The Irish have thrived in the New World. They have had issues in their own right but nothing like that of the American Indian. The deeper the wound, the easier it is to iritate. They don't quite scab over the same. And even Notre Dame has moved away from the image of "The fighting Irish" as belligerent pugilists. These days they are often simply referred to as the Irish.
The Irish have thrived in the New World. They have had issues in their own right but nothing like that of the American Indian. The deeper the wound, the easier it is to iritate. They don't quite scab over the same. And even Notre Dame has moved away from the image of "The fighting Irish" as belligerent pugilists. These days they are often simply referred to as the Irish.
Stumptown, did sum digging, found this word "Ola." It's race specific, that's the difference in this conversation. It's what Swedes and other Scandinavians refer to as "dumb Norwegians." I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that if you say that face to face to a Norwegian, not only is it insulting, you may get punched. It doesn't mean anything to me, seems ok, but clearly to a Norwegian, that's a major insult. Race specific. Shoe on the other foot. Change the Redskins to "Washington person," I'm sure there are plenty of rich Jewish people around DC.
"I'm afraid all we may have done is awakened a sleeping giant."
Stumptown, did sum digging, found this word "Ola." It's race specific, that's the difference in this conversation. It's what Swedes and other Scandinavians refer to as "dumb Norwegians." I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that if you say that face to face to a Norwegian, not only is it insulting, you may get punched. It doesn't mean anything to me, seems ok, but clearly to a Norwegian, that's a major insult. Race specific. Shoe on the other foot. Change the Redskins to "Washington person," I'm sure there are plenty of rich Jewish people around DC.
They changed the word I was saying in regards to Jewish people, 4 letters, sorry didn't know it was offensive, to the word "person." Interesting covers. Get it?
"I'm afraid all we may have done is awakened a sleeping giant."
They changed the word I was saying in regards to Jewish people, 4 letters, sorry didn't know it was offensive, to the word "person." Interesting covers. Get it?
The Irish have thrived in the New World. They have had issues in their own right but nothing like that of the American Indian. The deeper the wound, the easier it is to iritate. They don't quite scab over the same. And even Notre Dame has moved away from the image of "The fighting Irish" as belligerent pugilists. These days they are often simply referred to as the Irish.
Their logo is a little white man with fists up.
Irish are drunks who fight, a very common stereotype.
The Irish have thrived in the New World. They have had issues in their own right but nothing like that of the American Indian. The deeper the wound, the easier it is to iritate. They don't quite scab over the same. And even Notre Dame has moved away from the image of "The fighting Irish" as belligerent pugilists. These days they are often simply referred to as the Irish.
Their logo is a little white man with fists up.
Irish are drunks who fight, a very common stereotype.
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: The Irish have thrived in the New World. They have had issues in their own right but nothing like that of the American Indian. The deeper the wound, the easier it is to iritate. They don't quite scab over the same. And even Notre Dame has moved away from the image of "The fighting Irish" as belligerent pugilists. These days they are often simply referred to as the Irish. Their logo is a little white man with fists up. Irish are drunks who fight, a very common stereotype.
A stereotype many of them embrace. And even then, you don't see that logo used very often anymore. I bet in 5 years they will simply be called "The Irish". Now this will still be the best comparison to "The Indians" but still not as bad as "The Redskins". Plus the Irish are overwhelmingly catholic in this country. They eat that Notre Dame stuff up. Frankly, the eat up the drinking, fighting strereotypes as well. As stereotypes go, those aren't so bad. The context of what Native Americans have gone through in this country adds sensitivity to the issue.
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: The Irish have thrived in the New World. They have had issues in their own right but nothing like that of the American Indian. The deeper the wound, the easier it is to iritate. They don't quite scab over the same. And even Notre Dame has moved away from the image of "The fighting Irish" as belligerent pugilists. These days they are often simply referred to as the Irish. Their logo is a little white man with fists up. Irish are drunks who fight, a very common stereotype.
A stereotype many of them embrace. And even then, you don't see that logo used very often anymore. I bet in 5 years they will simply be called "The Irish". Now this will still be the best comparison to "The Indians" but still not as bad as "The Redskins". Plus the Irish are overwhelmingly catholic in this country. They eat that Notre Dame stuff up. Frankly, the eat up the drinking, fighting strereotypes as well. As stereotypes go, those aren't so bad. The context of what Native Americans have gone through in this country adds sensitivity to the issue.
