Theismann compares name-change debate to Caitlyn Jenner

Getty Images

In the aftermath of the decision by a federal judge to uphold the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s cancellation of the Washington name and logo, either FOX News tracked down or the team trotted out Joe Theismann to talk about the situation on TV.

The statement that has drawn the most attention came from Theismann’s attempt to compare the situation to the change in the gender of former U.S. Olympian Bruce Jenner.

“It brings up an interesting debate,” Theismann said in the clip posted by Deadspin. “Bruce Jenner versus Caitlyn Jenner. Bruce Jenner, they want to maybe change the medals from Bruce Jenner to Caitlyn Jenner because that’s who he is now — or she is now. So I think you will always be — I think there will be a time in history where whatever you were, you are. Whatever you will be going forward that is what you will become.”

It was a clumsy way to address a valid question: What happens to the accomplishments of the franchise for all the years that it played under a different name? While the knee-jerk response (with or without reference to Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner) is that “whatever you were, you are,” the NFL previously has managed to wave a wand and transform the Cleveland Browns into the Baltimore Ravens, stripping the accomplishments from what was the Browns franchise, moving the Browns franchise to a new city with a new name, leaving the accomplishments in Cleveland for three years, and giving them to what essentially was (and some would say still is) an expansion team.

So it’s possible that, if/when the name changes, someone other than owner Daniel Snyder will decide that the new name will apply retroactively. (Hey, if the NFL can apply its new Personal Conduct Policy retroactively, it can apply a new Washington name retroactively, too.)

In a roundabout way, Theismann’s reference to Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner has helped keep his substantive argument regarding the retention of the name from getting more attention. Which is good for Theismann, who contradicted himself in saying he’s never encountered a Native American who is offended by the name but then acknowledged that some tribes are offended by the use of Native American names and images by sports teams.

Theismann also dusted off the original argument in favor of keeping the name, pointing out that more than 60 high schools still use the name. He didn’t mention that the number has been dropping through local fights that always entail strong feelings and high emotions, but that systematically have seen communities reject the example maintained by the team at the top of the sport.

The segment also included the perfunctory outrage over government not devoting time and resources to more important matters like defending our country. By the way, the Confederate flag is being taken down at the South Carolina state capitol today.

110 responses to “Theismann compares name-change debate to Caitlyn Jenner

  1. His name is Bruce Jenner and he’s not a hero. He’s just a dude making money, and I can’t believe that people look up to him for dressing up as a woman. Abraham Lincoln was a hero, Jesus was/is a hero, Jackie Robinson was a hero. A man who dresses up as a woman is no hero. And it’s sad people are offended over a name. They are the Redskins and that will never change.

  2. Well, he changed the pronunciation of his name when it suited him, so it’s not hard to see why he has an opinion regarding changing the team’s name.

    Then again, his own name change didn’t work, and he has an opinion on everything.

  3. Which is good for Theismann, who contradicted himself in saying he’s never encountered a Native American who is offended by the name but then acknowledged that some tribes are offended by the use of Native American names and images by sports teams.

    _________________________________

    Actually, this isn’t contradictory. There are very few people in and of themselves who are offended by this at all. Get a group together and have a bunch of white liberals tell a bunch of Indians how they should feel about this and all of a sudden you have a bunch of supposedly outraged people.

  4. No one is asking the Redskins to erase history. That’s a revisionist approach worthy of ISIS.

    Actually, the franchise name change would make the new name all the more valid and significant because it represents advancement.

  5. The name change of the Washington football franchise is second to Middle East peace in duration.

    The Southern states actually acquiesced to removing the confederate flag before Dan Snyder and the nation’s capital gave up a derogatory nickname of their football team. That’s sad (good for the South, bad for Washington).

