got a little bandwagon rider of your own at home.
<< <i>A tight little Eagles shirt in black and a little white Eagles shorts and tank top set.
Did buy her a couple of tank tops last week, one in pink.
Her favorite shirt is one I bought her last year. It says, "yeah I have an attitude."
Of course she is proficient with a firearm which is pretty attractive to me.
You see I have no problem with women. They are the best thing that ever happened to us. If she wanted to wear pink (invariably) and required me to have "princess" tatooed on my a$$ she might have a taker because luckily I have found the perfect woman with which to spend life.
Keep reading. One day your testicles will descend and you'll understand.
Owned again. >>
Hah owned? Exactly how? Do you even know what that means? I doubt it. You probably read about it on whatever eagles message board when you got clowned repeatedly and thought you'd use it here.
Who here has problems with women? I simply have problems with women who are well past their prime, well past what would be considered 'cute' trying to act young. But then, I am sure your lady has NOOO problems like that, right?
<< <i>Ahh no wonder you're so pissy over my badgering the yankee 'fans' here, you've got a little bandwagon rider of your own at home. >>
No bandwagons here. Read and you will see that she was born in Yankee country. I am also a Yankee fan by marriage and personal experience. Telling you the story will bring up another of your asinine rants about conspiracies. In short my work required that I spend 3 1/2 weeks in NYC in support of the World Trade Center disaster operation. I worked with over 300 NYPD detectives on any given day. This led to the wonderful experience of watching the Yanks in the '01 Series in a huge mess tent with all of these great people. Who cares that they lost, it was fitting for the time that the Yanks made it. I could tell you more about the scene, the smell that I can recall to this day, and many stories of patriotism and the great work performed there but you would not understand.
Given that, I became a Yankees fan after that experience and bought a jersey before leaving NYC. The Phils are always first but the Yanks are close.
<< <i>Who here has problems with women? I simply have problems with women who are well past their prime, well past what would be considered 'cute' trying to act young. But then, I am sure your lady has NOOO problems like that, right? >>
You, by your remarks about pink and princesses have a problem with women. My guess it is one quite close to you.
My wife has no trouble acting young. I am lucky enough to have a wife that is 12 years younger than me.
In conclusion, you have been owned again.
Oh, I do not frequent any Eagles message board. You are entertaining enough and an easy target.
Take another stab at my wife and you'll be beaten down once again.
I've got no problem with an attractive 20 something woman wearing it, it's fitting, looks good on her, then by all means go ahead.
You don't check out the Eagles' message board? Wow, and you call yourself a fan?
<< <i>You don't check out the Eagles' message board? Wow, and you call yourself a fan? >>
I call myself a season ticket holder who lives 1200 miles away from Philly and travels north for games.
That's enough "fan" for most people.
Once again we can enter into the debate about keeping your hometown allegiance even when you leave the area, but you have proven it to be a concept well beyond your comprehension.
Owned again...moron.
<< <i>No, the only problem I have are women who are far past their prime trying desperately to recatch their youth is all. It's the same feeling I get when I see middle aged men cruising around in corvettes, desperately trying to look 'hip' while all they do is look pathetic - much like these ladies trying to do the same.
I've got no problem with an attractive 20 something woman wearing it, it's fitting, looks good on her, then by all means go ahead.
You don't check out the Eagles' message board? Wow, and you call yourself a fan? >>
Oh. so you have a problem with people being FREE to express themselves? You have a problem with what YOU find not acceptable?
You actually have a problem with the middle aged guy who can finally afford that corvette? Do you think he cares about what a fuc$king loser like yourself thinks? NO. And he shouldn't. People like YOU Axtell represent the nasty dark side of our free society. Heaven forbid someone dresses in a way that "offends" you or drives a car that you OBVIOUSLY will never be able to afford.
Get lost you scumbag ........
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
<< <i>
<< <i>No, the only problem I have are women who are far past their prime trying desperately to recatch their youth is all. It's the same feeling I get when I see middle aged men cruising around in corvettes, desperately trying to look 'hip' while all they do is look pathetic - much like these ladies trying to do the same.
I've got no problem with an attractive 20 something woman wearing it, it's fitting, looks good on her, then by all means go ahead.
You don't check out the Eagles' message board? Wow, and you call yourself a fan? >>
Oh. so you have a problem with people being FREE to express themselves? You have a problem with what YOU find not acceptable?
