Dan hinted that he holds The Truth About Patrick Kane, if you were really paying attention.

How so?

How so?

was an interesting discussion on re-litigation of past transgressions using 2018 standards (kobe even tyson brought up)

the exact louis CK question was if you were at the comedy cellar and louis ck walks on stage for his surprise set... would you leave....? mcdoink waited 3 seconds and then spit out with a defeated tone of voice that he would leave.... bernstein waffled even longer then tried to say he'd like to think he would have left. bullshit that 2012 mcdoink/bernstein leave... but 2018 woke versions would leave

parkins point (i think) was stop whining about past transgressions of atheletes... if you dont like it just dont attend/participate... its like a forced middle ground that sounds reasonable while at the same time does not fit in to today's all or nothing mentatility

How has Spiegs been edited?

Something about how there are things that don't reach the public regarding people in town. On the heels of Kobe Bryant rape talk, and considering Fels/McClure's continued insinuations that they have The Truth About Patrick Kane, that's what it seemed like. Though it could have been Russell, I suppose.

Something about how there are things that don't reach the public regarding people in town. On the heels of Kobe Bryant rape talk, and considering Fels/McClure's continued insinuations that they have The Truth About Patrick Kane, that's what it seemed like. Though it could have been Russell, I suppose.

...When Parkins and Spiegel were continuing the discussion started in tranny, Parkins made a comment along the lines of "Your morals don't have to align with everything a shortstop does. It's not like a nominee for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, which is horrifying!" I guess that was Parkins' way of saying he believes conclusive proof was presented that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Blasey-Ford?

I didn't hear any of it, but maybe he meant that whoever the SS of the Cubs is doesn't really mean shit to a tree outside of MLB, whereas a Supreme Court Justice will always have an effect on the country and, perhaps sometimes, the entire world.

Just another possibility ... no idea if it's accurate or not.

[. He said Burneko is one of the smartest people writing about sports, so I am going to assume he's a tedious windbag.

There is actually far more evidence that Bernstein has been sexist and dismissive to women than there is for Kavanaugh, so he should be leading the charge on not re-litigating the past. Others have been fired for far less than publicly belittling women in the same field.

Have wondered about Dan's dislike of the Hawks organization for awhile then I saw that Wirtz wrote a letter in support of Ald. Tunney.