<< <i> continue to prove, time and time again, how racist you truly are. The FACTS are you continue to follow a path of willful ignorance. Pathetic, willful ignorance. Instead of just coming out and saying 'you know what guys, you're right, the term is offensive and I was wrong' you continue to follow a path of ignorance and racism. >>
What a shame that continue to refer to the majority of proud Native American Indians who hold a different viewpoint than you as ignorant and racists. >>
YOU are ignorant and racist. You are NOT representing a majority of Native Americans. Got it?
<< <i> Most of us here would not be shocked if you sat in a room of 1000 Native Americans...... 800 of them view the term Redskin as non-offensive, and you stood up at the podium and called those 800 an ignorant and racists people, just because they don't agree with your point of view. >>
Would you call that group of 1000 people redskins?
<< <i>Perhaps one day will you come on here and say, "you know what, I was wrong, the majority of Native Americans, and people in general do not feel this is an offensive term, and we should just let this futile attempt of ours go". But no, you continue to come on here and call Native Americans ignorant and racists just because they don't see your silly point of view, that hardly anyone shares. >>
So you're calling the group of Native Americans who gave called for the change in the video I linked "silly"? Got it.
<< <i>BTW, you said the name of the Redskins WILL be changed. Last time I checked, it hasn't. So once again, 1985fan is
And although I disagree with Skin2, at least Skin2 is capable of keeping this discussion decent and respectable, and he is not willing to put down Native Americans who disagree with his viewpoint.
I am here to support the majority of Native Americans who could care less about this ridiculous issue. It's a shame that one poster here feels he has to call those Native Americans bigots and racists, just because they disagree with him.
He has no remorse for lashing out at these people. He feels no shame. He continues to call people real derogatory names, when he is fighting for an illusionary derogatory name to be removed from a team. Just doesn't make sense, does it.
Edmund this is how the current Native American population feels about this issue, and not som ancient study that was flawed to begin with.
One of the more common defenses of the Redskins name is that it's only a small proportion of American Indians calling for the change. Short of getting the five or so million natives left on a conference call, I'm not sure how you counter that argument. But this seems worth a shot.
The National Congress of American Indians, which counts among its membership hundreds of tribes from all over the country*, has released this video featuring seven elected tribal leaders, two of them national officials, speaking out against Washington's use of "Redskins" as a team name.
RELATED
Redskins' Indian-Chief Defender: Not A Chief, Probably Not Indian Lately, the Washington Redskins are having a harder time defending the team's name than the rest of the NFC East had defending the read-option… Read… And unlike Dan Snyder's chosen pitchman, presumably these seven have had their credentials checked.
* We'd originally said the NCAI includes every federally recognized tribe among its voting membership. Sentence is fixed now.
Those natives do count, but don't get ahead of yourself. A three minute video with 7 guys giving their point of view doesn't compare to a poll that was taken across 48 states, and found that 91% feel the Redskins is not an offensive name.
By the way, why do you support the removal of what you feel is an offensive name, yet you feel it's ok to call other people offensive names ? Everyone who wastes their time reading this thread can easily see the hypocrisy in that.
Plus, you still haven't removed those Washington Redskins cards from your collection. Kind of funny that you are so opposed to this name, yet you feel it's ok to keep such offensive cards under your own roof.
So your position is, since only 9% find it offensive, it's somehow okay? You'll apparently cling to anything that you mistakenly believe will allow you to bask in your bigotry. Truly sad that you would spend so much time and effort in justifying why prejudice should reign. >>
No, you are calling the 91% bigots. Not me. I could care less what Dan Snyder wants to call his team. You and 1985fan continue to call the majority of Native Americans bigots and racists, just because they feel the name Redskins is not offensive. That's kind of sad if you asked me, that you would stoop so low to call the Native people such low class names. Kind of sad.
Not one person here has said, "I am so offended and disgusted that I'm boycotting the NFL". Every time you watch a game and every time you purchase a licensed product, Dan Snider gets 1/32 of the proceeds you generate. You are *literally* putting money into his pocket. If you're that repulsed, freaking DO something about it. Until then, you want your demands immediately satisfied, just as long as it doesn't inconvenience you.
And to the advocates that call others racists, without any hesitation whatsoever, just because they disagree with your opinion. Go to a mirror and recall what you did on Thursday.
That, my friends, is the definition of hypocrisy.
Fin.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>Those natives do count, but don't get ahead of yourself. A three minute video with 7 guys giving their point of view doesn't compare to a poll that was taken across 48 states, and found that 91% feel the Redskins is not an offensive name. >>
These men represent hundreds of tribes across the US. You continue to refer to an out of date and bogus survey, all in the name of propping up your racist viewpoints.
You're willing to dismiss the viewpoint of several thousand tribes in favor of a flawed, decade old survey just to prove your racist views aren't all that offensive. You, sir, are in need of help.
I see no reason why Native people cannot celebrate Thanksgiving like many others, yet know the real history of this country. It wasn't just "settlers" that came to this country, it was murderers too, that our history books written by those people failed to fully mention. It was to call those who were here already Indians, savages or redskins, subhuman like so they did not have to call themselves murderers, they could look at themselves in the mirror more like hunters of animals instead of the monstrosity of human beings that they were. It is a matter of perspective but I am not going to drink the Kool-Aid that was given to me by elementary school history books. There is a reality for people to learn if they just care to educate themselves more fully.
BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
As for hypocrisy, your comments are so strung together on a thin rope that virtually EVERYTHING you and I do on a daily basis can somehow be tied back to hypocritical behavior. >>
I do not think that anyone should be called out for this as I know we are all guilty to a degree while a few of us may be more socially conscious than another. How can anyone be sure that the products they buy or the food they consume did not come at the expense of unfair labor conditions in another country, etc. There are a ton of possible scenarios to cite here and how your money goes in today's world. To single out a group of people for perhaps putting some money in Daniel Snyder's pocket and calling them hypocrites is going a bit too far. Glass houses my friend.....
BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after.
<< <i>As for hypocrisy, your comments are so strung together on a thin rope that virtually EVERYTHING you and I do on a daily basis can somehow be tied back to hypocritical behavior. >>
For something that absolutely disgusts me to the point that I demand immediate action, maybe one in a blue moon but definitely not even remotely close to daily.
Nice try on the broad generalization, though.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
The initial post wasn't directed to you, baseball; I replied to your reply.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
You are kidding right? That survey consisted of 768 people that 'identified' themselves as Native Americans. Ok, really?
Here is a quote from their study: "The sample of telephone exchanges called was randomly selected by a computer from a complete list of thousands of active residential exchanges across the country. Within each exchange, random digits were added to form a complete telephone number, thus permitting access to both listed and unlisted numbers. Within each household, one adult was designated by a random procedure to be the respondent for the survey. The interviewing is conducted by Schulman, Ronca, Bucuvalas, Inc. This report deals with interviewing conducted from Oct. 7, 2003, through September 20, 2004. In that period 65,047 adults were interviewed, of whom 768 identified themselves as Indians or Native Americans."
They called 65,000 random people, of whom 768 identified themselves as Native Americans....and you take and then proclaim that 91% of the Native American population in our borders agree that it isn't offensive?
1985fan shows the voices of the elected tribal leaders, and they say it IS offensive. They aren't just some random person that was called, that 'says' they are Native American. Not to mention that the survey was a phone call, with that one question. Hardly very thorough.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the words of the elected tribal leaders who have thoroughly gone through the issue, carry far more weight in regard to the feelings of Native Americans, than that of 768 random people of questionable Native American descent, that were called by some stranger and asked one question.
I think you need to move on from that study, lol.
I also agree with Baseball about the posters that champion their disregard for the issue...that is in very poor taste.
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after. >>
Well, no, they didn't answer about the hypocrisy. They spoke in broad, general terms while I was being very specific.
For boycotts, what's stopping you? If it's something you truly believe in, do something other than post in circles on a sports talk forum.
As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after. >>
Well, no, they didn't answer about the hypocrisy. They spoke in broad, general terms while I was being very specific.
For boycotts, what's stopping you? If it's something you truly believe in, do something other than post in circles on a sports talk forum.
As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences. >>
Barry, I believe wrestlingcardking is a Native American, IIRC.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences. >>
Video I've linked and relinked showing tribal leaders representing thousands of tribes not being enough to change your mind is proof positive this is an outright lie.
There you have it, you met an American Indian that is offended.
Also, I disagree...they did answer your hypocrisy question quite well, broad or not.
Maybe my way of doing something about it is pointing people to the true history of Native Americans. It is a small part for sure, but it is better than nothing. I have a lot of things on my plate, life isn't easy. Changing an offensive team name is
On another note, just because you met some that don't care, doesn't make it right to use someone as a mascot. A lot of people do care.
If a slave was ok with being a slave because they had guaranteed shelter and food...does that make it right to have slaves?
<< <i>Barry, I believe wrestlingcardking is a Native American, IIRC. >>
Meet, as in face to face, and talk about it. I didn't visit the reservations in a virtual world.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>On another note, just because you met some that don't care, doesn't make it right to use someone as a mascot. A lot of people do care. >>
Actually, the mascot they kinda do have a problem with is CLE's Chief Wahoo. It's too cartoonish.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after. >>
Well, no, they didn't answer about the hypocrisy. They spoke in broad, general terms while I was being very specific.
For boycotts, what's stopping you? If it's something you truly believe in, do something other than post in circles on a sports talk forum.
As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences. >>
Barry, I believe wrestlingcardking is a Native American, IIRC. >>
I'm Yurok here in Northern California.....you are right Grote!
BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
If you do your research on the team, the Washington Redskins were known as the Boston Redskins. Before that, they were known as the Boston Braves. The HC at the time when the name was being changed was a true Native American leader. It was his idea to change the name to Redskins, as he said the name was felt to be a strong, and uplifting. He then went on to draft many Native American players.
I am a Native American and believe me when I say being called an Indian will tick off more Native Americans than Redskin. My Great Grandfather called whites that lived near the reservation Round Eyes and Pale Skin. Does that offend you.
We are not Indian. People from India are Indian. Just because some French Sailor got lost and thought he was in India does not make us Indians. We are Native to America.
<< <i>Your comments about what Native Americans believe is hogwash as I seriously doubt you know anywhere near enough of them to know whether they find it offensive, let alone considering an "honor" which I seriously think you're just grasping at. And considering that a Native American is here telling you that it's offensive, it's really uncool that you would bring semantics into this about one's you have actually "met". Not funny and not decent. >>
My real life experience are hogwash because they don't agree your opinion.
