Offended by the name Redskins? OK, then what about these?

By 40 Comments 7,505 views

redskins helmet

The kerfuffle over the Redskins’ name is almost amusing. One has to wonder how it is that after eighty years the name Redskins suddenly became a pejorative. The team was organized in 1932 as the Boston Braves. The name later changed to Redskins supposedly in honor of one “Lone Star Dietz” and it has remained the same since. The team moved to Washington DC after the 1936 season.

Sen. Harry Reid, who never misses an opportunity to make as ass of himself, says he won’t attend another Redskins game until the name is changed. Reid’s been in the Senate a long time. Odd how only now he’s became offended by the name.

“I will not stand idly by while a professional sports team promotes a racial slur as a team name and disparages the American people,” Reid said in the letter. “Nor will I consider your invitation to attend a home game until your organization chooses to do the right thing and change its offensive name.”

Yet Harry is somehow not offended by other things of a similar nature- like “Negro dialects” coming from a black man who is “light skinned.”

So if you are offended by the name Redskins, are you similarly offended by these?

Redman chewing tobaaco?

How about the Cleveland Indians?

What about the United Negro College Fund?

Who says “Negro” any longer? Isn’t that offensive? If not, why not?

What about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People?

Who says “colored people” any more? Sounds pretty offensive to me.

Atlanta Braves?

How about the “Indian Chief” motorcycles?

The Patent and Trademark Office stripped the Redskins of its federal protections for six of its trademarks and they could not have been more wrong in doing so. Harry Reid and his idiot colleagues are clearly of the belief that the First Amendment may be abridged when a dog whistle democrat finds something offensive.

This is a First Amendment issue.

I do not care whether you like or dislike the Washington Redskins’ name. I think it’s a pretty dumb thing to call a football team. If Native Americans believe that “redskin” is offensive to them, then it is. Most people agree that it is about as offensive as using any other ethnic slur. I respect their position and their argument.

Nevertheless, here are my criticisms of this decision: Section (2)(a) of the Trademark Act bars the registration of any trademark that is “immoral” “scandalous” or “disparaging.” In other words, a civil servant executing the registration is allowed to be the arbiter of morality. Do we really want that?

Trademarks propose a commercial transaction. When you see or hear a trademark, you immediately receive information in a short-hand way that communicates where the products come from, or what level of service you can expect. Trademarks are First Amendment protected expression. There should be no issue with limiting their use to mislead the public. After all, what point do they serve if they do not propose a truthful association with their owner? And what rational governmental purpose does it serve to deny a benefit to a business because it might be deemed “immoral” by someone?

And why are we even arguing the point? The government should not be in the business of deciding what is moral, immoral, or offensive. This section of the trademark act is a leftover from Victorian times, and is used now primarily to promote social agendas with coercive censorship.

The actions of the government are so egregious that even WaPo is bothered:

There is an obvious problem when the sanctioning of free exercise of religion or speech becomes a matter of discretionary agency action. And it goes beyond trademarks and taxes. Consider the Federal Election Commission’s claim of authority to sit in judgment of whether a film is a prohibited “electioneering communication.” While the anti-George W. Bush film “Fahrenheit 9/11” was not treated as such in 2004, the anti-Clinton “Hillary: The Movie” was barred by the FEC in 2008. The agency appeared Caesar-like in its approval and disapproval — authority that was curtailed in 2010 by the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United.

Even water has become a vehicle for federal agency overreach. Recently, the Obama administration took punitive agency action against Washington state and Colorado for legalizing marijuana possession and sales. While the administration said it would not enforce criminal drug laws against marijuana growers — gaining points among the increasing number of citizens who support legalization and the right of states to pass such laws — it used a little-known agency, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, to cut off water to those farms. The Bureau of Reclamation was created as a neutral supplier of water and a manager of water projects out West, not an agency that would open or close a valve to punish noncompliant states.

When agencies engage in content-based speech regulation, it’s more than the usual issue of “mission creep.” As I’ve written before in these pages, agencies now represent something like a fourth branch in our government — an array of departments and offices that exercise responsibilities once dedicated exclusively to the judicial and legislative branches. Insulated from participatory politics and accountability, these agencies can shape political and social decision-making. To paraphrase Clausewitz, water, taxes and even trademarks appear to have become the continuation of politics by other means.

