Unbelievable: FCC to consider banning to the name Redskins

[GNG]

Stewart is very funny.....when his show is off the air.

Seriously, this little runt has been playing leftist demagogues for dupes for a looong time and his audience just stuffs their hands in their pants and chuckles along.

 

[HammerDown]

I have no idea how he does it... but somehow Jon Stewart manages to knock it out of the park every f*cking time.

Except when he doesn't.

Not funny.

 

[Caynine29]

I'm glad you think he's funny. He seems like a pompous asshole to me.

I suppose, to me, it's not so much about the comedy (although it is hilarious) as it is the message, which is dead on.

Personally, I don't think the FCC, or congress, or whoever needs to be involved in attempting to "force" a name change. That's ridiculous. But fact of the matter is, there are several good reasons to make the change... and not one good reason not to.

 

[Caynine29]

Except when he doesn't.

Not funny.

Awww... come on now, Hammer. You at least cracked a smile, didn't you?

 

[darken65]

I suppose, to me, it's not so much about the comedy (although it is hilarious) as it is the message, which is dead on.

Personally, I don't think the FCC, or congress, or whoever needs to be involved in attempting to "force" a name change. That's ridiculous. But fact of the matter is, there are several good reasons to make the change... and not one good reason not to.

Name the several reasons. I can post one good reason not to..it has been the name of the team since 1932 when they started in Boston and nobody had an issue with the name until recently. Just another attempt at censorship,you know ,that thing we are not supposed to say during the holidays that has the 'C' word in it?

 

[Number7]

People have had an issue with this well before now. Not that that should even matter, but yeah.

 

[darken65]

People have had an issue with this well before now. Not that that should even matter, but yeah.

Post a link where this has been an issue of this level before the year 2012 at the least.

 

[Number7]

Lol? Do you not know how social change works in this society? Of course it's a bigger issue now than it was. But to suggest no one has had a problem with the name until recently is incorrect. It's recently been picked up by the media which is why it's an "issue of this level" now.

But again, whether or not something is a big issue has nothing to do with whether or not it's a racist term or not. I'm not picking a side by the way, I think they should be able to keep the name if they want, but people have had issue with the name for longer than the past couple years. Others have jumped on the hype sure, but that doesn't mean the issue hasn't been here for a while.

 

[Number7]

Oh and here:

The Great Redskins Name Debate of ? 1972? - The Washington Post

 

[Caynine29]

Name the several reasons. I can post one good reason not to..it has been the name of the team since 1932 when they started in Boston and nobody had an issue with the name until recently. Just another attempt at censorship,you know ,that thing we are not supposed to say during the holidays that has the 'C' word in it?

Good reasons to change the name?

-It's a derogatory term.
-Some people are offended by it.
-It's a simple change.
-It would benefit the league.
-The marketing opportunities alone are endless.
-It's smart business.

Respectfully I said name "one good reason" to not change it. "Because it's their name" doesn't really qualify. Their name was actually the "Braves" when they started in Boston back in 1932 and as the video stated, they've changed several aspects of the team (uniform/logo/colors/etc) since then without incident. Countless franchises across all leagues have done it for varying reasons. So, how is changing "Redskins" any different from changing "Oilers", or the NBA's "Bullets", or the NHL's "Whalers"? Hell... the MLB's L.A. Dodgers have changed names 11 times and their "tradition" predates Washington's by nearly 50 years.

Again... I DO agree that forcing a privately owned entity like a pro sports franchise to change it's name is a terrible idea and opens the door for all sorts of censorship we just don't need in America. But, it would behoove Daniel Snyder to make the change on his own.

 

[NinerSickness]

Liberals in government: "We're not finding enough ways to punish our political opponents. We need ides!"

IRS: "I think we may have 'overlooked' something in Dan Snyder's tax return."

Liberals in government: "Good! Good! I like it. Who else?"

Department of Justice: "We could try to find some bull-s**t charges & have Dan Snyder arrested like we did with Rick Perry. Doesn't even mater if he's guilty or not; we just want the mug shots so we can post 'em on the internet."

Liberals in government: "Good thinking. Someone needs to volunteer to move in next door to Snyder like that writer did w/ Sarah Palin. We're bound to see something eventually."

FCC: "I've got it! Let's make it illegal to use the team name on the air! Congress can't do $**t about us right now! They'll have no choice but to change the name."

Liberals in government: "I love it! In fact, let's see of we can call the term "Obamacare" a racial slur too so people will stop talking about it."

