Comments by "A.J. Hart" (@cobbler88) on "JRE Clips" channel.

@StandWatie1862 Not really. He said the 13-year-old was a party girl who had dated the guy and that he, personally, does not view statutory rape in the same way he does violent rape to the point where he doesn't call it that. Basically, the narrative that Polanski drugged a young girl to have sex with him is a false one, and that it was actually a girl with whom he took drugs with at other times and they just happened to have sex this time. (Remember, I'm just the messenger here.) He also took a somewhat European view of it, pointing out that having sex with someone that young is wrong by codified values in the U.S. - not necessarily other parts of the world. (Again, messenger) That being said, it absolutely did seem a little weird to go to those lengths to defend Polanski's actions, when all that he needed to say was, "There is more nuance to the story than the narrative with which we're familiar, but what it comes down to is that what he did was absolutely illegal."
1
Why? No one benefits from saying anything that detracts from Lee's legend. But a LOT of people have turned their experiences with him into enhancing THEIR reputations.
1
@jeffouellette9946 In other words, you can't come up with something that's actually relevant to what I posted, so you're just going to rant as though every spelling bee in 1969 was tied to the Bush family, the JFK assassination and the Illuminati. Got it. Never run out of tinfoil.
1
Feel free to name any of the guys from back in the day who gave you that impression who do not benefit by perpetuating the Lee myth. And training with someone bigger is a hell of a leap from actually fighting that person. Lee was a tiny man and there is no actual proof that he had the sort of power or accuracy needed to take down a moving, aggressive, skilled opponent. There's scant evidence of any real fight experience on Lee's resume.
1
@CloudsBeyond Yeah. None of my students can handle me either. They're STUDENTS. And am I somehow supposed to be impressed by a guy perhaps sparring with "street fighters"? Have you ever seen street fighters attempt to fight? People absolutely could have claimed to have kicked Lee's ass, but since there is almost no record of him ever actually engaging in a fight, that would be an awkward claim. And it's not exactly a secret that Inosanto has used his relationship with Lee to his financial benefit. On a related note, do you think a martial artist's reputation and/or bank account benefits more by telling people that Lee was not the demigod so many claim him to be, or by feeding their appetite for the myth? I'm not saying that everything that comes from the mouth or keyboard of people claiming to have had close relationships with Lee is a lie. I'm saying they stand to benefit by perpetuating the legend. You seem pretty comfortable saying that people who raise obvious issues regarding Lee's track record as a fighter are liars, though. And it appears to be based on nothing more than the myth creators in question. Take care.
1
@DeanCallan Sad but true. There really is scant evidence of Lee having any actual combat sport experience. The characterization of him as a "dancer" in the movie isn't that far off if you choose to back that point of view.
1
@DeanCallan Ultimately, we can never really truly know. But there really seems to be next to no actual evidence of Lee fighting. Feel free to look up sources yourself, though. Don't take my word for it. But it all appears to be "I heard this" and "I saw that" about Lee doing something behind closed doors, and even those end up being things being done as a demonstration, being done in front of students or sparring. And obviously none of those is actually fighting an aggressor hell bent on kicking your ass. That's not to take away from Lee's other contributions to martial arts. It's just that the part of the legend related to him being a great fighter is on a pretty shaky foundation.
1
That's an exaggeration. Good MMA fighters and martial artists would likely deliver a beating on Lee, but not just ANYONE could beat him down.
1
@giancarloleon9983 I'm afraid you're going to have to be a little more specific. You didn't really say anything there.
1
Those movements were already discredited. There's a reason they were "counter" culture movements. People were very anti-hippie until about the end of the war in Vietnam.
1
So it is your contention that "size" is synonymous with height?
1
Mark Lucchese I don't think I've seen anyone claim that taking 3-10 shots from Lee wouldn't do any damage. The thing is, that's not the same as trying to deliver them against an opponent who is defending himself while keeping in mind that you may get hit in return if you aren't careful. Then you've got an actual fight. And evidence of Lee in situations like - let alone being dominant in them - that is fairly scant. That's aside of any differences in weight, which can be a huge factor depending on the size of the difference. Take care.
