Skip to content

Poll shows high support for Redskins name

Redskins Getty Images

The push against the Redskins name has intensified in recent weeks.  Public opinion has yet to follow.

An Associated Press poll conducted form April 11 through 15 of 1,004 adults found that 79 percent didn’t believe the Redskins should change their name.  Another 11 percent disagreed, eight percent weren’t sure, and two percent didn’t answer.

The last national poll on the issue came in 1992, with 89 percent saying at the time that the name should not be changed.

“That’s who they’ve been forever. That’s who they’re known as,” one person polled last month told the Associated Press. “I think we as a people make race out to be a bigger issue than it is.”

“With everything that Native Americans have gone through in this country, to have a sports team named the Redskins — come on, now. It’s bad,” another person said. “Much farther down the road, we’re going to look back on this and say, ‘Are you serious?  Did they really call them the Washington Redskins?’  It’s a no-brainer.”

The most important constituency consists of one person:  owner Daniel Snyder.  He’s 100 percent certain the name is staying, at least for as long as he owns the team.

Permalink 179 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
179 Responses to “Poll shows high support for Redskins name”
  1. wisewoo says: May 2, 2013 3:33 PM

    Durt da durrr

  2. Rick Spielman is a Magician says: May 2, 2013 3:34 PM

    How about a poll of native americans? If they’re fine with it, I’m fine with it.

  3. killxswitch says: May 2, 2013 3:36 PM

    Don’t care.

  4. mavajo says: May 2, 2013 3:36 PM

    There was no need to conduct a nationwide poll on this. Just read the comments section on any of the thousand articles PFT has written on this dead-horse of a topic.

    If a team was named the Washington Whiteskins, I’d love it.

  5. doomsdaydefensetx says: May 2, 2013 3:36 PM

    Hail to the Redtails.
    Hey that’s catchy LOL

  6. gcsuk says: May 2, 2013 3:37 PM

    Additional poll shows low support (as in none) for troll Redskin fans that frequent this website (here’s looking at you, logic!).

    Kudos to true Redskins fans that can argue football rationally and objectively. I may not agree with your choice of teams, but can’t argue with a dedicated (and realistic) fan.

  7. thesteelers says: May 2, 2013 3:38 PM

    Redtails! WOOOO!

  8. ctattles says: May 2, 2013 3:38 PM

    The name needs to go. Replace “Redskins” with any other derogatory term about race and it it becomes quite clear. Would Washington Negros be acceptable?

  9. tapakip says: May 2, 2013 3:38 PM

    Something tells me if we had a team named the Arizona Wet****s or Atlanta N*****s, people might feel differently. Ask an American Indian how they feel about being called a Redskin.

    “That’s the way it’s always been” is terrible reasoning to continue something.

  10. obsessedvikingfan says: May 2, 2013 3:39 PM

    If people would not look for “race issues” in every facet of life, there wouldn’t be a problem.

    I swear there are groups of people hired to scour the internet to find things they can call racist. The leader is Warren Moon.

  11. bechillin says: May 2, 2013 3:40 PM

    i’m glad most people have something we call brains

  12. bigdaddyraven says: May 2, 2013 3:40 PM

    What I do in situations like this is I give the benefit of the doubt to the insulted parties if it passes a reasonableness test. And this does, referring to any ethnic group by skin color is reasonably offensive, no stretch of imagination is required.

  13. northshorejag says: May 2, 2013 3:40 PM

    You still think RG3 should lobby mgmt

  14. skins0ntop says: May 2, 2013 3:40 PM

    So if the Redskins must change their name, does that mean that if 11% of 1% of all people in the U.S. claim offense to anything then it too must change?

  15. theclaim says: May 2, 2013 3:40 PM

    Hail To The Redskins, I say with NOTHING BUT RESPECT AND ADMIRATION!

  16. bigjd says: May 2, 2013 3:42 PM

    Much farther down the road, people are going to say. Really, that’s what these idiots spent their time worrying about?

  17. bigkountry24 says: May 2, 2013 3:42 PM

    I on the fence about the name change. It really “so far” hasn’t bothered many of the Indian race with the exception of a few from what a have been seeing. But on the other hand i just want to be done with all of this fuss about the name.

    If they change it to something “decent ” that no one can gripe about then no one will have jack to say about anything! But im with them either way as i have been for the past 25+ years! HTTR!

  18. blackandbluedivision says: May 2, 2013 3:43 PM

    White Man 130,034,049,090

    People that were here first…2

    It’s not helping. No one is truly educating the masses on WHY this is offensive to them. People just think it’s a name. It doesn’t help that Native Americans are a very marginalized minority. So you’re not going to hear that much of an uproar.

  19. Sideline Mob says: May 2, 2013 3:43 PM

    It’s too bad somebody already took “Pelicans”. That would’ve been a great replacement.

  20. blacknole08 says: May 2, 2013 3:43 PM

    I’m not surprised. The derogatory usage of the word “Redskin” is so outdated anyways.

  21. kylexitron says: May 2, 2013 3:44 PM

    I’m partially native american and honestly don’t really care either way.

    That being said, anyone who says the term “Redskin” isn’t meant to be derogatory is fooling themselves. Just because it doesn’t mean anything to you doesn’t mean it’s not an offensive term to some.

    The word was invented to be a objectifying label of a people deemed to be socially inferior.

    I hate hearing people say that it’s “not offensive”. It doesn’t bother me at all but it bothers some people; also, consider the fact that the main reason it doesn’t bother MORE people? Because the term “Redskin” was usually used when talking about a target to be killed. There aren’t “more” people to be offended, because those people have long since been murdered.

    Does that suddenly make it..better?

  22. blackandbluedivision says: May 2, 2013 3:45 PM

    The fact that we’re even having this discussion in 2013 is embarrassing. A guy named his team after a racist term and because it’s lasted forever…people think it should stay. Because no one has had the guts to stand up and say something about it…They think it should stay?

  23. rg3andthensome says: May 2, 2013 3:45 PM

    I SUPPORT THE REDSKINS NAME….

    Please add me to the list who say that we should not change the name of the team.

  24. purpwalk says: May 2, 2013 3:46 PM

    leave it alone

  25. lackofabetter says: May 2, 2013 3:46 PM

    How do we teach our kids that “sticks and stones may break our bones, but words will never hurt me” Then we turn around and get sooooo offended by words. If you are offended by a word, you are a child, a sad little child.

