Orlando Magic

[jack]

2 hours ago, HankStrong said:

Is anyone other than the DeVos family excited that the DeVos family owns the team?  I doubt it, but the team itself is a team with a shot in the very near future.

May I point to the Washington football team (I will not call them the commanders) and the Phoenix Suns (which are being sold) as worse owners. For general incompetence, the Dolan's in NYC are my number one disgrace. Not criminal or anything like that, they just stink. 

[spenser1058]

The Magic  fall to the Lakers at home tonight; they’re now 13-22

[HankStrong]

15 hours ago, jack said:

May I point to the Washington football team (I will not call them the commanders) and the Phoenix Suns (which are being sold) as worse owners. For general incompetence, the Dolan's in NYC are my number one disgrace. Not criminal or anything like that, they just stink. 

You won't call them by their name?  That's weird.

I agree that Sarver and Snyder are worse.  Their behavior has been incredibly bad.  Accusations of racism, bigotry, unfair hiring/firing practices, hostile work environments, financial crimes, spying on changing cheerleaders, and the list continues long beyond those things.

Beyond the entire MLM thing (which is sadly just a gray area to the government) our local owners don't *seem* on that same level.  That's not what I was saying, however.  I was saying that the general level of satisfaction as owners is insanely low in this town.  In fact, I've never heard or read anything saying "YAY! We love them!" because it's always been my experience that it's quite the opposite.

[jack]

6 hours ago, HankStrong said:

You won't call them by their name?  That's weird.

I agree that Sarver and Snyder are worse.  Their behavior has been incredibly bad.  Accusations of racism, bigotry, unfair hiring/firing practices, hostile work environments, financial crimes, spying on changing cheerleaders, and the list continues long beyond those things.

Beyond the entire MLM thing (which is sadly just a gray area to the government) our local owners don't *seem* on that same level.  That's not what I was saying, however.  I was saying that the general level of satisfaction as owners is insanely low in this town.  In fact, I've never heard or read anything saying "YAY! We love them!" because it's always been my experience that it's quite the opposite.

I think their name still stinks. They are near our nations capital and could not come up with a better name? 

Losing will do that. Plus, the family mainly is in Michigan where they are more involved in philanthropy. 

[spenser1058]

The Pistons showed the Magic how it’s done tonight. Orlando falls to 13-23.

[prahaboheme]

15 hours ago, jack said:

I think their name still stinks. They are near our nations capital and could not come up with a better name? 

Losing will do that. Plus, the family mainly is in Michigan where they are more involved in philanthropy. 

The Commanders are “near” DC only in physical distance. It is possibly the most unpopular NFL team in the league for all the reasons mentioned. 

Snyders days seem to be numbered at this point. And with Bezos eyeing the team as well as building the Amazon HQ in Arlington, don’t be too surprised if the Commanders end up west of the Potomac in a few years.

Washington has made it clear that there will be no return for the team inside the district.

[spenser1058]

It’s worth noting both the Washington and Phoenix teams are likely to have or recently have had an ownership change.

Meanwhile, the DeVos family goes blithely on, fielding mediocre or worse teams for well over a decade, while letting one of the most high visibility sites downtown lay fallow for years (while destroying a needed parking garage).

Not to mention the sort of quasi-pyramid scheme that got Bernie Madoff in trouble (more recently, FTX went down that rabbit hole) was perfected years ago by the DeVos family (the courts in several states have kept them from operating). This is also one of the most homophobic families in America who have done their damndest to destroy public education.

The company name we have on our arena is so disgraced that when they try to recruit you, it’s part of the firm’s SOP not to tell you who they are if at all possible.

I’ll be extraordinarily happy when they finally go back to Ada where they belong as will a significant chunk of Orlando’s citizens.
 

Edited December 29, 2022 by spenser1058

[jack]

2 hours ago, prahaboheme said:

The Commanders are “near” DC only in physical distance. It is possibly the most unpopular NFL team in the league for all the reasons mentioned. 

