Skip to content

Indians To Stop Using Chief Wahoo Logo In Their Uniforms in 2019

The Tribe Board
83 12 3.0k 1
  • @nickers said:

    He needs his care bear...

    Lol Shmuck SJWs and Shmuck safe spaces.

    Long live Trump. Long live western civilization.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #63

    @lionofbuddha said:

    Lol Shmuck SJWs and Shmuck safe spaces.

    Long live Trump. Long live western civilization.

    Those last two sentences are oxymoronic.

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    Lol Shmuck SJWs and Shmuck safe spaces.

    Long live Trump. Long live western civilization.

    Those last two sentences are oxymoronic.

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by
    #64

    @the-gipper said:

    Those last two sentences are oxymoronic.

    How so?

  • @the-gipper said:

    Those last two sentences are oxymoronic.

    How so?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #65

    @lionofbuddha said:

    How so?

    Trump, and civilized. You figure it out.

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    How so?

    Trump, and civilized. You figure it out.

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by LionOfBuddha
    #66

    @the-gipper said:

    Trump, and civilized. You figure it out.

    ?? Your answer does nothing to prove your point. Do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

  • @the-gipper said:

    Trump, and civilized. You figure it out.

    ?? Your answer does nothing to prove your point. Do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #67

    @lionofbuddha said:

    ?? Your answer does nothing to prove your point. Do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

    Jesus.  Seriously?

  • @stillmotion said:

    I don't have as much as a problem of getting "rid of the wahoo logo" as I do "how we got rid of the wahoo logo".

    Dolan did it ONLY because his boss (the comissioner) said he'd give us the allstar game.

    And the problem is, is that when they see they can change things, they will constantly want more until you don't even have a right to free speech.

    First they change team names, then columbus day, then you can't wear any halloween costume, you can't even be a bear for halloween because that's offensive to bears. You have to call everyone by their gender pronouns. Just because someone is offended doesn't give them the right to tell you how to act or what to do. I understand how they feel, and if the owner LEGIT wanted to do it, then why did he do it after the commissioner promised him the allstar game. Because he's a sellout and a pussy. 

    It’s an interesting argument, but here’s where the discrepancy is. Getting rid of Chief Wahoo does not equate to getting rid of free speech. 

    You or I can still buy a Chief Wahoo hat and wear it. Taking away free speech would be the government telling you you CANT wear a Chief Wahoo hat. No one is saying that.

    You still have the right to express yourself and purchase and wear Chief Wahoo, even to the games.

    On a side note: 

    How is the Cleveland Indians any different than the Cleveland Blacks?

    W wargograw wrote on last edited by
    #68

    @lionofbuddha said:

    It’s an interesting argument, but here’s where the discrepancy is. Getting rid of Chief Wahoo does not equate to getting rid of free speech. 

    You or I can still buy a Chief Wahoo hat and wear it. Taking away free speech would be the government telling you you CANT wear a Chief Wahoo hat. No one is saying that.

    You still have the right to express yourself and purchase and wear Chief Wahoo, even to the games.

    On a side note: 

    How is the Cleveland Indians any different than the Cleveland Blacks?

    Did you really just ask that question and you're still going to claim you're not a PC guy? Okie dokie. 

    Also, I see you've now moved on to "this isn't a free speech violation" (something no one on this thread IIRC has argued anyway). Seriously, pick one and stick with it.

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    It’s an interesting argument, but here’s where the discrepancy is. Getting rid of Chief Wahoo does not equate to getting rid of free speech. 

    You or I can still buy a Chief Wahoo hat and wear it. Taking away free speech would be the government telling you you CANT wear a Chief Wahoo hat. No one is saying that.

    You still have the right to express yourself and purchase and wear Chief Wahoo, even to the games.

    On a side note: 

    How is the Cleveland Indians any different than the Cleveland Blacks?

    Did you really just ask that question and you're still going to claim you're not a PC guy? Okie dokie. 

    Also, I see you've now moved on to "this isn't a free speech violation" (something no one on this thread IIRC has argued anyway). Seriously, pick one and stick with it.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #69

    @wargograw said:

    Did you really just ask that question and you're still going to claim you're not a PC guy? Okie dokie.:

    How is the Cleveland Indians any different than the Cleveland Blacks?

    Also, I see you've now moved on to "this isn't a free speech violation" (something no one on this thread IIRC has argued anyway). Seriously, pick one and stick with it.

    FYI....the Cleveland Browns ARE essentially the Cleveland "Blacks" or Cleveland Negroes if you want.....by one theory.  That theory being that the Browns are named after Joe Louis....the Brown (as in brown skin) Bomber.  Now....this theory's prime promotor was Paul Brown.....because he wanted to pretend the team was not named after him....so he came up with the Joe Louis thing.  My only question, Paul, is if you wanted to name the team after Joe Louis, and not yourself...then why did you not name them the Bombers?  Instead going for the Browns?   The Bombers may have been a popular nickname...considering we just came out of WWII.

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    It’s an interesting argument, but here’s where the discrepancy is. Getting rid of Chief Wahoo does not equate to getting rid of free speech. 

    You or I can still buy a Chief Wahoo hat and wear it. Taking away free speech would be the government telling you you CANT wear a Chief Wahoo hat. No one is saying that.

    You still have the right to express yourself and purchase and wear Chief Wahoo, even to the games.

    On a side note: 

    How is the Cleveland Indians any different than the Cleveland Blacks?

    Did you really just ask that question and you're still going to claim you're not a PC guy? Okie dokie. 

    Also, I see you've now moved on to "this isn't a free speech violation" (something no one on this thread IIRC has argued anyway). Seriously, pick one and stick with it.

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by
    #70

    @wargograw said:

    Did you really just ask that question and you're still going to claim you're not a PC guy? Okie dokie. 

    Also, I see you've now moved on to "this isn't a free speech violation" (something no one on this thread IIRC has argued anyway). Seriously, pick one and stick with it.

    Dude, the guy before me literally said it’s a free speech violation. Lol, do you even read?

    No matter what I say, you’re going to twist it. At the end of the day, you lost. Just accept that Chief Wahoo is gone and move on 

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    ?? Your answer does nothing to prove your point. Do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

    Jesus.  Seriously?

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by
    #71

    @the-gipper said:

    Jesus.  Seriously?

    Absolutely. If it’s so obvious, why can’t you back up your claim?

    Oh yeah, because it’s based on emotion and not facts.

  • DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
    #72

    Don't you have something else to contribute except Chief Wahoo?  Are you a redskin?

  • @the-gipper said:

    Jesus.  Seriously?

    Absolutely. If it’s so obvious, why can’t you back up your claim?

    Oh yeah, because it’s based on emotion and not facts.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #73

    @lionofbuddha said:

    Absolutely. If it’s so obvious, why can’t you back up your claim?

    Oh yeah, because it’s based on emotion and not facts.

    OK...here you go....just turn  to any new media outlet in America....and you will have your information all day, every day.  (except for a couple of the sychophantic ones).

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    Absolutely. If it’s so obvious, why can’t you back up your claim?

    Oh yeah, because it’s based on emotion and not facts.

    OK...here you go....just turn  to any new media outlet in America....and you will have your information all day, every day.  (except for a couple of the sychophantic ones).

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by
    #74

    @the-gipper said:

    OK...here you go....just turn  to any new media outlet in America....and you will have your information all day, every day.  (except for a couple of the sychophantic ones).

  • @the-gipper said:

    OK...here you go....just turn  to any new media outlet in America....and you will have your information all day, every day.  (except for a couple of the sychophantic ones).

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #75

    @lionofbuddha said:

    Are you always gonna be this big of an idjit?    (Likely, considering)

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    Are you always gonna be this big of an idjit?    (Likely, considering)

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by
    #76

    @the-gipper said:

    Are you always gonna be this big of an idjit?    (Likely, considering)

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

  • @the-gipper said:

    Are you always gonna be this big of an idjit?    (Likely, considering)

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #77

    @lionofbuddha said:

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

    I didn't bother to watch.  It came from you...and that was enough for me to believe it was likely idiotic.

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

    I didn't bother to watch.  It came from you...and that was enough for me to believe it was likely idiotic.

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by LionOfBuddha
    #78

    @the-gipper said:

    I didn't bother to watch.  It came from you...and that was enough for me to believe it was likely idiotic.

    Lol the fact that you call me an idiot based on a video you didn’t even watch is so hilarious and ironic. Anyways, I don’t have time for this.

    Lets bond through our love for the Browns, not bicker over the dichotomy of politics 

  • @the-gipper said:

    I didn't bother to watch.  It came from you...and that was enough for me to believe it was likely idiotic.