  6. niners816 says:
    Jul 10, 2015 9:11 AM
    His name is Bruce Jenner and he’s not a hero. He’s just a dude making money, and I can’t believe that people look up to him for dressing up as a woman. Abraham Lincoln was a hero, Jesus was/is a hero, Jackie Robinson was a hero. A man who dresses up as a woman is no hero. And it’s sad people are offended over a name. They are the Redskins and that will never change.

    __________

    Bruce Jenner is insane too bad the liberal left see this as being a hero. Get the man the help he needs to make him realize he is a man not a women. I can give you a cat and tell you it is a dog but the fact remains it is still a cat.

  7. All these years later, the team is still reaping what founder George Preston Marshall sowed.

  8. The segment also included the perfunctory outrage over government not devoting time and resources to more important matters like defending our country. By the way, the Confederate flag is being taken down at the South Carolina state capitol today.
    ——————————————-
    This article has the perfunctory stupid comment. The segment was absolutely correct pointing out that the federal government has bigger problems to address than the name of an NFL franchise. The federal government has no authority over private businesses. However, overreach and selective prosecution (and in this case persecution) have become the calling card of the current administration. BTW – The decision to take down the confederate flag in SC was made by the STATE, not the federal government.

  9. You will never see the Dukes of Hazard again on television. And soon it will be illegal to show highlights of any football games featuring players in a Redskins uniform.

  10. Mike, why do you always mention that the Ravens were formally the Browns in every article you ever write about them? We know they were, we don’t care.

    Why aren’t you referencing the Potsmouth Spartans in every article about the Lions? Or the Dallas Texans in every article about the Chiefs?

  11. REDKINS SINCE 1952 LEAVE THE REDSKINS NAME ALONE!!! I’m not a REDSKINS fan but leave the heritage alone!!!

    ——————————–

    That argument didn’t work for the Confederate flag.

  12. This is getting ridiculous. Every time some relatively small group of people express feelings of being offended or outraged by something or other, liberals jump on the bandwagon and try to force others to abide by their definition of right and wrong. And the “sheep” are so afraid of being accused of being offenders that they blindly acquiesce.
    The idiocy in this case is that if you want to look at a “racist” symbol of a native American, the logo of the Cleveland Indians is a much more offensive caricature than the profile on the side of the Redskins helmet, but no one seems to be complaining about that one (yet)
    The point is if you look at almost anything hard enough, you can find some person or group who is going to be offended by it.That doesn’t mean we should change everything.

  13. The Washington Caitlyn Jenners does have a ring to it.

    All sashey no substance.

    It fits.

  14. Just curious, but don’t most websites, news papers and stat keeping use WAS as the designation and not RED? If everything I look at says WAS then there is no way that changing the team name will matter one bit. Has it changed any ‘accomplishments’ of two other Washington teams? One with a name change and another with a location and name change? Vladimir Guerrero is still the Expos/Nationals all time homerun leader, are his accomplishments wiped away because they moved?

    I guess Jackie Robinson never played baseball then since he never played for the LA Dodgers and their history was wiped out when they moved.

    Changing the name does not change anything that happened in the past. All it changes is the future.

  15. Probably time for you to quit hammering the Confederate Battle Flag, you have already made it clear along with many others that we need to erase our history.

    Milan Kundera:

    “The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long the nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was.”

  16. The legal fiction of the Cleveland Browns/Baltimore Ravens situation was brought about by the city of Cleveland was threatening the NFL with an an antitrust suit, so the league caved in and gave the city, not just an expansion team, but the team history and stats that the city had no right to have.

  17. a) He won the medals as “Bruce” regardless of who he is now.
    b) You can change the name of the DC team while keeping its history.
    c) Theismann is not allowed to have any opinion on name-changes, considering the cheap deal he pulled with his own.

  18. He’s right. If you don’ t agree with what the vocal minority says, you’re automatically labeled a bigot, racist, hate-mongerer.

    I don’t care if Jenner wants to use the ladies bathroom, but to me, she is what her DNA says she is. I don’t want the Redskins to change their name, but to some, that means I’m worse than Kim Jong Un.

