“Washington Redskins” is just a name and nothing more. However, certain groups or individuals in Congress are making it out to be a slap at Native Americans. These groups and individuals may be trying to make a name for themselves by using the Redskins as a ploy or a ruse.
If that is true, then they had better broaden their concerns to consider Cheyenne, Wyo., in the same way. And the Kansas City Chiefs.
Or how about the company that brewed Iroquois beer, which might have been derogatory to Native Americans who don't drink.
Then of course we have Erie and Lake Erie. Did they receive unequivocal permission to use that name in that way?
What about Sioux Falls, S.D.? Sounds like a locale where the Sioux took a beating.
We have Aliquippa. I'm certain Queen Aliquippa didn't give permission to have her name shortened into “Quips,” which has every possibility of being insulting to her name and the memory of her.
There are innumerable places or things around this country named after or about Native Americans that may or may not pay homage, but whose names were used innocently with positive intentions.
If the Washington Redskins are to be made a scapegoat, then we had better look into changing the name of that wonderful meal supplement — redskin potatoes.
E. Robert Hasis
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.