Snyders days seem to be numbered at this point. And with Bezos eyeing the team as well as building the Amazon HQ in Arlington, don’t be too surprised if the Commanders end up west of the Potomac in a few years.

Washington has made it clear that there will be no return for the team inside the district.

I hope it goes back within the District but it is a long shot unless the new owner has the necessary connections. 

2 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

It’s worth noting both the Washington and Phoenix teams are likely to have or recently have had an ownership change.

Meanwhile, the DeVos family goes blithely on, fielding mediocre or worse teams for well over a decade, while letting one of the most high visibility sites downtown lay fallow for years (while destroying a needed parking garage).

Not to mention the sort of quasi-pyramid scheme that got Bernie Madoff in trouble (more recently, FTX went down that rabbit hole) was perfected years ago by the DeVos family (the courts in several states have kept them from operating). This is also one of the most homophobic families in America who have done their damndest to destroy public education.

The company name we have on our arena is so disgraced that when they try to recruit you, it’s part of the firm’s SOP not to tell you who they are if at all possible.

I’ll be extraordinarily happy when they finally go back to Ada where they belong as will a significant chunk of Orlando’s citizens.
 

But both of those teams owners are guilty of workplace violations. The Magic just don't win games. 

[HankStrong]

3 hours ago, jack said:

The Magic just don't win games. 

I don't think the general population thinks this is true.

[spenser1058]

2 hours ago, HankStrong said:

I don't think the general population thinks this is true.

If that’s true, that suggests they really don’t care enough about the team to follow it. If that’s the case, why are we subsidizing billionaires again, especially incompetent ones whose values are wildly out of sync with one of the nation’s bluest counties?

[HankStrong]

Please don't turn this into yet another politics thread.

[jrs2]

On 12/27/2022 at 5:21 PM, jack said:

May I point to the Washington football team (I will not call them the commanders) and the Phoenix Suns (which are being sold) as worse owners. For general incompetence, the Dolan's in NYC are my number one disgrace. Not criminal or anything like that, they just stink. 

Well...do you want my opinion?  I hope so b/c it's coming:

Hank claims he doesn't want to turn this into a politics thread, yet feigns confusion as to why someone (you) doesn't want to call the Redskins the Commanders.  Seriously?  How many reasons can there possibly be?  Only two, bad logo and politics, and those are both very big and likely reasons.  So how is that possibly "weird?" It should be expected.  I don't know; maybe it's weird when we're used to just going with the flow without questioning its path.

So, I have to side with @spenser1058on his weaving in of a political angle on his prior comment on a team because of this reality (even though I don't necessarily agree with it).  But, politics happens in EVERYTHING especially sports and people here, like @HankStrongsee the white elephant in the room, like in this case, and choose to ignore it,  yet its effects are seen in the product on the field (or arena) that they are themselves talking about.   

Hank seems to be ok with the name change, which is fine; but I'm not ok with it- not by a longshot.   

[prahaboheme]

25 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

Well...do you want my opinion?  I hope so b/c it's coming:

Hank claims he doesn't want to turn this into a politics thread, yet feigns confusion as to why someone (you) doesn't want to call the Redskins the Commanders.  Seriously?  How many reasons can there possibly be?  Only two, bad logo and politics, and those are both very big and likely reasons.  So how is that possibly "weird?" It should be expected.  I don't know; maybe it's weird when we're used to just going with the flow without questioning its path.

So, I have to side with @spenser1058on his weaving in of a political angle on his prior comment on a team because of this reality (even though I don't necessarily agree with it).  But, politics happens in EVERYTHING especially sports and people here, like @HankStrongsee the white elephant in the room, like in this case, and choose to ignore it,  yet its effects are seen in the product on the field (or arena) that they are themselves talking about.   

Hank seems to be ok with the name change, which is fine; but I'm not ok with it- not by a longshot.   

You WANT the name change to be about politics and a lot of people see it completely differently. It can be seen as a course re-correction of what is now understood to be a derogatory term. Not everything needs to be a politically divisive issue.