  26. ninetysixer says: May 2, 2013 3:46 PM

    who was polled and where do they live? I highly doubt a large amount of Native Americans were included in this

  27. blackqbwhiterb says: May 2, 2013 3:47 PM

    The reason the poll doesn’t shock me is because there is no true outrage, the whole issue is fabricated by the media looking for a story and an opportunity to make everyone bend to their idea of what’s right and what’s wrong.

    Long-time Redskins owner George Preston Marshall said “I’ll hire some black football players when the Harlem Globetrotters hire some white basketball players”…….Now 90% of the franchise’s players the last 40 years have been black and they’re still racist, only now it’s Native Americans being oppressed by the evil Redskins……

  28. barneyrumble says: May 2, 2013 3:48 PM

    If the team mascot was making fun of or disparaging to Native Americans, that would be one thing, but that’s not what I believe is happening. It seems to me that representing warriors from DC going into battle, is some what representative of what part of the history of Native American culture is all about.

  29. myeaglescantwin says: May 2, 2013 3:49 PM

    Ok,, do you not see the problem here?

    Americans exterminated the native people.
    Their numbers would never be enough for a vote.

    Why is that even necessary?
    Why does an organization in our nation’s capitol need to have someone tell them to change a prejudice offensive name?

    get real.

  30. scoonie97 says: May 2, 2013 3:51 PM

    They’re privately owned. Snyder can do what he wants. If you don’t like, don’t watch.

    ‘merica.

  31. koolrepetoire says: May 2, 2013 3:52 PM

    Redskins fan since ’72, honestly I’m open to a change if needed, I am a life-long fan of the team, the area, & the color scheme. Washington Indigenous to honor them or Washington ‘Skins, if they don’t want to lose their identity.

  32. 509seahawks says: May 2, 2013 3:52 PM

    even if they were named the washington redtails it would still be better then the cleveland browns

  33. h1ndrix says: May 2, 2013 3:52 PM

    Those who are against it should spend less time worrying about the name and more time putting Dave Mathews bumper stickers on their Prius.

  34. titan4ever595 says: May 2, 2013 3:53 PM

    I am a Native American and believe me when I say being called an Indian will tick off more Native Americans than Redskin. My Great Grandfather called whites that lived near the reservation Round Eyes and Pale Skin. Does that offend you.

    We are not Indian. People from India are Indian. Just because some French Sailor got lost and thought he was in India does not make us Indians. We are Native to America.

  35. filthymcnasty1isadouche says: May 2, 2013 3:54 PM

    I’m gonna start calling them Redtails just to annoy Skins fans.

  36. papazoid says: May 2, 2013 3:56 PM

    Poll shows racism and bigotry alive and well. there are hundreds of insensitive and offensive names and the list continues to evolve. redskins is on that list. stop using it.

  37. lunarpie says: May 2, 2013 3:57 PM

    If this goes through it will more proof the Democrats are involved at the upper level of the NFL.

  38. jacktheraven says: May 2, 2013 3:59 PM

    If they change the name, probably should change the city too. They play in MD and their training/FO are in VA. Not much Washington about them.

  39. azarkhan says: May 2, 2013 3:59 PM

    “owner Daniel Snyder. He’s 100 percent certain the name is staying, at least for as long as he owns the team.”

    And since he’s only 47, the name will be here a while. I suggest all the clowns who are opposed get over it.

  40. manderson367 says: May 2, 2013 3:59 PM

    What do you think of when you hear the word “Redskins”?
    I’d venture to guess 99% of the people would automatically think of the football team, NOT of Native Americans in a derogatory way.

  41. bigsuede says: May 2, 2013 4:01 PM

    It is unreasonable for any person to be hurt by the word redskin as it is an archaic word that is not used in a derogatory fashion. Redskin has never been used in a derogatory sense during any of our lifetimes.

    It would be the same as if we outlawed a team being called the carpetbaggers- this is absurd.

    I would also mention that this poll will probably go back to the 89% who believe the name shouldn’t be changed as more people become aware of the attempt to change the name. The poll in question occured after this group protested and made national news. As the discussion gets more attention- that 79 percent will go higher.

  42. rg321 says: May 2, 2013 4:01 PM

    If you do your research on this matter, you will find that before the Washington Redskins, they were known as the Boston Redskins. Before that, they were known as the Boston Braves. The HC at the time when the name was being changed was a true Native American leader. It was his idea to change the name to Redskins, as he said the name was felt to be a strong, and uplifting. He then went on to draft many Native American players. Remember if I were to tell any of you , ” hey I met a redskin today!” how many of you would think I was talking about a Native American
    Hail

  43. bigmikeskinsfan says: May 2, 2013 4:03 PM

    when you say the word “redskin” out in public 90% of the people are going to think you are talking about the football team.

    When I was a kid living on a reservation in northern Cali the people there all loved that I was a Skins fan. They didnt take it as a slight..they took it as something cool.

  44. footballgreed says: May 2, 2013 4:06 PM

    Again, the only person that has the final say in it is the owner of the team. If you don’t like it buy the team and change it. Funny though one article I read about it was the the Native Americans didn’t want to change the name, BUT wanted a cut of the money…

  45. snuffysmif says: May 2, 2013 4:06 PM

    The people I have know who are of Native American descent are fans of the Redskins because of the name.

    They sure as hell don’t cheer for the Cowboys.

  46. keepounding1234 says: May 2, 2013 4:09 PM

    Whoops. They are called the Fighting Whities.

  47. bigsuede says: May 2, 2013 4:11 PM

    Another way for a typical person to understand this. Yankee was and still is a derogatory term for americans. The british used the word as an insult in the 1700s-

    And we have a major sports team that utilizes this offensive term!

  48. darrkkomens says: May 2, 2013 4:11 PM

    Of course there is going to be High Support to keep the name.. Native Americans are the minority (as far as numbers) in the D.C area so of course the poll is in favor of the name stay.

    The Majority of the People in the area are not affected by the name, it doesn’t offend them, they just know its the name they’ve always known and rooted for so they could care less about the people it hurts and that’s the sad part..

    Those people who wants the name to stay including the owner haven’t gone through what the Native Americans have gone through so they can’t identify and don’t even choose to educate themselves on the issue.

  49. whodeytrox says: May 2, 2013 4:12 PM

    I can kind of see both sides of this issue. On one hand, Redskins got their name from an indigenous people who used red clay as paint for camouflage.. They aren’t the “Dirty Redskins” or the “Homeless Redskins”. However, this was clearly a poll of predominantly white football fans who are the least likely group to find it offensive. It’s not unfair to say it’s a bit insensitive, but, to me it isn’t this hateful racism driven moniker that was designed to put a group of people down. If you want to see something RACIST, just check out the Cleveland Indians logo.

  50. bigdaddyraven says: May 2, 2013 4:14 PM

    From now on I will refer to them as the Washington “formerly known as a derogatory term for Native Americans” Football Team.

  51. skydivn01 says: May 2, 2013 4:16 PM

    Oh boy… this is going to get Al Sharpton all worked up!!

  52. ganja4all says: May 2, 2013 4:16 PM

    I was born in Washington D.C. I am a native American. Hail to the Redskins.

  53. bison4me says: May 2, 2013 4:23 PM

    As a member of the Catawba Nation, I say, HTTR!

  54. vmannj says: May 2, 2013 4:24 PM

    Weren’t the Patriots about 98.5% white? No one in Boston is complaining. And how about the “Blue”jays, or referring to the Cardinals as the redbirds? How DARE you judge a bird by the color of its feathers!!!

  55. west4420 says: May 2, 2013 4:25 PM

    I kind of agree that Redskins is a little bad but there is no ill will behind the name. PC’ness has gotten out of control though. Look at Marquette being forced to change from the “Warriors” to the “Golden Eagles”.

    Why does Warrior smack of racism?

    That’s not racism. Racism is not letting a guy into a game because he’s native american.

  56. patsfan13 says: May 2, 2013 4:25 PM

    If they were to change their name, think of the revenue that will be brought in for team gear.

  57. southpaw2k says: May 2, 2013 4:25 PM

    I find it a bit odd and hypocritical that the Redskins are being petitioned to change their name, when there are other teams out there like the Braves, the Seminoles, the Chiefs, the Blackhawks, and the Indians (FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, THE INDIANS!!!!) aren’t being asked to do the same.

  58. ickky says: May 2, 2013 4:25 PM

    Support was also High for the Fighting Sioux. Any guess how that ended up?

  59. elscorcho5000 says: May 2, 2013 4:26 PM

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A poll of American Indians found that an overwhelming majority of them are not bothered by the name of the Washington Redskins.

    Only 9% of those polled said the name of the NFL team is “offensive,” while 90% said it’s acceptable, according to the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey, released Friday.

  60. raideralex99 says: May 2, 2013 4:28 PM

    There is one way of solving this problem … stop calling the Native American people “Native American” and just call the redskins and lets see how far that goes.

  61. stlunatik says: May 2, 2013 4:29 PM

    the Redskins should forever be the Redskins. If you don’t like it, who the hell cares. Trying to please everyone is getting totally ridiculous

  62. glac1 says: May 2, 2013 4:31 PM

    I’m not a Redskin fan.. but please… There is no reason to change your name.

  63. outpattern says: May 2, 2013 4:32 PM

    I once asked an Indian friend of mine (yes, he was not offended to be called an Indian) who his favorite pro football teams were. His answer?

    “The Chiefs. The ‘Skins.”

    “But aren’t you offended by the Redskins name?” I asked.

    “What do I care. My skin ain’t red!”

  64. waterfalldungeon says: May 2, 2013 4:32 PM

    Anyone who thinks that the name “REDSKINS” is racist or derogatory in any way, IS IGNORANT to the ORIGIN of the name!

    They named it as such in HONOR of one of their past coaches who was 50 percent Sioux Indian.

    The name REDSKIN is used to describe Indian Warriors who would paint themselves RED before going into battle.

    LEARN SOME HISTORY BEFORE DRAWING CONCLUSIONS!

  65. b3nz0z says: May 2, 2013 4:39 PM

    “we make too big a deal out of race in this country” is something said by people who are never personally affected by racism.

  66. clssylssy says: May 2, 2013 4:39 PM

    This is all about revenue…how many Native Americans will benefit?…da, talk about no-brainer.
    This is all about greed, most Native American Indians could care less about this. They have bigger concerns like feeding their families and putting a roof over their head, and getting decent jobs.

  67. isphet71 says: May 2, 2013 4:40 PM

    America – where the minority that cries “foul” rules over the majority.

  68. cwwgk says: May 2, 2013 4:42 PM

    Um, if almost 90% of people polled don’t think the name should be changed who then exactly is making this “push”?

  69. thrstr says: May 2, 2013 4:43 PM

    been said a million times already, the fans of the team don’t give one negative thought to native americans because of the name of their football team. I really question the mindset of people making an issue of this, why do YOU immediately and automatically think racism every chance that you get, seems like they might have some personal issues to deal with.
    Bobby G III says it best, (paraphrasing here) the PC crap has to stop somewhere, I’m fine with right here.
    HTT NFC East Champs (hey that’s a catchy team name), you all OK with that one?

  70. kwickett85 says: May 2, 2013 4:43 PM

    People love to whine and complain about every little thing. The team is named after William Dietz who coached them during the 30’s. They changed their name from the Braves to the Redskins in honor of him because he was a native american. He didn’t seem to mind it did he?

  71. freedomispopular says: May 2, 2013 4:44 PM

    A better idea would be for people to stop being so thin-skinned all the time. Offended by something? Man up, grow a pair, and shrug it off, instead of boo-hooing every time somebody looks at you the wrong way.

  72. macwomack says: May 2, 2013 4:45 PM

    How insulting is the term ‘Native Americans’ – it implies that a whole race of people didn’t know they were “Americans” until they were discovered by Italian explorers. Aren’t they the Native _________ where ________ refers to their own name for their own land/country?

    What do “Indians” call themsleves? Certainly not “Native Americans” – “America” is a term that was cast upon them by Europeans any attempt to refer to themselves as “Americans” diminishes their identity and is insulting to their entire race.

  73. prmpft says: May 2, 2013 4:55 PM

    i think your last post on the name change reflected that to a large degree as well…

  74. hometownfan says: May 2, 2013 4:55 PM

    from wikipedia, Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the
    prior poll’s findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states
    on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of
    the questions.

