With the new NFL season upon us let's play rename the Washington Redskins

V

VOLracious

Arizona Fall Leaguer
Personally I think Washington, the first half of the name, is far comical and offensive than the second half of the name Redskins. Please keep in mind that my maternal grandmother's moter was 1005 full blooded Cherokee Indian and I'm not the least bit offended. Judging from the the screen names and avatars I gather many of you are not either.

So my name will be the Washington Welfares. Complete with helmet logo.

obama+redskins4.jpg
 
VOLracious said:
Personally I think Washington, the first half of the name, is far comical and offensive than the second half of the name Redskins. Please keep in mind that my maternal grandmother's moter was 1005 full blooded Cherokee Indian and I'm not the least bit offended. Judging from the the screen names and avatars I gather many of you are not either.

So my name will be the Washington Welfares. Complete with helmet logo.

obama+redskins4.jpg
Click to expand...

Actually on the Radio, Dan Patrick asked someone in the know about the reaction (Mike Carey fiasco) and they said the Indians on the reservation could care less about the name, they are more into everyday problems they are having issues with like food, water, clothing and shelter and you do not think the casinos they run are crooked. We might have a potential war in Wisconsin between two tribes because of casinos.
 
Of course the large majority that are in an uproar are non Native Americans. Which, the Redskins organization has ton more for than any of these idiots that can out in disagreement have done. Do you think Mike Carey has ever donated money to an Indian reservation or provided them with running water and food? I doubt it.

I really don't care if they change the name or not; its just another example of whiny Americans finding something to bitch (be offended) about.
 
thethe said:
Its just fake outrage so people can feel better about their moral compass.
Click to expand...

That pretty much nails it.

Ive been a Redskins fan and a Native American; never even associated the two together till people started whining. People don't hear the term Redskins and think Native Americans.
 
gilesfan said:
That pretty much nails it.

Ive been a Redskins fan and a Native American; never even associated the two together till people started whining. People don't hear the term Redskins and think Native Americans.
Click to expand...

Wait you never associate Redskins with native americans? How ****ing obtuse were you?

You're in your early 30s right? Every Redskins logo has a native inside and feathers around the end. If you coudln't amke that jump, then damn. I'ts like people not thinking Blackhawks were native based.
 
zitothebrave said:
Wait you never associate Redskins with native americans? How ****ing obtuse were you?

You're in your early 30s right? Every Redskins logo has a native inside and feathers around the end. If you coudln't amke that jump, then damn. I'ts like people not thinking Blackhawks were native based.
Click to expand...

Here is example number 1 thethe, the shining jewel.

Zito, do you know the difference between a name and a logo? I would hope so.

Every time you hear the name Redskins, you think "Poor Indians?"
 
gilesfan said:
Here is example number 1 thethe, the shining jewel.

Zito, do you know the difference between a name and a logo? I would hope so.
Click to expand...

You do know what anyone worth a damn intelligently would recognize both. I'm guessing growing up you only read about the redskins, never saw their logo in association with photos, or TV broadcasts. Or did you just think logos were totally unrelated to the team names. And the fact that the Eagles had an Eagle, was just coincidence?
 
zitothebrave said:
You do know what anyone worth a damn intelligently would recognize both. I'm guessing growing up you only read about the redskins, never saw their logo in association with photos, or TV broadcasts. Or did you just think logos were totally unrelated to the team names. And the fact that the Eagles had an Eagle, was just coincidence?
Click to expand...

So it does sound like you acknowledge their is a difference, thanks.
 
gilesfan said:
So it does sound like you acknowledge their is a difference, thanks.
Click to expand...

Seriously? That's what your'e coming up with in defense? You don't think that Redskins had anything to do with indians, because you couldn't associate a name with picture.
 
I'll worry about Washington changing its name once Red Mesa High School (on a Navajo reservation) changes its nickname from the Redskins.
 
btw, this thread is a very small example of why republicans won't win national elections

just so you know
 
Rupublicans don't win elections because people like getting free stuff. Plain and simple.
 
The Republicans will certainly take control of the Senate this fall (meaning Congress) and more than likely the Presidency in 2016 unless the Democrats can navigate around the festering pile of dog**** the executive branch is currently unloading. Obama is amazingly toxic right now. We won't see a hard-left 'centrist' like him be relevant again for at least two presidential cycles (not a condemnation of that political philosophy, per se, but rather a reflection on Obama's inept implementation of it). Hillary will probably be forced to run as more of a blue dog type candidate to avoid being typecast as Obama 2.0 ... which her people (Bill) have already floated as a primary goal, starting with the bit in The Atlantic a few weeks ago.

I would really, really love to see a Bush/Clinton face-off in 2016. Mainly because I think the Bush brand is the only juggernaut capable of matching up with the Clintons -- who, partisanship sillies aside, are political geniuses.

But I digress.
 
With the way this country is going I don't see how a Republican is ever elected again. People who receive government welfare are more likely to vote Democrat and more and more people are receiving that assistance. I wouldn't necessarily consider myself to be Republican but for now they are the party that is mostly in line with my polictical/economic stances.
 
thethe said:
People who receive government welfare are more likely to vote Democrat and more and more people are receiving that assistance. I wouldn't necessarily consider myself to be Republican but for now they are the party that is mostly in line with my polictical/economic stances.
Click to expand...

The problem, for Democrats, is that the 'poor' (and by natural extension, those who qualify for government benefits) don't generally vote. This is something they have been working on since 2008 though, and we could see a change in that perception in just a few short months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top