Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Comments

  • topdawgnctopdawgnc Member Posts: 7,838
    Amanda's last name offends horses of color.
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 37,428 Founders Club

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 37,428 Founders Club

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 37,428 Founders Club

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    So what is relevant is whether the government thinks it's offensive? Thanks for clearing that up for me.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,789

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you're suggesting there is an objective standard for right and wrong that transcends what anyone of us thinks or doesn't think.
  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 37,428 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you're suggesting there is an objective standard for right and wrong that transcends what anyone of us thinks or doesn't think.
    Sounds biblical.
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    dnc said:

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you're suggesting there is an objective standard for right and wrong that transcends what anyone of us thinks or doesn't think.
    I would not agree that it transcends what we think. But something hurting your feelings doesn't make it wrong.
  • topdawgnctopdawgnc Member Posts: 7,838

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you are being a twister.
  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 44,520 Standard Supporter
    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Please to be using the politically correct term "wizards" rather than 'bullets' in future rants.

    Phil Chenier and Archie Clark weep.

  • QuornDawgQuornDawg Member Posts: 1,162
    edited July 2014

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Please to be using the politically correct term "wizards" rather than 'bullets' in future rants.

    Phil Chenier and Archie Clark weep.

    So Willingham didn't have enough Wizards?
  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 37,428 Founders Club

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Please to be using the politically correct term "wizards" rather than 'bullets' in future rants.

    Phil Chenier and Archie Clark weep.

    The use of bullets in that sentence was 100% intentional. You get an awesome for picking up on that.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rzU2iJ9qfXg
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,511 Founders Club
    I fucking hate when I start threads that hurt my own brain.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886
    edited July 2014
    dnc said:

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you're suggesting there is an objective standard for right and wrong that transcends what anyone of us thinks or doesn't think.



    I'm waiting for apag to provide what the definition of is...is.
  • sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    dnc said:

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you're suggesting there is an objective standard for right and wrong that transcends what anyone of us thinks or doesn't think.
    Yes... there is. It's called capitalism. While most here were never alive when it was practiced in the US, it's the concept that consumers of a product determine what is and isn't a viable product by voting with their wallets.

  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771

    dnc said:

    PurpleJ said:

    PurpleJ said:

    It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.

    I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.

    Should they change it now that I am offended?

    God damn...what a bunch of softdick pussies this country has become. Words are like bullets and all that.
    Not a surprise but you've missed the point again. The amount of people offended doesn't matter. Not if it's 100% or 0%.
    Huh? I think I just made a mockery of your poont. I'm calling the patent office right now. The name "Seahawks" will be no more! I'm the only one who is offended, but you said it doesn't matter if I am the only one. They should change it, right?
    I realize that, like most fools, you're so eager to make your own point that you won't stop and think about what the other person has said.

    You are illustrating my point. You are showing exactly why people being offended is irrelevant.

    The number of people that are offended is irrelevant. That means that if one person is offended it is irrelevant. If everyone is offended it is irrelevant. If no one is offended it is irrelevant. How many people are offended has no part in the equation. That does not mean "if even one person is offended we have to change it". Do. You. Understand. That. ?.
    Sounds like you're suggesting there is an objective standard for right and wrong that transcends what anyone of us thinks or doesn't think.
    Yes... there is. It's called capitalism. While most here were never alive when it was practiced in the US, it's the concept that consumers of a product determine what is and isn't a viable product by voting with their wallets.

    Not sure if you don't understand what DNC and I are discussing or if your moral compass is so fucked that you think right and wrong are determined by dollars and cents.

    I know the answer for Damone though.
Sign In or Register to comment.