Posted on 05/20/2009 5:05:58 PM PDT by Perdogg
E(mail) Last Friday, in a judicial decision that hinged on a legal technicality, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., upheld the right of the local pro football team to keep its unconscionable nickname.
Gloated team attorney Bob Raskopf, Its a great day for the Redskins and their fans and their owner, Dan Snyder.
Alas, it was another shameful day for America.
Redskins helmet. (Stephen J. Boitano/AP Photo)
In clinging to the most racially offensive moniker held by a major U.S. professional sports team since the Emancipation Proclamation yes, I know, since forever the franchise continues to offend some Native Americans and assault the sensibilities of a citizenry that should be long past such insensitive and shallow depictions.
(Excerpt) Read more at sports.yahoo.com ...
so true
I find it offensive that a team based in Massachusetts is called the Patriots.
The washington douchebags
Thing is, if we called them “Warriors” or “Braves”, there are some folks who’d get their panties in a wad over that.
So WTF is the difference?
Call them the “Whiners”!
Just asking...
I understand that the “pale faces” or “black skins” or “Yellowmen” could be offensive, but the “Red Man” seems to have a slightly less “mean” connotation, more about strength and pride vs. weakness.
How about the ‘Washington Pensioners living on the teat of the American Taxpayer while F-ing up the Nation’?
Sort of like the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim...
Not if odumbo supported it. Then it would an enlightened and sensitive name.
(I just vomited)
BELTWAY BANDITS!
I just tossed of the following to Silver via Yahoo! Sports mail link:
Remind me again what is ‘unconscionable’ about having a sports franchise named for American Indians? (That’s what most of them like to be called, not the PC ‘Native Americans’.)
Human mascots without a local association like the Oklahoma Sooners, by and large honor martial virtue, often martial virtue in a losing cause: the USC Trojans, the Minnesota Vikings (I’ve not heard any Norwegians or Swedes militating about the ‘insult’ of that franchise’s name, and I being of 1/4 Norwegian descent with ancestors from the Vik find nothing offensive about it at all), various and sundry team named things like ‘Cavaliers’, ‘Knights’, ‘Crusaders’, and (my personal favorite) the Yeshiva University Maccabees, as well as all of the various American Indian themed team names sported by pro, college and high school teams, all honor the fact that some group of people exhibited courage against great odds, hardihood in battle, and nobility when their cause proved to be a losing one.
Only politically correct wusses who have no conception of martial virtue, or sneer at martial virtue—the sort of people who think that ‘military intelligence’ is an oxymoron (guffaw! guffaw!) are offended at American Indian themed team names. Why be one of them?
How about the DC Injuns?
And that day is coming.
Hopefully they never trounce the cleavland browns... very UnPC. ;-P
Is this still on the market?
If anyone is interested, here
http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/
is the homepage of Ives Goddard, which has a link to his (very detailed) article on the history of the term “redskin” (”I am a Red-Skin”). A useful corrective to the Indian activist revisionism.
/thank you Instapundit!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.