[HankStrong]

1 hour ago, jrs2 said:

Well...do you want my opinion?  I hope so b/c it's coming:

Hank claims he doesn't want to turn this into a politics thread, yet feigns confusion as to why someone (you) doesn't want to call the Redskins the Commanders.  Seriously?  How many reasons can there possibly be?  Only two, bad logo and politics, and those are both very big and likely reasons.  So how is that possibly "weird?" It should be expected.  I don't know; maybe it's weird when we're used to just going with the flow without questioning its path.

So, I have to side with @spenser1058on his weaving in of a political angle on his prior comment on a team because of this reality (even though I don't necessarily agree with it).  But, politics happens in EVERYTHING especially sports and people here, like @HankStrongsee the white elephant in the room, like in this case, and choose to ignore it,  yet its effects are seen in the product on the field (or arena) that they are themselves talking about.   

Hank seems to be ok with the name change, which is fine; but I'm not ok with it- not by a longshot.   

Simply put, using derogatory terms isn't a political issue.  It's certainly attached to people waving their politics on both sides, but not using derogatory terms isn't a political issues, it's simply about treating others with respect.

I'm not a fan of changing team names just because they reference a culture.  I will admit that the Cleveland Indians name doesn't contain anything derogatory, although it does use the outdated term Indian which has been supplanted by Native American.  I get the change.  The KC Chiefs have kept the name, but are attempting to scrub some of the more iffy pieces of it out of their culture.  The Braves have chosen a similar path, although they are still looking to smooth out some aspects of it.  However, the former name of the Washington team (no matter how long it was used or how much it was said) contained a slang term that since its initial use was a derogatory term.  It never meant "great, cool, upstanding Native American person who I love so much!"  It was always meant as a cut-down, and an insult.  It's all-together a different type of term than "brave" or "chief" or "scout" or whatever.

 

We've grown as people.  At least some of us.  That's not political, it's growing. 

[jack]

2 hours ago, jrs2 said:

Well...do you want my opinion?  I hope so b/c it's coming:

Hank claims he doesn't want to turn this into a politics thread, yet feigns confusion as to why someone (you) doesn't want to call the Redskins the Commanders.  Seriously?  How many reasons can there possibly be?  Only two, bad logo and politics, and those are both very big and likely reasons.  So how is that possibly "weird?" It should be expected.  I don't know; maybe it's weird when we're used to just going with the flow without questioning its path.

So, I have to side with @spenser1058on his weaving in of a political angle on his prior comment on a team because of this reality (even though I don't necessarily agree with it).  But, politics happens in EVERYTHING especially sports and people here, like @HankStrongsee the white elephant in the room, like in this case, and choose to ignore it,  yet its effects are seen in the product on the field (or arena) that they are themselves talking about.   

Hank seems to be ok with the name change, which is fine; but I'm not ok with it- not by a longshot.   

Logo aside, it's a bit of politics and just a bad rebranding. It makes it worse when the franchise has been a hot dumpster fire since Snyder took it over. The fans of the team I know are okay with changing the name, but they hate Snyder so it makes the name change worse. If they were winning, they would not care as much. 

I think it is a silly name. I liked them called the Washington Football team better (WFT!). They should have stuck with it and put GW's face on the helmet. 

2 minutes ago, HankStrong said:

Simply put, using derogatory terms isn't a political issue.  It's certainly attached to people waving their politics on both sides, but not using derogatory terms isn't a political issues, it's simply about treating others with respect.

I'm not a fan of changing team names just because they reference a culture.  I will admit that the Cleveland Indians name doesn't contain anything derogatory, although it does use the outdated term Indian which has been supplanted by Native American.  I get the change.  The KC Chiefs have kept the name, but are attempting to scrub some of the more iffy pieces of it out of their culture.  The Braves have chosen a similar path, although they are still looking to smooth out some aspects of it.  However, the former name of the Washington team (no matter how long it was used or how much it was said) contained a slang term that since its initial use was a derogatory term.  It never meant "great, cool, upstanding Native American person who I love so much!"  It was always meant as a cut-down, and an insult.  It's all-together a different type of term than "brave" or "chief" or "scout" or whatever.

 

We've grown as people.  At least some of us.  That's not political, it's growing. 

I should clarify that when I say politics, I meant it as more of people don't want change for a team that has so much history. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by jack

[HankStrong]

I will strongly agree that Commanders is a dumb name for a team.  I will also agree that WFT had a nice, if wholly generic, ring to it.

Some of the other options seemed to mesh better with the team history, like the Washington Hogs option.  That was already a 30+ year old nickname that meant something to fans.  I believe that Red Hogs was another option.  That works.  I liked the Washington Presidents with GW's face on the helmet.  I get that Commanders is a related term, but it just doesn't mean anything without a picture related to it. 

I understood, but didn't love, the option of the Washington Pigskins as a closely related twist.  They could still be "The Skins" as people called them, but it reference both football as a whole and the Hogs reference from the 80s.

I liked the callback to the USFL as the Washington Federals and even laughed at the Globetrotters reference of the Generals, but that's a bit silly.

I think they chose poorly, but it's still a step up from a derogatory term.  I get that there is a subset of Americans that think because a derogatory term has been used for their entire lifetime (or longer) that it makes it ok.  I also get that there is a subset of Americans who feel that racism is cool because it makes them feel better about themselves and their dreams of an America where they are #1 and everyone else owes them something.

[jrs2]

On 1/4/2023 at 4:06 PM, HankStrong said:

Simply put, using derogatory terms isn't a political issue.  It's certainly attached to people waving their politics on both sides, but not using derogatory terms isn't a political issues, it's simply about treating others with respect.

I'm not a fan of changing team names just because they reference a culture.  I will admit that the Cleveland Indians name doesn't contain anything derogatory, although it does use the outdated term Indian which has been supplanted by Native American.  I get the change.  The KC Chiefs have kept the name, but are attempting to scrub some of the more iffy pieces of it out of their culture.  The Braves have chosen a similar path, although they are still looking to smooth out some aspects of it.  However, the former name of the Washington team (no matter how long it was used or how much it was said) contained a slang term that since its initial use was a derogatory term.  It never meant "great, cool, upstanding Native American person who I love so much!"  It was always meant as a cut-down, and an insult.  It's all-together a different type of term than "brave" or "chief" or "scout" or whatever.

 

We've grown as people.  At least some of us.  That's not political, it's growing. 

well, the former name is The Redskins, or has Biden passed an executive order outlawing its use?  

That being said, I grant you Redskin.  But, now you are distinguishing a nickname with whether it was used in a derogatory way at some point in history as a standard.  You say "it was always."  Are you referring to the 1800's?, because since the inception of The Redskins franchise in the early 1900's, it hasn't been.  So now what?

And did they create that NFL team to slander Native Americans?  No.  They created it to field a champion.  Redskins as they refer to them were fierce, deadly, tough, honorable warriors, hence why they chose that as their mascot. Otherwise they would have called them the lying thieves.  The main difference with FSU is that they chose a specific tribe, as did Illinois.  Washington didn't.  But don't tell me "Redskin" was ever meant to be derogatory to Native Americans as a whole; and not in the 20th Century; the NFL moniker was meant to describe the warriors of those tribes.  Washington didn't choose a "weak, red-skinned female nursing an infant" as their mascot, did they?  No.  Use common sense. 

Washington might should have used Warriors as a mascot name instead and kept the logo.  It is not racist to have a profile of a face with red or brown skin.  If that's the case, then go after Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Apple, and Google for depictions of any complexion for smiley faces or personalized avatars.  And then sue Band-Aid for manufacturing brown band-aids.  What, Black people need band-aids because they cut themselves or have warts and corns?  That's racist.

And what's this ridiculous statement in your other post about a subset of whites ("Americans") thinking of racism as being cool and their dreams  where "they are #1 and everyone else owes them something"?  Owes them something?  Were you talking about whites or another race?   Because if white are the ones you refer to that feel like society owes them, then they should be the ones complaining about racism against them.

And an Indian head-dress is not iffy.

On 1/4/2023 at 2:23 PM, prahaboheme said:

You WANT the name change to be about politics and a lot of people see it completely differently. It can be seen as a course re-correction of what is now understood to be a derogatory term. Not everything needs to be a politically divisive issue.

I don't want what is.  How many Republicans protested The Redskins?  Zero.  How many Liberals did: I don't know, but those that did are Liberals that vote Democrat, so stop playing games.  Political correctness always has been about politics and always will be.

[prahaboheme]

11 hours ago, jrs2 said:

well, the former name is The Redskins, or has Biden passed an executive order outlawing its use?  

That being said, I grant you Redskin.  But, now you are distinguishing a nickname with whether it was used in a derogatory way at some point in history as a standard.  You say "it was always."  Are you referring to the 1800's?, because since the inception of The Redskins franchise in the early 1900's, it hasn't been.  So now what?

And did they create that NFL team to slander Native Americans?  No.  They created it to field a champion.  Redskins as they refer to them were fierce, deadly, tough, honorable warriors, hence why they chose that as their mascot. Otherwise they would have called them the lying thieves.  The main difference with FSU is that they chose a specific tribe, as did Illinois.  Washington didn't.  But don't tell me "Redskin" was ever meant to be derogatory to Native Americans as a whole; and not in the 20th Century; the NFL moniker was meant to describe the warriors of those tribes.  Washington didn't choose a "weak, red-skinned female nursing an infant" as their mascot, did they?  No.  Use common sense. 

Washington might should have used Warriors as a mascot name instead and kept the logo.  It is not racist to have a profile of a face with red or brown skin.  If that's the case, then go after Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Apple, and Google for depictions of any complexion for smiley faces or personalized avatars.  And then sue Band-Aid for manufacturing brown band-aids.  What, Black people need band-aids because they cut themselves or have warts and corns?  That's racist.

And what's this ridiculous statement in your other post about a subset of whites ("Americans") thinking of racism as being cool and their dreams  where "they are #1 and everyone else owes them something"?  Owes them something?  Were you talking about whites or another race?   Because if white are the ones you refer to that feel like society owes them, then they should be the ones complaining about racism against them.

And an Indian head-dress is not iffy.

I don't want what is.  How many Republicans protested The Redskins?  Zero.  How many Liberals did: I don't know, but those that did are Liberals that vote Democrat, so stop playing games.  Political correctness always has been about politics and always will be.

It might serve you to research a topic before posting a passionate and false narrative. The Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes led a decades long  campaign, one that made its way to the Supreme Court, to change the name of the team because it was offensive to them.

Who cares if republicans protested the name or not. I’m not sure how that is relevant. It’s not up to you or me to decide what is offensive or “politically correct” to an entire race or ethnic group that we don’t belong to.

Edited January 7, 2023 by prahaboheme

[HankStrong]

Yeah.  I'm just going to let your special brand of logic stand on its own.  That's just an entire rant of cringe right there, buddy.  Not a good look.

[jrs2]

On 1/7/2023 at 7:28 AM, prahaboheme said:

It might serve you to research a topic before posting a passionate and false narrative. The Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes led a decades long  campaign, one that made its way to the Supreme Court, to change the name of the team because it was offensive to them.

Who cares if republicans protested the name or not. I’m not sure how that is relevant. It’s not up to you or me to decide what is offensive or “politically correct” to an entire race or ethnic group that we don’t belong to.

like every subculture that feels like society owes them something special, those two tribes did not sue in a vacuum.  Besides, if the SCOTUS suit was because of the NFL Redskins of WAS, then why and/or how did St. Johns, Syracuse, Miami OH, FSU, Illinois, and NE Louisiana etc. get caught up in this "offensive" naming drama?  False narrative?  No movement or lawsuit of great national exposure takes place without some sort of financial backing and direction from an outside source.  And it usually has to do with money- Liberal money.  So if @HankStrongdoesn't agree with my special brand of logic, then so be it.  Eyes wide shut, right?  