    Rather than boast how open-minded you are to be on the right side of history, if you really want to help the world, give blood or donate to a food drive.

  19. Anyone feeling bad for the Native Americans is free to donate their own money or volunteer their time to help them out. That’s how you really show that you care. Telling someone else to help out is a joke. Who’s visited an Indian reservation lately? Anyone? It’s kind of sad. They need lots of help. Tons of help. But that’s ok. Bury your head in the sand and ignore their suffering. Then get on a website and talk about changing the Redskins’ name so that you can feel good about yourself. You’re the problem, not Dan Snyder. Ask not what Dan Snyder can do, ask what you can do. John F. Kennedy

  20. Giants- offends tall people
    Browns- it’s a color just like red, black etc..
    Cowboys- killed the Indians
    Saints- offends non-believers

    When and where will this stop? The state of this country is in a full fledged decline, let’s continue to please the 10% while all decency goes out the window.

  21. The name means nothing, fans will still support the franchise and the players once the name changes. Are you really going to stop watching the NFL over a name change?
    The name obviously doesn’t mean now what it used to mean, but to some it stirs up reminders of genocide of their people in this country. In this country we are removing flags, breaking down old walls that were built up by bigoted hatred of the unknown brought on by a book to control people. You don’t erase history, but it’s just a sports team name,so why not leave an example for generations to come( that will look back on this and be disgusted that we actually had people so closed minded over the name of a football team.We will look so uneducated that we said awful things to one another about a sports team playing a game that makes hundreds of millions of dollars ).

    Houston is able to support the Texans, not clamoring to be the Oilers. Baltimore supports the Ravens, even though Indy stole their history and tries to make it their own. DC has supported multiple baseball team names in the DMV, they have even learned to accept the name change of the Bullets to the Wizards ,even though Bullets was named after a bullet train. DC already set the bar because bullets was seen as a negative name in the community in which it nears the leader board in murders.

  22. Que the dead enders who seek to enable an out of date racist name because it makes them feel like they have control in an ever changing world.

  23. I have never met Mike Florio or anyone else who desires the name change. It is not of importance.

    Only the owner of the name can change it.

    I am not rude enough to interject myself into the telling someone else to change their name.

    If there was a large enough group they could pitch in together and buy the name and change it. If a million people chipped in $150 dollars they could possibly do it.

    But there aren’t a million people opposed to the name much less those who think it is worth $150 to change the name.

    There is much more hate for Daniel Snyder and RGIII than there is for the Washington District of Columbia NFL franchise name.

  24. The name is a dictionary defined as offensive, disparaging, and insulting. Not by “the left”.

    I get the resistance to change but it just isn’t right that the NFL has a team named after a slur.

  25. The Wizards were formally called the Bullets, their history is still withe the franchise. Theesman is a blowhard who loves to hear himself talk.

  26. At this point, the writing is on the wall. I don’t care about the name on bit in either direction. Change it, don’t change it, whatever. But “Team Outrage: America Police” is on the case now, and they pretty much can’t be stopped. They chew up issues like this (and everyone around them) and eat them for breakfast. Gay marriage? Confederate flag? Women going topless in public? Gender equality? Income inequality? Micro-aggressions? Safe Spaces and Trigger Zones?

    Sorry Danny, but you’re next. Just give up. It’ll all be over soon. Shhhhhh. Shhhhhh. There there. It’s just what they do. Shhhhhhhhhh.

  27. Hard to sympathize with Jenner after seeing those pictures of his giant SUV ramming a grandmother’s car into an oncoming Hummer and killing her. Something tells me “Cait” would love to attribute that to the old Bruce.

  28. I challenge any of you keyboard tough guys to go to a bar on an indian reservation and call someone a redskin and tell them its a term of endearment

  29. Yawn. I’m so sick of the liberal agenda in this country. Good God Almighty. For the love all things good, please just go away. I’m begging you.

