Monday, October 11, 2010

We Can't Have Bullets and Colt .45s, but Redskins are OK?

One of my Topps Million Card give-away is this 1962 Joe Amalfitano card of the Houston Colt .45s. After looking at the wiki page and some of their cool logos the story of the .45s seems really interesting to me.

In today's politically correct world, we could never have another Colt .45s team, just as we can't have a Washington Bullets team name. I get it, I'm not here to argue the name change, but I don't understand what appears to be a double-standard.

We can't have:
- Colt .45s
- Washington Bullets
- Eastern Michigan Hurons
- Miami (OH) Redskins

Why can we have the Washington Redskins and Chief Wahoo of the Cleveland Indians? Why are these images and stereotypes OK?


Carl Crawford Cards said...

I think that's a BIG part of the problem: they're NOT OK but a lot of folks just like to turn the other way or invent reasons as to why they're just fine. I'm pretty close to one of these mascot/logo situations right now and let me tell you, it ain't pretty.

James said...

@Carl - Agree. It amazes me that in 2010 we can actually have a team, in the most popular American sport, named after a color of skin.

Tony said...

Why do the Braves fans still do the Tomahawk Chop? I remember back in 1992 when the Braves were playing the Blue Jays in the World Series, and I seem to recall Jane Fonda who was Turner's girlfriend feigning innocence and saying she didn't know it was offending people. The chop was supposed to stop then..I see things haven't changed much in 18 years...

James said...

@Tony - You are right. I even heard them doing the chant last night against the Giants.