I agree that it may be in the team and owners' best interests to make a
name change. However, I strongly disagree with tactics used by the government.
Polls show that a majority of Native Americans are ok with the franchise. It is
a small group that continues to stir the pot. The government should not be able
to revoke a trademark that has stood for decades. Where will this end? When I
hear the name redskins I think of the NFL team. It is a strong brand name. I would never call a Native American a redskin or a brave or a squaw or
a savage. Does that mean that all of those words should be banned for business
use? Who gets to decide what is proper? Is it fair to take something away from
an organization because of public opinion? Those in power have
overstepped their boundary in using the government to bully those that think
differently than they do. It is ironic that those that preach tolerance are
extremely intolerant to those that don't believe as they do.
I don't think most American Indians care much at all. In fact, I've
hardly ever heard an Indians refer to him/herself as a "Native
American." (And I encounter a LOT of Indians) It is really only
politically correct white people who mind for the most part. If it happened
today, I'm sure they wouldn't have named the team the Redskins. But,
it is a long tradition and it was meant as an honor and compliment at the time
it was done.I just don't see how an agency of the Federal
Government has the right to make these determinations for private individuals or
companies. I can't understand why the U.S. Senate is wasting time on this
when there are so many other important issues to address. Sounds like
they're trying to change the subject.
The name Redskins was chosen to honor the warrior spirit of the American Indian.
If they would rather not be honored that way, then let them be remembered for
what they are now...Personally I'm tired of the issue and think
Washington should change the name and let the Warrior image of the American
Indians just fade into obscurity.
Professor Smith gets a C-.No objective evidence in his presentation.
He says the pressure is mounting on Snyder and that advertisers may soon
withdraw support. Really? Has any Redskins sponsor indicated they're even
thinking about it?Trying to draw parallels to Sterling is an even
weaker argument. Sterling was long believed to be a racist, but the tapes were
new and compelling evidence.The Redskins have been the Redskins
forever. Snyder didn't pick the name. He did pay millions of dollars for
the goodwill associated with it and wants to protect that investment...nothing
new here, this issue has been around for years.If the Professor is
looking for an apt analogy, he might try the legal theory of coming to a
nuisance. Property owners would likely have a claim if pig farmer, with his
pungent livestock, moved into a residential neighborhood. But if the pig farm
is already there and folks build around it, they've got no claim, they
built next to an existing nuisance.If the Redskin name is a
nuisance, it's one that's been around forever. Those choosing to pick
a fight now are building houses next to a pig farm.
I'll defer to Native Americans as to whether the use of the name should be
discontinued. However, I predict that a certain faction of Americans will be
against it because another certain faction is seen as in favor of it.
"It can be argued with some force that the government should stay out of
this business"Yes you're right the government should stay
out of the business of subsidizing professional football. Many of them play in
government funded stadiums, the NFL is classified as a "non profit"
organization, and who do you think picks up the health care tab for all of those
broke, ex-football heroes after the NFL is done with them!In
Minnesota the legislature coughed up $506 million to cover almost half the cost
of the Vikings $1.1 billion facility. One expert claims that taxpayers pick up
70% of NFL stadium construction costs.I think the government has
every right to demand a name change of the Redskins by these "free
Pat Robertson of CBN, Christian Broadcast News, stated 2 days ago that the
Redskins name was a name of honor given to a Native American Indian. I agree
with Pat that this is not a racist name. I am an enrolled member of the
Blackfeet Tribe and I would be proud if a team was named after me in the spirit
of honor. Redskins is an awesome name. I say to fight on to keep the registered
The term "redskins" is offensive to sunburnt white people too. We prefer
UV challenged and if the Redskins start doling out money to people offended by
the name as the author suggests they do, then I want a piece of the pie.
It's interesting that 90 percent of American Indians are not offended by
the name, and many embrace it. I've seen many American Indians wearing
Redskins gear. This isn't about racism, it's about
politics. This is far different than the Donald Sterling thing.
Sterling is an old jerk and everyone knew it. When Sterling had a fight with a
"girlfriend" that aired on TMZ the league saw an opportunity to push him
Are the liberal politically correct elite going to make Red Mesa High School
change it's nickname? Have fun in Navajo Nation.Why in this
country do we let people get away with speaking for others? First Nations/Native
American people I know are tired of it. And some are even Washington Redskins
Why does this story seem to be a lobbying effort rather than accurate. The
American citizens, as a whole, are not asking for this. From what I've read
even Native Americans (large majority) are not asking for this. It is democrat
senators and small lobbying groups with personal agendas. This story seems to be
feeding the fire of one of those personal agendas. I haven't trusted
reporters for years, and this just add to the distrust.