1
@nooneyouknowof Yeah, but it's perspective overwhelmingly from people who have an interest in propping up the Lee myth, and pretty much none of it supported by any sort of fight footage. The fighters may have had popularity on their own merit, but a willingness to discuss and tie themselves to Lee raised and extended their profiles and not a one would risk that by even daring to categorize anything Lee did as being "average" or "good," lest they risk the torches and pitchforks of the legion of Lee fanboys. From the little video evidence there is, I can't say I ever thought Lee had KO power in his jabs. And the lack of evidence, unfortunately, makes it kind of an uphill battle for those claiming exalted fighting capabilities on Lee's part. Take care.
1
@nooneyouknowof 1) Norris never studied under Lee, so I'm not sure much that followed actually needs to be addressed, but ... 2) Footage of Norris competing in the ring with an actual opponent looking to defeat him - while almost always being from tournaments - is still something that does not seem to exist for Lee, organized competition or not. The logic doesn't really follow that a basically unsubstantiated fight background of Lee is bolstered by there being LESS evidence. 3) Norris is not lauded by throngs of fans as a dominant street fighter with with no verifiable evidence to back it up. You don't approach his legend the same as Lee's because they're very different. 4) It's interesting that in the Lee fanboy-verse, you were able to dig up footage of a person claimed to be a young Bruce Lee, and it's adorable that a person would believe that a street fight between kids is even relevant to the discussion to begin with. I coached some kids who were great pitchers in Little League. I'll post a vid of them, comparing them to Kershaw in his prime sometime. Take care.
1
Wow! Joey actually went more than two minutes without telling a story that started with, "This one time, I was getting my dick sucked ..."
1
Even if we accept that as true, we can - by this logic - actually credit Lee's inspirations and leave him completely out of the picture, can't we?
1
Was this another of the "fights" no one has ever been able to prove ever took place? Lee's doing very minimal damage if he's playing defense, especially being such a tiny man. If he's keeping a guy off of him, that's really all he's doing. If he wants to inflict damage, he has to let that distance close a bit. And all bets are off once that happens.
1
@greenb1a I'll accept it. It's more substantiated than 99% of the other alleged Lee "fights" even though the witness list seems pretty short. :) Although what I asserted in my previous post kind of still stands. Regardless of whether people think Lee was much of a fighter, when you mix specialties the advantage often goes to the aggressor. If someone who could make short work of him on the ground, for instance, spars on his heels and doesn't press the action, he gets what he gets.
1
And "ready" would be what, exactly? Everyone's working on treatments but there is no cure, so it's not like we had vats of that on hand to distribute. The testing that was delayed was diagnostic - not screening - testing. The people who received those tests had already been isolated and were being treated, so the delay meant nothing. I don't want to minimize the impact of this virus on the groups most susceptible to it, but trying to get everyone running around like civilization is coming to an end over something with such a low mortality rate outside of those groups is lunacy. Unfortunately, until the party in the White House changes, cries of panic will become the new normal every time there is a new virus and I'll be left scrambling to get toilet paper because of all the twitchy sky-is-falling freaks emptying the shelves. The CDC recommendations are nowhere near as drastic as what various entities have done, canceling or suspending seasons, events, etc. How does a nation become "ready" for something like this beyond what it does for any other virus, which seems to work pretty well?
1
Crazy people of all stripes speak of all manner of things that you don't find in prison books. It doesn't make them Jesus or Napoleon.
1
And have Norris say what, exactly? Does anyone believe that Norris would say ANYTHING - regardless of what the truth is - that would detract from the Lee myth? Norris doesn't strike me as the kind of guy to shovel more dirt on the dead.
1
Miller generally tries to avoid the labels, but strongly implies that he started as a "classic liberal" who was left behind as his people kept racing headlong toward the Far Left.
