Alaskins

The Official ES Redskins Name Change Thread---All Things Related to Changing the Team's Name Go Here

Recommended Posts

It should've been, a couple months ago, when our owner said, "NEVER."

I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but am not on board with most of the "I'm offended" crap. Don't like watching a mother breastfeed? That's why your neck has mobility. Move it , don't stare and say, "That's repulsive!"

If your neck doesn't have mobility, your eyelids do. Blinking is both involuntary, and voluntary. Use your senses for all that they're worth, and then get over it.

Ya but that response only fans the flames of the extremists, as well as many who were otherwise neutral.

If the media took half as much time to investigate harjo and halbritter as they did criticizing dan snyder, this would have been a dead issue long ago. But it's more popular to take up a sympathetic, disadvantaged minority cause while simultaneously taking jabs at a demonized owner (who has brought much of it on himself).

But it's nice to know there are some reasonable bleeding heart libs out there :)

And shame on anyone who criticizes breast feeding moms. The more public boobage men get, the better. :D

Edited by grego
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya but that response only fans the flames of the extremists, as well as many who were otherwise neutral.

If the media took half as much time to investigate harjo and halbritter as they did criticizing dan snyder, this would have been a dead issue long ago. But it's more popular to take up a sympathetic, disadvantaged minority cause while simultaneously taking jabs at a demonized owner (who has brought much of it on himself).

But it's nice to know there are some reasonable bleeding heart libs out there :)

Sorry, I know in some cases, eyelids aren't necessarily responsive either, and for that misstep,(I did make one) I apologize. 

Hubby (the other BHL in the house) said the Browns is OK.  Oh boy, did we go at it for a while...I'll bet a good 2 hours got wasted on that argument! 

But we always came back to the Braves. 

 

The Redskins is WHO I AM.  Since long before I knew who I was. 

(OK, that made no sense at all, but yet it did.)

 

Hail!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think you've got a point. That yes, we have been conditioned to, at the very least, give a heightened scrutiny to anything which so much as recognizes that sometimes there are differences between the races. Or even that races exist.

It's like, anybody who admits to noticing, gets looked at funny.

That said, though, I'm not certain that's a bad thing, either.

I think that the way our country has treated other races, and may well be treating them, today, indicates that yeah, there's a streak of racist in all of our characters.

I know it's in mine. (Despite the fact that I'm also aware that, compared to my father, I'm practically "color blind". And my father wasn't exactly Archie Bunker, either. But I'm still aware that the streak is there.)

I think that, just as we've established the legal concept that matters involving race ought to be subject to a heightened level of scrutiny, so other things racial ought to be, too.

Sometimes treating the races differently is justified. Some races are more prone to certain medical conditions, and I don;t think doctors should pretend to be ignorant of that when they're treating a patient.

 

Okay, I'm back.

 

As someone who often finds himself aligned with Larry on other topics, I'm enjoying watching him try to align his liberal orthodoxy with his defense of the team name.

 

Out of curiosity, Larry, if you were a fan of the Raiders or Seahawks, do you think you would be defending the name this strongly? In other words, are you defending the name or defending yourself? (Not a challenge or a criticism, just a curiosity.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that article by harjo is mind blowing.

 

i knew she was a radical,  but didnt know she was that far out there. 

 

so, this lunatic and a corrupt casino boss are the people we are up against. just checking, for the record. 

 

oh, and btw, given what we know about these 2 people spearheading this movement. shouldnt this be over by now?

 

Just goes to show how one-sided the media REALLY is in this issue...

 

I really believe it's dying down. Issues like this can only hold the fire for so long...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just goes to show how one-sided the media REALLY is in this issue...

I really believe it's dying down. Issues like this can only hold the fire for so long...

I'm thinking it may be dying down- at least a little bit- for now. A few have come out actually questioning the other side. And there may be just a little backlash against some of the more outspoken people like costas and peter king.

