ON AIR NOW

LISTEN NOW

Weather

cloudy-day
83°
Sunny
H 98° L 79°
  • cloudy-day
    83°
    Current Conditions
    Sunny. H 98° L 79°
  • clear-day
    95°
    Afternoon
    Sunny. H 98° L 79°
  • clear-day
    94°
    Evening
    Sunny. H 98° L 79°
LISTEN
PAUSE
ERROR

Krmg news on demand

00:00 | 00:00

LISTEN
PAUSE
ERROR

Krmg traffic on demand

00:00 | 00:00

LISTEN
PAUSE
ERROR

Krmg weather on demand

00:00 | 00:00

Local
Native American Chief blasts “Redskins” name
Close

Native American Chief blasts “Redskins” name

Native American Chief blasts “Redskins” name
Photo Credit: Russell Mills
Principal Chief George Tiger of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation

Native American Chief blasts “Redskins” name

The chief of the one of the largest tribes in the United States sat down with KRMG Friday morning to discuss his belief that Native American mascots need to be removed from all non-Native American teams.

“I’ve gone out publicly saying that I am for changing the NFL football team’s name,” Chief Tiger said. “And I stand behind that. I feel very adamant about that. I think there’s no difference in what our African American communities consider racial when the “N” word is used.”

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office made headlines Wednesday when it ruled the Washington's Redskins should be stripped of trademark protection because the name is "disparaging of Native Americans."

Chief Tiger believes he is in agreement with tribal leaders across the country when he says it’s a very racist situation. Particularly troubling, Chief Tiger said, because it involves a national football team making money off of the term.

“You’re talking about a race of people who historically in this country have always been considered second class citizens,” Chief Tiger said. “This government has done everything they could to eliminate us as a race of people. When you have that kind of history and you’re talking about traditions and cultures, those things are very dear to us.”

To Chief Tiger, schools and professional teams depicting Native Americans as goofy or having people wearing headdresses is simply unacceptable.

“You just don’t do that,” Chief Tiger said. “The right to wear one (a headdress) is handed down traditionally and sacredly, with instruction on how and where to wear them. It’s just something that is very sacred. There is protocol, for lack of a better term.”

Despite contributing a lot to Oklahoma’s economy and impacting local communities, Chief Tiger said the stigma against Native Americans is still there and that the public needs to be better educated on their culture and how these issues should be addressed.

 