Consider:

It didn’t matter to the patent office that polls show substantial majorities of the public and the Native American community do not find the name offensive. A 2004 Annenberg Public Policy Center poll found that 90 percent of Native Americans said the name didn’t bother them. Instead, the board focused on a 1993 resolution adopted by the National Congress of American Indians denouncing the name.

So what is this really about? It is about exactly what you would guess- money.

Team owner Dan Snyder is a GOP donor.

Government is once again being used to trample the rights of (GOP supporting) citizens guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This is one more example of the sheer lawlessness of this despicable administration and its henchmen. They went after Romney and Romney donors this way. They’re trying to destroy Scott Walker this way. It has been said- if you want to see what tyranny looks like- just look around.

It’s not just that any longer. Want to see what fascism looks like? Just look at the White House. Just look at the Senate. Look at democrats.

Look at Barack Obama. Look at Harry Reid.

UPDATE

retire05 is quite correct. “Oklahoma” derives from the words “okla” and “humma” and it does mean “red people” in the Choctaw language.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

40 Responses to “Offended by the name Redskins? OK, then what about these?”

  1. 1

    bwax

    OK, since we now have a group of native Americans objecting to using their names in an insulting way, how about if we cancel all the income tax breaks they get for operating gambling operations on their reservations?

    Just a thought. Besides, Obama could use the money.

  2. 2

    old guy

    I am waiting for the athiests to challenge the LA Angels as the next event, and it will go on from there.
    White Sox too, must be racist, right?

  3. 3

    Bill

    “Sen. Harry Reid, who never misses an opportunity to make as ass of himself, says he won’t attend another Redskins game until the name is changed.” Reid strikes me as more of a curling affectionado. Unless he is comped, I doubt he ever attends a Redskins game anyway.

    “The Patent and Trademark Office stripped the Redskins of its federal protections for six of its trademarks and they could not have been more wrong in doing so. ” OK, so let me get this straight; the federal government, in support of that guy somewhere that found offense in the name and logo, pulls the trademark protection from the Redskins. So, now, anyone anywhere can produce Redskins paraphernalia without having to pay copyright fees, making the Redskins franchise the cheapest NFL gear on the market. This should result in a gigantic proliferation of Redskins gear, making it ubiquitous. Does the phrase “we’re with the government and we’re here to help” mean anything?

  4. 4

    retire05

    As a person of Native American heritage, I find nothing disparaging about the “Redskins” name. But if the Obama administration is going to violate copy right laws to push its cultural Marxism on the rest of us, then I demand the state of Oklahoma change its name since the meaning of Oklahoma in Choctaw is “red people.”

  5. 5

    ilovebeeswarzone

    THIS LEADERSHIP IS CONSTANTLY IN YOUR FACE,
    because they are too stupid to find what is wrong with AMERICA IS THEM ALL AS LEADERS,
    elected by buying everyone, which is to be one of the reason why they should be impeach,
    for not conducting clean election as the CONSTITUTION DEMAND,
    it make criminal and unelecteble forever, SAME AS THE IRS SHOULD BE CLOSE FOREVER, BECAUSE OF NOT ONE OFFENSE ON THE PEOPLE, NOT TWO NOT THREE BUT MULTIPLE OFFENSES WHICH HAVE MADE SOME PEOPLE LOOSE THEIR BREAD AND BUTTER AND BEING POINTED FINGER AT BY THEIR CLOSE FAMILY, WHO PREFER TO BELIEVE THE IRS ACTIONS AND SHUN THEIR OWN BLOOD,
    nd the IRS ALWAYS CAME OUT CLEAN AS PURE EACH TIME THEY HATEFULLY DESTROY THE GOOD CITIZENS FROM THE FIRST TIME OF THEIR GIVEN POWER, THEY BECAME THE EVIL POWER TO BEAT,
    and dismantle to be replace by a clear open agency doing the work they are suppose to do,
    and now having been given more power by OBAMA ON HIS OBAMACARE, THEY ALL ARE NOW ONE BIG
    DANGER FOR SOCIETY, ABLE TO USE ANY CONFIDENTIAL KNOWLEDGE TO DESTROY PEOPLE
    WHO ARE NOT WITH THE LEADERSHIP MINDSET, and dare to tell the truth THAT OBAMA IS WITH HIS MULTIPLE AGENCYS SCREWING THE AMERICANS, on an ACCELERATING PACE OF NOT MONTHS,
    BUT DAYS, REVEALING HIS USE OF UNGIVEN POWER , AND EVIL MINDSET TO CHANGE AMERICA FOREVER,
    AND MAKE THE PEOPLE HATE HIM FOR HIS NEFARIOUS ACTIONS THAT PUT ALL AMERICANS IN DANGER EVERY DAY, WHILE HE LAUGHT ABOUT DOING IT, with his UNION”s help who runn his life, every day, and securing his life every seconds,
    hundreads of them on the pockets of THE PEOPLE,
    which are abused to the max, by his intervention in their lives,
    and now the the WHITE HOUSE, since he was elected using fraudulent criminal actions, HELP BY OTHER CRIMINAL MINDS,
    FOLOWING THE DEMOCRAT PARTY LINE, TELLING THEM DON’T THINK, JUST REPEAT THE LEADER’S WORDS,

