Re: The Civil Rights Game. Does anybody else find it odd that the first game of what will surely become a national tradition celebrating equality and human decency will be played with the Indians (commonly known as "The Tribe"--a term not so enjoyed by Native Americans. And actually, "indians" isn't so hot either--it's considered analogous to using "negroes" to describe African-Americans)? As the official site says, Cleveland was the first AL team to integrate and the first with an African-American manager--so their credentials there can't be disputed. But that logo of the caricatured "injun brave" is awfully close to a mammy-face, isn't it? That's why the Atlanta Braves dropped the "screaming warrior" logo they used throughout the 50's-70's (though the "Tomahawk Chop" obviously survives with fans). I have an acquaintance who is a Native American rights activist and he finds the Indians' logo incredibly offensive. He's also working to rid U of I of their "Chief" mascot here in Illinois, an effort that has so far been met with vehement opposition from U of I officials and many vocal fans.  What do you guys (and ladies) think about this? Should tradition trump modern p.c. attitudes when sports teams are concerned?