DogofWar1 Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Since UnWise Mike decided to whine about this again, I thought I'd share this screen cap from his last festival of obnoxiousness. So who wants to call him out on opening day 2018 with me? Oh, I saved it alright. I saved it. Just you wait Fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 DogsofWar1 writes: Since UnWise Mike decided to whine about this again, I thought I'd share this screen cap from his last festival of obnoxiousness. So who wants to call him out on opening day 2018 with me? Yeah, wasn't the little moron saying a couple of years ago that by 2015, the name will be changed? He keeps pushing his date back. Wait till he gets to 3000, then sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Doesnt count? What are you, twelve?Im an 1/8 Cherokee and take a lot of pride in my lineage and find that remark highly offensive and extremely ignorant. I can only hope my two boys take as much pride in where they come from as I do, despite only having been passed down a fraction of the Cherokee blood. Good god, I could go on but I get the feeling I'd be wasting my time. You either have no pride or, most likey, you're the idiot. My post was in response to full blooded Native American's who have a problem with Non-Native Americans who have acquired NA blood through generations of marriage and whatnot who claim to know better than they do as to what offends them. My friend throws it around when it's convenient, as do alot of white's of European decent when it fits their agenda. Like I said in my original post, I could probably dig far enough back that maybe, just maybe there was a NA in our family. For me, I'm just not interested on going beyond 1/4 in my lineage. I "NEVER" said he shouldn't be proud or that anyone shouldn't be proud of their lineage. Those were your words. My view is, your post was very overly sensitive and if that's the case, well, that's your problem. I've known this guy for almost 30 years and it's not like we have a full blown argument about it. We mess with each other about things like this in jest. I'm proud of my lineage. I'm Irish-English with some German and Nordic in there somewhere. But mainly I just say I'm Irish-English. My wife is from Peru and she has Peruvian, Argentinian, Italian and German in her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Question: If you believe in the Harjo curse, does that mean if a Christian that you have turned your back on God and Jesus because clearly you have some faith in a theistic something. There are other Gods in play there with the power to curse us? Just a semi-random, semi-related thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 The perfect response to the "would you call her a redskin to her face" question would have been "No, because she's not apart of our organization or team". You stay respectable while indicating that no one actually uses that word in society other than to refer to the team or its members. That's a loaded question. Would you just go up to any person that you do not know and just call them anything you want. I've called women, Miss, and then correct me with "Mizz" or "Mrs". It depends on the person and what they are offended by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I think that if the organization is one day forced to change the nickname, I vote for not having a nickname at all. How about a nice big middle finger to every governing body forcing the change and just refer to the team as the "Washington Football Team" or just "Washington Team"; and then remove any logo while we're at it, replacing it with a checkerboard of burgundy and gold. Because let's face it, no nickname is ever going to replace what we have now, and I'd personally rather not give these people the satisfaction of knowing they forced a nickname change. We just won't have a nickname. Or we can just call them the Wizards--that's a solid replacement. Pull a Prince, a symbol formerly known as the Redskins. That symbol would be our logo. ---------- Post added May-10th-2013 at 08:47 AM ---------- Since UnWise Mike decided to whine about this again, I thought I'd share this screen cap from his last festival of obnoxiousness.So who wants to call him out on opening day 2018 with me? http://s1.postimg.org/jovdfnn5r/Mike_Wisedickbag.jpg Oh, I saved it alright. I saved it. Just you wait Fool. What's a beadspread? F Wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Just wonder what the reaction everyone would have if Snyder changed the name to the Natives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Since UnWise Mike decided to whine about this again, I thought I'd share this screen cap from his last festival of obnoxiousness.So who wants to call him out on opening day 2018 with me? http://s1.postimg.org/jovdfnn5r/Mike_Wisedickbag.jpg Oh, I saved it alright. I saved it. Just you wait Fool. What's a beadspread? F Wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortisBetts Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Since UnWise Mike decided to whine about this again, I thought I'd share this screen cap from his last festival of obnoxiousness.So who wants to call him out on opening day 2018 with me? http://s1.postimg.org/jovdfnn5r/Mike_Wisedickbag.jpg Oh, I saved it alright. I saved it. Just you wait Fool. What does that even mean? What an idiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsCountry Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Since UnWise Mike decided to whine about this again, I thought I'd share this screen cap from his last festival of obnoxiousness.So who wants to call him out on opening day 2018 with me? http://s1.postimg.org/jovdfnn5r/Mike_Wisedickbag.jpg Oh, I saved it alright. I saved it. Just you wait Fool. The only thing that's going to be memorabilia by 2018 is his articles in the Washington Post after they go under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PF Chang Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 That twitter screencap has @sugewhite94 ... isn't that the paloffs guy? Awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn X Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Firstly, congrats to Dan Snyder for his response to USA Today, as the easy way out would've been to try to placate the P.C. police on this issue. Long ago, in fact. Back when Suzan Shown Harjo launched her (failed) lawsuit against the team's nickname roughly a decade ago. Secondly, regarding the inaptly-named UnWise Mike, I vaguely recall him starting his crusade against the nickname in a column of his that appeared just days after a story ran in the Washington