Comments Thread For: Lopez To Loma: Don't Back The F--k Out; Everybody Wants To See This Fight

[Combat Talk Radio]

*Please explain to me how those two sentences you quoted demonstrate hypocrisy, when they both clearly state that an individual has control over their own actions and that they are accountable to them regardless of outside factors.*

Because this all started due to your fiery attacks against "Wuhan Virus" despite the virus originating from Wuhan. Or did you forget?

Being accountable means taking responsibility period, whether it's an action or a decision, it doesn't matter.

Negative.

Being accountable means you are to account for that which was in your control. Not everything that happens later.

Because if what you suggest were the case, you'd have the United States paying the salaries of every African and Native American due to "reparations" to be "accountable" for slavery. It's nonsense.

In regards to Crawford, he is entirely responsible for his own career. There's always options to make the Spence fight. He could take numerous concessions if he really wanted it. He can pressure Arum or he can jump to the PBC, but he seems content doing what he's doing. I'm not into this diva aspect of the sport but note that even if he did everything in the world and the fight didn't happen, he's not responsible for the outcome, but he IS accountable for HIS actions.

Wrong. Crawford is responsible AND accountable for his own outcome, because he is the cause of it.

Trump's accountability begins and ends with what was in his control - which is what I said. When you have three branches of government, you have no such control. Especially when one branch is blocking your attempt to implement a travel ban.

Because of course, if there WERE a full stop travel ban, it would have lessened the amount of infections.

Get it?
]

[Hnnnggg]

Because this all started due to your fiery attacks against "Wuhan Virus" despite the virus originating from Wuhan. Or did you forget?



Negative.

Being accountable means you are to account for that which was in your control. Not everything that happens later.

Because if what you suggest were the case, you'd have the United States paying the salaries of every African and Native American due to "reparations" to be "accountable" for slavery. It's nonsense.



Wrong. Crawford is responsible AND accountable for his own outcome, because he is the cause of it.

Trump's accountability begins and ends with what was in his control - which is what I said. When you have three branches of government, you have no such control. Especially when one branch is blocking your attempt to implement a travel ban.

Because of course, if there WERE a full stop travel ban, it would have lessened the amount of infections.

Get it?
]

This is an exercise in futility. You can’t have a discussion when the other person can’t seem to grasp simple abstract ideas.

Obviously I recall how our whole discussion began, all my subsequent posts have addressed our initial exchange. I don’t know why that’s how you wanted respond to my question, you still didn’t address your claim about my contradicting myself. It’s probably because you have no leg to stand on. Again elaborate where I contradicted myself through syntax.

I feel that the reason we’re fundamentally different is that you cannot in your mind separate action/response from the outcome. If you could understand that your behavior is completely in your control regardless of circumstance then you can understand the notion that you’re accountable for your behavior. Have you ever heard the idiom “work with what you have?”

AGAIN, your response to a situation can be evaluated regardless of outcome; for example, the evaluation of a physician’s standard of care for a terminally ill patient. Even though the patient may die, the physician can be evaluated on their quality of care delivered, for which they are held accountable. Would it be acceptable to not hold the doctor accountable for their quality of care just because the patient was battling cancer?

How is this concept so difficult for your mind to grasp? Your example of the US paying reparations is not relevant. They can indeed be held accountable for slaughtering and slavery even though the desired outcome (reparations) have not taken place.

I’m sorry man but you’re awful at forming an argument. Before you come back at me again, read the dictionary instead of making up ridiculous definitions to suit your argument.

Accountable - “(of a person, organization, or institution) required or expected to justify actions or decisions; responsible.”

No where do I see anything about specific conditions being met, to being allowed to be held accountable. Trump was expected to take measures (or other words make decisions and take actions) to help mitigate the effects of the pandemic.

[Slicc]

So explain why Crawford has yet to fight a top opponent then?

Pacquiao didn't wanna fight him before he left Top Rank, and will probably take Mikey or Spence. Spence told Crawford to get a belt, then deflected to Porter when Bud brought this up to his face. DSG was recently handed the mandatory position under the WBO, and ducked it. Thurman said he's not interested in fighting Bud, but never explained why. Last I heard about Porter, he was in talks with Bud about a potential match. If a fighter wants a match badly enough, they'll make it regardless of promoters.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Pacquiao didn't wanna fight him before he left Top Rank, and will probably take Mikey or Spence. Spence told Crawford to get a belt, then deflected to Porter when Bud brought this up to his face. DSG was recently handed the mandatory position under the WBO, and ducked it. Thurman said he's not interested in fighting Bud, but never explained why. Last I heard about Porter, he was in talks with Bud about a potential match. If a fighter wants a match badly enough, they'll make it regardless of promoters.

All of what you mentioned circles back to...what?

Crawford signing with Top Rank.

Which makes HIM responsible for not getting those fights.

[Derranged]

Uncle Bob saves Lomachicken from another challenge, what else is new.

[Derranged]

In a span of a couple of years,

Loma ducked Mikey, Pacquiao, Teofimo.

I wouldn't blame him. Those three would wreck him.

100 % agree. This is Lomachicken every time Mikey or Lopez's names are mentioned: