^
There it is again....
Stupidity Alert.... ..Stupidity Alert....
Leftwing Lawyer at Large
There it is again....
Stupidity Alert.... ..Stupidity Alert....
Leftwing Lawyer at Large
Redskins
- Thread starter The 5 solas
- Start date
^
LOL!
All I have to do is see this:
.....and I know something stupid has just been posted. I don't even need to read the post.
saves a lot of time, eh? :thumb:
In light of this month's efforts by CC I felt obliged to share a chuckle I had today looking over a few things...CC was really going on about my objecting to Res for the pedophile and family shots, to remind everyone.
Your reports must be over something almost unutterably serious...let's see. Here are a handful of the sixteen, unedited, from this month:
Speaking of which.
lain: Nancy please...
This next one I loved.
And these ditties:
Why those?
That's why.
Oh, and you reported Kat for calling you a "poodle head". I concur with the mods' consideration and echo the judgment here: :rotfl:
And the Redskins? They should really change that name.
About 16 so far this month. But getting right down to your outrage because my reporting was somehow different and less substantive.
Your reports must be over something almost unutterably serious...let's see. Here are a handful of the sixteen, unedited, from this month:
Yeah, that's so much worse than being called a pedophile.
Speaking of which.
Someone called you what? They called you a "wimp".
lain: Nancy please...This next one I loved.
That one was either completely dishonest or the dumbest report of your remarkable month. Link
And these ditties:
Why those?
That's why.Oh, and you reported Kat for calling you a "poodle head". I concur with the mods' consideration and echo the judgment here: :rotfl:
And the Redskins? They should really change that name.
genuineoriginal
New member
A leader of the Navajo Code Talkers who appeared at a Washington Redskins home football game said Wednesday the team name is a symbol of loyalty and courage — not a slur as asserted by critics who want it changed.
Roy Hawthorne, 87, of Lupton, Ariz., was one of four Code Talkers honored for their service in World War II during the Monday night game against the San Francisco 49ers.
Hawthorne, vice president of the Navajo Code Talkers Association, said the group’s trip was paid for by the Redskins. The four men met briefly with team owner Dan Snyder but did not discuss the name, Hawthorne said.
Still, he said he would endorse the name if asked, and the televised appearance in which three of the Indians wore Redskins jackets spoke for itself.
“We didn’t have that in mind but that is undoubtedly what we did do,” Hawthorne said when asked if he was intending to send a statement with the appearance. “My opinion is that’s a name that not only the team should keep, but that’s a name that’s American.”
source
Roy Hawthorne, 87, of Lupton, Ariz., was one of four Code Talkers honored for their service in World War II during the Monday night game against the San Francisco 49ers.
Hawthorne, vice president of the Navajo Code Talkers Association, said the group’s trip was paid for by the Redskins. The four men met briefly with team owner Dan Snyder but did not discuss the name, Hawthorne said.
Still, he said he would endorse the name if asked, and the televised appearance in which three of the Indians wore Redskins jackets spoke for itself.
“We didn’t have that in mind but that is undoubtedly what we did do,” Hawthorne said when asked if he was intending to send a statement with the appearance. “My opinion is that’s a name that not only the team should keep, but that’s a name that’s American.”
source
genuineoriginal
New member
The only North American Indians we know of that want Redskins to change name are those who are career activists, i.e., their singular mandate is to identify an issue and advocate for change. Those North American Indians who aren’t career activists have always found the name to be a reliable source of pride. It’s unfortunate that the negative experiences of some are eclipsing the positive experiences of others.
Hopefully those North American Indians who support keeping the name Redskins will be given as much opportunity to convey their position in media as those that are advocating for name change.
source
Hopefully those North American Indians who support keeping the name Redskins will be given as much opportunity to convey their position in media as those that are advocating for name change.
source
With respect, he isn't entitled to speak for anyone else and he speaks contrary to the actual authority on point, though he's certainly free to feel any way he wants about it and he'll find agreement within his community and outside of it.
Not that it touches the point of objection.