FSU paid off the Tribe.  They still use Chief Osceola.  And the Tribe doesn't really care.  So what does that say about the Cheyenne and Arapaho?  What makes them so special that a paycheck would satisfy another tribe but not them?  Why would UI discontinue using the headdress in their logo?  Is that offensive?  H.W. Casey has a picture in that headdress.  Same with Nugent; same with Felipe Rose, and many more.  Do they have to stop using that too or ban those albums from being sold on the secondary market?  It's just ridiculous.  Syracuse?  Did Donald J. Trump sue Syracuse b/c of "Orangemen?"  Did the Florida Citrus Growers or Sunkist?

Aren't a bunch of peaceful Greek olive picking philosophers and mathematicians ticked off at Michigan State for using the warring "Spartans" as their mascot?  What about everyone that's Irish vs Notre Dame's "Fightin' Irish"?  Or does nobody care about Greeks and Irish folk because they're considered white?  

What about the "Gator Bait" cheer that's been discontinued by the Liberals at UF b/c they claim that a hundred and fifty years ago "people" would throw Black babies into alligator-laden swamps and would call them gator bait?  Seriously?  Even after Black players protested banning that cheer to the school and media, yet they did it anyway?  Who was behind that BS? It sure as hec wasn't everyday Black folk. It was fringe Liberal troublemakers.  Well, you might as well outlaw lateral tree branches too since Blacks were lynched on them.  Then outlaw the sale of bullwhips and cargo carrier boats and any instrumentality that was used in the acquisition and/or keeping of Black slaves, which included most southern estates from that era in Louisiana, MS, GA, AL, SC, and FLA.  Outlaw cotton too while you're at it.  And you might as well outlaw the use of the name "Germany" because of what they did to the Jews in WWII and how just that name can be considered offensive.  Then outlaw the use of the term Redcoats when depicting the Paul Revere historical tidbit b/c Brits may take offense to that as well.  Oh, wait, they're mostly white too.  

A lot of this is just utterly ridiculous and it just keep going and the apologists here just keep apologizing.  

Forget the NFL; we might as well just outlaw white people while we're at it- but before doing so, let's define who the white people actually are:  are they the whites that came over on The Mayflower?  Does that include whites that lived in the North during the Civil War?  Are they just Southern whites from that era? Are they white immigrants that came over after slavery ended?  Are they all of the above?  And where are these whites from exactly?  Are they French, British, German, Swedish, Russian, Polish, Israeli,  Czech, Turkish?  Are they white Puerto Ricans; white Mexicans; white Brazilians?  Are they white Italians?  White Greeks?  White Spaniards?  White Iraqi's? Who exactly are they?  So until this issue is resolved, maybe the population needs to back off of putting whites on trial just because a few people "feel" offended because somebody told them to.

Yes, this is a rant.  But if you're white and disagree with this, then you should be ashamed of yourself for making excuses for your skin color.  If you're white and vote democrat to atone for your sins of whiteness, I feel sorry for you.  Like I said many times before, Europeans see the BS that goes on in this country, like this stuff, and they laugh at us (you, actually- me partially).   The Chinese already think we're subhuman (second only to the Taiwanese).  So, keep pandering to the Left.

[prahaboheme]

1 hour ago, jrs2 said:

like every subculture that feels like society owes them something special, those two tribes did not sue in a vacuum.  Besides, if the SCOTUS suit was because of the NFL Redskins of WAS, then why and/or how did St. Johns, Syracuse, Miami OH, FSU, Illinois, and NE Louisiana etc. get caught up in this "offensive" naming drama?  False narrative?  No movement or lawsuit of great national exposure takes place without some sort of financial backing and direction from an outside source.  And it usually has to do with money- Liberal money.  So if @HankStrongdoesn't agree with my special brand of logic, then so be it.  Eyes wide shut, right?  

