<< <i>There are no shortage of places you can share your political leanings. They have no place here. >>
...and this coming from the Progressive PC cop. >>
No it's coming from the forum moderator, or did you fail to read the rules before you started posting? >>
Perhaps you need to inform the Sportsmoderator of the infraction. It is quite possible that many of the posters to this thread would make a hasty exit.
Obviously his remarks will have little to no impact whatsoever.
Dan Snyder has built a multi-million dollar product with the Redskins brand.
We won't even waste our time comparing Snyder's development of his #1 product The Redskins, to Obama's #1 project undertaking.
One guy has been a huge success. The other guy has been a huge failure.
Perhaps we should rename the unaffordable care-less act to the Redskins Health Plan, let Dan Snyder run it, and watch it turn into a billion dollar industry !
180 something odd posts and there is yet to be a singe posts of the racist term defenders explaining why they want the racist term to be continued to be used. Sad, really, how blatant their disregard for a race of people is. There's no dispute the term is racist, what's debatable is why these proponents are so in favor of its continued use.
Bringing up countless other unrelated topics doesn't hide your favor of racist language. It's pathetic.
<< <i>Native Americans have endured persecution and derision with great dignity. Greedy rich white people throw more insults at them in the naming of this team. To correct this injustice the Washington Redskins should now be called the Mid-Atlantic Redskins. >>
<< <i>That's it boys. Let's continue to spend countless hours taking time talking about a topic that everyone cares about.
I'm sure that families across America are sitting down at the dinner table talking about this very subject right now. >>
What's funny is you think you're being funny, but if you don't think families are indeed sitting down and having this discussion, then you, sir, couldn't be more wrong. Family discussions about serious topics (and racism and its place in modern day America should be discussed) does happen. Just because it doesn't happen in yours, doesn't mean it doesn't happen anywhere.
<< <i>IT'S THAT IMPORTANT ! >>
Anything which works to eliminate the marginalization of a race is important. Why is it more important to you to keep using a racist term to identify a football team? You and your other team name defenders continue to evade this very important question.
<< <i>Change is coming ! >>
It is. I will be on the right side of history. You and others like you will not be.
<< <i>People on this thread have guaranteed it, so it's got to happen >>
You'd be ignorant, a fool, or completely oblivious to history to think it won't happen.
<< <i>Why is it more important to you to keep using a racist term to identify a football team? You and your other team name defenders continue to evade this very important question >>
I will try this again. It is not important to keep the name Redskins. I believe that most of the "defenders" do not care what name the team owner chooses to keep or change. Though I think the reasons laid out for a change are specious.
When I was younger, like many sports fans, I felt that the Detroit Tigers was my team. Let me make this very clear. We have no claim or ownership to any sports team unless we truly hold an equity position. I learned that lesson when the jerk owner of the Tigers fired broadcaster Ernie Harwell. Despite all the protests and boycotts of his pizza brand, the dismissal held until Mike Ilitch bought the team and rehired Harwell.
I know that this may be difficult for the Liberal fray to grasp, but he who owns the team, chooses to keep or change the name. No more, no less.
<< <i>Why is it more important to you to keep using a racist term to identify a football team? You and your other team name defenders continue to evade this very important question
I will try this again. It is not important to keep the name Redskins. I believe that most of the "defenders" do not care what name the team owner chooses to keep or change. Though I think the reasons laid out for a change are specious. >>
Then why spend any time arguing against changing it, if its not important?
<< <i>I know that this may be difficult for the Liberal fray to grasp, but he who owns the team, chooses to keep or change the name. No more, no less. >>
Liberal fray? That's rich. I wonder if Dan Snyder would be ok with an NFL team named with a derisive Jewish name? Methinks he would (rightfully) have a problem with it. As far as his choice? No, since the team has a PUBLICLY funded stadium, then he is beholden to those same taxpayers.
<< <i>As far as his choice? No, since the team has a PUBLICLY funded stadium, then he is beholden to those same taxpayers. >>
Good luck on that one. >>
Thank you for choosing, like fitz and stown and others, to ignore the question about your motivations for resisting the change of the team name, and instead deferring to a billionaire simply because he's rich. Instead of standing up and doing the right thing (i.e. pushing for name change) you instead oppose anything that might be deemed socially progressive.
Thank you for making your position on the topic of racist team names perfectly clear.
1985fan, do you want a coherent answer or are you stuck on a programmed liberal view that defies any logical thought?
The name Redskins may offend you, it may offend Rachel Maddow and Debbie Wasserman Shultz and it may even offend some Native Americans that have a bunch of extra time on their hands to mull over such minutiae.
It seems though, that to the vast majority of Redskins fans, the name is just fine and dandy. Brands have value and to rename the team something stupid like the Wizards would no doubt harm the value of that brand. Not to mention the tradition of the team name and logo.
A Wiki check shows that the Redskins have sold out every game for many years in their 85,000 seat stadium and have a season ticket waiting list of 160,000 individuals. I am certain that many of them are Democrats and are willing to put up with the "injustice" to get at those tickets.
We cannot let small groups of "offended" folks dictate to the generally more rational masses how a private enterprise may operate their legally run businesses.
The Declaration of Independence refers to Native Americans as "the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions." Several early US Presidents shared their view of Native Americans. For example, George Washington referred to them as "ignorant Savages" and "beasts of prey," John Adams referred to them as "poor, ignorant savages" with "an aversion both to civilization and Christianity," and Thomas Jefferson confided to James Monroe: "I hope we shall drub the Indians well this summer & then change our plan from war to bribery." Believe it or not there are people that say that that they have never met a real Indian before or even, gasp, that they did not know that Indians were still alive. American needs to give Indians the same respect and consideration that is given for other races.......I do appreciate Skin with compliments on my cartoon montage and the other post I made...much appreciated.