  75. thrstr says: May 2, 2013 4:57 PM

    @patsfan13

    “If they were to change their name, think of the revenue that will be brought in for team gear”

    real Redskins fans won’t buy the new crap, we have experience with that one, I own no Wizards gear, but I still wear my Bullets stuff whenever I get a chance

  76. Rick Spielman is a Magician says: May 2, 2013 4:58 PM

    waterfalldungeon says:May 2, 2013 4:32 PM

    Anyone who thinks that the name “REDSKINS” is racist or derogatory in any way, IS IGNORANT to the ORIGIN of the name!

    They named it as such in HONOR of one of their past coaches who was 50 percent Sioux Indian.

    The name REDSKIN is used to describe Indian Warriors who would paint themselves RED before going into battle.

    LEARN SOME HISTORY BEFORE DRAWING CONCLUSIONS!
    _____

    Kind of funny that you used the terms “Sioux” and “Indian,” which are both offensive to many Native Americans.

  77. treesloth16 says: May 2, 2013 5:01 PM

    Only 60years ago, the majority of Americans advocated segregation of blacks and whites and interracial marriages was illegal. 100 years ago, women did not have the right to vote. This was all supported by the ‘majority’ of Americans. Looking back now, was it correct?

    Things changed because they were wrong, and now idiot football fans decry the name change because it infringes upon their ‘rights.’

  78. timbuttrum says: May 2, 2013 5:02 PM

    As a Redskins fan, I’ll be for a change in name when the NFL drops the equally offensive Rooney Rule.

  79. dcommish says: May 2, 2013 5:05 PM

    When will they go after the soft drink Cherokee Red too?

  80. clarencewhorley says: May 2, 2013 5:08 PM

    Fascists running this site now

    A 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of those American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name.

    But in 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll’s findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.

  81. thirdistheworrd says: May 2, 2013 5:10 PM

    Rick Spielman is a Magician says: May 2, 2013 3:34 PM

    How about a poll of native americans? If they’re fine with it, I’m fine with it.
    ________
    Look up the 2004 poll by UPenn’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. 92% of Natives sampled did not find the name offensive. What makes the poll even more conclusive is that the study, conducted over several years, surveyed 768 Natives. In contrast, most Gallup Polls, reliably representative of the entire country, survey 2-8 thousand Americans. The Native population in the United States are a little over 2 million, and the total population of the United States is a little over 315 million.

    In other words, the Annenberg survey’s sample size is 200 times larger than the sample size of America’s most reliable poll. So yeah, I would say “they’re fine with it”.

  82. clarencewhorley says: May 2, 2013 5:11 PM

    A 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of those American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name.

    But in 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll’s findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.

  83. lions81slappy says: May 2, 2013 5:12 PM

    so sick of the media needing hits on their web pages or nothing to write about so they wish their own personal agenda. heres a newsflash: report IMPORTANT facts and u will have no shortage of traffic

  84. thewizardofbs says: May 2, 2013 5:12 PM

    I’m sure more african-american people find the rebel flag offensive than native-americans find the redskins name offensive but I don’t see anyone outlawing rebel flags. Leave the name alone and get a life.

  85. ganja4all says: May 2, 2013 5:15 PM

    @b3nzoz

    we are all affected by racism. I am Scottish and am only allowed to be “white”, “non-hispanic white”, etc. There is absolutely 0 respect for my people, culture or future.

  86. 1historian says: May 2, 2013 5:18 PM

    I said a few days ago that the clown who proposed the name ‘redtails’ would have his 15 minutes and disappear. I already forgot what his name is and florio didn’t deign to mention it in this piece.

    Q.E.D.

  87. thirdistheworrd says: May 2, 2013 5:21 PM

    Kind of funny that you used the terms “Sioux” and “Indian,” which are both offensive to many Native Americans.
    _________
    “‘Sioux’ is offensive to [Natives]”? Right, just like the term “English” is offensive to most Europeans. The North Dakota “Fighting Sioux” had to change their nickname because the Sioux Nation wouldn’t endorse it.

  88. koolrepetoire says: May 2, 2013 5:21 PM

    Blackfoot & Cherokee blood in me. My skin is ruddy. The Native on the helmet has my complexion. When they say “Hail to them, it means hail to them.”

  89. ganja4all says: May 2, 2013 5:21 PM

    This recurring theme that we need/want/must have/ cant be without political correctness has gone on far too long. Those who insist on the PC of names, race, etc are low information people. It is perfectly acceptable to have a different viewpoint. ANY viewpoint. I am sure that the “race” crowd wants something different so they can “feel” relevant. Please read a book called” The Seven Daughters of Eve”. We are all from Africa. When pc people read this book they are stunned and offended by the lack of consideration and compassion by the cultural leadership. When the proven science is incorporated into an informed position the “race”, diversity issue is again rendered pointless. Stop playing games with race, pc. We are all human beings

  90. stevenwilliams2013 says: May 2, 2013 5:21 PM

    We are living in a world now where society wants us to respect gay people but yet they feel like it’s ok to have a team named the “Redskins” which is offense to an entire race of people.

    I am confused!!

  91. phinfan says: May 2, 2013 5:26 PM

    Well the old name pottsville maroons is available lol

  92. thirdistheworrd says: May 2, 2013 5:27 PM

    Rick Spielman is a Magician says: May 2, 2013 3:34 PM

    How about a poll of native americans? If they’re fine with it, I’m fine with it.
    ____________________
    Look up UPenn’s 2004 Annenberg Public Policy Center survey. The study was conducted over several years, with a sample size 200 times larger than most Gallup Polls, and concluded that 92 percent of Natives were not offended by the team nickname. So yeah I would say all available evidence says “they’re fine with it.”

  93. woodbridgekid73 says: May 2, 2013 5:31 PM

    I have never meet a Native American who wasn’t a Cowboy fan, that in it’s self makes me not care what Native American’s think about the nickname Redskins…HTTR!

  94. dbot1800 says: May 2, 2013 5:38 PM

    The headline of this story should read, “Poll shows high support for Redskins name, Media hardest hit”.

  95. tinopuno says: May 2, 2013 5:39 PM

    “The most important constituency consists of one person: owner Daniel Snyder. He’s 100 percent certain the name is staying, at least for as long as he owns the team.”

    Sensitivity has never been Danny’s long suit. The people most likely to be offended by the name ‘Redskins’ are Native American. I wonder how Danny Boy would feel about a name like the Washington Sheenys or Washington Hebes.

  96. sixjak says: May 2, 2013 5:50 PM

    Those people who wants the name to stay including the owner haven’t gone through what the Native Americans have gone through so they can’t identify and don’t even choose to educate themselves on the issue.

    ______________

    I’m gonna go out on a limb here and wager you haven’t either. Climb back into your Prius and go find another phoney cause to take up like Global Warming or Climate Change.

    Most indigenous ppl I know aren’t wound up tight enough to worry about something like this.

  97. tampajoey2 says: May 2, 2013 5:50 PM

    Compromise and call the Washington Cheerleaders the Redtails. Problem solved.

  98. croghan1919 says: May 2, 2013 5:54 PM

    Take a poll of American Indians only.
    If they are offended by a clear majority take a poll again for the general population with the results of the Nat. American poll as part of the question.
    Until then I have to believe that the most noise is coming from P.C. police and there bs agenda.

  99. nodindenver says: May 2, 2013 5:54 PM

    Where the heck is logicalvoice when you need him/her? Must be hanging out in the Broncos area as usual. Someone notify him/her that a skins question has come up.

  100. irishnativeson says: May 2, 2013 5:56 PM

    First of all if you can’t see why some see the term “Redskin” as offensive then you are refusing to put yourself in someone else’s position, a native axiom. All you history buffs should also know this as well. The reason seemingly innocuous or even venerating terms such as savage, warrior, brave, or even chief can be viewed as derogatory is because those terms tend to contribute to perpetuating a stereotype that natives are uncultured and warlike and their culture has no redeeming quality. I don’t buy the Dietz meme either, they were named the Braves before he coached in Boston so why the switch to Redskins for a coach that went 11-11-2 seems like they may have been mocking him instead of celebrating his heritage. Seems to me the ones throwing the pee whining hissy fit are the ones that don’t really have a dog in the fight and that friends is strange indeed.

  101. contract says: May 2, 2013 5:57 PM

    One lawsuit charging that they are creating a hostile work environment for Native Americans should settle this one for good.

  102. kalmyre says: May 2, 2013 5:58 PM

    Don’t change the name, just change the logo to a potato, all is well.

  103. kev86 says: May 2, 2013 5:59 PM

    I’ve hated the Redskins my whole life and love playing against them twice a year. Great rivalry. I wouldn’t want to play them as anything but the Redskins. Go Giants!

  104. ganja4all says: May 2, 2013 6:01 PM

    @irishnativeson

    Did you just call Indians, Native americans, the “race crowd”, etc, “DOGS”?

  105. mazblast says: May 2, 2013 6:02 PM

    There’s a certain irony in the fact that the team name was changed in the 1930s from “Braves” to “Redskins.”

    If the team name were changed back to Braves, the same PC crowd that wants it changed from Redskins would be just as upset. Remember all the fuss during the 1995 World Series (Braves-Indians)? My, the always-upset-about-something-because-they-enjoy-being-upset crowd had a great ol’ time that October. I never could get anyone to explain what was so bad about “Braves”.

  106. nativetrev says: May 2, 2013 6:09 PM

    My dad is 100% native, I am half. Natives are not easily offended, as you can see by many other Natives that are OK with the name. I am assuming they probably never had someone call them a Redskin or used the term to describe them in some derogatory way. There are two professional teams off the top of my head that are offensive. Redskins is one of them and the other is the mascot for the Cleveland Indians. If a group of people are offended by something in the United States there is usually an outcry for a public apology and denouncement of the said offense. I find it amazing that this does not happen and obvious and blatant racism is not only tolerated but defended. The so-called “poll” is now a part of the defense. I find this to be totally irresponsible for a journalism article and should be removed immediately. Other news articles use this and write “Redskins’ name not offensive to the majority of Americans” polls show. This is lying with irresponsible statistics and does not tell you that the majority that voted were indifferent because it does not really affect them one way or the other. Using a trait from a race to describe how a certain ethnic group looks or acts is racist. When the term is used to demean another group in the past or present or belittle them it should not be used as a name of a national team.

  107. navigator24 says: May 2, 2013 6:12 PM

    who cares what polls say ? a racist name is a racist name

  108. jetsjetsjetsnow says: May 2, 2013 6:12 PM

    How about the Washinton Casinos just to make amends for all the stupidity around this…

  109. thirdistheworrd says: May 2, 2013 6:14 PM

    Rick Spielman is a Magician:

    Kind of funny that you used the terms “Sioux” and “Indian,” which are both offensive to many Native Americans.
    _________
    Me:
    “‘Sioux’ is offensive to [Natives]“? Right, just like the term “English” is offensive to most Europeans. The North Dakota “Fighting Sioux” had to change their nickname because the Sioux Nation wouldn’t endorse it.
    __________
    Really? Two thumbs down? The Sioux are a Native nation. Using the term “Sioux” to describe an individual of Sioux heritage is no more derogatory than using the term “English” to describe an individual of English heritage. This is a fact. The North Dakota “Fighting Sioux” had to change their school mascot because the Sioux governing body asked them to. This is a fact.

  110. theclaim says: May 2, 2013 6:18 PM

    The team name. Team was purchased by George Preston Marshall The Newark Tornadoes were moved to Boston in 1932 and began as The Boston Braves. In 1935 Preston Marshall had the name changed to The Redskins to align with the more popular team in town the Boston Red Sox while maintaining the Native American theme/image he so respected(Marshall WAS a racist so to me this speaks volumes) The name change failed to draw larger crowds to the games as Marshall had hoped so at the end of the 35 season he moved the team to Washington. They won their first world Championship in 1937 with rookie QB/CB/Punter Sammy Baugh. NOW, What did you say about do research before you post? Some of us don’t need to research it. WE KNOW IT! Susan Harjo lost her case in Supreme court,precedent has been set. This WILL have bearing on the outcome of this and any future litigation in this matter. The coach at the time was also part Sioux a coincidence but still a piece in the puzzle
    This debate is RIDICULOUS. Redskins is not derogatory or offensive in any way. If the team in question was the New York Ni&&ers? I would understand. The Sacramento Sp&cs? The Detroit Da&os, The Seattle Sl&nts. This brings up a point of contention regarding common sense. I am NOT racist and DO find slurs offensive. NO ONE debating this seems to have ANY problem typing out or saying REDSKINS. Why? Because you don’t associate it with guilt or hatred. Try typing or tossing around the word N$&&@R! In public or on ANY site without censoring it. The difference is ONE is hateful,hurtful, comes with a sense of guilt, pointedly WRONG. The other doesn’t incurr any of these things by merely typing or saying them. Anyone INCLUDING Florio denying this as fact is a hypocrite. I believe his example was The Mandingos…Seriously? If people want to address offensive team names on the PC basis, the Giants and Titans need to be renamed. Gigantism is a very real disease that effects people on a daily basis. Is this not offensive? The Raiders and Buccaneers and Vikings ALL NEED to change their names as these groups were all associated with murder rape and pillaging as a guideline. I’m pretty sure Cowboys aren’t very well thought of on reservations around the US! Hey how about we REMOVE all reservations? Isn’t THAT INHERENTLY RACIST? Again, I am NOT racist but I am tired of Americans tiptoeing around issues claiming they are too offensive for the masses. Focus on something TANGIBLE like the despairity between the upper and lower classes in the US or the fact that the powers that be manipulate our laws to allow the wealthy to move industry offshore to avoid taxes the REST of us pay? Tired of the WEAK argument against this team name and the rhetoric/propaganda that surrounds it. Ask yourself an honest question, have you EVER in your life heard someone use the term Redskin in. Derogatory manner OTHER than to talk trash about a football team? I’ll be courteous and answer for you. NO you haven’t! It hasn’t been a slur in the US lexicon for WELL over a century. Racism is alive and well. Focus on eliminating that as opposed to a football teams name. The Claim

  111. defscottyb says: May 2, 2013 6:20 PM

    This is all about money, always has been. It’s “white” indians trying to get a big cut of Redskins merchandising profits. Real brown indians that live on reservations don’t even care about the name. Notice how I said brown and not Red? Their skin is brown/tan color (look at the redskins helmets) not red. The term “Red”skin refers to the red war paint they wore on their faces not their actual skin color. A lot of these “white” indians (as 100% natives call them) try and tell them to oppose the name and why? So they can collect big profits from skins merchandising (and not even share it with brown skined natives). Rich get richer and poor get poorer. Politicians bring this up to raise their profiles. So, in short… It’s not about the name being offensive to natives it’s about money and political careers and not for brown natives. Most natives don’t care about the name, most even support it, they care about the real issues on reservations like rampant corruption and a decent way of life not the name Redskins. This “push” is all cooked up by “white” indians trying to get rich or pc politicians trying to make names for themselves while hiding behind the excuse that the name is offensive. Frankly, that is what is most offensive to me. I’m not making this up, go research it for youself. I’m just exposing the truth.

  112. croghan1919 says: May 2, 2013 6:20 PM

    When I hear or use ” Washington Redskins”
    I don’t think of native Americans, I think of a high scho… err, NFL football team…

  113. thirdistheworrd says: May 2, 2013 6:24 PM

    I don’t buy the Dietz meme either, they were named the Braves before he coached in Boston so why the switch to Redskins for a coach that went 11-11-2 seems like they may have been mocking him instead of celebrating his heritage
    ____________
    Dietz was their first coach. Beloved by the team and the city of Boston, the team changed its name to honor him. Whatever your stance on the name, that is an indisputable point. When the team began moving away from the Native head logo, Walter Wetzel, president of the National Congress of American Indians, not only endorsed the team, but requested that they bring back the logo, and designed it himself.

    Again, whatever your stance on the issue, it’s inarguable that the franchise’s official interactions with Natives has historically been extremely positive.

  114. djachammer says: May 2, 2013 6:44 PM

    You know this is straight crap.
    ” Oh, I am offended . You must change it .” Cry a frigging River .
    If you do not like it, do not watch, read, or Partake in it.
    I do not care if your feeling are hurt, suck it up . Want a straw?

  115. raybees says: May 2, 2013 6:45 PM

    How about changing there name to the L.A. Redskins. That should keep D.C. city people happy

  116. nativetrev says: May 2, 2013 6:48 PM

    @theclaim
    “Redskins is not derogatory or offensive in any way”

    That statement is ignorant because “Redskin” is derogatory and offensive to me. I do not like being called “Redskin” or if someone calls me “Chief”. It is how the term is used to the offended. Not how you feel about the term. I would not think the words “Kike” or “Kraut” is offensive unless I knew how it was used in context.

  117. dennis2488 says: May 2, 2013 6:50 PM

    in the 1700’s support was very high for owning africans.

  118. mblue24 says: May 2, 2013 7:06 PM

    Keep the damn politics out of all sport teams.

  119. EJ says: May 2, 2013 7:10 PM

    If the team changed its name to the Washington Whiteskins, It wouldn’t bother me one bit. If anything, the team name is a compliment to the Native Americans. I mean c’mon, they named a team after you, how cool is that? I vote name stays. We build up issues about race when race is really not much of an issue anymore. Race, color, gender, sexual orientation, there all just words to me.

  120. partmachine says: May 2, 2013 7:11 PM

    The sooner they change the name the better off they’ll be. Own it. It can’t stay the same.

    Washington Hogs is my vote. It pays homage to their history and to the “hogs on the hill”.

  121. defscottyb says: May 2, 2013 7:15 PM

    There are always going to be a few people offended by something, you can’t please everyone. One could make the argument that the name Browns is racist (hey what if we inserted the color Black instead of Brown)… The Cleveland Blacks, see my point? Some people always want to dig for race issues or make lame arguments. Or how about the Giants (offensive to those with the disease giantism). Like I said in my previous post the term “Red” in Redskins is in reference to Red war paint not actual skin color, do some research. Dan S will never change the name so get over it. This is coming from a man of Cherokee hertigage. Hail to the best team in professional sports with the greatest fans. My Washington Redskins.

  122. FlyFromTheInside says: May 2, 2013 7:17 PM

    And the media keeps beating the dead horse…..

  123. coachbeck says: May 2, 2013 7:26 PM

    Go away progressives with your p c garbage. It’s a sports team. Stop trying to tear down all institutions in people’s lives. If you find it offensive then don’t support the team. I personally find everything In Pittsburgh offensive but I don’t call to ban them.

    I don’t even like the skins. But leave em alone

  124. johnnyballsack says: May 2, 2013 7:30 PM

    I took a poll of 274 people and 98% of them said the Redskins will never win a Super Bowl as long as Daniel Snyder is the owner. The other 2% asked who Daniel Snyder was.

  125. defscottyb says: May 2, 2013 7:30 PM

    Even though I’m a huge Redskins fan (a homer you may say and of Cherokee heritage) if I thought the name was racist or offensive I would admit it but it just isn’t. Again… Red war paint not skin color. Proud, brave warrior on the helmet, it’s beautiful. The only offensive or racist thing I’ve really seen in pro sports is the Cleveland Indians goofy, big toothed red faced cartoon character on their hats. Get rid of that logo.

  126. johnnyballsack says: May 2, 2013 7:33 PM

    I took another poll and asked 168 people what they think of PFT posters who agree with Redskins name. 41% said the majority are racist. The other 59% said most are not racist, just ignorant.

  127. raoool says: May 2, 2013 7:41 PM

    ‘…owner Daniel Snyder. He’s 100 percent certain the name is staying, at least for as long as he owns the team.’

    wow. Snyder DOES have (at least) one redeeming feature

  128. chocopoppy says: May 2, 2013 7:44 PM

    In other news, rich CEOs voted overwhelmingly for more tax breaks.

  129. ceteral says: May 2, 2013 7:47 PM

    So if a team was named the Saratoga Samurai, would that be offensive? It’s a celebration of a warrior clan, a proud people’s bravest souls. It’s about as offensive as the word United States Marine or Navy Seal. Stop with the racist interpretations already.

  130. geniusesq says: May 2, 2013 7:47 PM

    New Rule: White people should not determine what minorities find offensive. This is just a name, and one that polls show Native Americans don’t even find particularly derogatory. Stop with the fake outrage.

    HAIL TO THE REDSKINS

  131. manzoa says: May 2, 2013 7:53 PM

    Quick let’s poll Irish Americans to see if they are offended by the University of Notre Dame’s use of the nickname the Fighting Irish. It’s bad enough that PC is everywhere and has now reared its ugly head in professional sports. If the nickname bothers you…stop watching football.

  132. vasteelzeee says: May 2, 2013 8:03 PM

    This debate is better left for FOX and MSNBC. I”m just waiting for my damn NFL to start again. Enough said.

  133. tpa43 says: May 2, 2013 8:09 PM

    Most AmeriKKKans are racist. They don’t get it. The last time people didn’t see stuff wrong with these things was with Nazi Germany.

  134. tpa43 says: May 2, 2013 8:11 PM

    This just in. 98% of Americans supported slavery. Does that make it right?

  135. rlj2170 says: May 2, 2013 8:16 PM

    Way too much thought being put into this. let it go and stop trying to be so politically correct

  136. citizenstrange says: May 2, 2013 8:19 PM

    Majority rule only works if you’re also considering individual rights. Because you can’t have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper. — Larry Flynt

  137. csilojohnson says: May 2, 2013 8:20 PM

    DC seems to have trouble picking team names that aren’t offensive…

  138. raideralex99 says: May 2, 2013 8:41 PM

    It’s funny how so many comments get deleted that side with the name change.
    Perhaps that is how the poll favours the name redskins is okay … if you vote for the name change it does not count.

  139. TheWizard says: May 2, 2013 8:42 PM

    Political correctness voted down again.

    A good day.

  140. rg3andthensome says: May 2, 2013 9:12 PM

    DO NOT TRY AND CHANGE OUR NAME. YOU WILL LOSE.

  141. wisewoo says: May 2, 2013 9:19 PM

    You know what’s funny? I wrote “durt da durr” and received so many likes but what I meant was…

    “Yeah well, I don’t expect people in America to critically think about things unless they directly impact their own lives.”

    But hey – i’m glad ya’ll agree!

  142. mp4pack says: May 2, 2013 9:51 PM

    As someone was quoted in another article on the subject, “This is a really good example of why you never put racism up to a popular vote, because racism will win every time,” she said. “It’s not up to the offending class to say what offends the offended.” Perfectly said.

  143. nsmil10 says: May 2, 2013 9:54 PM

    It’s funny how some people in here can find ways to rationalize an opinion that is not theirs own but has been pushed to them. To the person that said that if I imagine a team called the Washington wetbacks or the Washington n***s then I would understand how offensive the name redskins would be LoL…
    First of all YES those names would be offensive but the name Redskins is not offensive when it signifies a brave people… Why else would fans not want the name changed. It’s not like people use the word redskin to put down native Americans, the word native american does that already

  144. musicman495 says: May 2, 2013 10:10 PM

    kwickett85 says: May 2, 2013 4:43 PM

    People love to whine and complain about every little thing. The team is named after William Dietz who coached them during the 30′s. They changed their name from the Braves to the Redskins in honor of him because he was a native american. He didn’t seem to mind it did he?
    ——————-
    Deitz was also said to have been given the lifelong nickname “Lone Star” by another Native American he met at the 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis. How do you suppose fans in both Dallas and Washington would feel if the name of the Redskins were changed to the “Washington Lone Stars.”

  145. bornsteel62 says: May 2, 2013 10:17 PM

    The name is the REDSKINS… deal with it.

  146. goodguyattorney says: May 2, 2013 10:37 PM

    I already see the thumbs down on this, but how about the Washington Natives or Washington Heritage or Washington Pride or some other name that puts a positive spin and keeps the colors and mascot.

  147. hrdcorbengalsfan says: May 2, 2013 10:40 PM

    People grow up! So no teams names the Blackhawks, White sox, Red sox…am I am certain a deer out there is highly offended at being called a buc?

  148. hawkstradamus says: May 2, 2013 10:45 PM

    For the sake of equality I propose the Baltimore Barbarians or the Phillidelphia Pale Faces

  149. devrick says: May 2, 2013 10:49 PM

    It’s racist. Change it.

  150. kibblesnvick says: May 2, 2013 10:53 PM

    Hundreds of thousands of fans rooting for a team called the “Redskins” …sounds like an honor to me.

  151. kibblesnvick says: May 2, 2013 11:14 PM

    BTW Im not a ‘Skins fan.

  152. thetooloftools says: May 2, 2013 11:42 PM

    In breaking news, My Cleveland Browns will now be known as the Cleveland Class Actions.

  153. macwomack says: May 2, 2013 11:43 PM

    @mazblast

    “Braves” is offensive because it implies that all native people have a fierce warrior spirit…it implies that there are no cowardly natives or natives that would negotiate away their lands for trinkets and whiskey– therefore it is a stereotype that has no place in professional sports.

  154. christopher525 says: May 2, 2013 11:44 PM

    Here’s a crazy ass idea, get with a tribe and get the blessing to use THEIR name instead of “Redskin.” There’s no problem with the Florida State Seminoles, because they have the tribes blessing. Otherwise go generic like the baseball team in Cleveland.