1
@ben5154 He's never been wall-to-wall funny. But his specials were solid. But you had to be the type of person who could be drawn into it. His specials are different than the last couple of decades, though, where things have shifted away from jokes toward stories. His standup wasn't everyone's cup back then, so it certainly will seem odd now.
1
@rumble2468 I'd contend - as he does - that he never became a conservative. He was left-of-center and stood his ground while his fellow liberals just kept walking - then racing - toward the Left.
1
@rumble2468 Dennis Miller has been famous since 1985 when he became a regular on SNL. After leaving, he then had his own show for 9 seasons on HBO, ending in 2002. The second Gulf War didn't start until 2003. Sixty percent of Congressional Democrats voted in support of that use of military force, including Sens. Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Feinstein, Reid and Schumer. Not only has Miller been in the fray long enough to see his views become characterized as right-of-center as his colleagues all drifted to the Left, but support to start a war almost two decades AFTER he became a celebrity was not a partisan issue. Here endeth the lesson. Now go get your fucking shine box.
1
I'm pretty sure no one claimed that some completely unskilled schlub off the street would take a tiny Bruce Lee. But if he was big enough, Lee would likely have to hit him a few times before being able to put him down. Now chance that opponent to a guy with combat sports skills who is significantly larger.
1
Tell the other three people who see it, "Hi" for me. :)
1
He's broached this subject multiple times. It's not that there are no funny people on the Right. But an audience has to be willing to laugh at itself, and those on the Left do NOT have a sense of humor about themselves.
1
@stevelarry3870 The Right is the butt of an overwhelming majority of the jokes told on all network and cable talk shows and late-night shows. How often has that resulted in the Right organizing to boycott a performer or network, cancel a show or declare that those jokes should not be allowed to be told? The Right generally accepts that this is the way things have been for decades and waits for other types of jokes to come around. The Left has a nervous breakdown and calls for the destruction of the offender's career while scrambling for the Vagisil.
1
@stevelarry3870 Not biting on the false equivocations. And they wouldn't be necessary if I was wrong on this. It's known as the "Daily Show" approach, where a person used to say, "Jon Stewart makes equal fun of the Left AND Right" even though the attack on the Left was accusations of jaywalking while those leveled at the Right were for rape. You can carve a notch for each side, but they are not equal. While it is true that the Far Right may get squirrely, that faction is almost always quickly condemned by the other 95% of the Right. By contrast, the views of the Far Left are almost all supported by the rest of the Left, allowing for a little bickering about the means to those ends. They claim to not support AntiFa hitting people with bicycle locks, but they will still voice their reservations about Ben Shapiro being allowed to speak on a college campus. Extraneous issues such as how businesses respond aside, given that the politics are what are setting people off, they seem pretty relevant. And I stand on solid ground in putting forth that one side has almost a monopoly on oversensitivity. Take care.
1
Wow. Just ... wow. The ignorance dripping from that statement.
1
@youandme9569 Their politics are too similar. The only way the NYT prints that story with malics is if there's some sort of power struggle between two factions of the American Left, represented by each party. For example, if the NYT is skewing its coverage so as to back one of the Democrat candidates - and Armenian genocide denier Uygur is fixated on content that undermines that candidacy, I can see it. It's not exactly beyond reason, is it?
1
It's a tough call. Tyson never defeated a skilled boxer. If Ali could keep him at arm's length for the first couple of rounds, he's got a very good shot. But Ali wasn't exactly the biggest puncher either. He beat guys like Foreman by getting them to punch themselves out. His loss to Frazier was an epic beating but definitely further proved he could take a punch.
1
Miller generally avoids labels, but he strongly indicates that he was a "classical liberal" before all of the other people in his group left him behind as they raced to the Far Left. Of course, it probably doesn't help matters any that you need to have better than a third-grade vocabulary to understand him. :)
1
Dammit! That's the fifth stuntman who worked with Lee on this message board alone. How can I possibly keep them all straight!
1
Because even in modern MMA - which by far exceeds what was being done in Lee's day of ... not actually fighting anyone - guys have a LOT of luck using "tactics" once a stronger guy with better grappling skills gets them wrapped up, right?
