Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Dos Equis on May 28, 2013, 01:44:10 PM
-
I don't have a problem being pc, within reason, but Congress needs to shut the heck up and stay out of this.
Congress calls for Redskins change
May 28, 2013
Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- Ten members of Congress are urging the Washington Redskins to change their name because it is offensive to many Native Americans.
The representatives said Tuesday that they've sent letters to Redskins owner Dan Snyder, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, Redskins sponsor FedEx, and the other 31 NFL franchises.
The letter to Snyder says that "Native Americans throughout the country consider the 'R-word' a racial, derogatory slur akin to the 'N-word' among African Americans or the 'W-word' among Latinos."
Among the group sending the letters are the leaders of the Congressional Native American Caucus, Tom Cole, R-Okla., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn.
The nickname is the subject of a long-running legal challenge from a group seeking to have the team lose its trademark protection.
Snyder has vowed that he will never change the name.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9319267/members-congress-urge-washington-redskins-change-name
-
::)
Isnt there actual Importnat stuff for these congressmen to be doing?
-
Are you fucking serious? Im Native American and I couldn't give a flying fuck. Granted, I look white as the day is long... but seriously? Fucking seriously?
-
Are you fucking serious? Im Native American and I couldn't give a flying fuck. Granted, I look white as the day is long... but seriously? Fucking seriously?
Political correctness strikes again.
-
This has just got to be whorish pandering at its most ridiculous level.
-
This has just got to be whorish pandering at its most ridiculous level.
www.usdebtclock.orgy
-
.orgy? Lol
-
This has just got to be whorish pandering at its most ridiculous level.
the worst part is its pandering to libtard left on behalf of people who probably dont even give a shit for the most part
-
the worst part is its pandering to libtard left on behalf of people who probably dont even give a shit for the most part
And in all likely hood some native Americans who are Redskin fans too. Lol
-
::)
Isnt there actual Importnat stuff for these congressmen to be doing?
I guess that got every other single problem/issue done already
btw - what's with this Republican congress trying to interfere with a private business
I thought they were all about free enterprise and getting government out of our lives and somehow they have the time (and think it's their place) to get involved in this nonsense?
-
I guess that got every other single problem/issue done already
btw - what's with this Republican congress trying to interfere with a private business
I thought they were all about free enterprise and getting government out of our lives and somehow they have the time (and think it's their place) to get involved in this nonsense?
You should know by now that 99.9% of the time the stupid party that supports these types of measure is the Democratic party.
Of the 10 representatives only 1 is a Republican.
Who are these 10 individuals?
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa), Tom Cole (R-Okla.), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Gwen Moore (D-Wis.), Michael M. Honda (D-Calif.), Donna M. Christensen (D-Virgin Islands), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-District of Columbia).
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000207158/article/redskins-name-change-congressmen-urge-dan-snyder
-
You should know by now that 99.9% of the time the stupid party that supports these types of measure is the Democratic party.
Of the 10 representatives only 1 is a Republican.
Who are these 10 individuals?
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa), Tom Cole (R-Okla.), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Gwen Moore (D-Wis.), Michael M. Honda (D-Calif.), Donna M. Christensen (D-Virgin Islands), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-District of Columbia).
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000207158/article/redskins-name-change-congressmen-urge-dan-snyder
The Stupid Party by their own admission are Republicans and more than half of the people listed are members of the Congressional Native American Caucus so I guess they have some legitimate reason to send this letter (I still think it's a bit silly but then so are the 40+ different votes to repeal Obamacare)
http://www.ciclt.net/sn/pol/poc_detail.aspx?P_ID=&ClientCode=masc&LegComID=19279
-
I call for Congress to actually start representing the will of the people and stop wasting time and money on all these unimportant issues.
If the name offends you then don't support the team.
Straw: If you insist on calling Republicans "the stupid party" then from now on the Democrats are "the queer party".
-
I call for Congress to actually start representing the will of the people and stop wasting time and money on all these unimportant issues.
If the name offends you then don't support the team.
Straw: If you insist on calling Republicans "the stupid party" then from now on the Democrats are "the queer party".
I did not call Republicans the stupid party
Republican's called themselves the stupid party
Dems have not called themselves the queer party
-
I did not call Republicans the stupid party
Republican's called themselves the stupid party
Dems have not called themselves the queer party
I only know of one Republican doing that. You know of more?
-
I only know of one Republican doing that. You know of more?
do I need more ?
I didn't coin that phrase
A Republican leader with national aspirations called his party as the Stupid Party
BTW - I wonder why no Repubs on this board haven't yet posted Bob Doles recent comments about the Stupid Party (by that of course I mean the Republican Party)
-
do I need more ?
I didn't coin that phrase
A Republican leader with national aspirations called his party as the Stupid Party
BTW - I wonder why no Repubs on this board haven't yet posted Bob Doles recent comments about the Stupid Party (by that of course I mean the Republican Party)
Guess not, I don't know.
Boehner's probably crying from hearing it anyway.
-
The Stupid Party by their own admission are Republicans and more than half of the people listed are members of the Congressional Native American Caucus so I guess they have some legitimate reason to send this letter (I still think it's a bit silly but then so are the 40+ different votes to repeal Obamacare)
http://www.ciclt.net/sn/pol/poc_detail.aspx?P_ID=&ClientCode=masc&LegComID=19279
Your previous post made it look as if Republicans were overwhelmingly supporting this idea. It was obvious what stance you took.
After you are shown that it was only 1 Republican and 9 other dumb Democrats you are trying to deflect from your blunder. HEHEHHEHE!! Then again. Not much can be expected from any liberal.
-
NFL Commissioner on Redskins: 'If One Person Is Offended, We Have to Listen'
by Breitbart Sports 12 Sep 2013
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell softened his stance on the Redskins name on Wednesday when he said that the NFL had to listen to concerns about the team's nickname even if only one person is concerned about it.
In an interview on 106.7 The Fan in Washington, Goodell, who grew up in the region as a Baltimore Colts and then Redskins fan, said, "I think what we have to do though is we have to listen."
“If one person is offended, we have to listen," he said.
Goodell's remarks come after Sports Illustrated's Peter King's website decided to refer to the team as the Washington football team. Earlier in the year, in response to 10 members of Congress who wrote him demanding action, Goodell defended the name. Redskins owner Dan Snyder has said he will "NEVER" change the team name and does not intend to sell the franchise.
"Ultimately it is Dan’s decision,” Goodell said of a possible name change. “But it’s something that I want all of us to go out and make sure we’re listening to our fans, listening to people of a different view, and making sure that we continue to do what’s right to make sure that team represents the strong tradition and history that it has for so many years."
ProFootballTalk believes Goodell's softer stance on the issue leaves "the door open for action if/when the opposition to the name reaches national critical mass. He senses that the day is coming; the only question is whether it happens before or after he retires from the job he already has held for seven years."
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2013/09/12/Goodell-Redskins
-
goodell has been pissing me off with all the rule change bull shit, I like the way he punishes the players but Im done with him...he needs to go.
-
more leftist garbage
-
After all the leftwing bullshit that these assbags spew...maybe a national "conversation" on the redskins name is ok. Maybe the rank and file blue collar football fan will see the libs for what they are...traitorus anti American pansies....These people are'nt football fans, they're San Fransisco bathhouse dwelling soccer fans. If the team were the Washington Transgender unicon queens, that would be just find with them. Every day these people strip away a little of America.
-
After all the leftwing bullshit that these assbags spew...maybe a national "conversation" on the redskins name is ok. Maybe the rank and file blue collar football fan will see the libs for what they are...traitorus anti American pansies....These people are'nt football fans, they're San Fransisco bathhouse dwelling soccer fans. If the team were the Washington Transgender unicon queens, that would be just find with them. Every day these people strip away a little of America.
Truth.
-
NFL Commissioner on Redskins: 'If One Person Is Offended, We Have to Listen'
by Breitbart Sports 12 Sep 2013
In an interview on 106.7 The Fan in Washington, Goodell, who grew up in the region as a Baltimore Colts and then Redskins fan, said, "I think what we have to do though is we have to listen."
“If one person is offended, we have to listen," he said.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2013/09/12/Goodell-Redskins
This is the problem with his whole thought process. Why should they change their name just because a very small group of people don't like it? Why should this issue be blown out of proportion just because a few people feel offended? They are probably not even football fans.
Soon the NFL and the media will distort this situation in such a way that they will put pressure on the Redskins to change their name.
The libtard philosophy is pathetic.
-
Then they also need to change the designation on the Apache and Chinook helos, and rename the Tomahawk cruise missile to something more important.
-
After all the leftwing bullshit that these assbags spew...maybe a national "conversation" on the redskins name is ok. Maybe the rank and file blue collar football fan will see the libs for what they are...traitorus anti American pansies....These people are'nt football fans, they're San Fransisco bathhouse dwelling soccer fans. If the team were the Washington Transgender unicon queens, that would be just find with them. Every day these people strip away a little of America.
;)
-
They should change the name to Whiteskins.
-
Oct 5, 10:21 AM EDT
OBAMA OPEN TO NAME CHANGE FOR WASHINGTON REDSKINS
BY JULIE PACE
AP WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT
AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
SPORTS VIDEO
LATEST NEWS
OBAMA OPEN TO NAME CHANGE FOR WASHINGTON REDSKINS
NY TRIBE TARGETING REDSKINS NAME PLANS DC MEETING
OLYMPIC CHAMP KIM YU-NA SIDELINED WITH FOOT INJURY
BUY AP PHOTO REPRINTS
LATEST NEWS
OBAMA SAYS HE EXPECTS CONGRESS WILL RAISE DEBT CAP
OBAMA: SENATORS SEEKING CONTROVERSY BAD FOR GOV'T
SUMMARY OF OBAMA INTERVIEW WITH ASSOCIATED PRESS
OBAMA: IRAN 'A YEAR OR MORE' FROM NUKE CAPABILITY
OBAMA OPEN TO NAME CHANGE FOR WASHINGTON REDSKINS
INTERACTIVE
OBAMA'S 2011 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
OBAMA'S 2010 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
PANORAMA OF THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama says that if he owned the Washington Redskins, he would "think about changing" the team name, wading into the controversy over a football nickname that many people deem offensive to Native Americans.
Obama, in an interview with The Associated Press, said team names like the Redskins offend "a sizable group of people." He said that while fans get attached to the nicknames, nostalgia may not be a good enough reason to keep them in place.
"I don't know whether our attachment to a particular name should override the real legitimate concerns that people have about these things," he said in the interview, which was conducted Friday.
An avid sports fan, Obama said he doesn't think Washington football fans are purposely trying to offend American Indians. "I don't want to detract from the wonderful Redskins fans that are here. They love their team and rightly so," he said.
But the president appeared to come down on the side of those who have sharply criticized the football team's name, noting that Indians "feel pretty strongly" about mascots and team names that depict negative stereotypes about their heritage.
Other professional sports teams have Indian nicknames, including football's Kansas City Chiefs and baseball's Atlanta Braves and Cleveland Indians.
Numerous colleges and universities have changed names that reference Native Americans. St. John's changed its mascot from the Redmen to the Red Storm, Marquette is now the Golden Eagles instead of the Warriors and Stanford switched from the Indians to the Cardinal.
The Redskins' nickname has attracted a fresh round of controversy in recent months, with local leaders in Washington calling for a name change and some media outlets refraining from using the name. The name is the subject of a long-running legal challenge from a group of American Indians seeking to block the team from having federal trademark protection.
Congressional lawmakers have introduced a bill seeking the same goal, though it appears unlikely to pass.
Opponents of the Redskins nickname also plan to hold a protest Monday outside the NFL's fall meeting in Washington.
Team owner Dan Snyder has vowed to never abandon the name. But NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said last month that the league should pay attention to those offended by the nickname - a subtle change in position for Goodell, who had more strongly supported the nickname in his previous statements this year.
Despite the controversy, an AP-GfK poll conducted in April showed that nationally, "Redskins" still enjoys wide support. Nearly 4 in 5 Americans don't think the team should change its name, the survey found. Only 11 percent think it should be changed, while 8 percent weren't sure and 2 percent didn't answer.
Obama said he doesn't have a direct stake in the Redskins debate since he's not a team owner. But he hinted that might be part of his post-White House plans.
"Maybe after I leave the presidency," he joked. "I think it would be a lot of fun."
He added: "I'd probably look at a basketball team before I looked at a football team. I know more about basketball than I do about football."
---
AP Sports Writer Joseph White contributed to this report.
---
Follow Julie Pace at HTTP://TWITTER.COM/JPACEDC
© 2013
-
They should be renamed the Pork Skins.
-
A sizeable group, virtually all white people who exist to be offended on others' behalf.
yep.
-
Oct 5, 10:21 AM EDT
OBAMA OPEN TO NAME CHANGE FOR WASHINGTON REDSKINS
BY JULIE PACE
AP WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT
AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
SPORTS VIDEO
LATEST NEWS
OBAMA OPEN TO NAME CHANGE FOR WASHINGTON REDSKINS
NY TRIBE TARGETING REDSKINS NAME PLANS DC MEETING
OLYMPIC CHAMP KIM YU-NA SIDELINED WITH FOOT INJURY
BUY AP PHOTO REPRINTS
LATEST NEWS
OBAMA SAYS HE EXPECTS CONGRESS WILL RAISE DEBT CAP
OBAMA: SENATORS SEEKING CONTROVERSY BAD FOR GOV'T
SUMMARY OF OBAMA INTERVIEW WITH ASSOCIATED PRESS
OBAMA: IRAN 'A YEAR OR MORE' FROM NUKE CAPABILITY
OBAMA OPEN TO NAME CHANGE FOR WASHINGTON REDSKINS
INTERACTIVE
OBAMA'S 2011 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
OBAMA'S 2010 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
PANORAMA OF THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama says that if he owned the Washington Redskins, he would "think about changing" the team name, wading into the controversy over a football nickname that many people deem offensive to Native Americans.
Obama, in an interview with The Associated Press, said team names like the Redskins offend "a sizable group of people." He said that while fans get attached to the nicknames, nostalgia may not be a good enough reason to keep them in place.
"I don't know whether our attachment to a particular name should override the real legitimate concerns that people have about these things," he said in the interview, which was conducted Friday.
An avid sports fan, Obama said he doesn't think Washington football fans are purposely trying to offend American Indians. "I don't want to detract from the wonderful Redskins fans that are here. They love their team and rightly so," he said.
But the president appeared to come down on the side of those who have sharply criticized the football team's name, noting that Indians "feel pretty strongly" about mascots and team names that depict negative stereotypes about their heritage.
Other professional sports teams have Indian nicknames, including football's Kansas City Chiefs and baseball's Atlanta Braves and Cleveland Indians.
Numerous colleges and universities have changed names that reference Native Americans. St. John's changed its mascot from the Redmen to the Red Storm, Marquette is now the Golden Eagles instead of the Warriors and Stanford switched from the Indians to the Cardinal.
The Redskins' nickname has attracted a fresh round of controversy in recent months, with local leaders in Washington calling for a name change and some media outlets refraining from using the name. The name is the subject of a long-running legal challenge from a group of American Indians seeking to block the team from having federal trademark protection.
Congressional lawmakers have introduced a bill seeking the same goal, though it appears unlikely to pass.
Opponents of the Redskins nickname also plan to hold a protest Monday outside the NFL's fall meeting in Washington.
Team owner Dan Snyder has vowed to never abandon the name. But NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said last month that the league should pay attention to those offended by the nickname - a subtle change in position for Goodell, who had more strongly supported the nickname in his previous statements this year.
Despite the controversy, an AP-GfK poll conducted in April showed that nationally, "Redskins" still enjoys wide support. Nearly 4 in 5 Americans don't think the team should change its name, the survey found. Only 11 percent think it should be changed, while 8 percent weren't sure and 2 percent didn't answer.
Obama said he doesn't have a direct stake in the Redskins debate since he's not a team owner. But he hinted that might be part of his post-White House plans.
"Maybe after I leave the presidency," he joked. "I think it would be a lot of fun."
He added: "I'd probably look at a basketball team before I looked at a football team. I know more about basketball than I do about football."
---
AP Sports Writer Joseph White contributed to this report.
---
Follow Julie Pace at HTTP://TWITTER.COM/JPACEDC
© 2013
It's good to see him devoting time, thought, and energy to attacking the real issues this country faces.
-
Alphabama dealing with real problems 8)
-
Inb4 Coach
-
They should change the name to the BigAch Skins.
-
Why would my redskins change their names......that's the most stupid, ridiculous bullshit I've ever heard...they're making it a racial issue for no reason...I hope Snyder fight this shit to the limit
-
anything to "shore up" unhappy campaign contributors....
-
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama says that if he owned the Washington Redskins, he would "think about changing" the team name, wading into the controversy over a football nickname that many people deem offensive to Native Americans.
Yeah, well, you don't own the team, shit stain.
-
Yeah, well, you don't own the team, shit stain.
everyone is owning the redskins this year
-
There should be a petition for a namechange for Barrack Osama
-
the nfl is at the mercy of the fed if it wants to keep it's tax-exemption status.
-
I hear he also wants to change the names of countries like Uruguay and Nigeria because its offends gays and blacks
-
If its offensive to people, why not change it to reflect contemparory values? Do you guys think any team name derogatory to lets say black people woulf be acceptable? Like the 'washington negroes'?
-
A sizeable group, virtually all white people who exist to be offended on others' behalf.
You joke, but has any native American group ever come forth about this?
-
Shouldn't he be more concerned about running the country than WTF is happening in the NFL?
-
Man, I'm far from a PC liberal, but that name can be construed as kinda offensive. That's the only one I feel this way about. The rest, fuck you, you don't have a case.
-
Its a fallacy to think that just because a person comments on a subject that they are less concerned with other potentially bigger issues. He must have been asked about it, in my opinion its a thoughtful response.
-
Never thought I would say it, but I totally miss George Bush and Darth Cheney. :-\
-
Man, I'm far from a PC liberal, but that name can be construed as kinda offensive. That's the only one I feel this way about. The rest, fuck you, you don't have a case.
Are you native American?
-
Are you native American?
No, just your average white dude.
-
Start a team called the White Devils, see if I give a shit.
-
Start a team called the White Devils, see if I give a shit.
How about the Dirty Mexicans or the Stinky Ni66ers? Wouldn't that sound like too much? The Redskins? I don't know, guy.
-
everyone is owning the redskins this year
Lol
Dude, Obama is using the Presidency as his personal sports fantasy camp. Golfing with tiger, playing pick up games with NBA players. The dude is one ESPN every fucking day talking about bullshit like this or drawing up his NCAA tournament bracket. Meanwhile the country is going down the toilet.
-
How about the Dirty Mexicans or the Stinky Ni66ers? Wouldn't that sound like too much? The Redskins? I don't know, guy.
I think it's more important that we quit bending over backwards and changing, in the name of being politically correct. If you're offended, get over it.
I can assure you that I'm MUCH more offended by the massive efforts of those who want to destroy the world my grandparents created. No one is concerned about offending me though.
-
It's good to see him devoting time, thought, and energy to attacking the real issues this country faces.
::)
The problem isn't the president, is the Senate and House, but Americants are sheep anyway.
-
Say redskins stand for deer hides worn by the Indians, problem solved 8)
-
::)
The problem isn't the president, is the Senate and House, but Americants are sheep anyway.
::)
The budget isn't our only problem, G_enius.
-
Start a team called the White Devils, see if I give a shit.
.
-
The racial issue operator is one of the key factors used to cause dissent and raise phony awareness resulting in intrusive changes.
There's a paper on Wikileaks where the US uses same agenda to bully France into giving in to "minority concerns" with the added bonus of a well thought out plan to restructure France's society and history - explicitly complaining that there are too many 'white' people in key positions.
Cultural marxism is a top priority to "equality".
-
Or call them the Red Cocks in honor of getbig.
-
I demand the words whitey, cracker and honky is censored on getbig like other racial slurs. Because I often get so offended by them I can't sleep at night :'(
-
::)
The problem isn't the president, is the Senate and House, but Americants are sheep anyway.
Lmfao. Obama is sludge.
-
July 6, 2013
Political Correctness Is Cultural Marxism
By W.A. Beatty
The excellent AT article "Conservatives Pushing Back" by Bruce Walker explored what we conservative thinkers (We are, after all, American Thinkers) have known for quite some time: political correctness (PC) is to culture what Marxism is to economics. To recognize that fact arms us with what we need in order to push back. As Walker says (emphasis added), "[t]hese marketplace ballots are the key not only to the survival of a non-totalitarian America, but also to the final defeat of those whose minds and wills are chained with hard, cold manacles of leftism."
Walker's article is (pardon the pun) right on the money. So, in an effort to further understand PC, exploration of its similarities to Marxism is in order.
PC, just like Marxism, forces people to live a lie by denying reality. PC takes a political philosophy and says that on the basis of the chosen philosophy, certain things must be true, and reality that contradicts its "truth" must be forbidden -- eradicated since it disputes PC, exposes as untrue what PC says is true. People are reluctant to live a lie, so they use their eyes and ears to see reality, to say, "Wait a minute. This isn't true. I can see it isn't true; the power of the state [PC] must be put behind the demand to live a lie." Marxism, by denying economic reality, did exactly the same thing.
PC, just like Marxism, depends upon defining what it considers good and bad groups. It defines good groups as "victims" of bad groups. The victims can never be anything but good, regardless of what their actions may be. Witness what the Black Panthers did in Philadelphia, PA in 2008 and 2012. Any group identified as good by PC (homosexuals, blacks, Hispanics, illegal immigrants, feminist women, mentally and/or physically challenged people, the poor, environmentalists, the list goes on and on) must be shown deference, both physically and linguistically. They must not be offended, must not be insulted.
