Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it's amusing that nobody has said a word about this for year after year after year, but all of the sudden, when the President is seeing a huge issue on the horizon (Obamacare collapsing), seemingly out of the blue, he gets a question about it from a lapdog reporter.
Does anyone else see this as nothing more than a diversionary tactic, to try and take some attention away from the disaster known as President Obama's signature legislation?
I think it's amusing that nobody has said a word about this for year after year after year, but all of the sudden, when the President is seeing a huge issue on the horizon (Obamacare collapsing), seemingly out of the blue, he gets a question about it from a lapdog reporter.
Does anyone else see this as nothing more than a diversionary tactic, to try and take some attention away from the disaster known as President Obama's signature legislation?
People have been talking about this for a few decades. In fact, there are a number of sportscasters/sportswriters who've refused to speak/write the Washington Redskin's full name for a long time now, and simply have gone on referring to the team as "Washington." It's not a political diversion.
"Fighting Irish" is a play on an Irish stereotype, so I can see why people may find that off-putting, but it's far from a racial slur. The two aren't equitably offensive though.
I'm going to have to disagree on the Viking/Celtic analogy. Those two names are celebratory; we don't celebrate racial slurs. We never have, and George Marshall (the well-known racist and founder of the Washington Redskins) certainly didn't... he used them like most racists do.
Still a "slur" since an ethnic group is listed by name along with some real bad habits. Tho I'm of Irish family; I DON'T find the "Fighting Irish" bad.
OK, you have a point with the "Irish" connection. But not with anything else because white groups are different because History is only one story. There aren't two separate parallel histories in which each race has been oppressed to the same degree. It's not parallel. IN fact, oppression has been very one-sided since the Enlightenment. So that's why it's different.
In 2013 the people who oppress the Black and American Indian people in the US ain't "white"; it's the hood rats and the "blanket asses" who HATE seeing 1 of their "own" rise above the ghetto or the Rez so they try to drag them back down.
I think it's amusing that nobody has said a word about this for year after year after year, but all of the sudden, when the President is seeing a huge issue on the horizon (Obamacare collapsing), seemingly out of the blue, he gets a question about it from a lapdog reporter.
Does anyone else see this as nothing more than a diversionary tactic, to try and take some attention away from the disaster known as President Obama's signature legislation?
I agree. Obama's mother knew this would happen the second he was born in Kenya.
People have been talking about this for a few decades. In fact, there are a number of sportscasters/sportswriters who've refused to speak/write the Washington Redskin's full name for a long time now, and simply have gone on referring to the team as "Washington." It's not a political diversion.
And there is a precedent for changing a team's name - Stanford University dropped its Indian mascot in 1972 after discussions from native American students who felt that it was insulting to their culture and heritage.
People have been talking about this for a few decades. In fact, there are a number of sportscasters/sportswriters who've refused to speak/write the Washington Redskin's full name for a long time now, and simply have gone on referring to the team as "Washington." It's not a political diversion.
I disagree. It's a local issue flaring up - locally.
I'm a little bit of a news junkie, and I'd never heard of any kind of movement against their name until now. I've also spent my whole life in or near two metropolises, so it's not like I'm some "redneck" out in "flyover country" who doesn't have plenty of exposure to liberal or Democrat ideas.
There's no more reason for the President to comment on this as there is for him to comment about the Zimmerman trial, but in both cases, him taking on these local issues helped him politically.
The Washington Redskins football team is changing its name.
Due to all the negativity, shame, humiliation, dissent, polarity, adversity, defiance, hatred, animosity, contempt, discrimination, division, violence, counter-productivity, ill-spirit, un-Godliness, and hostility associated with their name, they have decided to disassociate themselves from such an ill-conceived and controversial group.
From now on they will be known simply as the Redskins!
And there is a precedent for changing a team's name - Stanford University dropped its Indian mascot in 1972 after discussions from native American students who felt that it was insulting to their culture and heritage.
Hundreds of teams at the high school and college level have dropped Indians and Redskins. Now its time for the pro-team. I predict by the time the last Tea Party Geezer who is currently on Medicare has his last major government procedure the name will be changed to something like Warriors.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
