Tag Archives: Redskins

Obama FCC Considering Censoring ‘Redskins’ Name from Broadcast TV

The Obama Federal Communications Commission has announced that banning the name of the Washington Redskins  from broadcast TV, after a white legal activist and George Washington University Law School professor, John F. Banzhaf III, filed a petition with the bureaucracy earlier this month is under consideration.

Professor Banzhaf’s biography on the university’s website says he has earned nicknames such as “Legal Terrorist” and “Legal Flamethrower,” as well as others, and calls him one of the “100 most powerful persons in Washington.”

“We will be dealing with that issue on the merits, and we will be responding accordingly,” Obama FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said at a press conference on Tuesday, as reported by National Journal.

Banzhaf proclaimed the team name a “racist, racially derogatory word,” and if the FCC agrees with the leftist that the word is indecent, Redskins  would be censored on over-the-air networks such as CBS, FOX, and ABC, but could not be blocked from cable outlets since they are not considered public airwaves.

Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is not Native American, proclaimed the term as suddenly being racist after more than seven decades of little, if any objection to the team name.

However, as TPNN earlier reported, many Native Americans aren’t offended by the term, and in fact embrace it, as the name was originally chosen by Native Americans to honor Native Americans.

In a video released by Redskins Facts,  several Native Americans strongly object to those who are pushing to change the Redskin name.

Megan Yellowhorse, of The Navajo Nation, said the Redskins logo “shows a strong warrior, and our ancestors have always taught us to be strong and be proud of who you are.”

“The Redskins name, it’s always been a term that we felt was a unifying term,” said Mark One Wolf of the Chiricahua/Apache tribe in the video.

Wade Colliflower from the Chippewa Cree Tribe is insulted by those pushing for the name change, saying, “They’ve never asked Native Americans. It’s somebody else who knows nothing about us trying to speak for us and it’s kind of an insult.”

NFL Hall of Famer, Mike Ditka weighed in on the engineered controversy, blaming it on political-correctness, and called the push to change the name from liberals, “so stupid it’s appalling.”

The Wall Street Journal  reported last year that there are 500 high schools that use Redskins, Indians, or Braves as their team names.

One school, Red Mesa High School in Arizona, uses the name “Redskins.” It is a public school located on the Navajo Reservation, with attendees nearly 100% Navajo.

The high school’s website even has a tab titled “Redskins News” and features this logo:

Red-Mesa-Redskins

Apparently, they do not deem the term is offensive, but a lot of white liberals suddenly do.

[H/T TPNN]

VIDEO: Native American Washington Redskins Fans Fight Back to Save Team Name

In reaction from white Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s proclamation that the team name of the Washington “Redskins” is suddenly considered racist after more than seven decades, the Washington Post Editorial Board, Phil Sims and Tony Dungy have decided to ban the word from their vocabularies. Some Native Americans are speaking out in favor of keeping the Redskins name, claiming that it honors their heritage.

In a new video released by Redskins Facts, several Native Americans strongly object to those who are pushing to change the Redskin name.

Megan Yellowhorse, of The Navajo Nation, said the Redskins logo “shows a strong warrior, and our ancestors have always taught us to be strong and be proud of who you are.”

Will Harry Reid Tell This 100% Navajo Indian High School Their ‘Redskins’ Mascot is Racist?

“The Redskins name, it’s always been a term that we felt was a unifying term,” said Mark One Wolf of the Chiricahua/Apache tribe in the video.

Wade Colliflower from the Chippewa Cree Tribe is insulted by those pushing for the name change, saying, “They’ve never asked Native Americans. It’s somebody else who knows nothing about us trying to speak for us and it’s kind of an insult.”

Famous Rapper BLASTS ‘Super Sketchy F**kin Hypocrite’ Harry Reid for Redskins Obsession.

Last week, NFL great Mike Ditka weighed in the engineered controversy, blaming it on political-correctness, and called the push to change the name from liberals, “so stupid it’s appalling.”

Meanwhile, sites like Pro Football Talk, owned by the NBC, part of the Democrat Media Complex, referred to Ditka as “the crusty old coot of the football world,” when reporting Ditka’s comments. However, reviewing the comments of readers on the site indicates overwhelming agreement with Ditka’s charge that those pushing to change the name are “political-correct idiots.”

Michael David Smith of Pro Football Talk seemed outraged that Redskins owner won’t bend over at the whims of anti-free speech progressives, calling Redskins owner Daniel Snyder’s decision to stick with the time-honored name “stubborn.”

Smith said Ditka, “talks a lot about that which he knows nothing. This is one of those times.”

WATCH BELOW:

[H/T TPNN]

What’s the Real Reason the Left is Preoccupied With the Redskins?

Given how much evil there is in the world; given how many signs of moral, intellectual and economic decline there are here in America; and given the increasing irrelevance of America to world events, it is fair to ask why the American Left is preoccupied with the name Washington “Redskins.”

The Washington Redskins have been in existence for 82 years. For about 80 of those years, virtually no one, including the vast majority of American Indians, was troubled by the name.

