Skip to content

I’m guessing you wouldn’t wear a “New York Jews” or “San Francisco Chinamen” cap

Oct 8, 2013, 1:35 PM EST

While most commenters on my anti-Chief Wahoo posts forcefully assert that “no one cares” about racially offensive logos like the one used by the Indians, The National Congress of American Indians (and many other Native American individuals and groups) does.  To help raise awareness of how offensive Chief Wahoo is, the NCAI has created a poster to put the matter into pretty sharp relief:

source:

You’d never dare argue that either of the first two are cool. You only argue that the third one is because it’s been around a long time and, if you take issue with it, you feel like you’re losing something. That’s somewhat understandable, but I would hope you’d realize that you’d not lose anything worth a damn. Rather, you’d be losing something that is best lost to history.

But by all means, if you believe that the first two caps are totally cool, I’ll arrange to have one made and we can wear it around various neighborhoods of my choosing. We’ll see how you do.

(thanks to King Kaufman for the heads up)

254 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. bitlrc - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:14 PM

    I’m still waiting for them to change the name of St Louis or Los Angeles. who wants to be bombarded with religion all the time anyway?

    • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:54 PM

      The Catholics who founded those cities?

    • thebadguyswon - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:33 PM

      Those are cool hats.

  2. riverace19 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:20 PM

    Jews: religious group… Chinamen: derogatory word. This point fails to hit the mark.

    • cohnjusack - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:24 PM

      Jews: Group of people long discriminated against. Complete stereotype logo
      Chinamen: Deragatory term for group of people discriminated against in the US, complete with stereotype logo
      Indians: Group of people who were not from India who were long discriminated against, complete with stereotype logo.

      How this point fails to hit the mark is beyond me. Wait, no it isn’t. It hits the mark perfectly, but you choose to ignore that since it contradicts your belief that the Indians logo is just hunky dory. Veeeeerrrry pussy!

      • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:55 PM

        What was that last word?

      • skids003 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:02 PM

        historio, very offensive, eh?

    • uwsptke - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:05 PM

      Jews are more than a religious group. The Jewish people identify themselves as an ethnicity. There are plenty of secular individuals who would still consider themselves “Jewish.”

    • resilientcubsfan - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:45 PM

      To be PC, the following names need to change:

      -New Orleans Saints (religious)
      -Los Angeles Angels (religious)
      -Oklahoma Sooners (celebrating stealing land from Natives)
      -Chicago Blackhawks (obvious)
      -New York Yankees (don’t want to offend any Rebels, do we?)
      -Ole Miss Rebels (don’t want to offend any Yankees, do we?)
      -Florida State Seminoles (obvious)
      -Washington Redskins (obvious)
      -Portland Trailblazers (celebrating voyaging right through Native territory)
      -Cleveland Indians (obvious)
      -Indianapolis Indians (obvious)
      -New England Patriots (we should be celebrating the diversity of other cultures’ pasts, not America’s)
      -Minnesota Vikings (the cartoonish logo is offensive to any Norse person/follower)
      -San Diego Padres (friars, shmiars. religion is offensive)
      -Pittsburgh Pirates, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Oakland Raiders (Somalian pirates are terrorists and anything celebrating pirates or pirate attacks is shameful!)
      -Atlanta Braves (obvious)
      -San Francisco Giants and New York Giants (offensive to people who suffer from gigantism)
      -Boston Celtics (equivalent of New York Jews)
      -Denver Nuggets and San Francisco 49ers (celebrating the gold stolen from Natives)

      I’m sure there’s more…

      • clemente2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 8:38 PM

        If you think these are equivalent, well, you don’t think….

      • resilientcubsfan - Oct 8, 2013 at 10:40 PM

        I’m not saying these are equivalent. I was, in fact, mostly being facetious. However, the point was, where do you draw the line?

        If you changed Cleveland’s logo, the name alone would still probably be deemed offensive. If you changed the name to “Native Americans”, surely the logo alone would be deemed offensive. Therefore, logos and names should be politically correct and offend 0% of people. As Roger Goodell (I know, I know, blasphemy, wrong sport) stated even if one person is offended, we need to listen.

        Well, as “walking on eggshells” (politically-correctness) becomes the only acceptable form of opinion, and the current owners die-off, I’m sure we’ll have some name changes: Native American team names honoring/disrespecting that culture will be first up. That being said, who will be next? There WILL be a next, as PC knows no limits.

  3. bh192012 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:22 PM

    Where’s the Yankee’s hat on that list?

  4. grumpyoleman - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:22 PM

    Are Craig and Florio a couple?

