The more I think about the “fans” ripping on the Jay Cutler deal and ripping on Cutler in general, the more it annoys me. What has every good QB in the history of the game had in common? Consistency of (1) good coaching (2) good offensive system and (3) good offensive line (O-line).
Tom Brady? Has had one coach (Bill Belichick) his entire career and great offensive coordinators. He also had great O-lines who allowed him time to pass.
Peyton Manning? Had one coach (Tony Dungy) the majority of his career in Indy and good offensive coordinators. Also was one of the least sacked QBs in history. Oh and for as good a QB is Manning, he’s only gotten to the Super Bowl twice. And was known as a “choker” and predicted to be the next Dan Marino (great stats, no Super Bowl) until he finally pulled off a win vs the Patriots in 2006 to get to the Super Bowl. But he has more 1st Round “chokes” than he does long playoff runs.
Joe Montana? Had Bill Walsh and George Seifert as well as an amazing offensive system with the West Coast Offense and a great O-line.
Steve Young? Same situation as Joe Montana.
Dan Marino? Had Don Shula the majority of his career.
Bret Favre? Had Mike Holmgrem and the same offensive system the majority of his career.
Aaron Rodgers? He got to sit behind Bret Favre for 3 years to master the offense, then has had Mike McCarthy — a good head coach and great offensive mind — his entire career as head coach.
John Elway? Had Dan Reeves for years and then Mike Shanahan for years, including the 2 Super Bowl seasons.
That consistency of system and leadership makes a HUGE difference in a player’s and a team’s success.
Now let’s take a look at Jay Cutler.
2006-2008, he worked with Mike Shanahan. He had his best year in his 3rd year, which makes sense, since that is the typical amount of time it takes to master an offensive system, especially coming out of college.
In 2009, he’s traded to the Bears. New coaches (Lovie Smith, Ron Turner), new offensive system to learn (conservative, run-first offense), new players with whom to develop chemistry (went from #1 WR of Brandon Marshall in Denver to now having to throw to Earl Bennett and Johnny Knox).
In 2010, Bears fired their entire offensive coaching staff. Cutler now has to learn a new system and work with new coaches (Mike Martz as OC). Martz’s system of deep routes and 7-step drops got Cutler killed with hits and sacks for 2 years in 2010 and 2011.
In 2012, Mike Martz left as OC and Mike Tice became OC. Yet another coach and another offensive system to learn. Bears went from Martz’s wide open offense to Mike Tice’s ridiculously conservative offense.
And then this past year in 2013, he has yet ANOTHER change in head coach and offensive coaching staff and system to learn. This time, he finally has someone who knows how to create on offense, has weapons around him and has a good OL and he has the best season of his career.
Yet, despite that, Bears “fans” want to dump him.
I’d like to know how other people would do, through an 8 year career, having to go through 2 teams, 3 head coaches, 5 different offensive coordinators and systems — not to mention an offensive line that has gotten him KILLED each of his years in Chicago, including getting sacked EIGHT times in part of a game against the Giants that led to him having a concussion. That is a complete lack of stability and security there. New systems almost every 2 years. And yet people are complaining that he is not an elite QB like the ones I mentioned above.
Well gee freaking whiz, I wonder why other QBs are able to develop and improve when they are in stable, consistent systems with the same head coach and same offensive systems, but Cutler isn’t when he has to deal with new coaches and new systems every other damn year, and being planted on his ass 2-3 times per game and running for his life almost every drop back, because his offensive line sucks. Let’s see all you jackasses adapt to that and perform well each year and improve.
The Bears have FINALLY put it all together on offense, have the 2nd ranked scoring offense in the league, have a head coach who has developed a great relationship with Cutler and helped him to his best season of his career and… “fans” want to dump him.
What an absolute joke.
And for those complaining Cutler was “overpaid”, read this: Jay Cutler: Analyzing the Terms of His New Contract
Why the Bears Did It
The contract, essentially a three-year deal with a team option to make it a four-, five-, six- or seven-year deal, gives Phil Emery and the Bears coaching staff some flexibility. If they want to stick it out with Cutler, they can. If they want to go down a younger route after three years, they don’t have to put all their stock into one draft—they can assess each year’s crop of quarterbacks, and, with Cutler in their back pocket, proceed accordingly.
With so many issues to address on defense, the Bears’ General Manager may have figured, when it comes to the quarterback position, “if it aint broke, don’t fix it.” Cutler ranked eighth in the NFL in ESPN’s Total QBR and put up his best statistical season since arriving in Chicago.
Why Cutler Did It
Cutler gets a big payday, signing bonus or not. And with the huge payouts in the first three years of the deal, it’s likely that he’ll remain the starter over those years. Chicago’s supporting cast on offense is as strong as any in the NFL; after putting up the best quarterback rating of his career in Marc Trestman’s system, staying in Chicago is a prudent career decision.
Because the fourth and fifth years of the contract are the least expensive, $12.5 and $13.5 million plus bonuses, Cutler remains an attractive option over those years. So the deal, while it looks like it guarantees three more years of Cutler, could very well be five years of Cutler as long as he plays at a passing level.
Regardless of money, the agreement makes sense on several levels for Cutler and the Bears.
Not only will one of the league’s most productive offenses stay intact, but the rock-solid relationship between head coach and quarterback will get an opportunity to live on past the 11 games Cutler started this season.
Instead of starting over at the position, the Bears will keep Cutler, a fringe top-15 quarterback, and bank on more of the kind of improvement seen in his one season under Trestman.
And there’s no discounting the fact that locking up Cutler now gives the Bears maximum draft capital to fix a defense that was mostly to blame for Chicago’s 8-8 season.
Critics of the deal will point to Cutler’s injury history, or his propensity to throw interceptions, or the fact that the Bears have been to the playoffs once in his five years in Chicago. But this was a good decision for the future of the Bears.
In just one season, Trestman took a middling, inconsistent offense and turned it into one of the NFL’s best. And Cutler was right at the center of the improvement.
The Bears finished the 2013 season ranked second in points (27.8), behind only the record-setting Denver Broncos. The offense was also third in yards per play (6.0), eighth in total yards (381.8 per game) and total first downs (344), fifth in passing yards (267.6 per game), passing touchdowns (32) and net yards per attempt (7.0) and seventh in yards per rush (4.5).
The offense set new team records for total yards, passing yards, passing touchdowns, first downs and passer rating (96.9). The 445 points were second most in franchise history.
When I saw the headline for this ESPN article regarding the current situation with the NFL labor dispute, I just rolled my eyes: Ted Bruschi: Rookies have responsibility to skip draft
I then went to the comments section to see the reaction this was getting. Due to past experiences reading the comment sections on ESPN — where the demographics of the commenters seem to be young (teen-to-20s), liberal and ignorant — I was expecting agreement with Mr. Bruschi. I was pleasantly surprised to read the vast majority of comments strongly disagreeing with his stance, as well as with that of the NFL players ‘union’ overall.
Here is a sampling from the first page:
bfwoop (3/18/2011 at 7:18 PM)
Bruschi shows how arrogant the NFLPA is, to ask these kids to not show up at the draft is a joke. In the first place, we are only talking about a handfull of players, 15 to 20 at the most. Second, the biggest barganing chip that the NFLPA has used to this point is the rookie wage scale. So they are agreeing to pay these players a fraction of what the rookies before them have made and also they are supposed to stay at home and watch the draft on TV. This is a joke, shame on the NFLPA and any vet or former player that tries to talk these players into staying away from the draft. One last point, the draft and the NFL will not be hurt AT ALL by these players not showing up. It is only punishing the players that are invited.
Antipholus76 (3/18/2011 at 9:44 PM)
“How can I respect you to be the next leader of our team?” , Tedy asks — as if dutifully and compliantly deferring to the wishes of the herd is the mark of leadership. As if letting Others decide — and define — for you what is right and wrong is a sign of strong character. Gimme a break — leadership is made of sterner stuff.
If there was one iota of substantive leverage or actual strategic value in boycotting the draft, he might have some kind of point, but as others have already noted, there isn’t. Because he’s NOT advocating boycotting “the draft”, he’s advocating boycotting the draft CEREMONY. That’s all it is, a ceremony. For DeMaurice’s Smith to come up with this idea is so lame and so petty. It accomplishes exactly nothing of actual substance, while depriving these kids of an honor they’ve earned. I’ve heard Smith referred to as a shark and as a snake, but after this, it’s clear he’s just a weasel.
And btw, Tedy, what’s this about: “They might think all that is required of them is to sign a piece of paper saying they will pay their dues…” Dues? Huh? What dues? It’s not a union anymore, remember? They de-certified — by CHOICE. Seems the NFLPA want things both ways — all the benefits of a union with none of the legal obligations. They have declared themselves a voluntary trade association — while ignoring the “voluntary” part. I’m sure such double-standard-driven hypocricy will be an inspiration to these young men. Welcome to “Solidarity” !