Any group identified as bad by PC, such as white males or any Christian group, can be offended. This offense, PC practitioners say, "makes up" for past offenses certain to have been committed in the past by bad groups. And what's worse is that the PC practitioners get to define the offenses committed by the bad groups. This situation, by definition, is a "self-fulfilling prophesy."
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/political_correctness_is_cultural_marxism.html#ixzz2gzWBcCod
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
-
What if they just change to " The Skins". How would everyone feel about that Lol.
-
How about Obama and his welfare drug/drunk addicted family just go the fuck back to Africa and leave the rest of us alone?
-
This is really sickening, I hope everyone can see what's going on...
‘Duck Dynasty’ Star, “They Told Us To Stop Praying To Jesus So It Wouldn’t Offend Muslims”
By John Dellinger on October 5, 2013
In an interview with sports spectrum magazine Willie & Phil Robertson, stars of Duck Dynasty, talk about fake bleeps, praying in Jesus’ name, and getting flack from Christians.
When the editors of Duck Dynasty asked the stars to stop saying “In Jesus Name” during prayers because it might offend Muslims, Phil Robertson had to stand his ground.
I highly suggest watching this entire video. It’s worth 6 minutes of your time.
(There is an 18 second intro in the beginning if you want to scroll past it)
Read more: http://conservativepost.com/duck-dynasty-star-they-told-us-to-stop-praying-to-jesus-so-it-wouldnt-offend-muslims/
-
How about Obama and his welfare drug/drunk addicted family just go the fuck back to Africa and leave the rest of us alone?
Obama is from Hawaii, remember? ::)
-
This is really sickening, I hope everyone can see what's going on...
‘Duck Dynasty’ Star, “They Told Us To Stop Praying To Jesus So It Wouldn’t Offend Muslims”
By John Dellinger on October 5, 2013
In an interview with sports spectrum magazine Willie & Phil Robertson, stars of Duck Dynasty, talk about fake bleeps, praying in Jesus’ name, and getting flack from Christians.
When the editors of Duck Dynasty asked the stars to stop saying “In Jesus Name” during prayers because it might offend Muslims, Phil Robertson had to stand his ground.
I highly suggest watching this entire video. It’s worth 6 minutes of your time.
(There is an 18 second intro in the beginning if you want to scroll past it)
Read more: http://conservativepost.com/duck-dynasty-star-they-told-us-to-stop-praying-to-jesus-so-it-wouldnt-offend-muslims/
See, this is the kind of political correctness I despise.
-
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/10/06/obama-weighs-in-on-redskins-name-change-team-attorney-calls-him-ignorant-84779
LMFAO - of course O-SHIT is ignorant
Good job morons voting in this fool.
-
The president needs to just keep his mouth shut and stick to reading his teleprompter.
Redskins attorney responds to Obama
The Oval David Jackson, USA TODAY 1:31 p.m. EDT October 6, 2013
The Washington Redskins had their attorney respond to President Obama's suggestion that the football team change its name.
"We at the Redskins respect everyone," said a statement from attorney Lanny J. Davis. "But like devoted fans of the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians and the Chicago Blackhawks (from President Obama's hometown ), we love our team and its name and, like those fans, we do not intend to disparage or disrespect a racial or ethnic group."
Obama, citing objections from Native Americans and others to the nickname "Redskins," suggested a name change when asked about it during an interview with the Associated Press.
"If I were the owner of the team and I knew that the name of my team — even if they've had a storied history — was offending a sizable group of people, I'd think about changing it," Obama told the AP.
The full statement from Davis:
"As a supporter of President Obama, I am sure the president is not aware that in the highly respected Annenberg Institute poll (taken 2004) with a national sample of Native Americans, 9 out of 10 Native Americans said they were not bothered by the name the 'Washington Redskins.'
"The president made these comments to the Associated Press, but he was apparently unaware that an April 2013 AP poll showed that eight out of ten of all Americans in a national sample don't think the Washington Redskins name should be changed.
"We at the Redskins respect everyone. But like devoted fans of the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians and the Chicago Blackhawks (from President Obama's hometown ), we love our team and its name and, like those fans, we do not intend to disparage or disrespect a racial or ethnic group.
"The name 'Washington Redskins' is 80 years old - it's our history and legacy and tradition. We Redskins fans sing 'hail to the Redskins' every Sunday as a word of honor not disparagement."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/10/06/obama-washington-redskins-football-lanny-j-davis/2931859/
-
This attorney has only himself to blame for having to write this letter since he helped elect this fool in the first place.
The president needs to just keep his mouth shut and stick to reading his teleprompter.
Redskins attorney responds to Obama
The Oval David Jackson, USA TODAY 1:31 p.m. EDT October 6, 2013
The Washington Redskins had their attorney respond to President Obama's suggestion that the football team change its name.
"We at the Redskins respect everyone," said a statement from attorney Lanny J. Davis. "But like devoted fans of the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians and the Chicago Blackhawks (from President Obama's hometown ), we love our team and its name and, like those fans, we do not intend to disparage or disrespect a racial or ethnic group."
Obama, citing objections from Native Americans and others to the nickname "Redskins," suggested a name change when asked about it during an interview with the Associated Press.
"If I were the owner of the team and I knew that the name of my team — even if they've had a storied history — was offending a sizable group of people, I'd think about changing it," Obama told the AP.
The full statement from Davis:
"As a supporter of President Obama, I am sure the president is not aware that in the highly respected Annenberg Institute poll (taken 2004) with a national sample of Native Americans, 9 out of 10 Native Americans said they were not bothered by the name the 'Washington Redskins.'
"The president made these comments to the Associated Press, but he was apparently unaware that an April 2013 AP poll showed that eight out of ten of all Americans in a national sample don't think the Washington Redskins name should be changed.
"We at the Redskins respect everyone. But like devoted fans of the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians and the Chicago Blackhawks (from President Obama's hometown ), we love our team and its name and, like those fans, we do not intend to disparage or disrespect a racial or ethnic group.
"The name 'Washington Redskins' is 80 years old - it's our history and legacy and tradition. We Redskins fans sing 'hail to the Redskins' every Sunday as a word of honor not disparagement."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/10/06/obama-washington-redskins-football-lanny-j-davis/2931859/
-
October 9, 2013
To Everyone in our Washington Redskins Nation:
As loyal fans, you deserve to know that everyone in the Washington Redskins organization — our players, coaches and staff — are truly privileged to represent this team and everything it stands for. We are relentlessly committed to our fans and to the sustained long-term success of this franchise.
That’s why I want to reach out to you — our fans — about a topic I wish to address directly: the team name, “Washington Redskins.” While our focus is firmly on the playing field, it is important that you hear straight from me on this issue. As the owner of the Redskins and a lifelong fan of the team, here is what I believe … and why I believe it.
Like so many of you, I was born a fan of the Washington Redskins. I still remember my first Redskins game. Most people do. I was only six, but I remember coming through the tunnel into the stands at RFK with my father, and immediately being struck by the enormity of the stadium and the passion of the fans all around me.
I remember how quiet it got when the Redskins had the ball, and then how deafening it was when we scored. The ground beneath me seemed to move and shake, and I reached up to grab my father’s hand. The smile on his face as he sang that song … he’s been gone for 10 years now, but that smile, and his pride, are still with me every day.
That tradition — the song, the cheer — it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation.
Our past isn’t just where we came from — it’s who we are.
As some of you may know, our team began 81 years ago — in 1932 — with the name “Boston Braves.” The following year, the franchise name was changed to the “Boston Redskins.” On that inaugural Redskins team, four players and our Head Coach were Native Americans. The name was never a label. It was, and continues to be, a badge of honor.
In 1971, our legendary coach, the late George Allen, consulted with the Red Cloud Athletic Fund located on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota and designed our emblem on the Redskins helmets. Several years later, Coach Allen was honored by the Red Cloud Athletic Fund. On the wall at our Ashburn, Virginia, offices is the plaque given to Coach Allen — a source of pride for all of us. “Washington Redskins” is more than a name we have called our football team for over eight decades. It is a symbol of everything we stand for: strength, courage, pride, and respect — the same values we know guide Native Americans and which are embedded throughout their rich history as the original Americans.
I’ve listened carefully to the commentary and perspectives on all sides, and I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name. But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington Redskins family, but among Native Americans too.
Consider the following facts concerning the “Washington Redskins” name:
1) The highly respected Annenberg Public Policy Center polled nearly 1,000 self-identified Native Americans from across the continental U.S. and found that 90% of Native Americans did not find the team name “Washington Redskins” to be “offensive.”
2) In an April 2013 Associated Press survey, 79% of the respondents stated the Washington Redskins should not change their name, while only 11% believed the team’s name should change.
Paul Woody, a columnist for the Richmond Times Dispatch, interviewed three leaders of Virginia Native American tribes this May. They were all quoted by Mr. Woody as stating that the team name doesn't offend them – and their comments strongly supported the name “Washington Redskins.” Also in May, SiriusXM NFL Radio hosted Robert Green, the longtime and recently retired Chief of the Fredericksburg-area Patawomeck Tribe, who said, among other things:
“Frankly, the members of my tribe — the vast majority — don’t find it offensive. I’ve been a Redskins fan for years. And to be honest with you, I would be offended if they did change [the name, Redskins … This is] an attempt by somebody … to completely remove the Indian identity from anything and pretty soon… you have a wipeout in society of any reference to Indian people. … You can’t rewrite history — yes there were some awful bad things done to our people over time, but naming the Washington football team the Redskins, we don’t consider to be one of those bad things.”
Our franchise has a great history, tradition and legacy representing our proud alumni and literally tens of millions of loyal fans worldwide. We have participated in some of the greatest games in NFL history, and have won five World Championships. We are proud of our team and the passion of our loyal fans. Our fans sing “Hail to the Redskins” in celebration at every Redskins game. They speak proudly of “Redskins Nation” in honor of a sports team they love.
So when I consider the Washington Redskins name, I think of what it stands for. I think of the Washington Redskins traditions and pride I want to share with my three children, just as my father shared with me — and just as you have shared with your family and friends.
I respect the opinions of those who disagree. I want them to know that I do hear them, and I will continue to listen and learn. But we cannot ignore our 81 year history, or the strong feelings of most of our fans as well as Native Americans throughout the country. After 81 years, the team name “Redskins” continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come.
We are Redskins Nation ... and we owe it to our fans and coaches and players, past and present, to preserve that heritage.
With Respect and Appreciation,
Dan Snyder
PS. Wherever I go, I see Redskins bumper stickers, Redskins decals, Redskins t-shirts, Redskins … everything. I know how much this team means to you, and it means everything to me as well. Always has. I salute your passion and your pride for the Burgundy & Gold.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/dan-snyder-to-obama-were-keeping-the-redskins-name/article/2537046
-
It never ceases to amaze me that people will actually spend their time and energy over dumb shit like this.
-
It never ceases to amaze me that people will actually spend their time and energy over dumb shit like this.
When you say people you are referring to politicians. Am I correct?
Because there is nothing wrong with pushing back on issues like this when politicians are the ones who began harping on it. Like the failure in chief.
-
October 9, 2013
To Everyone in our Washington Redskins Nation:
As loyal fans, you deserve to know that everyone in the Washington Redskins organization — our players, coaches and staff — are truly privileged to represent this team and everything it stands for. We are relentlessly committed to our fans and to the sustained long-term success of this franchise.
That’s why I want to reach out to you — our fans — about a topic I wish to address directly: the team name, “Washington Redskins.” While our focus is firmly on the playing field, it is important that you hear straight from me on this issue. As the owner of the Redskins and a lifelong fan of the team, here is what I believe … and why I believe it.
Like so many of you, I was born a fan of the Washington Redskins. I still remember my first Redskins game. Most people do. I was only six, but I remember coming through the tunnel into the stands at RFK with my father, and immediately being struck by the enormity of the stadium and the passion of the fans all around me.
I remember how quiet it got when the Redskins had the ball, and then how deafening it was when we scored. The ground beneath me seemed to move and shake, and I reached up to grab my father’s hand. The smile on his face as he sang that song … he’s been gone for 10 years now, but that smile, and his pride, are still with me every day.
That tradition — the song, the cheer — it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation.
Our past isn’t just where we came from — it’s who we are.
As some of you may know, our team began 81 years ago — in 1932 — with the name “Boston Braves.” The following year, the franchise name was changed to the “Boston Redskins.” On that inaugural Redskins team, four players and our Head Coach were Native Americans. The name was never a label. It was, and continues to be, a badge of honor.
In 1971, our legendary coach, the late George Allen, consulted with the Red Cloud Athletic Fund located on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota and designed our emblem on the Redskins helmets. Several years later, Coach Allen was honored by the Red Cloud Athletic Fund. On the wall at our Ashburn, Virginia, offices is the plaque given to Coach Allen — a source of pride for all of us. “Washington Redskins” is more than a name we have called our football team for over eight decades. It is a symbol of everything we stand for: strength, courage, pride, and respect — the same values we know guide Native Americans and which are embedded throughout their rich history as the original Americans.
I’ve listened carefully to the commentary and perspectives on all sides, and I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name. But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington Redskins family, but among Native Americans too.
Consider the following facts concerning the “Washington Redskins” name:
1) The highly respected Annenberg Public Policy Center polled nearly 1,000 self-identified Native Americans from across the continental U.S. and found that 90% of Native Americans did not find the team name “Washington Redskins” to be “offensive.”
2) In an April 2013 Associated Press survey, 79% of the respondents stated the Washington Redskins should not change their name, while only 11% believed the team’s name should change.
Paul Woody, a columnist for the Richmond Times Dispatch, interviewed three leaders of Virginia Native American tribes this May. They were all quoted by Mr. Woody as stating that the team name doesn't offend them – and their comments strongly supported the name “Washington Redskins.” Also in May, SiriusXM NFL Radio hosted Robert Green, the longtime and recently retired Chief of the Fredericksburg-area Patawomeck Tribe, who said, among other things:
“Frankly, the members of my tribe — the vast majority — don’t find it offensive. I’ve been a Redskins fan for years. And to be honest with you, I would be offended if they did change [the name, Redskins … This is] an attempt by somebody … to completely remove the Indian identity from anything and pretty soon… you have a wipeout in society of any reference to Indian people. … You can’t rewrite history — yes there were some awful bad things done to our people over time, but naming the Washington football team the Redskins, we don’t consider to be one of those bad things.”
Our franchise has a great history, tradition and legacy representing our proud alumni and literally tens of millions of loyal fans worldwide. We have participated in some of the greatest games in NFL history, and have won five World Championships. We are proud of our team and the passion of our loyal fans. Our fans sing “Hail to the Redskins” in celebration at every Redskins game. They speak proudly of “Redskins Nation” in honor of a sports team they love.
So when I consider the Washington Redskins name, I think of what it stands for. I think of the Washington Redskins traditions and pride I want to share with my three children, just as my father shared with me — and just as you have shared with your family and friends.
I respect the opinions of those who disagree. I want them to know that I do hear them, and I will continue to listen and learn. But we cannot ignore our 81 year history, or the strong feelings of most of our fans as well as Native Americans throughout the country. After 81 years, the team name “Redskins” continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come.
We are Redskins Nation ... and we owe it to our fans and coaches and players, past and present, to preserve that heritage.
With Respect and Appreciation,
Dan Snyder
PS. Wherever I go, I see Redskins bumper stickers, Redskins decals, Redskins t-shirts, Redskins … everything. I know how much this team means to you, and it means everything to me as well. Always has. I salute your passion and your pride for the Burgundy & Gold.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/dan-snyder-to-obama-were-keeping-the-redskins-name/article/2537046
Good letter. Good for him. I'm glad he's not bowing to pressure.
-
The name's gotta go. It's racially insensitive.
-
The name's gotta go. It's racially insensitive.
sweet.
fuck racial sensitivity. People need to stop being bitches.
<--------- roll card carrying Native American
-
"Redskin" is an insulting word and concept. There is no way to spin that without looking like a total douche. I mean look at the letters published so far.
Nope, just do away with 'redskins' and replace it with the Winners!
The Washington Winners is much more alliterative, not accurate though.
-
When you say people you are referring to politicians. Am I correct?
Because there is nothing wrong with pushing back on issues like this when politicians are the ones who began harping on it. Like the failure in chief.
Both. Not the peeps that push back though. We wouldn't have to push back if over board zealot do-gooders wouldn't try to run everyone's lives.
-
"Redskin" is an insulting word and concept. There is no way to spin that without looking like a total douche. I mean look at the letters published so far.
Nope, just do away with 'redskins' and replace it with the Winners!
The Washington Winners is much more alliterative, not accurate though.
How is "Redskins" insulting?
-
How is "Redskins" insulting?
I think hes being sarcastic, but im not sure.
dude definitely has the dry humor of garebear.
-
How is "Redskins" insulting?
You're right. Could you do me a favor? Could you use the word "redskins" in a favorable sentence not involving football? You know, use the word in its finest hour. Since you reckoned that 'redskins' is not insulting, Snyder can sponsor "Better Red than Dead. . .like the Cowboys will be Sunday night!"
-
You're right. Could you do me a favor? Could you use the word "redskins" in a favorable sentence not involving football? You know, use the word in its finest hour. Since you reckoned that 'redskins' is not insulting, Snyder can sponsor "Better Red than Dead. . .like the Cowboys will be Sunday night!"
you realize that we actually started calling ourselves redskins to differentiate ourself from the europeans, right? Probably not.
-
you realize that we actually started calling ourselves redskins to differentiate ourself from the europeans, right? Probably not.
We all are our values. You seem comfortable as a veritable Uncle Tom of the controversy. But like you've intimated, there is no racial slur, thus no problemo!
What's all that stuff about indians as Human Beings and the Others, they were savages, no? That was from Little BigMan. Do I even have to go on? How about you Reddy the Redskin? How about a war whoop for old time's sake? Hiya Hiya, Wa hooo Wa hooo Waaahhhh
-
We all are our values. You seem comfortable as a veritable Uncle Tom of the controversy. But like you've intimated, there is no racial slur, thus no problemo!
What's all that stuff about indians as Human Beings and the Others, they were savages, no? That was from Little BigMan. Do I even have to go on? How about you Reddy the Redskin? How about a war whoop for old time's sake? Hiya Hiya, Wa hooo Wa hooo Waaahhhh
hell yeah, I just let out a war whoop. I have my tomahawk in hand.
quit being a bitch.
-
hell yeah, I just let out a war whoop. I have my tomahawk in hand.
quit being a bitch.
You can't force dignity on anyone. This is the USA!
-
You can't force dignity on anyone. This is the USA!
Let me guess, youre on of those well to do white guys that gets more butthurt at political incorrect comments than the actual "offended" minority....
you really do have a garebear air to ya.
-
You're right. Could you do me a favor? Could you use the word "redskins" in a favorable sentence not involving football? You know, use the word in its finest hour. Since you reckoned that 'redskins' is not insulting, Snyder can sponsor "Better Red than Dead. . .like the Cowboys will be Sunday night!"
When is it used today other than football?
-
Let me guess, youre on of those well to do white guys that gets more butthurt at political incorrect comments than the actual "offended" minority....
you really do have a garebear air to ya.
That's quite a flight of fancy on your part. You've plumbed the depth of my soul and then spit on me in the same sentence.
Since practically everyone else in the solar system views 'redskins' as a slur, I'm sure there's room for you redskins that like being called, 'redskin'. Granted, that's a tad bit submissive but we'll keep that between us and the 8 other people reading this thread.
-
When is it used today other than football?
Nope, you are correct sir.
Why anyone can plainly see that "redskin" is no more of a slur than 'gentleman' or 'Sir'.
-
Nope, you are correct sir.
Why anyone can plainly see that "redskin" is no more of a slur than 'gentleman' or 'Sir'.
Man, you need some midol. You sound like a woman. Too catty for even a gay dude.
-
Man, you need some midol. You sound like a woman. Too catty for even a gay dude.
Am I turning you on somehow?
Midol is for menstrual cramps so that won't help the uncomfortable warmness you are now feeling in your mouth and loins.
Are you dreaming of me in a wig and dress?
Now I'm getting interested!
-
Nope, you are correct sir.
Why anyone can plainly see that "redskin" is no more of a slur than 'gentleman' or 'Sir'.
Because one argument is true, it doesn't make the other also true.
I could say that one can plainly see that redskin is no more a compliment "asshole" or "jerk"
-
Am I turning you on somehow?
Midol is for menstrual cramps so that won't help the uncomfortable warmness you are now feeling in your mouth and loins.
Are you dreaming of me in a wig and dress?
Now I'm getting interested!
fail bro... fail.
-
Because one argument is true, it doesn't make the other also true.
I could say that one can plainly see that redskin is no more a compliment "asshole" or "jerk"
No you could not say the same thing about the concept's ameliorative aspects. That's weak.
You're better than this. Don't waste your time.
-
fail bro... fail.
If you are not prepared to play the game, stop whispering into my ear.
-
No you could not say the same thing about the concept's ameliorative aspects. That's weak.
You're better than this. Don't waste your time.
Doesn't change the flaccid approach of proving your point by measuring "redskin" against complimentary terms.
Redskin is either used as an insult or it isn't. In our society it isn't.
-
Doesn't change the flaccid approach of proving your point by measuring "redskin" against complimentary terms.
Redskin is either used as an insult or it isn't. In our society it isn't.
Really? Are you out of your fucking mind? I'm just curious. Whenever I connect with someone who claims or does something breathtaking, I have to check sanity.
So the US society does not view the word 'redskin' as an insult? I can give you hundreds of links dating back over years that crush your view. Now do you want to reconsider your position the word redskin is not an insult? Come on man. Honesty is the first step.
-
Really? Are you out of your fucking mind? I'm just curious. Whenever I connect with someone who claims or does something breathtaking, I have to check sanity.
So the US society does not view the word 'redskin' as an insult? I can give you hundreds of links dating back over years that crush your view. Now do you want to reconsider your position the word redskin is not an insult? Come on man. Honesty is the first step.
Start pasting.
Who calls anyone "redskin" if they are not referring to football?
You were the one to ask me to use the word and not refer it to football.
My point is it's only used as a football term.
Now that being said, you could say redskin is an insult as it relates to football. After all they got beat by the lowly Raiders. ;D
-
NBC Sports dedicated 60 seconds of the Washington Redskins Sunday game night game to call the Redskins name, 'an insult, a slur' ::) ::)
Political correct BS.
Leftist only watch football to see muscled players rub helmets - bodybuilding related
-
The only insult is how the Redskins are playing this year.
-
Yeah, the Dallas back-up defensive line was destroying their offense. Dallas kept the three man blitz going strong the entire game.
-
Lol seriously redskins isn't a mild slur. You might as well call a team the coons.
-
Lol seriously redskins isn't a mild slur. You might as well call a team the coons.
Actually I read somewhere the name really comes from the scalped victims of certain tribes... Not the color of the actual Indian skin. The victims scalps were redskins for obvious reasons. Not 100% sure if correct. Either way:
Political correctness is the work of The devil... Also islams biggest weapon against us. This made up controversy is ridiculous. I'm Italian if a team was named the greasers... Not a single fuck would be given.
-
Actually I read somewhere the name really comes from the scalped victims of certain tribes... Not the color of the actual Indian skin. The victims scalps were redskins for obvious reasons. Not 100% sure if correct. Either way:
That's some interesting history on the name and puts it into perspective as being a 'fierce' name to choose for a football team.
Political correctness seems to destroy our history at times.
Funny you mention being Italian, people don't realize Italians were one of the largest prejudiced groups of immigrants in America.
-
Bob Costas is an idiot.
If it's a slur, then someone should tell Native Americans.
http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/redskins-must-offend-the-white-man-because-90-of-native-americans-are-not-89001/
The headlines are sprinkled with renewed outrage over the Washington Redskins name, fueled in part by President Obama comment that the team should change their name.
A CBS article from Thursday asks “How Many Native Americans Think ‘Redskins’ Is s Slur?” but rambles trying to prove their opening assertion: “…it’s unclear how many Native Americans think “Redskins” is a racial slur.”
The article attempts to proclaim there are millions and millions of Native Americans and no polling data to determine their outrage over the mascots of sports teams.
In fact, in 2004 the National Annenberg Election Survey found that 90% of those surveyed didn’t find it offensive.
-
President Obama said in an AP interview last Friday that "a sizable group" of Native American Indians don't like the name 'Redskins' for the Washington NFL football team.
One tribe in North Carolina with about 1,200 members has something to say about Obama's marketing ploy to pressure a private enterprise to cave to a special interest's crusade.
Some members of the Croatan Indians of Sampson County, that can trace their origins back to 1650, provided statements. When remarking on Obama's meddling with the Redskins' name, Randy Davis of Godwin said:
Having spent years in DC and being a Croatan Indian, it sickens me to see President Obama weighing in on a team who gave me hope as a Native American in my youth. The President's time would be better spent asking NC Governor Pat McCrory why his office is currently ignoring the pleas for whistle blower protection from the Croatan Indians of Sampson County NC.
Other Croatans offered their take on the president's comments. Trina Maynor made the suggestion to attach the Croatan name to the "Washington Redskins so they will be achieving what our county, state, and federal authorities have failed to do -- acknowledge us as real Indians that really do exist."
Farrell Howard said he is "not offended by the term Redskins used as the name of a professional team. They are warriors and survivors and a great name for a team." And James Davis was emphatic when he said, "the Redskins are the genuine article, just as the Croatan Indians of Sampson County are legitimate. It seems anyone real must be bashed by those whose identity is in doubt. Leave the Redskins alone."
The Croatans know about battling to keep their name. They exist,
-
Perhaps the NE "Patriots" name is offensive to British fans that supported King George during the Revolutionary War.
And I"m sure TB "Buccaneers" is offensive to anyone who's ever been hijacked by actual pirates.
And if you've ever been bitten in the penis by a Dolphin while swimming nude in the Gulf, well, you're no Miami fan...
-
Chain of causation: Obama gives his usual presidential opinion into matters that are irrelevant to his office and a left news organization highlights his non-important opinion to try to turn it into having some sort of legitimate purpose.
Make no misake though Roger Goodell is an Obama ass kisser. Like that time he had Hank Williams Jr. dismissed/fired over his opinionated remarks concerning his views of Obama. Now we can't enjoy "are you ready for some football" on Monday nights. Soon Redskins will have to change their name to some team mascot animal. ::) :-\
-
Perhaps the NE "Patriots" name is offensive to British fans that supported King George during the Revolutionary War.
And I"m sure TB "Buccaneers" is offensive to anyone who's ever been hijacked by actual pirates.
And if you've ever been bitten in the penis by a Dolphin while swimming nude in the Gulf, well, you're no Miami fan...
So dumb but so right.
-
Being a roll card carrying native american (even though im white as the day is long), this is just more politicalky correct BS where an extremely small percentage of a group is offended so a much larger non offenddd group feels the need to take up the charge and make things "fair" for the couple of offended bitches.
People need to grow the fuck up... life isnt fair, things are offensive, and you shouldnt expect hundreds of years of tradition to change just because you feel butthurt.
FYI - redskin was originally used by the natives to differentiate themselves from the Europeans.
-
When sports teams work with the Native Americans in their area they have a great relationship....the Seminoles. That tribe is honored as being strong, brave, macho etc. As are the Irish honored with ND. I sure the Fightining Illini are also so honored.
Washington should contact the Algonquin tribe where during the time of the pilgrims their fiercest warriors painted themselves red and were called Redskins.
Stanford wanted a strong and fierce macho name for their sports teams. Indians. What an horor. No? OK lets change it to a color, Cardinal, and our mascot will be a metrosexual redwood tree.
I give up!!
-
The only insult is how the Redskins are playing this year.
Thanks....
-
This just in:
The Washington Redskins are going to change their name because of all the hatred, violence, lying, and hostility associated with their name.
From now on they will be known simply as the Redskins.
-
Really? Are you out of your fucking mind? I'm just curious. Whenever I connect with someone who claims or does something breathtaking, I have to check sanity.
So the US society does not view the word 'redskin' as an insult? I can give you hundreds of links dating back over years that crush your view. Now do you want to reconsider your position the word redskin is not an insult? Come on man. Honesty is the first step.
Is whiteskin also an insult?
-
Documents: Anti-Redskins Indian leader not a legitimate member of his tribe
9:17 PM 10/14/2013
Patrick Howley
The American Indian leader spearheading the campaign to change the name of the Washington Redskins is not a legitimate member of the tribe he leads, according to a New York State Assemblywoman, but rather an Obama crony who is raking in casino money and paying back only small stipends to his tribe members.
Oneida Nation Representative Ray Halbritter, who is also the CEO of Oneida Nation Enterprises, is not recognized in his position by the Grand Council of Chiefs governing the Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy. Halbritter is not a legitimate member of the Oneida tribe, Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney told The Daily Caller.
“He is not even technically an Oneida. There is not a drop of Oneida in him,” Tenney said.
Halbritter traces his lineage back to a woman who lived on traditional Iroquois Confederacy land, but as a non-member of the Six Nations.
A microcopy of 1885-1940 Indian Census Rolls from the National Archives of the United States, obtained by The Daily Caller, disputes Halbritter’s claim to have one-fourth Oneida blood on his mother’s side. The Oneida Indian Nation of New York determines membership by matrilineal descent and requires “a blood quantum of 1/4 degree,” according to its constitution, submitted to a former official of the U.S. Department of the Interior in 1994.
The document lists Lucy Carpenter, Halbitter’s great-great grandmother on the “Census of Indians residing upon the Oneida Reservation who do not belong to the Six Nations.”
Many Indians whose families left New York attempted to get back into the Six Nations during this period to take advantage of various treaties.
Lucy Carpenter’s daughter Christina Cornelius, born in Canada, had a daughter in New York named Mary Cornelius, who later married and changed her name to “Mary Winder” and had a daughter in New York named Gloria Winder, who went on to have a son with a man named “Ramon Halbritter.” That son was Arthur “Ray” Halbritter, the current Representative of the Oneida Nation, according to documents obtained by TheDC.
Halbritter ancestor Lucy Carpenter’s expulsion from the Six Nations, according to the 1885-1940 Census Rolls, invalidates Halbritter’s claim to one-fourth Oneida heritage on his mother’s side, according to Tenney.
“He has no ancestry in the Six Nations but he has a lot of powerful friends in D.C.,” Tenney said.
Halbritter attended a January 27, 2012 fundraiser with President Obama in Washington, D.C. with 70 Indian leaders. The $15,000 to $35,800 fundraiser raised up to $2.5 million for Obama’s re-election campaign.
“The president was most gracious and kind in his remarks,” Halbritter said after the event to a media network owned by his nation’s company, noting that Obama is doing more to reach out to Indian tribes than any president in his experience.
Obama recently said that if he was the owner of the Redskins, he would “think about changing it [the team name].”
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/14/documents-anti-redskins-indian-leader-not-a-legitimate-member-of-his-tribe/#ixzz2hpieCBZ7
-
Imagine that lol.
-
Imagine that lol.
par for the couse. Seems its always someone else getting offended on someones behalf.... shit drives me crazy. Why the fuck should someone get butthurt if the people themselves dont?
-
par for the couse. Seems its always someone else getting offended on someones behalf.... shit drives me crazy. Why the fuck should someone get butthurt if the people themselves dont?
Money
-
This just in:
The Washington Redskins are going to change their name because of all the hatred, violence, lying, and hostility associated with their name.
From now on they will be known simply as the Redskins.
lol
-
This just in:
The Washington Redskins are going to change their name because of all the hatred, violence, lying, and hostility associated with their name.
From now on they will be known simply as the Redskins.
Well played. ;D
-
Bob Costas: You'd Be Offended by 'Redskins' - If You'd Just 'Think for a Moment'
October 14, 2013
By Craig Bannister
After using an NFL halftime show to attack the Second Amendment last December, Bob Costas turned his sights on the First Amendment during last night's Redskins-Cowboys game.
Costas used his platform on the nationally televised NFL game - not to discuss football - but to voice his indignation at the Washington "Redskins" team name.
He began by admitting that the team intends no insult to Native Americans, and that even Native Americans themselves don't mind the name:
"There's no reason to believe that owner Dan Snyder, or any official or player from his team harbors animus towards Native Americans or wishes to disrespect them. This is undoubtedly also true of the vast majority of those who don't think twice about the long-standing moniker. And, in fact, as best as can be determined, even a majority (90 percent, apparently) of Native Americans says they're not offended."
Then came the lecture.
"But, having stipulated that, there's still a distinction to be made," Costas declared, launching into a list of teams with what he deemed less problematic names that changed their names in order to avoid risking offense.
Costas then argued that the people who don't mind the "Redskins" name would actually realize that it's "an insult, a slur" and be offended - if they'd just bother to "think for a moment":
"And the Miami of Ohio Redskins - that's right, Redskins - are now the Redhawks. Still, the NFL franchise that represents the nation's capital has maintained its name.
"But think for a moment about the term 'Redskins,' and how it truly differs from all the others. Ask yourself what the equivalent would be if directed toward African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, or members of any other ethnic group.
"When considered that way, 'Redskins' can't possibly honor a heritage or a noble character trait. Nor can it possibly be considered a neutral term. It's an insult, a slur, no matter how benign the present-day intent.
"It's fair to say that for a long time now, and certainly in 2013, no offense has been intended. But if you take a step back, isn't it easy to see how offense might legitimately be taken?"
So:
•A "vast majority" of people intend no insult and aren't offended,
•A "majority of Native Americans says they're not offended,"
•Owner Dan Snyder and the entire Redskins organization don't harbor or intend any disrespect
But, if people would just "think for a moment," they'd "see how offense might legitimately be taken" - that "It's an insult, a slur, no matter how benign the present-day intent."
And, what's with the benign "present-day intent" qualifier - as if the team, at its creation, might have chosen to call itself a name that was actually intended to be self-loathing?
So, it seems, it doesn't matter how you mean it - it matters how someone else interprets it...even if that someone else isn't a membered of the supposedly offended group.
In any case, Sean Hannity doesn't go on the NFL channel to preach about the deficit, so why should football fans have to be brow-beaten by Costas over the name "Redskins"?
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-bannister/bob-costas-youd-be-offended-redskins-if-youd-just-think-moment
-
Costas lol. He should just stick to sports.
-
Costas lol. He should just stick to sports.
Yeah. His social commentary often sucks.
-
Why are we talking about this and not the actual problems facing america?
Shame on all of us for falling into this trap. I do it myself as well. Obama looks like shit on the debt crisis or shutdown, so he makes a bonehead comment about a beer summit or NFL team name, and that knocks everything off the headlines.
-
I hope he stands his ground.
Poll: 59 percent see why 'Redskins' is offensive to Native Americans
By John Breech | CBSSports.com
October 16, 2013
The Redskins' controversy doesn't appear to be going away any time soon. (USATSI)
On Oct. 9, Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder wrote an open letter to fans explaining why the team wouldn't be changing its name. Snyder cited several polls in his letter, among them, an AP poll taken in May where 79 percent of respondents said they didn't have a problem with the Redskins name.
A new poll was released on Wednesday and it's safe to say that Snyder probably won't be referencing any time soon. In a poll commissioned by the Oneida Indian Nation, 59 percent of respondents say Native Americans have a right to feel offended by the term Redskins.
Among Redskins fans polled, a total of 46 percent of respondents said a name change would not lessen their support for the team. Another 23 percent said that a name change would actually make them even more of a Washington fan.
The poll of 500 adults in the Washington D.C. area was conducted by SurveyUSA and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percent.
In his letter, Snyder said he respects people who disagree, but he has no plans to change the team's name.
I respect the opinions of those who disagree. I want them to know that I do hear them, and I will continue to listen and learn. But we cannot ignore our 81 year history, or the strong feelings of most of our fans as well as Native Americans throughout the country. After 81 years, the team name "Redskins" continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come.
The NFL plans to meet with representatives of the Oneida Indian Nation in November to have a conversation about the Redskins team name. Snyder's been invited to attend, but has yet to confirm if he'll be there. Among those polled, 77 percent of respondents believe Snyder should attend.
"You cannot poll morality, and our hope is that Mr. Synder will demonstrate true leadership and change the offensive name, not because of what any public opinion studies show, but because it's the right thing to do," Oneida Indian Nation representative Ray Halbritter said. "However, this polling information is valuable because it shows that the team has nothing to fear economically by changing its name. In fact, the data indicates that the team stands to actually gain support from its fans by finally making the right decision and changing the name."
President Obama and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell both seem open to a name change, but as Goodell said in September, the decision is ultimately Snyder's to make.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24092567/poll-59-percent-see-why-redskins-name-is-offensive-to-native-americans
-
Taking it to a new level of absurd. ::)
Political cartoon compares Redskins logo to swastika, confederate flag
(http://wttg.images.worldnow.com/images/2908449_G.jpg)
Posted: Oct 18, 2013 1:46 AM
Updated: Oct 18, 2013 6:38 AM
WASHINGTON - The Redskins name debate just isn't going away.
A new political cartoon in the New York Daily News is raising eyebrows by comparing the Skins logo to a swastika and the confederate flag.
Next to it is written the caption "Archaic Symbols of Pride and Heritage."
FOX 5 reached out to a number of businesses that advertise at Fed-Ex Field, the home stadium of the Redskins, to see if the name bothered them.
They either had no comment on the issue but offered support for the team and the partnership - or didn't call us back altogether.
In a related story, The Richmond Free Press is dropping the Redskins nickname for the Washington NFL team from its pages, calling it racist.
In an editorial Thursday, the weekly primarily aimed at the city's African-American community called the name insulting to Native Americans and divisive.
http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/23726152/political-cartoon-compares-redskins-logo-to-swastika-confederate-flag#ixzz2i7w2UxV2
Follow us: @myfoxdc on Twitter | myfoxdc on Facebook
-
Hail to the Redskins!
Pat Buchanan reminisces about boyhood in D.C. singing team's 'racist' fight song
After Sunday mass at Holy Trinity, the parents left their four boys in Georgetown to drive to Griffith Stadium to join 27,000 fans to watch “Slingin’ Sammy” Baugh take on the Philadelphia Eagles.
Already a legend, Baugh was the greatest football player of his era. Record-setting passer, runner, punter, place kicker, defensive back. Yet, not until the fourth quarter did Sammy throw for a pair of touchdowns to finish off the Eagles 20-14.
Something else was happening that Sunday. As the scoreless tie went on, there came a series of public service announcements calling on admirals, generals and officials to leave the stadium and report to their posts. Only when mom and dad left did they learn why.
It was Dec. 7, 1941, and the headline on the extra edition of the tabloid press sold outside Griffith Stadium read in big war type: “Japs Bomb Pearl Harbor!”
Seven years on, after a black Tuesday in the family on my 10th birthday, Nov. 2, 1948, the day Harry Truman waxed Tom Dewey, I was the privileged son taken out to see the Redskins face the same Eagles.
But now the Eagles had the NFL’s leading running back Steve Van Buren and the great All-Pro end Pete Pihos.
Surfing the Web to conform my memories, I came across some things I did not know then. Van Buren, an NFL immortal who would set all-time rushing records, had been orphaned as a boy in Louisiana.
Pihos had a more arresting story. His father had been murdered. An All-American at Indiana, he had his career interrupted. He had been with the 35th Infantry under Gen. George Patton, took part in D-Day, was commissioned a second lieutenant on the battlefield, and won a Bronze Star and a Silver Star for bravery.
And for a tiny fraction of what players make today, these tough men were battling it out in the ’40s in a boys’ game in leather helmets.
Order Pat Buchanan’s brilliant and prescient books at WND’s Superstore.
Washington was another city then, a deeply rooted city, not the cosmopolitan world capital of today where our multicultural elites all seem to come from somewhere else.
Yet, one still recalls from boyhood that when the Redskins would score the fans would all take up the team’s fight song written by Corinne Griffith, wife of owner George Preston Marshall. Redskin bandleader Barnee Breeskin wrote the music in the ’30s. Here is how it went:
Hail to the Redskins!
Hail Victory!
Braves on the warpath!
Fight for old D.C.!
Yeah, I know. Pure unadulterated racism. We just didn’t know it.
Fortunately, we now have sensitive souls like Ray Halbritter of the Oneida Indian Nation to tutor us in our depravity.
“By changing his team’s name,” Redskin owner Dan Snyder “can create a better historical legacy for himself – one of tolerance and mutual respect,” says Halbritter: “Native Americans do not want their people to be hurt by such painful epithets.”
Hurt? Native Americans are “hurt” by the Redskins’ name?
Years ago, I recall hearing a line I thought a magnificent tribute to the toughness, bravery and perseverance of these peoples the Europeans encountered and fought on American soil for centuries.
“There is no whine in the Indian,” the writer said.
What he meant was that these were people who stood, fought and died, and did not whimper. And it is that character trait so many teams from the Fighting Sioux of North Dakota to the Cleveland Indians of the Cuyahoga seek to capture in their adopted names.
And as I have never heard of anyone choosing a team name to insult it, who is really lacking in tolerance and mutual respect here?
If Halbritter has a problem with the Redskins, he’s got more problems than that in D.C. Among this city’s great monuments is the memorial to Jefferson whose Declaration of Independence speaks of those “merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction, of all ages, sexes and conditions.”
After burning and pillaging Atlanta and Columbia, S.C., Gen. William Tecumseh “Uncle Billy” Sherman talked of a “final solution to the Indian problem” and wrote his friend Gen. Grant: “We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children.”
Theodore Roosevelt dissented from Gen. Sherman’s oft-stated view that the “only good Indian is a dead Indian.” Said. T. R., “I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of ten are, and I shouldn’t like to inquire too closely into the case of the tenth.”
And Teddy was a RINO.
And so what are we going to do here?
Edit Jefferson’s declaration, tear down the Jefferson Memorial, pull down Sherman’s statue, dynamite T.R. off the face of Mount Rushmore?
Or maybe just tell the Oneida crowd we know how excruciatingly painful it must be to have to hear “Hail to the Redskins!” but are confident they have the moxie and the manhood to deal with it.
Meanwhile, let’s get back to the game.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/hail-to-the-redskins/
-
NYT Sports Columnist: Redskins Name Change ‘Has To Start With Us In The Media’
By Paul Bremmer | October 28, 2013
Like the steady beat of a drum, the liberal media’s war on the Washington Redskins’ name continues. On Saturday’s CBS This Morning, co-anchor Vanita Nair broached the topic during a discussion with The New York Times sports columnist Bill Rhoden. Nair asked if the Redskins might really change their name, and Rhoden replied with certitude, “Oh, they’re going to change it. And I think it has to start with us in the media.”
So it’s the media’s job to pressure professional sports teams into changing their names? Rhoden repeated his brash call to liberal activist journalism: [See video below the break.]
"There will be legislation; eventually the name is going to be changed, but I think that it has to start with us in the media to just stop using the name."
Wow. Rhoden actually wants legislation to compel the Redskins, a privately-owned venture, to change their name. That would be government coercion on the level of ObamaCare. But as it stands right now, it’s up to owner Daniel Snyder to change the name, and he has said he doesn’t want to change it.