Got it.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>I'm Yurok here in Northern California.....you are right Grote! >>
If you ever come down to Houston, it would be my pleasure to buy you a beer.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>You obviously don't "get it". YOU'RE the one one who spoke on behalf of an ENTIRE ethnic group that you don't belong to based on your "real life experience" which isn't even the tiniest fraction of any relevant interaction with that ethnic group and you're passing it off as some sort of worthwhile evidence in a matter. You can have whatever "opinion" you want. But don't try to act like you have ANY authoritative perspective on the matter. >>
Go read my posts again, I never said such thing. Never, ever did I even remotely imply to speak on behalf of all Native Americans.
I typically offer an apology for someone misinterpreting my posts but won't in this case.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Really? Why don't you post the whole thing, baseball?
<< <i>As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature. >>
Yeah, just keep making wild accusations, just because you can, and perhaps something may eventually stick.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
No matter the color of our skin, we all need to toughen it up a bit. All of us can find something to be offended by. This is a difficult world that we inhabit.
If you do your research on the team, the Washington Redskins were known as the Boston Redskins. Before that, they were known as the Boston Braves. The HC at the time when the name was being changed was a true Native American leader. It was his idea to change the name to Redskins, as he said the name was felt to be a strong, and uplifting. He then went on to draft many Native American players. >>
You continue to ignore the most comprehensive, current group on the topic (which I have linked repeatedly). They speak for thousands of Native American tribes, and they are in agreement that the term is offensive and the name should be changed. The fact that you are now willing to overlook 20% of Native Americans who say the name isn't fine (up from your previously flawed 9% study) proves that you honestly don't care what Native Americans think - you think the continued use of this racist and offensive term is more important than the feelings of those it demeans and offends. You think those rowdy politically correct folk are only trying to push around successful business owners, and to hell with the feelings of the offended.
The head coach did not change the name (are you kidding? You think a coach has that power?) but the owners of the team, when they stopped SHARING a field with the Boston Braves, changed the team name to the Redskins. Lone Star Dietz, the man you're claiming as a 'true Native American leader' wasn't even Native American! "Dietz was a German American from Wisconsin who wanted to play football as an Indian to cash in on the fame accorded athletes such as Jim Thorpe, his good friend. Dietz also served jail time for dodging the draft during World War I because he falsely registered as an Indian." Source “The lies kept changing as needed,” says Linda M. Waggoner, an independent historian who has published articles debunking several of Dietz’s claims. As for the Redskins’ assertions about honoring Dietz?
“Phony baloney,” she says.
A half-century after his death, it seems that no one has decisively pinned down the heritage of William Henry “Lone Star” Dietz. This makes the Redskins’ flat-out assertions that the First Coach was an Indian even more problematic for some.
Dietz was a fraud, JUST LIKE YOU. No wonder you like him so much.
Just curious. If all teams named after Native Americans were changed, all such mascots done away with. If assurances were given to Native Americans that never again, in any way would any team be linked to Native Americans. If Native Americans knew that as generations died off and new ones came along these team names and mascots would only be ancient history, what percentage of Native Americans would be pissed?
BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
I said the name will be changed. I surely never said it would bbe this year.
Fitz why are you willing to ignore the 20% of respondents in your flawed survey you linked? Or the thousands of tribes represented in the video and story I linked? All so you can stick it to those so-called PC police? So those supposed 'conservative' websites you frequent will have more vitriol to push? Your obvious glee in the continued use of racist terms is not surprising but obviously disappointing.
Only disappointing to you my friend. I could care less what Dan Snyder names his team. They obviously can't win football games no matter what their name is.
Too bad you fight so hard against having bad names for a team, yet you call others bad names.
Too bad you don't even throw out your Redskins football cards, but you hold onto them even though it is a despicable, racist name in your point of view. A point of view that is shared by just a handful of people.
When we grew up as kids we said, "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me."
We never allowed people who used names that some said were bad to effect us. If someone called us a dirt-bag, we shrugged it off. Is someone called us stupid, or racist, we shrugged it off. Names never hurt us.
The world is filled with a lot of sissies, and those who support sissies. That's ok. I can be friends with sissies, and I can be friends with people who have a spine.
Your comments never cease to amaze in their utter IGNORANCE. Why don't you refer to African Americans you meet with the "N" word and tell them that they're just a bunch of "sissies" for letting "names" hurt them and that they should just "shrug it off". >>
I had many African American friends who called each other this word, and let their close inner circle of white friends use this word too. It was acceptable within the group, and it was done without anyone feeling offended. The N word and Honky were thrown around all the time, and we loved and cared for each other the same.
Again, it all comes down to intent. No one intended to hurt anyone. Just as Dan Snyder never intended to hurt anyone.
So the answer to your question is yes, many times as kids we called each other plenty of names, and it didn't matter one bit.
You can't do it anymore today though, because everyone seems to be on edge.
So what is your proposal Baseball? Change the name of the Redskins? Ok. What about the Cleveland Indians? Is the name ok if they ditch Chief Nokahoma or is name Indian itself offensive. Would the Cleveland Native Americans be acceptable or would that be considered pandering?
The Tomahawk chop: Is that still around or did the PC police end that as well?
How about the Dallas Cowboys. As kids Cowboys were always fighting the Indians so that name could be offensive.
Boston RedSox? What insidious meaning does that name have. Does the Red represent the Communists or the Indians?
