Federal judge upholds cancellation of Washington’s trademark rights

Getty Images

Usually, the wheels of justice move slowly. Sometimes, they don’t.

Only 15 days after a hearing regarding the 2014 decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that the Washington trademarks are disparaging to Native Americans, a federal judge has agreed.

Via Ian Shapira of the Washington Post, Judge Gerald Bruce Lee affirmed the ruling that the team’s name and logo should not have federal trademark protection.

“This is a huge victory,” Jesse Witten, one of the lawyers for the parties fighting the team, told the Post. “Getting this ruling from a U.S. District judge is a watershed event.”

But the money surely will keep flowing to fight the outcome. The team has automatic appeal rights to the next highest court, followed by the right to try to convince the Supreme Court to take up the case.

“The team has been fighting this case so hard and leaving no stone unturned and scorching every square inch of earth that it’s hard to imagine they will not appeal,” Witten said.

As the Post notes, even if the team exhausts all appeals and ultimately loses, it will still hold trademark rights under state law. But the process of enforcing those trademarks would become more cumbersome, allowing anyone from sea to shining sea to sell products containing the team’s name and logo, without fear of enforcement via federal law.

That’s the ultimate irony in this case. Those who want to change the name are trying to pressure Washington to do so by securing for anyone and everyone the ability to profit from the sale of items carrying the name and logo.

Of course, the fight is bigger than that. Apart from whether third parties would start peddling merchandise that no longer infringes on the franchise’s federal rights but that nevertheless carries a disparaging name or logo, an ultimate defeat in federal court could push the broader debate about the name closer to critical mass, making a change more inevitable.

208 responses to “Federal judge upholds cancellation of Washington’s trademark rights

  1. The activists scored a huge victory today in that a government entity has said the name is offensive.

    There is now a sense of legitimacy on their side.

  2. I am a Packers fan and I say Hail to the Redskins!
    Keep the name.

    My two questions are why are the PC crowd only going after the name Redskins? And which mascot is going to be next on the clock if the Redskins name changes?

  3. I find it pathetic that our government allows are justice system to openly defy the laws they are created to uphold. But it makes sense the judge was appointed by Clinton they do whatever they want.

  4. this is a joke, the red mesa high school on an indian reserve is called the redskins, no complaints from anyone and certainly not to the indian community that cheers them on

    Chicago blackhawks, Cleveland Indians, and many other teams could be considered to have offensive logos

    many prominent indian chiefs have celebrated the Washington redskins, and they have even had real chiefs come out before the start of games. now a bunch of people decide its offensive and want it removed.

    the joke is that the loudest voices for removing the name aren’t Indians but prominent white americans

    the world is a dark place when white people are telling everyone what is offensive to other races

  5. That’s the ultimate irony in this case. Those who want to change the name are trying to pressure Washington to do so by securing for anyone and everyone the ability to profit from the sale of items carrying the name and logo.

    —————

    Maybe is ironic, but if Washington wants to keep those profits they can change the name to something that can be trademarked, so the tactic will probably work in the end.

  6. “how come nobody complains about the Cleveland Indians trademark?

    or for that matter the Chicago Blackhawks?”

    That’s next. The rapacious appetite of PC liberals is NEVER satisfied. They will continue to consume everything they can until they kill their host…like cancer.

  7. boss81hogg says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:08 AM
    The activists scored a huge victory today in that a government entity has said the name is offensive.

    There is now a sense of legitimacy on their side.

    ———————-

    So because a liberal judge appointed by a liberal president ruled in favor of liberals this makes it legit? Wow people truly have stop thinking for themselves.

  8. bahahahaha cant wait!!!
    How about “Washington Pelicans” oh wait that name is taken in NBA… Something like that would be perfect though! bahahahahahaha

  9. Daniel Snyder is quickly running out of wiggle room. He had a chance to profit off the name change via negotiations with the league.. see if they offer him anything now. He’ll look even more pathetic when his “NEVER” turns into: “okay, we’ll do it, as it’s no longer profitable to maintain the status quo”

  10. Chief Justice John Roberts, appointed by Bush, will probably be The Decider. So much for right/left hate.

  11. Hasn’t Bruce Lee been dead for like thirty years??? Redskins, Redskins, Redskins. I’m more Native American than 95percent of the people reading this. Most certainly more than Bruce Lee!!!

  12. This was inevitable. Political correctness has the upper hand, and they have no intention of stopping here. The politically correct crowd will never stop, until everyone is in line, because the left believes in punishing speech which they disfavor. This was never about having a legitimate debate about the Redskins name.

  13. Snyder should rename them the Washington Corruption and use caricatures of politicians taking big bundles of cash from lobbyists as their logo.

    That would shut the politicians up in shock for about a minute before they started screaming and whining about how could anyone think a Washington politician was corrupt.

    Lolz

  14. When you name your team after a skin color it is RACIST. They’re people, not mascots.

    Change the name already Snyder…

  15. If people don’t want courts or government to step in, they need to show the ability to think critically and act accordingly.

    So many responses to the issue of the Redskins name show we’re not willing to engage in that practice. Therefore, the legal beatings will continue until brainpower improves.

  16. bullcharger says:Jul 8, 2015 11:15 AM

    Maybe is ironic, but if Washington wants to keep those profits they can change the name to something that can be trademarked

    Very true sir. If they do change the name to something that can be trademarked who will determine the name does not offend anyone?
    Would they allow Snyder to change it to whatever he wants? would there have to be a blue ribbon PC panel that approves it to make sure no one is offended? or would it hit the courts again if it offends someone?

  17. “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.”

    Would love to know where you came up with that number, but lets just assume that somehow they are indeed accurate. That means there are 52,000 native americans ticked off about the name. Seems like a large population to me…

  18. Why is the logo offensive? It shows someone who is proud and strong.

    The Cleveland Indians logo is much more offensive.

  19. I really think the name “Raiders” encourages bad behavior and street violence… but nobody seems to care about that! When I hear the name “Cowboys” I think of a bunch of men who nearly wiped the buffalo off the face of the earth, severely overgrazed our native praire and chased the indians off… but nobody says anything. Keep the Redskins name!

  20. Because this is the the stuff our government should be concerned with…

    Hail to the Redskins (that would be the football team, dudes & dudettes).

  21. 2014 – Article every 5 minutes
    2015 – Article every 5 days

    By 2017 we won’t have to worry about reading this nonsense for about 5 years.

    No one that isn’t concerned with making money or a name for themselves gives a single damn about this.

  22. Screaming out Redskins … a word some people find offensive … is the best way to convince them it’s not. Well played.

  23. I am very pro-American Indian having read tons on the subject. Still this strikes me as a case of opportunists looking to create a cause for their own betterment by attaching negative connotations to a previously unoffensive sports team name. I’d like to see whose pockets have been lined in this effort.