    • shaka49 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:42 PM

      You may have heard…they both work for NBC…so ya.

      • cocheese000 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:24 PM

        It boggles my mind that Florio has a job.

      • Kevin Gillman - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:04 PM

        They should never mix business with pleasure though in the work office. I’d give it 6 months, then nasty rumors when it ends.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:08 PM

        I just hope it doesn’t get all passive-aggressive at the holiday party.

  5. deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:24 PM

    I would so wear a Philadelphia Dagos hat.

    • wallio - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:59 PM

      As a proud third generation Italian-American, who great-grandfather came here with nothing, I am beyond offended……….that there is no NY WOPs hat. Considering that’s where the term started and all.

      But seriously folks, the “New York Smilin’ Jew” looks like Groucho Marx, and who doesn’t love Groucho? I’d buy one. This is seriously a protest fail.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:31 PM

        You’d buy one because it’s funny. And you say you’d buy one because you’re being provocative.

        And I’d suggest you’re too much of a chump change asshole to really make a difference in this or any other debate.

        Person fail.

      • wallio - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:06 PM

        Not quite. I said I’d buy one, because I would buy one. Either one of them. Post a link to them right now and as long as they were no more than $25-$30 bucks, I’d buy them right now.

        I would buy the NY Wops hat because I can relate to it. My great-grandfather came through Ellis Island and hear the term (despite coming here legally and actually having his papers), along with Dagos, Guinea, Greaser, Gumba, etc. He didn’t let him bother him. He knew they were just words. And he was too busy building a house with his own damn hands, a house he lived in, my grandfather lived in, my father lived in, and that is willed to me, to notice.He was too busy working 12-14 hour days and actually learning the language of the land, to notice. He taught my family they were just words, hence why we use the terms freely with a laugh, and why I would buy one. And why my father, and grandfather and great-grandfather (were the latter two still alive) would all buy one.

        As for the NY Jews, no I’m not Jewish, but as I said I’m a huge fan of Groucho Marx. I have all his movies, his albums, tapes of You Bet Your Life, books, some still prints, etc. I even smoked the awful awful line of cigars that used him on the label (which are thankfully, no longer made). And that hat IS Groucho. So I’d buy one. If ANY sports team, in ANY league, and ANY Sport named a team after the Marx brothers, I’d buy a hat. But since the bros. only really enjoyed crochet, its doubtful.

        Nothing provocative about it. Does it make me a “chump change asshole”? Maybe. I’m certainly not a 1% and unlike you, don’t act like one. But this is what’s nice about America, someone can make that hat, and I can buy it, and there’s nothing you PC crowd can do about it, other than complain, and boycott the product, which are your rights. Great country no?

      • koufaxmitzvah - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:11 PM

        I got what you said. You’d buy one. I get it. It could be a Chinaman hat. It could be Jewy Jew hat. You’d buy a WOP hat. I got it.

        What you don’t get is that this penchant you’ve got for wearing caricatures based on hateful stereotypical bullshit is counterproductive to your mindset that you somehow bring something interesting to this debate.

        You don’t. You’re blind. Tone deaf. Idiotic. Moronic. I don’t care why. You are what you are, so shouteth you from the rooftops. You would buy that hat because you find it hilarious no matter the hateful imagery.

        Because you think it’s funny.

        Yeah. I figured that out.

      • wallio - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:22 PM

        Way to not listen at all. Something is only hateful if you let be. If you put more weight in something than it has, stuff like this happens. Take “cracka” that’s a word designed to be an “n-word for whites” has ANY white man, EVER been offended by cracka? No, that’s stupid. I’ve been called one by black people before. You know what I did? I laughed. It’s ridiculous and we laugh at ridiculous things.

        And Like I said, WOP, et al. isn’t offensive either, and again, I’m Italian. My last name is Riccetti. If you don’t believe me, go to any Italian-American Club anywhere in the US Its pretty much all you’ll hear, besides “heyyyyy”.

        There’s an experiment where you take two grous of people and isolate them. The control group nothing happens, but one group you dub a ridiculous name like “applepickers” (it can be anything) and tell them (and the control group) they are inferior. Everyday. The applepickers will become depressed, suicidal etc. The control group, despite being no different in reality, will get a superiority complex and beat, and torment the “applepickers”, and show blantant racism to them, because they’re applepickers. This can happen in less than a month. Is applepickers offensive? You know everything, you tell me.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:25 PM

        What part of “You have no role in this debate” that you don’t understand.

        Some anonymous figure says “I’d buy that hat. Because it’s funny. Like I’d buy a lot of other hats because I think they’re funny.” and I– a Jewish fellow who does take offense to the imagery of the hate– am supposed to….. Help me out here. Give a shit? Change my mind? I know… I’d buy the hat.