How about changing the Washington Redskins to the Washington Americans? Anyone have an issue with that name change? Of course I used to love singing the Redskins fight song:
Hail to the Redskins! Hail Victory! Braves on the Warpath! Fight for old D.C.! Run or pass and score—We want a lot more! Beat 'em, Swamp 'em, Touchdown! -- Let the points soar! Fight on, fight on 'Til you have won Sons of Wash-ing-ton. Rah!, Rah!, Rah! Hail to the Redskins! Hail Victory! Braves on the Warpath! Fight for old D.C.!
How about changing the Washington Redskins to the Washington Americans? Anyone have an issue with that name change? Of course I used to love singing the Redskins fight song:
Hail to the Redskins! Hail Victory! Braves on the Warpath! Fight for old D.C.! Run or pass and score—We want a lot more! Beat 'em, Swamp 'em, Touchdown! -- Let the points soar! Fight on, fight on 'Til you have won Sons of Wash-ing-ton. Rah!, Rah!, Rah! Hail to the Redskins! Hail Victory! Braves on the Warpath! Fight for old D.C.!
I would also prefer that we change Black Lives Matter as the name offends me. LIVES MATTER...If you need a color in front of those two words then you are a racist. We are ALL Americans.
I would also prefer that we change Black Lives Matter as the name offends me. LIVES MATTER...If you need a color in front of those two words then you are a racist. We are ALL Americans.
I would also prefer that we change Black Lives Matter as the name offends me. LIVES MATTER...If you need a color in front of those two words then you are a racist. We are ALL Americans.
What exactly offends you. The term doesn't denote other lives not mattering. It's not Black Lives Matter More or, Black Lives Matter Only. What exactly is offensive about it?
I would also prefer that we change Black Lives Matter as the name offends me. LIVES MATTER...If you need a color in front of those two words then you are a racist. We are ALL Americans.
What exactly offends you. The term doesn't denote other lives not mattering. It's not Black Lives Matter More or, Black Lives Matter Only. What exactly is offensive about it?
I would also prefer that we change Black Lives Matter as the name offends me. LIVES MATTER...If you need a color in front of those two words then you are a racist. We are ALL Americans.
If you need a color in front of those two words then you have been made to feel that your life doesn't matter. Almost every group of people on the planet can relate. Modern white males can't. And they are losing their minds over it. It shows when you hear them say things like, "White men are the real discriminated group." "White men are the real persecuted group." You guys are so out of touch that you think hollywood SJWs saying mean things about you counts as persecution. The fact that you take offense to the term "Black Lives Matter." is ver telling. Bet you were against the #MeToo movement too. I thought it was/is a lil hokey. I kinda laughed at these chicks... but I respected it. I understood. I related. It's why you see so many white women at BLM rallies. They relate to being marginalized and devalued. They know the feeling of their lifes not mattering. You never will and stat's why you're offended by a term that is in no way offensive.
I would also prefer that we change Black Lives Matter as the name offends me. LIVES MATTER...If you need a color in front of those two words then you are a racist. We are ALL Americans.
If you need a color in front of those two words then you have been made to feel that your life doesn't matter. Almost every group of people on the planet can relate. Modern white males can't. And they are losing their minds over it. It shows when you hear them say things like, "White men are the real discriminated group." "White men are the real persecuted group." You guys are so out of touch that you think hollywood SJWs saying mean things about you counts as persecution. The fact that you take offense to the term "Black Lives Matter." is ver telling. Bet you were against the #MeToo movement too. I thought it was/is a lil hokey. I kinda laughed at these chicks... but I respected it. I understood. I related. It's why you see so many white women at BLM rallies. They relate to being marginalized and devalued. They know the feeling of their lifes not mattering. You never will and stat's why you're offended by a term that is in no way offensive.
It's all well and good that one can speak for all Irish people or all Americans and what they'd think about the name of a sports team and the social stigma that it entails....it is obviously a free country
However, given the evidence of what just transpired in Edmonton, and how the name of the Eskimos is not being changed after consulting the very people that a team name was given, I wouldn't give credence to what you're saying implying that you have a finger on the pulse of the Indian nation, anymore than some writer would on espn.
If it is an group of Indians that are saying the name Redskins, Indians, Warriors is offensive, I'd listen if I were the owner, though the obvious idea behind naming your team something like that is to give the impression that your team is a fighting entity that gives maximum effort in a competitive setting.
It's all well and good that one can speak for all Irish people or all Americans and what they'd think about the name of a sports team and the social stigma that it entails....it is obviously a free country
However, given the evidence of what just transpired in Edmonton, and how the name of the Eskimos is not being changed after consulting the very people that a team name was given, I wouldn't give credence to what you're saying implying that you have a finger on the pulse of the Indian nation, anymore than some writer would on espn.