  24. It’s getting so bad that I ran into Christian Okoye at a pizza joint in Rancho Cucamonga last Thursday(cuz he lives here) for the start of a birthday celebration. Not knowing who he was at first, someone said, “That’s Christian Okoye” while I was standing right next to him. I shook his hand and pointed to a poster of him on the wall and said “as in THAT Christian Okoye?”. He said yes. I said “As in ‘The Nightmare?'”, catching myself before I said Nigerian Nightmare as I didn’t want to offend him, if it offended him.(Of course, I was like a teenage girl meeting Justin Bieber)

    He happily signed my polo shirt with a sharpie and we went on to have a beer together, cuz he’s a really cool, down to earth, dude.

    It’s sad when you have to watch everything you’re saying for the sake of offending people.

  25. Really? Because basically nothing is going to change. The unis will look almost identical. The logo will change to something like Florida State’s. And the name will be something generic like Tribe or Warriors.

  26. Seriously?

    The Blackhawks logo has got to be next or it doesn’t make sense. Unless someone can tell me exactly why the Redskins logo (not name) is disparaging to Native Americans, but the Blackhawks logo is okay.

  27. I personally have no problem with the team name, but . . .

    It’s not about the use of an Indian related name (Braves, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Illini, etc), it’s about the use of a name considered derogatory by the group the name is intended to reflect. And no, everyone doesn’t get to decide what is offensive to a smaller group, that smaller group gets to decide and mutual respect is shown by accepting their wishes (Platinum rule = treat others as they wish to be treated).

    As an alternative example, Imagine the Ol’ Miss Rebels being called the SlaveOwners, or the Dallas Cowboys being called the Assassins. Neither is fair or true.

    Let the tirade against me begin.

  28. How awesome would it be for Snyder to take the loss and keep the name redskins in spite of all the white people that are offended. Don’t let the liberal bullies win! The native Americans are not offended so I don’t care, people that pretend the native Americans are offended are annoying. Especially when they clearly see the name as a sense of pride and just as clearly have much bigger things to worry about.

  29. “how come nobody complains about the Cleveland Indians trademark?

    or for that matter the Chicago Blackhawks?”

    People DO complain about those trademarks. However, the name “Redskins” is what is offensive. If the name was “Redhawks” with the same logo, this blog post would not be here.

  30. “Ye firste Meetinge House was solid mayde to withstande ye wicked onsaults of ye Red Skins!”

    Politicians will do anything for a vote. People don’t even talk like this anymore. The context that this was used back in 1699 vs. how it is being used today are completely different.

    This is not the same as using the N-word for blacks or C-word for Asians.

    And these politicians are educated individuals, they absolutely know its not being used in the same context. Any individual with half a brain knows its not being used in the same context. This is only being fueled to get noticed and to get votes.

  31. We are all sick of PC overkill, but the point is that it doesn’t matter what a bunch of middle age white NFL fans posting above think — it’s what native americans think. The majority not paid by the Washington NFL team find the name racially offensive.

    And if you can’t tell the practical or legal difference between the name Redskins and either the Indians or the Blackhawks you’re a dope.

  32. when people ask “what about the Chiefs or the Braves chop”. They’re offensive too.

    the answer is: when they force a name change, you rest assure they will be next

  33. jayniner says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:13 AM

    Political Correctness is KILLING this nation!

    ————

    So forget this particular issue for a second. Are you saying that words can never changes context or meaning over time and become offensive or racist to such an extent that they should not be used in the name of a business?

    Take the word “bully” for example.

    It used to mean superb or wonderful. For example, “bully for you!”.

    Now it means: use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants.

    Bullying has also now garnered enough attention that the word has a very serious context.

    You definitely don’t want to call someone a bully that is not one. You will notice that football announcers don’t use it to describe a team anymore.

    Look what happened when Rex said he would “build a bully” in Buffalo.

    I don’t think you want it to be used as part of a business name for sure.

    Things change over time. It’s not being politically correct to accept it and understand it.

    Trying to have word meanings remain exactly the same forever is futile.

  34. This isn’t like the Oilers turning into the Texans, this is forced tearing down of a tradition.

    Therefore, they will always be the Redskins to me, even if you save future generations from this so called racism.

  35. As usual, the Conservative (stupid) element shows their astounding ignorance and selfishness right here on PFT.

  36. AJ Green OWNS him
    _________________________________________

    AJ Green had a COMBINED 8 catches for 72 yards against Cleveland last year but yeah he owns Haden smh

  37. NFL team names and logos get tons of print.
    Gay marriage – yes tons of coverage.
    Micheal Sam … yeah baby – print it up.

    18 trillion dollars of debt …..
    …..toxic vaccine ingredients …..
    wars that USA has been involved in for decades …….
    Guantanamo bay, still open…….. crickets.

    its official – we are dumbed down. you can tell by the topics of conversation.

  38. alltee says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:15 AM

    the world is a dark place when white people are telling everyone what is offensive to other races

    —————————–

    Congratulations. You’ve just successfully countered your own argument!

  39. Supreme Court ignored the laws by pretending they didn’t know the definition of the word “state” just so they could uphold Obamacare.

    It should not be a surprise to see it now done on lower levels.

    This is dangerous. Courts don’t make law. They are supposed to uphold the law and send it back to congress so they can make changes.

    I really have no idea how anybody with a brain can cheer this trend of courts ignoring written law to do what they feel is best.

  40. Can we now finally put to rest the notion that government agencies and the judiciary are bound by law, not public opinion? I’m not even a fan of the team, and this is just stupid.

  41. bucthesepeople says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:42 AM

    “Ye firste Meetinge House was solid mayde to withstande ye wicked onsaults of ye Red Skins!”

    Politicians will do anything for a vote. People don’t even talk like this anymore. The context that this was used back in 1699 vs. how it is being used today are completely different.

    This is not the same as using the N-word for blacks or C-word for Asians.

    And these politicians are educated individuals, they absolutely know its not being used in the same context. Any individual with half a brain knows its not being used in the same context. This is only being fueled to get noticed and to get votes.

    ——–

    The N-word didn’t start out meaning what it does today and it didn’t start out being offensive. Now that word is offensive enough that it is irrelevant what context it is used in, it is too offensive to be used as a business name.

    It may not be the exact same in this case, but it’s close and it’s moving in that direction.

  42. I would lmao if Snyder moved the team and called them the London Redskins …. I don’t think the trademark courts could say anything then

  43. Words can change meaning over time and the courts do not (and should not) side with the majority in all situations.

    Both facts are relevant to this case and whether or not you agree with it, it’s the right call.

  44. coltscamp says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:07 AM

    Or, you know, it might just be a artificially-created hysteria. 99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.

    **************************************************

    You know they’ve already lost when the Redskin name lovers have to resort to ridiculous out and out lies like “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name”.

  45. Ho-hum, another activist judge that should be impeached, censored, and disbarred from the bench forever because of his wilful corrupt activist ruling infringing on the Washington Redskin’s FREEDOM of SPEECH right.

