Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
brah

WashPost Exposes 'Daily Show' Lying Ambush (Merged)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Howsithangin

The idea behind this kind of comedy segment is to find a cause which lacks logic and to give some exponents of that cause enough rope to hang themselves. That's the format of the segment and it's very useful and funny. It's useful because it showcases the cognitive biases which afflict the human mind.

 

It is ridiculous to claim that The Daily Show behaved unethically. Everyone knows that it's a comedy show which looks for absurdities in politics and culture.

 

Reds**** is a term which evokes a long, painful history of denigration and oppression of the First Peoples of America. When people ask you to avoid assigning that term as a name for people or organizations, the respectful, courteous thing to do is to comply. Only an insensitive douche continues to use such a name when it would cost them nothing - absolutely nothing - to use a neutral name unburdened by painful historical baggage.

 

Calling a team the Washington Reds**** is as socially hurtful as calling a team the Nantucket Nig****. It's funny how when one insulting name gains verboten status, insensitive cretins find other ways of indulging their cretinous urges. They retreat to a different cultural battlefield. For some people, that involves mindlessly defending the name Washington Reds****.

 

Just let it go!

 

 

Get a damned hobby, ok? In Denmark. Or Australia. Or Mars. Or wherever your institution is located.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin
Mr. E. Monkey

His profile has a Danish flag. For whatever that's worth

He's claimed to be Australian; he's claimed to be American. Now he claims to reside in Denmark.

 

 

I'd say it's worth absolutely nothing. Less than that, if it was possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

His profile has a Danish flag. For whatever that's worth

 

He's flakey and he's filled with cheese. That sounds about right.

 

What moron PC's the word 'skin'?

 

If we called them the Washington Redepidermis' would that be more soothing to one with his political piles?

Edited by Ticked@TinselTown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quickbeam

Good gawd you're a mindless buffoon.

 

If you had ever had the brains to familiarize yourself with the actual facts, you'd be aware that it was native Americans themselves who first coined and used the term "redskins":

 

"redskin" emerged from French translations of Native American speech in Illinois and Missouri territories in the 18th and 19th centuries. He cites as the earliest example a 1769 set of "talks" or letters from three chiefs of the Piankeshaw to an English officer at Fort de Chartres. The letter from Chief "Mosquito" (French: Maringouin) had the following passage in French: “I shall be pleased to have you come to speak to me yourself if you pity our women and our children; and, if any redskins do you harm, I shall be able to look out for you even at the peril of my life.” Another letter in the set, this from a "Chief Hannanas," contained the following passage: “… You think that I am an orphan; but all the people of these rivers and all the redskins will learn of my death.”

 

The term appeared again in an August 22, 1812 meeting between President Madison and a delegation of chiefs from western tribes. There, Osage chief "No Ears" (Osage: Tetobasi) response to Madison's speech included the statement "I know the manners of the whites and the red skins," while the principle chief of the Wahpekute band of Santee Sioux—French Crow—is recorded to have said "I am a red-skin, but what I say is the truth, and notwithstanding I came a long way I am content, but wish to return from here."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskin_%28slang%29

 

And what's more, every team's name is specifically intended as praise; a compliment; something supposed to denote bravery, strength, integrity, courage, etc. That's why nobody has ever named their team the "cowards" or the "weaklings" or the "morons" etc etc etc. Therefore all native Americans should be proud that a professional sports team has chosen "Redskins" as their name. Same goes for "Indians" and "Warriors" and "Braves" and "Chiefs" and so on.

 

This whole "controversy" over the name "Redskins" is pure BS; silly, contrived nonsense perpetrated the by usual idiots who are always looking for something.....anything.....to be "offended" by. And that's why it's to be expected that somebody like you would so eagerly jump on the BS Bandwagon.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Do you understand that a word's meaning can change over time?

 

The word "ni****" had relatively benign origins as well yet today it is arguably the most offensive word in American English.

 

The word "reds***" has had deeply pejorative connotations for many decades now.

 

If a native American became an astronaut would the headline be this?

 

First Reds*** Astronaut in History

 

Or would they use the term native American?

 

Think about that.

 

People who don't perceive the problem with using the word reds*** as a name for a person or organization lack empathy or intelligence or both.

Edited by Quickbeam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Genghs Shan

I consider the opinion of an actual Native American worth more than someone who is incredibly patronizing towards them, and won't admit where he is really from. When have you ever been to America Shaun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Kucing_belang_jingga_%28orange_mackerel_tabby_cat%29.JPG

 

 

:whistling:

 

Puttytat, right? :eyebrows:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

Do you understand that a word's meaning can change over time?

 

The word "ni****" had relatively benign origins as well yet today it is arguably the most offensive word in American English.

 

The word "reds***" has had deeply pejorative connotations for many decades now.

 

If a native American became an astronaut would the headline be this?

 

First Reds*** Astronaut in History

 

Or would they use the term native American?

 

Think about that.

 

People who don't perceive the problem with using the word reds*** as a name for a person or organization lack empathy or intelligence or both.

 

LOL. The definition of "Redskin" hasn't changed. It doesn't refer to anything "new" or "different" than its original intention when American Indians used it to refer to themselves hundreds of years ago. It still means exactly what it has always meant. And only mindless buffoons have tried to pretend it means anything "worse".

 

And in any case, LOLOLOLOL, considering your posting history around here, any lectures coming from you about "empathy" and/or "intelligence" are hilarious indeed!

 

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lyria

It really doesn't matter for the purposes of this discussion if "Redskin" is an offensive term or not. The discussion is about what the Daily Show did or didn't do when setting up a bit about the Redskins involving the fans of the football team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lyria

Probably not. They most likely had their heads in the clouds over being on TV. A mistake many people make.

 

Exactly. Read it before you sign it, people!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quickbeam

It really doesn't matter for the purposes of this discussion if "Redskin" is an offensive term or not. The discussion is about what the Daily Show did or didn't do when setting up a bit about the Redskins involving the fans of the football team.

 

Did they not know it was a comedy program in which they would look ridiculous? If they are interested enough in The Daily Show to volunteer to appear on it, surely they should already know, or be capable of informing themselves, that The Daily Show has long been critical of the idiots who defend the name of the team. There have been many segments about the issue over the last four months or so.

 

Why would you have sympathy for people whose cause is so lacking in logic that they cannot even explain it to some of the people it hurts?

 

The Daily Show did them a favour. People who defend racist epithets generally reduce the people of a racial group to an abstraction. In this segment a group of insensitive people had to actually look some native Americans in the eye and explain why redskins is not an offensive term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

I agree. And it isn't like the nature of the show isn't well known. You agree to be interviewed, you ought to be able to figure what's going to happen with that interview.

 

That said, if you promise something and don't deliver (and in fact do the opposite) then that's clearly unethical and could land them in some sort of civil action.

 

The controversy lies in the ambush, it was unethical of them to do that. Remember all interviews are done once, with the questions being asked and the interview run through completely. Both sides agree to these questions, and an ambush is when the interviewer slips in questions that were not agreed to. In most cases the right answer is to get up and leave in a dignified manner when that happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

The idea behind this kind of comedy segment is to find a cause which lacks logic and to give some exponents of that cause enough rope to hang themselves. That's the format of the segment and it's very useful and funny. It's useful because it showcases the cognitive biases which afflict the human mind.

 

It is ridiculous to claim that The Daily Show behaved unethically. Everyone knows that it's a comedy show which looks for absurdities in politics and culture.

 

Reds**** is a term which evokes a long, painful history of denigration and oppression of the First Peoples of America. When people ask you to avoid assigning that term as a name for people or organizations, the respectful, courteous thing to do is to comply. Only an insensitive douche continues to use such a name when it would cost them nothing - absolutely nothing - to use a neutral name unburdened by painful historical baggage.