 

[darken65]

Oh and here:

The Great Redskins Name Debate of ? 1972? - The Washington Post

Nice try but no where near this level like I was asking about. People are protesting outside of stadiums and lobbying congress to change the name. I'll just leave it as that and you and others can attempt to do whatever you feel is justified .

 

[darken65]

Good reasons to change the name?

-It's a derogatory term.
-Some people are offended by it.
-It's a simple change.
-It would benefit the league.
-The marketing opportunities alone are endless.
-It's smart business.

Respectfully I said name "one good reason" to not change it. "Because it's their name" doesn't really qualify. Their name was actually the "Braves" when they started in Boston back in 1932 and as the video stated, they've changed several aspects of the team (uniform/logo/colors/etc) since then without incident. Countless franchises across all leagues have done it for varying reasons. So, how is changing "Redskins" any different from changing "Oilers", or the NBA's "Bullets", or the NHL's "Whalers"? Hell... the MLB's L.A. Dodgers have changed names 11 times and their "tradition" predates Washington's by nearly 50 years.

Again... I DO agree that forcing a privately owned entity like a pro sports franchise to change it's name is a terrible idea and opens the door for all sorts of censorship we just don't need in America. But, it would behoove Daniel Snyder to make the change on his own.

This response is about the dumbest one I've ever seen in a debate. It makes no sense at all. I'll just mark this one up as if you had no clue why you even posted here.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Good reasons to change the name?

-It's a derogatory term. Matter of opinion
-Some people are offended by it. Many are not
-It's a simple change. Not really, most of their fans identify with the present name.
-It would benefit the league. Again not really, bowing to the PC crowd is not in the NFL benefit, it just opens the door to more of the same.
-The marketing opportunities alone are endless. The NFL and or the Redskins are not lacking in marketing opportunities.
-It's smart business. Matter of opinion.

Respectfully I said name "one good reason" to not change it. "Because it's their name" doesn't really qualify. Their name was actually the "Braves" when they started in Boston back in 1932 and as the video stated, they've changed several aspects of the team (uniform/logo/colors/etc) since then without incident. Countless franchises across all leagues have done it for varying reasons. So, how is changing "Redskins" any different from changing "Oilers", or the NBA's "Bullets", or the NHL's "Whalers"? Hell... the MLB's L.A. Dodgers have changed names 11 times and their "tradition" predates Washington's by nearly 50 years.

Again... I DO agree that forcing a privately owned entity like a pro sports franchise to change it's name is a terrible idea and opens the door for all sorts of censorship we just don't need in America. But, it would behoove Daniel Snyder to make the change on his own.

Changing the name may be no different then the Oilers changing their name and such, but most NFL fans hate that crap IMO.

Now I really don't have a dog in this fight, other then, I love tradition and want to see it continue.

 

[Caynine29]

This response is about the dumbest one I've ever seen in a debate. It makes no sense at all. I'll just mark this one up as if you had no clue why you even posted here.

Translation: "Well, damn... I've got no good rebuttal for that one at all."

It's cool, darken65. I get that a lot. For what it's worth... I actually respect your decision to simply stand down, rather than making it harder on yourself by attempting a measured response.

 

[Caynine29]

Changing the name may be no different then the Oilers changing their name and such, but most NFL fans hate that crap IMO.

Now I really don't have a dog in this fight, other then, I love tradition and want to see it continue.

Can't say I really have a dog in the fight either. There are no Rams outside the Edward Jones Dome toting picket signs that I'm aware of. Lol. But I don't recall any upheaval or drop in fan support for any of the teams I listed, or any of the scores of others who have changed monikers, for that matter.

I have however, seen stadiums full of new merchandise for every single one of them. I notice you didn't drop the 'Hawks after their second stadium and third uniform change.

 

[Rex Racer]

Translation: "Well, damn... I've got no good rebuttal for that one at all."

It's cool, darken65. I get that a lot. For what it's worth... I actually respect your decision to simply stand down, rather than making it harder on yourself by attempting a measured response.

darken65 is correct and you along with your PC BS are wrong. You need to grab a history book son.

 

[Rex Racer]

. I get that a lot..

I'm sure you do..

 

[Caynine29]

darken65 is correct and you along with your PC BS are wrong. You need to grab a history book son.

See, darken65... you're not alone. Rex Racer here couldn't muster a decent argument either.

 

[darken65]

See, darken65... you're not alone. Rex Racer here couldn't muster a decent argument either.

Your response was nothing but a bogus piece of garbage that held no real merit for an actual debate. If I were you I'd be ashamed to even post that. I guess in your little world you actually made some kind of point. Have fun with that.