The big headline on the Drudge Report at the moment is about president Obama saying that if he were the owner of the Washington Redskins, he would likely change the team name. A controversy about the name of the NFL team in DC is certainly not the most important news story of the day. Nevertheless, this report is instructive because of what it shows the nation about just who Barack Obama really is.
Let's start the discussion by noting that changing the name of the Redskins is not something that has much popular support. There was actually polling done on the issue and the results showed that over 80% support keeping the name unchanged while only 11% want to see it modified. Obama, however, worries that the name Redskins might offend Native Americans, so he wants to see it changed.
The idea that a name may not offend people is something new in this country. For centuries, America operated under the rule that there was free speech; in other words, each American had the right to be offensive if he or she thought that was appropriate. People who heard what was said were also free to react to the statements however they thought appropriate (within limits of course.) If a team owner wanted to name his football players the Giants, he did not have to worry that short people would be offended. If a team owner wanted to name his baseball players the Yankees, he did not have to worry that Southerners whose ancestors fought in the Civil War would be offended. Nor would the owner of the Pittsburgh Penguins, St. Louis Cardinals or Baltimore Orioles have to worry that bird watchers might be offended by those names. Are atheists offended by the California Angels? Do the Cleveland Indians offend Native Americans or people from South Asia? Under the age old rules of American life, it really did not matter. The choice of the name was up to the team owner.
Of course, if a team were to pick a really terrible name (the Nashville Nazis?), then there could be a fan reaction that showed displeasure and which led the owner to change that name. Even so, it was a private matter, not one about which the president would comment.
Now, however, Obama is weighing in on the need to avoid offending anyone. Obama is the sort of person who believes in hate crimes. You understand "hate crimes", right? If a thug mugs a man in the park and steals his wallet, that is robbery. On the other hand, if that same thug mugs the same man and steals the same wallet but shouts some racial or other epithet while doing so, it becomes a "hate crime" which carries with it a much more severe sentence in many states. The guy who is mugged really will not feel better if the criminal does not shout names at him while beating him.
Instead of free speech, Obama wants to "protect" "victims" from being offended. Obama wants the government to step into what ought to be an entirely private matter. It is another step away from the America of the last two centuries and toward a land where another freedom is limited, this time freedom of speech.
I have an idea. Maybe congressional Republicans should stand on the steps of the Capitol and announce that they are offended by statements made by Obama and the Democrats calling the GOP named like extortionists, terrorists, rapists and racists. If Obama is truly bothered by having any group upset about how others describe it, then he will have to stop using that language. I doubt he will change anything he says, however. You see, the goal is not to avoid upsetting folks; the real goal is to limit personal freedom.
Let's start the discussion by noting that changing the name of the Redskins is not something that has much popular support. There was actually polling done on the issue and the results showed that over 80% support keeping the name unchanged while only 11% want to see it modified. Obama, however, worries that the name Redskins might offend Native Americans, so he wants to see it changed.
The idea that a name may not offend people is something new in this country. For centuries, America operated under the rule that there was free speech; in other words, each American had the right to be offensive if he or she thought that was appropriate. People who heard what was said were also free to react to the statements however they thought appropriate (within limits of course.) If a team owner wanted to name his football players the Giants, he did not have to worry that short people would be offended. If a team owner wanted to name his baseball players the Yankees, he did not have to worry that Southerners whose ancestors fought in the Civil War would be offended. Nor would the owner of the Pittsburgh Penguins, St. Louis Cardinals or Baltimore Orioles have to worry that bird watchers might be offended by those names. Are atheists offended by the California Angels? Do the Cleveland Indians offend Native Americans or people from South Asia? Under the age old rules of American life, it really did not matter. The choice of the name was up to the team owner.
Of course, if a team were to pick a really terrible name (the Nashville Nazis?), then there could be a fan reaction that showed displeasure and which led the owner to change that name. Even so, it was a private matter, not one about which the president would comment.
Now, however, Obama is weighing in on the need to avoid offending anyone. Obama is the sort of person who believes in hate crimes. You understand "hate crimes", right? If a thug mugs a man in the park and steals his wallet, that is robbery. On the other hand, if that same thug mugs the same man and steals the same wallet but shouts some racial or other epithet while doing so, it becomes a "hate crime" which carries with it a much more severe sentence in many states. The guy who is mugged really will not feel better if the criminal does not shout names at him while beating him.
Instead of free speech, Obama wants to "protect" "victims" from being offended. Obama wants the government to step into what ought to be an entirely private matter. It is another step away from the America of the last two centuries and toward a land where another freedom is limited, this time freedom of speech.
I have an idea. Maybe congressional Republicans should stand on the steps of the Capitol and announce that they are offended by statements made by Obama and the Democrats calling the GOP named like extortionists, terrorists, rapists and racists. If Obama is truly bothered by having any group upset about how others describe it, then he will have to stop using that language. I doubt he will change anything he says, however. You see, the goal is not to avoid upsetting folks; the real goal is to limit personal freedom.
No comments:
Post a Comment