Yet, it is now of such importance to the American left that the majority leader of the United States Senate has repeatedly demanded, from the floor of the United States Senate, that the team drop its name; 50 United States senators, all of them Democrats, have signed an open letter demanding the same; Sports Illustrated’s Peter King no longer uses the name; other leading sportswriters have adopted the same practice; and the president of the United States has weighed in on the issue.

The pressure is relentless. There is more concern in the pages of the Washington Post and the New York Times — not to mention the rest of the left — with the Redskins than with Internal Revenue Service targeting conservative groups for investigation, one of its division heads pleading the Fifth Amendment before Congress, and the Agency’s losing all relevant emails and hard drives.

The angry will tell you that the name “Redskins” is profoundly offensive to American Indians and that they — the angry — are simply more sensitive to racial slurs than others.

This explanation is self-serving, but insufficient.

The great majority of American Indians understandably just don’t care. Like heterosexual AIDS and so many other crises, this has been entirely manufactured by the left.

Since 1947, there has been a movie theater, the Redskins Theatre (with the same logo as the football team), in Anadarko, Oklahoma, a city whose population is divided evenly between Indians and whites, and which calls itself the “Indian Capital of the Nation.” Why, in 67 years, have the Indian populations of Anadarko and Oklahoma not changed this theater’s name?

Because the left hadn’t made it an issue. It’s not an Indian issue; it’s a left-wing issue.

And why is the left so preoccupied?

It isn’t because they are more morally sensitive to injustice. That is what the left believes about itself. But there are other reasons for the manufactured hysteria about the Redskins name.

Here are some:

First, there is a rule in life: Those who do not confront the greatest evils will confront much lesser evils or simply manufacture alleged evils that they then confront.

This has been a dominant characteristic of the Left for at least half a century.

The greatest evils since World War II have been Communism and, since the demise of Communism in the Soviet Union and most other Communist countries, violent Islam — or, as it often called, Islamism. Islamism is the belief that Sharia (Islamic law) must be imposed wherever possible on a society, beginning, of course, with Muslim-majority countries. These Islamists are, as the British historian Andrew Roberts has noted, the fourth incarnation of fascism — first there was fascism, then Nazism, then communism, and now Islamism.

For many years, most of the Western left was supportive of communism, and after the 1960s, it was simply hostile to anti-communists. The left was far more concerned with attacking America than with attacking the Soviet Union. So, too, today, the left is far more concerned with attacking America — its alleged racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia and economic inequality — than with fighting Islamism.

Second, the corollary to the above is that those who do not fight the greatest evils invariably loathe those who do. The left hated American anti-communists much more than it hated communists. The left today hates traditional America much more than it hates traditional Islamists. The Redskins name is a symbol of that hated America.

Third, the left has huge nostalgia for the sixties. In the left’s eyes, virtually every one of its causes is as morally urgent as the civil rights battles on behalf of blacks (for which it falsely claims exclusive credit). Therefore getting the Redskins to change their name is a contemporary expression of working to give blacks full voting rights.

Fourth, aside from tearing down another American tradition, and showing how awful America was and remains, the motivating issue here is left-wing self-esteem. Remember it was the left that developed the self-esteem movement. And nobody feels as good about themselves as the left does when it finds another American moral flaw, especially when that flaw is another example of “intolerance,” and racism.

Fifth, and finally, the left is totalitarian at heart. Whenever possible, they seek control of others; and they love to throw their considerable weight around. The left-wing president does it so often that the Supreme Court has unanimously shot down his attempts on a dozen occasions. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, under huge pressure from leftists, just dropped conservative Pulitzer-Prize winning columnist George Will. Under pressure from left-wing professors and students, Brandeis and other universities dropped the few conservative speakers they had invited to this year’s commencement exercises. Forcing the Redskins to do their will is just the left’s latest attempt to force its views on the vast majority of its fellow citizens. That’s why it’s worth fighting for the Redskins. Today it’s the Redskins, tomorrow it’s you.

[H/T Real Clear Politics]

Washington Redskins New Name (tic)

This is an amusing meme I created to illustrate the absurdity of the liberal left. The team has had their name for almost 80 years. While the world is on fire this is what the left side of the isle concerns themselves with… and we wonder why our country is in such terrible trouble.

In other Redskins news:

Three Virginia lawmakers have formed the “Redskins Pride Caucus” in an effort to help Washington Redskins keep the nickname some people deem offensive.

One of the caucus’ stated goals is to prevent the U.S. Congress from forcing change upon the NFL team.

State Senator Chap Petersen (D- FAIRFAX), Delegate Jackson Miller (R – MANASSAS) and Delegate David Ramadan (R – LOUDON) called a 3:30 p.m. press conference to discuss the newly formed, bipartisan group.

Earlier Monday the Redskins Pride Caucus, or RPC,  announced its founding principles:

  1. Providing a voice for Redskins fans and season tickets holders.
  2. Supporting the Redskins franchise, a Virginia-based business that generates hundreds of millions of dollars in taxable revenue for schools, roads, public safety and other important public services in the Commonwealth.
  3. Opposing the inappropriate involvement of the United States Congress in issues surrounding the Redskins franchise and its supporters.
  4. Supporting commercial freedom in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the rights of businesses to their own brands and intellectual property.