Read More
  • State agriculture officials say there is evidence of Seven Oak Death Disease in Oklahoma. The disease affects oak trees and other plants and can make them appear to bleed. There is no current treatment for this disease. It was detected at Park Hill Plants, a nursery south of Tahlequah in Cherokee County. Work is underway to destroy infected trees and plants.
  • Fifty Tulsa Public School teachers are training on how to inform students on the 1921 Tulsa race massacre. The history of the event resulting in the deaths of many black people was not taught in schools. Teachers Tuesday got to ask questions about what happened back then and learn the importance of its historical impact in hopes of creating a better understanding within our community.
  • Tulsa police have not found any additional human remains after juveniles found a leg and part of a skull near Pine and Memorial on Monday. Police say they do not suspect foul play after a detective was assigned to the case Tuesday. The medical examiner's office is checking the bones as they attempt to determine when the person died.
  • Next summer will mark forty years since I drew my first paycheck on Capitol Hill as a Page in the House of Representatives. Between working for the Congress, and then covering lawmakers as a reporter, I've seen lawmakers almost come to blows, watched Speakers angrily denounce their critics, seen lawmakers block the doors to the House floor to keep lawmakers from leaving, and all sorts of other legislative mischief. But I have never seen what happened on Tuesday, when Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-MO) did what amounted to a 'gavel drop,' as he refused to read a parliamentary ruling against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and simply walked away. 'I abandon the Chair,' Cleaver said, after getting my attention by clearly not reading the script in front of him, and speaking in the first person from the Speaker's Chair. Maybe it's happened before in the almost 230 years that the House and Senate have been at work - but what Cleaver did on Tuesday was something that left my jaw on the floor. In his off-the-cuff remarks, Cleaver seemed to indicate that he had given a pass to Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI), who during debate on a resolution condemning President Trump, had denounced a group of minority women Democrats as 'anti-American.' When one Democrat rose to ask that Duffy's words be 'taken down' and scrubbed from the Record, Cleaver brushed off the complaint. And he evidently thought the same should have been done for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when she referred to the President's 'racist tweets,' directly going against precedents of the House which clearly state that such speech is against the rules. In a statement, Cleaver said he was simply frustrated at what was going on before his eyes. 'I have spent my entire life working with people of all faiths and stripes in an effort solve real-world problems with concrete solutions, but never have we been this divided and this unwilling to listen to countering opinions or accept objective truths,' the Missouri Democrat said. 'However, a house divided against itself cannot stand, regardless of how strong the foundation,' Cleaver added. Some of my colleagues were just as surprised at the turn of events. The rules rebuke of Pelosi was historic as well - it was the first time a Speaker had words 'taken down' in 35 years, since a famous floor spat between Speaker Tip O'Neill, and future Speaker Newt Gingrich (though not many people at the time would have predicted Gingrich's ascension to that leadership post).
  • The House voted Tuesday mainly along party lines to publicly rebuke President Donald Trump for tweets and remarks aimed at a group of minority women Democrats, but the legislative reprimand dissolved into hours of parliamentary disarray on the floor, as for the first time in 35 years, a Speaker of the House ran afoul of the House rules during debate on the Trump resolution. Four Republicans broke ranks with the President and voted for the resolution to condemn the President's remarks: Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX), Rep. Susan Brooks (R-IN), Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), plus one Independent, former GOP Rep. Justin Amash (I-MI). 'Every single Member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the President's racist tweets,' Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, triggering hours of delay, as the GOP demanded that her words be 'taken down' and expunged from the Congressional Record. When challenged by Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) - who suggested gracefully that the Speaker re-frame her comments to avoid running afoul of rules which severely limit what can be said about a President on the House floor - Pelosi said her remarks had been cleared by the Parliamentarian. But that did not turn out to be the case, as the chair ruled that the Speaker's words were out of order - though the House later overturned that ruling in a party line vote. 'I was compelled to demand that the House enforce the rules against Speaker Pelosi,' Collins said, 'for her deliberate attack on the President.' The House precedents are very clear that the word 'racist' - or anything which suggests that a President has engaged in 'racist' behavior - is not allowed in debate. It was the first time in 35 years - since Speaker Tip O'Neill had his words 'taken down' during a 1984 House floor dispute with future Speaker Rep. Newt Gingrich R-GA - that a Speaker had been so sanctioned. But this time, Democrats refused to strike the Speaker's words from the Record, and then voted to go against a long standing precedent by allowing the Speaker to re-join the debate. Normally, if a member is sanctioned - and has their words taken down - that person is not allowed to speak for the rest of the day. The day also included a highly unusual scene, after the Parliamentarian determined that Pelosi had violated House rules by referring to the President's 'racist tweets,' as Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-MO) refused to publicly admonish the Speaker, dropping the gavel and leaving the Speaker's chair. 'I abandon the Chair,' Cleaver said, leaving Congressional veterans grasping for any historic parallel. If the President was worried by the House vote, he didn't show it, using a session with reporters at the White House to again criticize four new Democratic women, who have repeatedly attacked his actions and policy choices. “It’s my opinion they hate our country. And that’s not good. It’s not acceptable,” Mr. Trump said. Republicans denounced the resolution as a political ploy. “If Democrats were serious about changing the rhetoric in Washington, this resolution would address at least a few of the egregious remarks made by Members in their own caucus,” said Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA).