  6. 7

    Nanny G

    Harry Reid is a scared old man.
    He gets scared of anybody he thinks might beat him up, literally or figuratively.
    Like last Wed.

    Politico reported Wednesday night that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had said The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its members are changing their views on gay rights.

    Why on earth would Harry Reid say such a silly thing?
    Because he was afraid of who was in the room with him:

    Politico reported that Reid, who is LDS, told a group of reporters, most of them working for LGBT publications according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, that his social views have shifted over time to support issues like ENDA.

    The quotes above as well as the official church response is also in this link:
    http://m.deseretnews.com/article/865590140/LDS-Church-responds-to-inquiries-about-Harry-Reid-comment.html?pg=all&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com

  7. 8

    tommy boy

    I truly believe the name is OFFENSIVE . Mr. Snyder should remove the name WASHINGTON as it is extremely offensive to MILLIONS of Americans !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  8. 9

    Nanny G

    In Utah where the Ute tribe is there is a college that uses the name, The Utes.
    Every couple of years (for decades now) a single Ute or two get it in their heads to play the victim, ”I’m so offended” card.
    Then the college points out how generous its scholarship arrangement is with all the natives in Utah.
    And that that arrangement would end if the name were changed by force.
    Argument over.

  9. 11

    ilovebeeswarzone

    Bill
    hi,
    i hope they start now to use all the publicity they can get to beat the competition,
    i bet Harry reid sold the name to the CHINEESES TO PROFIT FROM IT,
    and we”ll get a boat load of RED INDIAN , paraphelias made in CHINA, SOON,
    A MERICA CHECK THE LABEL AND IF IT IS CHINA, DON’T BUY IT,
    BUY ONLY WHAT COME FROM THE REDSKINS BUSINESS, AND NOW IS THE TIME TO RACE FOR IT,
    SO TO ENCOURAGE THE REDSKINS THEMSELVES,
    AND LET THE DEVIL TAKE HARRY REID, IS THAT A SLUR?

  10. 13

    Jeremy Norton

    This is making me laugh. What is happening to our country?! Seriously?! There are so many vital issues that need addressing, yet our senators spend more time and money on this kind of issue. What is wrong with you, Harry Reid?!

  11. 14

    Ditto

    @retire05:

    then I demand the state of Oklahoma change its name since the meaning of Oklahoma in Choctaw is “red people.”

    I guess if that’s the case, Indiana and Indianapolis might be considered offensive. What about other states, cities and other businesses with tribal/race related names? If a tribe member finds that they offend the name of their people (for whatever reason,) wont they have to change their names? And what about Notre Dame’s “The Fighting Irish.” I have a little Irish heritage and I’m a very non violent person, and whith that said, many of the Irish are the most peace loving people you could meet and they too might feel they are being slighted.

    Politically correctness must have it’s roots in a form of obsessive compulsive insanity, because no matter how many times you give in to their self-motivated emotional tirades, they can never ever be satisfied.

  12. 16

    ilovebeeswarzone

    what about the USA, WHO TOOK A LAND WITHOUT EVER ASKING IF IT WAS PERMITED,
    that with blood spill on the owners of the land,
    that is offensive , AND HARRY REIDS CANNOT ERASE THAT OFFENSE EVER, BY TRYING TO TAKE AWAY THE REMINDER,
    THAT THE REDSKINS ARE STILL ALIVE,
    AND IN YOUR FACE HARRY REIDS, THEY STILL OWN THE LAND,
    NOR THE BRITISH, WILL EVER ERASE IT,

  13. 17

    david7134

    What about the names Fighting Irish, Vikings, Oilers, Saints, Red Socks (I were them and find it discriminatory), the list can go on and on. In fact, where does the outrage stop?

