It's sad that you miss the point. it really is. It's even sadder that you think a violent gang proves your point.

Sorry you had to hear those things. Stupid people say shit, they hate, they exclude. But what does it matter where I grew up? I've heard people in my own family throw around slurs for blacks, jews, and hispanics. They're sad people and they should never be taken seriously.

I see where this one is going. White, male, middle income and thus I have no say in this sort of debate. Regardless of the fact that I'm right. But let's not hear that because I need to be outraged about something. Don't you dare take away my reason to be outraged.

Why the fuck would I? Redskin means a football player to me. You have your self righteousness, I'll have mine.

I respect that. I just have a different view on it. I don't feel that the name was used in such a way. It comes from a different era. One that was attempting to romanticize the events of the 19th century. But my whole point is that we give power to names and we can change how we perceive words. It may be too…

I should ask a reservation gang what they think of Redskins? Kind of like how I should go to the Crips to get a good lesson on the philosophy of the N word?

If you believe the word is bad and you want it to remain bad, then no use of it no matter how big or how small should be tolerated. It's hypocrisy otherwise. Besides, my use of "low hanging fruit" should have indicated that I know why they're focusing on the Redskins. It's all in the money son!

Wait wait, how does it end?!

Thank! :D

This is getting old. All this has ever been is a bunch of journalists (white journalists mostly) who are trying to make a name for themselves as the one who brought down the Redskins and made them change their name. It's the low hanging fruit of legitimacy. If this were a legitimate movement by the Native American…

Force play.

After watching a bunch of games and how the umps are handling (and blowing) obvious reversal calls, I'm convinced that they are colluding to undermine the system. I know this seems like conspiracy junk. But out of all the sports referee/umpire groups, who are the ones with the biggest egos? Baseball umps. They all…

That's your opinion. Plenty of people reach out to touch celebrities. They want signatures and high fives and such. Why is a pat on the back any worse? Drop your faux outrage.

I said commoners as a shot at some the view that some players (and fans) of "how dare a fan call them out or god forbid touch them". And this idea that he shouldn't touch him because he was throwing the ball is BS. He wasn't interfering with a play in progress.

No one was on base. And if they don't want to get touch by the "commoners" then maybe they should move the seats back.

Two words....Blood Sport. This shit needs to go away.....period.

Of course people misconstrue the point. But I guess we all have to carry some false sense of outrage about something no? Words don't have inherent power. It is given to them by us. This means a words meaning can change, a negative slur can become a word word of pride I'm sorry you don't understand this.

Give it a rest. The only people who are outraged are those in the media. This word hasn't been a racist term in close to a hundred years. It was forgotten and it died as a hurtful word and was replaced by something far more innocuous. But now all of you so called journalists are once again giving it power as a…

Being painted as a villain is the cost mixing business and sports. You can't discount the fans feelings just because a player wants to exercise his "capitalistic right" to find out how much money he can get on the open market. If he wants to make a ton of money and not be vilified then he should go into the…

Ethically? HAH!! That's a great lesson for young girls. "Hey little ladies! If your goal is to help out all the other little ladies achieve their engineering dreams, it's A-OK to steal some intellectual property to attain your financial goals". So Stealing is OK, being a meany isn't.