GNG
What Me Worry?
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.
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.
I have no idea how he does it... but somehow Jon Stewart manages to knock it out of the park every f*cking time.
I'm glad you think he's funny. He seems like a pompous asshole to me.
Except when he doesn't.
Not funny.
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?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.
Post a link where this has been an issue of this level before the year 2012 at the least.People have had an issue with this well before now. Not that that should even matter, but yeah.
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?
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 .
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
darken65 is correct and you along with your PC BS are wrong. You need to grab a history book son.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.
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.See, darken65... you're not alone. Rex Racer here couldn't muster a decent argument either.