To those who follow the liberal media, it’s not news that they are fans of political correctness. But it’s a little jarring to hear a journalist talk as if it is the media’s job to force political correctness onto one particular organization, possibly under penalty of law. What happened to just reporting on the facts?
Rhoden made it crystal clear how he felt about the Redskins’ name:
"[T]he name has outlived its usefulness. I mean, we all realize it’s not appropriate, some people are offended, and we have to move on. There’s only one person who doesn't realize it, and he owns the team."
He talks as if Snyder is the only one who doesn’t want to change the name. There have been differently-worded polls that have produced conflicting results as to whether Native Americans, or the public at large, want a name change. However, there have not been any polls that show overwhelming opposition to the name ‘Redskins.’ The Dan Snyder-versus-the-world picture that Rhoden paints is not accurate.
This was not the first time Rhoden mixed sports with liberal activism. Last December, he expressed his wish that the NFL would ban its players from owning guns. In April 2011, he called for the NBA to suspend Kobe Bryant for Game 1 of a playoff series after Bryant mouthed the “gay F-bomb” at a referee.
Below is a transcript of the October 26 segment:
VANITA NAIR: I want to talk to you about the other controversy right now involving the Washington Redskins' name. Where is this right now? I mean, is there a possibility they really could be changing this name?
BILL RHODEN, New York Times sports columnist: Oh, they’re going to change it. And I think it has to start with us in the media. Probably for the last 10 years I’ve not used it in a column. And I think that whether it’s here or wherever else, I think once we stop using that name and we recognize it's a racist name, I think that is what's going to resonate. There will be legislation; eventually the name is going to be changed, but I think that it has to start with us in the media to just stop using the name.
NAIR: Well, I think the fact that Oneida Indian officials will meet with NFL officials next week in New York City is a good indication that this is happening.
RHODEN: Oh no, it’s going to happen. This has become sort of the movement for a lot of young people of this generation who have gotten radio campaigns, Internet campaigns, because you know it’s just – the name has outlived its usefulness. I mean, we all realize it’s not appropriate, some people are offended, and we have to move on. There’s only one person who doesn't realize it, and he owns the team.
ANTHONY MASON: Well, but his neighbor has registered a trademark for Washington Bravehearts for use – for entertainment and the nature of football games. Do you think there’s a tie here?
RHODEN: Good luck with that. (Laughter) Let's come up with something else.
MASON: You don't like that one, huh?
RHODEN: Nah, I don't like that one.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/paul-bremmer/2013/10/28/nyt-sports-columnist-redskins-name-change-has-start-us-media#ixzz2j3n55h2w
-
Oneida, NFL meet about 'Redskins'
Updated: October 30, 2013
By Don Van Natta Jr. | ESPN.com
Representatives of the Oneida Indian Nation on Wednesday asked NFL executives to sanction Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder for conduct detrimental to the league for continuing to use a team nickname and mascot that "promote a dictionary-defined racial slur."
In the 90-minute meeting between Oneida Nation representatives and three senior league executives in New York City, the officials also asked for all team owners to meet with Oneida leaders the week of Super Bowl XLVIII. And they asked that Snyder and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who was traveling Wednesday and did not attend the meeting, visit Oneida Nation homelands in upstate New York.
But the Oneida representatives left disappointed, saying after the meeting with senior NFL executives Jeff Pash, Adolpho Birch and Paul Hicks that the league "defended the use of a racist name," Oneida spokesman Joel Barkin said.
"We are very disappointed," Barkin said. "This is the beginning of a process. It's clear that they don't see how this is not a unifying term. They don't have a complete appreciation for the breadth of opposition of Native Americans to this mascot and name."
Wednesday's meeting occurred one day after Goodell and Snyder met about the same issue. According to The Washington Post, Snyder repeated to Goodell that he had no plans to change the team's nickname.
"We met at the request of Ray Halbritter of the Oneida Nation. We listened and respectfully discussed the views of Mr. Halbritter, Oneida Nation Wolf Clan Representative Keller George and their colleagues, as well as the sharply differing views of many other Native Americans and fans in general," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said. "The meeting was part of an ongoing dialogue to facilitate listening and learning, consistent with the commissioner's comments earlier this year."
It is rare for the NFL to discuss such issues with tribal leaders directly. In 1992, NFL representatives met with tribal leaders about the appropriateness of the Redskins and Chiefs nicknames, but then-commissioner Paul Tagliabue said the league had no intention of pressuring the teams to change their names.
In a two-page letter written to Goodell and turned over to league executives Wednesday, Halbritter asked executives to amend the league's bylaws with a rule that would prohibit the NFL from naming teams with "dictionary-defined racial slurs," a classification that Oneida leaders say includes Redskins.
Halbritter also asked Goodell to open an inquiry of Snyder under section 8.13 of league bylaws, which gives the commissioner the power to initiate disciplinary action against any owner who is "guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the league or professional football."
"As Commissioner," Halbritter wrote to Goodell, "you have exercised your authority to act pursuant to this provision under circumstances that are far less egregious than the use of a racial epithet as a team's name, including imposition of sanctions for salary cap violations, prohibitions of on-field celebrations that do not reflect well on the game and punishing off-field misconduct by team officials."
Despite increased calls by groups and journalists to change the nickname, Snyder has said repeatedly he would "never" change the name. Snyder, who recently hired lawyer and public relations consultant Lanny Davis to help him navigate recent publicity over the issue, could not be reached for comment Wednesday. Davis also did not return requests for comment.
During the meeting, Oneida representatives presented league executives with a copy of an Oneida-commissioned, 30-page study that examined whether a "scientific rationale" existed for the stance that the Redskins' team mascot harms Native Americans. The conclusion is that it does. According to the study:
• The Redskins contribute to "prejudice and discrimination" against Native Americans by using the team name and mascot, which would be considered harassment or bullying in a workplace or if used interpersonally.
• Tests have shown that the presence of Native American mascots results directly in lower self-esteem and lower mood within this population, as well as increased negative associations of Native Americans among non-Native American groups. Importantly, these effects occur regardless of whether the Native American mascot is considered "offensive."
• Racial slurs, racial harassment and racial bullying have been associated with poor mental health among Native American children, adolescents and adults, according to study author Michael A. Friedman, a clinical psychologist specializing in how social environment can influence mental and physical health.
"Native Americans are the only group in the United States subjected to having a racial slur as the mascot of a prominent professional sports team," Friedman wrote in his study. "The Washington football team, whether it intends to do so or not, is contributing to prejudice and discrimination against Native Americans by persisting in using the 'R-word.' With the help of the National Football League's $9 billion a year global marketing machine, this behavior not only repeatedly exposes Native Americans to a harmful stereotype, but also implicitly condones the use of this term by non-Native Americans, which if performed on an interpersonal level would possibly constitute harassment or bullying."
"People ask, 'Why now?' but Native Americans have protested against this nickname for 40 years," Friedman said in an interview. "There are 10 different studies showing the direct causal effects on Native Americans and how it creates a racially hostile environment."
Friedman said that in the past 25 years, 28 U.S. high schools have dropped Redskins as a nickname.
This month, Snyder, who has owned the team since May 1999, wrote an open letter to Washington fans saying that the nickname was a cherished part of the team's heritage and would never be changed. "After 81 years," Snyder wrote, "the team name 'Redskins' continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come."
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9903563/oneida-nation-meets-nfl-leadership-seek-washington-redskins-name-mascot-change
-
The Washington Redskins and Liberal Fascism
BY: Sonny Bunch // November 4, 2013
I’ve been re-reading Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism for a longer term project, and I was struck by the following passage:
Orwell’s was a daddy-dystopia, where the state is abusive and bullying, maintaining its authority through a permanent climate of war and the manufacture of convenient enemies. Huxley’s is a maternal misery, where man is smothered with care, not cruelty. But for all our talk these days about manliness, individualism, and even the ‘nanny state,’ we still don’t have the vocabulary to fight off nice totalitarianism, liberal fascism.
With that distinction in mind, let us revisit It Takes a Village. On page after page, Clinton extols the idea that just about everything is a health issue. Divorce should be treated like a “public health issue” because it creates stress in children. The very basics of parenting are health issues because “how infants are held, touched, fed, spoken to, and gazed at” determines whether our brains can be “hijacked” by our emotions, potentially making us murderously violent.
This jumped out at me because, just last week, the group of Indians trying to force the Washington Redskins to change their name—by law, if that’s what it takes—has decided to couch their argument in exactly this sort of language:
During their meeting, [Oneida Nation representative Ray] Halbritter cited that Native Americans have the lowest life expectancy, the lowest quality of living, and one of the highest rates of teen suicides in the nation. He said that the team’s name, which is a dictionary defined racial slur, has destructive effects on his people and Native American people everywhere, and introduced a psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Friedman, who conducted a report on the psychological effects of the Washington football team’s name on Native American people.
Can we first note how absurd it is for Halbritter and co to blame the endemic problems of the Native American community on something as trivial as a football team name? A football team name that, as Rick Reilly has noted, is proudly embraced by a number of Native Americans and Native American institutions? It’s Dan Snyder’s fault that Native Americans are psychological train wrecks? That their communities have been ravaged by any number of social pathologies? Let’s leave aside the fact that the buck-passing here is extraordinary: “Our neighborhoods are trainwrecks, and it’s all Dan Snyder’s fault!” Are we actually supposed to believe this tripe?
Of course we are. And we are not only supposed to believe it, we are supposed to actively work to help ameliorate this utterly manufactured controversy. And how better to fix it than by using the naked force of the government to bend Dan Snyder to our will? The people have spoken! How dare Snyder stand in the way of progress? Doesn’t he understand the damage that he is doing to the fragile egos of our nation’s most vulnerable citizens? What sort of monster is he?
As Goldberg noted, “We still don’t have the vocabulary to fight off nice totalitarianism, liberal fascism.” And I doubt we’ll develop one in time to help Dan Snyder.
http://freebeacon.com/blog/the-washington-redskins-and-liberal-fascism/
-
You don't say?
Slate Article Discloses Benign Origin of ‘Redskins’
By Paul Bremmer | December 20, 2013
Slate published an enlightening piece on Wednesday in which journalist and author David Skinner revealed the true origin of the term “redskin,” which many liberal journalists have been crusading for NFL owner Dan Snyder to disavow.
According to Skinner, the word originated with Native Americans as a self-descriptive term. He explained:
The English term, in fact, derived from Native American phrases involving the color red in combination with terms for flesh, skin, and man. These phrases were part of a racial vocabulary that Indians often used to designate themselves in opposition to others whom they (like the Europeans) called black, white, and so on.
You don’t have to take Skinner’s word for it. His article was based on the research of Ives Goddard, a Native American language scholar at the Smithsonian Institution who published a study of the origin of the word “redskin” in 2005.
Skinner went on to mention a couple of times in the early 1800s when Indian chiefs used the term “red skins” to refer to their fellow Natives. He said the term soon became commonplace:
In the coming years, redskin became a key element of the English-language rhetoric used by Indians and Americans alike to speak about each other and to each other.
Will MSNBC invite Skinner on one of their programs to counter the network’s war against the Washington Redskins’ name? I doubt it, but they should if they are interested in providing a historical perspective rather than simply serving as a platform for critics of the team.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/paul-bremmer/2013/12/20/slate-article-discloses-benign-origin-redskins#ixzz2obvjHmhy
-
I don't have a problem being pc, within reason, but Congress needs to shut the heck up and stay out of this.
Congress calls for Redskins change
May 28, 2013
Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- Ten members of Congress are urging the Washington Redskins to change their name because it is offensive to many Native Americans.
The representatives said Tuesday that they've sent letters to Redskins owner Dan Snyder, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, Redskins sponsor FedEx, and the other 31 NFL franchises.
The letter to Snyder says that "Native Americans throughout the country consider the 'R-word' a racial, derogatory slur akin to the 'N-word' among African Americans or the 'W-word' among Latinos."
Among the group sending the letters are the leaders of the Congressional Native American Caucus, Tom Cole, R-Okla., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn.
The nickname is the subject of a long-running legal challenge from a group seeking to have the team lose its trademark protection.
Snyder has vowed that he will never change the name.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9319267/members-congress-urge-washington-redskins-change-name
some dimwit democrats in congress ask for change
team is privatly owned
answer is nope
-
::)
Redskins name to be discussed at United Nations
01.24
The Washington Redskins team name has been a subject of controversy for some time now, and there have been increased efforts to get the name changed over the past year. As it stands now, Washington owner Daniel Snyder isn't going to budge when it comes to changing the name, and the NFL isn't forcing him to do anything he doesn't want to do. While there seems to be no movement on the name change, that hasn't stopped groups from trying to get the conversation started again. One of those groups are the Oneida Indian Nation, who will be meeting with the United Nations to discuss the name.
http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/411011-redskins-name-to-be-discussed-at-united-nations
-
::)
Redskins name to be discussed at United Nations
01.24
The Washington Redskins team name has been a subject of controversy for some time now, and there have been increased efforts to get the name changed over the past year. As it stands now, Washington owner Daniel Snyder isn't going to budge when it comes to changing the name, and the NFL isn't forcing him to do anything he doesn't want to do. While there seems to be no movement on the name change, that hasn't stopped groups from trying to get the conversation started again. One of those groups are the Oneida Indian Nation, who will be meeting with the United Nations to discuss the name.
http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/411011-redskins-name-to-be-discussed-at-united-nations
Taking their cause to a corrupt, ineffective, worthless organization...they better have some bribe money.
-
this is officially the 34934856394587th biggest problem facing our country.
-
Taking their cause to a corrupt, ineffective, worthless organization...they better have some bribe money.
Or some casino chips. :)
-
::)
Lawmakers warn NFL about Redskins
Updated: February 10, 2014
By John Keim | ESPN.com
The fight to change the Redskins' name won't die. And it's become an issue among the nation's lawmakers.
Two members of Congress will send a letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on Monday, telling him to publicly announce support for a name change -- and that the NFL can no longer ignore the issue.
“
The National Football League can no longer ignore this and perpetuate the use of this name as anything but what it is: a racial slur.
”
-- Lawmakers' letter to Congress
The letter, obtained by multiple media outlets, was written by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.). Cantwell is chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, while Cole is a senior member of the appropriations committee -- and a member of the Chickasaw Nation.
"The National Football League can no longer ignore this and perpetuate the use of this name as anything but what it is: a racial slur," the letter stated.
Cantwell told the newspaper the Indian Affairs Committee would "definitely" examine the NFL's tax-exempt status as a means to apply pressure.
"You're getting a tax break for educational purposes, but you're still embracing a name that people see as a slur and encouraging it," Cantwell told The New York Times.
The letter reiterated that stance, telling the NFL it's on the "wrong side of history." That's why, it stated, the NFL should "take a formal position in support of a name change."
The Redskins have received "more than 7,000 letters and emails" in favor of keeping the name, with "almost 200 from people who identified themselves as Native Americans or as family members of Native Americans," the team said in a statement released Monday.
The statement included three letter excerpts from fans of Native American descent, all either supporting the Redskins' name or saying it was not offensive to them.
The Redskins also cited a 2004 survey that said 90 percent of Native Americans were not bothered by the Redskins' name. The lawmakers' letter criticized the team for clinging to "decade-old public opinion polling."
Goodell has declined to take a formal stance on the debate in the past. Before the Super Bowl, he told reporters, "I've been spending the last year talking to many of the leaders in the Native American communities. We are trying to make sure we understand the issues. Let me remind you: This is the name of a football team, a football team that's had that name for 80 years and has presented the name in a way that it has honored Native Americans."
The lawmakers' letter rebutted Goodell's statement, calling the name "an insult to Native Americans."
Redskins owner Dan Snyder has been adamant that he won't change the name. But he has received steady pressure, and protests, over the past year. In May, 10 members of Congress sent letters to Snyder, Goodell, the 31 other owners and Redskins sponsor FedEx, urging the franchise to change the name. Cole was part of that group as well.
That group introduced a bill last March that would "cancel the federal registrations of trademarks using the word redskin in reference to Native Americans."
Redskins spokesman Tony Wyllie said in a statement, "With all the important issues Congress has to deal with such as a war in Afghanistan to deficits to health care, don't they have more important issues to worry about than a football team's name? And given the fact that the name of Oklahoma means 'Red People' in Choctaw, this request is a little ironic."
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10430475/senator-threatens-nfl-tax-exempt-status-washington-redskins-name
-
Yeah..... Look for this to happen in the next couple of years
-
Redskins Have a Fiery Response for Lawmakers Who Make Their Team Name a Matter of National Politics
Kyle Becker
On February 11, 2014
When Sen. Maria Cantwell and Rep. Tom Cole, a Democrat and a Republican, respectively, decided to play Political Correctness beat-cops instead of grappling with the pressing issues of the day, they probably didn’t expect this.
The two lawmakers picked on the Washington Redskins NFL football team for having a name that some Americans find offensive. Well, this football team fired back, and it’s a score:
“Senator Cantwell should be aware that there are many challenges facing Native Americans, including an extremely cold winter with high energy bills, high unemployment, life threatening health problems, inadequate education and many other issues more pressing than the name of a football team which has received strong support from Native Americans,” the statement said. “Surely, with all the issues Congress is supposed to work on such as the economy, jobs, war and health care, the Senator must have more important things to do,” the statement said.
Ouch.
Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has already said that he will not cave to the pressure to change the team name so long as he is the owner. Fox News reported that even Roger Goodell has sided with the Redskins, despite his image as a league commissioner who is vulnerable to such pressures:
“Eight out of 10 Americans in the general population would not like us to change the name. So we are listening. We are being respectful to people who disagree. But let’s not forget this is the name of a football team.”
Right. And let’s not forget that there are 3.6 million long-term unemployed, a national debt that is on its way to $20 trillion by the end of this president’s term, and more than enough issues to keep Congress busy – especially the ones that lawmakers are toiling away creating.
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/02/114288-washington-redskins-fiery-response-lawmakers-things-besides-harass-football-team/
-
Glad to see they have their priorities in order.
U.S. senators send letters to Goodell
May 22, 2014
By Darren Rovell | ESPN.com
Letters signed by 50 U.S. senators urging the league to change the Washington Redskins name were sent on Thursday to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.
The senators draw a parallel between the NBA's no-tolerance policy regarding the racist comments made by Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling and asks the NFL to act similarly.
Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has been steadfast in his stance that he will not change his team's nickname.
"Today, we urge you and the National Football League to send the same clear message as the NBA did: that racism and bigotry have no place in professional sports," the senators write. "It's time for the NFL to endorse a name change for the Washington, D.C. football team.
"The despicable comments made by Mr. Sterling have opened up a national conversation about race relations. We believe this conversation is an opportunity for the NFL to take action to remove the racial slur from the name of one of its marquee franchises."
Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has opposed the name change, and his team has launched its own public relations campaign issuing comments by Native Americans that continue to support the name.
The NFL has stood behind Snyder and issued its own response Thursday to the news of the senators' letter.
"We have not received the letter, but the NFL has long demonstrated a commitment to progressive leadership on issues of diversity and inclusion, both on and off the field," NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said in a statement. "The intent of the team's name has always been to present a strong, positive and respectful image. The team name is not used by the team or the NFL in any other context, though we respect those that view it differently."
The Oneida Indian Nation, a tribe located in upstate New York that has been pushing for the name change through a national "Change the Mascot" campaign, applauded the senators' formal action while continuing to stay on its message.
"Washington team owner Dan Snyder and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell have claimed that using the R-word epithet somehow honors native peoples, but it is quite the opposite," Oneida Nation CEO Ray Halbritter said in a statement. "The R-word is a dictionary defined racial slur."
Halbritter said that the Redskins name is not a term of honor but "a malicious insult."
Jackie Pata, the executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, also weighed in Thursday.
"The NFL is a global brand," Pata said in a statement released through Oneida. "But it wants to contribute to the positive image of the United States across the world rather than callously promoting discrimination against Native Americans, then it must stop promoting this slur and finally change the name."
One letter to the NFL was signed by 49 senators (only Democrats) and was not signed by Tim Kaine or Mark Warner, the two Democratic senators from Virginia.
Senator Bill Nelson (D-Florida) sent a separate letter to Goodell calling for the Redskins to change their name.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/21/dem-congressman-weve-proved-that-communism-works/
-
Whores never miss an opportunity.
-
I don't know why anyone rich enough to buy an American pro sports team would want to deal with all the BS they'd have to deal with if they owned such a team in a private league in this PC-obsessed culture.
-
From the article:
One letter to the NFL was signed by 49 senators (only Democrats) and was not signed by Tim Kaine or Mark Warner, the two Democratic senators from Virginia.Senator Bill Nelson (D-Florida) sent a separate letter to Goodell calling for the Redskins to change their name.
The democratic party has nothing better to do? There are no other issues much more important than the name of a football team?
This is why the dumocratic party is a racist party. All they focus on is race. They focus on dividing the country along racial lines. They know that eventually there will be more Hispanics in this nation and that whites will be the minority (I wonder if by that time whites will be protected by affirmative action, but I digress). It's like they see racism in everything and they do it on purpose in order to secure the vote of the gullible minorities. They want to present themselves as being the guardian of all minorities.
They can't run on crapcare, they can't run on anything good that they accomplished since they didn't succeed in doing anything that can be considered as being beneficial to the nation. So what do they do? What do they talk about? Race. If you don't like crapcare you are a racist. If you don't like the president, you are a racist. If you have opposing views, you are a racist.