While Washington is in the team name and the team plays home football games in Maryland, the Washington Redskins are headquartered in Northern Virginia and recently moved training camp to Richmond.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Patent Office canceled six trademarks belonging to the Washington Redskins football team, saying they are offensive to Native Americans.

In a statement put out by the team, its trademark attorney said he believed this decision, like the previous one, would be overturned.

“We’ve seen this story before,” attorney Bob Raskopf, said. “And just like last time, today’s ruling will have no effect at all on the team’s ownership of and right to use the Redskins name and logo.”

He said the team would appeal.

In October 2013, President Obama said he would be open to changing the name if he owned the team.

“I don’t know whether our attachment to a particular name should override the real, legitimate concerns that people have about these things,” he said.

[H/T WTVR]

Patent Office Cancels ‘Disparaging’ Redskins Trademark Registration

In a landmark ruling on Wednesday, the United States Patent Office canceled six Washington Redskins trademarks because it determined that “Redskin” is “disparaging” to Native Americans.

As USA Today noted before the ruling, the Redskins would still be allowed to use the mark “even if it loses on appeal.” But since “federally registered trademarks keep others from selling items with the team’s logos,” the effect of the ruling “would be large” and dent the team’s profits even if the Redskins “try to keep unauthorized merchandisers from using the marks through common law and state statues.”

As the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board emphasized in the 2-1 ruling, federal law “prohibits registration of marks that may disparage persons or bring them into contempt or disrepute.” The Board said it found the evidence “overwhelmingly supports a determination that” the team’s name is “disparaging.”

Administrative Trademark Judge Karen Kuhlke noted in the opinion that the respondent introduced “evidence that some in the Native American community do not find the term ‘Redskin’ disparaging when it is used in connection with professional football,” but she said it ultimately “does not negate the opinions of those who find it disparaging.”

“The ultimate decision is based on whether the evidence shows that a substantial composite of the Native American population found the term ‘Redskins’ to be disparaging when the respective registrations issued,” she wrote. “Therefore, once a substantial composite has been found, the mere existence of differing opinions cannot change the conclusion.”

Kuhlke said the Judges concluded that, “based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered, in violation of Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a).”

Kuhkle also noted that the “decision concerns only the statutory right to registration” and the Board lacks the “statutory authority to issue rulings concerning the right to use trademarks.”

Five Native American plaintiffs testified that “Redskin” was disparaging, with one plaintiff equating it to the “N-word.”

“This victory was a long time coming and reflects the hard work of many attorneys at our firm,” lead attorney Jesse Witten said in a statement.

In May, 50 U.S. Senators signed a letter urging the NFL to force the team to change its name. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has said the name could be changed within the next three years. Redskins owner Dan Snyder has vowed to “NEVER” change the team’s name and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, after first saying that the NFL had to listen if even one person were offended, has repeatedly supported the team’s name since.

The Redskins have cited a Public Policy Polling poll that found “90 percent of Republicans, 59 percent of Democrats, and 65% of independents” believe the team should not change their name in defense of the team’s name. That poll also found that 18% feel the team should change their name.

“This poll, along with the poll taken among Native Americans by the Annenberg Institute, demonstrates continued, widespread and deep opposition to the Redskins changing our name,” the Redskins said in a statement in January. ”The results of this poll are solidly in line with the message we have heard from fans and Native Americans for months – our name represents a tradition, passion and heritage that honors Native Americans.  We respect the point of view of the small number of people who seek a name change, but it is important to recognize very few people agree with the case they are making.”

[H/T Breitbart]

Uh-Oh: Obama Uses ‘R-Word’ at White House Ceremony

Robert Griffin IIIBreitbart reported: Intentionally or not, President Barack Obama poked the far left bear during Tuesday’s White House ceremony honoring the 1972 Miami Dolphins when he used what many of his liberal base consider a racist, derogatory, and patently offensive term: Redskins.

By doing so, however, the president has potentially and many may argue finally offered the remote possibility that he might be on the side of an issue–like retaining the Washington Redskins name–which enjoys overwhelming public support.

While giving his speech on the ‘72 Dolphins’ historic 17-0 season, President Obama said:

“Winning the Super Bowl, however, was not a foregone conclusion. The Dolphins had to win in Pittsburgh just to make it there. And once they did, they still were slight underdogs to the Redskins in the big game.”

Although the Rachel Maddows of the world may take issue with the president ignoring their calls to abandon the mere mention of the “R-word,” they are, as usual, running opposite of popular public opinion. A recent Associated Press-GfK poll conducted in May found that “nearly four in five” Americans support keeping the Redskins name.

President Obama, whose job approval numbers are now in the mid-40’s and trending down, may find it advantageous to be willing to listen not to his liberal base, but instead to 79 percent of Americans. Suppose after five years in office, one has to start somewhere.