Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
11. LOL, you obviously aren't interested in the facts
Wed Feb 8, 2017, 02:26 PM
Feb 2017

You triumphantly refer to (part of) the appellate history of Bonds's case as if it's some new dynamite fact that destroys my argument.

If you had actually been considering the issue with an open mind, which would include reading my responses, you would have seen that my very first post in this thread (#5) included that fact. It appears that all my research on the subject has been wasted on you. You've made up your mind.

You just keep on asserting that Brady (whom the NFL suspended for four games) was treated more favorably than Bonds (whom MLB never suspended, banned, fined, or disciplined in any way for his use of PEDs).

The biggest problem with a bogus contention like this is that it undermines the struggles of people who actually are discriminated against. Poor beleaguered Barry Bonds, who became a multimillionaire by breaking the rules and getting away with it, is not the best poster child for the cause of civil rights.

You may now have the last word in this subthread. Unless someone else chimes in, I'm outta here.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»African American»QUESTION: If Brady was no...»Reply #11