Washington Post Bans 'Redskins' From Editorials

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The Washington Kikes in honor of owner Dan Snyder.

^ that is racism folks, why aren't any of you calling her/him on it?

 

[Lakhota]

The Washington Kikes in honor of owner Dan Snyder.

Redskins **** Owner Refuses To Change Team's Offensive Name

 

[AvgGuyIA]

"On an issue like this, public opinion is just a distraction. The reason the Redskins should change their name has nothing to do with what anyone thinks now, in the second decade of the 21st century. The reason the Redskins should change their name is the same reason they should have changed it decades ago – the same reason they never should have picked the name in the first place. The word "Redskin" has a well-established history as a racist epithet, and such words have no business being sung and chanted in support of a professional sports team. Simple as that, and it has nothing to do with tradition or fan pride or whether anyone's still offended by the name today. If the word has ever been used to ridicule or belittle human beings on the grounds of race, what's the good reason to keep it alive in a glorifying context? Changing it would harm literally no one. It would be an act with no motive but basic human courtesy." – Dan Graziano, ESPN

Redskin slang - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

A Redskin Is the Scalped Head of a Native American Sold Like a Pelt for Cash - Esquire

It's Official: Redskins Is Racist but Will the Team or NFL Listen - The Daily Beast

Redskin is racist. Redskin is offensive. Just like Donald Sterling, Dan Snyder will eventually surrender.

. Indians historically were referred to as savages. The term,Redskins, was coined by Hollywood movies. This is a big non-issue.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Why would anyone in show business (and the NFL is show business) want to hold onto a name that is now toxic in the public arena? Why would Conservatives want to applaud an owner who wants to hold onto a toxic brand? Well, the answer to that is simple. Conservatives don't mind stepping on the throats of anyone who is not White to make a lame point about "freedom".

But the Washington owner wants people to buy merchandise with the Redskins name and logo. He wants folks to dress up and support his team. He wants the profits from the merchandise sales. But he wants to continue to insult others while he revels in the support from bigots like Conservatives who fail yet again to see the damage they bring with their shallow, little old fashioned bigotry.

You assholes will not define our language.

 

[Lakhota]

"On an issue like this, public opinion is just a distraction. The reason the Redskins should change their name has nothing to do with what anyone thinks now, in the second decade of the 21st century. The reason the Redskins should change their name is the same reason they should have changed it decades ago – the same reason they never should have picked the name in the first place. The word "Redskin" has a well-established history as a racist epithet, and such words have no business being sung and chanted in support of a professional sports team. Simple as that, and it has nothing to do with tradition or fan pride or whether anyone's still offended by the name today. If the word has ever been used to ridicule or belittle human beings on the grounds of race, what's the good reason to keep it alive in a glorifying context? Changing it would harm literally no one. It would be an act with no motive but basic human courtesy." – Dan Graziano, ESPN

Redskin slang - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

A Redskin Is the Scalped Head of a Native American Sold Like a Pelt for Cash - Esquire

It's Official: Redskins Is Racist but Will the Team or NFL Listen - The Daily Beast

Redskin is racist. Redskin is offensive. Just like Donald Sterling, Dan Snyder will eventually surrender.

. Indians historically were referred to as savages. The term,Redskins, was coined by Hollywood movies. This is a big non-issue.

Holy shit, are you really that dumb?

 

[Nosmo King]

Why would anyone in show business (and the NFL is show business) want to hold onto a name that is now toxic in the public arena? Why would Conservatives want to applaud an owner who wants to hold onto a toxic brand? Well, the answer to that is simple. Conservatives don't mind stepping on the throats of anyone who is not White to make a lame point about "freedom".

But the Washington owner wants people to buy merchandise with the Redskins name and logo. He wants folks to dress up and support his team. He wants the profits from the merchandise sales. But he wants to continue to insult others while he revels in the support from bigots like Conservatives who fail yet again to see the damage they bring with their shallow, little old fashioned bigotry.

You assholes will not define our language.

Your brevity and choice of nouns betrays a language not worth defining.

 

[Lakhota]

Indigenous Americans were hunted, killed, and forcibly removed from their lands by European settlers.[26] This includes the paying of bounties beginning in the colonial period with, for example, a proclamation against the Penobscot Indians in 1755 issued by King George II of Great Britain, known commonly as the Phips Proclamation.[27][28] The proclamation orders, “His Majesty’s subjects to Embrace all opportunities of pursuing, captivating, killing and Destroying all and every of the aforesaid Indians.” The colonial government paid 50 pounds for scalps of males over 12 years, 25 pounds for scalps of women over 12, and 20 pounds for scalps of boys and girls under 12. Twenty-five British pounds sterling in 1755, worth around $9,000 today —a small fortune in those days when an English teacher earned 60 pounds a year.[27] Though the proclamation itself does not use the word, at least one historical association between the use of "redskin" and the paying of bounties can be made. In 1863, a Winona, MN newspaper, the Daily Republican, printed among other announcements:

"The state reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory. This sum is more than the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth." [29]
​

Redskin slang - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Redskin was not coined by Hollywood.