Washington Insider

  • Next summer will mark forty years since I drew my first paycheck on Capitol Hill as a Page in the House of Representatives. Between working for the Congress, and then covering lawmakers as a reporter, I've seen lawmakers almost come to blows, watched Speakers angrily denounce their critics, seen lawmakers block the doors to the House floor to keep lawmakers from leaving, and all sorts of other legislative mischief. But I have never seen what happened on Tuesday, when Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-MO) did what amounted to a 'gavel drop,' as he refused to read a parliamentary ruling against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and simply walked away. 'I abandon the Chair,' Cleaver said, after getting my attention by clearly not reading the script in front of him, and speaking in the first person from the Speaker's Chair. Maybe it's happened before in the almost 230 years that the House and Senate have been at work - but what Cleaver did on Tuesday was something that left my jaw on the floor. In his off-the-cuff remarks, Cleaver seemed to indicate that he had given a pass to Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI), who during debate on a resolution condemning President Trump, had denounced a group of minority women Democrats as 'anti-American.' When one Democrat rose to ask that Duffy's words be 'taken down' and scrubbed from the Record, Cleaver brushed off the complaint. And he evidently thought the same should have been done for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when she referred to the President's 'racist tweets,' directly going against precedents of the House which clearly state that such speech is against the rules. In a statement, Cleaver said he was simply frustrated at what was going on before his eyes. 'I have spent my entire life working with people of all faiths and stripes in an effort solve real-world problems with concrete solutions, but never have we been this divided and this unwilling to listen to countering opinions or accept objective truths,' the Missouri Democrat said. 'However, a house divided against itself cannot stand, regardless of how strong the foundation,' Cleaver added. Some of my colleagues were just as surprised at the turn of events. The rules rebuke of Pelosi was historic as well - it was the first time a Speaker had words 'taken down' in 35 years, since a famous floor spat between Speaker Tip O'Neill, and future Speaker Newt Gingrich (though not many people at the time would have predicted Gingrich's ascension to that leadership post).
  • The House voted Tuesday mainly along party lines to publicly rebuke President Donald Trump for tweets and remarks aimed at a group of minority women Democrats, but the legislative reprimand dissolved into hours of parliamentary disarray on the floor, as for the first time in 35 years, a Speaker of the House ran afoul of the House rules during debate on the Trump resolution. Four Republicans broke ranks with the President and voted for the resolution to condemn the President's remarks: Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX), Rep. Susan Brooks (R-IN), Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), plus one Independent, former GOP Rep. Justin Amash (I-MI). 'Every single Member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the President's racist tweets,' Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, triggering hours of delay, as the GOP demanded that her words be 'taken down' and expunged from the Congressional Record. When challenged by Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) - who suggested gracefully that the Speaker re-frame her comments to avoid running afoul of rules which severely limit what can be said about a President on the House floor - Pelosi said her remarks had been cleared by the Parliamentarian. But that did not turn out to be the case, as the chair ruled that the Speaker's words were out of order - though the House later overturned that ruling in a party line vote. 'I was compelled to demand that the House enforce the rules against Speaker Pelosi,' Collins said, 'for her deliberate attack on the President.' The House precedents are very clear that the word 'racist' - or anything which suggests that a President has engaged in 'racist' behavior - is not allowed in debate. It was the first time in 35 years - since Speaker Tip O'Neill had his words 'taken down' during a 1984 House floor dispute with future Speaker Rep. Newt Gingrich R-GA - that a Speaker had been so sanctioned. But this time, Democrats refused to strike the Speaker's words from the Record, and then voted to go against a long standing precedent by allowing the Speaker to re-join the debate. Normally, if a member is sanctioned - and has their words taken down - that person is not allowed to speak for the rest of the day. The day also included a highly unusual scene, after the Parliamentarian determined that Pelosi had violated House rules by referring to the President's 'racist tweets,' as Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-MO) refused to publicly admonish the Speaker, dropping the gavel and leaving the Speaker's chair. 'I abandon the Chair,' Cleaver said, leaving Congressional veterans grasping for any historic parallel. If the President was worried by the House vote, he didn't show it, using a session with reporters at the White House to again criticize four new Democratic women, who have repeatedly attacked his actions and policy choices. “It’s my opinion they hate our country. And that’s not good. It’s not acceptable,” Mr. Trump said. Republicans denounced the resolution as a political ploy. “If Democrats were serious about changing the rhetoric in Washington, this resolution would address at least a few of the egregious remarks made by Members in their own caucus,” said Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA).