You actually have a problem with the middle aged guy who can finally afford that corvette? Do you think he cares about what a fuc$king loser like yourself thinks? NO. And he shouldn't. People like YOU Axtell represent the nasty dark side of our free society. Heaven forbid someone dresses in a way that "offends" you or drives a car that you OBVIOUSLY will never be able to afford.
Get lost you scumbag ........ >>
It's very interesting that the usual "free speech don't prevent people from being themselves they have a right" Axtell becomes a bigot when it comes to women, and now middle aged men.
If you look at other threads you'll see defense of long hair, drug use, etc., which I have no problem with if not interfering with others, but here we have a gross contradiction.
<< <i>Hey hardcore,
And yet another Yankee related thread started by .... of course a hater. Here you have AGAIN on display why this forum has so many Yankee threads. >>
Hey Axtell, is it not wonderful people actually think I am you? I suppose there was ONLY supposed to be ONE Yankee hater around! As I have said before, I do not mind the Yankees, when I am constipated, reading about them really helps out for that!!!!
<< <i>
It's very interesting that the usual "free speech don't prevent people from being themselves they have a right" Axtell becomes a bigot when it comes to women, and now middle aged men.
If you look at other threads you'll see defense of long hair, drug use, etc., which I have no problem with if not interfering with others, but here we have a gross contradiction. >>
I didn't say people can't do these things, I just said I am going to laugh my ass off at them.
And a guy who's 50 and cruising in a mustang convertible, or corvette is a mockery waiting to happen. It's easy to see that this must fit softy to a T, otherwise, why would he be so pissy about it.
<< <i>
<< <i>
It's very interesting that the usual "free speech don't prevent people from being themselves they have a right" Axtell becomes a bigot when it comes to women, and now middle aged men.
If you look at other threads you'll see defense of long hair, drug use, etc., which I have no problem with if not interfering with others, but here we have a gross contradiction. >>
I didn't say people can't do these things, I just said I am going to laugh my ass off at them.
And a guy who's 50 and cruising in a mustang convertible, or corvette is a mockery waiting to happen. It's easy to see that this must fit softy to a T, otherwise, why would he be so pissy about it. >>
In my book it beats driving a Mini and playing fantasies like the Grimne dungeon game, "Thief Axtel" or is it "desparil?"
<< <i>
In my book it beats driving a Mini and playing fantasies like the Grimne dungeon game, "Thief Axtel" or is it "desparil?" >>
Driving a MINI...hmm great gas mileage, tons of power, and a blast to drive. I am guessing you probably drive an SUV to prove what a 'man' you are?
And Grimne was like 10 years ago! Dude, I know you googled anything searching for insight into who I am, but please, you sound desperate
<< <i>
<< <i>
In my book it beats driving a Mini and playing fantasies like the Grimne dungeon game, "Thief Axtel" or is it "desparil?" >>
Driving a MINI...hmm great gas mileage, tons of power, and a blast to drive. I am guessing you probably drive an SUV to prove what a 'man' you are?
And Grimne was like 10 years ago! Dude, I know you googled anything searching for insight into who I am, but please, you sound desperate
What I drive you could not afford, and I have two. Neither is an SUV or truck, both are imports and would leave you on the roadside stroking your Mini.
Desperate never.
Clever always.
Not 10 years, try less than 3.
There is more.
It is likely still around, as there's little to maintenance needed, but I haven't played that game in about 10 years.
Still not quite sure what you are desperately grabbing at, but the fact you try to justify your existence with expensive sports cars further points out the fact that you are a desperate little man actively seeking attention.
Clever? Hah, thanks for the laugh. You're an eagles fan, after all.
<< <i>Grime MUD was a text based game that was around and I was playing likely long before you discovered the internet.
It is likely still around, as there's little to maintenance needed, but I haven't played that game in about 10 years.
Still not quite sure what you are desperately grabbing at, but the fact you try to justify your existence with expensive sports cars further points out the fact that you are a desperate little man actively seeking attention.
Clever? Hah, thanks for the laugh. You're an eagles fan, after all. >>
...and the fact that you drive a Mini shows that you are a desperate little man actively seeking appropriately little cars. Can't handle much more can you? Small hands I bet.
Princess.