FSU paid off the Tribe.  They still use Chief Osceola.  And the Tribe doesn't really care.  So what does that say about the Cheyenne and Arapaho?  What makes them so special that a paycheck would satisfy another tribe but not them?  Why would UI discontinue using the headdress in their logo?  Is that offensive?  H.W. Casey has a picture in that headdress.  Same with Nugent; same with Felipe Rose, and many more.  Do they have to stop using that too or ban those albums from being sold on the secondary market?  It's just ridiculous.  Syracuse?  Did Donald J. Trump sue Syracuse b/c of "Orangemen?"  Did the Florida Citrus Growers or Sunkist?

Aren't a bunch of peaceful Greek olive picking philosophers and mathematicians ticked off at Michigan State for using the warring "Spartans" as their mascot?  What about everyone that's Irish vs Notre Dame's "Fightin' Irish"?  Or does nobody care about Greeks and Irish folk because they're considered white?  

What about the "Gator Bait" cheer that's been discontinued by the Liberals at UF b/c they claim that a hundred and fifty years ago "people" would throw Black babies into alligator-laden swamps and would call them gator bait?  Seriously?  Even after Black players protested banning that cheer to the school and media, yet they did it anyway?  Who was behind that BS? It sure as hec wasn't everyday Black folk. It was fringe Liberal troublemakers.  Well, you might as well outlaw lateral tree branches too since Blacks were lynched on them.  Then outlaw the sale of bullwhips and cargo carrier boats and any instrumentality that was used in the acquisition and/or keeping of Black slaves, which included most southern estates from that era in Louisiana, MS, GA, AL, SC, and FLA.  Outlaw cotton too while you're at it.  And you might as well outlaw the use of the name "Germany" because of what they did to the Jews in WWII and how just that name can be considered offensive.  Then outlaw the use of the term Redcoats when depicting the Paul Revere historical tidbit b/c Brits may take offense to that as well.  Oh, wait, they're mostly white too.  

A lot of this is just utterly ridiculous and it just keep going and the apologists here just keep apologizing.  

Forget the NFL; we might as well just outlaw white people while we're at it- but before doing so, let's define who the white people actually are:  are they the whites that came over on The Mayflower?  Does that include whites that lived in the North during the Civil War?  Are they just Southern whites from that era? Are they white immigrants that came over after slavery ended?  Are they all of the above?  And where are these whites from exactly?  Are they French, British, German, Swedish, Russian, Polish, Israeli,  Czech, Turkish?  Are they white Puerto Ricans; white Mexicans; white Brazilians?  Are they white Italians?  White Greeks?  White Spaniards?  White Iraqi's? Who exactly are they?  So until this issue is resolved, maybe the population needs to back off of putting whites on trial just because a few people "feel" offended because somebody told them to.

Yes, this is a rant.  But if you're white and disagree with this, then you should be ashamed of yourself for making excuses for your skin color.  If you're white and vote democrat to atone for your sins of whiteness, I feel sorry for you.  Like I said many times before, Europeans see the BS that goes on in this country, like this stuff, and they laugh at us (you, actually- me partially).   The Chinese already think we're subhuman (second only to the Taiwanese).  So, keep pandering to the Left.

What I find interesting about this “rant” and your questions is that you could easily answer all your own pondering thoughts. If logic prevailed. 

[HankStrong]

So.

How about those Magic getting obliterated last night with a team record of threes dropped against them?

[AmIReal]

The Magic are relocating their G League team. It will move from Lakeland to Kissimmee due to I4.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2023/04/magic-to-relocate-rebrand-g-league-affiliate.html

[jrs2]

On 1/9/2023 at 8:02 PM, prahaboheme said:

What I find interesting about this “rant” and your questions is that you could easily answer all your own pondering thoughts. If logic prevailed. 

holy cow...that was a rant.  I don't even remember writing all that...I'm just mad that The Gators suck...

[jgardnerucf]

How bout dem Magicians!!!

Paaak yaaa caaa in Haavaad yaad!!!

Can't wait for Alex to announce building sponsorship announcement upcoming.

 "Oooooooooo, beeee, our guest, be our guest!"

"Oh, boy!"