-
From the article:
One letter to the NFL was signed by 49 senators (only Democrats) and was not signed by Tim Kaine or Mark Warner, the two Democratic senators from Virginia.Senator Bill Nelson (D-Florida) sent a separate letter to Goodell calling for the Redskins to change their name.
The democratic party has nothing better to do? There are no other issues much more important than the name of a football team?
This is why the dumocratic party is a racist party. All they focus on is race. They focus on dividing the country along racial lines. They know that eventually there will be more Hispanics in this nation and that whites will be the minority (I wonder if by that time whites will be protected by affirmative action, but I digress). It's like they see racism in everything and they do it on purpose in order to secure the vote of the gullible minorities. They want to present themselves as being the guardian of all minorities.
They can't run on crapcare, they can't run on anything good that they accomplished since they didn't succeed in doing anything that can be considered as being beneficial to the nation. So what do they do? What do they talk about? Race. If you don't like crapcare you are a racist. If you don't like the president, you are a racist. If you have opposing views, you are a racist.
Are a lot of minorities gullible? Tell us about your views on that subject, my pc fellow getbigger.
-
I am part Native American on both sides, and this whole tree-hugging, hippy do-gooder push to force the owner to change the name because it's "racist" is what is actually offensive to me. These big govt hacks need to mind their own business and stick to more important matters like cutting spending to reduce the $18 trillion debt.
I saw some little Native fag on the Kelley File a couple of nights ago crying about the Redskins name like a little bitch. He really needs to grow a pair and stop letting these race hustlers speak for him and brainwash him.
-
NFL official: Redskins 'not a slur'
Updated: May 30, 2014
ESPN.com news services
An NFL official said Friday that the Washington Redskins' name is not a racial slur, a day after the head of the NFL Players Association said some think it is.
Adolpho Birch, the NFL's senior vice president of labor policy and government affairs, was asked by "Outside The Lines": "Is the team name a slur, yes or no?"
"The team name is not a slur," Birch said in a phone interview.
"The team name is the team name as it has been for 80-plus years," Birch said. "And what we need to do is get beyond sort of understanding this as a point-blank situation and understand it more as a variety of perspectives that all need to be addressed, that all need to be given some weight, so that at the end of it we can come to some understanding that is appropriate and reflects the opinions of all."
He added: "I think that is part of the issue with the question is that it is constantly being sort of put into a point-blank, yes-or-no, yes-or-no kind of context when that's not the reality of the situation that we're dealing with."
Thursday, NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith told ESPN's Sal Paolantonio: "It's an important issue. The name Redskins is offensive to some and is a slur, I'm not sure that this issue boils down to what any particular player has to say -- what it boils down to is the united nation and others have raised a legitimate conversation to the NFL about the name of the team that is entirely within their control."
Smith told reporters that his conversations with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on the Redskins name should be private. He did say he has talked with members of the Oneida Indian Nation about their concerns.
Last week, 50 members of the U.S. Senate wrote a letter to Goodell asking that the name be changed. Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has repeatedly said he does not intend to change the name.
"I would tell you that the Washington Redskins Football Club, the name of that organization is not and never has been intended to be used as a slur and is currently not one as well," Birch said on OTL.
After the interview, NFL spokesperson Greg Aiello told ESPN: "The team and our office have always said the name is intended to be positive and respectful. Why would you name a sports team otherwise for 80 years? ... As Adolpho said, our position is the same as it's been."
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11007769/nfl-official-says-washington-redskins-name-not-slur
-
I hope this gets overturned like the last one.
Patent Office: Redskins 'disparaging'
Updated: June 18, 2014
By Darren Rovell | ESPN.com
In what might be the most significant pressure put on Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder to change his team's name, the United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the team's trademarks on the basis that it is "disparaging to Native Americans."
In its 2-1 ruling issued on Wednesday, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, an independent tribunal within the USPTO, wrote it was charged with determining only whether the mark was offensive to the people it referenced, instead of to the entire population. Five Native Americans, representing four tribes, brought the case against the league.
While the Redskins name and past logos are involved in the decision, the trademarks that were canceled do not include the current Redskins logo.
"Petitioners have found a preponderance of evidence that a substantial amount of Native Americans found the term Redskins to be disparaging when used in connection with professional football," the ruling said. "While this may reveal differing opinions with the community, it does not negate the opinions of those who find it disparaging."
The ruling does not force the NFL or Redskins owner Daniel Snyder to change the name, but trademarks, registered between 1967 and 1990, will no longer be protected under federal law if the NFL and the Redskins lose an appeal to the U.S. District Court.
Bob Raskopf, the trademark attorney for the Redskins, said the team will appeal the ruling and is confident it will successfully overturn Wednesday's ruling and noted that the team's trademark registrations will remain valid while the case is appealed.
"We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins' trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board," Raskopf said in a statement.
In 1999, a panel ruled to cancel the trademarks after a 16-year battle with Native American groups. It was eventually overturned on a technicality after the courts decided that the plaintiffs were too old and should have filed their complaint soon after the Redskins registered their nickname in 1967.
"The evidence in the current claim is virtually identical to the evidence a federal judge decided was insufficient more than ten years ago. We expect the same ultimate outcome here," Raskopf said in his statement.
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) told ESPN.com that she expects Wednesday's ruling to be upheld on appeal.
"This puts a big dent in their business model of trying to gain revenue from a disparaging term of slur," she said. "I find it very unlikely that someone is going to overrule the patent office on this. This is a huge decision by a federal agency."
Cantwell, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, authored a letter signed by 50 Democratic senators last month that encouraged a name change. She said that if the Redskins and the league refuse to change the name, there are many options available for the Senate, including perhaps ridding the league of its tax exempt status.
Reid also applauded the decision.
"Daniel Snyder may be the last person in the world to realize this, but it's just a matter of time until he is forced to do the right thing and change the name,'' said Reid, who has said previously he will not attend home games until the team changes its name.
The new case was launched in 2006 by a younger group of Native Americans, and was heard by the board in March of last year.
The group argued that the Redskins should lose their federal trademark protection based on a law that prohibits registered names that are disparaging, scandalous, contemptuous or disreputable.
"The U.S. Patent Office has now restated the obvious truth that Native Americans, civil rights leaders, athletes, religious groups, state legislative bodies, Members of Congress and the president have all echoed: taxpayer resources cannot be used to help private companies profit off the promotion of dictionary defined racial slurs," said Oneida Indian Nation Representative Ray Halbritter and Nation Congress of American Indians executive director Jackie Pata in a joint statement.
"If the most basic sense of morality, decency and civility has not yet convinced the Washington team and the NFL to stop using this hateful slur, then hopefully today's patent ruling will, if only because it imperils the ability of the team's billionaire owner to keep profiting off the denigration and dehumanization of Native Americans.
Without protection, any fan can produce and sell Washington Redskins gear without having to pay the league or the team for royalties and wouldn't be in violation of any law for doing so. NFL teams split merchandise royalties 31 ways -- the Dallas Cowboys have their own deal -- so losing the trademark rights could be seen as a major negative by the league's owners.
The Redskins are an integral part of league sales. From April 1, 2012 to March 2013, the league said more jerseys of Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III were sold than any player in a single year in NFL history.
"In a business like professional football there is a huge amount of revenue in merchandising," Christine Farley, a law professor at American University who specializes in trademarks, told ABC News. "If pro football loses the ability to monopolize that market, that may convince them to change their name."
If the Redskins were to lose the rights to their trademarks, the question will be whether state and common laws would allow them to retain their exclusivity of use.
"The law is really unclear on this," said Sonia Katyal, the Joseph M. McLaughlin Professor of Law, who specializes in intellectual property. "We haven't really had something like this where you have a team and so many other interested parties involved, so we're treading new ground."
Suzan Shown Harjo, one of the plaintiffs who testified at last year's hearing, said she was "thrilled and delighted'' with the decision.
Redskins owner Snyder, asked by reporters Wednesday for his reaction to the trademark decision, simply waved to reporters and did not comment.
Redskins wide receiver Santana Moss called the decision "sad."
"It's sad, but like I said before it's something that I can't control so I'm going to leave it alone," Moss told reporters. "I hope the best for it because I feel like, as a Redskin, I don't think that we wore this name trying to bring any harm to anybody. A lot of us out here as players didn't know of the history or nothing like that and we've been kind of privileged to get a little bit of insight on some of the history and just with that you still don't know enough."
Griffin said he and his teammates would try to keep their focus on the field.
"Our jobs as players is to focus on what we can on this field day in and day out and let the league take care of that stuff. And when it's the right time then we can voice whatever it is that we know about the situation," he said.
Officials the NFL could not immediately be reached for comment.
Meanwhile, Miami University in Ohio, which also at one time used the Redskins nickname, used Wednesday's ruling as an opportunity to tweet to the NFL team.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11102096/us-patent-office-cancels-washington-redskins-trademark
-
Oh God...... they did.
-
Obama Admn being thugs and tyrants again
-
Ah, abuse of power under Bush: BAD
Abuse of power by a federal agency under pressure from the democratic party: GOOD
They can't force a citizen to think like them and do what they want him to do. So what do they do? Decrease his revenue. Penalize him financially. Similar to crapcare.
-
Ah, abuse of power under Bush: BAD
Abuse of power by a federal agency under pressure from the democratic party: GOOD
They can't force a citizen to think like them and do what they want him to do. So what do they do? Decrease his revenue. Penalize him financially. Similar to crapcare.
YOU are a citizen? Of what country?
-
Redskins defy trademark ruling, say they'll defend name
Washington Examinerr ^ | 6-18-2014 | Sean Higgins
Posted on 6/18/2014 2:58:40 PM by sheikdetailfeather
In a defiant statement issued Wednesday, the Washington Redskins said the team would appeal the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's decision to revoke the trademark to the team's name and logo on the grounds that they are offensive to Native Americans.
The professional football team added that in the meantime, the ruling would have "no effect at all" on its trademark rights while the case is on appeal. The press release even put that in boldface and underlined it.
"We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins’ trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board," said Redskins lawyer Bob Raskopf.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
-
Redskins defy trademark ruling, say they'll defend name
Washington Examinerr ^ | 6-18-2014 | Sean Higgins
Posted on 6/18/2014 2:58:40 PM by sheikdetailfeather
In a defiant statement issued Wednesday, the Washington Redskins said the team would appeal the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's decision to revoke the trademark to the team's name and logo on the grounds that they are offensive to Native Americans.
The professional football team added that in the meantime, the ruling would have "no effect at all" on its trademark rights while the case is on appeal. The press release even put that in boldface and underlined it.
"We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins’ trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board," said Redskins lawyer Bob Raskopf.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Good.
-
YOU are a citizen? Of what country?
YOU are an idiot? Of what village?
-
YOU are an idiot? Of what village?
No, actually. Not an idiot and I don't live in what people would call a village.
From your dodge I guess you're not a US citizen but I'm wondering if you were born in a village in the country you come from. And what country is that, anyway?
Let me add that if you're too ashamed of your birth country, feel free to not answer. I'll understand.
-
Redskins lose trademark, Harry Reid says team will be 'forced' to change name
By Paul Bedard | June 18, 2014 | 11:25 am
Topics: Sports NFL Redskins Washington Secrets Native Americans Patent Law
Photo - Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Washington Redskins at FedExField on December 24, 2011 in Landover, Maryland. (Photo by Patrick McDermott/Getty Images)
Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the Minnesota...
Photo - Â Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Washington Redskins at FedExField on December 24, 2011 in Landover, Maryland. (Patrick McDermott/Getty Images)
 Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the...
In what some see as the first step to forcing the Washington Redskins football team to change their name, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Wednesday cancelled six federal trademarks of the team name because it's “disparaging” to Native Americans.
Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!
“Petitioners have shown by a preponderance of the evidence that a substantial composite of Native Americans found the term REDSKINS to be disparaging,” said the decision.
Fans, however, won’t see any immediate change — even if Daniel Snyder’s team eventually loses in court. That’s because all the order will do is eliminate the trademark the team has on merchandise.
The Redskins are expected to appeal.
But opponents of the name were quick to pounce, expressing hope that it will lead Snyder to reconsider his devotion to the historic name of the team.
“I hope this ruling brings us a step closer to that inevitable day when the name of the Washington football team will be changed,” plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse said, according to Politico. “The team's name is racist and derogatory.”
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid called the team name "racist." He went to the Senate floor just after the trademark decision was made and said the team will be forced to change the name.
-
Patent office didn’t receive a single public complaint before stripping Redskins trademark
By Jim McElhatton-The Washington Times
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
The recent decision by an obscure administrative law board to cancel the Washington Redskins‘ trademark registrations came despite the fact the agency hadn’t received a single letter from a member of the public complaining about the team’s name, records show.
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which is part of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ruled last month that the name was disparaging to American Indians. The team is appealing that decision.
Politicians, including President Obama, have waded into the team name controversy, with many saying the team should change its name. But despite widespread media attention and a legal fight that goes back more than a decade, the USPTO recently acknowledged there’s hardly been an avalanche of public complaints filed with the agency.
In fact, the agency doesn’t have any record of correspondence from the public about the Redskins‘ name — expressing sentiments one way or another — prior to the board’s June 18 ruling.
A Freedom of Information Act request from The Washington Times asking for any communications from Congress or the public produced just 13 pages of records.
Six of those pages were a handwritten, meandering letter from a man in Lubbock, Texas, whose position on the team name controversy isn’t clear. Another writer congratulated the appeals board after its decision but questioned whether the judges would “go after” the United Negro College Fund. Both letters were sent after the ruling.
In addition, there were a few pages of email correspondence between staffers for the USPTO and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s nonvoting member of Congress. Ms. Norton has been a vocal critic of the team name, but her staffers were mostly seeking background information on the case.
The board made its ruling last month based on a legal challenge from Amanda Blackhorse and four others, who petitioned the USPTO against the Redskins, calling the team name offensive to American Indians. After the ruling, she called the decision a “great victory for Native Americans and all Americans,” saying the team’s name was “racist and derogatory.”
Both sides in the widely publicized case introduced thousands of pages of evidence and testimony from experts. And the decision hinged, in part, on the testimony of linguistics experts.
The Redskins declined to comment through an attorney Monday, but an attorney for Ms. Blackhorse said the paucity of public input isn’t entirely unexpected despite the intense media coverage.
“There are regimented procedures in which the USPTO makes its decisions, and there is no mechanism for input from the general public,” attorney Jesse A. Witten wrote in an email. “This is not at all like the notice and comment period that accompanies a regulatory rule making.”
Rebecca Tushnet, a law professor at Georgetown University, said the patent office isn’t like the Federal Trade Commission or Food and Drug Administration, where there can be a public comment procedure for individual cases.
“If you don’t have a particular stake there’s no obvious point at which your input can be given,” she said. “I’m sure that doesn’t stop people from sending in correspondence, but I honestly wouldn’t know how to go about getting it read in an individual case.”
The USPTO did not respond to phone calls Monday.
The trademark appeals board based its ruling on part of the law that says a trademark can be canceled if it is deemed disparaging. In the case of the Redskins, the board said the drop in the use of the word in the last century showed it was becoming a slur. The board also pointed to research that found at least 30 percent of American Indians surveyed found the name offensive.
The agency’s decision doesn’t mean the Redskins are barred from using the team name, but it does make it harder for them to assert their brand against potential copycats.
The same appeals board was overruled on appeal in 2003 after ruling against the Redskins in a similar case. Bob Raskopf, the team’s trademark attorney, said in a statement after the most recent ruling that he expects the same outcome.
“This case is no different from the earlier case, where the board canceled the Redskins‘ trademark registrations and where a federal-district court disagreed and reversed the board,” he said.
Even if the public hasn’t been very vocal with the agency, politicians have been quick to let the media and Redskins know where they stand.
Last fall, Mr. Obama said he would think about changing the name if he were team owner Dan Snyder.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has vowed not to attend any games until the team changes its name.
And Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, said last week at an Associated Press Sports Editors meeting that while he doesn’t think Mr. Snyder should be forced to drop the Redskins‘ name, he’d “probably” change the team name nonetheless.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/1/redskins-name-drew-no-public-complaints-patent-off/?page=2#ixzz36MOZhhgU
-
I see our independent AG is once again carrying the President's water.
Eric Holder: Redskins name 'offensive,' should be changed
Posted: Mon Jul. 14, 2014
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder says that the Washington Redskins' name 'ought to be changed' and that it's 'an offensive name,' reports TMZ. Holder made the comments in an appearance on ABC News.
More from Holder:
"The Redskins, that organization is a great one. It's a team with a storied history that has huge amounts of support in Washington, D.C., and in the 21st century they could increase their fan base, increase their level of support, if they did something that from my perspective that is so obviously right."
Holder is not the first government official to weigh in on the controversial name. Most prominently, President Barack Obama said last year that if he owned the team, he'd consider changing the name.
In May, 50 senators signed a letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell urging him to change the name, a letter that was endorsed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Redskins owner Dan Snyder has repeatedly stated he will not change the team's name, and recently NBC announcer Al Michaels said Snyder told him he'll change the name 'over my dead body.'
The Redskins have held that the team name honors Native Americans, while critics allege that the name is racist and offensive toward Native Americans.
http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/07/14/us-attorney-general-eric-holder-redskins-offensive-should-change
-
I just love it when these liberal uppity black and white jackasses speak for what should be "offensive" to Native Americans. You'd think these bureaucrats would have more important things to do somewhere?
-
Redskins lose trademark, Harry Reid says team will be 'forced' to change name
By Paul Bedard | June 18, 2014 | 11:25 am
Topics: Sports NFL Redskins Washington Secrets Native Americans Patent Law
Photo - Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Washington Redskins at FedExField on December 24, 2011 in Landover, Maryland. (Photo by Patrick McDermott/Getty Images)
Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the Minnesota...
Photo - Â Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Washington Redskins at FedExField on December 24, 2011 in Landover, Maryland. (Patrick McDermott/Getty Images)
 Washington Redskins fan 'Chief Zee' walks around the field before a game between the...
In what some see as the first step to forcing the Washington Redskins football team to change their name, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Wednesday cancelled six federal trademarks of the team name because it's “disparaging” to Native Americans.
Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!
“Petitioners have shown by a preponderance of the evidence that a substantial composite of Native Americans found the term REDSKINS to be disparaging,” said the decision.
Fans, however, won’t see any immediate change — even if Daniel Snyder’s team eventually loses in court. That’s because all the order will do is eliminate the trademark the team has on merchandise.
The Redskins are expected to appeal.
But opponents of the name were quick to pounce, expressing hope that it will lead Snyder to reconsider his devotion to the historic name of the team.
“I hope this ruling brings us a step closer to that inevitable day when the name of the Washington football team will be changed,” plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse said, according to Politico. “The team's name is racist and derogatory.”
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid called the team name "racist." He went to the Senate floor just after the trademark decision was made and said the team will be forced to change the name.
From what I've heard, the patent office did this to the Redskins and Snyder once before in 1999, only to lose in an appeals court in 2003.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/redskins/2014/06/18/redskins-trademark-revoked-us-patent-office/10735053/
-
Hillary Clinton: Redskins name ‘insensitive’
By JONATHAN TOPAZ | 7/30/14
Hillary Clinton says the Washington Redskins need a name change.
“I think it’s insensitive and I think that there’s no reason for it to continue as the name of a team in our nation’s capital,” Clinton said during an interview on Tuesday with Jorge Ramos, who asked her if she thought the name was a “racial slur.”
“I would love to see the owners think hard about what they could substitute,” she added.
Last month, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Wednesday canceled six federal trademarks of the team name because it was found to be “disparaging” to Native Americans. The decision has put more pressure on team owner Daniel Snyder — who has vowed he won’t change the name — to move on the issue.
Clinton is the latest political figure to suggest the D.C.-area team change its name. In May, 50 senators — 48 Democrats and two independents — wrote NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to urge the league to change the name. “The N.F.L. can no longer ignore this and perpetuate the use of this name as anything but what it is: a racial slur,” the letter read. The letter was not circulated among Republicans.
The NFL shot down the letter later that day, saying the team wants to portray a “strong, positive and respectful image” with the name.
Last October, President Barack Obama said the nickname offends “a sizable group of people” and that if he were the owner, he would “think about changing it.” And earlier this month, Attorney General Eric Holder said he thought the name should be dropped, calling it “offensive.”
When Ramos asked Clinton if she had any suggestions for a new name, the potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate laughed and said she hadn’t thought of any alternatives.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/hillary-clinton-washington-redskins-name-change-109529.html#ixzz38zOJvAx8
-
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/52562/lightbox/Football_Racist_Caps.jpg?1381470203)
-
Daniel Snyder defends 'Redskins'
August 5, 2014
ESPN.com news services
Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder told ESPN's "Outside the Lines" that he is adamant he doesn't have to bow to pressure to change his team's nickname because it's not disparaging to Native Americans but instead a term of honor and respect.
Snyder mentioned William Henry "Lone Star" Dietz, the team's first coach whom the Redskins were named after to honor his "Native American heritage," and Walter "Blackie" Wetzel, a former president of the National Congress of American Indians and chairman of the Blackfeet Nation, who helped design and approve the team's logo as examples of the positive history of the nickname.
"It's just historical truths, and I'd like them to understand, as I think most do, that the name really means honor, respect," Snyder told ESPN's John Barr.
"We sing 'Hail to the Redskins.' We don't say hurt anybody. We say 'Hail to the Redskins. Braves on the warpath. Fight for old D.C.' We only sing it when we score touchdowns.
"That's the problem because last season we didn't sing it quite enough as we would've liked to," Snyder said with a laugh.
Barr also asked Snyder, what is a Redskin?
"A Redskin is a football player. A Redskin is our fans. The Washington Redskins fan base represents honor, represents respect, represents pride. Hopefully winning," Snyder said. "And, and, it, it's a positive. Taken out of context, you can take things out of context all over the place. But in this particular case, it is what it is. It's very obvious."
In June, the United States Patent and Trademark Office canceled the team's trademarks in a 2-1 ruling on the basis they are "disparaging to Native Americans." The team has appealed the ruling and has said it is confident it will be overturned.
Several politicians have called on Snyder to change the team's name, including Attorney General Eric Holder, Sen. Harry Reid and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. President Barack Obama said last year that if he owned the Redskins, "I'd think about changing [the name]."
On Tuesday, Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley said on his Facebook page that it is "probably time" for the Redskins to change the nickname. The team plays in Landover, Maryland, at FedEx Field.
The Democratic governor, who is mulling running for president, posted: "I was asked earlier today and answered that I do believe it is probably time for the Washington Redskins to change their team name.''
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has not pressured Snyder to change the name and has said he stands by his stance that the name honors Native Americans.
Snyder's full interview will air in an "Outside the Lines" special Sept. 2 on ESPN2 at 8 p.m. ET.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11313245/daniel-snyder-redskins-term-honor-respect
-
Geeze Louise. ::)
Senator wants Indians name change
Updated: August 7, 2014
Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- It's time for the Cleveland Indians to drop their name and Chief Wahoo mascot, an Ohio state senator says.
Eric Kearney, a Democrat from Cincinnati, introduced a resolution Wednesday that would encourage the baseball team to adopt a new name and mascot, citing racial insensitivity. He also sent a letter to Indians owner Lawrence Dolan urging a change.
(http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2014/0109/mlb_g_indians-logo01jr_300x200.jpg)
Jason O. Watson/Getty Images
Ohio state senator Eric Kearney wants the Cleveland Indians to change their name and the Chief Wahoo mascot.
With the Indians in the midst of a four-game series with Cincinnati, Kearney said it's the right time to introduce the resolution. The Legislature is on summer break.
American Indians and others have protested the use of the logo for years at the team's annual home opener, complaining that the mascot mocks them and their heritage. It's part of a national debate over the use of Indian nicknames in sports that has regained momentum in recent months, particularly the campaign to get the NFL's Washington Redskins to change their name. In June, a federal trademark board ruled the Redskins' trademarks protections should be canceled because the team name is disparaging to Native Americans.
At an unrelated Thursday news conference, Indians President Mark Shapiro said the Chief Wahoo mascot "represents the heritage of the team and the ballpark" and will remain in place. He added that the team will continue to build and promote the use of the block "C."
Kearney, who said he's a big baseball fan, didn't expect major change right away but said Thursday he's "asking for a discussion to occur." Retiring the Indians' name and mascot would show that much has changed in the 100 years since the name was adopted, he said.
Kearney is the former running mate of Ohio Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ed FitzGerald. He withdrew from the ticket in December amid questions about tax liens.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/11322447/politician-urges-cleveland-indians-change-name-mascot
-
Pat Sajak is Offended by a Pro Sports Team Name and it’s Not the Redskins
August 8, 2014 By Matthew Burke
TV game show host Pat Sajak of Wheel of Fortune fame weighed in on the Democrat Party’s obsession with the Washington “Redskins” team name suddently being racist after decades of not being offensive.
Thursday on Twitter, Sajak mocked the left’s faux outrage, perhaps even taking a stab at Democrat Senator Harry Reid, by tweeting that he was offended by the NHL team the Ottawa Senators.
Pat Sajak ✔ @patsajak
A nation's capital should not have a team with such an offensive nickname. Please, NHL, no more Ottawa Senators.
4:19 AM - 7 Aug 2014
Sajak wrote on his Twitter account, “A nation’s capital should not have a team with such an offensive nickname. Please NHL, no more Ottawa Senators.”
On July 30, Sajak took a shot at Obama Secretary of State John Kerry:
The man knows his baseball. The ’62 Mets finished with a win-loss record of 40-120.
In June, I asked if Harry Reid will tell this 100% Navajo Indian High School that their “Redskins” mascot is racist? We’re still waiting for the answer.
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/08/08/pat-sajak-is-offended-by-a-pro-sports-team-name-and-its-not-the-redskins/
-
Mike Carey said no to Redskins
Updated: August 21, 2014
ESPN.com
A former NFL referee told The Washington Post that he requested not to work home or away games for the Washington Redskins due to the team's controversial nickname.
Mike Carey, who retired after the 2013 season following 24 years in the league, says he requested off Washington's games beginning with the 2006 season because it became clear to him that "something disrespectful" was happening and being on the field "probably (was) not the best thing for me."
"Human beings take social stances," Carey, the first African-American referee to work a Super Bowl, told the newspaper. "And if you're respectful of all human beings, you have to decide what you're going to do and why you're going to do it.
"In America we've learned that respect is the most important thing that you have. I learned it from my parents, my schools, from my faith. And when you learn there's something that might not be as respectful as you like, when you come to terms with it, you have to do something about it."
"I know that if a team had a derogatory name for African-Americans, I would help those who helped extinguish that name. I have quite a few friends who are Native Americans. And even if I didn't have Native American friends, the name of the team is disrespectful."
According to the Post's research, Carey didn't work any Redskins games -- preseason, regular season or playoffs -- after Week 1 of the 2006 season.
"The league respectfully honored my request not to officiate Washington," he said.
Carey said he made the request with the person in the league office who handles officiating assignments, never going through NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.
"When they were making assignments, I said I'd like to be excluded from those assignments," Carey told the Post.
“
In America we've learned that respect is the most important thing that you have. I learned it from my parents, my schools, from my faith. And when you learn there's something that might not be as respectful as you like, when you come to terms with it, you have to do something about it.
”
-- Ex-referee Mike Carey,
to The Washington Post
At the time, Carey said that he asked that the matter be kept private. He added that he wasn't sure if Goodell, Redskins owner Daniel Snyder or any other members of Washington's team knew of his preference.
Contacted by the Post, neither an NFL official nor the team said they were informed of Carey's request. The official noted that scheduling for officiating crews works around "many factors."
The Post, citing research done on profootballreference.com, reported that Carey officiated a total of seven games involving the Redskins since 1999 -- when official logs were first kept. His last game involving the team was in the 2006 playoffs, when he ejected Sean Taylor for spitting in the face of a Tampa Bay Buccaneers player during a Washington victory.
Carey said no one knew about his desire not to work Redskins games after that aside from his family, his work crew and the person in the league office who did the scheduling.
"There was no reason to tell anyone," he told the Post. "I made sure I didn't have anybody else involved."
The Redskins nickname, seen by some as disparaging to Native Americans, has been a source of controversy for some time while escalating in recent months.
Snyder told ESPN's "Outside the Lines" earlier this month that he is adamant he doesn't have to bow to pressure to change the nickname, insisting it's a term of honor and respect.
Carey disagrees -- and is hopeful Snyder will see it his way one day, too.
"I think sometimes evolution is slow for some people," he said. "But where else in America do you see that, though, the refusal to change? From Stanford on down, most everybody has changed from a derogatory name to one that is acceptable."
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11381298/mike-carey-asked-washington-redskins-games-due-nickname
-
Will Mike Ditka be suspended by ESPN? Rush Limbaugh thinks so
By Cindy Boren August 21, 2014
Hall of Famer Mike Ditka couldn’t have been clearer in expressing his support for the Washington Redskins’ nickname and one fellow conservative thinks he may pay a price for it.
Rush Limbaugh mused that Ditka, who said the debate was manufactured by “all the political correct idiots in America,” might be suspended from his broadcasting job by ESPN for his remarks.
“I think it’s very classic the way the media does this,” he said on “The Rush Limbaugh Show.” “They present the story as though everybody agrees with them and everybody agrees this has gotta go. Out of nowhere! This is just the agents of intolerance on the march demanding that everybody agree with them. It’s the same thing and the same myth that’s propelling the Ferguson story. There’s a myth here that this nation is fed up with the name Washington Redskins.
“There’s a myth that everybody wants it changed. There is a myth that numbers, millions of people are routinely/profoundly offended by it. None of that’s true. Again, we’re dealing with a politically correct minority intent on having their way, and Ditka is just speaking up for people who say, “What the hell is this? There’s no real issue here! Nobody’s really upset. There’s more important stuff going on. Leave it alone! Hope the owner hangs in there.”
“Anyway, he works at ESPN, but I don’t know… I mean once this gets out, he’s at least gotta be suspended.”
Ditka’s comments came shortly after Tony Dungy, of NBC’s top-rated “Sunday Night Football,” and Phil Simms of CBS said they would no longer use the nickname. In an interview with Mike Richman of RedskinsHistorian.com, he said:
“What’s all the stink over the Redskin name?” Ditka said. “It’s so much [expletive] it’s incredible. We’re going to let the liberals of the world run this world. It was said out of reverence, out of pride to the American Indian. Even though it was called a Redskin, what are you going to call them, a Proudskin? This is so stupid it’s appalling, and I hope that owner keeps fighting for it and never changes it, because the Redskins are part of an American football history, and it should never be anything but the Washington Redskins. That’s the way it is.
“Its been the name of the team since the beginning of football. It has nothing to do with something that happened lately, or something that somebody dreamed up. This was the name, period. Leave it alone. These people are silly — asinine, actually, in my opinion.”
Richman theorized that the debate is coming from outside the D.C. area.
“It’s all the political correct idiots in America, that’s all it is,” Ditka said. “It’s got nothing to do with anything else. We’re going to change something because we can. Hey listen, I went through it in the 60s, too. I mean, come on. Everybody lined up, did this. It’s fine to protest. That’s your right, if you don’t like it, protest. You have a right to do that, but to change the name, that’s ridiculous. Change the Constitution — we’ve got people trying to do that, too, and they’re doing a pretty good job.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2014/08/21/will-mike-ditka-be-suspended-by-espn-rush-limbaugh-thinks-so/?tid=hpModule_a4df998e-86a7-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394
-
Don`t those lazy fucks have something more important to work on for fucks sake.
-
The Minnesota Vikings should change their name immediately. Congress needs to get involved.
Both the name and Mascot imply that individuals of Nordic descent are violent barbarians.
We are a nation of immigrants. America needs to stop appeasing the racists in the Tea Party. Americans must not condone bigotry or intolerance against anyone, anywhere, period.
-
LOL @ Democrat from Cincinnati
His life sucks in so many ways.
-
NFL player poll: Redskins name OK
Updated: September 2, 2014
ESPN.com
A majority of NFL players support the Washington Redskins nickname, according to a non-scientific survey conducted by NFL Nation reporters throughout the offseason and training camp.
Players were asked a simple question: "Yes or no: Do the Redskins need to change their name?" Of 286 players polled, 167 -- 58 percent -- said the Redskins should not change their name, with 119 players -- 42 percent -- saying they should find a new nickname.
NFL Nation polled 51 Redskins players in a separate survey, with 26 (51 percent) saying they should keep the nickname and one saying it should be changed. Twenty-four players said they didn't want to answer -- a handful saying it was up to owner Dan Snyder or team president Bruce Allen.
While the Redskins' public relations department was aware of the poll, no player said he was not allowed to answer or told what he should say. Some players laughed and walked away when asked the question, not wanting any attachment to the debate.
Not all did, of course.
"I'm not into that PC [politically correct] stuff," one player said.
And one Redskins player, who answered neither yes or no, called the issue too complicated and said he sees both sides of the issue, although he talked more about the benefits of keeping the name.
ESPN asked NFL players whether Washington should change its nickname. A majority (58 percent) said it should not be changed.
"It helps keep them relevant," the player said of the nickname. "There are so many issues on so many reservations that are not forgotten. ... I've seen all the numbers, but to me it's a small issue and we should be looking at other big social issues."
An "Outside the Lines" poll of 1,019 Americans conducted by Langer Research found that 71 percent favor keeping the nickname.
One player from another team called Redskins a "positive name." He said they were named after fierce warriors, giving pride to their culture.
Jets outside linebacker Jason Babin was OK with keeping the name as well, saying, "We live in a society that is way too concerned with the PC police."
However, Chicago tight end Martellus Bennett said the nickname should be changed. He echoed the thoughts of another NFL player likening it to the N-word. The other player felt that if the nickname was changed, "You're giving [offensive] words too much power, and that's a problem today. We give words too much power in our age of trying to be so PC."
Bennett offered the flip side, but did not seem optimistic the nickname would be changed.
"It's like how everyone is talking about eliminating the N-word, penalizing people for using that word or the way we are in the work space, where we're challenging everybody else to grow," Bennett said. "The difference here is with a team, there's a whole lot of money they have to spend to change jerseys, change everything else. They don't want to have to go through all that because of all the money it would cost to do so. It's all politics and money, man."
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11452022/nfl-nation-confidential-majority-players-support-washington-redskins-nickname
-
totally political story. colin had a big piece on it today.
conservatives care a great deal. liberals do not. 71% of NFL viewers don't care.
this is a political issue, used by both sides to rally their donors and supporters. politicians attach themselves to all sorts of things that have nothing to do with politics, that the people involved aren't as concerned about. both parties doing it.
-
Redskins merchandising dips sharply
Updated: September 5, 2014
By Darren Rovell | ESPN.com
Is the controversy over the Washington Redskins' name starting to have an impact at retail?
No NFL team has seen a sharper drop in year-over-year merchandise sales in the past year than the Redskins. That's according to data from market tracking firm SportsOneSource.
Through August, Redskins sales were down 43.8 percent, the firm's numbers show, beating out slides from other teams that failed to make the playoffs last year, including the Ravens (34.5 percent), Texans (32.8 percent), Giants (25.5 percent), Vikings (25.1 percent) and Falcons (20.1 percent).
But how much the Redskins really have fallen and what exactly that can be attributed to is debatable.
Data from NFLShop.com, the league's official store, shows that the Redskins were the 12th-most-popular team in sales last year and are at the same position this year. And two retailers told ESPN.com that they believe almost the entire slide is due to coming off a 3-13 season and quarterback Robert Griffin III falling out of prominence.
In the 2012-13 season, Griffin sold more jerseys in a season that anyone in NFL history. From April through August of this year, he didn't even make the list of the league's 25 best-selling jerseys.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11471322/washington-redskins-merchandising-sales-drop-438-percent-year-research-shows
-
Redskins merchandising dips sharply
Updated: September 5, 2014
By Darren Rovell | ESPN.com
Is the controversy over the Washington Redskins' name starting to have an impact at retail?
Could just be RG3 totally blows this year. All hope is gone in that city, and Cousins ain't great, but probably should be starting. I don't care what you call them... if they're undefeated in the pre-season and predicted to go 13-3, their shit is selling. Tough to attribute the stinky sales entirely to name issues, when this year's major bounceback ended up with RG3 completely impotent.
Some folks will say "but they stunk last year, too!" but there was hope last year. Last year, it was "RG3 is back too soon, let's take the last month off, heal, and be fresh for 2014". This year it's make or break, and they're break so far, in a big way.
-
Could just be RG3 totally blows this year. All hope is gone in that city, and Cousins ain't great, but probably should be starting. I don't care what you call them... if they're undefeated in the pre-season and predicted to go 13-3, their shit is selling. Tough to attribute the stinky sales entirely to name issues, when this year's major bounceback ended up with RG3 completely impotent.
Some folks will say "but they stunk last year, too!" but there was hope last year. Last year, it was "RG3 is back too soon, let's take the last month off, heal, and be fresh for 2014". This year it's make or break, and they're break so far, in a big way.
Cousins should be starting? lol
-
Cousins should be starting? lol
cousins isn't great, but he's probably at the level of the lowest 1/3 of starters in the NFL.
RG3 is worse than Cousins.... when you consider RG3 has all the reps, he has the 2 years of running things, minue the 5 games or whatever last year...
You give Cousins those reps and he's WAY better than RG3. I mean, I love watching RG3 play. I watchever every Wash game I could the last 2 years. he's sensational when he's on. But it's probably time to cut losses, trade him away for picks... See what cousins can do for 14 games as the starter... and if you're still 3-13 at the end of the year, then you go draft mariotti or winston and try from scratch.
otherwise, you're trying to trade RG3 at the END of the season, worth way less...
and you don't know if cousins can play, you've never given him an actual season...
and you don't know if you should draft a QB or not. Just find out now. RG3 had his chance.
-
cousins isn't great, but he's probably at the level of the lowest 1/3 of starters in the NFL.
RG3 is worse than Cousins.... when you consider RG3 has all the reps, he has the 2 years of running things, minue the 5 games or whatever last year...
You give Cousins those reps and he's WAY better than RG3. I mean, I love watching RG3 play. I watchever every Wash game I could the last 2 years. he's sensational when he's on. But it's probably time to cut losses, trade him away for picks... See what cousins can do for 14 games as the starter... and if you're still 3-13 at the end of the year, then you go draft mariotti or winston and try from scratch.
otherwise, you're trying to trade RG3 at the END of the season, worth way less...
and you don't know if cousins can play, you've never given him an actual season...
and you don't know if you should draft a QB or not. Just find out now. RG3 had his chance.
Bwahahaha! So your BS extends to sports too? lol . . . . :)
-
Bwahahaha! So your BS extends to sports too? lol . . . . :)
this off-season, my pediction here will probably come true too... they'll be all "which QB to keep" and tired of RG3, not sure if they should use their really awesome draft pick on a QB, or wait to see what cousins can do. RG3 was horrible yesterday.
Wash's only hope is that they LET Rg3 play like a fool, let him get injured again, and cut him with the fans approval. get cousins starting this year by game 7 or 8 when it gets cold and RG's knee can't take the beating under 20 degrees.
-
this off-season, my pediction here will probably come true too... they'll be all "which QB to keep" and tired of RG3, not sure if they should use their really awesome draft pick on a QB, or wait to see what cousins can do. RG3 was horrible yesterday.
Wash's only hope is that they LET Rg3 play like a fool, let him get injured again, and cut him with the fans approval. get cousins starting this year by game 7 or 8 when it gets cold and RG's knee can't take the beating under 20 degrees.
Dude just stop it already.
-
FCC will consider punishing broadcasters for saying 'Redskins'
BY SI WIRE
Posted: Tue Sep. 30, 2014
The Federal Communications Commission will consider punishing broadcasters for using the Washington Redskins' nickname on air, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said during a conference call with reporters, according to Reuters.
Legal activist John Banzhaf III, a law professor at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., petitioned the FCC to revoke a Washington radio station's broadcast license due to its repeated use of the nickname.
Wheeler said his organization will "be looking into that petition."
"There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today," Wheeler added, according to Reuters. "And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."
• Native American chief urges boycott of FedEx over 'Redskins' name
In June, the franchise had its trademark revoked on the grounds that it was "disparaging to Native Americans."
An SI poll earlier this month found that only 25 percent of fans thought the name should be changed.
CBS broadcaster Phil Simms told SI.com earlier this month he would try not to use the name while broadcasting Washington's game against the Giants in Week 4.
• South Park takes on the Washington Redskins' nickname controversy
A senator from Washington state also announced she would introduce legislation to strip the NFL of its tax-exempt status as a response to the league's support of the nickname.
Washington owner Dan Snyder infamously told USA Today in 2013, "We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER — you can use caps."
http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/09/30/washington-redskins-name-change-fcc-punishment
-
LOL @ the punk bitches in congress.... they WILL legislate on WASH football, but they DONT bother to vote on ISIS bombings in syria lol.
-
FCC will consider punishing broadcasters for saying 'Redskins'
BY SI WIRE
Posted: Tue Sep. 30, 2014
The Federal Communications Commission will consider punishing broadcasters for using the Washington Redskins' nickname on air, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said during a conference call with reporters, according to Reuters.
Legal activist John Banzhaf III, a law professor at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., petitioned the FCC to revoke a Washington radio station's broadcast license due to its repeated use of the nickname.
Wheeler said his organization will "be looking into that petition."
"There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today," Wheeler added, according to Reuters. "And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."
• Native American chief urges boycott of FedEx over 'Redskins' name
In June, the franchise had its trademark revoked on the grounds that it was "disparaging to Native Americans."
An SI poll earlier this month found that only 25 percent of fans thought the name should be changed.
CBS broadcaster Phil Simms told SI.com earlier this month he would try not to use the name while broadcasting Washington's game against the Giants in Week 4.
• South Park takes on the Washington Redskins' nickname controversy
A senator from Washington state also announced she would introduce legislation to strip the NFL of its tax-exempt status as a response to the league's support of the nickname.
Washington owner Dan Snyder infamously told USA Today in 2013, "We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER — you can use caps."
http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/09/30/washington-redskins-name-change-fcc-punishment
Simms called them the Redskins, during the Bucs-Falcons debacle, as they were previewing the matchup for the following week.
-
Nice. :)
AWESOME PICTURE: Washington Redskins Owner Watches Football Game with President of the Navajo Nation
October 13, 2014
By Greg Campbell
(http://www.tpnn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ZSnyder2.jpg)
Far more than the supposed infraction itself, the thing that has galled the political correctness police the most is how Washington Redskins owner, Dan Snyder, has refused to back-down from the political correctness bullying.
In fact, nothing enrages a bully like a potential victim scoffing and saying, “You don’t scare me.”
More than any supposed offense aimed at American Indians, the real crime committed, so far the humorless left is concerned, is that Snyder has refused to bow-down and kiss the ring of guilty white liberalism.
That’s why this picture is so awesome; while Snyder has been called every name in the book and countless media hacks have come to refuse to refer to the Redskins as their rightful name, Snyder has taken the bullying in stride and on Sunday, as he watched his team play football, he enjoyed the company of Ben Shelly, the president of the Navajo Nation.
Hopefully, liberals will find another cause calling their name and move on to another crusade to make them feel important.