I think some of at has to do with more information getting out there- that seems to be the case with Reilly and smith. They both admitted as much.

I've always felt like the issue would die down if more people knew the facts. I hope that's the case.

Edited by grego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard of the Daily Caller before, but they are calling out Costas and his "affiliation" with the Ray Halbritter.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/23/bob-costas-network-partners-with-tribe-changing-to-change-redskins-name/

 

I think you're going to start to see these two "heads"--Halbritter and Harjo--get more scrutiny the longer this carries on. They eventually be discredited as whack-jobs.

Edited by Riggo#44
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if calling an American Indian a redskin is racist then wouldn't calling somebody white racist, because it inherently refers to the color of their skin? Or your one black friend? It's no longer ok to call him black?

Just because we don't call them white skins or black skins makes it ok? Even though that's exactly what we are talking about!

 

Not sure that's a worthy argument to make.  Do you think it would be seen as acceptable to call a team the Washington Whites or the Washington Blacks (or whatever race you choose) and have a image that depicts what must be considered a standard representative of that race on the helmet?  I think the answer is clearly no despite the fact that "White" or "Black" isn't a offensive term on its own.  

 

I understand the point you are trying to make, that Redskins is not an offensive term, but I don't think that argument works when explored a little further.  

I've never heard of the Daily Caller before, but they are calling out Costas and his "affiliation" with the Ray Halbritter.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/23/bob-costas-network-partners-with-tribe-changing-to-change-redskins-name/

 

I think you're going to start to see these two "heads"--Halbritter and Harjo--get more scrutiny the longer this carries on. They eventually be discredited as whack-jobs.

 

I'm glad Costas is getting grief.  His little rant in the middle of a football game was not appreciated . 

 

Oh for the love of God not Arizona politicians... Holding your nose works only up until the point the stench becomes so powerful you can taste it.  It's getting close.  If Sheriff Joe pops up in the Redskins defense I'm going to have to think things over.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I'm back.

 

As someone who often finds himself aligned with Larry on other topics, I'm enjoying watching him try to align his liberal orthodoxy with his defense of the team name.

 

Out of curiosity, Larry, if you were a fan of the Raiders or Seahawks, do you think you would be defending the name this strongly? In other words, are you defending the name or defending yourself? (Not a challenge or a criticism, just a curiosity.)

Well, I'm not a baseball fan, and I have no problem at all with the Atlanta Braves. :)

But yes, I do think you've got a point. Part of the vehemence that gets put into Defending The Name, is no doubt rooted in defending the self.

 

I observed something similar, myself, in a recent class I took in Ethics. People were discussing the ethics of corporal punishment. Needless to say, virtually everybody in the class was quite a bit younger than I.

And I did observe that, when I would read comments boldly declaring that spanking a child is child abuse, that there was a reaction within me that rose up and became very angry at the notion that my Father and Mother were child abusers.

Funny, you call somebody a racist, they tend to get defensive. :)

But I also will observe that part of the reason why you see more people defending the name, from within the ranks of fans, is because that group tends to be better informed of certain facts which the broader public hasn't been informed of.

Even the Costas monologue, which did mention things like the name not being offensive, briefly, before simply declaring it to be racist, anyway, referred to the Annenberg data simply as "a majority of natives don't find the name offensive." I was grateful that he mentioned that fact at all (the vast majority of the attackers won't mention that it exists). But even then he doesn't say "90% don't find it offensive". He minimizes "90%" by using "a majority".

Yes, I can easily see why people who aren't aware of the facts can come to the offensive, racist, conclusion. I mean, heck, it's a reference to skin, and color.

However, I am aware of the facts. It does make a difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard of the Daily Caller before, but they are calling out Costas and his "affiliation" with the Ray Halbritter.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/23/bob-costas-network-partners-with-tribe-changing-to-change-redskins-name/

 

I think you're going to start to see these two "heads"--Halbritter and Harjo--get more scrutiny the longer this carries on. They eventually be discredited as whack-jobs.