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>1985fan, do you want a coherent answer or are you stuck on a programmed liberal view that defies any logical thought? >>
The fact that you are the one with obvious programming yet insist on calling others 'liberal' as if it's a bad thing. Proceed, sir.
<< <i>The name Redskins may offend you, it may offend Rachel Maddow and Debbie Wasserman Shultz and it may even offend some Native Americans that have a bunch of extra time on their hands to mull over such minutiae. >>
The fact that it offends Native Americans (I have repeatedly linked the story of the committee which represents thousands of Native American tribes calling for the change) should be reason enough for any one with a conscience to call for change. Go on, though, I get the feeling you have more talking points to express.
<< <i>It seems though, that to the vast majority of Redskins fans, the name is just fine and dandy. Brands have value and to rename the team something stupid like the Wizards would no doubt harm the value of that brand. Not to mention the tradition of the team name and logo. >>
So what if it's tradition? It doesn't make it any less offensive or racist in tone. Blackface used to a tradition comedians used often. By using your 'logic' (or lack thereof) we should be able to use any racial mockery we want, because the majority doesn't find it offensive. Makes sense to me!
<< <i>A Wiki check shows that the Redskins have sold out every game for many years in their 85,000 seat stadium and have a season ticket waiting list of 160,000 individuals. I am certain that many of them are Democrats and are willing to put up with the "injustice" to get at those tickets. >>
Your insistence on painting everyone you disagree with a Democrat or liberal or progressive speaks volumes about your simple-minded approach to any discussion.
<< <i>We cannot let small groups of "offended" folks dictate to the generally more rational masses how a private enterprise may operate their legally run businesses. >>
The Redskins are not a private enterprise, not by a long shot. Throw in his publicly funded stadium and no, sir, this is not private enterprise. The use of 'Redskin' and being ok with it is NOT 'rational'. I am sorry you are so narrow minded that you cannot see this term as the racist shot it is. You are so blinded with rage at the very thought of a minority 'getting over' on white America you can't even see straight (it's why you insist on labeling everyone you disagree with).
Don't bother responding, it's obvious you are in favor of using racist terms to identify a football team. Thank you for confirming!
Andrew Jackson , in his 1830 Annual Message to Congress, likewise referred to Indian removal as a "benevolent policy" that would allow Indians to "cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community." Jackson went on to win a second term as president, and in his Fifth Annual Message he told Congress that Indians "have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race...they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear."
If people want to cite this was long ago....I am not yet forty and my great grandmother lived a long life and I knew her as a child and everyone in our family loved her. She lived all of her young adulthood life in this country, yet was not considered a citizen of this country because she was Yurok Indian. It was not long ago through my eyes, I see no equity in how Indian people are treated in this country in comparison to other races.....and instead people want to act as though there is no injustice.
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>Andrew Jackson , in his 1830 Annual Message to Congress, likewise referred to Indian removal as a "benevolent policy" that would allow Indians to "cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community." Jackson went on to win a second term as president, and in his Fifth Annual Message he told Congress that Indians "have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race...they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear."
If people want to cite this was long ago....I am not yet forty and my great grandmother lived a long life and I knew her as a child and everyone in our family loved her. She lived all of her young adulthood life in this country, yet was not considered a citizen of this country because she was Yurok Indian. It was not long ago through my eyes, I see no equity in how Indian people are treated in this country in comparison to other races.....and instead people want to act as though there is no injustice. >>
If you look through the previous thread, I mentioned that of the Native Americans I've met, not one uses or accepts a $20 bill. 175+ years ago may seem like an eternity to some but in the whole scheme of things, it's nothing but a blip on the radar.
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>The Declaration of Independence refers to Native Americans as "the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions." Several early US Presidents shared their view of Native Americans. For example, George Washington referred to them as "ignorant Savages" and "beasts of prey," John Adams referred to them as "poor, ignorant savages" with "an aversion both to civilization and Christianity," and Thomas Jefferson confided to James Monroe: "I hope we shall drub the Indians well this summer & then change our plan from war to bribery." Believe it or not there are people that say that that they have never met a real Indian before or even, gasp, that they did not know that Indians were still alive. American needs to give Indians the same respect and consideration that is given for other races.......I do appreciate Skin with compliments on my cartoon montage and the other post I made...much appreciated. >>
Wrestlingcardking, you are welcome
The thread has since lost its focus, but the major points you made ring true, and stand tall above all the other nonsense
<< <i>The fact remains that an overwhelming majority of Native Americans do not find the term Redskin offensive. >>
You keep using this word fact...I don't think you know what that word means. Irregardless the fact reminds the term IS offensive and IS racist in nature therefore it should be changed. Wanting to keep the name and having no opinion are to very different things, and anyone in favor of th continued use of racist terminology and mascots do indeed have racist views.
<< <i>That in of itself shows that all other arguments hold no weight. >>
You fail miserably at debate. Maybe you should take a class in how to debate properly.
<< <i>If anyone wants to call these Native Americans bigots or racists, that is their prerogative. >>
Nobody is calling them so. We're calling defenders of the continued use of racist language and mascots bigoted.
< I am waiting for the day that the defenders, the actual people, of native mascots decide to name one of their community little league or pop warner football teams after another race instead of Indians and honor them too because they deserve it. The honorers of racist mascots can dress up like them, portray the stereotypes of them to the nth degree and see the outrage that would come their way. Name your team with a non-racist term like Kings after MLK. In the mean time, be sure to dress up like him (black paint necessary if you are white), imitate his speeches to others, includes aspects of religion in here as many deeply spiritual experiences are basically ridiculed by others when in a sports context, and do nothing but honor the team and I am sure you will be making the news in no time. You could literally be on ABC, NBC, CBS all of them.....and I am sure you would be known as the town racist or bigot and people and/or businesses would want to distance themselves from you, to not be associated with you, and depending where you work fired or on ad min leave. Yet it is perfectly okay for mascots to happen to native people, why? >>
Edmund, you still have some questions to answer.
Since you approve of naming YOUR youth teams redskins, blackskins, or yellowskins...I can see why you won't address it.
<< <i>< I am waiting for the day that the defenders, the actual people, of native mascots decide to name one of their community little league or pop warner football teams after another race instead of Indians and honor them too because they deserve it. The honorers of racist mascots can dress up like them, portray the stereotypes of them to the nth degree and see the outrage that would come their way. Name your team with a non-racist term like Kings after MLK. In the mean time, be sure to dress up like him (black paint necessary if you are white), imitate his speeches to others, includes aspects of religion in here as many deeply spiritual experiences are basically ridiculed by others when in a sports context, and do nothing but honor the team and I am sure you will be making the news in no time. You could literally be on ABC, NBC, CBS all of them.....and I am sure you would be known as the town racist or bigot and people and/or businesses would want to distance themselves from you, to not be associated with you, and depending where you work fired or on ad min leave. Yet it is perfectly okay for mascots to happen to native people, why? >>
Edmund, you still have some questions to answer.
Since you approve of naming YOUR youth teams redskins, blackskins, or yellowskins...I can see why you won't address it. >>
If what you said all along that it simply is Snyder's team and he has the right to name it what you wanted, then there was no reason to even start a thread, because EVERYONE agrees with that!
However, you have made several other claims, and you are being called on them;
Why do you feel it is in poor taste and offensive to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but is not offensive or in poor taste to name a professional team that??
Why do you feel it is in poor taste to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but you have no problem redskins being used on a professional team? Yeah, it is Snyder's team, everyone gets that, and NOBODY disagrees with that. But why do you feel it is in bad taste to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins, but ok for professional teams? >>
Skin,
I never answered that question.
But please keep asking it time after time, again and again.
Someday you'll actually convince yourself that I really answered it.
I never said it's in good taste or bad taste. Perhaps you should go back and do your own due diligence on the subject. Reread every post. Please see where I never said anything about this dumb question. It really has nothing to do with anything.
You really need to ask Dan Snyder these questions. He's the guy with the team named Redskin.
BTW, last time I checked, over 90% of Native Americans are fine with the name. And some Native Americans have Redskin as their own team name. LOL
If what you said all along that it simply is Snyder's team and he has the right to name it what you wanted, then there was no reason to even start a thread, because EVERYONE agrees with that!
However, you have made several other claims, and you are being called on them;
Why do you feel it is in poor taste and offensive to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but is not offensive or in poor taste to name a professional team that??
Why do you take the word of 768 random people who we do not even know if they are Native, and apply that to 90% of the five million plus Native population? That study you spout isn't remotely accurate! Why do you keep spouting 90% like it is real? Are you dumber than everyone actually thinks?
You started two threads(and participated in two others) saying the term isn't offensive, and that it is ok to refer to people by skin color, so I ask...
Why do you feel it is in poor taste and offensive to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but is not offensive or in poor taste to name a professional team that??
"it’s difficult to tell how many are opposed to the name."
"Perhaps this uncertainty shouldn’t matter — because the word has an undeniably racist history, or because the team says it uses the word with respect, or because in a truly decent society, some would argue, what hurts a few should be avoided by all."
This has been an entertaining thread so far. Have read some very insightful posts, as well as some very narrow minded ones IMHO. As a minority in the USA, I’ve experienced profiling, racism, and all kinds of other nonsense in my years. Have personally watched my dad get pulled over with me in the car when I was a boy, and watched him get put into the pavement for doing nothing more than being a Mexican man driving in an El Camino with his son (yes, I realize that fits a lot of stereotypes, but I’m not ashamed of that, and for those that think he must have done something to deserve that, he didn’t, I was sitting right beside him and heard everything) Have been in many a store as I got older with some of my Caucasian friends, and guess who got followed around on multiple occasions because the owner(s) was/were afraid the minority was going to steal (Hint, it wasn’t the Caucasians lol) . However, I turned out alright and quite frankly they were character building events that helped make me into a fairly level headed man, and actually made me want to strive to treat people of all races relatively the same.
In my opinion, if the ownership group or sole owner or whatever, wants to name his/their team the Washington Redskins (or borrowing my friend Rob's cartoon, the Washington Wetbacks for that matter), so be it. This is the USA and in this great country, that’s his privilege. By the same token, if Native Americans, or Mexicans want to protest that, so be it, that’s their prerogative as well. Just because some want to make it an absolute one way or the other, and type things akin to you either go against the name or you are a flaming racist, or you either support the name or you are against the privileges of Americans to do certain things with their own property, is equally absurd on both sides of the fence as far as I’m concerned.
Personally, I wouldn’t be overly offended if someone wanted to name their youth teams whatever, doesn’t mean I would like it, and doesn’t mean I wouldn’t think it was in poor taste either, but I would support their ability to do it, while at the same time tell them I personally thought they were a dumb… Would it hurt a bit inside? Perhaps, but I’d get over it pretty quickly.
To believe that the name doesn’t offend some, is basically being ostrich like (no offense intended to ostriches, and yes, I know they don’t actually do that except to dig), sticking your head in the sand with nothing but your dumb… sticking up. But, I support your privilege to believe that.
And as a member of a race that is frequently discriminated against, I choose to just let the chip fall right off of my shoulder and live my life without really giving a hoot what someone thinks about my race for the most part. Have actually found over the years that most people discriminate more against those that are of a different wage bracket than they are, as opposed to race, but no reason to digress into that.
Doesn’t mean I haven’t taken offense to someone that says something against my race and I called their hand on it, as I’d be lying if I said it didn’t bother me at all, but it’s really no different a feeling inside from when someone would call me four eyes, big nose, fat ... whatever, an insult is an insult, and in this Country, thank God, people are free to be ignorant within fairly reasonable restraints. I wouldn’t want it any other way, God bless the USA!
Trying to equate a youth team, or even a high school or college team with (by far) the most visible sports league in the country and based in our country's capital is one that just doesn't hold any water. The term 'Redskin' is not one used to show honor, or anything other than to demean the person being named as such. We don't go around calling people 'Blackskins' or 'Yellowskins' as we know referring to people by the color of their skin is both highly insensitive and racially motivated.
Just because Native Americans have been essentially exterminated and pushed to the furthest reaches of the lands doesn't mean we should sit idly by while their likenesses are used in mockery. Chief Wahoo is not a positive symbol; it's a caricature and a poor one at that. The Washington Redskins name is not a tribute to the people, it's a reminder that an entire race of people were conquered and displaced.
People like fitz and mcglicker have it in their minds that any change that benefits a group of people must be a bad thing - their media of choice have this ingrained in their heads - and therefore they must fight it tooth and nail. They see this topic as any of countless other that their media of choice have been railing against. You cannot possibly have a conscience while at the same time be fighting so feverishly to keep a team name as blatantly racist as 'Redskins'. Period.
The facts remain that these bigoted defenders of this term refuse, REFUSE to address just why they are so vehemently fighting the name change. These people aren't even fans of the team, so they don't even have that in their corner. They are either blatant racists, or are so programmed to resist any social change they can't think for themselves. In either case, I weep for their families that have no choice but to interact with their wildly out of touch and out of date views.
<< <i>People like fitz and mcglicker have it in their minds that any change that benefits a group of people must be a bad thing - their media of choice have this ingrained in their heads - and therefore they must fight it tooth and nail. They see this topic as any of countless other that their media of choice have been railing against. You cannot possibly have a conscience while at the same time be fighting so feverishly to keep a team name as blatantly racist as 'Redskins'. Period. >>
Please shut off your teleprompter and reread some of your own threads before disseminating false information.
My media of choice is NPR on the radio and CNN on Cable. Fox is my third choice. Are Diane Rehm and Anderson Cooper the bigots that you are referring to? I do not see it.
Where am I fighting feverishly to keep the team name? If I was a longtime fan of the team, that might be true but I have no skin (uh oh) in the game.
I do though respect rights of ownership and Daniel Snyder owns the team. If a new owner wants to come in and rename it the Washington Pansi Arses, that is fine with me. It might be appropriate for 2013 NFL football with the soft hits and Pink shoes and socks.
<< <i> Please shut off your teleprompter and reread some of your own threads before disseminating false information. >>
Another teleprompter 'dig'. Let me guess - this is a thinly veiled Obama dig where you think he can only read off a teleprompter, and you're likening my points to his? If that's the case - thank you! He's an amazing speaker. I am honored at the comparison.
<< <i>My media of choice is NPR on the radio and CNN on Cable. Fox is my third choice. Are Diane Rehm and Anderson Cooper the bigots that you are referring to? I do not see it. >>
Riiight. Fox is third. Got it.
<< <i>Where am I fighting feverishly to keep the team name? If I was a longtime fan of the team, that might be true but I have no skin (uh oh) in the game. >>
And yet you continue to bash those who want to change the offensive, racist team name. Again, your views and motivations are well known.
<< <i>I do though respect rights of ownership and Daniel Snyder owns the team. If a new owner wants to come in and rename it the Washington Pansi Arses, that is fine with me. It might be appropriate for 2013 NFL football with the soft hits and Pink shoes and socks. >>
Yeah, those damned breast cancer folks are doing so much to undermine the manliness of the NFL. Good gravy you are a dolt, you know that?
Yes Fox is third, clearly by exposure time. NPR radio runs most of the day while I am working. Probably two thirds CNN to 1/3 Fox TV at night . Fox gets way too dry for me.
I am confident in my thoughts and beliefs and do not need a Hope and Change rabble rouser to frame my ideas for me.
Yes Fox is third, clearly by exposure time. NPR radio runs most of the day while I am working. Probably two thirds CNN to 1/3 Fox TV at night . Fox gets way too dry for me.
I am confident in my thoughts and beliefs and do not need a Hope and Change rabble rouser to frame my ideas for me.
Give it a try sometime. >>
So I was spot on in my assessment of your 'teleprompter' comments. Thank you for the comparison to our President! He is truly an inspiring public speaker, and it's an honor that you compare my posts to his speeches. Thank you again!
<< <i>So I was spot on in my assessment of your 'teleprompter' comments. Thank you for the comparison to our President! He is truly an inspiring public speaker, and it's an honor that you compare my posts to his speeches. Thank you again! >>
You are welcome. And yes, you do seem to share many traits with the President.
<< <i>So I was spot on in my assessment of your 'teleprompter' comments. Thank you for the comparison to our President! He is truly an inspiring public speaker, and it's an honor that you compare my posts to his speeches. Thank you again! >>
You are welcome. And yes, you do seem to share many traits with the President. >>
What's hilarious is you think that's an insult. But back on topic. Back to explaining why you think rich white dudes should be allowed to continue to use racist terms to identify their football team.
Comments
<< <i>There are no shortage of places you can share your political leanings. They have no place here. >>
...and this coming from the Progressive PC cop.