Thunder69_2005 (3/19/2011 at 3:45 AM)
The unions are in trouble in the country… BOUT TIME. Hey teddy instead of joining the players already in the unions how about they not join your stupid union. What protection do they need from a union? If you got talent your gonna get a contract. If you don’t pan out you get fired. Im sick and tired of these crybabies. If you had been responsible with your money like most of your fans are then you would have good coverage for your health when you get out, you should be able to afford it as it is the way you get paid. You guys play a minimum 16 games a year to make your money. Most make more money in one game than a hard working man or woman makes in a year! and most players make more in one contract than some people do in a lifetime. to top it off the union went out and hired Demaurice Smith… anyone know who he worked for? hmmm give ya a hint he worked for that guy doing a bracket and that #### Rahm Emmanuel. Good choice players!!! way to pick one of your own!
Saintfan45 (3/19/2011 at 8:10 AM)
The players are really starting to p$%# me off with some of their comments. Comments like, we’re just slaves, we just want a fair deal, etc. etc.. Yes the owners are greedy, and are trying for a big money grab. But alot of us fans who are lucky enough to still be employed, have either taken a pay cut, or have not had a raise in years. The players salaries have been going up between 5 and 10% every year the way I understand it. Every time one of them gets in front of a camera and whines about how bad their being treated, it makes me want to puke. I have decided not to renew my season tickets, and the union, the owners, and the players can all go straight to hell as far as I’m concerned
voodoochef1 (3/19/2011 at 8:10 AM)
I wonder if any of the players have ever had a “real” union job. The kind where you are on a scissor lift 35 ft of the ground with a safety harness on that you prey that you don’t need. Or responding to a utlility emergency in the wee hours of the morning on a freeeway, setting up an emercency detour, or responding to a fire at someone’s home only to find it burning out of control.
I was union for years and even though the players are no longer a “union”, they should be ashamed of themselves.
GiantPitts (3/19/2011 at 8:17 AM)
Very easy for Tedy Bruschi to be down for rookies to skip the draft 15 years after he got drafted. Forget the players – “Oh we only want whats fair” YOU WANT WHATS FAIR?! Try getting paid $9 an hour and having to work 40 hours a day answering phones. Don’t complain to me about whats fair because if we had things fair, you guys would be getting paid FAIR WAGES – so just shut up and enjoy the fact that we pay you the absurd amount we do while more deserving people get the shaft
nathanoverbey (3/19/2011 at 8:34 AM)
Until the players are drafted and sign their contracts on the dotted line, they’re not part of anything. What this new players coming in should do is start their own union. The NFL has gotten way to high on it’s own horse and better realize that very soon. The fans won’t stand for it. The public doesn’t want to hear these guys fuss over millions of dollars when we the people are struggling to pay bills in this economy!! I for one will never come back to the NFL, it’s turning in to the NBA to much anyways all show and no action.
drewokc (3/19/2011 at 8:42 AM)
This article is irresponsible. The players don’t have a unted front. Cromartie may be the most vocal in his dissent, but there are many others we don’t get to hear.
It’s hard to blame anything on the owners right now when the NFLPA has chosen to litigate and brow-beat.
spanky1762 (3/19/2011 at 8:50 AM)
Dear NFL players,
STF U!!! Stop comparing the situation you are in to slavery and being 2nd class citizens!!! You get paid at minimum hundreds of thousands of dollars to PLAY A GAME. Unless you donate substantial amounts of your paycheck to charities (which i know SOME of you do), you directly contribute absolutely nothing to society other than entertainment. You didn’t set up the rules and infrastructure, nor do you own any part of the NFL. They are talking about NOT PAYING military members and other federal employees, yet there is no talk of strike from any of them, merely jokes and sarcastic comments. In this time of economic hardship, it makes me lose any will to support a professional football team that has players supporting a lock out. Feel free to repost my rant.
Gibba192471 (3/19/2011 at 9:20 AM)
Hey just one more tid bit .. Wasn’t it Brees who lambasted the owners for, pretty much, calling them all stupid? He was angry because the owners said that they would be able to interpret the financial info they would get if they open the book to them? Well here you have Bruschi saying the the rookies are to stupid to understand how important the “UNION” is to them and that they should just take their word for it and do as they are told. I guess whats good for the goose isn’t good for the gander huh?