        What you don’t understand is that you’re spending a lot of energy explaining to me that my opinion of your douchbaggery dickheadedness is misbegotten. But, trust me, it’s not.

        That’s my opinion of your opinion of that hat. Got it?

      • clemente2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 8:41 PM

        wallio—yours is a commet fail born of intelligence fail.

      • clemente2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 8:41 PM

        wallio—yours is a comment fail born of intelligence fail.

    • wallio - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:28 PM

      Obviously you find “hat” offensive, proving my point. So tell me, how do you survive in the big scary world out there, if a hat destroys your fragile little mind?

      • cur68 - Oct 8, 2013 at 8:34 PM

        Are you dense? The Jewish Guy doesn’t like the Jewish caricature imagery on the damn hat. Same way I wouldn’t like an “Edmonton Darkies” hat with a caricature black guy on it. How are you failing to to understand his dislike of your promoting that hat as “something cool”? Here’s a news flash, bro; its NOT just a word and THAT’S NOT GROUCHO MARX!

        It aint fucking Harpo, fucking Larry, fucking Curly or FUCKING MO. Its a fucking caricature Jew hat, ok? Its fucking offensive. Why? Because of CENTURIES OF FUCKING ABUSE, all tight? THAT’S what he finds offensive about it.

        Jeez.

  6. philliesblow - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:32 PM

    Would the Jews be able to play games on Friday nights or on Saturdays?
    I’d like to get a Detroit Incompetent Democrats hat.

    • jakeshuman2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:27 PM

      Or a Texas Idiot one

      • jakeshuman2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:55 PM

        With the logo being a smiling Rick Perry.

    • koufaxmitzvah - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:14 PM

      Since Jews already play baseball in the pros, and they play on Fridays and Saturdays, I guess your joke falls flat.

      But I don’t expect much from asshats who trivialize the serious points of racism.

  7. jrocknstuff - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:35 PM

    Being Jewish I find absolutely nothing offensive about that hat. In fact, Id love to be able to get one. I think that and the Chinaman hat are awesome! I think as far as getting their point across, this one backfired on the NCAI

    • The Common Man - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:01 PM

      On the off chance this isn’t sarcasm, I encourage you to wear your San Francisco Chinamen hat and see how quickly people treat you like the asshole you are.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:11 PM

        Do you think he’s Asian?

  8. nderdog - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:38 PM

    I am cracking up over people whining about how Chinamen isn’t a proper term and shouldn’t be considered the same thing. It’s almost like they think that we’re in India now, so calling Native Americans Indians is totally cool.

    • jakeshuman2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:34 PM

      I think it kinda shows what bullies we white people can be. For Indians, we nearly wipe out their population, trample all over their sacred grounds, kill their main source of food for sport, give them the worst possible land to live on and cheat them on every treaty they ever signed and then a hundred and thirty years later still find it necessary to demean them by having team names which are derogatory. Sort of like adding insult to injury.

      • bigbuffguy95 - Oct 12, 2013 at 2:08 AM

        “We white people?” Speak for yourself, dude. Some white people were responsible for those things, but I was born in 1982, so I wasn’t one of them, and I will not be grouped in just because my skin happens to be white. I’m fairly certain we can find examples of people who are not white acting in ways that are just as bullying throughout history. I don’t feel like holding modern nonwhite people responsible for that, though.

  9. 2jivecrew - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:38 PM

    This Craig character is “off the reservation”. Hate to break it to ya Craig, Native Americans have reddish skin. That’s kinda why the Choctaw had a word for it, Oklahoma. Only hyper-sensitive blowhards such as yourself would entertain the idea that a multi-million dollar business would build its identity around something it was trying to disparage, rather than celebrate. That would be like the Ku Klax Klan dressing up as black people for their public identity.

    I bet if a team called themselves the White Skins or Colonials you’d chalk it up to white supremacy, i bet we’d not hear anything from about that being disparaging toward whites. Here’s a tip: don’t say anything you don’t want turned around on you. If your logic doesn’t work both ways, then it doesn’t work at all.

    Nobody cares that you’re offended. In fact, I highly enjoy the fact that you’re offended. It amuses me to offend ultra-sensitive PC types such as yourself. I try to offend at least one of you per day to balance the scales against people like you and your nauseating PC mentality that’s permeating this society. Here’s another tip: it’s not anybody’s responsibility to conform to YOUR standards or delicate sensibilities. You’re no more “enlightened” than anybody from years gone by, although it’s clear you think you are (and you’re mistaken in that).

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:46 PM

      If your logic doesn’t work both ways, then it doesn’t work at all.

      Your entire rant is illogical, let’s break it down:

      Only hyper-sensitive blowhards such as yourself would entertain the idea that a multi-million dollar business would build its identity around something it was trying to disparage, rather than celebrate

      There is nothing “Indian” about the indigenous people from North America. So they are celebrating a giant mistake. Well done business!

      I bet if a team called themselves the White Skins or Colonials you’d chalk it up to white supremacy, i bet we’d not hear anything from about that being disparaging toward whites.

      Oh look, another logic fail. First, when have whites ever been repressed, throughout history? Second, you’d never find a team with that name because there are too many people who would protest if a team was ever named as such.

      Nobody cares that you’re offended. In fact, I highly enjoy the fact that you’re offended. It amuses me to offend ultra-sensitive PC types such as yourself. I try to offend at least one of you per day to balance the scales against people like you and your nauseating PC mentality that’s permeating this society. Here’s another tip: it’s not anybody’s responsibility to conform to YOUR standards or delicate sensibilities. You’re no more “enlightened” than anybody from years gone by, although it’s clear you think you are (and you’re mistaken in that).

      Quoting this for hilarity’s sake. Wow you offend people to counter the “pc mentality”. Treating others with respect is obviously a foreign concept to you.

      • 2jivecrew - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:50 PM

        The nomenclature regarding the word “Indian” is irrelevant. You failed to acknowledge the point, which was to highlight the idiocy of believing a sports team would use something supposedly durogatory to build its identity around. But I’ll continue to call them Indians because I can see it annoys you and, as I said, I get great enjoyment out of toying with your delicate sensibilities. Homie don’t play that PC nonsense.

        So basically you have no argument to the point that it would be perfectly non-offensive to whites to have a team called the White Skins, as much as most evidence seems to indicate that these names are not offensive to Indians.I got news for ya bud, everybody’s been persecuted at one time or another. If you don’t think so you should try some college level world history courses.

        Wrong, treating people with respect is not the same thing as caving to a very small and very vocal minority. And thus far none of those sharing your opinion seem to be able to put forth any EVIDENCE to the contrary. Grow a thicker skin, regardless of what color it is. I’m not going to walk on eggshells out of fear of offending you or anyboidy else. If you’re offended I could not possibly care less.

        It’s hilarious how worked up people get over a little Melanin.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 8, 2013 at 7:32 PM

        The nomenclature regarding the word “Indian” is irrelevant.

        It’s not irrelevant, merely because you say so. There weren’t indians here. To name a team that, thinking is the proper term is ignorance at its’ finest.

        But I’ll continue to call them Indians because I can see it annoys you and, as I said, I get great enjoyment out of toying with your delicate sensibilities. Homie don’t play that PC nonsense.

        Again, do you enjoy being an asshole or does it come naturally to you? And an In Living Color joke, the 90s called and they want their relevance back

        So basically you have no argument to the point that it would be perfectly non-offensive to whites to have a team called the White Skins

        I’m sure there are plenty of people who would be offended by a team called the white skins, both thinking it was mocking white people and/or thinking it was some white supremacy issue. That’s not the point though. Then again, you followed up that statement with:

        as much as most evidence seems to indicate that these names are not offensive to Indians

        They are extremely offensive to Native Americans. This George Costanza, it’s not a lie if you believe it, bullshit is almost as offensive. Did you read the article? There’s a link detailing a specific group that is offended by these names. There are multiple protests at Cleveland and Washington games each year decrying the team names. Just because you don’t know about them, or choose to ignore them, doesn’t mean they don’t happen.

        If you don’t think so you should try some college level world history courses.

        Please educate me on history when you think no one cares about these names. I’ll sit here waiting.

        And thus far none of those sharing your opinion seem to be able to put forth any EVIDENCE to the contrary

        How about 20 straight years of protests against the Cleveland Indians? Here’s a link:

        http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=Native+American+Groups+Protesting+the+Cleveland+Indians

        How about groups petitioning Congress to change the name of the Redskins?

        How about you learn to use google to figure things out, rather than claim they didn’t happen?

        Grow a thicker skin, regardless of what color it is. I’m not going to walk on eggshells out of fear of offending you or anyboidy else. If you’re offended I could not possibly care less.

        The odds that you are a mid to late 30s/early 40s white middle class male are almost 1:1. It’s very easy to say someone should grow some thicker skin when you’ve never had to face the issues these groups have.

    • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:46 PM

      I don’t know how many times I have to call you on that Oklahoma crap, but 1) it’s not really common knowledge, so it’s not like people are drawing on that, and 2) none of the native groups indigenous to here call themselves redmen originally. You are simplifying a complex historical narrative to be petty.

      • asimonetti88 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:01 PM

        I’m not arguing either way, but it not being common knowledge isn’t justification for it being ok. Regardless of how many people know what Oklahoma means, it is either acceptable or not. The number of people who know what it means doesn’t change that.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:04 PM

        No, he was arguing before that people were using “redskin” as a tribute to the Choctaw word — and I’m calling BS on that. Most people don’t know what “Oklahoma” means, so there’s no way they are doing it to honor a Choctaw word (which still fails on my second point).

      • 2jivecrew - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:52 PM

        Your second point is contradictory to your first point. Yes, we have evidence that the “indigenous people” DID have a word for themselves. Whether you like it or not, or whether it’s “common knowledge” or not, that word is Oklahoma.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:59 PM

        Prior to contact with white people, they did NOT call themselves “redmen.” They called themselves “Muscogee,” and “Cherokee,” and the other names that they have for their various nations/people. (Or, just “human beings.”) Oklahoma was not a word they used prior to forming the state/territory. In fact, they didn’t not collectively think of themselves as a race. Contact with white people brought that, and they didn’t even start building a large pan-Indian alliance to fight white people together until the late 18th-early 19th century.

    • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:53 PM

      The liberal mindset is that whites can not be discriminated against- as delusional and misguided as that thinking is- that’s what most of them believe, so this isn’t going to resonate with anyone that thinks renaming sports franchises is tantamount to saving the world.

      • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:01 PM

        Yep…we white, straight men have it SO hard in America.

        The Negros are running are out of control, taking our virtuous white women.

        The Chinamen and Japs with their calculators and abaci, taking our good engineering jobs.

        The Injuns taking our money at their casinos.

        I tell ya…it’s hard out there for a honkey!

        Nothing more pathetic than a privileged white man whining about victimhood.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:07 PM

        So, it’s impossible for a white person to be discriminated because you don’t feel they’ve suffered enough? Your logic is flawed. Anyone can be discriminated against. Do white homosexuals not have the same rights as black homosexuals? Or does the liberal mindset wipe away the whiteness because they’re gay and that trumps being white?

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:13 PM

        Who said white people can’t be discriminated against? If there’s actual discrimination, and not some perceived slight like “you’re no longer solely atop the food chain”, it’s bad.

      • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:27 PM

        The “liberal mindset” is that there is that racism and discrimination are still very real things in America, and should be addressed.

        The “conservative mindset” is that everything is 100% fine and fair, and you goddamned ungrateful blacks should shut your mouths, get the bone out of your nose (Rush Limbaugh’s words) and get off welfare.

        I didn’t say whites COULDN’T be discriminated against, but if you don’t think there’s a racial pecking order in America, you’ve got your head buried in the sand.

        It’s not 1955 Alabama anymore…America has made a lot of progress, but there’s still more to do.

      • jakeshuman2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:38 PM

        Yep…we white, straight men have it SO hard in America.

        The Negros are running are out of control, taking our virtuous white women.

        The Chinamen and Japs with their calculators and abaci, taking our good engineering jobs.

        The Injuns taking our money at their casinos.

        I tell ya…it’s hard out there for a honkey!

        Nothing more pathetic than a privileged white man whining about victimhood.
        ________________________________________________________

        Ya, hit the nail on the proverbial hard head

    • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:04 PM

      Hey look everybody! It’s the poor man’s Rush Limbaugh!

      It must infuriate you that you’re a nobody and that your rants amuse no one but yourself. You’re a legend in your own mind.

      Let me guess…you have a fake radio studio set up in your mom’s basement and you rant into the idiot wind, pretending you have millions of listeners like your bloated, pill-popping hero.

      You’re basically the psychotic Rupert Pupkin from King of Comedy without the charm:

    • mckludge - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:15 PM

      You do realize that the issue is with the logo, not the name, right?

  10. poprox13 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:44 PM

    Lets see………

    We have a Hawk post and a PC post, can we get another Dallas Latos post next? At least some pictures? Thanks!

  11. deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:54 PM

    when have whites ever been repressed, throughout history?

    Other than the holocaust you mean?

    • franklinandbashandflorio - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:59 PM

      That happened to Jewish people so don’t lump all white people together.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:04 PM

        They weren’t white?

    • indaburg - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:04 PM

      They weren’t white enough for Hitler.

    • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:19 PM

      We’re talking about America here.

      Stop deflecting the issue.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:28 PM

        Oh, so now we’re narrowing down history to fit your argument. Got it.

      • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:35 PM

        This is just typical right-wing deflection on your part.

        What bearing does what happened in Germany over 70 years ago have on the history of race relations in America over the past 50-60 years?

        You right-wingers will go to any length to portray those shiftless minorities as layabouts and undeserving welfare queens.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:29 PM

        And the original comment was:

        “Oh look, another logic fail. First, when have whites ever been repressed, throughout history? ”

        It didn’t say American history.

      • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:37 PM

        First of all, calling European Jews “white” isn’t accurate.

        Secondly, I’M narrowing the debate to America. You can go off and talk about Europe from 70 years ago if you’d like, but it’s wandering from the main point of Craig’s article, which is race relations in America.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:38 PM

        Not a rightwinger, but just keep throwing that out there. So, what bearing does slavery have since that was even longer ago in the past?

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:41 PM

        And talk about deflection- how the hell do you know what my opinion is on other races or religions? You keep throwing out the same tired “Welfare Queens”. “Rush Limbaugh” “Shiftless Minority” garbage over and over. Just because I’m not putting the same weight on what someone names their sports team as you, doesn’t make me a facist.

      • aceshigh11 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:49 PM

        You’ve made enough derogatory comments about liberals…it’s pretty clear you’re a conservative.

        C’mon…fascist? I’m not calling you that, and I’m not calling you a racist.

        I’m simply saying that a lot of conservatives tend to be unsympathetic towards victims of racism and would prefer to pretend that it’s not even an issue worth discussing anymore.

      • skids003 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:51 PM

        deathmonkey, you are wasting your breath. This guy couldn’t be convinced the sky is blue if he was staring right at it. True Bot.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:04 PM

        I’m certainly not a liberal- but I am not a rightwinger. I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh, I don’t watch Fox News, and I don’t go to church or follow any religion. My beliefs fall all over the spectrum. I wouldn’t vote for a Replublican or Democrat anymore. The whole point of this article was “How would you like it if they had a hat with (enter your race/nationality/religion here). My answer is that I wouldn’t give an F. My family came over to this country as dirt poor Italians (and some Germans). I’m sure they were looked down upon and referred to as Dagos, WoPs, Guineas, Greaseballs, or Goombahs. None of those names offend me. And I wasn’t offended by the googy, big-nosed plumber caricatures in Mario Bros either.

      • wallio - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:26 PM

        Finally somebody who gets it. If you’re ever in PA deathmonkey, I’ll take you out for pasta.

      • tfbuckfutter - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:27 PM

        deathmonkey, I’m pretty sure you don’t face any prejudice whatsoever because you’re Italian. Previous generations of your family may have, but you haven’t.

        Asians and Jews (and many other groups) still face the same thing YOUR GRANDPARENTS FACED TODAY.

        And do you think there’s a reason YOU no longer suffer the same discrimination that your grandparents or great grandparents did?

        Maybe, you know….people EVOLVING and “being whiny liberals” about the mistreatment of your stupid greasy smelly ancestors?

      • asimonetti88 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:34 PM

        “You’ve made enough derogatory comments about liberals…it’s pretty clear you’re a conservative.”

        I dislike liberal ideology and I’m not conservative. Despite this being a two-party county (sadly), there are more than two ideas out there.

      • largebill - Oct 8, 2013 at 6:08 PM

        “We’re talking about America here.

        Stop deflecting the issue.”

        Huh, he was responding to a question about when have whites ever been repressed throughout history? History did not start 50 years ago or 200 years ago.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 6:35 PM

        tfbuckfutter – Oct 8, 2013 at 4:27 PM
        deathmonkey, I’m pretty sure you don’t face any prejudice whatsoever because you’re Italian. Previous generations of your family may have, but you haven’t.

        Not true! I dated a Polish girl in high school and her father didn’t want her dating me because he didn’t trust Italians, lol! But now that I think about it…the things I did with his daughter…maybe he was right!

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 6:51 PM

        asimonetti88 – Oct 8, 2013 at 4:34 PM
        “You’ve made enough derogatory comments about liberals…it’s pretty clear you’re a conservative.”

        I dislike liberal ideology and I’m not conservative. Despite this being a two-party county (sadly), there are more than two ideas out there.

        Amen, brother. Nothing more I hate than disagreeing with something Obama does and then having the predictable “Well, Bush did this…” counter argument. Apparently, there are only two parties and two trains of thought in the world.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 6:57 PM

        wallio – Oct 8, 2013 at 4:26 PM
        Finally somebody who gets it. If you’re ever in PA deathmonkey, I’ll take you out for pasta.

        Ha ha! I’m from PA, brotherman!

    • leerosenthall - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:24 PM

      Are you fucking daft? They weren’t “repressed” for being “white”? They were slaughtered en masse for being “sub-human.” He didn’t give a fuck what color their skin was.

      • deathmonkey41 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:36 PM

        The Jews have been repressed and attacked throughtout history by multiple groups.

  12. franklinandbashandflorio - Oct 8, 2013 at 2:54 PM

    How about changing the city of Cleveland’s name to New Dehli? The ignorance and stupidity of Native American themed teams is astounding.

  13. babyfarkmcgeezax - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:01 PM

    Anything to steer the attention away from the racist ways of the Braves, right Craig? Maybe you should rant about your own team before hypocritically teeing off on other teams. I guess it’s not surprising though, considering you still can’t even find your popcorn.

    • The Common Man - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:03 PM

      Hi. You must be new around here.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:15 PM

        He’s a self-professed troll, please stop replying to him.

      • babyfarkmcgeezax - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:55 PM

        Yes, by all means, only reply to Calcaterra lapdogs like churchy boy here. What he fails to realize is I actually agree with Craig but find it interesting that with all these screeds he’s been posting about teams glorifying racism the Braves rarely, if ever, seem to be singled out like the other teams. I am just a troll, however, so don’t try to cross the bridge or I will eat you.

      • mckludge - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:52 PM

        I’ll state it again. The issue is with the logo, not the name. Based on the fact the the organization is called “National Congress of American Indians,” they don’t have a complaint against the name Indians.

        The Braves used to have an offensive caricature as well with Chief Noc-a-homa, but they haven’t used that since the 80s. I don’t know if they stopped because they responded to public outcry or not. They did try to bring him back for the 2013 “batting practice” hats, and some were made, but they stopped after people protested. Yes, there are some old t-shirts with the “screaming Indian” icon, but that is not their current logo.

        So yes, Braves are not pristine in this issue. But if you can’t recognize the difference in offensiveness between the Braves tomahawk and the Indians Chief Wahoo, then you clearly have difficulty with basic reasoning.

        But even if you want to attack the name, I would reason that Braves is on par with other warrior-type team names like Warriors, Knights, Cavaliers, Pirates.

    • chrisernst82 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:31 PM

      Its not like the Braves have a traditional “Indian” tomahawk as their logo or anything. And “Braves” has nothing to do with them using tomahawks in battle. Its about them being brave in their construction of tools. Nobody wants a coward making tools for them lol

    • Francisco (FC) - Oct 8, 2013 at 5:23 PM

      Anything to steer the attention away from the racist ways of the Braves, right Craig? Maybe you should rant about your own team before hypocritically teeing off on other teams

      What that dastardly Calcaterra! He just goes to great lengths to avoid talking about the Brave’s racist ways. Take for example:

      http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/03/mlb-and-the-braves-need-to-trash-that-new-batting-practice-cap-now/

  14. klownboy - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:15 PM

    I think the Indians logo is more offensive than the Redskins’ name.

  15. chill1184 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:22 PM

    Is it wrong that I wanted a New York Cuban’s jersey? There was a game between the Brewers and Mets back in 2010 and the Mets were wearing them as a tribute to the Negro leagues. It was an away grey with orange lettering and thought it was pretty sweet looking.

    As for the subject at hand, if people are really going to get pissed over team like the Redskins, Indians, Braves and others. Let me point to this rant by Carlos Mencia.

    NOT SAFE FOR WORK DO NOT VIEW IT IF YOU ARE WORKING BAD LANGUAGE

    • indaburg - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:35 PM

      Carlos Mencia is a no-talent unfunny hack.

      • tfbuckfutter - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:38 PM

        Carlos Mencia has a LOT of talent.

        He has the talent to turn other comedians’ material into cash money in his pocket.

    • franklinandbashandflorio - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:47 PM

      Watching Kanyes henchmen beat the crap out of mencia is better than your crappy video.

  16. jakeshuman2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:26 PM

    I get your point here. I used to be one of the naysayers about changing offensive names but, then again, I am a white male raised in Midwest suburbia. However, with then name Indians, Redskins and Braves, I tend to agree they need to be changed. The word Indian was given to the Native-Americans by ignorant Europeans who thought they had found India. To continue to use it is to perpetuate that ignorance. “Redskin” was used by Americans derogatorily describe anyone’s who skin wasn’t black (they were given their own names) or white. It was used not only to differentiate between the races but to justify evil behavior against them because they were different. “Braves” to me is the least offensive of the three. A “brave” was a young man who had proved himself to have acquired skills necessary to be a man, a winner in battle and one who could accept hardship without acting like a child. This, by itself, should prove the Atlanta team, at the very worst, is not worthy of this monicker.

  17. newpairofsox - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:27 PM

    Hey everybody, there’s a ball game starting in about an hour.

  18. tfbuckfutter - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:31 PM

    The Chinamen one is ok, I might wear it because I like the color, but to be honest….I’m much more fond of the alternative hat where he’s swinging a railroad hammer like a bat.

    • clemente2 - Oct 8, 2013 at 8:48 PM

      One in a never-ending stream of tfb comments proving he is an idiot.

      • tfbuckfutter - Oct 8, 2013 at 8:53 PM

        7:1 ratio.

        Guess math isn’t your strong suit.

    • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 9:44 PM

      How do people take your posts seriously?

      • tfbuckfutter - Oct 8, 2013 at 9:56 PM

        Meso solly

        *fwapping my dickey*

      • historiophiliac - Oct 8, 2013 at 9:57 PM

        You’re crazy.

        How’s things?

  19. chip56 - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:40 PM

    As a Jew I kinda like the hat. I think it’s funny. It’s a caricature; people really need to get the stick out about this stuff.

    If Native Americans want to gripe over the fact that they lost their land – fine; but this is only insulting if you let it be. For example, I just found out that my kid isn’t allowed to sit “Indian style” in school – it’s now “cris cross apple sauce.” What the crap is that??

  20. 34dizzy - Oct 8, 2013 at 3:56 PM

    Thanks for sharing the graphic, Craig.

  21. billyboots - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:02 PM

    Does anyone know where I could get one of these posters? Are they for sale or purchase on the NCAI website? FYI, I am a social studies teacher and this would look pretty good with some of the other visuals I have in my classroom.

  22. yankee172 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:06 PM

    Again with this?

    NO ONE CARES

    • The Common Man - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:13 PM

      “NO ONE CARES” he says, about the most commented on articles on this site.

  23. yankee172 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:06 PM

    Having said that, I’ll take a “NY Jews” cap, please.

  24. ndrick731 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:15 PM

    Where can I get mine!!!!!!!

  25. chrisernst82 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:18 PM

    As one of the “Jews” who was trying to make a point in your sites last column about this issue, I will take you up on that offer. Dead serious, I would love to have the NY Jews hat!! Put your money where your mouth is. I bet I walk down any street I want in that hat. I know enough Hebrew to stay out of trouble.

    Like I was trying to say in your last article, until we learn that were all just people. Regardless of where your ancestors came from and regardless of your religion. Stupid people will hold the power. Are we not mature enough to take the power out of the words of the ignorant? Im 100% proud of my race and religion. The only offense I take is a that hideous orange. We aren’t colorblind you know.

    Grow up and quit giving the racist’s power. We are never going to rid the world of ignorance. But we can take the ammo out of they’re verbal rifles.

    And if you go through your websites posts from that previous article you will find that it ended with an “indian” making horrible racist and anti-Christian/ Catholic comments. A definite backfire.

    Also if you want to change the world how about not trying it from a baseball blog. Actually put a little effort into it instead of copying and pasting a story.

    I WILL be expecting some sort of contact info to get my hat!

    And luckily for a little proof check my surname its in my screen name Ernst (Ashkenazic). It means serious. As im sure the people who run the site can tell you, I had it before the topic even came up.

    • chrisernst82 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:23 PM

      My bad I made one mistake its the purple hat not the orange one. Just as ugly though, can I get it in Cardinal red please. Or you can go traditional “Jewish” black and white. Just not purple, no team would wear purple or orange lol

    • chrisernst82 - Oct 8, 2013 at 4:44 PM

      So by giving me a thumbs down your are pretty much saying I have to be offended. I choose not to offended by ignorance. Or is it that im smart enough to know that regardless of what a cartoon says I know that 99.99% of Jewish people don’t look like that. And that other stereotype where we are good at math, with money or “frugal” as some would put it is a positive stereotype IMO. Its true and thank you to all my ancestors for making me in the top 1% of the country in math, school was a breeze (at least math wise).

      • chrisernst82 - Oct 8, 2013 at 5:11 PM

        לא ליפול טרף לבורות של הגזענים

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (2130)
  2. J. Kang (2022)
  3. D. Ross (1892)
  4. J. Shields (1811)
  5. M. Scutaro (1810)
  1. D. Haren (1780)
  2. C. Gonzalez (1767)
  3. T. Tulowitzki (1701)
  4. J. Grilli (1666)
  5. C. Hamels (1526)