Cincinnati Reds and Detroit Red Wings need to go too. All colors should be eliminated from professional sports. Except Pink as Breast Cancer Awareness is popular with the PC folks.
<< <i>My proposal is that people that aren't of the ethnic group keep their mouths shut if all they're going to do is ridicule a concern that has NOTHING to do with them and they don't have ANY first hand experience on what it might be like to have lived through the prism of the ones being affected.
I can't imagine what you, Snyder, and the Jewish community would think today if back in the 1920s, the New York Giants decided to name themselves the New York Hebes or the New York Kikes. >>
Can't speak for Snyder but I don't care what handle any business or team uses. But yeah, I grew up in the 60's and learned to ignore things that I found offensive rather than whine like a baby and demand reparations.
Baseball: Not too many months ago Chris Matthews on MSNBC Hardball accused Tea Party members of being racists. They disliked the president and their policies because he was a Black man. Matthews was not the first to make similar accusations but he was a guy that I respected many years before he had joined the hard Left MSNBC and I was a bit surprised by his statement.
I am a member of the Tea Party and have little doubt that some members are racists, just as every group including the Democratic party included these regrettable folks.
I am getting the sense from your posts that you are a bit like Chris. You have some firm beliefs about how the world should be and that is fine. That does not make the rest of us less pious or fair minded. We just see stuff through a different lens.
The Washington Redskins is owned by Daniel Snyder. I don't like him and I don't like the team and frankly I don't like the name much. He is the owner and has the right to maintain the name if he wishes, not you or me.
If attendance drops over this debate and as a business decision he makes the name change, so be it. If he wakes up at 4:00 and thinks the name is inappropriate, so be it as well. It is his team and his decision.
<< <i>2) No right should be denied any individual as long as the wishes of that individual don't infringe on the rights of others (a left wing tenet) >>
So it is ok for my 1st amendment right to free speech to be silenced if in your opinion, that speech is offensive to others?
If that is true, you have no regard for the Constitution. Sadly you are not alone.
<< <i>What's sad is that you are confusing common decency with legal rights. One could technically spew the "N" word endlessly and arguably not be in violation of any laws >>
There are folks that spew out the "N" word. They are called rap artists. Richard Pryor was known to use the word copiously as well.
Now we get into a situation where language is apportioned to different ethnicities. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a few years ago proposed that the word not be used by anyone, Black or White. I applauded that move, but many of the rap stars just didn't get it.
Would the Redskins name be ok if Native Americans purchased the team? Before you dismiss the idea, these folks rake in huge revenue from their virtual monopoly on casinos, so the idea is feasible.
Time to step back from the "everyone is a victim" madness, though I can tell that your heart is in the right place.
<< <i>What's sad is that you are confusing common decency with legal rights. One could technically spew the "N" word endlessly and arguably not be in violation of any laws >>
There are folks that spew out the "N" word. They are called rap artists. Richard Pryor was known to use the word copiously as well.
Now we get into a situation where language is apportioned to different ethnicities. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a few years ago proposed that the word not be used by anyone, Black or White. I applauded that move, but many of the rap stars just didn't get it.
Would the Redskins name be ok if Native Americans purchased the team? Before you dismiss the idea, these folks rake in huge revenue from their virtual monopoly on casinos, so the idea is feasible.
Time to step back from the "everyone is a victim" madness, though I can tell that your heart is in the right place. >>
Please enlighten me on what Tribe could afford to buy a NFL team and please let me know how many tribes are gaming tribes......
BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
<< <i>What's sad is that you are confusing common decency with legal rights. One could technically spew the "N" word endlessly and arguably not be in violation of any laws >>
There are folks that spew out the "N" word. They are called rap artists. Richard Pryor was known to use the word copiously as well.
Now we get into a situation where language is apportioned to different ethnicities. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a few years ago proposed that the word not be used by anyone, Black or White. I applauded that move, but many of the rap stars just didn't get it.
Would the Redskins name be ok if Native Americans purchased the team? Before you dismiss the idea, these folks rake in huge revenue from their virtual monopoly on casinos, so the idea is feasible.
Time to step back from the "everyone is a victim" madness, though I can tell that your heart is in the right place. >>
Please enlighten me on what Tribe could afford to buy a NFL team and please let me know how many tribes are gaming tribes...... >>
Start with the Mohegans. They own one of the nations largest Hotel casinos with revenue of over $1,500,000,000 and recently announce a $700 Million expansion. They could no doubt rustle up a $100M down payment and get a federal fun money loan to cover the rest.
Mohegan Sun employs some 10,000 local employees, with about 40% female and 60% male, and brought in $1.62 billion in revenues in 2007.[9] Concerts and boxing events bring further temporary employment and revenues. The casino also submits about 25% of its revenues from slot machines to the State of Connecticut.[10] However, this impact has not been without costs to the tribe and local communities. The Mohegan Tribe is $1.6 billion in debt[11] while local communities have complained about increased local costs for services associated with casino-related traffic, crime and social welfare service demands.[12]
Not exactly what the NFL would be looking for.........
BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
<< <i>Mohegan Sun employs some 10,000 local employees, with about 40% female and 60% male, and brought in $1.62 billion in revenues in 2007.[9] Concerts and boxing events bring further temporary employment and revenues. The casino also submits about 25% of its revenues from slot machines to the State of Connecticut.[10] However, this impact has not been without costs to the tribe and local communities. The Mohegan Tribe is $1.6 billion in debt[11] while local communities have complained about increased local costs for services associated with casino-related traffic, crime and social welfare service demands.[12]
Not exactly what the NFL would be looking for......... >>
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i> continue to prove, time and time again, how racist you truly are. The FACTS are you continue to follow a path of willful ignorance. Pathetic, willful ignorance. Instead of just coming out and saying 'you know what guys, you're right, the term is offensive and I was wrong' you continue to follow a path of ignorance and racism. >>
What a shame that continue to refer to the majority of proud Native American Indians who hold a different viewpoint than you as
ignorant and racists. >>
YOU are ignorant and racist. You are NOT representing a majority of Native Americans. Got it?
<< <i>
Most of us here would not be shocked if you sat in a room of 1000 Native Americans...... 800 of them view the term Redskin as non-offensive, and you stood up at the podium and called those 800 an ignorant and racists people, just because they don't
agree with your point of view.
>>
Would you call that group of 1000 people redskins?
<< <i>Perhaps one day will you come on here and say, "you know what, I was wrong, the majority of Native Americans, and people in general do
not feel this is an offensive term, and we should just let this futile attempt of ours go". But no, you continue to come on here
and call Native Americans ignorant and racists just because they don't see your silly point of view, that hardly anyone shares.
>>
So you're calling the group of Native Americans who gave called for the change in the video I linked "silly"? Got it.
<< <i>BTW, you said the name of the Redskins WILL be changed. Last time I checked, it hasn't. So once again, 1985fan is
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGG >>
Wow you're full of maturity. But then I don't count on racists to be mature or intelligent.
is not willing to put down Native Americans who disagree with his viewpoint.
I am here to support the majority of Native Americans who could care less about this ridiculous issue.
It's a shame that one poster here feels he has to call those Native Americans bigots and racists, just because they disagree with him.
He has no remorse for lashing out at these people. He feels no shame. He continues to call people real derogatory names, when he
is fighting for an illusionary derogatory name to be removed from a team. Just doesn't make sense, does it.
Edmund this is how the current Native American population feels about this issue, and not som ancient study that was flawed to begin with.
One of the more common defenses of the Redskins name is that it's only a small proportion of American Indians calling for the change. Short of getting the five or so million natives left on a conference call, I'm not sure how you counter that argument. But this seems worth a shot.
The National Congress of American Indians, which counts among its membership hundreds of tribes from all over the country*, has released this video featuring seven elected tribal leaders, two of them national officials, speaking out against Washington's use of "Redskins" as a team name.
RELATED
Redskins' Indian-Chief Defender: Not A Chief, Probably Not Indian
Lately, the Washington Redskins are having a harder time defending the team's name than the rest of the NFC East had defending the read-option… Read…
And unlike Dan Snyder's chosen pitchman, presumably these seven have had their credentials checked.
* We'd originally said the NCAI includes every federally recognized tribe among its voting membership. Sentence is fixed now.
Damn...I need to stay out of the casino.
doesn't compare to a poll that was taken across 48 states, and found that 91% feel the Redskins is not an offensive name.
By the way, why do you support the removal of what you feel is an offensive name, yet you feel it's ok to call other people offensive names ?
Everyone who wastes their time reading this thread can easily see the hypocrisy in that.
Plus, you still haven't removed those Washington Redskins cards from your collection. Kind of funny that you are so opposed to this
name, yet you feel it's ok to keep such offensive cards under your own roof.
<< <i>
So your position is, since only 9% find it offensive, it's somehow okay? You'll apparently cling to anything that you mistakenly believe will allow you to bask in your bigotry. Truly sad that you would spend so much time and effort in justifying why prejudice should reign. >>
No, you are calling the 91% bigots. Not me. I could care less what Dan Snyder wants to call his team.
You and 1985fan continue to call the majority of Native Americans bigots and racists, just because they feel the name Redskins is not offensive.
That's kind of sad if you asked me, that you would stoop so low to call the Native people such low class names.
Kind of sad.
And to the advocates that call others racists, without any hesitation whatsoever, just because they disagree with your opinion. Go to a mirror and recall what you did on Thursday.
That, my friends, is the definition of hypocrisy.
Fin.
<< <i>Those natives do count, but don't get ahead of yourself. A three minute video with 7 guys giving their point of view
doesn't compare to a poll that was taken across 48 states, and found that 91% feel the Redskins is not an offensive name. >>
These men represent hundreds of tribes across the US. You continue to refer to an out of date and bogus survey, all in the name of propping up your racist viewpoints.
You're willing to dismiss the viewpoint of several thousand tribes in favor of a flawed, decade old survey just to prove your racist views aren't all that offensive. You, sir, are in need of help.
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
As for hypocrisy, your comments are so strung together on a thin rope that virtually EVERYTHING you and I do on a daily basis can somehow be tied back to hypocritical behavior. >>
I do not think that anyone should be called out for this as I know we are all guilty to a degree while a few of us may be more socially conscious than another. How can anyone be sure that the products they buy or the food they consume did not come at the expense of unfair labor conditions in another country, etc. There are a ton of possible scenarios to cite here and how your money goes in today's world. To single out a group of people for perhaps putting some money in Daniel Snyder's pocket and calling them hypocrites is going a bit too far. Glass houses my friend.....
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after.