If it is an group of Indians that are saying the name Redskins, Indians, Warriors is offensive, I'd listen if I were the owner, though the obvious idea behind naming your team something like that is to give the impression that your team is a fighting entity that gives maximum effort in a competitive setting.
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71: the #of felons in the nfl last yr was 871 out of 1696 players And they want to lecture the rest of the country about police reform. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! No wonder they want to defund the police.
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71: the #of felons in the nfl last yr was 871 out of 1696 players And they want to lecture the rest of the country about police reform. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! No wonder they want to defund the police.
It's all well and good that one can speak for all Irish people or all Americans and what they'd think about the name of a sports team and the social stigma that it entails....it is obviously a free country However, given the evidence of what just transpired in Edmonton, and how the name of the Eskimos is not being changed after consulting the very people that a team name was given, I wouldn't give credence to what you're saying implying that you have a finger on the pulse of the Indian nation, anymore than some writer would on espn. If it is an group of Indians that are saying the name Redskins, Indians, Warriors is offensive, I'd listen if I were the owner, though the obvious idea behind naming your team something like that is to give the impression that your team is a fighting entity that gives maximum effort in a competitive setting.
If only there were enough of them left to get a true consensus.
It's all well and good that one can speak for all Irish people or all Americans and what they'd think about the name of a sports team and the social stigma that it entails....it is obviously a free country However, given the evidence of what just transpired in Edmonton, and how the name of the Eskimos is not being changed after consulting the very people that a team name was given, I wouldn't give credence to what you're saying implying that you have a finger on the pulse of the Indian nation, anymore than some writer would on espn. If it is an group of Indians that are saying the name Redskins, Indians, Warriors is offensive, I'd listen if I were the owner, though the obvious idea behind naming your team something like that is to give the impression that your team is a fighting entity that gives maximum effort in a competitive setting.
If only there were enough of them left to get a true consensus.
Looking likely from the sounds of things that the Redskins will change their name.
This despite two polls of those with native american blood at two separate times with 90% of Indians saying the name "Redskins" is not offensive to them.
90%?
Where are you going to get agreement on 100% of anyone, including your own family?
Will have to see if the All Blacks, the Rainbow Warriors, Seminoles, various other Warriors, etc., become vocal advocates of name and mascot changes because they suddenly realize their organization's name gives off a racist connotation.
Perhaps if we took a poll of native Norwegians or those from Minnesota, 10% of them would be offended at the Vikings' name. They will then start protesting, filing lawsuits and claim irreparable damage to their psyche because a Viking portrays them as uncouth, bearded with poor dress sense, having poor hygiene with tendency towards violent murderous rages and incessant wanderlust.
Looking likely from the sounds of things that the Redskins will change their name.
This despite two polls of those with native american blood at two separate times with 90% of Indians saying the name "Redskins" is not offensive to them.
90%?
Where are you going to get agreement on 100% of anyone, including your own family?
Will have to see if the All Blacks, the Rainbow Warriors, Seminoles, various other Warriors, etc., become vocal advocates of name and mascot changes because they suddenly realize their organization's name gives off a racist connotation.
Perhaps if we took a poll of native Norwegians or those from Minnesota, 10% of them would be offended at the Vikings' name. They will then start protesting, filing lawsuits and claim irreparable damage to their psyche because a Viking portrays them as uncouth, bearded with poor dress sense, having poor hygiene with tendency towards violent murderous rages and incessant wanderlust.
Looking likely from the sounds of things that the Redskins will change their name. This despite two polls of those with native american blood at two separate times with 90% of Indians saying the name "Redskins" is not offensive to them. 90%? Where are you going to get agreement on 100% of anyone, including your own family? Will have to see if the All Blacks, the Rainbow Warriors, Seminoles, various other Warriors, etc., become vocal advocates of name and mascot changes because they suddenly realize their organization's name gives off a racist connotation. Perhaps if we took a poll of native Norwegians or those from Minnesota, 10% of them would be offended at the Vikings' name. They will then start protesting, filing lawsuits and claim irreparable damage to their psyche because a Viking portrays them as uncouth, bearded with poor dress sense, having poor hygiene with tendency towards violent murderous rages and incessant wanderlust. I feel worse about myself just thinking about it.