 

[Circle_Breaker]

Let's pick a new name for the Washington Redskins. My favorite is Washington Kikes (since owner is Jewish).

Pick your favorite from the following list:

List of ethnic slurs - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Wait I'm confused. If Native American's find the term offensive then why does a 99% native american Highschool use the name Redskins has it's mascot

RMUSD 27 Red Mesa High School

When a Redskin's fan cheers for the redskins, they mean it has a term of honor. The only reason it has negative connotations is because people like you turn it into a negative word.

And in case you needed a history lesson it was native Americans who coined the original phrase to differentiate themselves from the white man.

 

[Circle_Breaker]

Indigenous Americans were hunted, killed, and forcibly removed from their lands by European settlers.[26] This includes the paying of bounties beginning in the colonial period with, for example, a proclamation against the Penobscot Indians in 1755 issued by King George II of Great Britain, known commonly as the Phips Proclamation.[27][28] The proclamation orders, “His Majesty’s subjects to Embrace all opportunities of pursuing, captivating, killing and Destroying all and every of the aforesaid Indians.” The colonial government paid 50 pounds for scalps of males over 12 years, 25 pounds for scalps of women over 12, and 20 pounds for scalps of boys and girls under 12. Twenty-five British pounds sterling in 1755, worth around $9,000 today —a small fortune in those days when an English teacher earned 60 pounds a year.[27] Though the proclamation itself does not use the word, at least one historical association between the use of "redskin" and the paying of bounties can be made. In 1863, a Winona, MN newspaper, the Daily Republican, printed among other announcements:

"The state reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory. This sum is more than the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth." [29]
​

Redskin slang - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Redskin was not coined by Hollywood.

According to Smithsonian historian Ives Goddard, early historical records indicate that "Redskin" was used as a self-identifier by Native Americans to differentiate between the two races. Goddard found that the first use of the word "redskin" came in 1769, in negotiations between the Piankashaws and Col. John Wilkins. Throughout the 1800s, the word wasfrequently used by Native Americans as they negotiated with the French and later the Americans. The phrase gained widespread usage among whites when James Fenimore Cooper used it in his 1823 novel The Pioneers. In the book, Cooper has a dying Indian character lament, "There will soon be no red-skin in the country."

Are You Ready For Some Controversy The History Of Redskin Code Switch NPR

 

[Lakhota]

Let's pick a new name for the Washington Redskins. My favorite is Washington Kikes (since owner is Jewish).

Pick your favorite from the following list:

List of ethnic slurs - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Wait I'm confused. If Native American's find the term offensive then why does a 99% native american Highschool use the name Redskins has it's mascot

RMUSD 27 Red Mesa High School

When a Redskin's fan cheers for the redskins, they mean it has a term of honor. The only reason it has negative connotations is because people like you turn it into a negative word.

And in case you needed a history lesson it was native Americans who coined the original phrase to differentiate themselves from the white man.

Many Native Americans don't realize that the Washington Redskins name came from a diseased racist who hated all non-whites. George Preston Marshall's racist legacy must die.

 

[Circle_Breaker]

Nobody cares about George Marshall, he has no legacy. The term Redskins is not his, and if it was you should take it back by joining in the honoring of its use.

If anything George Marshall should be turning in is grave because of the prestige, glory, and celebration that living redskin fans use it in.

 

[Lakhota]

Nobody cares about George Marshall, he has no legacy. The term Redskins is not his, and if it was you should take it back by joining in the honoring of its use.

If anything George Marshall should be turning in is grave because of the prestige, glory, and celebration that living redskin fans use it in.

That's horseshit. Funny, but horseshit.

The Cranky Redskins Fan's Guide to Dan Snyder - Washington City Paper

 

[Circle_Breaker]

what does Dan Snyder being a horrible owner have to do with anything?

Hell the Redskins aren't the third most valuable franchise in NFL because of their winning record.

It's because of the fans love and endearment for the term Redskins.

 

[Lakhota]

what does Dan Snyder being a horrible owner have to do with anything?

Hell the Redskins aren't the third most valuable franchise in NFL because of their winning record.

It's because of the fans love and endearment for the term Redskins.

In other words - lots of racist fans. Same with NASCAR. Same with country music.

 

[Circle_Breaker]

In other words - lots of racist fans. Same with NASCAR. Same with country music.

Ahh so now supporting the Washington Redskins makes me a racist?

Just stop and think for a second. Do you think a bunch of Kentucky redneck KKK members would actively root for a team named the Kentucky N*ggers? Do you think a bunch of bigoted muslims would root for a team called the New York kikes. Do you think a group of jews would support a team named the Deleware Nazis?

There is no bigotry involved with use of term Washington Redskin. Its meant with to be used with celebration and prestige. The only people who use it in degrading terms are people like you, who take a term that is meant bring honor and renown to Native Americans and turn it into something hateful.

 

[Lakhota]

In other words - lots of racist fans. Same with NASCAR. Same with country music.

Ahh so now supporting the Washington Redskins makes me a racist?

Just stop and think for a second. Do you think a bunch of Kentucky redneck KKK members would actively root for a team named the Kentucky N*ggers? Do you think a bunch of bigoted muslims would root for a team called the New York kikes. Do you think a group of jews would support a team named the Deleware Nazis?

There is no bigotry involved with use of term Washington Redskin. Its meant with to be used with celebration and prestige. The only people who use it in degrading terms are people like you, who take a term that is meant bring honor and renown to Native Americans and turn it into something hateful.

Fine, so honor the current Jewish owner by renaming team the Washington Kikes. Would that be racist?

 

[blackhawk]

 

[auditor0007]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Washington Post says it will stop calling Washington's football team the "Redskins" on its editorial page.

The paper's editorial board announced Friday that it will refrain from using the term that it says "unquestionably offends not only many Native Americans but many other Americans, too."

The board noted that it has been speaking out against the Redskins name since 1992. Redskins spokesman Tony Wyllie said the announcement was therefore "no surprise" to the team.

Several major newspapers have stopped using the name altogether.

Redskins owner Dan Snyder has vowed never to change the name, saying it honors Native Americans.

Washington Post Bans Redskins From Editorials

Most famously of all, Marshall was the last owner to accept a black player—fully 15 years after the ban was lifted. And his team drafted an African-American then (in 1961) only because it was forced to by the government—the then-new stadium that we call RFK Stadium today was built on Department of Interior land, which permitted the Kennedy administration to order the lessee (the team) to adhere to federal nondiscrimination policies. In other words, Marshall wasn’t merely a standard-issue racist of the time, like H.L. Mencken or countless others. He was diseased. He seethed with hatred of nonwhite people. And “Redskins” is his handiwork. Because “Braves” wasn’t quite descriptive enough.

The Racist Redskins - The Daily Beast

Progress is slow - but it's still progress. The man who named the Washington Redskins team, George Preston Marshall, was a diseased racist. His racist legacy should die.

While the man may have been racist, here is the problem with this argument. Why would anyone name their franchise after a group of people that they have no respect for and hate? Can you imagine a white supremacist naming their team the Washington *******? Of course not.

By removing the Redskin name, all we are doing is trying to phase out any recognition whatsoever of native Americans, and that is just wrong in my opinion. If you look at the emblem, there is absolutely nothing degrading about it in regards to the American Indian. This is one that libs are just wrong about.

 

[Lakhota]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Washington Post says it will stop calling Washington's football team the "Redskins" on its editorial page.

The paper's editorial board announced Friday that it will refrain from using the term that it says "unquestionably offends not only many Native Americans but many other Americans, too."

The board noted that it has been speaking out against the Redskins name since 1992. Redskins spokesman Tony Wyllie said the announcement was therefore "no surprise" to the team.

Several major newspapers have stopped using the name altogether.

Redskins owner Dan Snyder has vowed never to change the name, saying it honors Native Americans.

Washington Post Bans Redskins From Editorials

Most famously of all, Marshall was the last owner to accept a black player—fully 15 years after the ban was lifted. And his team drafted an African-American then (in 1961) only because it was forced to by the government—the then-new stadium that we call RFK Stadium today was built on Department of Interior land, which permitted the Kennedy administration to order the lessee (the team) to adhere to federal nondiscrimination policies. In other words, Marshall wasn’t merely a standard-issue racist of the time, like H.L. Mencken or countless others. He was diseased. He seethed with hatred of nonwhite people. And “Redskins” is his handiwork. Because “Braves” wasn’t quite descriptive enough.

The Racist Redskins - The Daily Beast

Progress is slow - but it's still progress. The man who named the Washington Redskins team, George Preston Marshall, was a diseased racist. His racist legacy should die.

While the man may have been racist, here is the problem with this argument. Why would anyone name their franchise after a group of people that they have no respect for and hate? Can you imagine a white supremacist naming their team the Washington *******? Of course not.

By removing the Redskin name, all we are doing is trying to phase out any recognition whatsoever of native Americans, and that is just wrong in my opinion. If you look at the emblem, there is absolutely nothing degrading about it in regards to the American Indian. This is one that libs are just wrong about.

Thanks for your dignified response; however, I disagree. If the team founder hadn't been such a diseased racist, I wouldn't much care one way or the other. I want his racist legacy to die.

 

[Wildman]

washington compost, plus ALL other liberlying MSM print makes decent bird cage liner and fish guts wrapper.