the washington...

[imac_21]

How the fuck do you know if it's offensive or not? If you are white and a non white calls you a whiteskin, you gonna get all bent out of shape about it? Please tell me how all of these not American Indians, can tell the actual Native Americans, that they should be offended. This is more than injustice, it's about these fraudulent politicians trying to make a buck and/or name for themselves.

It's rough when you try to participate in any sort of discussion without actually following the entire thing. One of the leading groups in protesting the name, and one of the groups that pioneered the movement, is the Oneida Nation. They are native. The Oneida nation were living here before any Europeans even had a thought about coming here. Hell, they had an early democracy before any Europeans thought of coming to North America.

The reason you want to reference fraudulent politicians (and others like to reference the white media as well) is because those are the visible people speaking for the natives who don't like it. Natives don't have positions in politics or the media to voice their opinions.

I believe that the American democracy is built on a similar base as the British where individuals are elected to government to speak on behalf of their constituents. When they speak for the native ones who don't like the name, whey are they fraudulent?

As for media, which I know you didn't mention, here's an interesting article.

Blackfeet Elder Says Rick Reilly Misquoted Him; Wants ?Redskins? Banned - ICTMN.com

 

[TobyTyler]

It's rough when you try to participate in any sort of discussion without actually following the entire thing. One of the leading groups in protesting the name, and one of the groups that pioneered the movement, is the Oneida Nation. They are native. The Oneida nation were living here before any Europeans even had a thought about coming here. Hell, they had an early democracy before any Europeans thought of coming to North America.

The reason you want to reference fraudulent politicians (and others like to reference the white media as well) is because those are the visible people speaking for the natives who don't like it. Natives don't have positions in politics or the media to voice their opinions.

I believe that the American democracy is built on a similar base as the British where individuals are elected to government to speak on behalf of their constituents. When they speak for the native ones who don't like the name, whey are they fraudulent?

As for media, which I know you didn't mention, here's an interesting article.

Blackfeet Elder Says Rick Reilly Misquoted Him; Wants ?Redskins? Banned - ICTMN.com

Hey, no fair ruining Sickness' argument with facts.

 

[darken65]

Every year we have a government holiday..Columbus Day. The day some idiot landed on these American shores. Being a complete moron he thought he landed in India.The indigenous people who lived on this land were called Indians due to one stupid white guy not knowing where he was. The U.S.of A. still celebrates this holiday....why? Why was America 'discovered' when people lived here? I would love to show up at someone's house and plant a flag stating "I discovered this house".

 

[darken65]

Forgot to mention that our government employees get paid for every year for this fuck-up.

 

[Jikkle]

It's rough when you try to participate in any sort of discussion without actually following the entire thing. One of the leading groups in protesting the name, and one of the groups that pioneered the movement, is the Oneida Nation. They are native. The Oneida nation were living here before any Europeans even had a thought about coming here. Hell, they had an early democracy before any Europeans thought of coming to North America.

The reason you want to reference fraudulent politicians (and others like to reference the white media as well) is because those are the visible people speaking for the natives who don't like it. Natives don't have positions in politics or the media to voice their opinions.

I believe that the American democracy is built on a similar base as the British where individuals are elected to government to speak on behalf of their constituents. When they speak for the native ones who don't like the name, whey are they fraudulent?

As for media, which I know you didn't mention, here's an interesting article.

Blackfeet Elder Says Rick Reilly Misquoted Him; Wants ?Redskins? Banned - ICTMN.com

Woody: American Indians in Va. have no problem with ?Redskins? - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Football

The issues is Native Americans aren't even unified in their opinion of the name which is why there is still a debate on the issue.

As I said way earlier in this thread if these politicians really want to represent and speak for Native Americans then they would take up the causes they all really care about which is a quote I take from the article

“We’re more worried about our kids being educated, our people housed, elder care and the survival of our culture. We’ve been in that survival mode for 400 years. We’re not worried about how some ball team is named.”

All the crusade to change the Redskins name does is make the politicians look like they "care" about people when all they've done is avoid the real issues because changing the name is easy compared to the issues that actually matter.

If they change the name and continue to champion the Native American cause afterwards I'll give the politicians credit. But the most likely outcome is they would get the name change and pat themselves in the back about how they righted some injustice and what morally upstanding people they are while Native Americans wake up the next morning no better off than they were before the name change.

 

[whysies]

What's more offensive? The term "Redskin" or Sick's unpatriotic butchering of good old American English?

 

[NinerSickness]

Well, plenty of black men have used the n-word to describe their people, even more recently than 200 years ago. I guess if Atlanta wanted to change to the Atlanta N@@@ers you'd be okay with that, because it's close to n###as and blacks use that to describe themselves all the time.

Black people didn't tend to say the N word for black people in speeches. Especially not black political leaders. They might've said "negros," but that necessarily isn't a derogatory term either.

There weren't a lot of cool sounding terms for Natives people would've recognized. The Braves & Indians are proof of that. Some people think the term Indian is offensive because if it's fallacious etymology, but those people are looking for reasons to whine as well.

Words can have multiple denotations. If the term Redskin was so egregious, there would've been intense public outrage against the team for decades & not just activist liberals / media personalities trying to make it seem like it's a racist term. But the vast majority of people polled have always said keep the name how it is.

 

[imac_21]

Black people didn't tend to say the N word for black people in speeches. Especially not black political leaders. They might've said "negros," but that necessarily isn't a derogatory term either.

There weren't a lot of cool sounding terms for Natives people would've recognized. The Braves & Indians are proof of that. Some people think the term Indian is offensive because if it's fallacious etymology, but those people are looking for reasons to whine as well.

Words can have multiple denotations. If the term Redskin was so egregious, there would've been intense public outrage against the team for decades & not just activist liberals / media personalities trying to make it seem like it's a racist term. But the vast majority of people polled have always said keep the name how it is.

The N word gets used all the time. Therefore any similar words are not racist. That's the logic you have presented here with your "Red people" = Redskins argument.

Your point is a poor one. Accept it and move on.

 

[NinerSickness]

The N word gets used all the time. Therefore any similar words are not racist. That's the logic you have presented here with your "Red people" = Redskins argument.

Your point is a poor one. Accept it and move on.

No, that's not the argument I'm making. If you read how Native leaders used the word "red" man or "red" children, you see it wasn't slang or unique to them. It was proper and ubiquitous term.

The N word is slang. You're not going to hear black politicians refer to black people as N-words. They'll usually say African Americans.

 

[spacedoodoopistol]

Why do a bunch of high school teams on reservations use Redskins as a team name if its so offensive?

And its not comparable with the "n-word" which is probably the most divisive and racially-loaded terms in American history. The word is basically a symbol for centuries of mistreatment. Redskins was never used in that way.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Welcome to 2013, when you can't breathe anymore without someone somewhere getting offended. When did American turn into a giant cesspool of whimps?

Stop this planet please, I'd like to get off.

 

[TobyTyler]

Every year we have a government holiday..Columbus Day. The day some idiot landed on these American shores. Being a complete moron he thought he landed in India.The indigenous people who lived on this land were called Indians due to one stupid white guy not knowing where he was. The U.S.of A. still celebrates this holiday....why? Why was America 'discovered' when people lived here? I would love to show up at someone's house and plant a flag stating "I discovered this house".

Your intentions were good I'm sure but if you are going to give us a history lesson at least give us an accurate one. Columbus never landed on "these American shores". In fact, he never set foot in North America at all. He found the island of Hispaniola.

 

[TobyTyler]

Forgot to mention that our government employees get paid for every year for this fuck-up.

...And, thanks to the Tea Party, we sat at home for 5 days this month doing nothing while they shut the government down and we still got paid. Only in America.

 

[MHSL82]

Senator threatens NFL's tax-exempt status over Washington Redskins name - ESPN

The Redskins also cited a 2004 survey that said 90 percent of Native
Americans were not bothered by the Redskins' name. The lawmakers' letter
criticized the team for clinging to "decade-old public opinion polling."

What is the thinking here? A decade old poll would be incorrect because there are more people now of the minimum age for the survey who would object to the name? They are now old enough to take part in the poll and would say it was offensive now? The poll is incorrect because now the name is more offensive? The poll is incorrect because liberals have properly educated Native Americans how to feel? The poll is wrong because those people who took the poll in 2004 were less Native American than they are today? The poll is incorrect because society hadn't been enlightened yet about its offensiveness? It's now hip to be offended by the name?

I get that the name may be offensive. Polls can be skewed. Neither of those facts have changed. It could still be offensive and a new poll could be skewed, age is really the only difference, assuming the poll is properly conducted. But when we are ten more years away from the time where it was originated, where it could have been intended as a slur, time isn't a factor unless it's the opposite way. I could see people being more receptive to the name because they have ten more years of the name meaning "a Washington D.C.-based team" and not "the color of those people."

 

[Jikkle]

Senator threatens NFL's tax-exempt status over Washington Redskins name - ESPN

The funny thing is that one of the Senators is from Oklahoma which translates into "Red People" in Choctaw.

So I suppose when he's finished with the Washington Redskins he'll turn his attention to getting his own state to change it's name.

 

[NinerSickness]

The funny thing is that one of the Senators is from Oklahoma which translates into "Red People" in Choctaw.

So I suppose when he's finished with the Washington Redskins he'll turn his attention to getting his own state to change it's name.

This is about as empty as threats get.

 

[MHSL82]

Why does the NFL get tax breaks? I understand that they contribute to the economy, local and national, etc. and there's an incentive, but the incentive would seem to have to be local. If we don't have our tax break, we'll move to LA. But if we don't get our federal tax break, we'll move to... London or Canada? Any or all 32 teams? This seems to be a case of offering a tax break for incentives when the taxpayer wouldn't do anything different without the tax break.

I'm ok with it because now that they have it, if removed, they would increase the ticket prices even more than they already are. They would not lower it if they got a bigger break.

 

[NinerSickness]

Why does the NFL get tax breaks?

I don't know. It says, "You're getting a tax break for educational purposes." I don't know what the crap that means.

The tax code is one giant cluster F full of stupid little exceptions & payoffs all over the place. The entire thing needs to be thrown out. I say just go to a national sales tax & throw out the tax code because of stupid rules like this one.

 

[MHSL82]

I don't know. It says, "You're getting a tax break for educational purposes." I don't know what the crap that means.

If they are putting that under an "NFL Cares" program distinction, removing the tax break would just make them remove the "NFL Cares" program. Name is just illustrative, not sure what their PR name is, I mean, what their compassionate name is.

 

[MHSL82]

The tax code is one giant cluster F full of stupid little exceptions & payoffs all over the place. The entire thing needs to be thrown out. I say just go to a national sales tax & throw out the tax code because of stupid rules like this one.

Be careful what you wish for, but yeah, there are probably not too many different ways to fuck it up, though I'm sure they would try.