1
@monketstyling Yes. He was a combination of Jesus Christ, the Buddha and Barack Obama. No more perfect person has ever trod the soil. We get it. But there's little to no documentation that he was much of an actual fighter. The number of witnesses to him actually fighting are not legion, and actual proof of a fighting background tends to be sparse at best. That's fine. Just don't tout a guy with that sketchy of a fighting background as one of the greatest fighters of all time or someone who would excel in today's MMA. That's ludicrous.
1
@monketstyling As has been observed countless times, no one does himself a service by dissing Bruce Lee. Just look how that works in comments sections. No one in that world is going to say "boo" about Lee in any way that can be seen in a negative light. By contrast, there has been a LOT of money made by people able to tie themselves to the Lee legend. This is not Lee's fault. To be fair to Lee, I've never really gotten an inkling that very many people in that field at the time harbored any real dislike for him. But perhaps you've noticed that if you do not agree that Lee is the greatest martial artist of all time, the fastest "fighter" of all time and a guy who can play pingpong with nunchucks, you are considered a Bruce Lee hater. As is the case in many instances today, people are so concerned with everything being the best, most historical, etc., that they never really acknowledge the great things a person actually did. It's understandable, though. Most people like to believe the times in which they live harbor the best of everything. And let's be honest. Lee would not exactly be the first celebrity to shine much brighter decades later for having died young. If Lee were walking around today at 80, he'd probably be looked at as more of a trailblazer for Jackie Chan and Jet Li when it comes to movies, and maybe the status of a John McEnroe in tennis, but in the field of martial arts. He likely wouldn't be forgotten or by any means irrelevant, but the chances a kid under 30 would have ever heard of him would be pretty slim. Take care.
1
I worked in the media in Pa. more than a decade ago. We were familiar with the copy editor who was in charge of everything Smith wrote. He told us the copy was so bad when submitted that he (the editor) should have been added to the byline, given how much he had to fix and change to make things readable and coherent.
1
Not fair. I worked in the business in Pa. while Smiff was regularly writing his column in Philly. We were familiar with the guy in charge of editing Smiff's writing. Squidward is MUCH smarter than Smiff.
1
It reveals a lot when people ignore the fact that not only does size have a great impact regarding power and the ability to absorb most blows, but that they also don't realize that what looks lightning quick to a civilian watching janked-up film footage is not that fast to a real martial arts practitioner. At least, even though that fighter might still recognize the speed, it doesn't matter as much when you're USED to seeing speed.
1
Ants are relatively strong as well. Ever been tossed around by one?
1
So because we have no evidence that the government has been up to anything outside of the things we know of since then, the proper conclusion is to imagine it's been up to a TON of things. That's sound logic.
1
@cdr861532 It's absolutely typical. It's just not how the argument was phrased. As an aside, I try to not take anything Snowden says seriously. At any given time, he's owned by whomever is giving him protection from prosecution. I think that's been Russia for about the last eight years.
1
@cdr861532 Proof is very difficult. Evidence is how many high-profile people who disobey the state end up dead or disapopear in Russia. And there's a reason there isn't a long history of public dissent in that country over the last few generations. You may not be aware of this (I brushed up on it a bit myself recently), but Snowden doesn't want to be in Russia. From the start he wanted to go to Latin America. But the U.S. did a pretty good job of making that near impossible for him if he wanted to retain his freedom. So he's swapped one prison for another. I'm not saying that everything he says is a lie. But because of his situation and things he's said in the past that were apparently exaggerated or untrue, we can't just out of hand trust anything he says that we can't corroborate either.
1
I think this is my personal sweet spot for Joe. I'm not really into MMA or stand-up comedians in general, although the pods with them and more "fancy" guests are still usually interesting. But when you get a guy who isn't up his own ass about the 'craft of stand-up' (and doesn't allow Joe to go there either) and they just sort of start to freestyle BS like in this vid, I think we get a happier, better, more animated Joe. And he doesn't seem as lit either, which may help that along.
1