  46. Snyder should just remove all references to aboriginal Americans from the team publications and site. Then go back to the “R” logo.

    Then tell everyone “Redskin” refers to potatoes.

  47. bostontdparty says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:12 AM
    how come nobody complains about the Cleveland Indians trademark?

    or for that matter the Chicago Blackhawks?

    ————————–

    I’m sure both teams have weathered their share of complaints, but IMO the Cleveland Indians logo is infinitely more offensive than those of the Blackhawks or Redskins

  48. harrisonhits2 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:24 AM
    Snyder should rename them the Washington Corruption and use caricatures of politicians taking big bundles of cash from lobbyists as their logo.

    That would shut the politicians up in shock for about a minute before they started screaming and whining about how could anyone think a Washington politician was corrupt.

    Lolz

    ———————————

    You sir just won the internet.

  49. thank you activists for teaching us all an important lesson: when things don’t go your way, just keep complaining until all your dreams come true

  50. randomcommenter says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:55 AM
    Supreme Court ignored the laws by pretending they didn’t know the definition of the word “state” just so they could uphold Obamacare.
    _______________________________________________

    So which State is the State of the Union? Sorry buddy, but this here is America. In America we have capitolist words that have many definitions, not your commie words that only mean one thing forever.

  51. I love this new progressive liberal age we live in. Something offends you? Ban it! So much more refreshing than those tedious book burnings.

    Living in the age of tolerance has never been so encompassing.

    Blackhawks.
    Indians.

    Hypocrites.

  52. If you’re using the Blackhawks as an example, I’m sorry, you are either have no real clue, or you’re just lashing out.

    Snyder trots a handful of Native Americans he can pay off as PR human shields when the heat gets turned up.

    The Blackhawks for years have actually been working with native organizations behind the scenes and have support fromthe local Native community. Proactively. Funding monuments and scholarships.

    Chicago media and general fandom point out when the random bandwagon fan show up in redface and Tonto dress as exactly what not to do. There are no tomahawk chops. Their mascot is an humanoid bird. They probably need to adjust their logo to something closer to Black Hawk and do more to celebrate him and his people, sure.

    The name Redskin is a slur. Sorry, but it is. If you’re worried about a slippery slope, it stops at names like “Braves” and Chief Wahoo. Generic stereotypical stuff.

    At last check, the Seminoles were a great example of how to go about this.

    Actually work with the local Native American community and don’t just use them. And drop the racist slur of a name. You’ll be surprised how quickly Washington could turn even this around.

  53. Kind of like the Confederate flag, not considered offensive until liberals told you it was.

  54. Washington Rainbows! That way no color, creed or sexual preference can be offended!

    Well, except for us common-sense types who know that all this is just ridiculous nonsense.

  55. Sad, I work for a large company with a pretty larger workforce presence in OK, IL & WI and in my position interact with a lot of colleagues in all of those states and many Native Americans. None that I have asked find the name offensive in the least and some of my OK buddies tell me they and all their friends are Redskins fans and love, and are proud of the logo. Leave it to white liberal know-it-alls to create problems where the don’t exist in order to have a cause.

  56. activist judges making laws
    ______

    You understand that is literally the opposite of what has happened here, right? The Court upheld the ruling of the Trademark office. If they had ruled in favor of Washingtons patents, then it would be activist judges making laws. And even that is a little off. Regardless where you stand on the issue, try to understand the issue.

  57. If they had changed in by themselves, I’d have been, “Oh, how nice. Let’s move on.”

    Because of this constant barrage from people who claim to represent every American Indian, I went to, “Give it a rest. I have a headache. Let’s move on!”

    Now, and I’m a Bills fan, I’m entrenched in the Redskin camp!!! “Get your own damn team and call it whatever you like!! The only one winning here is the lawyers!! Let’s move on!!!”

  58. “…the Washington trademarks are disparaging to Native Americans, a federal judge has agreed.”

    ————————————-

    Let’s see … who’s opinion carries more weight …

    A) That of a federal judge.

    B) The masses of generally under informed yahoos in the court of public opinion that scream anti PC propaganda.

    Yeah … tough one. I’m going with A.

  59. “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.”

    You pulled that number right out of your fanny.

  60. “Washington. Are we talking about the Seahawks or the Redskins?”

    Don’t quit your day job.

  61. “Can’t they just compromise by changing the name to the “Skins”?”

    ——————————————

    Though you make a good point, I think the long term fight is bigger than that.

    Given the stature of the NFL, taking down the only team name that uses Native Americans as a mascot will just be the first step in eliminating them as mascots in all American sports at every level.

    Here’s the thing … I’m both of Irish and Norwegian descent (among others). There is no problem with the Notre Dame Fighting Irish or the Minnesota Vikings names. Big difference. Stop lowering the conversation and making those comparisons.

    There have been two groups throughout all of American history that have had the floor mopped with them by everybody else … African Americans and Native Americans. Therefore, it is inappropriate to use either ethnic background as a team mascot.

    How screwed up would it be if a team changed it’s mascot to an African American and characatureized it’s image? It would be unimaginable. What is the difference when it comes to Native Americans?

    Take a look at the Florida State Seminoles and what their fans do throughout the duration of home football games. Or go look up the Cleveland Indians mascot. Not cool.

    Anybody that defends keeping things the way they are really needs to check themselves.

  62. Is the govt going to change the Apache, black hawk,Kiowa,Lakota helicopter name and the Tomahawk missile names, and I believe the code name for the bin laden attack was Geronimo. Leave the name alone

  63. kmartin173 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 12:12 PM

    Kind of like the Confederate flag, not considered offensive until liberals told you it was.
    ——————————————————
    Never offensive? What a joke. It’s been controversial since it first flew. If all you conservative, it’s a free country, I got the right to do as I want feel so strongly about your rights I guess there’s no problem flying an ISIS flag or say, decorating a cake with that same ISIS flag. Freedoms and rights are all great until someone else’s freedoms or rights don’t agree with yours.

  64. Difference between Blackhawk/Indian names:

    Redskin is a slanderous term intended for the bounty on slaughtered American Indians. These are more than movie characters- HUMAN BEINGS. It is akin to using the n-word or any other disparaging label that has been applied to generalize a race of people.

    PC is killing this country:

    Really? How? Your view of Americanism is somehow tied to nicknaming and capitalizing on slanderous terms of others? I think you should read the Bill of Rights.

    -Republican-voting American

  65. “Is the govt going to change the Apache, black hawk,Kiowa,Lakota helicopter name and the Tomahawk missile names, and I believe the code name for the bin laden attack was Geronimo.”

    ———————————————-

    Interesting.

  66. Honest question, for those of you who believe it, how is PC ruining or killing this country? I’d like to understand that argument, please. I see it stated often in these articles and I’d like to better understand that viewpoint.