  30. wannabeqb says:
    Jul 10, 2015 10:09 AM

    The name is a dictionary defined as offensive, disparaging, and insulting. Not by “the left”.

    You really don’t think lefties added it to the dictionary? C’mon man!

  31. I am just going to throw this out there, as a person who grew up in the North. The term Yankee is thrown around, with derogatory connotation toward people from the north. So if the skins have to change their name, then there is no question, the New York Yankees have to change theirs.

    People argue that the name redskins is offensive, and that’s probably true, but the intent of that was never to be offensive. Times change, it is now considered a slur, fine, but the intent of the term was never negative. Yankee on the other hand, was always intended to be a negative term, and is quite commonly used in a negative manner. My parents just recently moved to the south from Massachusetts, where they lived their entire lives, and on multiple occasions, it has been pretty obvious that the folks of the south don’t care much for “Yankees”. Just saying.

  32. wannabeqb says: Jul 10, 2015 10:09 AM
    The name is a dictionary defined as offensive, disparaging, and insulting. Not by “the left”.
    I get the resistance to change but it just isn’t right that the NFL has a team named after a slur.

    Just out of curiosity,….What addition of what dictionary are you finding this definition?

  33. I certainly do care that the Ravens were formerly the Browns, and that the current Browns began as an expansion team. It infuriates me that the NFL found it expedient to avoid a lawsuit by falsifying history.

  34. midwest123 says:
    Jul 10, 2015 9:49 AM
    Probably time for you to quit hammering the Confederate Battle Flag, you have already made it clear along with many others that we need to erase our history.

    Milan Kundera:

    “The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long the nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was.”

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

    Maybe as a nation we do need to no longer be a society that views non-white men as 3/5ths of a person, women not as people at all, and thinks that putting an entire race into concentration camps reservations is an okay thing. Maybe evolving as a nation and a people isn’t a bad thing.

    I’m not saying that we should forget the terrible things in this nation’s past. What I am saying is that we should not continue to cling to them as if we are proud.

  35. Maybe if you try holding your breath until you turn blue…

    I’m tired of you bashing blue-skins.

  36. AFC East…..

    Bills – depressing name, reminds people of how bad their financial condition is. Change it.

    Dolphins – Its illegal to catch, harm or kill a dolphin, so why can they be tackled and hit? Change it.

    Patriots – A bad example for kids as it inspires cheating. Change it.

    Jets – change it just because.

  37. This coming from the dude who changed the way he pronounces his last name so it rhymed with Heisman?
    “Whatever you were, you are” — is that right Mr Theesman?

  38. So essentially dating back to the Redkins first owner who did not approve of segregation, the franchise will always be racist even with a name change.

    Thanks for clarifying that.

  39. So people generally realize that the name was never meant to be insulting but rather a show of respect but feel it should be changed because now it’s a slur.
    A) when did it become a slur because it has been referenced by a native American to a French diplomat in the late 1700’s” we are redskin and you’ll never understand us”. In the mid 1800’s Oklahoma was the name chosen for their new home.
    B) why can’t it change back since the only time you EVER hear/see the word is in reference to the team.

  40. Citing “heritage” and “tradition” are how people indicate they have no substantial reasons for keeping things the way they are.

    If you use those two terms to make your case, you’ve lost the argument.

  41. PFT comment section loaded with uneducated racists and bigots who think they speak for Native Americans or First Nations people. Redskins is offensive and I highly doubt you understand the history in North America. I grew up on a reservation and don’t know one person that would allow themselves to be called an “Indian” or “Redskin”.

  42. jimmyt says:
    Jul 10, 2015 10:18 AM
    wannabeqb says:
    Jul 10, 2015 10:09 AM

    The name is a dictionary defined as offensive, disparaging, and insulting. Not by “the left”.

    You really don’t think lefties added it to the dictionary? C’mon man!

