"REPORT AND REPENT" lol....

Jonathan Twilley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------
>
> You really read that and took from it that I was
> "attacking" his disability. "Attacking" the
> disability. Really?

Yeah, at first I did....because you said he was hiding behind the glasses. As if he had a *choice* to wear them.

But I can see that you (finally) explained your point. Thanks for taking the time to do that.


Perhaps it would have been
> more appropriate to say "hidden behind those
> glasses" he pretends to be a tough coach.

That's a little better. Not for P.C. purposes, but just so my dense self could understand it. (believe it or not I"m not very concerned with political correctness the way most of our society is).



I am
> sure you would suggest not to use it at all. But
> dude, DUDE! I was just painting a picture of the
> guy and that behind the hard ass fascade is really
> a confused desparate coach who didn't have the
> courage to put Porter in his place.

I get it. And I agree with this.



Whether I
> believe it or not, I was infuriated by the
> pathetic performance by the special teams and was
> cathartically ranting. Then you come in and try
> to make out that I am "attacking" his disability.
> You've got to be kidding me.
>

Just trying to get you to phrase it in a way that doesn't point attention to his condition. I personally think it's better to convey a point without doing that. Even if you don't agree and start chucking political ideology allegations into the mix.

But I get it, ...the glasses are a facade. I don't get metaphors right away sometimes. That's why I got crappy grades in English/writing classes.


> Get this. When I say I don't care about his
> disability, I don't mean it in the way you
> interpret it.

Yeah I see that now.

What I mean is that I didn't care
> about that part of what I was saying. The part I
> was clearly emphasizing is that I felt he should
> do the tough thing and fire Bonamegone.
>
> The funny part is that I don't think Sparano would
> be so much offended by me mentioning the fact that
> he wears shades. Something tells me he would be
> more upset by the fact that I implied he had no
> nuts.
>

haha. I don't think he'd be offended either. I heard an interview of him describing his injury and how it happened and he was very easygoing about it. But the radio guy interviewing him really wanted to clear up a public perception about his glasses because a lot of people out there just think he is...you know...hiding behind them.


> Please except my apologies for mentioning the
> glasses. It was a horrible and extremely
> insensitive thing for me to have done. I feel
> awful about it and wish that I would never done
> it. Not.

Hey that's great. Good for you.

By the way, one of the reasons I've enjoyed the back-and-forth with you in this thread is that it *is* cathartic after a loss, as you mentioned.

And to quote Phinsfan2? " I like to argue"

JC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jonathan Twilley Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------
> >
> > You really read that and took from it that I
> was
> > "attacking" his disability. "Attacking" the
> > disability. Really?
>
> Yeah, at first I did....because you said he was
> hiding behind the glasses. As if he had a
> *choice* to wear them.
>
> But I can see that you (finally) explained your
> point. Thanks for taking the time to do that.
>
>
> Perhaps it would have been
> > more appropriate to say "hidden behind those
> > glasses" he pretends to be a tough coach.
>
> That's a little better. Not for P.C. purposes,
> but just so my dense self could understand it.
> (believe it or not I"m not very concerned with
> political correctness the way most of our society
> is).
>
>
>
> I am
> > sure you would suggest not to use it at all.
> But
> > dude, DUDE! I was just painting a picture of
> the
> > guy and that behind the hard ass fascade is
> really
> > a confused desparate coach who didn't have the
> > courage to put Porter in his place.
>
> I get it. And I agree with this.
>
>
>
> Whether I
> > believe it or not, I was infuriated by the
> > pathetic performance by the special teams and
> was
> > cathartically ranting. Then you come in and
> try
> > to make out that I am "attacking" his
> disability.
> > You've got to be kidding me.
> >
>
> Just trying to get you to phrase it in a way that
> doesn't point attention to his condition. I
> personally think it's better to convey a point
> without doing that. Even if you don't agree and
> start chucking political ideology allegations into
> the mix.
>
> But I get it, ...the glasses are a facade. I
> don't get metaphors right away sometimes. That's
> why I got crappy grades in English/writing
> classes.
>
>
> > Get this. When I say I don't care about his
> > disability, I don't mean it in the way you
> > interpret it.
>
> Yeah I see that now.
>
> What I mean is that I didn't care
> > about that part of what I was saying. The part
> I
> > was clearly emphasizing is that I felt he
> should
> > do the tough thing and fire Bonamegone.
> >
> > The funny part is that I don't think Sparano
> would
> > be so much offended by me mentioning the fact
> that
> > he wears shades. Something tells me he would
> be
> > more upset by the fact that I implied he had no
> > nuts.
> >
>
> haha. I don't think he'd be offended either. I
> heard an interview of him describing his injury
> and how it happened and he was very easygoing
> about it. But the radio guy interviewing him
> really wanted to clear up a public perception
> about his glasses because a lot of people out
> there just think he is...you know...hiding behind
> them.
>
>
> > Please except my apologies for mentioning the
> > glasses. It was a horrible and extremely
> > insensitive thing for me to have done. I feel
> > awful about it and wish that I would never done
> > it. Not.
>
> Hey that's great. Good for you.
>
> By the way, one of the reasons I've enjoyed the
> back-and-forth with you in this thread is that it
> *is* cathartic after a loss, as you mentioned.
>
> And to quote Phinsfan2? " I like to argue"
>
>


Well that was refreshing. I don't know you so I kind of expected some rhetoric about how I am just being an insensitive jerk. As we have seen on here many times before some people can never agree or even just agree to disagree. They then make personal attacks and it gets out of hand. I now see that you understand my true intent. I appreciate your cool demeanor and honesty. While, out of my frustration, I did use some sarcasm, I am glad I never once personally attacked you. Unless you consider the liberalism thing an insult(personally I would). LOL. Anyhow thanks for being so cool about it. By the way, I love to argue too.

I'm so happy you guys kissed and made up. LOL

Now what the hell is the freaking Rizzi thing about? Dam I don't like this a bit.

Leon In Denver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm so happy you guys kissed and made up. LOL
>
> Now what the hell is the freaking Rizzi thing
> about? Dam I don't like this a bit.


How can I not like a guy whose last name is Twilley. Howard was my favorite receiver when I was a kid....partly because he caught that TD in SBVII and partly because his roster pic showed some missing teeth---I thought that made him look like a badass lol