  67. Snyder will take the advice of the real Bruce Lee who once said:

    “Defeat is a state of mind; No one is ever defeated until defeat has been accepted as a reality.”

  68. The name WILL eventually be changed, no matter what the racist supporters of “Redskins” think or want. It’s only a matter of when, not if. Get used to it, because it’s going to happen. Follow the money, people. Always follow the money. Once the bottom falls out of the marketing dollars for “Redskins,” the name will change. Count on it.

  69. Amanda Blackhorse has already indicated that the “Chiefs” are next….

    … and to those of you that claim the name “is after” or “was intended” or “is based on” it doesn’t matter.

    The PC crowd has determined “if a group of people” find a name offensive it has to go. What they have never defined is what constitutes “a group of people.” In most cases the small group offended by “Redskins” is sufficiently accepted, but the smaller group of people offended by “Chiefs” is not accepted. I am not sure why this is the case then again the PC crowd goes by “feelings”, “instinct”, etc. so we shall see how long “Chiefs” lasts.

  70. suhmonster90 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:47 AM
    This isn’t like the Oilers turning into the Texans, this is forced tearing down of a tradition.

    Therefore, they will always be the Redskins to me, even if you save future generations from this so called racism.

    19 8
    Report comment

    ———————————————-

    The Oilers became the Titans.

    Because someone had to reset your foolishness.

  71. Never offensive? What a joke. It’s been controversial since it first flew. If all you conservative, it’s a free country, I got the right to do as I want feel so strongly about your rights I guess there’s no problem flying an ISIS flag or say, decorating a cake with that same ISIS flag. Freedoms and rights are all great until someone else’s freedoms or rights don’t agree with yours

    =============================================

    I didn’t realize that when the Dukes put the confederate flag on the roof of the General Lee it was the equivalent of putting an ISIS flag on said roof. Nothing like a little nuance.

  72. kmartin173 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 12:12 PM

    Kind of like the Confederate flag, not considered offensive until liberals told you it was.
    ——————————————————
    Never offensive? What a joke. It’s been controversial since it first flew. If all you conservative, it’s a free country, I got the right to do as I want feel so strongly about your rights I guess there’s no problem flying an ISIS flag or say, decorating a cake with that same ISIS flag. Freedoms and rights are all great until someone else’s freedoms or rights don’t agree with yours.

  73. Is it ironic that the name change from Bullets to Wizards was nothing like this one? You’d think the gun lobby would have been fighting it tooth and nail reminding everyone that bullets don’t kill people……people do.

  74. madderstork says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:06 PM

    Never offensive? What a joke. It’s been controversial since it first flew. If all you conservative, it’s a free country, I got the right to do as I want feel so strongly about your rights I guess there’s no problem flying an ISIS flag or say, decorating a cake with that same ISIS flag. Freedoms and rights are all great until someone else’s freedoms or rights don’t agree with yours

    =============================================

    I didn’t realize that when the Dukes put the confederate flag on the roof of the General Lee it was the equivalent of putting an ISIS flag on said roof. Nothing like a little nuance.
    ——————————————–
    I rest my case.

  75. The Obama administration and activist judges continue to be involved in ways they should not, one power grab after another. All Americans should be worried if the government can force them to give up the name Redskins, as what else can the government force you to do?

  76. …PETA should be filing a grievence any day now on the humilation animals & birds feel about their species being exploited by the NFL….WATCH OUT !! Jags, Bills, Dolphins, Falcons, Eagles, Panthers, Seahawks, Cardinals, Bengals, Lions, Bears, Colts, & Ravens. The PC police are coming to get ya !!!

  77. I hear those in Maryland are a progressive and fair group of folks. I suggest the name be changed to the Washington Unity & they use the Rainbow Pride flag as their logo. The alternate uniform designs could be endless! What a great example it would be.

  78. This is wasteful. It comes down to WHO THE HECK CARES in my book. While some tribes are against the name, many have expressed support for the names in one way or another.

    The lady who went after the Redskins seems to be a tool. She might very well be a nice lady, but I get the feeling Ms. Blackhorse is doing this to gain notoriety for herself. She all but confirmed this when she also went after the Kansas City Chiefs, claiming that their name was also disrespectful to the Native American people. This was a nickname of the KC Mayor, who was instrumental in bringing the Hunt franchise to the city of KC.

    Is name wrong? That depends on your POV. Is the amount of time, money, energy, and human capital worth it? NOT AT ALL.

  79. “I didn’t realize that when the Dukes put the confederate flag on the roof of the General Lee it was the equivalent of putting an ISIS flag on said roof. Nothing like a little nuance.”
    ——————————————————-
    Of course the fact that the confederate flag was the battle flag of those who would have sought to destroy the United States escapes this person. How he doesn’t see the correlation between the two is quite mind boggling.

  80. Let’s see … who’s opinion carries more weight …

    A) That of a federal judge.

    B) The masses of generally under informed yahoos in the court of public opinion that scream anti PC propaganda.

    Yeah … tough one. I’m going with A.
    ——————————————————
    That might carry some weight if they all ruled by the Constitution instead of based on their ideology. 2 different Presidents doing the judicial nominating will result in 2 completely different rulings. Look up Ruth Ginsburg’s opinions and see if she’s a strict Constitutionalist or rules by her far-left ideology.

  81. @ ace8842

    I’m confused. The judge UPHELD a law/order in this case so he did not change anything. To you, is an “activist judge” someone who does something you disagree with?

  82. “The PC crowd has determined “if a group of people” find a name offensive it has to go. ”

    —————————————-

    The PC crowd? Please elaborate on the NON PC crowd. Tell us more about them.

    I could use a good laugh this afternoon.

    🙂

  83. Pride in he confederate flag. Perhaps the most un-American thing I can imagine.

    A group of people tried to destroy the United States of AMERICA, and 640,000 people were slaughtered because their right to enslave black HUMAN BEINGS was threatened.

    Southern pride indeed.

    How can it get any more un-American??? Anyone???

  84. You see this is why I believe there has to be intelligent life somewhere else in the universe. If humanity is the best the God I serve has to offer in the entire universe, then the universe is in trouble. We’re talking about football. To be honest I wish that they would post anything that has any relelvance to social issue. I’m a black male. No, I don’t like the idea of people calling me the “N” word and I don’t like the fact that there are people that are supporting a flag that represents the symbol of the most oppressive times in our history. But, I respect the right of those individuals to use those terms and to fly that flag. But, let’s just talk about football and how the Saints are going to win it all this year

  85. “That might carry some weight if they all ruled by the Constitution instead of based on their ideology.”

    ——————————-

    Fair enough.

    I think my original point was to illustrate that the general public that rules the courts of public opinion are generally not qualified to rule on much of anything at all in any subject.

  86. “A group of people tried to destroy the United States of AMERICA, and 640,000 people were slaughtered because their right to enslave black HUMAN BEINGS was threatened.”