<< <i>As for hypocrisy, your comments are so strung together on a thin rope that virtually EVERYTHING you and I do on a daily basis can somehow be tied back to hypocritical behavior. >>
For something that absolutely disgusts me to the point that I demand immediate action, maybe one in a blue moon but definitely not even remotely close to daily.
Nice try on the broad generalization, though.
<< <i>Read it and weep >>
Edmundfitzgerald,
You are kidding right? That survey consisted of 768 people that 'identified' themselves as Native Americans. Ok, really?
Here is a quote from their study: "The sample of telephone exchanges called was randomly selected by a computer from a complete list of thousands of active residential exchanges across the country. Within each exchange, random digits were added to form a complete telephone number, thus permitting access to both listed and unlisted numbers. Within each household, one adult was designated by a random procedure to be the respondent for the survey. The interviewing is conducted by Schulman, Ronca, Bucuvalas, Inc.
This report deals with interviewing conducted from Oct. 7, 2003, through September 20, 2004. In that period 65,047 adults were interviewed, of whom 768 identified themselves as Indians or Native Americans."
They called 65,000 random people, of whom 768 identified themselves as Native Americans....and you take and then proclaim that 91% of the Native American population in our borders agree that it isn't offensive?
1985fan shows the voices of the elected tribal leaders, and they say it IS offensive. They aren't just some random person that was called, that 'says' they are Native American. Not to mention that the survey was a phone call, with that one question. Hardly very thorough.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the words of the elected tribal leaders who have thoroughly gone through the issue, carry far more weight in regard to the feelings of Native Americans, than that of 768 random people of questionable Native American descent, that were called by some stranger and asked one question.
I think you need to move on from that study, lol.
I also agree with Baseball about the posters that champion their disregard for the issue...that is in very poor taste.
<< <i>Stown,
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after. >>
Well, no, they didn't answer about the hypocrisy. They spoke in broad, general terms while I was being very specific.
For boycotts, what's stopping you? If it's something you truly believe in, do something other than post in circles on a sports talk forum.
As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences.
<< <i>
<< <i>Stown,
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after. >>
Well, no, they didn't answer about the hypocrisy. They spoke in broad, general terms while I was being very specific.
For boycotts, what's stopping you? If it's something you truly believe in, do something other than post in circles on a sports talk forum.
As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences. >>
Barry, I believe wrestlingcardking is a Native American, IIRC.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences. >>
Video I've linked and relinked showing tribal leaders representing thousands of tribes not being enough to change your mind is proof positive this is an outright lie.
There you have it, you met an American Indian that is offended.
Also, I disagree...they did answer your hypocrisy question quite well, broad or not.
Maybe my way of doing something about it is pointing people to the true history of Native Americans. It is a small part for sure, but it is better than nothing. I have a lot of things on my plate, life isn't easy. Changing an offensive team name is
On another note, just because you met some that don't care, doesn't make it right to use someone as a mascot. A lot of people do care.
If a slave was ok with being a slave because they had guaranteed shelter and food...does that make it right to have slaves?
<< <i>Barry, I believe wrestlingcardking is a Native American, IIRC. >>
Meet, as in face to face, and talk about it. I didn't visit the reservations in a virtual world.
<< <i>On another note, just because you met some that don't care, doesn't make it right to use someone as a mascot. A lot of people do care. >>
Actually, the mascot they kinda do have a problem with is CLE's Chief Wahoo. It's too cartoonish.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Stown,
Baseball and Wrestlingcardking answered your post in regard to hypocrisy pretty well.
One thing I wanted to add about your proposal of boycotting, and all that other stuff. There are many things that can be done, and many things that need to be changed. Many of those things are VERY hard to change, and it is very hard to organize a boycott that will have any real meaning. However, none of that makes it right to continue using the Redskins or any other skins name.
Also, a team name...it is very easy to change a team's name! That is an extremely simple fix that could pay off multiple times its effort. Obviously no need to argue the reason why the name should be changed(the whole thread is about that!). I'm all for making a simple fix, and maybe other more difficult things can change after. >>
Well, no, they didn't answer about the hypocrisy. They spoke in broad, general terms while I was being very specific.
For boycotts, what's stopping you? If it's something you truly believe in, do something other than post in circles on a sports talk forum.
As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature.
I may change my opinion if I meet a Native American that has the same views as you but until then, no amount of shame or fauxrage will change my personal experiences. >>
Barry, I believe wrestlingcardking is a Native American, IIRC. >>
I'm Yurok here in Northern California.....you are right Grote!
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
If you do your research on the team, the Washington Redskins were known as the Boston Redskins. Before that, they were known as the Boston Braves. The HC at the time when the name was being changed was a true Native American leader. It was his idea to change the name to Redskins, as he said the name was felt to be a strong, and uplifting. He then went on to draft many Native American players.
I am a Native American and believe me when I say being called an Indian will tick off more Native Americans than Redskin. My Great Grandfather called whites that lived near the reservation Round Eyes and Pale Skin. Does that offend you.
We are not Indian. People from India are Indian. Just because some French Sailor got lost and thought he was in India does not make us Indians. We are Native to America.
<< <i>Your comments about what Native Americans believe is hogwash as I seriously doubt you know anywhere near enough of them to know whether they find it offensive, let alone considering an "honor" which I seriously think you're just grasping at. And considering that a Native American is here telling you that it's offensive, it's really uncool that you would bring semantics into this about one's you have actually "met". Not funny and not decent. >>
My real life experience are hogwash because they don't agree your opinion.