Looking likely from the sounds of things that the Redskins will change their name. This despite two polls of those with native american blood at two separate times with 90% of Indians saying the name "Redskins" is not offensive to them. 90%? Where are you going to get agreement on 100% of anyone, including your own family? Will have to see if the All Blacks, the Rainbow Warriors, Seminoles, various other Warriors, etc., become vocal advocates of name and mascot changes because they suddenly realize their organization's name gives off a racist connotation. Perhaps if we took a poll of native Norwegians or those from Minnesota, 10% of them would be offended at the Vikings' name. They will then start protesting, filing lawsuits and claim irreparable damage to their psyche because a Viking portrays them as uncouth, bearded with poor dress sense, having poor hygiene with tendency towards violent murderous rages and incessant wanderlust. I feel worse about myself just thinking about it.
That poll should be taken with a truckload of salt. Per Wikipedia:
Native American scholars have done academic research that address the problem of using standard polling methods, which are not valid for measuring the opinions of a small, yet culturally and socially diverse population such as Native Americans.
Withdrawal of corporate sponsors may force the issue. Per AdWeek:
On Friday, three separate letters signed by 87 investment firms and shareholders worth a collective $620 billion asked Nike, FedEx and PepsiCo to terminate their business relationships with the NFL's Washington Redskins unless the team agrees to change its controversial name
That poll should be taken with a truckload of salt. Per Wikipedia:
Native American scholars have done academic research that address the problem of using standard polling methods, which are not valid for measuring the opinions of a small, yet culturally and socially diverse population such as Native Americans.
Withdrawal of corporate sponsors may force the issue. Per AdWeek:
On Friday, three separate letters signed by 87 investment firms and shareholders worth a collective $620 billion asked Nike, FedEx and PepsiCo to terminate their business relationships with the NFL's Washington Redskins unless the team agrees to change its controversial name
the #of felons in the nfl last yr was 871 out of 1696 players
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71:
for felons list go to usatoday.com/sports/nfl/arrests/
Last year there were 30 arrests. And that's just arrests, not felony convictions. Arresta for things like driving on a suspended license is included. And even if you were to backtrack, say, 10 years to get people who may still be in the league who were previously arrested, cross reference for duplicates, you still don't end up with 871.
the #of felons in the nfl last yr was 871 out of 1696 players
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71:
for felons list go to usatoday.com/sports/nfl/arrests/
Last year there were 30 arrests. And that's just arrests, not felony convictions. Arresta for things like driving on a suspended license is included. And even if you were to backtrack, say, 10 years to get people who may still be in the league who were previously arrested, cross reference for duplicates, you still don't end up with 871.
32 teams---53 players per team---total-1691 players 871 CONVICTED FELONS PLAY IN NFL. you own a company with 2000 workers and over 800 are convicted felons you have a problem
32 teams---53 players per team---total-1691 players 871 CONVICTED FELONS PLAY IN NFL. you own a company with 2000 workers and over 800 are convicted felons you have a problem
32 teams---53 players per team---total-1691 players 871 CONVICTED FELONS PLAY IN NFL. you own a company with 2000 workers and over 800 are convicted felons you have a problem
Going by the list you provided, i'm not seeing how you came up with 871 convicted felons. I see math isn't your strong suit. Nor is data comprehension. This is a problem in today's world though. People just make up the facts as they go along.
32 teams---53 players per team---total-1691 players 871 CONVICTED FELONS PLAY IN NFL. you own a company with 2000 workers and over 800 are convicted felons you have a problem
Going by the list you provided, i'm not seeing how you came up with 871 convicted felons. I see math isn't your strong suit. Nor is data comprehension. This is a problem in today's world though. People just make up the facts as they go along.
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71: 32 teams---53 players per team---total-1691 players 871 CONVICTED FELONS PLAY IN NFL. you own a company with 2000 workers and over 800 are convicted felons you have a problem Going by the list you provided, i'm not seeing how you came up with 871 convicted felons. I see math isn't your strong suit. Nor is data comprehension. This is a problem in today's world though. People just make up the facts as they go along.
After a little internet sleuthing I figured out where you got that 871 number and i'm sorry to report, I feel horrible saying this, but you're an idiot. How old are you? I find you can put just about anything on the internet and people over 70 will believe it. Not all septuagenarians but many. They come from a time when there was such a thing as journalistic integrity. They believe if they see it in print it must be true. They don't realize that any whacko can just write whatever on the internet. There are no fact-checkers. No editors. Don't even get me started on bots. You mention bots to these geriatrics and they have images of "Danger! Danger, Will Robinson!" ....but I digress. You can just accept that you're wrong and drop it or I can point out how stupid and/or gullible you are for the class.