(http://www.tpnn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ZSnyder.jpg)
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/10/13/awesome-picture-washington-redskins-owner-watches-football-game-with-president-of-the-navajo-nation/
-
Protest of Redskins name planned before game at Vikings on Sunday
BY SI WIRE
Posted: Fri Oct. 31, 2014
Organizers of a protest of the Redskins name before their road game against the Minnesota Vikings on Sunday expect "thousands" of people to participate, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.
The peaceful protest is being put on by the National Coalition Against Racism in Sports and Media, in cooperation with the University of Minnesota and Minneapolis police. The plan calls for protestors to gather at Northrop Plaza on the campus of the University of Minnesota before marching to TCF Bank Stadium, where the game is being played, for a rally.
Expected speakers at the rally include include Indian reservation leaders, Minneapolis mayor Betsy Hodges, comedian and social activist Dick Gregory and former Vikings star Joey Browner.
“I think this demonstration is going to show the best of Minnesota,” U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum, one of the rally speakers and one of the most outspoken opponents of the nickname on Capitol Hill, just a few miles from the team’s stadium in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., said to the Star-Tribune.
“Never in my history in dealing with issues like this have we had [this level] of solidarity of civil rights and human rights organizations and all the tribal people,” said Clyde Bellecourt, a longtime leader and co-founder of the American Indian Movement.
The protest will be the fourth of its size in the area against the use of Indian imagery since the Minnesota Twins-Atlanta Braves World Series in 1991, according to the report.
McCollum had requested in August that the University of Minnesota bar the use of the Redskins name from the stadium and promotional materials for the Nov. 2 game, and university president Eric Kaler said in response that the school would make "every effort" to do so. It was then reported that the university requested the Redskins to wear throwback jerseys with no team name or logo for the game.
The Vikings, who have leased the use of TCF Bank Stadium from the university while their new stadium is being constructed, said they were obligated by the NFL to treat the game like any other home game and thus wouldn't bar the use of the Redskins name. But the team said it was "sensitive to the issue."
Opposition to "Redskins" has grown over the past year, with critics labeling it an offensive and racist nickname. Redskins owner Daniel Snyder and other team officials have remained adamant that they won't change the name, citing history and support for the name among Native Americans.
The Vikings and Redskins meet at 1 p.m. ET on Sunday.
http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/10/31/washington-redskins-name-protest-minnesota-vikings
-
Justice Department defends decision to strip Redskins' trademark
(http://cdn-jpg.si.com/sites/default/files/styles/si_article_main/public/2015/03/24/washington_redskins_name_change_lawsuit_justice_department.jpg)
Photo: Larry French/Getty Images
BY SI WIRE
Posted: Tue Mar. 24, 2015
The U.S. Department of Justice defended the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's decision to revoke the Washington Redskins' trademark on their nickname in a document filed in federal court Monday.
The franchise filed a federal lawsuit after the trademark board stripped it of federal trademark protections on the grounds that the nickname and logo are "disparaging to Native Americans." The suit claims that the law the board based its decision on "effectively chills First Amendment free speech rights."
"Not only do trademarks function only minimally as a vehicle for expression, but trademark registration also involves the necessary participation of the government in approving that registration, which confers relaxed First Amendment review even when combined with the speech of a private party," the Justice Department's filing read, according to The Washington Times.
• Native American group launches anti-'Redskins' telephone campaign
Opposition to the team's nickname is nothing new but has increased dramatically in recent years.
• New Yorker cover mocks 'Redskins' nickname
A SI poll in September found that only 25 percent of fans thought the name should be changed.
NFL broadcasters used "Redskins" 27 percent less often during telecasts this season, according to a Deadspin study. In September, the FCC said it would consider punishing a Washington radio station for using the nickname. In December it announced that station would not be punished because the name is not profane.
• BARSHOP: Youth leagues also wrestling with Redskins nickname
A senator from Washington state also announced she would introduce legislation to strip the NFL of its tax-exempt status as a response to the league's support of the nickname.
Washington owner Dan Snyder infamously told USA Today in 2013, "We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER — you can use caps."
http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/03/24/washington-redskins-name-change-lawsuit-justice-department
-
Don't people have better things to do like climate change? :D
-
Confederate flag case cited in Redskins trademark battle
Associated Press
ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- A U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week on license plates and the Confederate flag could be bad news for the Washington Redskins.
(http://a2.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=%2Fphoto%2F2014%2F0828%2Fnf_a_redskins_kh_1296x729.jpg&w=534)
Lawyers for Native Americans who object to the Redskins' trademark say their case has been strengthened by a recent Supreme Court ruling on the Confederate flag. AP Photo/Alex Brandon
A judge Tuesday heard arguments in U.S. District Court on a lawsuit filed by the team seeking to preserve its trademark registration for the Redskins name. Last year the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled that the team's trademark registration should be canceled on the grounds that it may be offensive to Native Americans.
U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee, who will decide the case, asked lawyers at the start of the hearing to focus on how that Supreme Court case affects the Redskins' case.
Jeff Lopez, lawyer for the Native Americans, said their case has been boosted because the high court ruled that Texas was not infringing on the free speech rights of a Confederate heritage group by rejecting a special interest license plate design that shows the Confederate flag. Similarly, he argued, the federal government is not infringing on the Redskins' free speech rights just by denying them the protection of a federal trademark.
The Redskins' lawyer, Robert Raskopf, said the two cases are distinct because license plates are issued by the state, and forcing the state to print license plates with the Confederate flag is equivalent to forcing the government to adopt the Confederate group's appreciation for the flag. In contrast, he said, merely issuing a trademark registration does not require the government to take a position advocating the Redskins' viewpoint.
The team has argued in court papers that losing its trademark protections infringes upon its free speech rights. Lawyers for the Native Americans say the case has nothing to do with free speech. The Redskins are free to use the name even if they lose the trademark battle; they just lose some of the legal protections that go along with a registered trademark.
The Justice Department has also intervened in the case on the side of the Native Americans. The intervention was prompted by the team challenging the constitutionality of the law that requires trademark examiners to evaluate whether a trademark is disparaging.
Lee questioned the team on how exactly it would be harmed by losing the trademark registration.
"No one is going to forget the Redskins trademark or team if the registration is canceled," he said.
Raskopf countered that "trademark registration is a staple of brand management" in the modern era and that no corporation today would pursue a brand development strategy without a trademark registration.
Besides all the narrow legal questions, Lee also heard arguments on the fundamental substantive question in the case: whether the Redskins name is in fact offensive. More specifically, the judge must evaluate whether the name was offensive to Native Americans back in the 1970s and '80s, when the mark was last registered.
The team denies the name is offensive. It cites the fact high school and Little League teams on Indian reservations have used the Redskins name. It also says that, in a modern context, the name Redskins has essentially become synonymous with the football team and has its own positive association unrelated to the word's use as a description of Native Americans.
Lawyers for the Native Americans say there is a 40-year history of tribal leaders and activists objecting to the Redskins name. They also cite the dictionary: Many editions, though not all, have described the word as pejorative for many decades.
Lee will issue a written ruling at a later date. He can rule for either side or he can determine that the case should be decided at a formal bench trial later this year.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13136383/confederate-flag-case-cited-washington-redskins-trademark-battle
-
Obama Administration Turns Screws on Redskins Over Name
By Dylan Gwinn
July 4, 2015
Remember that time the Obama administration took a courageous stand against the face of evil and racism in our time? Me neither. No, instead the Obama Administration has contented itself with throwing down the gauntlet in the face of an NFL team.
If the Redskins want to move back to the District of Colombia, they need to cave and change their allegedly racist name. According to The Hill:
The Obama administration will likely block Washington, D.C., authorities from building a new stadium for the NFL's Washington Redskins because of objections to the team’s name.
The National Park Service (NPS) owns the land under the 54-year-old Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium, a venue two miles east of the Capitol that hosted the Redskins from 1961 to 1996. Some city leaders want to demolish the current stadium and build a new one to lure the football team back from suburban Maryland.
But Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, whose department includes the NPS, told D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser in April that, unless the Redskins change their name, the Obama administration would not work to accommodate construction of a new venue, according to The Washington Post.
In a letter a month later, a local NPS official told Bowser the agency opposed the idea of building a new stadium.”
It’s important to note that the Redskins “controversy” is almost entirely driven by media activism, birthed mainly by the arrogant elitists at The Washington Post and enthusiastically pushed by the left-wingers that dominate sports journalism. (They’re the kind who sneer that fans who just want to enjoy football are “on the wrong side of history.”) There is no groundswell of public outrage and most Native Americans don’t care
But the Obama administration officially has adopted a tougher stance with the Washington Redskins than he has the holocaust-denying, soon-to-be nuclear powerhouse of Iran.
Moreover, the Redskins new stadium would have been built in Washington, D.C., which is overwhelmingly black, and the people who worked in that stadium would have been overwhelmingly black. However, instead of helping the people who were instrumental in his election and re-election, while faring far worse under his economic tutelage, than any other demographic group, other than teenagers, Obama has decided that facing down the scourge of “Redskin-ism” is a bigger priority.
But he did sing “Amazing Grace.” So, there’s that.
Conveniently, King Putt didn’t believe hosting his adopted hometown Chicago Blackhawks (very racist) after their last Stanley Cup Championship on the federal lands of the White House constituted any kind of problem. Not holding my breath that he’ll do any 180 this time around either.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/dylan-gwinn/2015/07/04/obama-administration-turns-screws-redskins-over-name#sthash.a0g9lPmT.dpuf
-
Judge upholds ruling against Redskins' trademark; team to appeal
ESPN.com news services
ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- For the first time in a legal battle that has stretched over 20 years, a federal judge on Wednesday ordered the cancellation of the Washington Redskins' trademark registration, ruling that the team name may be disparaging to Native Americans.
The ruling does not bar the team from using the Redskins name if it wishes. The team could even still sue for trademark infringement, but winning such a case could prove more complex without the legal protections that come with a federally registered trademark.
"Dan Snyder and the NFL have to face the fact that we have a changing country. How long do they want to fight that?"
Joel Barkin, spokesman for the Change the Mascot campaign
Redskins president Bruce Allen said the team will appeal.
"I am surprised by the judge's decision to prevent us from presenting our evidence in an open trial," Allen said in a statement Wednesday. "We look forward to winning on appeal after a fair and impartial review of the case. We are convinced that we will win because the facts and the law are on the side of our franchise that has proudly used the name Redskins for more than 80 years."
Ray Halbritter, Oneida Indian Nation Representative and the leader of the Change the Mascot campaign, which works to educate the public on the damaging nature of the "redskin" moniker, issued a statement in response to Allen.
"If something happening decades ago was reason alone to continue doing it, then America would still have Jim Crow laws and Confederate flags would still be flying on top of state capitol buildings. Bruce Allen's comments perfectly illustrate why the NFL has a crisis on its hands: at a time when America is demanding an end to outdated symbols of bigotry, one of the league's teams insists on continuing to promote, market and profit off an offensive and racist symbol.
"The NFL must take action against an owner and his team, which have clearly lost control of themselves to the point where they are going to court to try to continue slurring people of color."
The ruling by Judge Gerald Bruce Lee affirms an earlier finding by an administrative appeal board. The judge ordered the federal Patent and Trademark Office to cancel the registration.
Lee emphasized in his 70-page ruling that the organization is still free to use the name if it wishes -- the team would just lose some legal protections that go along with federal registration of a trademark.
"We look forward to winning on appeal after a fair and impartial review of the case. We are convinced that we will win because the facts and the law are on the side of our franchise that has proudly used the name Redskins for more than 80 years."
Redskins president Bruce Allen
The team had sued to overturn a ruling against it by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The team argued that cancellation of its trademark infringed on its free-speech rights because it required the government to judge whether the name is offensive.
Jesse Witten, an attorney with Drinker Biddle & Reath, the law firm that represented the Native Americans in the case, said in a statement that Lee's "decision is a victory for human dignity and for my courageous clients who have waited so long for this ruling."
Earlier Tuesday, Jeff Lopez, a lawyer for the Native Americans who challenged the team's name, said he expected the Redskins to appeal the ruling to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond. But he said that Lee's ruling was an across-the-board victory for his clients and that he is confident it will be upheld.
Lopez said his clients are hopeful the team will heed the decision and change its name.
In rejecting the team's free-speech argument, Lee cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month allowing the state of Texas to bar depiction of the Confederate battle flag on specialty license plates sought by the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
Joel Barkin, spokesman for the Change the Mascot campaign, also made a comparison to the Confederate flag in reacting to the ruling. He noted how quickly the culture has shifted views in rejecting the Confederate flag and in accepting same-sex marriage, and said the team and the National Football League will find themselves on the wrong side of history if they continue to defend the name.
Team owner "Dan Snyder and the NFL have to face the fact that we have a changing country," Barkin said. "How long do they want to fight that?"
Specifically, Lee said federal law allows the government to exercise editorial control over the content of the trademark registration program, and he equated trademark registration to government speech as opposed to private speech.
Lee said the legal standard for canceling the registration is whether the name "may disparage" a substantial composite of the Native American community. Though the team has maintained that the name honors Native Americans, Lee said there is ample evidence that the name can be perceived as disparaging. He cited the fact that Native American leaders have been objecting to the name for decades, along with dictionary citations that the word is typically considered offensive.
Amanda Blackhorse, one of the Native Americans who filed the most recent challenge to the team's name, said in a statement that she is pleased with the ruling.
"I have asked this many times before and have never heard a sensible answer -- if people wouldn't dare call a Native American a 'redskin' because they know it is offensive, how can an NFL football team have this name?" she said in a statement.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13220885/federal-judge-upholds-washington-redskins-trademark-ruling
-
Bruce Allen: Redskins won't change name in order to build new home
John Keim, ESPN Staff Writer
RICHMOND, Va. -- Washington Redskins president Bruce Allen said the team will not reconsider changing its name -- even if it's a political barrier to a potential new stadium.
The Redskins have started the process of finding a new home, exploring potential sites in Maryland, where they now play; Washington, D.C., where they used to play; and Virginia, where they train. But Allen supplied a short answer when asked about changing the name stance to build a new home.
"No," he said.
Despite protests from Native Americans and others, the Redskins have maintained they won't change their longtime nickname. But Interior Secretary Sally Jewell opposes the team name, which could prove to be a hindrance if the Redskins want to return to Washington, D.C.
(http://a1.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=%2Fphoto%2F2015%2F0708%2Fnfl_u_redskins_d1_1296x729.jpg&w=1140)
The Redskins are starting the process of finding a home to replace FedEx Field, but the team won't change its name for a new stadium, president Bruce Allen says. Geoff Burke/USA TODAY Sports
It's an issue because there isn't much land available in the district, but one potential spot would be where RFK Stadium, their former home, now stands.
"Secretary Jewell has been clear that she considers the Washington football team's name a relic of the past and believes it should be changed," Department of the Interior spokeswoman Jessica Kershaw told reporters in the spring.
The National Park Service leased that land to the city, and the lease doesn't expire for 22 years. But the Redskins would need an extension to build a stadium on the site since a stadium lease would go longer than 22 years.
It's not an immediate issue because the Redskins own the stadium and the land in Landover, Maryland but their lease with Prince George's county runs through 2026. Governors in both Maryland and Virginia have said Washington's nickname would not be an issue in trying to get a stadium built.
A new stadium could be agreed upon within the next few years. Allen said the Redskins are in the preliminary stages of designing their new stadium.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13454083/washington-redskins-not-drop-name-stadium-president-bruce-allen-says
-
California schools barred from using 'Redskins' as team name or mascot
Melanie Mason
October 11, 2015, Reporting from Sacramento
California became the first state in the nation to pass a law prohibiting public schools from using the term "Redskins" as a team name or mascot.
Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday approved the measure barring the use of the term that many Native Americans find offensive but vetoed a separate measure that would have barred public properties from being named after individuals associated with the Confederacy.
As of Jan. 1, 2017, all public schools will be barred from using the term "Redskin," which many Native Americans consider a racial slur. The measure by Assemblyman Luis Alejo (D-Watsonville) will allow schools that use materials that contain the term, such as uniforms, to phase out their use to alleviate cost concerns. The new law will affect four California high schools in Merced, Calaveras, Tulare and Madera counties.
Oneida Indian Nation Representative Ray Halbritter and National Congress of American Indians Executive Director Jackie Pata, leaders of the advocacy group Change the Mascot, used the new California law to exert pressure on the Washington Redskins, the professional football team that has faced sharp criticism over its name.
"This landmark legislation eliminating the R-word in California schools clearly demonstrates that this issue is not going away, and that opposition to the Washington team on this issue is only intensifying. The NFL should act immediately to press the team to change the name,” Halbritter and Pata said in a statement.
Brown was less receptive to a bill by state Sen. Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) that sought to prohibit public buildings and parks from carrying the name of Confederate figures.
Glazer introduced the bill after a mass shooting in Charleston, S.C., catalyzed a movement to remove the Confederate flag from public buildings.
Brown, in his veto message, said such an action was "long overdue." But he said the naming of public buildings was different and an issue "quintessentially for local decision makers."
"Local governments are laboratories of democracy, which, under most circumstances, are quite capable of deciding for themselves which of their buildings and parks should be named, and after whom," Brown wrote.
Glazer, a former Brown adviser, rebuked the governor’s veto on Twitter.
“Locals have had decades to remove confederate leaders from places of honor in Ca. Veto is hollow defense of unacceptable status quo,” Glazer wrote.
Also on Sunday, in a final sweep of bill actions for the year, Brown approved laws that will:
* Ban professional baseball players from using chewing tobacco on the playing field of major league stadiums.
* Authorize state employees to use ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft and short-term rentals such as Airbnb while traveling on state business.
* Legalize the use of electronic skateboards.
Brown also vetoed a measure that would have expanded unpaid family leave to allow workers to take up to 12 weeks off to care for an ailing sibling, grandparent, grandchild, parent-in-law or domestic partner.
The governor, in his veto message, said the bill by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) created a disparity between state and federal law that could require employers in some cases to grant up to 24 weeks of leave.
"I am open to legislation to allow workers to take leave for additional family members that does not create this anomaly," Brown wrote.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-me-pc-redskins-mascot-banned-20151011-story.html
-
can Congress call for an Offensive Line chance for the team?
-
Boost for Redskins? Court rules against trademark law used in NFL case
By Courtney Stein Vargas
Published December 22, 2015
FoxNews.com
The Washington Redskins received an early Christmas gift Tuesday when a federal appeals court ruled against a trademark law that has been used to challenge the team’s name.
The D.C. Circuit Court ruled that the federal Lanham Act's ban on "disparaging" trademark registrations is viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment.
The ruling came in a separate case filed in 2013 by members of an Oregon band called The Slants, who were refused a registration of their trademark on the grounds that their name is offensive to Asian Americans.
But the ruling falls in line with what the Redskins are arguing in their appeal, which is pending before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
A federal judge in July initially ordered that the Redskins’ trademark registration be revoked. The team appealed, and the Native Americans who challenged the trademark have until Jan. 14 to file their response to the Redskins’ appeal.
The decision in the case involving The Slants could loom large.
At issue was a federal trademark law barring registration of trademarks that "may disparage" individuals or groups or "bring them into contempt or disrepute."
The federal court in D.C. now says it’s unconstitutional for the government to refuse to register trademarks because it disapproves of the messages or concludes that they may be disparaging to others.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/12/22/boost-for-redskins-court-rules-against-trademark-law-used-in-nfl-case.html
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3747389/Obama-appointee-William-Mendoza-allegedly-beat-insulted-autistic-Barrett-Dahl-Dahl-wore-Redskins-sweater-Washington-DC-pow-wow.html
Unreal. Typical obama appointee.
-
Supreme Court: Rejecting trademarks that ‘disparage’ others violates the First Amendment
The outcome is likely to affect the legal case of the Washington Redskins, whose trademark registration was revoked in 2014 under the same disparagement clause. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)
By Robert Barnes June 19, 2017
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a law that prohibits the government from registering trademarks that “disparage” others violates the First Amendment, a decision that could impact the Washington Redskins’ efforts to hang on to its controversial name.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. delivered the opinion for a largely united court. He said the law could not be saved just because it evenhandedly prohibits disparagement of all groups.
“That is viewpoint discrimination in the sense relevant here: Giving offense is a viewpoint,” Alito wrote.
He added that the disparagement clause in the law “offends a bedrock First Amendment principle: Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend.”
All of the participating justices — Neil M. Gorsuch was not on the court when the case was argued — joined that part of Alito’s opinion. Four justices peeled off from parts of the opinion where they say Alito opined on more than what was needed to decide the case.
The trademark office in 2011 said registering the trademark of the Slants, an Asian American rock group, would violate a part of the 1946 Lanham Trademark Act that prohibits registration of a trademark that “may disparage . . . persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute.”
The office said the name was likely to disparage a significant number of Asian Americans. But founder Simon Tam said the point of the band’s name is just the opposite: an attempt to reclaim a slur and use it as “a badge of pride.”
In a Facebook post after the decision, Tam wrote:
“After an excruciating legal battle that has spanned nearly eight years, we’re beyond humbled and thrilled to have won this case at the Supreme Court. This journey has always been much bigger than our band: it’s been about the rights of all marginalized communities to determine what’s best for ourselves.”
Tam lost in the first legal rounds. But then a majority of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the law violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech. The government may not “penalize private speech merely because it disapproves of the message it conveys,” a majority of that court found.
The outcome is likely to affect the legal case of the Washington Redskins, whose trademark registration was revoked in 2014 under the same disparagement clause.
The Redskins filed an amicus brief supporting the Slants, which was cited in the opinion. The Washington football team’s case, however, is moving on a separate track.