Got it.
<< <i>I'm Yurok here in Northern California.....you are right Grote! >>
If you ever come down to Houston, it would be my pleasure to buy you a beer.
<< <i>You obviously don't "get it". YOU'RE the one one who spoke on behalf of an ENTIRE ethnic group that you don't belong to based on your "real life experience" which isn't even the tiniest fraction of any relevant interaction with that ethnic group and you're passing it off as some sort of worthwhile evidence in a matter. You can have whatever "opinion" you want. But don't try to act like you have ANY authoritative perspective on the matter. >>
Go read my posts again, I never said such thing. Never, ever did I even remotely imply to speak on behalf of all Native Americans.
I typically offer an apology for someone misinterpreting my posts but won't in this case.
<< <i>As for your desire to change a private company's team name because you deem it to be offensive, I have yet to meet one Native American (and I've been on reservations from OK to AZ) that finds the name 'Washington Redskins' and its logo to be offensive. If anything, it's the exact opposite; they see it as a symbol of pride and honor. I'm sure there are some Native Americans that do find it offensive but that's expected. Take an object from one culture and there will be others in a different culture that find it offensive. It's different perspectives and human nature. >>
Yeah, just keep making wild accusations, just because you can, and perhaps something may eventually stick.
100
<< <i>Current AP poll - 80% say Redskins name is fine
If you do your research on the team, the Washington Redskins were known as the Boston Redskins. Before that, they were known as the Boston Braves. The HC at the time when the name was being changed was a true Native American leader. It was his idea to change the name to Redskins, as he said the name was felt to be a strong, and uplifting. He then went on to draft many Native American players. >>
You continue to ignore the most comprehensive, current group on the topic (which I have linked repeatedly). They speak for thousands of Native American tribes, and they are in agreement that the term is offensive and the name should be changed. The fact that you are now willing to overlook 20% of Native Americans who say the name isn't fine (up from your previously flawed 9% study) proves that you honestly don't care what Native Americans think - you think the continued use of this racist and offensive term is more important than the feelings of those it demeans and offends. You think those rowdy politically correct folk are only trying to push around successful business owners, and to hell with the feelings of the offended.
The head coach did not change the name (are you kidding? You think a coach has that power?) but the owners of the team, when they stopped SHARING a field with the Boston Braves, changed the team name to the Redskins. Lone Star Dietz, the man you're claiming as a 'true Native American leader' wasn't even Native American! "Dietz was a German American from Wisconsin who wanted to play football as an Indian to cash in on the fame accorded athletes such as Jim Thorpe, his good friend. Dietz also served jail time for dodging the draft during World War I because he falsely registered as an Indian." Source “The lies kept changing as needed,” says Linda M. Waggoner, an independent historian who has published articles debunking several of Dietz’s claims. As for the Redskins’ assertions about honoring Dietz?
“Phony baloney,” she says.
A half-century after his death, it seems that no one has decisively pinned down the heritage of William Henry “Lone Star” Dietz. This makes the Redskins’ flat-out assertions that the First Coach was an Indian even more problematic for some.
Dietz was a fraud, JUST LIKE YOU. No wonder you like him so much.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
Sunday night the NY Giants play at the Washington Redskins.
1985fan said the name will be changed.
Looks like he's wrong again.
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
Fitz why are you willing to ignore the 20% of respondents in your flawed survey you linked? Or the thousands of tribes represented in the video and story I linked? All so you can stick it to those so-called PC police? So those supposed 'conservative' websites you frequent will have more vitriol to push? Your obvious glee in the continued use of racist terms is not surprising but obviously disappointing.
Too bad you fight so hard against having bad names for a team, yet you call others bad names.
Too bad you don't even throw out your Redskins football cards, but you hold onto them even though it is a despicable, racist name in your point of view.
A point of view that is shared by just a handful of people.
When we grew up as kids we said, "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me."
We never allowed people who used names that some said were bad to effect us.
If someone called us a dirt-bag, we shrugged it off. Is someone called us stupid, or racist, we shrugged it off. Names never hurt us.
The world is filled with a lot of sissies, and those who support sissies. That's ok. I can be friends with sissies, and I can be friends with people who have a spine.
<< <i>I said the name will be changed. . >>
Yes you did. Just wanted to point out that as of 12/1/13, the name remains the same.
Therefore, as of today, you are wrong once again.
We'll revisit this throughout the years.....that is......if you're still around.
<< <i>
Your comments never cease to amaze in their utter IGNORANCE. Why don't you refer to African Americans you meet with the "N" word and tell them that they're just a bunch of "sissies" for letting "names" hurt them and that they should just "shrug it off". >>
I had many African American friends who called each other this word, and let their close inner circle of white friends use this word too.
It was acceptable within the group, and it was done without anyone feeling offended. The N word and Honky were thrown around all the time, and
we loved and cared for each other the same.
Again, it all comes down to intent. No one intended to hurt anyone. Just as Dan Snyder never intended to hurt anyone.
So the answer to your question is yes, many times as kids we called each other plenty of names, and it didn't matter one bit.
You can't do it anymore today though, because everyone seems to be on edge.
The Tomahawk chop: Is that still around or did the PC police end that as well?
How about the Dallas Cowboys. As kids Cowboys were always fighting the Indians so that name could be offensive.
