Obama open to name change for Washington Redskins

[Kondor3]

"...I agree with most of what you said but why is it being 'whiny"'when someone else does it but 'free speech' when someone you agree with does it?"

I made no such connection between whining and free speech.

Each of us is completely free to speak in such a way as to be construed as a whiney biotch by some of their listening audience...

You're on the right track, but you've gotta use a better grade of 'bait' than that...

I made the connection for you...

Yes. That much is patently obvious. Not that it holds one whit more validity for doing so.

"...since you have said this before on other threads to my recollection..."

Golly-gosh gee-willickers and goodness-gracious, Emmy Lou, but did I call somebody a whiney little biotch someplace else?

Where are my manners?

Puh-leeze.

"...They are one and the same. Someone voices their opinion and if you agree its free speech. If you dont agree then its construed as 'whiny'..."

You are welcome to go and hunt-down such examples, if that amuses you. I don't recall making representations to the effect: "If you don't agree with me, then you're a whiney little biotch"... even on a metaphorical level...

Although I, like 'most everyone else on the planet, have, from time to time, called a person, or a side, a 'whiney biotch' when I thought it was appropriate... and I, like you, reserve to myself the right to make that call, whenever-the-hell I like, yes?

"...Just like those that criticize the POTUS are whiny lil biotches..."

I have no dog in the Obumble fight... I voted for the guy twice myself, although I held my nose going into the voting booth, both times.

"...See what I mean? Why is an opinion less valid if you dont agree with it?"

Only vaguely.

You DO understand that lightweight sarcasm and dramatics are part-and-parcel of most exchanges within this sort of medium, do you not?

Even by folks who manage to serve-up substantive contributions, as well as sarcastic humorous or fun-poking supporting verbiage, yes?

I've never claimed to be Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farms or Pollyanna.

Merely one of hundreds of contributing members, who operates within the mainstream, with respect to ethics, behaviors and manifestations in the heat of argument or passion.

Hope that helps.

Now, stop dry-humping my pants-leg, eh?

 

[Pogo]

He was asked a question, he answered it. He gave the most non-committal, safe answer he possibly could have given.

What exactly are you guys "outraged" about?

You're correct, i'm outraged, but not surprised that the lapdog media asks a question like this at a time like this.........

Doc linked the transcript to the interview. It was about the shutdown, the ACA, the budget, political moves, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Syria and Egypt... and then a throwaway question at the end about football and basketball teams.

And we see, out of all that, where the OP chose to focus. That should tell you all you need to know about who's agenda is what.

 

[driveby]

Jesus Christ who give a shit what Obama's opinion is on this matter? Or just about any other matter not pertaining to his duties as President? The cult of personality is so disturbing, liberals may actually jump off a fucking bridge if this asshole told them too........

 

[bendog]

Espn had a poll this afternoon (prolly a phone in with no real probative value) where most SUPPORTED changing the name. I was shocked.

"the dysfuncitional useless dipshits." Obviousy not the Senators. The bullets are non-pc.

 

[Pogo]

Jesus Christ who give a shit what Obama's opinion is on this matter? Or just about any other matter not pertaining to his duties as President? The cult of personality is so disturbing, liberals may actually jump off a fucking bridge if this asshole told them too........

Um-- the OP does. Talk to the Kangaroo - he's the guy who shat this here.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Jesus Christ who give a shit what Obama's opinion is on this matter? Or just about any other matter not pertaining to his duties as President? The cult of personality is so disturbing, liberals may actually jump off a fucking bridge if this asshole told them too........

Many conservatives in this thread seem to give quite a shit about Obama's opinion on this.

It's apparently very outrageous.

 

[driveby]

He was asked a question, he answered it. He gave the most non-committal, safe answer he possibly could have given.

What exactly are you guys "outraged" about?

You're correct, i'm outraged, but not surprised that the lapdog media asks a question like this at a time like this.........

Doc linked the transcript to the interview. It was about the shutdown, the ACA, the budget, political moves, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Syria and Egypt... and then a throwaway question at the end about football and basketball teams.

And we see, out of all that, where the OP chose to focus. That should tell you all you need to know about who's agenda is what.

And the answers were:

Republicans fault

Republicans fault

Republicans fault

Republicans fault

Republicans fault

That no good jew Snyder should consider changing the name of his team, it would make my friend Elizabeth Warren very happy.