  14. 18

    ilovebeeswarzone

    david7134
    THEY WANT TO CHANGE AMERICA, ANYTHING GOES,
    insanity goes, A LONG WAY IN THE MIND OF A FRUSTRATED OLD PERSON,
    WHICH HAVE SOME POWER TO DO IT,
    BYE

  15. 19

    FAITH7

    The hypocrisy is stunning unless everything I read and hear about (celebrating “diversity” sarc) is wrong…

    It only takes a bunch of puffy hate filled liberals to spin things like this into a…. NEGATIVE.

    God help us.

  16. 20

    This one

    The origin of “redskins” is attributed to the historical practice of trading Native scalps and body parts as bounties and trophies. In 1749, the British bounty on the Mi’kmaq Nation was a straightforward “ten Guineas for every Indian Micmac taken or killed, to be paid upon producing such Savage taken or his scalp.”

    Redskins is a derogatory term and it’s rooting in the scalping slaughter of men, women and children for profit. An entire race of people have protested against this for years. It’s time for a change. Society evolves even if the right does not”

  17. 21

    john

    Dr John
    Times change, what was acceptable in the past may cease to be acceptable in the future.
    Stop trying to live in the past, embrace the future.

  18. 22

    ilovebeeswarzone

    john
    and why not,
    the past was okay with AMERICANS,
    why some nuts like you want to change it, because you took power?
    no you cant
    things where better before you arrogant know it all know nothing got elected,
    by fraudulent actions,
    a lot better,

  19. 23

    Nathan Blue

    @john: Like being “liberal”…

    Get with the times. Being an offended liberal is so 90s…

    “Embracing the future” is clever way of announcing that all those around you must adopt your views…or else. People are starting to see that your personal vision of the “future” isn’t so imminent after all. Perhaps it’s time to embrace the reality that this nation is made of many people of different creeds, beliefs, cultures, and religions. Better if you allow America to be the great consensus it’s always been, rather than demanding we all submit to your version of “the future”.

  20. 27

    ilovebeeswarzone

    THAT’S FOR THE REDSKINS
    have many red feathers for sale, we will buy it and watch your game,
    everyone wearing the feather on their head, made in AMERICA BY THE REDSKIN, AND SIGNED
    OR TO PUT ON THE WINSHIELD LAYING, OR AS A CORSAGE, FOR BOTH WOMAN AND MEN, OR AS A LOOK ALIKE CANDY TO EAT FOR CHILDREN
    AND GROWNUP, STRAWBERRY, RASBERRY, OR A STICKER,
    IT WILL TAKE A BUNCH OF CHICKEN JUST KEEP THE BLOOD
    AND RUB THE FEATHER WITH IT, EASY DONE,
    SEND THAT ONE TO HARRY REID, YES IT WILL OFFEND

  21. 30

    Jim S

    Here in Michigan, Indian based names are everywhere from the state itself down to local school mascots. Nobody (who matters) cares. 😉 I guess we’ll have to start scrapping the Pontiacs and Jeep Cherokees next… When will the gay mafia start complaining about “Detroit”, since it’s old French for “the strait” 😉

  22. 31

    ilovebeeswarzone

    HARRY REID would prefer AMERICAN names,
    like KONTIKEN, MUSALINMINADORSSTATRIUMHISGOTMYHESGOTMYSTUFFAMITUMLOISLERNERIRSACKDIRTYHARRYSACK,

  23. 32

    Ditto

    Navajo Code Talker says Redskins name not derogatory

    A leader of the Navajo Code Talkers who appeared at a Washington Redskins home football game said Wednesday the team name is a symbol of loyalty and courage — not a slur as asserted by critics who want it changed.

    Roy Hawthorne, 87, of Lupton, Ariz., was one of four Code Talkers honored for their service in World War II during the Monday night game against the San Francisco 49ers.

    Hawthorne, vice president of the Navajo Code Talkers Association, said the group’s trip was paid for by the Redskins. The four men met briefly with team owner Dan Snyder but did not discuss the name, Hawthorne said.

    Still, he said he would endorse the name if asked, and the televised appearance in which three of the Indians wore Redskins jackets spoke for itself.

    “We didn’t have that in mind but that is undoubtedly what we did do,” Hawthorne said when asked if he was intending to send a statement with the appearance. “My opinion is that’s a name that not only the team should keep, but that’s a name that’s American.”

    Do You Know the History Behind the Name ‘Washington Redskins’?

    “Ninety percent of Native Americans feel that the name isn’t offensive and shouldn’t be changed,” Beck remarked, echoing a letter written by the Redskins owner Dan Snyder to fans. “Students at primarily Native American schools all across America wear the name with pride, and say now they’re afraid they might lose the name. At Kingston Oklahoma high school, which is 58 percent Native American, the name ‘Redskins’ has been worn by its students for 104 years. In fact, ‘Redskins’ was a name first used by Native Americans.”

    “In 1932, the NFL team moved to the historic Fenway Park and were left under the leadership of George Preston Marshall. The very next year, Marshall changed the name to ‘Redskins.’ Why?” Beck continued. “Well that’s a good question for the president to ask … the name was changed to ‘Redskins’ to honor then-coach Lone Star Dietz, an American Sioux. So the name actually pays tribute to a great people.”

  24. 33

    AdrianS

    As Harry Reid gets older every day, he becomes more and more childish. He is a mormon (non-capitalized on purpose) and should be dealt with in the same way the Pope is dealing with the Mafia in Italy. Excommunicate the ass; he is a rabid abortionist and does not belong anywhere near a mormon church or temple. But will the “church” excommunicate Harry’s ass? Probably not considering that the mormon church leadership some time ago spent some time with Obama presenting him with his genealogy. In the meanwhile, how many hundreds of abortions occurred while these mormon idiots kissed ass in the oval office? It is mormons who say, “What would Jesus, say or do?” Perhaps He would denigrate Obama. Those “leaders” of the mormon church should be excommunicated themselves. We know who is watching from above. Abortion is a sin. Condoning abortion is as great a sin as abortion is itself.

    Let’s hope the Pope seeks out Nancy Pelosi and kicks her ass out with the Mafiosos. By the by, pelosi or pelo means hair (or harry). Excommunicate both!

  25. 34

    ilovebeeswarzone

    Ditto
    what a good find, a real treasure of history,
    what kind of people get elected without knowing the history of the AMERIKA THEN ?
    what kind of teachers do we have ? who don”t know the history of AMERIKA THEN?
    it”s mind bothering to know that is not taught in school , while they spend time teaching
    all the sexsuals need to know FROM the first grade, ON TO THE LAST,
    leaving their student sexualy constantly arouse , but not able to answer a question ,
    on how AMERICA got to become so EXTRAORDINARY EXCEPTIONAL, AND HOW SUPER INTELLIGENT SHE HAS BEEN AND MORE THAN EVER, EVEN NOW THAT THEY TRY TO REGRESS HER ADVANCE, THEY CAN’T ACHIEVE TO HUMBLE THIS GREAT PEOPLE, BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT, THEY SPILL THEIR BLOOD ON IT, TO HELP ALL THE WORLD TO FIND FREEDOM AND PEACE, AND THEY KNOW HOW TO DO IT,

  26. 35

    Redteam

    @Bill: 3

    “Sen. Harry Reid, who never misses an opportunity to make as ass of himself, says he won’t attend another Redskins game until the name is changed.”

    Has he attended any in the past? If so, why was he supporting ‘racists’?
    I’ll be he hasn’t attended a game in at least 10 years. He’s kinda numb. What kind of ‘dialect’ does Reid speak with? Is he ‘light skinned’? If so, then he must be racist. Right?

  27. 36

    Redteam

    @This one: This ONE, I object to your use of that name. “One” is reserved for the One and only true God and it ain’t you. So let’s get about having a name change for you so you won’t be so despicable. Quit using God’s name.

  28. 37

    Budvarakbar

    @Jeremy Norton: You asked:

    What is wrong with you, Harry Reid?!

    He is just the perfect illustrative example of an old Russian saying I first heard over 40 years ago, which roughly translates to: “Excrement floats upward”

  29. 38

    Liz

    What about, O-k-l-a-h-o-m-a. Which means, “Land of the Red man”, by this logic will we need to change the name of Oklahoma, so not to offend.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *