The New York Times wasn’t always quite as sensitive over what they said about Native Americans. You might notice a subtle difference in tone.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Climate Of 1923
- Market Volatility
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
- Gemini Can See The Future
- Clinton To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Climate Intelligence Means “Making Things Up”
- Comedy From The BBC
- The Climate Afterlife
- Rewriting The Northern Hemisphere
- Useful Graphs From ChatGPT
- Fort Lauderdale Drowning
- Sinking Of The Titanic
- Expert Arctic Forecasting
- Sinking Of The Titanic
- Nobel Prize Winning Forecast
- Changing Climate
- Gen Z Math And Solutions
- Orwellian NASA Maps
- Faking US Temperature Data
Recent Comments
- arn on Market Volatility
- arn on Gemini Can See The Future
- conrad ziefle on Gemini Can See The Future
- conrad ziefle on “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Bill on Gemini Can See The Future
- conrad ziefle on Market Volatility
- conrad ziefle on Hottest Summer Ever
- stewartpid on Market Volatility
- William on Record CO2 Growth
- Greg in NZ on Hottest Summer Ever
Naw, the difference is way too subtle for me.
They should drop that disgusting name. Drop the Washington!
Because of this past treatment of American Indians, we have been cursed to live in Global Warming Hell.
Seam’s like NYT can never get it right. They thought Uncle Joe was a nice guy as well.
The Indians were undoubtedly Conservative.
I still think the Redskins should be renamed after a potato.
I was thinking a peanut…
A possibility:
http://www.nuts.com/nuts/peanuts/redskin.html
Besides, think of the concession sales!
Washington Spuds?
Since the majority of DC residents are government employed or on government handouts, how about the Washington Ticks…..comes from the word Politicks.
Already done:
http://www.food.com/recipe/garlic-herbed-roasted-red-skin-potatoes-317120
So just change the insignia. Washington is close to Idaho, so why not claim to be potatoes?
From this over-the-top excerpt, it just may be that the author is writing in ironic mode. Did the city slickers of 1877 New York City really believe that the frontier settlers were “cultured” and “gentle”? Did they really have respect for the military commander Sheridan who they misquoted here? This lead-in looks like a setup to me.
And I am thus in the very unusual position of offering a possible defense for the New York Times. Can you link the rest of the article, please?
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
Study a little history…the real thing, not the rehashed, sanitized pap that passes for history, these days…
Yep, folks actually did think like that back then. Not all of them mind you, but more often than not, it was the same crowd as today…the ‘sophisticated’, open-minded, ‘liberal’, ‘progressive’ branch.
Certainly people did think that way about the Indians, but it doesn’t seem likely that the times thought frontiersmen were gentle and cultured. That does sound like sarcasm.
Keith,
Have you been imbibing in liberal Kool-Aid recently? The article is quite serious, and typical of the era. Indians were massacring settlers on a regular basis.
No. I try to be as fair, and this article’s lead-in was a possible ironic setup. L. Frank Baum, around this time, wrote about Sitting Bull and suggested, in his best ironic style, that we might as well slaughter the rest of the Indians since we’ve done them so very much harm.
This was recently taken without irony to suggest that the writer of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was just like Adolph Hitler. Just as many today think that Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” is a serious suggestion of cannibalism.
From the opening above, the article could have gone either way. The references to the Federal military man and to the frontier folk certainly suggested sarcasm. But while I wasn’t able to find this article, I found others that suggested that this one could have been straight. A few years later (early 1900s) the NYT changed tone, and began lauding the man as “the Native American George Washington” and publishing his speeches with reverence. The Progressive Era had begun.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
Renaming them the “Transgender Transexualists” would be far more politically correct!
The New York Times was true to form. It has apparently always been wrongheaded and intolerant of anyone who did not agree with those progressive thinkers who controlled the Times. North American Indians just were not on-board with the progressive mindset at that time.
I hope the Redskins have a much better season this year. If the North American Indians have a real gripe against them, it ought to be because their play has not measured up to the standard North American Indians would want from a team named after them. There was a time under Joe Gibbs when the Redskins won battle after battle, unlike the history of the 1600s, 1700s, and 1800s.
Mark Twain had a good commentary in “The Noble Redman” destroying the romantizing of the natives.
Renaming the team “Washington Perverts” would offend Congress! Congress has earned its reputation, and for a bunch of jocks to steal Congressional birthrights…
They’ll always be the Washington Sunburntskins to me.
There may be another factor at play: what if the Washington Redskins beat someone’s favorite football team and this is revenge for winning?
Stranger things happen. “You win this game and I’ll sue your name away!”