    —————————————

    Wow. SOLID point.

  87. pacificdan says:
    Jul 8, 2015 12:59 PM
    Honest question, for those of you who believe it, how is PC ruining or killing this country? I’d like to understand that argument, please. I see it stated often in these articles and I’d like to better understand that viewpoint.
    *******
    Well first, and foremost, the elimination of meaningful debate at 99% of all colleges. How about the demonization of anyone who disagrees with global warming…sorry, climate change. How about the growing concern with “microagressions”? Should I keep going? Please stay on the left coast.

  88. “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.”

    Would love to know where you came up with that number, but lets just assume that somehow they are indeed accurate. That means there are 52,000 native americans ticked off about the name. Seems like a large population to me…

    Sounds like 52,000 people need therapy to me.

  89. imodan says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:22 PM
    ——————————————————-
    …those who would have sought to destroy the United States escapes this person…
    —–
    “Destroy” seems like a strong word – if the Confederates wanted to leave the US… how would this “destroy” America? They didn’t want to overturn the US government – they just wanted to walk away. (NOTE: I am not advocating their reasons or rationality).

    Think of it this way I wife wants to leave a marriage she no longer likes and seeks a divorce… but the husband keeps her in the marriage with the threat of a gun… does the wife really seek to “destroy” the marriage or is she just trying to get out of a situation she no longer wishes to be a part?

  90. I’ve had a problem with this for years and as long as I am expressing my frustrations I would also like to ask for the removal of Red Foxx, Red Skelton, Red Buttons, Red Ryder, Red Rover ( I mean who wants him coming over? Am I right?) Red Wings, I will never get a movie from a Red Box again, or eat at a Red Lobster. Taylor Swifts album has me furious….in fact I’m seeing….DOH!!!

  91. 1. Washington Warlocks
    2. WashingtonToros
    3.Washington Reddogs
    **************************************

    1. Maryland Redskins
    2. Oklahoma Redskins

  92. So lets see …Indians, Braves, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles, are all Okay ?

    And of course the tomahawk chop is okay as well ?

    But Redskins is not okay?

    Not to mention 62 high schools in 22 states with the name Redskins including Red Mesa High in Arizona, located on a NAVAJO reservation, and where 99.3 percent of its students are Native American!

  93. love it! Snyder is not only a jerk, but a racist jerk as well. Funny how racists everywhere cry “political correctness sticks ” to rationalize their own bigotry

  94. So lets see …Indians, Braves, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles, are all Okay ?

    And of course the tomahawk chop is okay as well ?

    But Redskins is not okay?
    —————————————————————–

    yes, because the term “‘redskins” was the equivalent of the n-word, and those other terms were not

  95. So many tears from those on the losing side of this argument. And there will only be more tears. Just like the people who tried to stop gay marriage and found that progress is inexorable.

  96. “…PETA should be filing a grievence any day now on the humilation animals & birds feel about their species being exploited by the NFL….WATCH OUT !!”

    ————————————–

    As the principal from Billy Madison once said …

    What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

  97. A group of people tried to destroy the United States of AMERICA, and 640,000 people were slaughtered because their right to enslave black HUMAN BEINGS was threatened.
    ———————————————-
    The Civil War wasn’t fought over slavery it was fought over secession, its idiots that believe it was that are causing all this PC flag nonsense.

  98. Snyder could always stick it to the politicians and move the team to Toronto. If I was him, I would. There would be a whole lot of singing another tune.

  99. “So lets see …Indians, Braves, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles, are all Okay ?

    And of course the tomahawk chop is okay as well ?

    But Redskins is not okay?

    Not to mention 62 high schools in 22 states with the name Redskins including Red Mesa High in Arizona, located on a NAVAJO reservation, and where 99.3 percent of its students are Native American!”

    ——————————————

    They’re NOT okay.

    Getting the high profile Redskins of the NFL to change it’s name is the first step in getting all the others to change it as well.

    And the FSU tomahawk chop you speak of is absolutely vile.

  100. A few white Liberals got together and they alone have determined what is racist and what isn’t racist for all Native Americans. Never mind the fact that vast majority of NAs don’t care about the Redskin’s name.

  101. Those who are offended should watch “Blazing Saddles.” Mel Brooks knew how to offend EVERY racial group, including whites, and in the end, nobody took offense because everybody was equally offended (of course, today the movie would be the subject of street protests and riots, but it is one great movie).

  102. kmartin173 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:24 PM

    That might carry some weight if they all ruled by the Constitution instead of based on their ideology. 2 different Presidents doing the judicial nominating will result in 2 completely different rulings. Look up Ruth Ginsburg’s opinions and see if she’s a strict Constitutionalist or rules by her far-left ideology.

    ————————————————————

    That knife cuts both ways. Read Scalia and you’ll see how often he trips himself up to go against his prior rulings when it suits his ideology. That is the point of the justices being vetted by the Senate. So that in a perfect world the far right and far left aren’t sitting on the bench and moderates that both parties can agree on make the rulings. In practice that nearly never happens.

  103. @ thepoofighters

    1. college debate. I agree its changed our ability to debate as much or effectively but I don’t think that has the ability to ruin a country.
    2. climate change. Shouldn’t climate change critics be able to stand and defend their position? Ironic, but I see conflict between your first and second example. PC people make it hard to debate but you don’t want debate between supporters and critics of climate change.
    3. I assume you mean Microaggression. That theory, started in the early 1970s, is hardly gaining traction and lacks the ability to “ruin” a country.

    Yes, please, if you would, keep going. I found those first three pretty weak.

    And don’t worry, I have no intentions of moving away from CA. But I do so enjoy my conversation with my fellow Americans regardless of their POV.

  104. “Political Correctness is KILLING this nation!”

    That’s a truly brain-dead statement and I’ll show you what unites everyone who uses it if you don’t already know.

    The “anti PC” group claim that ordinary people can no longer say what they want, that their freedom is being attacked and other such erroneous positions meant to make themselves sound like defenders of the Freedom of Speech, but that’s not what they’re actually after, and not who they actually are.

    What they actually want is to be able to say anything they want to anyone they want, no matter how hateful, hurtful, offensive and ignorant it is, without any consequences. Too bad. No one is stopping them from saying abusive things, they just get upset when people call them out on it, when people have the guts to stand up to their offensive statements. They label this standing up as a terrifying “PC attitude” that needs to be stopped, stopped, STOPPED- which is the exact opposite of standing up for free speech. They just want to say whatever awful thing they can think of without getting in any trouble for it, and that’s it. They are bullies, that’s all. Whining bullies, incensed that they can on longer abuse people any get away with it, and they actually think that they’re righteous Americans for standing up to stop people from standing up for their justice. Our country is extraordinarily strong, and learning how to speak with civility to each other will only strengthen it.

  105. grumpyoleman says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:33 PM

    “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.”