<< <i>
<< <i>There are no shortage of places you can share your political leanings. They have no place here. >>
...and this coming from the Progressive PC cop. >>
No it's coming from the forum moderator, or did you fail to read the rules before you started posting?
<< <i>I knew that eventually, if this thread lasted long enough, that it would be all Obama's fault.. >>
All paths to ruin eventually lead us to that pesky Kenyan, Tim!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>There are no shortage of places you can share your political leanings. They have no place here. >>
...and this coming from the Progressive PC cop. >>
No it's coming from the forum moderator, or did you fail to read the rules before you started posting? >>
Perhaps you need to inform the Sportsmoderator of the infraction. It is quite possible that many of the posters to this thread would make a hasty exit.
Redskins stink...Go birds!
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
Obviously his remarks will have little to no impact whatsoever.
Dan Snyder has built a multi-million dollar product with the Redskins brand.
We won't even waste our time comparing Snyder's development of his #1 product The Redskins, to Obama's #1 project undertaking.
One guy has been a huge success. The other guy has been a huge failure.
Perhaps we should rename the unaffordable care-less act to the Redskins Health Plan, let Dan Snyder run it, and watch it turn into a billion dollar industry !
C'mon boys, you can do it !
Bringing up countless other unrelated topics doesn't hide your favor of racist language. It's pathetic.
I'm sure that families across America are sitting down at the dinner table talking about this very subject right now.
Forget 200. Let's take this to 300 and beyond boys.
IT'S THAT IMPORTANT !
Change is coming !
People on this thread have guaranteed it, so it's got to happen
<< <i>Native Americans have endured persecution and derision with great dignity. Greedy rich white people throw more insults at them in the naming of this team. To correct this injustice the Washington Redskins should now be called the Mid-Atlantic Redskins. >>
Not sure how I missed this gem from brick.
<< <i>That's it boys. Let's continue to spend countless hours taking time talking about a topic that everyone cares about.
I'm sure that families across America are sitting down at the dinner table talking about this very subject right now. >>
What's funny is you think you're being funny, but if you don't think families are indeed sitting down and having this discussion, then you, sir, couldn't be more wrong. Family discussions about serious topics (and racism and its place in modern day America should be discussed) does happen. Just because it doesn't happen in yours, doesn't mean it doesn't happen anywhere.
<< <i>IT'S THAT IMPORTANT ! >>
Anything which works to eliminate the marginalization of a race is important. Why is it more important to you to keep using a racist term to identify a football team? You and your other team name defenders continue to evade this very important question.
<< <i>Change is coming ! >>
It is. I will be on the right side of history. You and others like you will not be.
<< <i>People on this thread have guaranteed it, so it's got to happen >>
You'd be ignorant, a fool, or completely oblivious to history to think it won't happen.
<< <i>Why is it more important to you to keep using a racist term to identify a football team? You and your other team name defenders continue to evade this very important question >>
I will try this again. It is not important to keep the name Redskins. I believe that most of the "defenders" do not care what name the team owner chooses to keep or change. Though I think the reasons laid out for a change are specious.
When I was younger, like many sports fans, I felt that the Detroit Tigers was my team. Let me make this very clear. We have no claim or ownership to any sports team unless we truly hold an equity position. I learned that lesson when the jerk owner of the Tigers fired broadcaster Ernie Harwell. Despite all the protests and boycotts of his pizza brand, the dismissal held until Mike Ilitch bought the team and rehired Harwell.
I know that this may be difficult for the Liberal fray to grasp, but he who owns the team, chooses to keep or change the name. No more, no less.
<< <i>Why is it more important to you to keep using a racist term to identify a football team? You and your other team name defenders continue to evade this very important question
I will try this again. It is not important to keep the name Redskins. I believe that most of the "defenders" do not care what name the team owner chooses to keep or change. Though I think the reasons laid out for a change are specious. >>
Then why spend any time arguing against changing it, if its not important?
<< <i>I know that this may be difficult for the Liberal fray to grasp, but he who owns the team, chooses to keep or change the name. No more, no less. >>
Liberal fray? That's rich. I wonder if Dan Snyder would be ok with an NFL team named with a derisive Jewish name? Methinks he would (rightfully) have a problem with it. As far as his choice? No, since the team has a PUBLICLY funded stadium, then he is beholden to those same taxpayers.
<< <i>As far as his choice? No, since the team has a PUBLICLY funded stadium, then he is beholden to those same taxpayers. >>
Good luck on that one.
<< <i>
<< <i>As far as his choice? No, since the team has a PUBLICLY funded stadium, then he is beholden to those same taxpayers. >>
Good luck on that one.
Thank you for choosing, like fitz and stown and others, to ignore the question about your motivations for resisting the change of the team name, and instead deferring to a billionaire simply because he's rich. Instead of standing up and doing the right thing (i.e. pushing for name change) you instead oppose anything that might be deemed socially progressive.
Thank you for making your position on the topic of racist team names perfectly clear.
The name Redskins may offend you, it may offend Rachel Maddow and Debbie Wasserman Shultz and it may even offend some Native Americans that have a bunch of extra time on their hands to mull over such minutiae.
It seems though, that to the vast majority of Redskins fans, the name is just fine and dandy. Brands have value and to rename the team something stupid like the Wizards would no doubt harm the value of that brand. Not to mention the tradition of the team name and logo.
A Wiki check shows that the Redskins have sold out every game for many years in their 85,000 seat stadium and have a season ticket waiting list of 160,000 individuals. I am certain that many of them are Democrats and are willing to put up with the "injustice" to get at those tickets.
We cannot let small groups of "offended" folks dictate to the generally more rational masses how a private enterprise may operate their legally run businesses.
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>1985fan, do you want a coherent answer or are you stuck on a programmed liberal view that defies any logical thought? >>
The fact that you are the one with obvious programming yet insist on calling others 'liberal' as if it's a bad thing. Proceed, sir.