    Lol the fact that you call me an idiot based on a video you didn’t even watch is so hilarious and ironic. Anyways, I don’t have time for this.

    Lets bond through our love for the Browns, not bicker over the dichotomy of politics 

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #79

    @lionofbuddha said:

    Lol the fact that you call me an idiot based on a video you didn’t even watch is so hilarious and ironic. Anyways, I don’t have time for this.

    Lets bond through our love for the Browns, not bicker over the dichotomy of politics 

    I never bickered.  I gave you info and  You   just started acting like a dumb blond.....pretending like you have no clue.

  • @the-gipper said:

    Are you always gonna be this big of an idjit?    (Likely, considering)

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #80

    @lionofbuddha said:

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

    The claim that mainstream media is biased.  That is idiotic.  It is idiotic because those people only want to hear the news that that meets their OWN biased point of view.   FACTS that show someone they are akin to in a bad light...are fake.  Facts that tell the truth about the corruption of this administration is fake....even if it is true.  Again.....anything and everything that you don't like or agree to is fake news.  

    Are mistakes made in reporting some of these facts?  Certainly....nothing and no one is perfect.   Is commentary based on current issues fake?  Uhh, no....it is commentary. It is not news at all. 

  • @lionofbuddha said:

    What specifically is idiotic about the contents of that video?

    The claim that mainstream media is biased.  That is idiotic.  It is idiotic because those people only want to hear the news that that meets their OWN biased point of view.   FACTS that show someone they are akin to in a bad light...are fake.  Facts that tell the truth about the corruption of this administration is fake....even if it is true.  Again.....anything and everything that you don't like or agree to is fake news.  

    Are mistakes made in reporting some of these facts?  Certainly....nothing and no one is perfect.   Is commentary based on current issues fake?  Uhh, no....it is commentary. It is not news at all. 

    L LionOfBuddha wrote on last edited by
    #81

    @the-gipper said:

    The claim that mainstream media is biased.  That is idiotic.  It is idiotic because those people only want to hear the news that that meets their OWN biased point of view.   FACTS that show someone they are akin to in a bad light...are fake.  Facts that tell the truth about the corruption of this administration is fake....even if it is true.  Again.....anything and everything that you don't like or agree to is fake news.  

    Are mistakes made in reporting some of these facts?  Certainly....nothing and no one is perfect.   Is commentary based on current issues fake?  Uhh, no....it is commentary. It is not news at all. 

    Lol dude the video I posted actually clearly shows how the mainstream media has a severe left bias. 95% of mainstream media outlets are left wing. Mainstream media is absolutely fake, and paints an outlier as the narrative, and vice versa, to fit the agenda.

    I hope you take 5 minutes of your day to enlighten yourself with that video, very informative. Until then you’re just blabbering a bunch of nothing.

    Have a good one. Go Browns

  • @the-gipper said:

    The claim that mainstream media is biased.  That is idiotic.  It is idiotic because those people only want to hear the news that that meets their OWN biased point of view.   FACTS that show someone they are akin to in a bad light...are fake.  Facts that tell the truth about the corruption of this administration is fake....even if it is true.  Again.....anything and everything that you don't like or agree to is fake news.  

    Are mistakes made in reporting some of these facts?  Certainly....nothing and no one is perfect.   Is commentary based on current issues fake?  Uhh, no....it is commentary. It is not news at all. 

    Lol dude the video I posted actually clearly shows how the mainstream media has a severe left bias. 95% of mainstream media outlets are left wing. Mainstream media is absolutely fake, and paints an outlier as the narrative, and vice versa, to fit the agenda.

    I hope you take 5 minutes of your day to enlighten yourself with that video, very informative. Until then you’re just blabbering a bunch of nothing.

    Have a good one. Go Browns

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #82

    @lionofbuddha said:

    Lol dude the video I posted actually clearly shows how the mainstream media has a severe left bias. 95% of mainstream media outlets are left wing. Mainstream media is absolutely fake, and paints an outlier as the narrative, and vice versa, to fit the agenda.

    I hope you take 5 minutes of your day to enlighten yourself with that video, very informative. Until then you’re just blabbering a bunch of nothing.

    Have a good one. Go Browns

    See what I mean.  I watched it......it was just another moronic goose stepping horseshite filled pile of right wing drivel.....which is the only agenda that it serves.