 

 

"NBC Sports partnered with Oneida casino prior to Costas Redskins rant"

 

 

lol. love it. suck it, costas.

 

especially loved this part-

 

"The Daily Caller revealed last week that Halbritter is not a legitimate member of the Oneida Indian Nation, which he leads as official Representative and CEOicon1.png of the tribe’s affiliated corporation."

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/14/documents-anti-redskins-indian-leader-not-a-legitimate-member-of-his-tribe/

 

so, it appears that halbritter isnt even an oneida indian. this articles a week old but i somehow missed it if it was posted. its definitely not getting the attention it deserves.

 

the critics are so quiet.........

 

Halbritter is not a legitimate member of the Oneida tribe, Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney told The Daily Caller.

“He is not even technically an Oneida. There is not a drop of Oneida in him,” Tenney said...............

 

Halbritter ancestor Lucy Carpenter’s expulsion from the Six Nations, according to the 1885-1940 Census Rolls, invalidates Halbritter’s claim to one-fourth Oneida heritage on his mother’s side, according to Tenney.

“He has no ancestry in the Six Nations but he has a lot of powerfulicon1.png friends in D.C.,” Tenney said.

Halbritter attended a January 27, 2012 fundraiser with President Obama in Washington, D.C. with 70 Indian leadersicon1.png. The $15,000 to $35,800 fundraiser raised up to $2.5 million for Obama’s re-election campaign.

“The presidenticon1.png was most gracious and kind in his remarks,” Halbritter said after the event to a media network owned by his nation’s company, noting that Obama is doing more to reach out to Indian tribes than any president in his experience.

Obama recently said that if he was the owner of the Redskins, he would “think about changing it [the team name].”

 

Edited by grego
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"NBC Sports partnered with Oneida casino prior to Costas Redskins rant"

 

 

lol. love it. suck it, costas.

 

especially loved this part-

 

"The Daily Caller revealed last week that Halbritter is not a legitimate member of the Oneida Indian Nation, which he leads as official Representative and CEOicon1.png of the tribe’s affiliated corporation."

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/14/documents-anti-redskins-indian-leader-not-a-legitimate-member-of-his-tribe/

 

so, it appears that halbritter isnt even an oneida indian. this articles a week old but i somehow missed it if it was posted. its definitely not getting the attention it deserves.

 

the critics are so quiet.........

 

Halbritter is not a legitimate member of the Oneida tribe, Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney told The Daily Caller.

“He is not even technically an Oneida. There is not a drop of Oneida in him,” Tenney said...............

 

Halbritter ancestor Lucy Carpenter’s expulsion from the Six Nations, according to the 1885-1940 Census Rolls, invalidates Halbritter’s claim to one-fourth Oneida heritage on his mother’s side, according to Tenney.

“He has no ancestry in the Six Nations but he has a lot of powerfulicon1.png friends in D.C.,” Tenney said.

Halbritter attended a January 27, 2012 fundraiser with President Obama in Washington, D.C. with 70 Indian leadersicon1.png. The $15,000 to $35,800 fundraiser raised up to $2.5 million for Obama’s re-election campaign.

“The presidenticon1.png was most gracious and kind in his remarks,” Halbritter said after the event to a media network owned by his nation’s company, noting that Obama is doing more to reach out to Indian tribes than any president in his experience.

Obama recently said that if he was the owner of the Redskins, he would “think about changing it [the team name].”

 

 

Where is this coverage by Deadspin and PFT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem?

For me, if I am Dan Snyder and I am forced to change the name of MY team...I go in a completely different direction.  I strike every single ounce of "Native American" imagery out of my team, and name them the Washington Warriors with an Armed Forces theme.  Maybe burgundy and gold done in a camo kind of way, but absolutely NOTHING that could be construed as Native American.  

