RedSoxFaithful
a vicar in a tutu
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2011
- Messages
- 27,273
- Reaction score
- 4,722
Maybe I'm just too tired to think, but what did Dan mean by this
"My question for anyone who maintains that Walker, having been given repeated chances, should not be held accountable for doing something he knows is wrong, then how does [Redacted] face those who remain steadfast in doing what is right?"
Is it just me, or is that sentence convoluted as hell?
I think what he's trying to say is this: If people are making excuses for Walker (they aren't), then how would they expect [Redacted] to treat those who don't do all of Ty's shit? But yeah, it's a convoluted sentence based on a really flawed premise.