• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Former D.C. Criminal Defense Lawyer Disbarred | Main | Financial Firms Battle For Rights to a Castle »

May 15, 2009


Lisa Fantino, Esq.

At some point in this ridiculously politically correct society of ours why does freedom of speech and expression always take a back seat to the hurt feelings of a chosen few seeking their 15 minutes in the spotlight?

Perhaps as a New Yorker I should be insulted if someone from the south calls me a Yankee. However, as an intelligent woman I am not; in fact, I am proud to be a Yankee, now if only Derek Jeter would call!


I think legally, bluntly, there should be enough free expression here that you can call the team whatever the hell you want. I mean, they are saying that this is too offensive. Have you ever seen the name of the production company behind the show "Jackass"? i am not even sure i can repeat it here. Its a clear reference to the male anatomy. And "redskins" is supposed to be so offensive they can't trademark that?

As far as whether it is morally offensive, i would say 1) at best it is borderline. i mean, isn't it pretty clear that they are invoking the term so everyone thinks of fearsome warriors? I know more than a few native american dudes who take it as a compliment.

and 2) oh, seriously, lighten up. Life is too short to get hung up on this.

I mean i suppose next we will hear from the pirate-american community upset about the Buchaneers. (don't laugh. Al Sharpton has already tried to claim the Somali pirates are just "misunderstood.") And then the rodeo union gets mad about the cowboys, texans get mad about the texans and so on.

And bluntly, congress needs to step in here. there needs to be a strict statute of limitations on challenging a trademark for offensiveness.


In this day and age when high schools, colleges and universities are being forced to drop their mascots that refer in any way to Native Americans, why doesn't the Washington NFL team stand up and do what's right. It has one of the most derogatory names out there, much more offensive than the "warriors" or the "braves." The Washington NFL team could set a postive example for all americans. People would quickly get over the loss of a long-standing name. Look at the NBA, they move and change names all the time. The "Oilers" are gone, the "Expos" are gone, along with a few versions of the "Senators." I don't think in the long run that people would miss the "Redskins."

To put things in perspective, what if the team had been named the "Blackskins" or the "Negroes" or the "Coloreds." What then? People would not stand for that, would they? Why is it ok to treat one race of people in an insulting way when it would not be acceptable to make use of such terms offensive to another race.

Stand up Washington, this has gone on long enough.


Hail to the Redskins!!


I see the Redskins' point, but in the end shouldn't they just defer to the wishes of the Native Americans? Just because they are "right" doesn't mean they are right. I would cheer just as loud and buy just as much crap if they renamed themselves to something else - bullets to wizards didn't stop me, or even really slow me down; and come on - we have to change the Nats to something else asap before we get stuck with that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad