• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Tea Party Nation: The NFL Should Lose Its Tax-Exempt Status Because Michael Sam

Wait, if the NFL was liberal, wouldn't the outcome of every game be null as both sides are always winners and instead hitting each other hard, the players complimented each other and pick flowers out of the turf and hand them to their opponents? That the Super Bowl would be an affirmation that we are all winners and everyone gets a medal?

I also think it is cute that the article says Tebow was run out of the NFL because of his religious beliefs, as if his skills (especially as shown by the Patriots in the playoffs) were lacking a bit.

But more to the article's point... is the NFL really tax-exempt? Because if it is, I can't think of a reason why it should be.

The NFL is not tax exempt, but they do have a special monopoly status under current law. This allows them to decide where a team will be located and who can own it.

Beyond that, many cities have special arrangements with their NFL franchise, especially with regard to stadiums. As far as I know, all NFL stadiums are publicly owned.
Cleveland just recently passed an extension on the "sin tax" to pay for upgrades on Browns Stadium or is First Energy Stadium now? Tens of millions are needed to save the stadium from utter destruction or something, and according to the team owners and sponsors, the people of Cuyahoga County were morally responsible to pay up.

Remember, only the Browns play in this place. The fucking Browns! The Cleveland "We are going to destroy Manzel's career before it even starts" Browns. And First Energy is telling Cuyahoga County that they need to save the stadium to invest in their city.

Logic and reason have no place in these kinds of discussions. Not many people want to be mayor of Cleveland, but no one wants to be the mayor who let the town's pro team run away.

The root cause of this kind of insanity is the legal monopoly the NFL(and other sports leagues) are granted by law. Football teams are treated more like public utilities. It would be horribly inefficient for a city to have competing power companies, with double power lines strung down each street. It would drive up the costs for each company and in the end be bad for consumers. Fair enough, so we trade enterprise for a regulated market. In the case of pro sports, we don't regulate very much. It seems the pro teams write the regulations, but we are content with that. We hear a lot of moaning about millionaire ball players, but we(the people) created them. If player salaries were dependent on ticket sales, few players would be paid more than $100k a year.

The monopoly makes the television revenues possible, which make some players worth millions a year. This also makes the location of the team almost superfluous. They could be based anywhere. This puts a city in a very weak bargaining position.
 
Cleveland just recently passed an extension on the "sin tax" to pay for upgrades on Browns Stadium or is First Energy Stadium now?

Its official name has been, and will continue to be, "Factory of Sadness".

Do season ticket holders show up with bags over their heads? Sooner or later, things turn around.
saints.jpg
 
Cleveland just recently passed an extension on the "sin tax" to pay for upgrades on Browns Stadium or is First Energy Stadium now?

Its official name has been, and will continue to be, "Factory of Sadness".
Do season ticket holders show up with bags over their heads? Sooner or later, things turn around.
If the ownership is good. The Patriots went through hell until Bob Kraft bought them. Cleveland gets purchased by a guy who's company is being investigated by the Government for fraud. The local press is already setting Manzel up for failure. The firing of the last head coach after just a year was an absolute farce, even bigger than hiring that guy in the first place. Cleveland at one point was hiring the who's who in failed NFL coaching.

However, the recent firing of the head coach after just a season which was riddled with an absurd number of injuries was the straw that broke my back with the franchise. If they aren't going to run the team seriously, fuck them.
 
Tea Party Nation must be dancing in the streets today. Michael Sam was released by the Rams in the final roster cut.

The Rams handled the "distraction" of having Sams on the team by going about their business and treating him the same way they treated the rest of the players trying to win a spot on the team. Imagine that. He wasn't quite good enough to beat out the others at his position, but it's very possible that the Rams or another team could sign him to their "practice squad", and he could still end up on an NFL roster this year or next.

So don't unpucker quite yet, Teabaggers.
 
Why is that article printed in such a gigantic font? At first I thought I was reading the lede but it never changed to normal text.

Most conservatives are old. The typeface (not font) is large because that website clearly knows their audience.
 
Why is that article printed in such a gigantic font? At first I thought I was reading the lede but it never changed to normal text.

Most conservatives are old. The typeface (not font) is large because that website clearly knows their audience.

I'm no typography geek, but I've spent some time working in a job that necessitated being close to the print industry - font is correct. And that post is like a hundred years old!
 
Most conservatives are old. The typeface (not font) is large because that website clearly knows their audience.

I'm no typography geek, but I've spent some time working in a job that necessitated being close to the print industry - font is correct. And that post is like a hundred years old!

Helvetica is a typeface. Palatino is a typeface.

12 point Helvetica italic is a font. 14 point Palatino bold is a font.

If the text you are referring to never varies in terms of italics, bold, underlining, size, etc., then you are correct to call it a font. Otherwise, it's a typeface.
 
I'm no typography geek, but I've spent some time working in a job that necessitated being close to the print industry - font is correct. And that post is like a hundred years old!

Helvetica is a typeface. Palatino is a typeface.

12 point Helvetica italic is a font. 14 point Palatino bold is a font.

If the text you are referring to never varies in terms of italics, bold, underlining, size, etc., then you are correct to call it a font. Otherwise, it's a typeface.

I was talking about the size - thus font. It doesn't matter if the text varies or not, size implies font. I wouldn't make sense to say that Helvetica is big.

http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028971/whats-the-difference-between-a-font-and-a-typeface

Personally I'm a fount. By me a beer and ask me the difference between tracking and kerning.
 
I'm no typography geek, but I've spent some time working in a job that necessitated being close to the print industry - font is correct. And that post is like a hundred years old!

Helvetica is a typeface. Palatino is a typeface.

12 point Helvetica italic is a font. 14 point Palatino bold is a font.

If the text you are referring to never varies in terms of italics, bold, underlining, size, etc., then you are correct to call it a font. Otherwise, it's a typeface.
The discussion was about the size of the text, so font is the correct word to use. Typefaces don't have size, fonts do, so it's incorrect to say the article is set in a large typeface, but correct to say it's set in a large font.
 
The discussion was about the size of the text, so font is the correct word to use. Typefaces don't have size, fonts do, so it's incorrect to say the article is set in a large typeface, but correct to say it's set in a large font.

I thought the discussion was about Michael Sam and the Tea Party.
 
The discussion was about the size of the text, so font is the correct word to use. Typefaces don't have size, fonts do, so it's incorrect to say the article is set in a large typeface, but correct to say it's set in a large font.

I thought the discussion was about Michael Sam and the Tea Party.
Well you thought wrong. Grammar Naziism and nitpicking about the technical definitions of various of terms are always more important than the actual subject the OP intended.
 
"Many Americans were grossed out by the spectacle of two men kissing on TV. Many were appalled by what was obviously a staged event to push an agenda. Over the last few years, the NFL has become much more of an arm of the political left. .
Is it ironic that it's actually religion that's choosing to be political on this subject?
I mean, people are demanding that the laws of the nation be written to recognize their god-given right to discriminate against gays because God.
And now, people are pointing at the NFL and at business shops who claim to be gay friendly, saying that their behavior, which is not to demand a right to discriminate, discriminates against the religious right.

Wouldn't it be more efficient at this point, and more accurate, to just classify the Tea Party as a religious institution?
 
"Many Americans were grossed out by the spectacle of two men kissing on TV. Many were appalled by what was obviously a staged event to push an agenda. Over the last few years, the NFL has become much more of an arm of the political left. .
Is it ironic that it's actually religion that's choosing to be political on this subject?
I mean, people are demanding that the laws of the nation be written to recognize their god-given right to discriminate against gays because God.
And now, people are pointing at the NFL and at business shops who claim to be gay friendly, saying that their behavior, which is not to demand a right to discriminate, discriminates against the religious right.

Wouldn't it be more efficient at this point, and more accurate, to just classify the Tea Party as a religious institution?

Or as a psychiatric institution?
 
Helvetica is a typeface. Palatino is a typeface.

12 point Helvetica italic is a font. 14 point Palatino bold is a font.

If the text you are referring to never varies in terms of italics, bold, underlining, size, etc., then you are correct to call it a font. Otherwise, it's a typeface.
The discussion was about the size of the text, so font is the correct word to use. Typefaces don't have size, fonts do, so it's incorrect to say the article is set in a large typeface, but correct to say it's set in a large font.

Font is a leftover term from when metal blocks of characters were kept in little boxes in big trays, and should probably be retired. If you're going to insist on using the term, then at least apply it properly so that text that is italicized is a different font from text that is not, which is a different font from text that is bold, which is a different font from text that is underlined, which is a different font from text that is all of the above. All such would have been kept in separate trays and would have been referred to as different fonts.
 
The discussion was about the size of the text, so font is the correct word to use. Typefaces don't have size, fonts do, so it's incorrect to say the article is set in a large typeface, but correct to say it's set in a large font.

Font is a leftover term from when metal blocks of characters were kept in little boxes in big trays, and should probably be retired. If you're going to insist on using the term, then at least apply it properly so that text that is italicized is a different font from text that is not, which is a different font from text that is bold, which is a different font from text that is underlined, which is a different font from text that is all of the above. All such would have been kept in separate trays and would have been referred to as different fonts.

Font is an entirely appropriate term which is used correctly in tools like Word or Openoffice. Occasionally people will confuse it with a typeface (viz. font-family), but no one in the thread was using the term inappropriately until this tangent started.

At this point we're quickly approaching Ferrous Cranus territory.
 
Back
Top Bottom