After the absolutely embarrassing performance my Chicago Bears displayed at Soldier Field today vs the Patriots (36-7 butt-kicking in the cold and snow), I got online to find out their chances of making the playoffs. Via the NFL website, here are the Tie-Breaker Procedures:
TO BREAK A TIE WITHIN A DIVISION
If, at the end of the regular season, two or more clubs in the same division finish with identical won-lost-tied percentages, the following steps will be taken until a champion is determined.
(1) Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs).
(2) Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division.
(3) Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games.
(4) Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
(5) Strength of victory.
(6) Strength of schedule.
(7) Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
(8) Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
(9) Best net points in common games.
(10) Best net points in all games.
(11) Best net touchdowns in all games.
(12) Coin toss
Head-to-head: the Bears currently hold the edge there as they already beat the Packers at Soldier Field 20-17 earlier this season in Week 3.
Here, the Bears control their own destiny. If the Bears beat the Vikings next week, the worst they can do in the division is 5-1, while the best the Packers can do is 4-2 (by beating the Bears the last week of the season).
Common Games Record: The Bears’ record in common games so far is 4-3 (@DAL, @NYG, vsWAS, @BUF, @MIA, vsPHI, vsNE) with vsNYJ to go.
The Packers’ record in common games so far is 4-2 (vsDAL, @WAS, vsBUF, vsMIA, @PHI, @NYJ) with @NE and vsNYG to go.
Here, the Packers control their own destiny. The best the Bears can finish is 5-3. The best the Packers can finish is 6-2.
Here, the Bears control their own destiny. The best the Bears can finish is 9-3. The best the Packers can finish is 8-4.
Now, let’s look at some scenarios for the Bears to win the division.
(1) The Bears lose both @MIN and vsNYJ. This puts their record at 9-6 (4-1) (4-4) (7-4).
Let’s assume the Packers lose @NE and win vsNYG. If the Bears then lost to the Packers in Week 18, they would tie head-to-head, tie in Division Record and that would put the 3rd tie-breaker in play: common games. Assuming the Packers lose @NE and win vsNYG, this would put the Packers record in common games at 5-3, 1 game better then the Bears’ 4-4.
RESULT: Packers [9-7 (4-2) (5-3) (8-4)] win Division with Win vsCHI [9-7 (4-2) (4-4) (7-5)]. Bears [10-6 (5-1) (4-4) (8-4)] win Division with Win @GB [9-7 (4-2) (5-3) (7-5)].
(2) The Bears win @MIN and lose vsNYJ. This would put their record at 10-5 (5-0) (4-4) (8-3).
If they then lost to the Packers [10-6 (4-2) (5-3) (8-4)] in Week 18, the Bears [10-6 (5-1) (4-4) (8-4)] would tie head-to-head, but win the Division Record tie-breaker.
RESULT: Bears win Division with win or loss @GB.
(3) The Bears lose @MIN and win vsNYJ. This would put their record at 10-5 (4-1) (5-3) (7-4).
If they then lost to the Packers [10-6 (4-2) (5-3) (8-4)] in Week 18, they would tie head-to-head, tie in Division Record, tie in common games (assuming the Packers lose @NE and win vsNYG), but lose the Conference Record tie-breaker.
RESULT: Packers [10-6 (4-2) (5-3) (8-4)] win Division with Win vsCHI [10-6 (4-2) (5-3) (7-5)]. Bears [11-5 (5-1) (5-3) (8-4)] win Division with Win @GB [9-7 (4-2) (5-3) (7-5)].
So, basically, if next week the Bears defeat the Vikings and the Packers lose to the Patriots, the Bears will win the NFC North and clinch the playoffs. Anything other than that, and both the Division and playoff berth will likely come down to who wins the Week 18 matchup.
(4) Both teams win each of their next 2 games. Their records would be:
Bears: 11-4 (5-0) (5-3) (8-3)
Packers: 10-5 (3-2) (6-2) (7-4)
RESULT: The Bears would win the Division with a Win or Loss, because of the better Division Record.
(5) Both teams lose each of their next 2 games. Their records would be:
Bears: 9-6 (4-1) (4-4) (7-4)
Packers: 8-7 (3-2) (4-4) (6-5)
RESULT: A Packers win would force the #5 tie-breaker into play.
