Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
More on the National Tragedy of the Name Redskins: By George Will
Comments
-
Washington post and George Will is your source?
-
Amanda's last name offends horses of color.
-
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.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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. -
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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. -
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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 biblical.dnc said:
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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. ?.
-
I would not agree that it transcends what we think. But something hurting your feelings doesn't make it wrong.dnc said:
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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. ?. -
Please to be using the politically correct term "wizards" rather than 'bullets' in future rants.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
Phil Chenier and Archie Clark weep.
-
So Willingham didn't have enough Wizards?PurpleThrobber said:
Please to be using the politically correct term "wizards" rather than 'bullets' in future rants.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
Phil Chenier and Archie Clark weep. -
Some of you really need to find out where your dick went. Good Christ.
-
The use of bullets in that sentence was 100% intentional. You get an awesome for picking up on that.PurpleThrobber said:
Please to be using the politically correct term "wizards" rather than 'bullets' in future rants.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
Phil Chenier and Archie Clark weep.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rzU2iJ9qfXg -
I fucking hate when I start threads that hurt my own brain.
-
dnc said:
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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. ?.
I'm waiting for apag to provide what the definition of is...is. -
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.dnc said:
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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. ?.
-
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.sarktastic said:
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.dnc said:
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.allpurpleallgold said:
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.PurpleJ said:
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?allpurpleallgold said:
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%.PurpleJ said:
I'm offended by the name Seahawks (some hawks are endangered) and the 12th Man is sexist.allpurpleallgold said:It doesn't matter how many people are offended by it. That's what you idiots are missing.
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.
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. ?.
I know the answer for Damone though.