I've noted a number of tribes and one major counsel in support of the trade mark objection.
That said, ten percent of the Native Americans objected to the term in the polling. That can't be rationally or honestly dismissed the way you're trying to.
While I don't know what the number is for those who would actively support the use, I know 90 percent have declared themselves to be unoffended and that number has been widely publicized.
genuineoriginal
New member
Then neither is Amanda Blackhorse.
As a proud American Indian, he is an actual authority on the point.
genuineoriginal
New member
You have the poll results backwards.
The question was phrased: “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn’t it bother you?”
Data showed that 8 percent of men and 9 percent of women found the name offensive, while 90 percent of each sex said it did not bother them.
Those having more education, higher incomes and being younger and “politically liberal” were more likely to dislike the name than those whose education and income levels were lower, who were older, or who described themselves as “moderate” or “conservative” politically.
For example, 14 percent of those who called themselves liberal said they found the name offensive, compared with 6 percent of conservatives and 9 percent of moderates. Yet, even 85 percent of self-identified liberal Indians said the name did not bother them.
source
Data showed that 8 percent of men and 9 percent of women found the name offensive, while 90 percent of each sex said it did not bother them.
Those having more education, higher incomes and being younger and “politically liberal” were more likely to dislike the name than those whose education and income levels were lower, who were older, or who described themselves as “moderate” or “conservative” politically.
For example, 14 percent of those who called themselves liberal said they found the name offensive, compared with 6 percent of conservatives and 9 percent of moderates. Yet, even 85 percent of self-identified liberal Indians said the name did not bother them.
source
She's not trying to. She's speaking for that ten percent offended by the use and as one of five representative plaintiffs.
No, being a proud member of the class doesn't make him an authority. It makes him a Native American with a strong opinion.
The actual authority was presented to the Court ruling on how the term was used during the years around the patent challenge and convincingly. It agreed with Webster's. It agreed with the prior win in 1992, set aside on a technicality. That's a bit wider than one Native American.
can anybody explain why town is focusing on the 10% of whiners and ignoring the 90% who aren't offended?
that would be the 90%, right?
So who is the authority on point for the 90%?
they don't count
You're mixing two different points. There's one authority in the sense that there was a mostly negative connotation advanced in the popular culture for the time period covering the patent.
All we know about the 90% is that they aren't offended by the term. Some may simply be indifferent to it. Some may use and have a positive feeling about it. We don't know how that number breaks down. So we can't say 90% are in favor of it, only that they aren't offended by it.
The 10% are offended. Their perception is in line with the popular usage for much of the terms history, as recognized by the Court and other authority.
And it is from that and the reasonableness of taking exception to the term, coupled with the stated intent of many here that I advanced a single proposition: if you don't desire to offend anyone and you understand yourself to be offending then stop doing that.
lain:You're mixing two different points. There's one authority in the sense that there was a mostly negative connotation advanced in the popular culture for the time period covering the patent.
All we know about the 90% is that they aren't offended by the term. Some may simply be indifferent to it. Some may use and have a positive feeling about it. We don't know how that number breaks down. So we can't say 90% are in favor of it, only that they aren't offended by it.
The 10% are offended. Their perception is in line with the popular usage for much of the terms history, as recognized by the Court and other authority.
And it is from that and the reasonableness of taking exception to the term, coupled with the stated intent of many here that I advanced a single proposition: if you don't desire to offend anyone and you understand yourself to be offending then stop doing that.
so you don't care about roy hawthorne until he starts whining about being offended?
genuineoriginal
New member
if you don't desire to offend anyone and you understand yourself to be offending then stop doing that.
That's all we need to know.
Ten percent of people in general are probably whiners like you. That's the whole story in a nutshell.
Go Redskins!
Depends on the question and the point.
Said the guy who reported someone for calling him a "poodle head". :chuckle:
That's your whole story, to be sure.
There's nothing like a good counter argument...and that certainly qualifies.
And in general, if you mean to do good, do good. If you don't mean to offend, remove the offense.
if i tell you i'm offended by you, will you go away?