 

Calling a team the Washington Reds**** is as socially hurtful as calling a team the Nantucket Nig****. It's funny how when one insulting name gains verboten status, insensitive cretins find other ways of indulging their cretinous urges. They retreat to a different cultural battlefield. For some people, that involves mindlessly defending the name Washington Reds****.

 

Just let it go!

 

REDSKINS is a term that was chosen by the team decades ago. You just need to let it go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

Do you understand that a word's meaning can change over time?

 

The word "ni****" had relatively benign origins as well yet today it is arguably the most offensive word in American English.

 

The word "reds***" has had deeply pejorative connotations for many decades now.

 

If a native American became an astronaut would the headline be this?

 

First Reds*** Astronaut in History

 

Or would they use the term native American?

 

Think about that.

 

People who don't perceive the problem with using the word reds*** as a name for a person or organization lack empathy or intelligence or both.

 

So did Indian's make the word theirs? Do they walk around like American blacks do using the N-Word? Are they running around calling each other "my Redskin"? Have we gotten to that point yet?

 

And no, words have specific meanings, those meanings are defined in dictionaries. Just because you coin a new racist jargon for cracker does not mean we should ban the use of the word cracker from our lives. To do so is ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

It really doesn't matter for the purposes of this discussion if "Redskin" is an offensive term or not. The discussion is about what the Daily Show did or didn't do when setting up a bit about the Redskins involving the fans of the football team.

 

It seems to me that that is at the heart of the matter.

 

If there wasn't this idiotic controversy about calling the Washington Redskins the Washington Redskins, then why would anyone at the Stewart show give it a second thought or waste their time cooking up this segment?

 

If there wasn't something to be used to contrive a situation where they can mock people, why would they do it?

 

Yeah, I know, making people laugh out of purely creative humor vs. mockery of others is a damned sight harder to do, so taking the easy way out will always be the first choice, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quickbeam

So did Indian's make the word theirs? Do they walk around like American blacks do using the N-Word? Are they running around calling each other "my Redskin"? Have we gotten to that point yet?

 

And no, words have specific meanings, those meanings are defined in dictionaries. Just because you coin a new racist jargon for cracker does not mean we should ban the use of the word cracker from our lives. To do so is ignorant.

 

 

redskin

 

rɛdˌskɪn/

 

noun, Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.

 

1. a North American Indian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13

I don't watch his show on purpose. I have watched it in order to form an opinion on it and that's it. Anyone who thinks he's so witty or smart is fooling themselves. He's a leftist hack who thinks he's smarter than he really is. He's nothing more than a less abrasive Bill Maher.

He had to go off the air while the Hollywood writers were on strike.

 

WHY????

 

He is a genius coming up with all this funny stuff on the fly, right??? Right????

 

He is actually JUST like Bill Maher.....but with bleeps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13

The laughter isn't canned - The show is taped in front of an audience.

 

Jus' sayin'

 

B)

Filmed in New York??

 

If you had to guess, are you more likely to meet more pot smokers or conservatives at a John Stewart taping?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Why would you have sympathy for people whose cause is so lacking in logic that they cannot even explain it to some of the people it hurts?

Thanks for the advice on how to deal with your kind of people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wyn

Do you understand that a word's meaning can change over time?

 

The word "ni****" had relatively benign origins as well yet today it is arguably the most offensive word in American English.

 

The word "reds***" has had deeply pejorative connotations for many decades now.

 

If a native American became an astronaut would the headline be this?

 

First Reds*** Astronaut in History

 

Or would they use the term native American?

 

Think about that.

 

People who don't perceive the problem with using the word reds*** as a name for a person or organization lack empathy or intelligence or both.

 

:rofl:

 

Too funny, thanks for the morning laughs foreigner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13

This is awesome.