(6) The Bears go 0-2 and the Packers go 2-0. Their records would be:
Bears: 9-6 (4-1) (4-4) (7-4)
Packers: 10-5 (3-2) (6-2) (7-4)
RESULT: The Packers would win the Division with a Win or Loss, because of the better Common Games Record.
So I’m listening to Doug Karsch and Scott ‘the Gator’ Anderson on 97.1FM The Ticket this morning here in Detroit and they’re discussing the Lions game from yesterday. As usual when talking about the Lions, inevitably the gripes come up about the Week 1 loss to the Chicago Bears and the disallowed Calvin Johnson catch. I don’t blame them, as they did get jobbed by the refs that day on the catch. Though it was no guarantee that they win that game, since (1) there were still about 40 seconds left in the game, (2) the Bears were doing great with kick returns all game and (3) all they would have needed to do was get into FG range to either tie the game or win it (depending on whether or not the Lions were able to convert on the 2-pt conversion).
They also lamented that if the Lions could have gotten the Bears win and maybe another game where they were close, the NFC North division race would look completely different and the Lions would be able to compete. So I went to look at the current NFC North standings to see just how different the race would look had the Lions been able to pull off wins in their close games.
Currently, the standings look like this (record in division games in parenthesis):
CHI — 4-2 (2-0)
GB — 3-3 (1-1)
MIN — 2-3 (1-0)
DET — 1-5 (0-3)
Now, let’s first give the Lions a victory the Week 1 game against the Bears. Second, I believe the Lions got ripped off in the game they lost to the Packers 28-26. They were driving for a game-winning FG late in that game and there were at least 2 passing plays where Packers’ DB Charles Woodson was guilty of Pass Interference (PI) and it wasn’t called. The most blatant was a 4th Down pass to Calvin Johnson where Woodson was all over him. The refs didn’t throw the flag, the pass fell incomplete and the Lions turned the ball over on downs. Game over, Lions lose. Well, I believe the Lions were the victims of the refs giving preferential treatment to veteran DBs like Woodson. I further believe the Lions would have driven down for a game-winning FG had the flags been thrown on Woodson for his PIs. So let’s give a win to the Lions in the Packers game.
Now, watch how dramatically this changes the NFC North standings:
DET — 3-3 (2-1)
CHI — 3-3 (1-1)
MIN — 2-3 (1-0)
GB — 2-4 (0-2)
The Detroit Lions would be in 1st Place! And the pre-season favorite by the so-called “experts” for the Super Bowl, the Packers, would be in last place, with 2 division losses! Simply amazing.
As it is, I still think this division is up for grabs. My Bears have MAJOR issues with their OL and have a BRUTAL end of season schedule (MIN, @MIA, PHI, @DET, NE, @MIN, NYJ, @GB). I have them pegged to finish 8-8 (3-3), losing their last 5 games of the season. But that’s giving them wins vs PHI and MIN at home. Lose those and the Bears are at 6-10 (2-4).
Let’s look at Green Bay: MIN, @NYJ, DAL, @MIN, @ATL, SF, @DET, @NE, NYG, CHI
Damn, that’s one tough schedule. Given their injuries, they could easily lose all of those, in my opinion, with the best chances for victories coming against DAL, SF, @DET, NYG and CHI. Let’s be generous and say that’s how it works out. That puts the Packers at 8-8 (3-3). In other words, tied with the Bears. But that’s giving the Packers wins in tough games vs DAL, @DET and NYG. And the season ending game vs CHI could come down to a playoff spot. So a lot could be on the line and that game would be no guarantee. Worst case, as I see it, with losses to DAL, @DET and NYG puts the Pack at 5-11 (2-4)!
Let’s look at Minnesota: @GB, @NE, ARI, @CHI, GB, @WAS, BUF, NYG, CHI, @PHI, @DET
Another tough schedule with 6 road and 5 home games. Starting with being generous, let’s give them wins @GB, ARI, GB, @WAS, BUF, NYG, CHI, @DET. That puts them at 10-6 (5-1) and in 1st Place over the 8-8 Pack and 8-8 Bears. But @WAS, NYG and @DET will be tough games. Let’s say they falter there. That puts the Vikings at 7-9 (4-2).