    ——————————————————

    Oh the poor put-upon conservatives finding a conspiracy around every corner. Paranoia strikes deep!

    Take a lesson from Dr. Freud — sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.

  43. The Yankees are next. Very derogatory term. I’ve been down South. I’ve been called a Yankee. And on that basis I have been denied access to wedding reception halls and other things.

    In my opinion, the team’s name will have to be changed. I recommend New York Carpetbaggers.

  44. Change everything. No more gender identity (this is already happening in some public schools), everyone wears gray, and whatever else you think with not offend.

    Enjoy the NFL, reading and posting comments on websites like this while we have it…at this rate they’ll be gone before we know it.

  45. Which is good for Theismann, who contradicted himself in saying he’s never encountered a Native American who is offended by the name but then acknowledged that some tribes are offended by the use of Native American names and images by sports teams.

    Maybe he never encountered those tribes

    He didn’t mention that the number has been dropping through local fights that always entail strong feelings and high emotions, but that systematically have seen communities reject the example maintained by the team at the top of the sport.

    Unfortunately someone got in a power position and forced the change on the vast majority.

  46. The Browns comparison is stupid. When we refer to the old Browns we can still talk about their name without a dozen dancin’ Nancies getting their panties in a bunch. If we suddenly say the name is racist and it is changed, then references to the name historically will have to be changed, too. It is a big deal and Snyder stands to lose a ton of money from the loss of sale of Redskins legacy merchandise. It also will make the team a target for discrimination lawsuits which will rack up a lot of legal costs. I think the name would have been changed already if it were not for the financial damage it would do.

  47. bencoates57 says:
    Jul 10, 2015 9:36 AM
    REDKINS SINCE 1952 LEAVE THE REDSKINS NAME ALONE!!! I’m not a REDSKINS fan but leave the heritage alone!!!

    ——————————–

    That argument didn’t work for the Confederate flag.

    When did the Redskins start playing games on the grounds of the capital?

  48. @ bencoates57: you are absolutely correct theis ounry is going to the dogs the confederate flag is history as well. This is exactly what happens when politics get envolved with anything!!!

  49. I challenge any of you keyboard tough guys to go to a bar on an indian reservation and call someone a redskin and tell them its a term of endearment

    If you use it that way you deserve a butt whooping. For a team name not so much.

  50. So when does the “Cracker Barrel” change its name to “Caucasian Barrel.”

  51. The Ravens are not an expansion team. The Baltimore Colts left our city too. Indy was the expansion team. JohnnyUnitis and Ray Lewis statues will forever be side by side at the entrance to M&T Bank Stadium. Anyone that claims Johnny U’s accomplishment as part of Indy as a city are ridiculous. Same concept.

  52. The name was given by George Preston Marshall as what could at best be described as an off-color honor to his then Head Coach, William “Lone Star” Dietz, whose mother was believed to be Sioux. Also note: Marshall would have Dietz put on war paint and Indian feathers for home games. That’s the true “heritage” you are protecting.

  53. There’s a team in the CFL called the “Red Blacks”, is that really were we want to end up one day, so absolutely no one can get offended?

    It’s a slippery slope, think about it.

  54. I would think Native Americans would be more offended from having their land stolen from them and being forced to live on reservations in the middle of nowhere. If you really want to help them out, do something about that.

  55. ontherocks1964 says:
    Jul 10, 2015 10:17 AM
    Yawn. I’m so sick of the liberal agenda in this country. Good God Almighty. For the love all things good, please just go away. I’m begging you
    ______________________________________

    yes, because the idea of Blacks actually eating at the same lunch counter as you –a big part of the liberal “agenda” in the ’50’s–makes you “sick”

  56. Neither Indy nor the Ravens were or are expansion teams. They are the successor franchises to their predecessor franchises, the Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns respectively. The new Browns, not Indy, were an expansion team. It’s fine to honor Unitas, etc. in Baltimore, but the stats of the Baltimore Colts team and its players belong to the Colts wherever they’re currently playing. Incidentally, the Baltimore Colts were also a successor franchise, having previously played as the Boston Yanks (1944-48), New York Bulldogs (1949), New York Yankees (1950-51), and Dallas Texans (1952). This is a fact that the NFL officially and stubbornly refuses to recognize.