 

[Pogo]

"...Is the adjective 'lazy' even necessary when you've got 'Redskin'?..."

Yes, to my way of thinking, and based upon my own life-experiences, and in all sincerety (not just to vaguely reinforce a discussion-point)... yes.

You say 'Redskin' to me, and you conjure up imagery of the Brave Savage; the Red Man of North America; regardless of tribe or region; the proud legacy of proto-civilization and a valiant multi-generational, multi-century and doomed struggle against Invading Europe.

According to the 2010 US Census, there are only about 2.9 million who identify as Native Americans / Indians, or 9/10 of 1 percent (.009) of the total US population.

So, the other 99.1% of the population celebrates their legacy (and expunges a bit of lingering and largely inoperative White Man's Guilt) by remembering them and their Free Lives and their Savage Innocence and their Bravery by naming things after them.

Sometimes it's more specific, pertaining to a particular cultural attribute or tribal or regional association or some-such, and sometimes it manifests in the vernacular of bygone days and in a manner that strikes much of the 99.1% as neutral and remembering and honoring the entire race and its bravery and its fighting spirit rather than as a brickbat.

But, if the Native Indian folk win this one, it's my hope that the Washington NFL franchise abandons anything whatsoever to do with Native folk, and switches to an entirely different motiff altogether, so that this former Honor Rendered to the bravery and fighting spirit of their ancestors is lost to the collective memory.

Rather than deriding Native Americans, the name conjures-up imagery and sentiments which actually HONOR those now long-dead or long-enfeebled Peoples in the minds of most, but, if they insist upon taking yet another step towards Cultural Oblivion, I can't stop them.

That's all very well but here's where reading my post 66 would have helped -- my point is the temporal meaning of the word.

There was a time when "******" (or Chinaman, or Dago or ****, etc) were not societal taboos, within the dominant (less inclusive) society, in their own time. "Redskin" is in this category too.

That's why I asked if you'd patronize an establishment called the Lazy Wetback or the Uppity ******, as those too would be anachronistically misplaced. And as I recall you said you would not, and I'm really really tempted here to lay down the punchline of the old joke, "we've already established that, now we're just haggling over the price".

 

[driveby]

Jesus Christ who give a shit what Obama's opinion is on this matter? Or just about any other matter not pertaining to his duties as President? The cult of personality is so disturbing, liberals may actually jump off a fucking bridge if this asshole told them too........

Many conservatives in this thread seem to give quite a shit about Obama's opinion on this.

It's apparently very outrageous.

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

 

[Pogo]

Jesus Christ who give a shit what Obama's opinion is on this matter? Or just about any other matter not pertaining to his duties as President? The cult of personality is so disturbing, liberals may actually jump off a fucking bridge if this asshole told them too........

Many conservatives in this thread seem to give quite a shit about Obama's opinion on this.

It's apparently very outrageous.

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

-- and that's why there are 130 posts about the totem of a football team, and zero about the shutdown, the ACA, the budget, political moves, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Syria and Egypt.

Clear as mud. And twice as honest.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Jesus Christ who give a shit what Obama's opinion is on this matter? Or just about any other matter not pertaining to his duties as President? The cult of personality is so disturbing, liberals may actually jump off a fucking bridge if this asshole told them too........

Many conservatives in this thread seem to give quite a shit about Obama's opinion on this.

It's apparently very outrageous.

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

Why did Roo start this thread, if he didn't give a shit about Obama's opinion on this?

Why did The T, skye, R. C. Chrisitian, and novasteve post about their outrage, if they didn't give a shit?

That's only from the first few posts, I could go on.

 

[driveby]

Many conservatives in this thread seem to give quite a shit about Obama's opinion on this.

It's apparently very outrageous.

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

-- and that's why there are 130 posts about the totem of a football team, and zero about the shutdown, the ACA, the budget, political moves, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Syria and Egypt.

Clear as mud. And twice as honest.

Murky as muddy water and twice as deceiving. The OP doesn't give a shit what Obama's opinion is regarding this matter and thinks he should focus on leadership, not sports/pop culture. The other posts seem to follow that narrative, except for the moonbats of course.........