Finally, let’s look at the Lions: WAS, NYJ, @BUF, @DAL, NE, CHI, GB, @TB, @MIA, MIN
Now, let’s keep in mind that the Lions get Matthew Stafford back after their BYE week, starting with the WAS game. That will be a HUGE shot in the arm and morale booster having their leader back at QB. Let’s start with being generous, giving them wins against WAS, @BUF, CHI, GB, @TB and MIN. That puts them at 7-9 (3-3). Now, before I get to the worst case, let’s see how the Lions’ best case stacks up against the worst case for the rest of the division:
MIN — 7-9 (4-2)
DET — 7-9 (3-3)
CHI — 6-10 (3-3)
GB — 5-11 (2-4)
Wow. The Lions would finish tied for 1st Place, but lose the tie-breaker (division record).
Now let’s see how they would have done if we combine this scenario with wins @CHI and @GB:
DET — 9-7 (5-1)
MIN — 7-9 (4-2)
CHI — 5-11 (2-4)
GB — 4-12 (1-5)
NFC North Division Champion DETROIT LIONS! Wow.
Granted, that would also mean the Lions go 8-2 the rest of the season, but I think it’s doable with (1) Matthew Stafford (2) an improved defense and (here’s the key) (3) more discipline with regards to penalties. That’s really what has been killing the Lions so far this season: (1) dumb penalties killing drives and (2) turnovers at horrible times (ie the Nate Burleson fumble in yesterday’s game @NYG when the Lions were driving to take the lead late in the game). If the Lions can make these improvements, they could really shake things up in the NFC North.
However, if they don’t fix those problems, I’d take away wins against WAS, @BUF, GB and MIN. That would put them at 4-12 (1-5) and last place once again.
Regardless of how things turn out in the division this season (which will probably be somewhere in between my ‘best case’ and ‘worst case’ scenarios for each team), I think the future looks really bright for the Lions going forward. With Bret Farve retiring, the Vikings go back to being just an average 7-10 win team. The Bears success going forward will be based on fixing their OL, then they will be dangerous. And the Packers just need to keep their players healthy and fix their discipline problem with penalties. With a full season of Matthew Stafford, lots of weapons for him to utilize on offense and an ever improving Lions defense, this division could be wide open for ANYONE to take — including the LIONS — in the next 5 years.
And it will be great watching the maturity of 3 young QBs in Stafford, Culter and Rodgers. If the Bears ever fix their OL problems to allow Cutler more than 2 seconds to throw, we could be looking at 3 of the most exciting young offenses in the NFC the next 5-10 years.
Let’s just hope everyone can stay healthy and we’ll be able to enjoy some pretty competitive football, with no one dominant team, in the NFC North for many years going forward.
Or maybe just against senior citizen women. That’s my conclusion based on the logic of the whiney feminists at the Women’s Media Center:
The Women’s Media Center, which had objected to Focus on the Family advertising in the Super Bowl, said it was expecting a “benign” ad but not the humor. But the group’s president, Jehmu Greene, said the tackle showed an undercurrent of violence against women.
“I think they’re attempting to use humor as another tactic of hiding their message and fooling the American people,” she said.
Hmmm, really? Well I guess this means that Snickers — or Mars, Incorporated, which owns Snickers — is “hiding their message [of violence against women] and fooling the American people” with their Super Bowl ad?
So, are the whiney feminists going to come out to complain about “the undercurrent of violence against women” at Mars, Incorporated?
“Snickers really satisfies… an undercurrent of violence against women!”
I won’t be holding my breath on that.
Oh shocker. Noted feminazi Amanda Marcotte also has her panties in a twist over the Tim Tebow ad.
Tebow: Hey Mom! Tried to kill you from the womb and failed. How about a blind side tackle? Violence against Moms FTW! (via @MarcFaletti)
about 19 hours ago from Tweetie in reply to MarcFaletti
Interesting that she hasn’t posted a ‘tweet’ making fun of Snickers, though, huh? I guess violence against women is good so long as the men kill babies, eat chocolate or are named Bill Clinton?
I guess I now know what to give for Valentine’s Day if I ever date a feminist: a pack of Snickers, a gift card to Planned Parenthood and slap across the face.
It really is interesting how feminazis come up with their own definitions for things. If a woman wants her baby, it’s a baby. If a woman doesn’t want her baby, it’s a fetus. If a woman chooses to get an abortion, it’s a woman’s choice. If a woman chooses to have a baby, it’s anti-abortion. If a male politician is pro-abortion, his misogyny and abuse of women is praised. If a male politician is pro-life, he’s automatically anti-woman.
I have a feeling that Melvin Udall’s definition of a woman in As Good as it Gets was actually talking about feminazis:
Receptionist: How do you write women so well?
Melvin Udall: I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability.