In other news, though, there was a native American group that recently released an ad featuring the logo for the Cleveland Indians alongside made-up logos for the New York Jews and the San Francisco Chinamen.

New York YANKEES --- Now THAT is an offensive name, right? After all, the Yankees, to those in the south, were the people that killed their family members, deprived them of their state's rights, etc. It is certainly NOT a uniformly adored concept...damned Yankees...

@hecks -- You realize the you could buy and run an ad, right. The existence of an Ad does not mean there is support for the ad, other than form whomever bought the ad. I saw lots of Ads fro Mitt Romney...but less than half the nation cared for him.


Otherwise, businesses running advertising wouldn't fail...think about it....

@Mendax,
"Krellin is an absolute moron, but using faggot as a slur is just not a good thing."
Technically, neither is using moron as a slur. "Moron" denotes someone with a mental impairment, just like "retard." I used to work with people with Down Syndrome who would get pretty offended by either.

@Krellin,
I wasn't pointing to that ad as evidence of popular support. Just saying, "Hey, here's a real life thing that happened that is apropos of this conversation." I don't really care to make a value judgement on said happening. There's a picture of the poster in this story.
http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/racism-of-sports-logos-put-into-context-by-american-indian-group/

You're grasping at straws krellin.

No 2WL...I'm mocking you.

@Hekcs - when I say moron, I *intend* to offend. I'm glad it's effective.

@Krellin,
Then may I assume you approve of the fact that I was pointing out Mendax's hypocrisy (which you would probably tag his libpocracy or some equally awkward portmanteau) in using an offensive slur to accuse someone else of using an offensive slur?

@hecks -- I approve of you pointing out such hypocrisy. I point out that hypocrisy on a fairly consistent basis. It's one of the reason that I have little to no respect for a great deal of people around here -- they bitch and complain about the things they do themselves - it makes it hard to take them seriously. and that way beyond name calling, but to their charitable giving , their flagrant use of wasteful electricity even though they are "destroying the planet", their lack of action in response to things like shootings in which they cry for change but won't take personal action to cause such change.

In general, I find the Libtards around here to be just a bunch of blowhards that want to tell everyone ELSE how to live, while they exist within a protective bubble of sin themselves in which they do all the things they claim to despise...up to an INCLUDING their racist attitudes towards minorities, in which they think no minority can protect themselves/stand up for their own rights without White Man leading the charge. If the Redskins were really such a big issue, I think a few leaders of Indian nations would pow-wow together and send a delegation to Washington. They haven't, they don't, it's clearly not as big an issue as feel-good Libtards want it to be.

@hecks - thanks for letting me know that about the word moron. I had no idea, and will now avoid using it in future.

@Krellin,
As always, I think your perspective on Liberals is skewed; honestly, I don't think you have the vaguest idea of what the Liberals on this site do with their private time. I think you're making really biased, baseless assumptions. Just because you don't hear about what somebody from this site does in their own time doesn't mean it's not happening.

But to your broader point, I think that what you're trying to say was more eloquently state by the Indian Country Today Media Network: "But what’s been discouraging is the reliance that some of our people have on the non-Native liberal champions of the Redskins discussion. Who cares? The Natives who want this discussion to happen should care 100% more about what Native people think about the Redskins, and whether the name is offensive, than what non-Natives think about the Redskins. I don’t know why the champions of this cause haven’t thought about bringing this discussion to us, to the people who are the actual stakeholder in this discussion. Natives."

^ (For the sake of clarity, that was Gyasi Ross writing for the Indian Country Today Media Network.)

This might be helpful for this debate.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/washington-redskins-change-their-name-to-the-dc-re,34161/

All kidding aside, redskins is a straight-up epithet. It referred to scalps of slaughtered natives. The PETA idea of changing to a potato logo is hilarious, but there are plenty of suitable names for them that could nicely reference DC.

Sequester has a nice ring to it. Blowhards would be fitting as well.

@HECKS: "As always, I think your perspective on Liberals is skewed; honestly, I don't think you have the vaguest idea of what the Liberals on this site do with their private time."

Ohhh...you mean like how all the Libtards comeup with the vilest charicatures of Conservatives? I thought that was how the game was played. silly me...I gues

...I guess it's onyl supposed to be a one-way street, a Liberal priveledge to mischaracterize people in the vilest of terms...

Except, when I challenge people on their bahavior -- their name-calling, on whether or not they contact their Congressman about gun laws, about what they do to reduce their electricity bill, etc, I am *inevitably* met with silence, or a basic "fuck you" because what I do with my life isn't really gonna make a difference.

So...sorry, Heck, but my opinion of the good folks here is based upon their personal behavior and the personal revelations (or lack thereof...) of their behavior.

What's-his-name that moved to NOLA, did some time in Senegal -- one of the few Liberal I respect around here - put his life where his mouth is.

"All kidding aside, redskins is a straight-up epithet. It referred to scalps of slaughtered natives"

No it doesn't. It once did. If it STILL did, you wouldn't need to educate us of that. Redskins today, all across America, is a football team, named in honor of Native Americans, because of their fierce pride and strength.

LANGUAGE CHANGES...what the fuck is so hard to grasp about that. vAnd what an awesome thing that a once-hurtful word has been co-opted to be a term of honor – rendering it’s former harm irrelevant, as we now CELEBRATE the Native American nations. The mascot of Redskins *defeats* this past harm…why can’t you Libtards celebrate this as a good thing, instead of always trying to seek a fight. How pathetic, truly…

@Krellin,
"Ohhh...you mean like how all the Libtards comeup with the vilest charicatures of Conservatives? I thought that was how the game was played. silly me...I gues"

I challenge you to find an occasion of me caricaturing Conservatives or painting with broad stripes as you've just done. If you can't I'll expect you to cede the point that not *all* Liberals mis-characterize people. If you can, I'll publicly post the comment "Krellin owns the moral high road" in the thread of your choice. Do you accept my challenge?

Hecks - You ought to know by now that in my book that you are not amongst the ranks of the Libtards. I have respect for you, and I'm sorry if you feel that I was unnecessarily grouping you with the others. I truly mean that.

It also means 'Angry People', which I think is apropos.