Post about a linguist at the Smithsonian who had debunked Harjo's (and Wise's) claim that the nickname was a racial epithet. In short, the linguist discovered that the first recorded usage of the word "redskin" was by an American Indian chief who had met with the President during the early years of the American Republic and referred to himself and his delegation as "redskins" and their counterparts as "whiteskins." I have yet to hear an acknowledgement of this story by UnWise Mike, Tony Kornheiser, Michael Wilbon or any of the other local sports commentators who have been clamoring for the nickname to be changed. I guess they don't read their own newspaper. Thirdly, even if the Redskins did change the nickname (let's say to Warriors), the Harjos of the world wouldn't be placated by that because what they really want is for the team's logos (e.g. the Indian-head-inside-the-dreamcatcher logo and the spearhead-with-feathers logo) to disappear altogether, as they dislike the idea of non-Indians using Indian-related imagery. Which is a separatist brand of thinking. So I say screw 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 I called in to sports talk here in Charlotte as they were talking about this yesterday. I was trying to explain to them about the NA's actually calling themselves Redskins first and mentioned the poll in 2006 and last year. Then I got cut off. First time I've ever called in. I wanted to talk about Lone Star Deitz and Walter Wetzel, but they didn't give me time and they were crunched for time. I sent them an email with the other information. A Redskin fan called in before me (2 callers before) and he stated he wanted to change the name, but had no name to change and said he was a season ticket holder. He did not get the history about the name right. He didn't know the correct story. I felt rushed and I feel like I wasn't able to get my point across. Next time, I'll take my time and not rush. Felt like an idiot. Oh and the 2 hosts, Taylor Tzarzar and Marc James agreed with Dan Snyder and believe the world has gone too PC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hammer Posted May 12, 2013 Share Posted May 12, 2013 Actually, I learned (from watching Criminal Minds) that "Apache" is not what that tribe actually uses to refer to themselves. Supposedly, "Apache" is a Pueblo word, which means "enemy". Supposedly, the Apache refer to themselves as the Dineah (spelling?), which translates as "the People". [/useless trivia] On a more businesslike vein: I can't see the team spending a whole bunch of money changing the team's name to something where the team doesn't own the trademark. Wow thanks for the info. I never knew that's what Apache really meant? As for the side note I've read, on another forum, that Snyder has already chosen and trademarked The Warriors if he's forced to change the name. As much as I bashed Snyder, in the past, that's the one redeeming quality he has...fighting to keep the teams name. If the the team is made to change their name and logo I would dig The Braves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerryMason Posted May 12, 2013 Share Posted May 12, 2013 Yeah, I think Dan's "I don't know her, so I have nothing to say" was the correct response. It's a safe response. But I think sending the message that no one actually uses the word Redskin as a slur anymore also would have been effective. The 3 or so people bringing the trademark lawsuit DO NOT represent the entire Native American community as ESPN and others blanketly assume. In fact, by assuming such, you actually are stereotyping by doing so. "Well if this group of Native Americans are offended, they all must feel the same way" I have lived in Oklahoma for years around lots of Native Americans and lots of people who hate Native Americans and never once in my life have i heard the word "Redskin" or "Redskins" been used to refer to anything other than the NFL team. ---------- Post added May-11th-2013 at 07:34 PM ---------- that argument lies the problem. if it only refers to the team members and it is offensive otherwise, thats why people are saying change it I can see what you mean, but i think sending the message that the word "Redskin" has fallen out of use as a slur and is universally used to refer to an NFL team is a good stance to take. Mainly, because its the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 someone bothered to ask actual native americans how they feel about the name? wacky. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/05/15/three-virginia-indian-tribes-not-offended-by-redskins/ The Richmond Times-Dispatch reached out to the chiefs of some of Virginia’s Indian tribes to gather some thoughts about the Redskins name and find out whether those tribes are offended by the name controversy that launched a thousand blog posts. Robert Green, retired chief of the Patawomeck Tribe in Virginia, told the paper that he has no objection to the team’s name. “It doesn’t bother me,” Green said. “About 98 percent of my tribe is Redskins fans, and it doesn’t offend them, either.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 yay,, more people to ignore! Come on white man! civilize them Virginia savages and show 'em how stupid they are for not being offended. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 someone bothered to ask actual native americans how they feel about the name? wacky.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/05/15/three-virginia-indian-tribes-not-offended-by-redskins/ The Richmond Times-Dispatch reached out to the chiefs of some of Virginia’s Indian tribes to gather some thoughts about the Redskins name and find out whether those tribes are offended by the name controversy that launched a thousand blog posts. Robert Green, retired chief of the Patawomeck Tribe in Virginia, told the paper that he has no objection to the team’s name. “It doesn’t bother me,” Green said. “About 98 percent of my tribe is Redskins fans, and it doesn’t offend them, either.” And apparently, Mike Florio feels it is a one-sided article. As HTTR24-7 so adeptly pointed out on Twitter: like the 98% of the articles coming out aren't one-sided to the negative. That's who is really driving this: a small, vocal minority and the Mike Florios, UnWise Mikes, and John Feinsteins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 How many more sides are there to "These people don't find it offensive"? Frankly, i hope the more articles of this sort that come out, that they do indicate that the other side of this issue consists of FIVE petitioners. After all, it would only be fair. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.