 

Call it spite, but it is what it is.  No way I could still have a Native American mascot under those circumstances.

Sound like someone has hard feelings towards Native Americans...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pro-team name folks can rely on the past 80 years usage of the word as a team name and show that the negative usage of the word has been long outdated. 

 

Not at all.  There is no question that the Redskins under previous ownership,  before I became a fan 40-45 years ago, was a racist organization, even for the times;  the last team to integrate in the NFL.     Likewise there is no question that the Redskins name as envisioned early in the franchise was a racist slur prompting revisions of our logo

6378.gif1960-65

 

and fight song over the years.....

 

The previous version of the fight song pre 1963 ( same music ) prompted the imagry of savage indian warriors speaking pigeon english running amuck dismembering the opossing team...

 

 

Hail to the Redskins!

Hail, victory!

Braves on the warpath!

Fight for Old D.C.!

Scalp 'em, swamp 'um

We will take 'um big score

Read 'um, Weep 'um, touchdown

We want heap more

Fight on, fight on, till you have won

Sons of Washington

Rah! Rah! Rah!

 

 

 

Ives Goddard of the Smithsonian showed the word was created by Native Americans as a descriptor, much like people use white and black today. There are Native American high schools using the team name as well. The Annenberg Poll is the only one that polled Native Americans on the name and as you know its results showed 90% in favor of the name.

 

Ives Goddard is a smithsonian expert on the languages of a few tribes centered around the Chesapeake.   I don't think he's an english expert,  nor is his pdf report  supported by the facts already published in this thread.    Using his pdf report as a blanket refutation of the racist nature of the origins of the term Redskisn has already been dismissed by the US Trademark board..

 

 

It's going to take a lot more evidence from the offended than simply a few of them being offended. In fact, Harjo and others have used the claim that the name comes from scalping Indians as one of their historical claims, yet they have no proof of such a claim at all and it has been denounced by Goddard and other historians as complete fiction.

 

Godard is not a historian or an expert on the origins of terms in English.   He's a linguist specializing in a few languages of Indian tribes located near the DC area.

 

 

The dictionary term says "usually offensive" and "taboo," but the results of the poll and the majority Native American support are proof that such definitions are wrong. How can something be "usually offensive" when the vast majority of the effected people are not usually offended?

 

Yea I think that's where the real meat of this topic belongs....  How many redskins are really offended,  and how many redskins does it take to be offended to vacate the trademark.   I think we need to offend at least 100,000 redskins to have our trademark vacated..

Edited by JMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I think that's where the real meat of this topic belongs....  How many redskins are really offended,  and how many redskins does it take to be offended to vacate the trademark.   I think we are talking about at least 100,000 redskins to be offended.

 

Yeah...they are coming out in droves: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/09/15/about-two-dozen-protest-redskins-name-at-lambeau-field/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I agree - Halbritter definitely does.  Especially since he is guilty of withholding appropriate profits from his own people.  (see some of the articles linked above)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

am i the only one who thinks someone is trolling? 

 

constantly referring to 'redskin' as a slur, dismissing the best research on the name in a very cavalier fashion, talking about james 'fedimore' cooper....

 

maybe this is pittman4two's latest effort?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

am i the only one who thinks someone is trolling? 

 

constantly referring to 'redskin' as a slur, dismissing the best research on the name in a very cavalier fashion, talking about james 'fedimore' cooper....

 

maybe this is pittman4two's latest effort?

Nope.

At this point, it's obvious.

Despite tons of evidence, the blind remain blind.

 

LMAO @ pittman4two.

Edited by Ellis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem?

Sound like someone has hard feelings towards Native Americans...

 

NBC was dishonest by not disclosing their multi-million dollar partnership with Ray Halbritter. That's irresponsible journalism and portrays NBC as having a direct bias towards the Redskins.