<< <i>The name Redskins may offend you, it may offend Rachel Maddow and Debbie Wasserman Shultz and it may even offend some Native Americans that have a bunch of extra time on their hands to mull over such minutiae. >>
The fact that it offends Native Americans (I have repeatedly linked the story of the committee which represents thousands of Native American tribes calling for the change) should be reason enough for any one with a conscience to call for change. Go on, though, I get the feeling you have more talking points to express.
<< <i>It seems though, that to the vast majority of Redskins fans, the name is just fine and dandy. Brands have value and to rename the team something stupid like the Wizards would no doubt harm the value of that brand. Not to mention the tradition of the team name and logo. >>
So what if it's tradition? It doesn't make it any less offensive or racist in tone. Blackface used to a tradition comedians used often. By using your 'logic' (or lack thereof) we should be able to use any racial mockery we want, because the majority doesn't find it offensive. Makes sense to me!
<< <i>A Wiki check shows that the Redskins have sold out every game for many years in their 85,000 seat stadium and have a season ticket waiting list of 160,000 individuals. I am certain that many of them are Democrats and are willing to put up with the "injustice" to get at those tickets. >>
Your insistence on painting everyone you disagree with a Democrat or liberal or progressive speaks volumes about your simple-minded approach to any discussion.
<< <i>We cannot let small groups of "offended" folks dictate to the generally more rational masses how a private enterprise may operate their legally run businesses. >>
The Redskins are not a private enterprise, not by a long shot. Throw in his publicly funded stadium and no, sir, this is not private enterprise. The use of 'Redskin' and being ok with it is NOT 'rational'. I am sorry you are so narrow minded that you cannot see this term as the racist shot it is. You are so blinded with rage at the very thought of a minority 'getting over' on white America you can't even see straight (it's why you insist on labeling everyone you disagree with).
Don't bother responding, it's obvious you are in favor of using racist terms to identify a football team. Thank you for confirming!
<< <i>Don't bother responding, it's obvious you are in favor of using racist terms to identify a football team. Thank you for confirming! >>
Did Oprah write your script?
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't bother responding, it's obvious you are in favor of using racist terms to identify a football team. Thank you for confirming! >>
Did Oprah write your script? >>
Did Rush write yours? Or was it Bill?
If people want to cite this was long ago....I am not yet forty and my great grandmother lived a long life and I knew her as a child and everyone in our family loved her. She lived all of her young adulthood life in this country, yet was not considered a citizen of this country because she was Yurok Indian. It was not long ago through my eyes, I see no equity in how Indian people are treated in this country in comparison to other races.....and instead people want to act as though there is no injustice.
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>Andrew Jackson , in his 1830 Annual Message to Congress, likewise referred to Indian removal as a "benevolent policy" that would allow Indians to "cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community." Jackson went on to win a second term as president, and in his Fifth Annual Message he told Congress that Indians "have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race...they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear."
If people want to cite this was long ago....I am not yet forty and my great grandmother lived a long life and I knew her as a child and everyone in our family loved her. She lived all of her young adulthood life in this country, yet was not considered a citizen of this country because she was Yurok Indian. It was not long ago through my eyes, I see no equity in how Indian people are treated in this country in comparison to other races.....and instead people want to act as though there is no injustice. >>
If you look through the previous thread, I mentioned that of the Native Americans I've met, not one uses or accepts a $20 bill. 175+ years ago may seem like an eternity to some but in the whole scheme of things, it's nothing but a blip on the radar.
<< <i>The Declaration of Independence refers to Native Americans as "the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions." Several early US Presidents shared their view of Native Americans. For example, George Washington referred to them as "ignorant Savages" and "beasts of prey," John Adams referred to them as "poor, ignorant savages" with "an aversion both to civilization and Christianity," and Thomas Jefferson confided to James Monroe: "I hope we shall drub the Indians well this summer & then change our plan from war to bribery." Believe it or not there are people that say that that they have never met a real Indian before or even, gasp, that they did not know that Indians were still alive. American needs to give Indians the same respect and consideration that is given for other races.......I do appreciate Skin with compliments on my cartoon montage and the other post I made...much appreciated. >>
Wrestlingcardking, you are welcome
The thread has since lost its focus, but the major points you made ring true, and stand tall above all the other nonsense
The fact remains that an overwhelming majority of Native Americans do not find the term Redskin offensive.
That in of itself shows that all other arguments hold no weight.
If anyone wants to call these Native Americans bigots or racists, that is their prerogative.
<< <i>The fact remains that an overwhelming majority of Native Americans do not find the term Redskin offensive.
That in of itself shows that all other arguments hold no weight.
If anyone wants to call these Native Americans bigots or racists, that is their prerogative. >>
The thread has since lost its focus, but the major points you made ring true, and stand tall above all the other nonsense
<< <i>The fact remains that an overwhelming majority of Native Americans do not find the term Redskin offensive. >>
You keep using this word fact...I don't think you know what that word means. Irregardless the fact reminds the term IS offensive and IS racist in nature therefore it should be changed. Wanting to keep the name and having no opinion are to very different things, and anyone in favor of th continued use of racist terminology and mascots do indeed have racist views.
<< <i>That in of itself shows that all other arguments hold no weight. >>
You fail miserably at debate. Maybe you should take a class in how to debate properly.
<< <i>If anyone wants to call these Native Americans bigots or racists, that is their prerogative. >>
Nobody is calling them so. We're calling defenders of the continued use of racist language and mascots bigoted.
...and I cannot name a single player on the team.
That may be the local sports story of the year!
Sorry for interrupting the venom, carry on......
