• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tribal chief: No FedEx until Redskins change team name

You don't understand me.
Does anyone?
Possibly your time would be better spent in a gulch somewhere, inventing, pontificating, blathering.....
Just a thought.
 
Does anyone?
Possibly your time would be better spent in a gulch somewhere, inventing, pontificating, blathering.....
Just a thought.

Is that all you have to say?
 
Stereotypes harming society is not a "figment of liberal wild imagination", it's a sociological fact.

Quantify the exact harm done by a team name, and harm done to Native American's over a name and logo that they not only approved when adopted, but had input in creating?
 
NO. It. Is. Not.

I do know a **** load about "American First Nations" History, and "warrior" is only a compliment in some tribes. Your posts here show the usual level of "cowboys and injuns" myth starting with the fact that there were over a hundred co-existing nations with well formed societies, complete with legal structure some of whom taught the Pinksins how to survive.

The "warrior" label along with "redskin" is continuing the stereotypical myth that "Indians" are "savages", when it was they who were the scouts and frontiersmen who taught pinksins and were repaid by being kicked out of their traditional lands and slaughtered in "take no prisoners raids" killing women and children indiscriminately. The "savages" were the ones with cannons and muskets with a greed-thirst for free land

I'm just curious how noting the color of their skin that the white men saw many generations ago is "stereotyping"?

I agree that white men were very brutal to the Indians. But the Indians were also very brutal to whites in return. It was a pretty ugly time in history.
 
I'm just curious how noting the color of their skin that the white men saw many generations ago is "stereotyping"?

I agree that white men were very brutal to the Indians. But the Indians were also very brutal to whites in return. It was a pretty ugly time in history.

Indians were pretty brutal to each other, too. Ya know, people throughout history have been brutal to other people, and race or ethnicity hasn't always mattered. It could be two groups vying for control within a larger group... people just suck. There's nothing new here, yet some act like it is.
 
Indians were pretty brutal to each other, too. Ya know, people throughout history have been brutal to other people, and race or ethnicity hasn't always mattered. It could be two groups vying for control within a larger group... people just suck. There's nothing new here, yet some act like it is.

The competitive tribes sold each other out in Connecticut & New York. They were very brutal to each other. For some pretty disturbing reading, research what the Mohegan tribe did to help John Mason slaughter the Pequots in 1637.
 
Chick-fil-a is outcompeted in its own niche by the Burger King Classic Chicken Sandwich and Wendy's Spicy Chicken. Even McDonalds has a better chicken sandwich value for dollar with the McChicken.

And their fries are mediocere.

Wow...to each their own.

The Classic Chicken Sandwich and Wendy's Chicken Sandwich aren't even in the same ball park to the Chick-Fil-A chicken sandwich for me. To even compare that flimsy patty that is the McChicken to the Chick-Fil-A sandwich is just an insult. Yeah, it's CHEAPER...that doesn't mean better.

And I personally prefer their waffle fries to pretty much any of the fries from the Big 3 other than perhaps a fresh out of the frier McD's fries.

Everyones got a different taste but...yeah, for me, Chick-Fil-A's sandwich and nuggets are the best in class.
 
Must not?
What will happen if they do?:shrug:


Do you foresee cataclysmic consequences?
Next you won't be able to buy your kids items like these:
racist-sexist-retro-toys-11-660x574.jpg


racist-sexist-retro-toys-10-660x572.jpg


sambobank.jpg
 
I'm just curious how noting the color of their skin that the white men saw many generations ago is "stereotyping"?

I agree that white men were very brutal to the Indians. But the Indians were also very brutal to whites in return. It was a pretty ugly time in history.

That is my point Tres.


This began over "savages" not just "Redskin"; my point is that "savages" IS stereotyping as it only portrays redskins as such while ignoring the savagery you acknowledge. If "they" were savages, so were whites, so maybe we can focus on the culture, the structure and spiritualism they also had, recognize that even with modern building techniques we would be hard pressed to build the villages of the Pueblos; maybe acknowledge that Captain Meriwether Lewis would not have survived without the help and guidance of local peoples, despite the fact he often angered them by not knowing local customs.
 
That is my point Tres.


This began over "savages" not just "Redskin"; my point is that "savages" IS stereotyping as it only portrays redskins as such while ignoring the savagery you acknowledge. If "they" were savages, so were whites, so maybe we can focus on the culture, the structure and spiritualism they also had, recognize that even with modern building techniques we would be hard pressed to build the villages of the Pueblos; maybe acknowledge that Captain Meriwether Lewis would not have survived without the help and guidance of local peoples, despite the fact he often angered them by not knowing local customs.

I get all that. I have no clue what it has to do with the name "Redskins".
 
Next you won't be able to buy your kids items like these:

Moderator's Warning:
Next time you want to reference these in this thread please simply refer back to your original post numbers rather than repeateldy spamming the thread with the same three large pictures
 
Oh so what? The team has been the Washington Redskins since 1936. It is only in this latest era of political correctness that it has become an issue with pansy asses....I say keep the name forever!

It has been an offensive term for longer than that. It is what it is. It has a dictionary definition, defined as an offensive term. And always has been.
 
I'm not saying they can't protest, they're welcome to do so, just as I, and many others, can think they're ridiculous for doing so. But of course, instead of actually dealing with the reality here, you'd rather insult me. It's okay, I know you liberals aren't intellectually capable of having a rational conversation.

I don't believe I've insulted you in any way. The you was a universal you. It marks anyone who uses the term. It has a definition, and words have meaning. Words don't just mean what you want them them to mean. And by you, I mean anyone who make up definitions of words to suit what they want to use it for.
 
We can't let these stoopid libruls vote with their wallet! How dare they mess with a job creator?
 
Well now.......that's it......I' switching my business' account from UPS to FedEx........go Redskins.....scalp 'em!
 
Back
Top Bottom