    Would love to know where you came up with that number, but lets just assume that somehow they are indeed accurate. That means there are 52,000 native americans ticked off about the name. Seems like a large population to me…

    Sounds like 52,000 people need therapy to me.
    ——————————————————-
    Let me correct that for you. 52,000 plus one. Your way or they are all mentally ill, got it. Call in the white coats, stat!

  106. kmartin173 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:46 PM

    A group of people tried to destroy the United States of AMERICA, and 640,000 people were slaughtered because their right to enslave black HUMAN BEINGS was threatened.
    ———————————————-
    The Civil War wasn’t fought over slavery it was fought over secession, its idiots that believe it was that are causing all this PC flag nonsense.
    ——————————————–
    Please, do enlighten us why the south wanted to secede.

  107. kmartin173 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 12:12 PM
    Kind of like the Confederate flag, not considered offensive until liberals told you it was.

    _______________________________________no, actually it was the KKK using it while lynching and burning men alive, and the racist white Southerners using it to justify segregation

  108. “The Civil War wasn’t fought over slavery it was fought over secession, its idiots that believe it was that are causing all this PC flag nonsense.”

    You’re a complete ignoramus. It was fought over secession because the secessionists wanted to secede so they could KEEP SLAVERY. Under the guise of ‘States Rights’ if you want to try making that non-point. PC is not, despite your clownish attempt to smear it, a pejorative term. It takes guts to stand up to bullies.

  109. qbarrel says:
    Jul 8, 2015 12:03 PM

    bostontdparty says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:12 AM
    how come nobody complains about the Cleveland Indians trademark?

    or for that matter the Chicago Blackhawks?

    —————————————————————

    Very simple answer … actually am surprised i have to explain this but here goes …… neither of the names mentioned outside “Redskins” is a dictionary defined racial slur … very simple

  110. More inevitable? Inevitable is a binary state, something either is inevitable or it isn’t. Claiming that something is more inevitable or less inevitable is complete nonsense from a grammatical perspective. Since there is no guarantee that the name of the team will change at any point in the future, it is more than a bit presumptuous to refer to the change as inevitable.

    Hail to the Redskins!

  111. What is so contemptible about supporting a racial epithet is how petty and how low some will stoop to demonstrate their own ignorance. In the years since this debate has started, I’ve yet to see one argument, not one, that has any validity whatsoever. I challenge anyone who supports the perpetuation of this racial epithet to forward the best argument they can, and I will blow it out of the water. Believe me I’ve seen them all and they are all pathetic.

  112. ~”yes, because the term “‘redskins” was the equivalent of the n-word, and those other terms were not”

    And yet you have used the word, REDSKINS, in your own assumption that it is the equivalent to the n-word. HAHAHAHA

  113. Oklahoma is Choctaw for “red people” and the name they chose to name the territory they were forced on to. Guess they should’ve been more sensitive to the English way of describing people, places and things than they’re own tradition of using descriptors.

  114. drgreenstreak says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:48 AM
    As usual, the Conservative (stupid) element shows their astounding ignorance and selfishness right here on PFT.
    *****
    Thought we weren’t supposed to call people ugly names. Oops, forgot his own PC code.

  115. Everyone thinks the civil war was about slavery. Not so much as it was about the North wanting industry that only the south could provide. Like cotton and food.

    If you think the civil war was about slavery, and nothing else. You should go back to school.
    If you think a flag, or a word, like the confederate flag or the word redskins, has control over you; what you think, your actions and behavior, then you need a hug.

  116. metalman5150 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:57 PM
    ~”yes, because the term “‘redskins” was the equivalent of the n-word, and those other terms were not”

    And yet you have used the word, REDSKINS, in your own assumption that it is the equivalent to the n-word. HAHAHAHA
    ________________________________________
    what a bizarre nonsensical post…yet it illustrates the depths of racist stupidity shown by Snyders groupies

  117. I am white, and would be totally fine with them changing the name to the Washington Whiteskins – the new logo could be the profile of Vanilla Ice. Hail, Ice, Ice, Baby!

  118. Not to mention 62 high schools in 22 states with the name Redskins….
    ===========================
    Getting the high profile Redskins of the NFL to change it’s name is the first step in getting all the others to change it as well.
    ===========================
    Selective outrage. That is why this debate over what YOUR side considers to be racism isn’t that you want to fix anything, but rather you just want to shout and make noise from the rafters.

    The commenter TOLD you there were numerous high schools in the country that do the same thing. Why not pick a fight with them? Never mind, no need to answer. Its because nobody will see or hear you.

  119. “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.”

    Would love to know where you came up with that number, but lets just assume that somehow they are indeed accurate. That means there are 52,000 native americans ticked off about the name. Seems like a large population to me…
    _

    Probably the same scientific study that says 97% of all scientists believe in man made global warming. We all know that’s legit.

  120. “99% of native Americans don’t care about the name.”
    __________________

    Would love to know where you came up with that number, but lets just assume that somehow they are indeed accurate. That means there are 52,000 native americans ticked off about the name. Seems like a large population to me…
    __________________

    Probably the same scientific study that says 97% of all scientists believe in man made global warming. We all know that’s legit.

  121. qbarrel says:
    Jul 8, 2015 12:03 PM

    bostontdparty says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:12 AM
    how come nobody complains about the Cleveland Indians trademark?

    or for that matter the Chicago Blackhawks?

    —————————————————————

    Very simple answer … actually am surprised i have to explain this but here goes …… neither of the names mentioned outside “Redskins” is a dictionary defined racial slur … very simple

    Maybe we need an update of the dictionary.

  122. pftcensor1 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:35 PM

    imodan says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:22 PM
    ——————————————————-
    …those who would have sought to destroy the United States escapes this person…
    —–
    “Destroy” seems like a strong word – if the Confederates wanted to leave the US… how would this “destroy” America? They didn’t want to overturn the US government – they just wanted to walk away. (NOTE: I am not advocating their reasons or rationality).

    Think of it this way I wife wants to leave a marriage she no longer likes and seeks a divorce… but the husband keeps her in the marriage with the threat of a gun… does the wife really seek to “destroy” the marriage or is she just trying to get out of a situation she no longer wishes to be a part?
    ———————————————————-
    No, she isn’t. But let’s remember who fired their gun first. It wasn’t the Union. So who had the gun pointed at who? The confederates didn’t just want to walk away. They wanted to take a huge part of the west with them and make them slave areas. There would have been two countries instead of one so I would say that would have pretty much destroyed what was known as the United States.

  123. If you think the civil war was about slavery, and nothing else. You should go back to school.

    You should read the Articles of Secession…

    We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

  124. For other people to copy and sell that logo and team name, don’t they first have to have people willing to actually pay money for Redskins gear? I think all 5 fans already have their crap.

  125. pacificdan says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:48 PM
    @ thepoofighters

    1. college debate. I agree its changed our ability to debate as much or effectively but I don’t think that has the ability to ruin a country.
    2. climate change. Shouldn’t climate change critics be able to stand and defend their position? Ironic, but I see conflict between your first and second example. PC people make it hard to debate but you don’t want debate between supporters and critics of climate change.
    3. I assume you mean Microaggression. That theory, started in the early 1970s, is hardly gaining traction and lacks the ability to “ruin” a country.

    Yes, please, if you would, keep going. I found those first three pretty weak.

    And don’t worry, I have no intentions of moving away from CA. But I do so enjoy my conversation with my fellow Americans regardless of their POV.
    ****
    PCDan you need to read more carefully. The demonization of people who disagree with global warming would indicate that I am disturbed by the lack of debate on this subject. Reading is fundamental PCDan.

  126. @ thepoofighters,

    ok demonization is big word (actually not a word) and big words confuse me. I, admittedly, may have read more into your statement, so please elaborate how does the PC crowd demonize climate change critics? I took it as criticism towards climate change critics was demonization but perhaps you have more examples of actual demonization.

  127. How is this justice when Native Americans themselves continue to use the Redskins name and mascot to describe themselves in their schools?

    This isn’t justice; this is setting a dangerous precedent. Any and all business names are now in danger, including pro football talk, if a group of people just so happen to find the name offensive.

  128. Better be careful with this ruling, Remember this is a Private business, Allowing the owner to lose his rights over the name, could mean YOUR Private business name could be swiped away from you just because somebody complains about it!
    And you CAN’T PLEASE EVERYBODY! There is an activist for everything in the World..
    Lets ship the activists to China, believe me, their piddly crap here is minor in compairison!!!

  129. hail74 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:59 PM

    Oklahoma is Choctaw for “red people” and the name they chose to name the territory they were forced on to. Guess they should’ve been more sensitive to the English way of describing people, places and things than they’re own tradition of using descriptors.
    ———————————————-
    Redskin” is a slang term for Native Americans defined in current dictionaries of American English as offensive, disparaging, insulting,and taboo. Apparently some are unfamiliar with dictionaries.

  130. Redskin” is a slang term for Native Americans defined in current dictionaries of American English as offensive, disparaging, insulting,and taboo. Apparently some are unfamiliar with dictionaries.
    =============================
    The use of the word doesn’t seem to bother you, I see. I suppose you would be scared out of your white skin to write out a derogatory word directed at African Americans, right? In your mind, is there really a difference between the use
    R-word and the N-word, even in print? Just curious to see how you reconcile your own racism.

  131. “Redskin” is a slang term for Native Americans defined in current dictionaries of American English as offensive, disparaging, insulting,and taboo.”
    —————–

    Only if it’s used in a disparaging way. Which is precisely why the Native American high school called the Red Mesa Redskins doesn’t fall under that definition; just like the Washington Redskins name doesn’t.

    Sports teams and Native American high school mascots aren’t named to disparage those who play, they’re named due to the honor, pride, and respect the name gives the team and school.

    That’s why you don’t see sports teams or Native American high schools calling themselves “the weak idiots”. That mascot name would actually be disparaging in a way that the Red Mesa Redskins or Washington Redskins names are not intended to be.

    You can be offended by anything if you choose to be. Even when no offense is meant. That doesn’t mean you should be able to destroy a business’ name just because you misunderstood why they named themselves.

  132. Unless you have proof that Dan Snyder is a racist you need to stop calling him. JKC refused to change the name too but I don’t remember anyone calling him a racist. He was called a bully,grumpy and mean but never a racist.

  133. I have never heard of a person being called a Redskin except in association with the NFL franchise.

    Why should left wing whites tell Native Americans that they should be ashamed of their skin color?

    Why wipe out all remembrances of the people that used to live on the continent?

    Why do they want to eliminate history and tradition?

  134. It has been REDSKINS since 1952!!! native americans don’t care about it, leave the REDSKINS name alone already!!! This is what happens when politics get involved with things it should not be involoved in!!! REDSKINS!!!

  135. “Is the govt going to change the Apache, black hawk,Kiowa,Lakota helicopter name and the Tomahawk missile names, and I believe the code name for the bin laden attack was Geronimo.”

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Tell me which of those names are not the actual names of a tribe, person or artifact as opposed to a racial epithet, please.

    What is it about letting go of old ways and moving into the future with an open mind that is so terrible? How many of you would experience any REAL impact in your life if Washington changed their name to the Washington Freedom, Washington Warriors, Washington Sharknados, or even the Washington Kardashians? You’d have to spend $90 on a new jersey and learn a new fight song, maybe?

    Is the minor inconvenience of that really worth supporting bigotry?

  136. Lobbyists, Lawyers, Politicians, Potomacs, BlueReds, Legislators, Bureaucrats, Regulators, doubtless others, too.

    I don’t find Redskins to be offensive and certainly there are other similar controversies in pro snd college sports.

    But I’d rather my government to worry about the effects of the Greek economic crisis, Puerto Rico’s debt issues, black churches burning, than this issue, which is an issue, to be sure, but not high on the list.

  137. revelation123 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 2:54 PM

    “Redskin” is a slang term for Native Americans defined in current dictionaries of American English as offensive, disparaging, insulting,and taboo.”
    —————–

    Only if it’s used in a disparaging way. Which is precisely why the Native American high school called the Red Mesa Redskins doesn’t fall under that definition; just like the Washington Redskins name doesn’t.

    Sports teams and Native American high school mascots aren’t named to disparage those who play, they’re named due to the honor, pride, and respect the name gives the team and school.

    That’s why you don’t see sports teams or Native American high schools calling themselves “the weak idiots”. That mascot name would actually be disparaging in a way that the Red Mesa Redskins or Washington Redskins names are not intended to be.

    You can be offended by anything if you choose to be. Even when no offense is meant. That doesn’t mean you should be able to destroy a business’ name just because you misunderstood why they named themselves.

    —————

    Please admit there are words that are offensive regardless of whether offense is meant or not.

    You can argue whether this is one of those cases, but some words are beyond context.

  138. hail74 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 1:59 PM

    Oklahoma is Choctaw for “red people” and the name they chose to name the territory they were forced on to. Guess they should’ve been more sensitive to the English way of describing people, places and things than they’re own tradition of using descriptors.

    ——————-

    The N-word was derived from the Spanish word for the color black.

    Is that what it means now? No.

    A word can have context beyond just a descriptor.