  • As lawmakers kick off hearings on Capitol Hill Tuesday about a cryptocurrency plan launched by a group led by the social media giant Facebook, the 'Libra' idea faces increasing resistance from the White House, federal banking regulators, and lawmakers in both parties. 'The Treasury Department has expressed very serious concerns that Libra could be misused by money launderers and terrorist financiers,' said Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin on Monday. 'This is indeed a national security issue,' Mnuchin said, in a rare briefing for reporters at the White House. On Capitol Hill, lawmakers share many of the same concerns, and heard those amplified last week at a hearing by Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. 'Libra raises many serious concerns regarding privacy, money laundering, consumer protection and financial stability,' Powell said in remarks to the House Banking Committee - where he seemed very ready to give a public warning about Libra. 'I strongly believe that we all need to be taking our time here,' Powell told lawmakers about the Libra proposal. 'We all want innovation,' said Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH). 'But we all want innovation that protects data security.' 'We got to have a better understanding of the impact on our economy and our ability to manage money,' said Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO), as lawmakers in both parties expressed concern. More of that is going to be heard on Tuesday and Wednesday, as the head of the Libra project for Facebook goes before House and Senate committees 'Libra is about developing a safe, secure, and low-cost way for people to move money efficiently around the world,' said David Marcus, the head of the Libra effort. 'We believe that Libra can make real progress toward building a more inclusive financial infrastructure,' Marcus will tell lawmakers, even as he agrees with the Federal Reserve chairman's call for a thorough review of the cryptocurrency plan. But the idea is already a loser in the mind of President Trump. 'If Facebook and other companies want to become a bank, they must seek a new Banking Charter,' Mr. Trump tweeted last week, as he made clear his opposition to Libra. 'I’m not comfortable today,' Treasury Secretary Mnuchin said of the Facebook Libra plan. 'As I’ve said, they and others have a lot of work to do before they get us comfortable.
  • As President Donald Trump on Monday intensified his criticism of a group of more liberal Democratic women lawmakers in Congress, Democrats announced they would bring a resolution to the House floor this week to condemn the President's weekend tweets, in which he said the group of minority women members should 'go back' to the countries they 'originally came from.' 'The House cannot allow the President’s characterization of immigrants to our country to stand,' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wrote in a letter to fellow Democrats.  'Our Republican colleagues must join us in condemning the President’s xenophobic tweets,' Pelosi added. At the White House, the President stood by his criticism. “If you're not happy here, then you can leave,” Mr. Trump told reporters. The Speaker's announcement came as a handful of GOP lawmakers publicly criticized President Trump's tweets, which targeted Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA). 'Those tweets are racist and xenophobic,' Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX) said on CNN. 'President Trump was wrong to suggest that four left-wing congresswomen should go back to where they came from,' said Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) in a written statement. 'I urge our President immediately disavow his comments,' said Rep. Pete Olson (R-TX). 'Frankly I’m appalled by the President's tweets,' said Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI). 'There’s no excuse.' Returning to Capitol Hill for the legislative work week, Democrats were furious. 'Donald Trump's bigoted attacks over the weekend were intended to divide this country,' said Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV). 'Another vile, racist attack from the President,' said Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ). But none of that slowed Mr. Trump. “These are people that hate our country,” the President said, as a crowd outside the White House cheered his comments. One Democrat, Rep. Al Green of Texas, announced that he would file articles of impeachment against the President - based just on his weekend tweets.  “I will again, this month, bring impeachment to a vote on the Floor of the U.S. House of Representatives for bigotry in policy, harmful to our society,” Green said.
  • The Trump Administration on Monday rolled out new restrictions designed to limit the ability of migrants from Central America to apply for asylum in the United States, stating those who try to make it to the U.S. via Mexico will be ineligible for asylum along the southern border. In a document posted to the Federal Register, the new regulations from the Trump Administration say that if a migrant tries to make it by land to the southern border, they must ask for legal protection in a third country along the way, before asking for asylum in the United States. 'The United States has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of aliens encountered along or near the southern land border with Mexico,' the new rules state. The regulations - scheduled to be published on Tuesday - say, 'an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border after failing to apply for protection in a third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which the alien transited en route to the United States is ineligible for asylum.' “This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum,” said Attorney General William Barr in a written statement. “The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border,” Barr added. There are limited exceptions to the new asylum rule, such as if the migrant can demonstrate persecution or torture; or if the person is a victim of human trafficking. In Congress, GOP lawmakers gave the President a quick thumbs up. “For too long, our broken asylum system has been exploited by illegal aliens as a means to enter and remain in our country,” said Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ). The new rules are certain to face a legal challenge. “The Trump administration is trying to unilaterally reverse our country's legal and moral commitment to protect those fleeing danger,” said Lee Gelernt of the ACLU. “This new rule is patently unlawful and we will sue swiftly,” the ACLU added in a statement.