 

Seriously, you believe Bob Costas and Chris Collinsworthless had this epiphany of racial harmony on SNF which led them to speak out and call us all racists? BS Those two never once had an issue with the Redskins name until the casino tycoon came calling.

 

Hard feelings towards Native Americans? Hardly. I'm mad at middle-aged white dudes pushing this manufactured agenda.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

am i the only one who thinks someone is trolling? 

 

 

 

No. You're not.

 

And it's definitely more than one.

 

iqtsmayxmhz1vvxmwba9.gif1960 - 1964

 

washington-redskins-officially-licensed-

Edited by Spearfeather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James George Janos AKA Jesse "The Body" Ventura has now entered the ring. Ventura claims the name is undeniably racist and it's amazing the name is still around in 2013.

 

This of course comes from a guy who believes the government planted explosives in the World Trade Center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC was dishonest by not disclosing their multi-million dollar partnership with Ray Halbritter. That's irresponsible journalism and portrays NBC as having a direct bias towards the Redskins.

 

Seriously, you believe Bob Costas and Chris Collinsworthless had this epiphany of racial harmony on SNF which led them to speak out and call us all racists? BS Those two never once had an issue with the Redskins name until the casino tycoon came calling..

 

You can't dismiss this as NBC driving this issue.  The court cases involved in this have been going on for decades.   NBC is just one of the new guys joining this.

 

 

 

Hard feelings towards Native Americans? Hardly. I'm mad at middle-aged white dudes pushing this manufactured agenda

 

I don't think there is any question that the Washington Redskins organization since I've been a fan (1967-68) has had the highest standards with regards to race and political correctness.    To the fans there is no negativity associated with the name.   It's our team and I agree with you we fans exist in a void to this entire controversy.   

 

I personally would hate it if they changed the name.   That's the name I grew up with and no other name would be the same to my mind.   I mean if they called themselves the generals or something I don't know if I would have had the same loyalty to them over the abismal last few decades of play.

 

Now having said that,  I can still understand the facts and understand why some Native Ameericans could justifiable be offended.   I don't need to make up facts or pretend the franchise name is no different than the Rams, Bengals, or bEagles.   I can also understand where the legal line is drawn.    It's not enough for a few native Ameriicans to be offended by our use of this term.   There has to be a reasonable number of folks offended for the government to act.  Now having said that I also realize the government has already found that the name is offensive, and enough folks are offended to vacate our trademark.  That was done a decade ago.   No subsequent act by the governemnt ( federal court )  reversed that finding by the Trademark board.     So I'm guessing,  dispite the reports of the local CBS news affiliate;  there are a sizeable number of native Americans  offended.

 

Either way that is where this issue lies.    Not in my saying you are stupid because you don't understand what a dictionary is used for... Or you calling me a troll because I don't find your Smithsonian Linquist specializing in Algonquian languages as more definiative than the American Heritage Dictionary on English etomology.

 

How many folks are offended by our use Redskins,  and how many is enough to make us change.

Edited by JMS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't dismiss this as NBC driving this issue.  The court cases involved in this have been going on for decades.   NBC is just one of the new guys joining this.

 

 

But don't you think it's a tad fishy that NBC joins in now when they've never had an issue speaking about the name in the past?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But don't you think it's a tad fishy that NBC joins in now when they've never had an issue speaking about the name in the past?

 

At the very least it gives the appearance of a conflict of issue. If they are "in bed" with the main plaintiff, of course they are going to help broadcast their views

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I had read claims that there was no written record of the word "Redskin" ever being used to refer to Natives (other than by themselves). 

 

 

Yes larry if you disregard every instance of folks reffering to Native Americans as Redskins,  it's easy to make the claim and no such writtings exist..    Coarse for the rest of us who can't self edit on the fly like that,   we would have to say such a claim deny's reality....

 

It's the literary equivelent to closing your eyes,  putting your fingers in your ears, and chanting loudly; I can't hear you,  I can't hear you,  I can't hear you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.