  139. gobolts says:
    Jul 8, 2015 2:53 PM

    Redskin” is a slang term for Native Americans defined in current dictionaries of American English as offensive, disparaging, insulting,and taboo. Apparently some are unfamiliar with dictionaries.
    =============================
    The use of the word doesn’t seem to bother you, I see. I suppose you would be scared out of your white skin to write out a derogatory word directed at African Americans, right? In your mind, is there really a difference between the use
    R-word and the N-word, even in print? Just curious to see how you reconcile your own racism.
    ——————————————————
    Haven’t read my previous comments on this subject I see. I am anti racial slur, period. But, just to prove a point I typed the n-word in my reply to you and guess what? Censored, as I knew it would be. Now that’s rich. Censor a word because it’s offensive, disparaging, insulting, and taboo while at the same time a word which by definition is exactly as offensive, disparaging, insulting, and taboo is used in this articles headline. So your rage is misplaced. I recommend a stern letter to NBC for the use of the R-word. Oh, and next time read before you cast stones.

  140. How many people on here are defending keeping the name because they are Washington fans and do not want to lose the tradition but understand that the name could be racist to Native Americans(thumbs up) vs. those who are defending keeping the name because they feel the name is not racist and people are just being too politically correct (thumbs down).

  141. “…yes, because the term “‘redskins” was the equivalent of the n-word, and those other terms were not..”

    **********************************************

    Then why do we say ” native americans ” instead of Indians now ?

    “Chief Wahoo” ..that is not offensive ?

    The answer of course is to eliminate ALL team mascot names and refer to the city that team represents only

  142. Harve Gulch Cowboy says:
    Jul 8, 2015 3:06 PM

    Cowboy was originally cow boy, an offensive term for young white men.
    —————————————————-
    The key word being originally. It is no longer an offensive term now is it? Great example of how meanings change with time.

  143. “Please admit there are words that are offensive regardless of whether offense is meant or not.”
    ———————

    Why would I admit something that’s incorrect? People choose to be offended. If you choose not to be offended, you won’t be.

    The same flawed logic that says the Washington Redskins should change their name also says that the Native American high school, the Red Mesa Redskins, should change their name as well.

    Do the Red Mesa Redskins not get to name themselves out of pride and respect either because a small group of people choose to find their name offensive?

  144. Kingmj4891 says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:15 AM

    boss81hogg says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:08 AM
    The activists scored a huge victory today in that a government entity has said the name is offensive.

    There is now a sense of legitimacy on their side.

    ———————-

    So because a liberal judge appointed by a liberal president ruled in favor of liberals this makes it legit? Wow people truly have stop thinking for themselves.
    ———————————————-
    Boo hoo. That’s the system we live in. To the victors goes the spoils. In this particular case your conservative leanings convince you this is bad simply because, your term, liberals, were involved in this decision. Now let’s go the other way. There’s been a conservative(Bush 2) in office for 8 years and I’m guessing he appointed his fair share of conservative justices. There will, and I am sure have, come a time when that conservative judge rules in your favor and liberals will feel as you do now. That’s Murica man, ain’t it grand?

  145. From wiki in regards to George Preston Marshall, the original owner of the Washington NFL franchise:

    Marshall has gained infamy for his intractable opposition to having African-Americans on his roster. According to professor Charles Ross, “For 24 years Marshall was identified as the leading racist in the NFL”.[4] Though the league had previously had a sprinkling of black players, blacks were excluded from all NFL teams in 1933. While the rest of the league began signing individual blacks in 1946 and actually drafting blacks in 1949, Marshall held out until 1962 before signing a black player. Along with his own personal views, Marshall refused to sign African-American players because of a desire to appeal to Southern markets, which lacked an NFL team until Dallas entered the league in 1960.[5] His intractability was routinely mocked in Washington Post columns by legendary writer Shirley Povich, who sarcastically used terms from the civil rights movement and related court cases to describe games: for instance, he once wrote that Jim Brown “integrated” the end zone, making the score “separate but unequal”.

    Finally, in 1962, Interior Secretary Stewart Udall and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy issued an ultimatum — unless Marshall signed a black player, the government would revoke the Redskins’ 30-year lease on the year-old D.C. Stadium (now Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium), which had been paid for by government money and was owned by the Washington city government (which, then as now, is formally an arm of the federal government). Marshall’s chief response was to make Ernie Davis, Syracuse’s all-American running back, his number-one draft choice for 1962. Davis, however, demanded a trade, saying, “I won’t play for that S.O.B.”[citation needed] He got his wish, as the team sent him to Cleveland for All-Pro Bobby Mitchell. Mitchell was the first African American football player to play a game for the Redskins, and he played with the team for several years, initially at running back, but he made his biggest impact at wide receiver. Mitchell was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1983.

    Seems racism was the foundation this franchise was built on so why would it change now?

  146. The Redskins should change their name.

    On their own. With no government intervention.

    And if they don’t, so be it. They live with the consequences.

    That’s a little thing called “freedom”.

  147. The same government that nearly murdered an entire race of people off the continent rules a name in their honor is offensive. Pfffffffffffffhahahahahhhahahahahhahaha

  148. Thought this was America. Didn’t realize we were in Montreal with the language police.

    Also I would like to formally request a change to the name of the Blackhawks. As a transracial, trans-species individual I find that name offensive on two levels…

  149. According to the federal trademark law, a trademark that may “disparage” people or bring them into “contempt or disrepute” is not eligible for federal registration, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is supposed to cancel trademark registrations issued contrary to law. The federal government has no business promoting the use of the R*dsk*ns epithet by giving federal registrations to the team’s trademarks.

    Waste your money appealing.

  150. bostontdparty says:
    Jul 8, 2015 11:12 AM

    “how come nobody complains about the Cleveland Indians trademark?

    or for that matter the Chicago Blackhawks?”

    And therein lies the reality of too many Patriot fans…”

    Delusional–like condemning the NFL for botching the Brady investigation and for lying about the footballs –and simultaneously, conveniently forgetting Brady’s blatant lie that he didn’t know The Deflator–yet texted him six times…AND, the self-righteous blowhard, Kraft, demanded an apology, because his coach and QB “did nothing wrong”–yet fired two low level employees…

    For what? Answering Brady’s texts?

    Let’s try and make it simple for the clueless Pat’s fans, like teachers do for third graders:

    Any reasonable individual can argue that the Chief Wahoo logo–being a caricature–is offensive…

    But , beyond that, the whole “slippery slope” red herring just doesn’t swim.

    The Chiefs, Braves, Seminoles, and Blackhawk logos OR NAME, are in no way offensive. Atlanta is the only one of those four who, to my knowledge, hasn’t consulted Native American groups regarding their logos.

    The exact comparison too put the Washington nickname into a fair context would be a team name like “The Denver Darkies.”

    Even if that were named for a beloved African American 60 years ago, the name would be extremely offensive in today’s America–even more so if the Logo was a Black guy’s profile..

    A Chief or Brave, or Warrior, or Blackhawk nickname has no overt or implied connection to skin color, is not dictionary-defined as a racial slur, and does’t have a 160 year history as a slur.

    Why is that so hard to see? I challenge any of you to put up a reasonable argument to the contrary.

    I’ll wait…

  151. Fox news called . . . they want their “fair and balanced” uber-conservative posters back.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!