Play Video 2:55
He says ‘Redskins’ is just a name, she says it’s offensive
Rusty and Anita Whitworth are members of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation in western Montana. Rusty was part of a survey by The Washington Post that found 9 in 10 Native Americans do not think the term is distasteful. (Jorge Ribas/The Washington Post)
“The team is thrilled with today’s unanimous decision as it resolves the Redskins’ long-standing dispute with the government,” Redskins attorney Lisa Blatt said in a statement. “The Supreme Court vindicated the team’s position that the First Amendment blocks the government from denying or cancelling a trademark registration based on the government’s opinion.”
Free speech advocates had supported The Slants, and the court’s decision seemed likely from the oral arguments.
But some worried about what kinds of trademarks the government will now be forced to register. “It seems this decision will indeed open the floodgates to applications for all sorts of potentially offensive and hateful marks,” said Lisa Simpson, an intellectual property lawyer in New York. She added: “While this may be the right result under the First Amendment and the principles of free speech that are foundational to our country, it seems the responsibility will now pass to the public.”
The team’s trademark registration was canceled in 2014 after decades of use. The team asked a district judge in Virginia to overturn the cancellation and was refused. The case is now in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, pending the Supreme Court’s decision in the Slants case.
Registration of a trademark provides a nationwide defense against others who would try to use it.
The case is Matal v. Tam.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rejecting-trademarks-that-disparage-others-violates-the-first-amendment/2017/06/19/26a33ffa-23b3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.9ef5df0aceab
-
Another loss for obama the fag and his cult of idiot losers.
-
Supreme Court: Rejecting trademarks that ‘disparage’ others violates the First Amendment
The outcome is likely to affect the legal case of the Washington Redskins, whose trademark registration was revoked in 2014 under the same disparagement clause. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)
By Robert Barnes June 19, 2017
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a law that prohibits the government from registering trademarks that “disparage” others violates the First Amendment, a decision that could impact the Washington Redskins’ efforts to hang on to its controversial name.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. delivered the opinion for a largely united court. He said the law could not be saved just because it evenhandedly prohibits disparagement of all groups.
“That is viewpoint discrimination in the sense relevant here: Giving offense is a viewpoint,” Alito wrote.
He added that the disparagement clause in the law “offends a bedrock First Amendment principle: Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend.”
All of the participating justices — Neil M. Gorsuch was not on the court when the case was argued — joined that part of Alito’s opinion. Four justices peeled off from parts of the opinion where they say Alito opined on more than what was needed to decide the case.
The trademark office in 2011 said registering the trademark of the Slants, an Asian American rock group, would violate a part of the 1946 Lanham Trademark Act that prohibits registration of a trademark that “may disparage . . . persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute.”
The office said the name was likely to disparage a significant number of Asian Americans. But founder Simon Tam said the point of the band’s name is just the opposite: an attempt to reclaim a slur and use it as “a badge of pride.”
In a Facebook post after the decision, Tam wrote:
“After an excruciating legal battle that has spanned nearly eight years, we’re beyond humbled and thrilled to have won this case at the Supreme Court. This journey has always been much bigger than our band: it’s been about the rights of all marginalized communities to determine what’s best for ourselves.”
Tam lost in the first legal rounds. But then a majority of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the law violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech. The government may not “penalize private speech merely because it disapproves of the message it conveys,” a majority of that court found.
The outcome is likely to affect the legal case of the Washington Redskins, whose trademark registration was revoked in 2014 under the same disparagement clause.
The Redskins filed an amicus brief supporting the Slants, which was cited in the opinion. The Washington football team’s case, however, is moving on a separate track.
Play Video 2:55
He says ‘Redskins’ is just a name, she says it’s offensive
Rusty and Anita Whitworth are members of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation in western Montana. Rusty was part of a survey by The Washington Post that found 9 in 10 Native Americans do not think the term is distasteful. (Jorge Ribas/The Washington Post)
“The team is thrilled with today’s unanimous decision as it resolves the Redskins’ long-standing dispute with the government,” Redskins attorney Lisa Blatt said in a statement. “The Supreme Court vindicated the team’s position that the First Amendment blocks the government from denying or cancelling a trademark registration based on the government’s opinion.”
Free speech advocates had supported The Slants, and the court’s decision seemed likely from the oral arguments.
But some worried about what kinds of trademarks the government will now be forced to register. “It seems this decision will indeed open the floodgates to applications for all sorts of potentially offensive and hateful marks,” said Lisa Simpson, an intellectual property lawyer in New York. She added: “While this may be the right result under the First Amendment and the principles of free speech that are foundational to our country, it seems the responsibility will now pass to the public.”
The team’s trademark registration was canceled in 2014 after decades of use. The team asked a district judge in Virginia to overturn the cancellation and was refused. The case is now in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, pending the Supreme Court’s decision in the Slants case.
Registration of a trademark provides a nationwide defense against others who would try to use it.
The case is Matal v. Tam.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rejecting-trademarks-that-disparage-others-violates-the-first-amendment/2017/06/19/26a33ffa-23b3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.9ef5df0aceab
Good ruling.
-
Cleveland Indians Will Remove 'Chief Wahoo' From Uniforms In 2019
(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/01/29/ap_17171149771667_wide-81c76b0156aaafff5b8a398b5afc840e08d45714-s800-c85.jpg)
January 29, 2018
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/29/581590453/cleveland-indians-will-remove-chief-wahoo-from-uniforms-in-2019
-
Prominent Chief Wahoo protester pleads guilty to stealing federal money meant for Native Americans
https://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/index.ssf/2018/05/prominent_chief_wahoo_proteste_1.html#incart_m-rpt-1 ^ | May 17, 2018
Posted on 5/17/2018, 9:00:23 AM by Wolfie
Prominent Chief Wahoo protester pleads guilty to stealing federal money meant for Native Americans
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A prominent activist known for his opposition to the Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo mascot pleaded guilty Wednesday to stealing more than $77,000 in federal grant money meant to benefit Native Americans in Northeast Ohio.
Robert Roche, 71, of Cleveland, pleaded guilty to two counts of theft of government funds. Federal prosecutors say he embezzled Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration grant money awarded to the Parma-based American Indian Education Center, where he served as executive director.
Federal authorities said he used the money to pay personal expenses.
Roche and the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed to recommend a sentence of between 10 and 16 months in federal prison, though both sides can also ask for the judge to vary up or down from that range. Roche also agreed to pay back the money he stole.
Senior U.S. District Judge Donald Nugent will sentence him Aug. 29.
Roche, who is Chiricahua Apache Indian, has been a vocal advocate for the need for more resources for Native Americans. He has also been a well-known face in the movement to rid Cleveland of Chief Wahoo, the controversial mascot of the Indians the team is phasing out. He has had a lower profile since his indictment.
Roche arrived at the courtroom late for Wednesday's hearing. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Greenberg asked Roche a set of standard questions about his mental fitness. Roche noted he was in the early stages of dementia.
After an off-the-record conversation between the judge, prosecutors and Roche's attorney Larry Zukerman -- and then one between Zukerman and Roche -- Roche indicated he was fully cognizant of the plea and the proceeding. He read along with his plea agreement as Assistant U.S. Attorney Alejandro Abreu recited the facts of his case out loud and indicated they were correct.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services investigated Roche for several years before his indictment in August.
Investigators said Roche worked with consultant Craig McGuire to steal Circle of Care grant money. McGuire, whose company wrote grant applications, pleaded guilty in April 2017 to conspiracy and theft of government funds.
The grants the pair secured were supposed to support mental health and wellness programs for Native American children and families, according to Roche's indictment.
Prosecutors said SAMHSA sent Roche's non-profit $482,766 grants between 2011 and 2013 and did not get all the money it was awarded because SAMHSA placed it in "high risk" status. Of that money, Roche and McGuire embezzled a combined $183,703, according to the indictment.
Roche took a salary by classifying himself as a project coordinator of the programs paid for by the grant, even though the grant's regulations precluded him from doing so, prosecutors said. The grant applications also contained false statements, prosecutors say.
"This defendant stole from taxpayers and betrayed the Native American families he purported to help," U.S. Attorney Justin Herdman said in a statement.
Zukerman declined to comment after the hearing.
McGuire, of Lewis Center, agreed to cooperate with the government when he pleaded guilty. He has yet to be sentenced.
-
Prominent Chief Wahoo protester pleads guilty to stealing federal money meant for Native Americans
https://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/index.ssf/2018/05/prominent_chief_wahoo_proteste_1.html#incart_m-rpt-1 ^ | May 17, 2018
Posted on 5/17/2018, 9:00:23 AM by Wolfie
Prominent Chief Wahoo protester pleads guilty to stealing federal money meant for Native Americans
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A prominent activist known for his opposition to the Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo mascot pleaded guilty Wednesday to stealing more than $77,000 in federal grant money meant to benefit Native Americans in Northeast Ohio.
Robert Roche, 71, of Cleveland, pleaded guilty to two counts of theft of government funds. Federal prosecutors say he embezzled Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration grant money awarded to the Parma-based American Indian Education Center, where he served as executive director.
Federal authorities said he used the money to pay personal expenses.
Roche and the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed to recommend a sentence of between 10 and 16 months in federal prison, though both sides can also ask for the judge to vary up or down from that range. Roche also agreed to pay back the money he stole.
Senior U.S. District Judge Donald Nugent will sentence him Aug. 29.
Roche, who is Chiricahua Apache Indian, has been a vocal advocate for the need for more resources for Native Americans. He has also been a well-known face in the movement to rid Cleveland of Chief Wahoo, the controversial mascot of the Indians the team is phasing out. He has had a lower profile since his indictment.
Roche arrived at the courtroom late for Wednesday's hearing. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Greenberg asked Roche a set of standard questions about his mental fitness. Roche noted he was in the early stages of dementia.
After an off-the-record conversation between the judge, prosecutors and Roche's attorney Larry Zukerman -- and then one between Zukerman and Roche -- Roche indicated he was fully cognizant of the plea and the proceeding. He read along with his plea agreement as Assistant U.S. Attorney Alejandro Abreu recited the facts of his case out loud and indicated they were correct.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services investigated Roche for several years before his indictment in August.
Investigators said Roche worked with consultant Craig McGuire to steal Circle of Care grant money. McGuire, whose company wrote grant applications, pleaded guilty in April 2017 to conspiracy and theft of government funds.
The grants the pair secured were supposed to support mental health and wellness programs for Native American children and families, according to Roche's indictment.
Prosecutors said SAMHSA sent Roche's non-profit $482,766 grants between 2011 and 2013 and did not get all the money it was awarded because SAMHSA placed it in "high risk" status. Of that money, Roche and McGuire embezzled a combined $183,703, according to the indictment.
Roche took a salary by classifying himself as a project coordinator of the programs paid for by the grant, even though the grant's regulations precluded him from doing so, prosecutors said. The grant applications also contained false statements, prosecutors say.
"This defendant stole from taxpayers and betrayed the Native American families he purported to help," U.S. Attorney Justin Herdman said in a statement.
Zukerman declined to comment after the hearing.
McGuire, of Lewis Center, agreed to cooperate with the government when he pleaded guilty. He has yet to be sentenced.
-
So what are they called in 2018?
Did they change the name in 2013?
-
The Redskins changed to Foreskins
-
The Redskins logo is a sense of pride to the Native American Tribe who created the team logo, the son of the designer says.
WASHINGTON — Changing Washington's NFL team logo is bittersweet for the family of the man who originally designed it.
The Washington Redskins announced Monday they will retire the Redskins nickname and logo. They have not yet selected a new name.
Washington's logo has been an Indian chief since 1971. It was designed by Native American Walter “Blackie” Wetzel to depict a member of the Blackfeet tribe.
Wetzel grew up on the Blackfeet Reservation in Montana and was eventually elected president of the National Congress of American Indians in Washington, D.C. He was instrumental in the Redskins franchise logo change from an “R” to the current depiction of a Native American.
Walter Wetzel with JFK when he served as president of the National Congress of American Indians. According to Wetzel's son, Lance, the logo is not offensive, but rather evokes a sense of pride. "Everyone was pretty upset (about the change)," Lance Wetzel said. "Everyone understood the name change we were all on board with that. Once they weren't going to use the logo, it was hard. It takes away from the Native Americans. When I see that logo, I take pride in it. You look at the depiction of the Redskins logo and it’s of a true Native American. I always felt it was representing my people. That's not gone"
The Redskins logo is a picture of John "Two Guns" White Calf, a Blackfeet Chief who also appears on the Buffalo Nickel. Washington's NFL team launched a "thorough review" of the Redskins name on July 3, after a new rise in calls to change it due to its offensive nature to Native Americans.
The franchise had used the nickname since 1933. “The Native Americans were forgotten people. That logo, lets people know these people exist," Wetzel said. "If it were changed and it removed any derogatory feelings toward any person, then I think it’s a win. I don’t want that logo to be associated in a negative way, ever.”
Walter "Blackie" Wetzel was always into sports. Wetzel attended the University of Montana and lettered in three sports: Football, boxing and track.
Over the past few years, the Washington Redskins have brought in Blackfeet tribal hand drum, Blackfeet singers and shared that imagery with the fans. During the 2018 season, Walter "Blackie" Wetzel was honored by the team during a game against the Houston Texans.
Wetzel died in 2003.
-
Welcome to the Washington Redwolves - the new favorite name for the team....
-
If I were Daniel Snyder I would have refused to change the name and if FedX dropped the name I would name the stadium REDSKINS STADIUM in huge letters encircling the stadium. You never give in to these leftist scum because it just emboldens them to become even more aggressive and demand more.
-
Welcome to the Washington Redwolves - the new favorite name for the team....
What about the Cowboys, will they be renamed too?
CowMen? CowHe/Him? CowGenderFluids?
-
What about the Cowboys, will they be renamed too?
CowMen? CowHe/Him? CowGenderFluids?
The Patriots will be next. Patriots were all evil white people.
-
The Patriots will be next. Patriots were all evil white people.
It wouldn’t surprise me in this day and age. But, I’m wondering when the Chiefs will start getting the calls.
-
Chiefs is not derogatory.
Redskins is a slang term for Native-Americans.
-
Fuck the NFL and the Washington Foreskins. And the NBA. And MLB. And all sports for that matter because none of them matter. Whiny fuckwits.
Leave the team name as is and put red potatoes on the helmets instead of native hamericans. Fuck sports, especially "professional" ones.
-
Welcome to the Washington Redwolves - the new favorite name for the team....
Hogs or Generals would have been better. For whatever reason, they are stuck on "Red".
The Patriots will be next. Patriots were all evil white people.
New England Small Pox
What about the Cowboys, will they be renamed too?
CowMen? CowHe/Him? CowGenderFluids?
You live in Sweden.
-
This pandemic proved that the world does not need sports. Many seasons cancelled and the world ticked on. Most didn’t even care.
-
You live in Sweden.
CowYouLiveinSweden? What kind of name is that G?
Will probably more likely be something like CowMen, CowHe/Him or CowGenderFluids.
Keywontrezes of Peace
-
Chiefs is not derogatory.
Redskins is a slang term for Native-Americans.
Neither is Indians but Cleveland is getting shit.
-
Neither is Indians but Cleveland is getting shit.
Cleveland needs a true Indian mascot...
(http://www.oncewed.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/6-modern-indian-groom.jpg)
-
Cleveland needs a true Indian mascot...
(http://www.oncewed.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/6-modern-indian-groom.jpg)
They could sell curry at the games.
-
They could sell curry at the games.
And Dunkin Donuts.
-
And Dunkin Donuts.
And mud puddle water for a beverage.
-
Red Indians? Red Natives? ???
-
Red Indians? Red Natives? ???
Savages or wagon burners.
-
Savages or wagon burners.
Washington Ticket Scalpers.
-
What about the Cowboys, will they be renamed too?
CowMen? CowHe/Him? CowGenderFluids?
Cow "people" should suffice.
-
Chiefs is not derogatory.
Redskins is a slang term for Native-Americans.
William and Mary was nicknamed the Tribe and had a feather and they did away with that. Never underestimate cancel culture and wokeness.
-
William and Mary was nicknamed the Tribe and had a feather and they did away with that. Never underestimate cancel culture and wokeness.
St. Johns Redmen changed to Red Storm.
-
What about the Cowboys, will they be renamed too?
CowMen? CowHe/Him? CowGenderFluids?
Cowthem, Cowtheir, Cowtheirs, and Cowthemselves (or Cowthemself), as an epicene (gender-neutral) singular pronoun. ;D
-
Cowthem, Cowtheir, Cowtheirs, and Cowthemselves (or Cowthemself), as an epicene (gender-neutral) singular pronoun. ;D
Cowsills.
-
“Washington Code Talkers”
“A code talker was a person employed by the military during wartime to utilize a little-known language as a means of secret communication. The term is now usually associated with United States service members during the world wars who used their knowledge of Native American languages as a basis to transmit coded messages. In particular, there were approximately 400 to 500 Native Americans in the United States Marine Corps whose primary job was to transmit secret tactical messages.”
https://nypost.com/2020/07/14/navajo-nation-suggests-code-talkers-as-washington-football-team-name/
-
St. Johns Redmen changed to Red Storm.
Miami (OH) Redskins changed to RedHawks a long time ago.
-
Miami (OH) Redskins changed to RedHawks a long time ago.
The Redskins are going extinct!
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/9-17-2015/uFIGQD.gif)
-
The name will apparently be the "Sentinels". Kinda funny considering the surveillance state we now live in.
-
The name will apparently be the "Sentinels". Kinda funny considering the surveillance state we now live in.
Gay
-
The name will apparently be the "Sentinels". Kinda funny considering the surveillance state we now live in.
I think that's the Washington team name in the Keanu Reeves film, "The Replacements". The film I watched and enjoyed. The NFL? Fuck those twatlings.
-
Lol. Sentinels. I’d prefer the Washington Corrupters.
-
weak as piss changing the name and totally pointless, won't stop the whining it will just move to something else, can't believe we even give it oxygen let alone give in to change.
-
Sentinels...
(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/xmenmovies/images/b/ba/Screen-Shot-2014-04-16-at-12.16.41-PM.png/revision/latest?cb=20160610000110)
-
Sentinels...
(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/xmenmovies/images/b/ba/Screen-Shot-2014-04-16-at-12.16.41-PM.png/revision/latest?cb=20160610000110)
;D
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.qwipster.net%2Freplacements.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
-
weak as piss changing the name and totally pointless, won't stop the whining it will just move to something else, can't believe we even give it oxygen let alone give in to change.
The whining never stops on the left. Even after Snyder announced the name change they have moved on to women being harassed in the organization.
-
Boy, they really went out on a limb with the new "temporary" name the Washington Football Team ...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2020/07/23/washington-football-team-redskins-2020-rebranding-logo-dan-snyder/5494337002/
-
Boy, they really went out on a limb with the new "temporary" name the Washington Football Team ...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2020/07/23/washington-football-team-redskins-2020-rebranding-logo-dan-snyder/5494337002/
The Redparations
-
The Folders. The Knuckleunderers. The Compliers. The Appeasers. The Mistakes Were Mades. The
Washington Pacific Nonconfrontational Geldings.
Just call it what it is. The Way Overpaid Yet Dissatisfied Blacks With An Aged Wally Walrus White Viewership.
-
the name change was a no brainer. i don't understand.
(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/58f04422a5790a8991a831dc/1548953226761-0VO1HA6H3PNILT7400BL/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kJK4Mm1kch8SFO9ZNkN1NT97gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmFk_H6M1tkD9NpL7mXac0oVSXdFfjxR5AjcLwGSebOiGBsFzzcw3xKxvyC_6CFFG_/HOGS_RT.jpg)
-
the name change was a no brainer. i don't understand.
(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/58f04422a5790a8991a831dc/1548953226761-0VO1HA6H3PNILT7400BL/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kJK4Mm1kch8SFO9ZNkN1NT97gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmFk_H6M1tkD9NpL7mXac0oVSXdFfjxR5AjcLwGSebOiGBsFzzcw3xKxvyC_6CFFG_/HOGS_RT.jpg)
That's shaming fat people.
-
Wait, they still have the Indian icon on the HOGS-cap?
Don't they need to change the icon to a hog`as well?
-
I'll say it again...
Watching these grossly over paid thugs toss around a ball and fall all over each other like homos is ridiculous and a total waste of your precious time.
Use the time to improve your knowledge and skills.
-
I'll say it again...
Watching these grossly over paid thugs toss around a ball and fall all over each other like homos is ridiculous and a total waste of your precious time.
Use the time to improve your knowledge and skills.
Skills?
-
When is Jeep going to change the Cherokee to Jeep Truck thingy?
-
RIP to this thread. Dan Snyder: all hat, no cattle.
-
Skills?
Two months.
-
I DO find the term "Redskins" offensive..I think something more appropriate would be Washington "Scalpers", or maybe Washington "Injuns", or maybe "Red Devils".
-
I'll say it again...
Watching these grossly over paid thugs toss around a ball and fall all over each other like homos is ridiculous and a total waste of your precious time.
Use the time to improve your knowledge and skills.
This is good advice but we definitely could say the same thing about posting on a bodybuilding forum.
-
RIP to this thread. Dan Snyder: all hat, no cattle.
Great coach though.
-
Great coach though.
He's not a coach.
-
This is good advice but we definitely could say the same thing about posting on a bodybuilding forum.
LOL those two things do not compare.
-
He's not a coach.
Are you sure he's not the coach?
Because he's very involved.
-
Are you sure he's not the coach?
Because he's very involved.
He's the owner.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/zfxQMT1K/Eevo-H2d-Xk-AAPUs-G.png)