  57. OK, I’m a black man and My favorite team is the Saints. Now, if the Saints were let’s say the New Orleans Cotton Pickers and that’s all l knew them as I’m really not sure how I would feel about that. The Saints have been the Saints sense before I was born. And, I remember watching the Saints play the Redskins in Tulane Stadium. That’s all I’ve ever known them as. So, I just don’t know how to feel about this. Now, as far as what Joe said. I don’t want to offend anyone but does anyone else find that funny.

  58. ————————————-
    trollkiller55 says:
    Jul 10, 2015 12:09 PM

    yes, because the idea of Blacks actually eating at the same lunch counter as you –a big part of the liberal “agenda” in the ’50’s–makes you “sick”
    ————————————-

    Let me just point out a few things for you:
    Abraham Lincoln – “The Emancipation Proclamation”, Civil War, Freed the Slaves – Republican.
    Frederick Douglas – Abolitionist, Civil Rights Leader – Republican
    Hiram Revels – First African American Senator – Republican
    Cora Brown – First Femaile African American Senator – Republican
    Octavius Valentine Catto – Civil Rights Leader – Republican
    Samuel B. Fuller – Head of the Chicago NAACP, President of the National Negro Business League – Republican

    Guess what, all of these people are black… and republicans. Being a republican doesn’t make you racist, our conservative agenda doesn’t care what color you are. Here’s a look at our conservative agenda, SPEND LESS THAN YOU MAKE AND STAY UNDER BUDGET.

  59. New Englanders were the first to be called “Yankees” (probably by the Dutch), and they were proud of the label rather than insulted by it.

  60. americankris says:
    Jul 10, 2015 10:40 AM
    Y’all gonna be eating so much crow when the name changes.

    Till then keep eating yours

    White people be feeling guilty over stuff they’ve never done.

  61. Oh, like how the first recorded existence of “redskins” was Santee chief crow telling Europeans that “white and red skins can exist together” and it was considered an honorific among natives?

    Yves Goddard. Educate yourself.

  62. Indy, the successor franchise to the predecessor franchise Baltimore Colts, didn’t steal the history of the latter. Indy is entitled to that history, just as the Ravens are entitled to the history of the old Browns, and as the Baltimore Colts themselves were entitled to the history of three predecessor franchises.

  63. ‘I am a Red-Skin’: The Adoption of a Native-American Expression (1769-1826). European Review of Native American Studies (vol. 19, no. 2, 2005). I am grateful to the editor, Christian F. Feest, for permission to post this article in advance of publication.

    [The quotation “I am a Red-Skin” in the title is from a speech made by the Santee chief French Crow in a formal council with President James Madison in the President’s House in Washington on August 22, 1812, as interpreted by John A. Cameron and officially recorded. French Crow’s speech and one given just before it on the same occasion by the Osage chief No Ears contain the first known public uses of redskin in English. The same expression was used by the Potawatomi chiefs Topinabee and Metea at a treaty conference in Chicago in August, 1821, as interpreted by Whitmore Knaggs and recorded by Henry Rowe Schoolcraft.]

  64. I challenge any of you keyboard tough guys to go to a bar on an indian reservation and call someone a redskin and tell them its a term of endearment

    I could also walk into a bar in the city and say what’s up African Americans and get the same treatment

  65. In a thread worthy of some of the most reactionary comments I have read on PFT I do agree with one:

    ” . . . the Cleveland Indians is a much more offensive caricature than the profile on the side of the Redskins helmet, but no one seems to be complaining about that one (yet)”

    That caricature of Chief Wahoo is the most offensive in sport.

    I’m Irish and the Boston Celtics mascot, Lucky the Leprechaun, doesn’t bother (nor does it endear itself to) me. It has its derivation in an old Irish myth, not in the subjugation of the Irish in Brahman Boston which was real discrimination.

    I would advise the Washington fans that it is not the depiction on the the helmet that is offensive it its the name and how it was derived.

  66. RogerGoodell✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:
    Jul 10, 2015 12:34 PM
    ————————————-
    trollkiller55 says:
    Jul 10, 2015 12:09 PM

    yes, because the idea of Blacks actually eating at the same lunch counter as you –a big part of the liberal “agenda” in the ’50’s–makes you “sick”
    ————————————-

    Let me just point out a few things for you:
    Abraham Lincoln – “The Emancipation Proclamation”, Civil War, Freed the Slaves – Republican.
    Frederick Douglas – Abolitionist, Civil Rights Leader – Republican
    Hiram Revels – First African American Senator – Republican
    Cora Brown – First Femaile African American Senator – Republican
    Octavius Valentine Catto – Civil Rights Leader – Republican
    Samuel B. Fuller – Head of the Chicago NAACP, President of the National Negro Business League – Republican

    Guess what, all of these people are black… and republicans. Being a republican doesn’t make you racist, our conservative agenda doesn’t care what color you are. Here’s a look at our conservative agenda, SPEND LESS THAN YOU MAKE AND STAY UNDER BUDGET.

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

    Unless I’m completely confused, Abraham Lincoln wasn’t black.

    I’m also pretty sure that the last Republican president took a over for a Democrat that had the nation operating at a surplus to pay down the national debt and ended up going an additional $4.9 trillion in the hole.

    Blindly accepting what *EITHER* political party tells you they believe without checking it against the facts is a bad plan.

  67. steelerben says:
    Jul 10, 2015 1:37 PM

    Unless I’m completely confused, Abraham Lincoln wasn’t black.

    I’m also pretty sure that the last Republican president took a over for a Democrat that had the nation operating at a surplus to pay down the national debt and ended up going an additional $4.9 trillion in the hole.

    Blindly accepting what *EITHER* political party tells you they believe without checking it against the facts is a bad plan.

    ———————————–

    PFT took down my other post explaining my logic for stating that Lincoln was black. (It was rather amusing but, I digress).

    Clinton had a surplus because he cut funding to intelligence and national defense then, 9/11 happened and Bush had to put money back into the NSA, CIA, etc…. We also sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq which turned our budget inside out. Enter Barack Obama, in just 7 short years, the National Debt goes from 5 Trillion to 15 Trillion.

    It took America 232 years to get out National debt to 5 trillion dollars. It took Barack 7 years to triple that number.

    But, this has nothing to do with the Redskins so let’s stay on topic. Odds are, Snyder will fight this all the way to the Supreme court, which will take another year or 2, then lose, and change the name to “Skins”, trademark it, change up the indian on the logo a bit (maybe add another feather) and we will all sleep easy knowing that the football team in Washington DC is named the Skins.

  68. Cleveland fans would surely disagree that they aren’t entitled to keep the Browns history, as they were able (unlike Baltimore) to keep their franchise name. Precedent and common sense says the Johnny U history happened in Baltimore, and belongs linked to Baltimore Football, forever.

  69. Why isnt anyone offended by the Washington part of Washington Redskins? George certainly owned hundreds of slaves. Lets all turn in our quarters and $1 dollar bills. And $5 dollar bills and $10 dollar bills and $20’s as well. All picturing slave owners. How can you stand to have things so offensive in your pocket?

  70. And you must also redact all historical footage. As I’ve said blurring out the name and logo is the only way to ensure the offended are not offended if they choose to watch the 83 Super Bowl

  71. Charles Barkley “Poor people have been voting Democratic for ever and they are still poor”. Can’t wait until the Republicans sweep the next election.

  72. RogerGoodell✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ , nice try. Yes, if you go back to Lincoln, and the post-slavery period of Reconstruction, Republicans and Northerners were much better on race than the Democrats that were beholden to Southern whites. But you are talking about the 1800s.

    FDR, a rich, white guy, who was a Democrat, was elected to an unprecedented four terms, promoted a society of government intervention to counter the devastating effects of laissez-faire capitalism and ended the Great Depression. He also fought a world war on three continents to end fascism. The military started to break down racial barriers slowly over time.

    Presidents Kennedy and Johnson were aggressive in promoting civil rights legislation. In response, Southern Democrats who seceded from the party in 1948 in opposition to its policy of extending civil rights, followed George Wallace into a third party before being welcomed into the the new Republican Party that went from being more libertarian to be a corporate party of anti-government extremists like Goldwater, Southern racists, businessmen, and working class whites.

    When the KKK was exposed and mostly obliterated, organizations like the CCC took their place and the Confederate flag (long dormant in use) became their symbol of the resistance to civil rights. Guys like Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott willingly associated with these groups. Racists like David Duke transferred their party affiliation from Democrat to Republican as late as 1989, the year Duke won election to the Louisiana House of Representatives as a Republican.

    Republicans cemented their status as the party of racists when Jebb Bush initiated “voter reforms” to deny voting rights to thousands of Black voters. Those voters were unjustly removed from the voting rolls in Florida to aide his brother in his presidential race against Al Gore because, by that time, Black voters overwhelmingly supported Democratic candidates.

    Sorry, today Lincoln would be a Democrat.

  73. Why do you think the liberals are still around and always will be. More and more people are starting to realize that if they think for themselves and quit being led like sheep they can become more successful and have a better feeling about themselves. they will also begin to realize that the liberals want to control you.

    having said that, there will always be a large group of dumb, stupid people, who don’t pay attention, can’t think for themselves, believe everything the liberal media tells them, for the liberals to control.

  74. FDR didn’t end the Great Depression, though he was on his way to doing so from 1933 to 1937. Then he made a couple of policy changes that caused a recession that lasted from 1937 to 1938. The preparation of European nations for WWII, which involved large-scale purchases from the U.S., finally ended the Great Depression.

  75. The next election is in 2016, and there won’t be any Republican sweep, or anything close to it. If you’ve been paying attention (and I doubt that you have), the Democratic base turns out to vote in large numbers in presidential elections, and the Democrats have an almost insurmountable lead in the electoral vote going into the campaign. Demographics also favor the Democrats, since the Republican base consists largely of cranky, bitter old white men, who are in the process of dying off. The Democratic nominee in 2016 will be the next president. The Republican advantage in both houses of Congress also shrinks in presidential election years.

  76. “we will all sleep easy knowing that the football team in Washington DC is named the Skins.”

    Mr Potato Head will surely be offended by that name.

  77. Joe Theismann and Caitlyn Jenner would make a beautiful couple. Both are now in their 60’s but are well preserved and still crave publicity.
    They deserve each other.

  78. Theismann was Johnny Manziel before Johnny Manziel. He actually returned punts early in his NFL career, after a short career in Canada.

  79. I am surprised the liberals haven’t taken this to the supreme court yet to force everyone to never use the term “redskins” again. Isn’t that what liberals do when you don’t agree with them? And as a compromise they need to promise to never use the term “freedom” again.

  80. I doesn’t matter whether Washington’s NFL team is called the Redskins, Deadskins, Slobs or Idiots (my personal favorite). They still haven’t won a title since 1991-23 years and counting! Our charge for 2015- LET’S GO FOR 24!

  81. Andrew Jackson being on the $20 bill is way more offensive. The 1849ers forcibly removed and murdered 100K Native Americans during the Gold Rush and raped NA women and children. Look it up.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.