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71: 32 teams---53 players per team---total-1691 players 871 CONVICTED FELONS PLAY IN NFL. you own a company with 2000 workers and over 800 are convicted felons you have a problem Going by the list you provided, i'm not seeing how you came up with 871 convicted felons. I see math isn't your strong suit. Nor is data comprehension. This is a problem in today's world though. People just make up the facts as they go along.
After a little internet sleuthing I figured out where you got that 871 number and i'm sorry to report, I feel horrible saying this, but you're an idiot. How old are you? I find you can put just about anything on the internet and people over 70 will believe it. Not all septuagenarians but many. They come from a time when there was such a thing as journalistic integrity. They believe if they see it in print it must be true. They don't realize that any whacko can just write whatever on the internet. There are no fact-checkers. No editors. Don't even get me started on bots. You mention bots to these geriatrics and they have images of "Danger! Danger, Will Robinson!" ....but I digress. You can just accept that you're wrong and drop it or I can point out how stupid and/or gullible you are for the class.
hey idiot go back to the usa article and actually read the charges most un resolved plea down but they are all serious charges.i know your type if someone said to you your pants are on fire you would call 911.you must walk with a severe left tilt
hey idiot go back to the usa article and actually read the charges most un resolved plea down but they are all serious charges.i know your type if someone said to you your pants are on fire you would call 911.you must walk with a severe left tilt
hey idiot go back to the usa article and actually read the charges most un resolved plea down but they are all serious charges.i know your type if someone said to you your pants are on fire you would call 911.you must walk with a severe left tilt
You're really going to make me point out how stupid you are? Ok. If I must. There's a lot to unpack here. First, the word Felon. A felon, by definition, is someone arrested, tried, and convicted of a felony offense. Some use it for anyone who has done jail time for a serious or semi-serious offense. For the sake of your argument, and considering we are talking about athletes with good lawyers, i'll even accept the definition: Someone who has been simply charged with a felony. This isn't an accepted definition anywhere but i'll give it to you, for the sake of your argument, before then obliterating said argument.
The list. I've read the list in it's entirety. I'm quite sure you haven't. There are some serious offenses on there. Assaults, most stemming from bar fights. DUIs, drug offenses... typical dumb athlete stuff. Then there are some really serious offenses. Domestic assaults. Armed robberies. Murders. There are also jaywalking citations. The list, which clearly you didn't read, isn't a list of felons currently in the NFL. It's a cumulatve list of not convictions, not even arrests, a cumulative list of every incident involving an NFL player OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS!!! Alongside serious crimes there are minor traffic citations, minor drug citations. Any incident involving the authorities over the last 20 years. Most of the people on that list have not been in the league for some time. Some never even made an active roster. Just spent time in camp and played in pre-season. Last year their were 32 incidents. Not even arrests. Incidents. Year before that, 36. All tolled, there are probably less than 100 of what could be called "felons" in the NFL, even by the loosest of definitions. There's more....
hey idiot go back to the usa article and actually read the charges most un resolved plea down but they are all serious charges.i know your type if someone said to you your pants are on fire you would call 911.you must walk with a severe left tilt
You're really going to make me point out how stupid you are? Ok. If I must. There's a lot to unpack here. First, the word Felon. A felon, by definition, is someone arrested, tried, and convicted of a felony offense. Some use it for anyone who has done jail time for a serious or semi-serious offense. For the sake of your argument, and considering we are talking about athletes with good lawyers, i'll even accept the definition: Someone who has been simply charged with a felony. This isn't an accepted definition anywhere but i'll give it to you, for the sake of your argument, before then obliterating said argument.
The list. I've read the list in it's entirety. I'm quite sure you haven't. There are some serious offenses on there. Assaults, most stemming from bar fights. DUIs, drug offenses... typical dumb athlete stuff. Then there are some really serious offenses. Domestic assaults. Armed robberies. Murders. There are also jaywalking citations. The list, which clearly you didn't read, isn't a list of felons currently in the NFL. It's a cumulatve list of not convictions, not even arrests, a cumulative list of every incident involving an NFL player OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS!!! Alongside serious crimes there are minor traffic citations, minor drug citations. Any incident involving the authorities over the last 20 years. Most of the people on that list have not been in the league for some time. Some never even made an active roster. Just spent time in camp and played in pre-season. Last year their were 32 incidents. Not even arrests. Incidents. Year before that, 36. All tolled, there are probably less than 100 of what could be called "felons" in the NFL, even by the loosest of definitions. There's more....
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.