 

Tell you what, when Australia tackles it's own racism problems in football (soccer) and other sports, then you can come back and lecture us. Until then, mind your own business.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10082520/Aussie-Rules-football-hit-by-racism-row-as-player-Adam-Goodes-is-called-an-ape.html

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2003/jan/20/cricket

 

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/sydney-fc-lodge-complaint-over-alleged-racist-abuse-of-ali-abbas-20140309-34f4m.html

 

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/whats_the_score/pdf/introduction.pdf

 

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2010/09/13/how-big-problem-racism-australian-sport

 

http://www.foxsports.com.au/breaking-news/racism-common-in-australian-sport/story-e6frf33c-1111114656872?nk=e891f4ec3c56c0640c65400d11b8c705

 

 

As a soccer fan, I have to admit that racism is rampant throughout the world of soccer.

 

Just this weekend, an Italian (originally born in Africa) that plays in England was bombarded with racist tweets from Manchester United fans after making fun of their loss.

 

Every year, in EVERY major European country, there are racist chants aimed at black people or Jewish people. They are done for the specific purpose of demeaning and degrading the target.

 

 

So, forgive me for not being too upset by a team identifying itself after a brave warrior class.

 

Do teams NORMALLY name themselves after groups they wish to DEMEAN.......or do they name themselves after groups which they hold in high regard?

 

Does the baseball team in Atlanta make you think of a bunch of scared men.....are they the Atlanta Scaredy Cats?

 

 

I wonder if native Americans would prefer if the Washington Redksins changed their name to the Washington Alcoholics. I swear that I would take it too the extreme......as much as he legally or financially can. The league probably retains control over what it would be changed too....and the team's board of directors might take too big of a financial hit too allow the change.

 

You want Dan Snyder to change......fine. He is worth over a billion dolllars.....change it to the Washington Alcoholics for a season or two. Make it a public service message towards the recovery & rehab of all of alcoholic (native) Americans. Promise too donate 5% of all net revenue from merchandising apparel towards Alcoholics Anonymous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lyria

It seems to me that that is at the heart of the matter.

 

If there wasn't this idiotic controversy about calling the Washington Redskins the Washington Redskins, then why would anyone at the Stewart show give it a second thought or waste their time cooking up this segment?

 

If there wasn't something to be used to contrive a situation where they can mock people, why would they do it?

 

Yeah, I know, making people laugh out of purely creative humor vs. mockery of others is a damned sight harder to do, so taking the easy way out will always be the first choice, right?

 

That some people are offended by the name is nothing new - this controversy has been going on for ages. It's just now heated up again. The issue is misrepresentation, not the actual naming controversy. The misrepresentation would be the same if they were interviewing Ravens fans that oppose Ray Rice's suspension. The actual issue of the Washington team name is a red herring.

Edited by lyria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Now I finally understand why American leftists are so upset about Washington REDskins. They wanted it called Washington BLUEskins. Well, too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

redskin

 

rɛdˌskɪn/

 

noun, Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.

 

1. a North American Indian.

 

The SLANG Term is disparaging. IT DOES NOT MEAN WE SHOULD BAN THE WORD.

 

nig·gard·lyˈnigərdlē/adjectiveadjective: niggardly
  1. 1. not generous; stingy."serving out the rations with a niggardly hand"synonyms:cheap, mean, miserly, parsimonious, close-fisted, penny-pinching, cheeseparing, grasping, ungenerous, illiberal; Moreinformalstingy, tight, tightfisted "a niggardly person"antonyms:generous

adverbarchaicadverb: niggardly

  1. 1. in a stingy or meager manner.

 

Do we ban the term because you are ignorant? Of course not, we continue using the word where it is appropriate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

That some people are offended by the name is nothing new - this controversy has been going on for ages. It's just now heated up again. The issue is misrepresentation, not the actual naming controversy. The misrepresentation would be the same if they were interviewing Ravens fans that oppose Ray Rice's suspension. The actual issue of the Washington team name is a red herring.

 

Great point, but the question remains WHY are they bringing up this issue again? The answer is the further feminization of the American male. If you can make football unpopular to men we will be watching Cricket next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...