Hawthorne, who serves as the Navajo Code Talkers Association’s vice president, should be considered a reliable source on the matter.
“My opinion is that’s a name that not only the team should keep,” he said, “but that’s a name that’s American
Don't you love how some here take great pleasure in calling Roy Hawthorne a bigot ?
Got to love these progressives. Number one they'll lie to either get their way or to make a false point.
Then if that doesn't work, they'll start calling you vicious names if you disagree with them.
The progressives will call honorable Native Americans bigots just because progressives are filled with venom.
Edmund, you still have some questions to answer.
Since you approve of naming YOUR youth teams redskins, blackskins, or yellowskins...I can see why you won't address it.
<< <i>Don't you love how people who represent the far left enjoy calling Native Americans bigots ?
Got to love these progressives. Number one they'll lie to either get their way or to make a false point.
>>
What like referencing a decade old and inherently flawed survey over and I've again? Yeah those people are the worst.
<< <i>< I am waiting for the day that the defenders, the actual people, of native mascots decide to name one of their community little league or pop warner football teams after another race instead of Indians and honor them too because they deserve it. The honorers of racist mascots can dress up like them, portray the stereotypes of them to the nth degree and see the outrage that would come their way. Name your team with a non-racist term like Kings after MLK. In the mean time, be sure to dress up like him (black paint necessary if you are white), imitate his speeches to others, includes aspects of religion in here as many deeply spiritual experiences are basically ridiculed by others when in a sports context, and do nothing but honor the team and I am sure you will be making the news in no time. You could literally be on ABC, NBC, CBS all of them.....and I am sure you would be known as the town racist or bigot and people and/or businesses would want to distance themselves from you, to not be associated with you, and depending where you work fired or on ad min leave. Yet it is perfectly okay for mascots to happen to native people, why? >>
Edmund, you still have some questions to answer.
Since you approve of naming YOUR youth teams redskins, blackskins, or yellowskins...I can see why you won't address it. >>
Cone on fitz ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!
I am glad that he has clarified that
<< <i>Edmundfitzgerald has now said he DOES NOT approve of naming youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins.
I am glad that he has clarified that
Hey Skin2.
You're turning out to be a compulsive liar. What a shame.
I never answered your dumb question about naming a team after a skin color.
I've said all along that Dan Snyder can name his team whatever he wants, and the free market will dictate whether it's a good or bad idea.
It's really sad that you continue to post lie after lie.
Let me make this loud and clear.
Your question has nothing to do with Dan Snyder naming HIS TEAM the Redskins.
Perhaps you should learn how to not falsely accuse people of saying things they didn't say.
If what you said all along that it simply is Snyder's team and he has the right to name it what you wanted, then there was no reason to even start a thread, because EVERYONE agrees with that!
However, you have made several other claims, and you are being called on them;
Why do you feel it is in poor taste and offensive to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but is not offensive or in poor taste to name a professional team that??
<< <i>Edmund,
Why do you feel it is in poor taste to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but you have no problem redskins being used on a professional team? Yeah, it is Snyder's team, everyone gets that, and NOBODY disagrees with that. But why do you feel it is in bad taste to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins, but ok for professional teams? >>
Skin,
I never answered that question.
But please keep asking it time after time, again and again.
Someday you'll actually convince yourself that I really answered it.
I never said it's in good taste or bad taste. Perhaps you should go back and do your own due diligence on the subject. Reread every post.
Please see where I never said anything about this dumb question. It really has nothing to do with anything.
You really need to ask Dan Snyder these questions.
He's the guy with the team named Redskin.
BTW, last time I checked, over 90% of Native Americans are fine with the name.
And some Native Americans have Redskin as their own team name.
LOL
If what you said all along that it simply is Snyder's team and he has the right to name it what you wanted, then there was no reason to even start a thread, because EVERYONE agrees with that!
However, you have made several other claims, and you are being called on them;
Why do you feel it is in poor taste and offensive to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but is not offensive or in poor taste to name a professional team that??
Why do you take the word of 768 random people who we do not even know if they are Native, and apply that to 90% of the five million plus Native population? That study you spout isn't remotely accurate! Why do you keep spouting 90% like it is real? Are you dumber than everyone actually thinks?
<< <i>
However, you have made several other claims, and you are being called on them;
? >>
Go find them my friend, copy and paste them, and I will gladly answer them.
You started two threads(and participated in two others) saying the term isn't offensive, and that it is ok to refer to people by skin color, so I ask...
Why do you feel it is in poor taste and offensive to name youth teams redskins, yellowskins, or blackskins...but is not offensive or in poor taste to name a professional team that??
"it’s difficult to tell how many are opposed to the name."
"Perhaps this uncertainty shouldn’t matter — because the word has an undeniably racist history, or because the team says it uses the word with respect, or because in a truly decent society, some would argue, what hurts a few should be avoided by all."
In my opinion, if the ownership group or sole owner or whatever, wants to name his/their team the Washington Redskins (or borrowing my friend Rob's cartoon, the Washington Wetbacks for that matter), so be it. This is the USA and in this great country, that’s his privilege. By the same token, if Native Americans, or Mexicans want to protest that, so be it, that’s their prerogative as well. Just because some want to make it an absolute one way or the other, and type things akin to you either go against the name or you are a flaming racist, or you either support the name or you are against the privileges of Americans to do certain things with their own property, is equally absurd on both sides of the fence as far as I’m concerned.
Personally, I wouldn’t be overly offended if someone wanted to name their youth teams whatever, doesn’t mean I would like it, and doesn’t mean I wouldn’t think it was in poor taste either, but I would support their ability to do it, while at the same time tell them I personally thought they were a dumb… Would it hurt a bit inside? Perhaps, but I’d get over it pretty quickly.
To believe that the name doesn’t offend some, is basically being ostrich like (no offense intended to ostriches, and yes, I know they don’t actually do that except to dig), sticking your head in the sand with nothing but your dumb… sticking up. But, I support your privilege to believe that.
And as a member of a race that is frequently discriminated against, I choose to just let the chip fall right off of my shoulder and live my life without really giving a hoot what someone thinks about my race for the most part. Have actually found over the years that most people discriminate more against those that are of a different wage bracket than they are, as opposed to race, but no reason to digress into that.
Doesn’t mean I haven’t taken offense to someone that says something against my race and I called their hand on it, as I’d be lying if I said it didn’t bother me at all, but it’s really no different a feeling inside from when someone would call me four eyes, big nose, fat ... whatever, an insult is an insult, and in this Country, thank God, people are free to be ignorant within fairly reasonable restraints. I wouldn’t want it any other way, God bless the USA!
Just because Native Americans have been essentially exterminated and pushed to the furthest reaches of the lands doesn't mean we should sit idly by while their likenesses are used in mockery. Chief Wahoo is not a positive symbol; it's a caricature and a poor one at that. The Washington Redskins name is not a tribute to the people, it's a reminder that an entire race of people were conquered and displaced.
People like fitz and mcglicker have it in their minds that any change that benefits a group of people must be a bad thing - their media of choice have this ingrained in their heads - and therefore they must fight it tooth and nail. They see this topic as any of countless other that their media of choice have been railing against. You cannot possibly have a conscience while at the same time be fighting so feverishly to keep a team name as blatantly racist as 'Redskins'. Period.
The facts remain that these bigoted defenders of this term refuse, REFUSE to address just why they are so vehemently fighting the name change. These people aren't even fans of the team, so they don't even have that in their corner. They are either blatant racists, or are so programmed to resist any social change they can't think for themselves. In either case, I weep for their families that have no choice but to interact with their wildly out of touch and out of date views.
<< <i>People like fitz and mcglicker have it in their minds that any change that benefits a group of people must be a bad thing - their media of choice have this ingrained in their heads - and therefore they must fight it tooth and nail. They see this topic as any of countless other that their media of choice have been railing against. You cannot possibly have a conscience while at the same time be fighting so feverishly to keep a team name as blatantly racist as 'Redskins'. Period. >>
Please shut off your teleprompter and reread some of your own threads before disseminating false information.
My media of choice is NPR on the radio and CNN on Cable. Fox is my third choice. Are Diane Rehm and Anderson Cooper the bigots that you are referring to? I do not see it.
Where am I fighting feverishly to keep the team name? If I was a longtime fan of the team, that might be true but I have no skin (uh oh) in the game.
I do though respect rights of ownership and Daniel Snyder owns the team. If a new owner wants to come in and rename it the Washington Pansi Arses, that is fine with me. It might be appropriate for 2013 NFL football with the soft hits and Pink shoes and socks.
<< <i>
Please shut off your teleprompter and reread some of your own threads before disseminating false information.
>>
Another teleprompter 'dig'. Let me guess - this is a thinly veiled Obama dig where you think he can only read off a teleprompter, and you're likening my points to his? If that's the case - thank you! He's an amazing speaker. I am honored at the comparison.
<< <i>My media of choice is NPR on the radio and CNN on Cable. Fox is my third choice. Are Diane Rehm and Anderson Cooper the bigots that you are referring to? I do not see it. >>
Riiight. Fox is third. Got it.
<< <i>Where am I fighting feverishly to keep the team name? If I was a longtime fan of the team, that might be true but I have no skin (uh oh) in the game. >>
And yet you continue to bash those who want to change the offensive, racist team name. Again, your views and motivations are well known.
<< <i>I do though respect rights of ownership and Daniel Snyder owns the team. If a new owner wants to come in and rename it the Washington Pansi Arses, that is fine with me. It might be appropriate for 2013 NFL football with the soft hits and Pink shoes and socks. >>
Yeah, those damned breast cancer folks are doing so much to undermine the manliness of the NFL. Good gravy you are a dolt, you know that?
<< <i>Riiight. Fox is third. Got it. >>
Yes Fox is third, clearly by exposure time. NPR radio runs most of the day while I am working. Probably two thirds CNN to 1/3 Fox TV at night . Fox gets way too dry for me.
I am confident in my thoughts and beliefs and do not need a Hope and Change rabble rouser to frame my ideas for me.
Give it a try sometime.
<< <i>
<< <i>Riiight. Fox is third. Got it. >>
Yes Fox is third, clearly by exposure time. NPR radio runs most of the day while I am working. Probably two thirds CNN to 1/3 Fox TV at night . Fox gets way too dry for me.
I am confident in my thoughts and beliefs and do not need a Hope and Change rabble rouser to frame my ideas for me.
Give it a try sometime. >>
So I was spot on in my assessment of your 'teleprompter' comments. Thank you for the comparison to our President! He is truly an inspiring public speaker, and it's an honor that you compare my posts to his speeches. Thank you again!
<< <i>So I was spot on in my assessment of your 'teleprompter' comments. Thank you for the comparison to our President! He is truly an inspiring public speaker, and it's an honor that you compare my posts to his speeches. Thank you again! >>
You are welcome. And yes, you do seem to share many traits with the President.
<< <i>
<< <i>So I was spot on in my assessment of your 'teleprompter' comments. Thank you for the comparison to our President! He is truly an inspiring public speaker, and it's an honor that you compare my posts to his speeches. Thank you again! >>
You are welcome. And yes, you do seem to share many traits with the President. >>
What's hilarious is you think that's an insult. But back on topic. Back to explaining why you think rich white dudes should be allowed to continue to use racist terms to identify their football team.