phuqueue wrote:So when John Boehner buys a sandwich it's a government matter?
Well, let's see: Is he and teaming-up with other members of Congress and sending a letter to the sandwich maker suggesting they change the name of their sandwiches? Or is he merely buying a sandwich?
Are members of Congress merely buying tickets to Redskins games or they sending a letter to the Redskins asking them to change their name?
So you're saying if Boehner and a few buddies petitioned Quiznos to change the name of their favorite sandwich to "the Congressman," that would be tantamount to an act of the government itself?
phuqueue wrote:
No it isn't. White people can conceptualize racism in the abstract but I doubt very many can understand the actual experience of it. Even in countries where white people are a minority, they don't experience the kind of institutionalized discrimination they've imposed on other races over the centuries; even when they're a fairly small minority they often still impose such discrimination on others (eg South African apartheid). I say this as just about the whitest person you will ever meet. There is no scale on which you can determine that one racial slur is "worse" than another, particularly when they target different groups of people. It's condescending (to put it as politely as possible) for one who will never be the victim of racism himself to decide which slur is more offensive to members of the target groups.
I respectfully disagree. And we're not likely to make each other change our minds. But, I did want to clarify that I wasn't trying to suggest that the "N" carries more weight than the word, "Redskins." They are both racial slurs meant for 2 different races. I can't speak to their level of offensiveness among those races. But, based on my own personal experience, the "N" word seems to be used more than the word, "Redskins." In fact, I have never heard anyone call a Native American a "redskin" (not saying people don't use that word). But, people and media seem to be more hung up with the use of the "N" word (which, in my invalid opinion, is probably more likely to be heard in America). But, I wasn't trying to downplay the significance of either word, just trying to evaluate which one you'd be more likely to hear if you're walking down a street.
I mean you literally said, verbatim, "one has a stronger meaning than the other." I'm not sure what difference it makes which one you're "more likely to hear" -- you're also more likely to see a black person when you're walking down the street, which probably is the single biggest reason you're more likely to hear an anti-black slur. That doesn't mean it's acceptable to name a sports team after a racial slur.
phuqueue wrote: buddies petitioned Quiznos to change the name of their favorite sandwich to "the Congressman," that would be tantamount to an act of the government itself?
Let's get 10 random DC area residents and have them petition Quiznos to create a sandwich called, "the Congressman" and see how much news it makes. Then, let's get 10 members of government do the same thing and see the results. My guess is government workers who most likely used tax-payers resources to form their letterhead would be the bigger story.
phuqueue wrote:I mean you literally said, verbatim, "one has a stronger meaning than the other."
Right...in today's society, that is. You can go to any random group of people and yell the "N" word and yell, "Redskins" and see which one gets a bigger response. But the meaning of the words within the groups of people they're intended for are probably about the same.
phuqueue wrote: That doesn't mean it's acceptable to name a sports team after a racial slur.
phuqueue wrote: buddies petitioned Quiznos to change the name of their favorite sandwich to "the Congressman," that would be tantamount to an act of the government itself?
Let's get 10 random DC area residents and have them petition Quiznos to create a sandwich called, "the Congressman" and see how much news it makes. Then, let's get 10 members of government do the same thing and see the results. My guess is government workers who most likely used tax-payers resources to form their letterhead would be the bigger story.
Sure the Congressmen are more newsworthy than ten random DC residents, but if it were ten movie stars, or ten football players (or even ten athletes from another sport), or ten otherwise famous people, it would also be newsworthy.
AllThingsKC wrote:
Right...in today's society, that is. You can go to any random group of people and yell the "N" word and yell, "Redskins" and see which one gets a bigger response. But the meaning of the words within the groups of people they're intended for are probably about the same.
So I don't understand why you don't think the Redskins name should be abandoned.
The NFL is changing the Pro-Bowl. Some of the changes are:
1. Eliminating the AFC-NFC format in favor of captains picking 43 players per team regardless of conference.
2. Kickoffs will be eliminated from the game.
3. The ball will be placed at the 25-yard line at the start of the game and after scoring plays.
4. Since there will be no kickoffs, the kick-return specialist Pro Bowl roster spot will be replaced with an additional defensive back spot.
5. The two leading vote-getters will be named captains and will be assisted by Hall of Famers Jerry Rice and Deion Sanders and two NFL.com fantasy football champions in picking the two teams.
6. A two-minute warning will be added to the first and third quarters in addition to the traditional rule in the second and fourth quarters.
7. Possession also will change hands after each quarter.
8. Changes will be made to the game clock during the two-minute warning, with the clock stopping if the offense doesn't gain at least 1 yard, in order to encourage offenses to try to gain yardage at the end of each quarter.
The NFL is taking a crappy game and making it even crappier.
Is anyone interested in doing an NFL Pick 'em game? We could pick the straight-up winner, rather than against the spread since NFL games are nearly impossible to predict.
Wee 1:
Baltimore @ Denver
Atlanta @ New Orleans
Oakland @ Indianapolis
Miami @ Cleveland
Minnesota @ Detroit
New England @ Buffalo
Tampa Bay @ New York Jets
Kansas City @ Jacksonville
Seattle @ Carolina
Cincinnati @ Chicago
Tennessee @ Pittsburgh
Green Bay @ San Francisco
Arizona @ St. Louis
New York Giants @ Dallas
Philadelphia @ Washington
Houston @ San Diego
So, if anyone is interested and cares to join me, here are my straight-up picks:
Baltimore @ Denver Atlanta @ New Orleans
Oakland @ Indianapolis
Miami @ Cleveland
Minnesota @ Detroit New England @ Buffalo Tampa Bay @ New York Jets Kansas City @ Jacksonville Seattle @ Carolina
Cincinnati @ Chicago
Tennessee @ Pittsburgh
Green Bay @ San Francisco
Arizona @ St. Louis New York Giants @ Dallas
Philadelphia @ Washington Houston @ San Diego
Denver over Baltimore - correct
Atlanta over New Orleans - wrong
Indianapolis over Oakland - correct
Miami over Cleveland - correct
Detroit over Minnesota - wrong
New England over Buffalo - correct (but barely, jeez!)
New York Jets over Tampa Bay - correct (on a freaking MIRACLE in the final seconds)
Kansas City over Jacksonville - correct
Seattle over Carolina - correct
Cincinnati over Chicago - wrong
Pittsburgh over Tennessee - wrong
Green Bay over San Francisco - wrong
Arizona and St. Louis both lose (ok, Arizona wins) - wrong
New York Giants over Dallas
Washington over Philly
Houston over San Diego
Baltimore @ Denver Atlanta @ New Orleans
Oakland @ Indianapolis
Miami @ Cleveland
Minnesota @ Detroit New England @ Buffalo Tampa Bay @ New York Jets Kansas City @ Jacksonville
Seattle @ Carolina Cincinnati @ Chicago
Tennessee @ Pittsburgh
Green Bay @ San Francisco
Arizona @ St. Louis New York Giants @ Dallas
Philadelphia @ Washington Houston @ San Diego
