While I do think the NFL needs to be more open about the Washington FT investigation along with actually doing something about it, “many of the women” isn’t “all of the women”. What do you do about the women who do not want pieces about them exposed to the public? Do we just say “suck it up”??
And some of that may overlap so it’s not easy to redact information/names without people really knowing who they are. And given how the sob sisters of today’s journalism (really, blogging) act, it’s not like they care what the victims want if it gets in the way of their story and 15 seconds of fame.
Just like DC, where a bunch of old white me think they know what women want. Why don’t more women try to vote these old white men out before they destroy everyone’s lives, except the 1% of course.
Did he order the evidence destroyed, the way he did for “spygate”? I mean, I know Washington is one of the teams under some kind of weird protection by the league, but it’s been years since I cared about football, so…..
jbmlaw01 about 3 years ago
Strange, seems that none of our usual posters here want to touch that one. I thought it was funny.
skildude about 3 years ago
let me mansplain it for you.
Ellis97 about 3 years ago
Didn’t Nick and Kate have their own strip at one point?
amxchester about 3 years ago
By “knows what is best for those women” NFL & owners mean “for the owners”.
Bob Blumenfeld about 3 years ago
And I suppose all (or at least most) of those NFL owners are … male? By the way, it’s nice to see the Chances again.
rugeirn about 3 years ago
Dear Nick: you’re dead. It’s been nice knowing you.
Linguist about 3 years ago
Move one, move on … Nothin’ to see here … keep movin’ …
drivingfuriously Premium Member about 3 years ago
I wonder if Tony Corrente goes home and watches himself on TV? The NFL should explain to him that REFs shouldn’t be a part of the game.
Timothy Madigan Premium Member about 3 years ago
While I do think the NFL needs to be more open about the Washington FT investigation along with actually doing something about it, “many of the women” isn’t “all of the women”. What do you do about the women who do not want pieces about them exposed to the public? Do we just say “suck it up”??
And some of that may overlap so it’s not easy to redact information/names without people really knowing who they are. And given how the sob sisters of today’s journalism (really, blogging) act, it’s not like they care what the victims want if it gets in the way of their story and 15 seconds of fame.
edstiles about 3 years ago
Yeah, like the government knows best what best for all Americans’ health by injecting them with an experimental drug.
Judeeye Premium Member about 3 years ago
The NFL protecting women? Be serious.
randolini Premium Member about 3 years ago
Just like DC, where a bunch of old white me think they know what women want. Why don’t more women try to vote these old white men out before they destroy everyone’s lives, except the 1% of course.
MrsBeamer about 3 years ago
Kate’s expression in the last panel sums it up …
moondog42 Premium Member about 3 years ago
Did he order the evidence destroyed, the way he did for “spygate”? I mean, I know Washington is one of the teams under some kind of weird protection by the league, but it’s been years since I cared about football, so…..
jmworacle about 3 years ago
Enjoy sleeping on the couch and celibacy’s dude…