 

[Kondor3]

"...There was a time when '******' (or Chinaman, or Dago or ****, etc) were not societal taboos, within the dominant (less inclusive) society, in their own time. 'Redskin' is in this category too..."

Disagree, insofar as 'Redskin' has not yet attained this status.

There is an element of the population that is trying to force the issue and to place it within the domain of 'societal taboo' but we are not there yet.

This (the present controversy) shall determine that (whether the name remains untarnished).

The name was meant as a Remembrance and Badge of Honor - a living memorial to Bravery and Fighting Spirit - rather than anything negative.

Neither I nor anyone else who is 'just fine' with that name, can do anything to prevent others from intentionally misinterpreting that original (and still operative) intention, nor to stop them from advocating to take action which, ultimately, takes another step down the road of Cultural Forgetfulness and Oblivion.

They (and you, apparently) read Malevolent Intent and Derision into the Name and Logo.

Others read a Rendering of Honors and Acknowledgement of Bravery into the Name and Logo.

Impasse.

 

[driveby]

Many conservatives in this thread seem to give quite a shit about Obama's opinion on this.

It's apparently very outrageous.

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

Why did Roo start this thread, if he didn't give a shit about Obama's opinion on this?

Why did The T, skye, R. C. Chrisitian, and novasteve post about their outrage, if they didn't give a shit?

That's only from the first few posts, I could go on.

And you'd go on being incorrect.......

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

Why did Roo start this thread, if he didn't give a shit about Obama's opinion on this?

Why did The T, skye, R. C. Chrisitian, and novasteve post about their outrage, if they didn't give a shit?

That's only from the first few posts, I could go on.

And you'd go on being incorrect.......

You can deny that this thread exists, if you like.

 

[Swagger]

Well let's come up with some new names for the team formerly known as the Redskins.

1. "Teabagger slayers". No one of worth about would get offended.
2. "Redcoats" instead of Redskins. No doubt this is offensive to some as well.
3. Just rename the team "Trayvon".
4. "One party rule" because in Washington there is really just one party and they are all having a big party wtih no credit limit.

Not in the slightest. In fact, it has a delicious twist of irony about it.

The Washington Redcoats, cojoining two historically opposed birds with one stone. Gen. Cornwallis field, too, perhaps?

 

[Kondor3]

"...Why did Roo start this thread, if he didn't give a shit about Obama's opinion on this?..."

Oh, it's an opportunity and excuse to throw rocks at Obumble, no doubt about it.

But that's not necessarily a bad thing; certainly not in this particular circumstance.

Presidents of the United States are supposed to be above such maudlin interference.

Personally, I think Fearless Leader shot off his mouth in a topical area where his opinion should have no more weight than any other citizen...

And I do not think that he should have used the Presidential Bully Pulpit for something as otherwise frivolous as this.

You do that, and you open yourself up to the brickbats.

Let the games begin.

 

[bendog]

The Washington Monuments!

 

[Pogo]

You and pluggo are wrong, they don't give a shit about his opinion on this, but you couldn't troll about it if you were honest........

-- and that's why there are 130 posts about the totem of a football team, and zero about the shutdown, the ACA, the budget, political moves, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Syria and Egypt.

Clear as mud. And twice as honest.

Murky as muddy water and twice as deceiving. The OP doesn't give a shit what Obama's opinion is regarding this matter and thinks he should focus on leadership, not sports/pop culture. The other posts seem to follow that narrative, except for the moonbats of course.........

If the OP doesn't give a shit, then why did he post a thread on an insignificant cherrypick of an irrelevant part of the interview while ignoring the shutdown, the ACA, the budget, political moves, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Syria and Egypt? That is where the focus of the interview was...

Because he's selling myths, that's why. And you're buying. You already bought the idea that Obama's taking the active role and stirring the shit, rather than a simple passive answer to an unsolicited and insignificant question that it is.

 

[driveby]

Why did Roo start this thread, if he didn't give a shit about Obama's opinion on this?

Why did The T, skye, R. C. Chrisitian, and novasteve post about their outrage, if they didn't give a shit?

That's only from the first few posts, I could go on.

And you'd go on being incorrect.......

You can deny that this thread exists, if you like.

I splain'd it again in post 133, you can deny that post exists or deny your lack of reading comprehension, if you like......