Boston RedSox? What insidious meaning does that name have. Does the Red represent the Communists or the Indians?
Cincinnati Reds and Detroit Red Wings need to go too. All colors should be eliminated from professional sports. Except Pink as Breast Cancer Awareness is popular with the PC folks.
<< <i>My proposal is that people that aren't of the ethnic group keep their mouths shut if all they're going to do is ridicule a concern that has NOTHING to do with them and they don't have ANY first hand experience on what it might be like to have lived through the prism of the ones being affected.
I can't imagine what you, Snyder, and the Jewish community would think today if back in the 1920s, the New York Giants decided to name themselves the New York Hebes or the New York Kikes. >>
Can't speak for Snyder but I don't care what handle any business or team uses. But yeah, I grew up in the 60's and learned to ignore things that I found offensive rather than whine like a baby and demand reparations.
I am a member of the Tea Party and have little doubt that some members are racists, just as every group including the Democratic party included these regrettable folks.
I am getting the sense from your posts that you are a bit like Chris. You have some firm beliefs about how the world should be and that is fine. That does not make the rest of us less pious or fair minded. We just see stuff through a different lens.
The Washington Redskins is owned by Daniel Snyder. I don't like him and I don't like the team and frankly I don't like the name much. He is the owner and has the right to maintain the name if he wishes, not you or me.
If attendance drops over this debate and as a business decision he makes the name change, so be it. If he wakes up at 4:00 and thinks the name is inappropriate, so be it as well. It is his team and his decision.
<< <i>2) No right should be denied any individual as long as the wishes of that individual don't infringe on the rights of others (a left wing tenet) >>
So it is ok for my 1st amendment right to free speech to be silenced if in your opinion, that speech is offensive to others?
If that is true, you have no regard for the Constitution. Sadly you are not alone.
The N word is accepted by 100% of society (or maybe 99%) as a bad word, that should never be said.
The term Redskin is not only seen by 80% of society as non-offensive, but even the majority of Native-Americans do not feel the term is offensive.
His whole argument is senseless when he tries to equate the N word with Redskin.
Again, the term Redskin is only seen by 10-20% of the entire population as a "bad word".
These 10-20% are trying to convince 80% of the population that they should change their minds.
Good luck.
<< <i>What's sad is that you are confusing common decency with legal rights. One could technically spew the "N" word endlessly and arguably not be in violation of any laws >>
There are folks that spew out the "N" word. They are called rap artists. Richard Pryor was known to use the word copiously as well.
Now we get into a situation where language is apportioned to different ethnicities. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a few years ago proposed that the word not be used by anyone, Black or White. I applauded that move, but many of the rap stars just didn't get it.
Would the Redskins name be ok if Native Americans purchased the team? Before you dismiss the idea, these folks rake in huge revenue from their virtual monopoly on casinos, so the idea is feasible.
Time to step back from the "everyone is a victim" madness, though I can tell that your heart is in the right place.
<< <i>
<< <i>What's sad is that you are confusing common decency with legal rights. One could technically spew the "N" word endlessly and arguably not be in violation of any laws >>
There are folks that spew out the "N" word. They are called rap artists. Richard Pryor was known to use the word copiously as well.
Now we get into a situation where language is apportioned to different ethnicities. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a few years ago proposed that the word not be used by anyone, Black or White. I applauded that move, but many of the rap stars just didn't get it.
Would the Redskins name be ok if Native Americans purchased the team? Before you dismiss the idea, these folks rake in huge revenue from their virtual monopoly on casinos, so the idea is feasible.
Time to step back from the "everyone is a victim" madness, though I can tell that your heart is in the right place. >>
Please enlighten me on what Tribe could afford to buy a NFL team and please let me know how many tribes are gaming tribes......
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What's sad is that you are confusing common decency with legal rights. One could technically spew the "N" word endlessly and arguably not be in violation of any laws >>
There are folks that spew out the "N" word. They are called rap artists. Richard Pryor was known to use the word copiously as well.
Now we get into a situation where language is apportioned to different ethnicities. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a few years ago proposed that the word not be used by anyone, Black or White. I applauded that move, but many of the rap stars just didn't get it.
Would the Redskins name be ok if Native Americans purchased the team? Before you dismiss the idea, these folks rake in huge revenue from their virtual monopoly on casinos, so the idea is feasible.
Time to step back from the "everyone is a victim" madness, though I can tell that your heart is in the right place. >>
Please enlighten me on what Tribe could afford to buy a NFL team and please let me know how many tribes are gaming tribes...... >>
Start with the Mohegans. They own one of the nations largest Hotel casinos with revenue of over $1,500,000,000 and recently announce a $700 Million expansion. They could no doubt rustle up a $100M down payment and get a federal fun money loan to cover the rest.
Not exactly what the NFL would be looking for.........
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
<< <i>Mohegan Sun employs some 10,000 local employees, with about 40% female and 60% male, and brought in $1.62 billion in revenues in 2007.[9] Concerts and boxing events bring further temporary employment and revenues. The casino also submits about 25% of its revenues from slot machines to the State of Connecticut.[10] However, this impact has not been without costs to the tribe and local communities. The Mohegan Tribe is $1.6 billion in debt[11] while local communities have complained about increased local costs for services associated with casino-related traffic, crime and social welfare service demands.[12]
Not exactly what the NFL would be looking for......... >>
Got me on that one.