“False simplistic statements from a simple person.”
Dan1963 on Jul 20, 2014 at 15:57:18
“You are correct I am a simple person. But, every word I said is a fact. Politicians are supposed to do the will of the people that voted for them. They work for us. they tend to forget that. The current president is certainly no exception”
“What exactly does "come through for you" mean? That sounds like the sentiment of a lazy, gimmee-gimmee-gimmee person who is afraid of hard work. You do know that change via the political process is now exactly easy, right? Think about your own stupid statements.”
Dan1963 on Jul 17, 2014 at 19:58:44
“What it means is does not live up to campaign promises. If you think he is one thing and turns out to be something else. According to you you should stick with him anyway, That is dumb.
Lazy I am not. Naive you may be. And Gimme is very far from the truth. In fact, let me be is more the truth. Most of Obama voters are what can government do for me types.”
“No, I'm not a lawyer. What I was most responding to was this from your post, "Only those who are offended get to decide offense in this new world we now live in." I think that's a simple solution, but incomplete. To make the case a bit more clear-cut, you don't need to be black to be offended by the use of the N-word in your presence, right?
Because there is some supposed "gray area" regarding this particular term, it's been easier to brush aside and hedge one's bets, but the I think the basic argument still stands. Either none of us but Native Americans have a dog in this fight, or all of us do.
“If you had a sense of empathy you might be able to contribute to a constructive debate regarding this topic instead of surrendering to such an overly-simplistic stance. We don't have to get hysterical over it, but it's worth considering.”
Earl King on May 27, 2014 at 11:09:03
“Empathy? what an odd choice of terms about a post to let the American Indians decide if Redskins should remain or go. My empathy is to the American Indian. As I have stated some are not at all bothered by the term. I am not bothered by the term cracker or redneck as I don't see myself as either one. Out of empathy we don't use the Q word around gays. White people don;t use the N word...but blacks do. Do I think we are hypersensitive these days? Yes.....Are there hysterical people over this issue...Im sure but its not me. I just suggested a practical way to handle this and frankly its really not for whites to decide....If you think that is a simplistic approach you must be a lawyer. You all are always making things complicated.”
“I dunno, but I'm looking at taking care of the life we already have as a more noble goal. Certainly not as spectacular, I will admit, but I think that descriptors such as "significant and important" are highly subjective.”
“Just because he's still angry about the whole "Wait, I'm only allowed to have ONE wife?" rule doesn't mean he should take it out on the rest of us.
Does he even know what anarchy is? Why aren't they ever required to explain the exact chain of events that will supposedly be put in motion by gay marriage? I'm getting rather tired of the endless free passes we give those in power.”
“I mean, seriously, when has the free market ever not worked according to theory? As Ayn Rand perfectly (over) explained (many, many times...in the same books): if we look after the profits, the profits will look out for the people. What could go wrong?”
North West Pundit on May 28, 2014 at 00:06:48
“The people are the corporations per the Supremes.”
baby bird on May 23, 2014 at 09:11:29
“As someone who self-describes as a "little-L libertarian" (and questioning even that lately) because I think the principles of liberty are a great thing while actual libertarians are often moronic ideologues, don't even get me started on that hair-brained psychopathic hack's philosophies and writing!
I watched an interview with her from the 1950s before she was very well known and before libertarianism even existed, and she had utterly refuted her own position in less than the first 5 minutes. Frightening that so many years on, she still has so many ill-informed, devoted acolytes. She should be left in the fiction aisle where her ideas belong.”
Dr Scott on May 21, 2014 at 23:19:43
“I know! Right? So "logical" - if by "logical" you mean completely not logical.”
“Blaming "the government" is pretty much the easiest, least scrutinized cop-out used across the entire social & financial strata of America. Perhaps it's time we the public stop accepting the excuse (and that includes when you hear some personal whiny anecdote, not just in the press). I'm starting to think that it should not be a case of Big Government v No Government, but of Good Government v Bad Government.”
“It's right next to that very specific part about AK-47s”
Thinkster on May 14, 2014 at 00:53:53
“Interesting how right wingers interpret the Constitution loosely when it's about something they want, but suddenly it's the literal wording that becomes important when it's something they don't want. Based on this foolish discussing we're having, they should turn in all their guns, since none of these people constitute a "well regulated militia". Yet, I'm willing to allow Americans to own (appropriate, licensed) guns, but Americans can't marry whom they wish. Odd - in the extreme.”
“Of course someone with a US flag for their avatar wouldn't have a clue how the US constitution actually works and whether or not it applies in this case. Ask around. He is being sanctioned by his employer, not the US government.”
“He is free to say whatever he likes, but he might find employment rather tricky. Let's not make this a constitutional case when it clearly is not.”
Charles A Marshall on May 12, 2014 at 16:04:22
“Constitutional? Freedom of speech?”
The Right on May 12, 2014 at 08:54:13
“It most certainly is a "constitutional case". It is a man being condemned because of saying ONE WORD. Will you explain why his RIGHT to speak is being used against him? Or maybe explain why it isn't a "constitutional case". Instead of just saying it isn't. Do you think he has the right to sue the organization for limiting his personal speech on his personal tweet?”
revelationmaster on May 12, 2014 at 05:31:04
“The he has a rightful lawful.”
rockydog1 on May 12, 2014 at 01:51:13
“Your employer has every right to determine if your actions and words will reflect badly on the company. If the boss thinks you would be a problem then the boss was a right to can your little tuna behind.”
Vince Foster on May 12, 2014 at 01:44:55
“I seriously doubt he will find employment "tricky" and he shouldn't. Thinking homosexuality is horrible is his personal opinion and may be based on his religious beliefs. Even if it isn't then so what ? He hasn't tried to kick him out of the league or prevent him from playing”
Mondo Fruto on May 12, 2014 at 00:21:14
“He is being punished for exercising his constitutional rights which makes it a constitutional case.”
jkpalmdaleca on May 11, 2014 at 23:16:28
“There is NOTHING he said that could cost him his job and if he does he can sue and would win because the word Horrible means nothing. I saw plenty of people say Horrible about several of the draft picks.”
Sam Prilovic on May 11, 2014 at 08:40:51
“In recent years, the new conservative interpretation of the First Amendment seems to be "no one is allowed to react negatively to my opinions, no matter how much I have insulted or debased them personally, and I have the right to live a consequence-free existence while spouting off with hateful crap whenever and however I feel like it."”
drbopperthp on May 11, 2014 at 08:12:01
“Uhh - wrong. It is a constitutional case. It's a clear-eyed example of the real world limitations on the notion of "freedom of speech". Talk all you want, but threaten the sanctity of the Almighty Dollar and the pursuit (of happiness) thereof, and you're going to be dealt with by the powers that be.”
“1) Name calling/sarcasm: awesome move. You really articulated your point well with that one.
2) So is Tylenol, genius. You likely ingest dozens of types of legal drugs each year, yet only fall for the fear-mongering over the ones that Nancy Reagan told you to. Way to think for yourself, genius.”