  155. ravonatorswallowsspunk says: May 2, 2013 11:47 PM

    Seriously, dont we have better things to argue about? I want to know what the Ravens chances to repeat are?

    Redskins, Redtails, RedApples, RedFox… who gives a damn?

  156. thestatsishere says: May 3, 2013 12:07 AM

    I’m a Cowboys fan and I love the name. The name is a classic opposite. The Cowboys and Redskins fight and do battle on the field! I know it isn’t politically correct and that isn’t the whole truth behind the Indian wars, but who cares? It is in the past now.

  157. slick3 says: May 3, 2013 2:10 AM

    They called it a “national” poll because it was conducted in the nation’s capital.

  158. modogg42 says: May 3, 2013 2:28 AM

    i love all the opinions in here telling everyone how to think. regardless of your opinion on this, it could likely be fixed by changing the name to something cool like Dothraki.

    or if Petulant rich boy Snyder has to keep the derogatory term to make him feel good, maybe he should dig in his pockets a bit and offer to support some native american charities for some good will

  159. defscottyb says: May 3, 2013 2:54 AM

    This issue is and has always been about money (Redskins merchandising profit sharing) period. Also, for politicians and activists to raise their status and draw interest to themselves. Do some research and become informed about the truth.

  160. gonavybeatarmy says: May 3, 2013 3:16 AM

    In the interest of competitive balance, the Giants shall forfeit $36 million in salary cap to the Redskins to compensate for the unfair advantage created during the uncapped year in which Peter Minuet stole Manhattan for $24.00.

  161. j4man1 says: May 3, 2013 4:42 AM

    hey nativetrev, so now we go after the Kansas City Chiefs. Get over it and grow up!

  162. johnnyballsack says: May 3, 2013 10:32 AM

    161 comments so far. I would say that would be considered a fair sampling size. It shows that there are a lot of racists and ignorant people. Backward logic does not change facts. The name is racist whether you are using it in that context or not, end of story.

    Google the origin, definition and meaning of the term, all of them start with “A racially offensive and derogatory term referring to Native Americans”. Backward logic does not change that. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. Looks like most of you removed all doubt.

  163. thirdistheworrd says: May 3, 2013 1:05 PM

    johnnyballsack says:
    May 3, 2013 10:32 AM
    161 comments so far. I would say that would be considered a fair sampling size. It shows that there are a lot of racists and ignorant people. Backward logic does not change facts. The name is racist whether you are using it in that context or not, end of story.
    ________
    Wait, so everyone who disagrees with you (including 92% of actual Natives) is a racist and a fool? What a powerful and well-thought-out argument. OK everyone, pack up and go home, debate’s over: Johnny wins.

  164. johnnyballsack says: May 3, 2013 1:52 PM

    thirdistheword….thanks for proving my point. Just because you say something doesn’t make it factual. Did you even read the story? Where did you find a poll that said 92% of “Natives” think the name is not offensive? Only 79% of the general (white) population thought it non offensive.

    It is offensive enough that the best news anchor in Washington over the past 3 decades (Jim Vance) refuses to say the name on air or off air. Several newspapers, some in DC, will not use the word. The National Museum of the American Indian director says it is “the equivalent of the N-word”.

    As the article clearly states- “This is a really good example of why you never put racism up to a popular vote, because racism will win every time. It is not up to the offending class to say what offends the offended”.

    There was a time when the overwhelming majority thought that Women should not be allowed to vote and that supported slavery. Was the majority correct on those issues too?

  165. clarencewhorley says: May 3, 2013 2:36 PM

    @johnnyballack just doesn’t like to read, there have been 2 polls in the last 10 years of NATIVE AMERICANS and both found that an OVERWHELMING majority did not find it offensive. But I guess we should all just go with what the PC police and liberal white people say is right.

    A 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of those American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name.

    But in 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll’s findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.

  166. nsmil10 says: May 3, 2013 2:51 PM

    Stop arguing that the our teams name the REDSKINS is offensive… If you care so much about native Americans then fight to give them their land back, and instead of calling then native Americans call them Americans and call yourself illegal aliens… No you wouldn’t want to do that would you? Instead argue that the name of a team that people cheer for and is associate with nothing but good traits is offensive to the native Americans (which you all of sudden care about) . wake up and realize this only for political power and gain and has nothing to do with the actual natives when our team and the team name is in honor to them.

  167. theclaim says: May 3, 2013 4:04 PM

    johnnyballsack says:
    May 3, 2013 10:32 AM
    161 comments so far. I would say that would be considered a fair sampling size. It shows that there are a lot of racists and ignorant people. Backward logic does not change facts. The name is racist whether you are using it in that context or not, end of story.

    Google the origin, definition and meaning of the term, all of them start with “A racially offensive and derogatory term referring to Native Americans”. Backward logic does not change that. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. Looks like most of you removed all doubt.

     Don’t forget you are one of the people you just threw into a statistic in your head. Reading the comments I see johnnyballsack repeatedly.
    FIRST let’s address your calling 90% of Americans ignorant or racist, On what basis? If its on the basis of an NFL teams name then you are a sad little boy. Posting your cut and paste rhetoric from google doesn’t make you come across as intelligent AT ALL in fact you would have garnered more acceptance voicing your OPINION in your own words. If you read ANY of my posts you would know that the term Redskin was disparaging at one point in American culture. So was the term “Yankee”, in fact Yankee is STILL used as a slur to describe ALL AMERICANS by Canadiens, Aussies, and Brits respectively. The baseball team over the years has rendered the term inert. MOST don’t find it offensive any longer although you may find a small margin of people it still bothers. Jim Vance says its derogatory??? Oh well we ALL change our minds then. Sounds to me like Johnnyballsack is easily swayed by the propaganda box. The point is Redskins WAS a desparaging term in this country, but not for well over a century. Again words only wield the power we give them. Hate to say it johnnyballsack, it seems you are standing on the ground that we need to preserve this word as a SLUR? Although most of us recognize that it carries no demeaning value in a modern world you want to abolish it to the racial slur book? Who is ignorant? I am NOT racist and have empathy for the plight of downtrodden people’s. Redskins doesn’t fall into that category. Native Americans do, NOT the term Redskins. So I won’t lower myself to calling YOU a racist because you want to keep the ugliest definition of a word in place. Is keeping the VALUE of racial slurs the answer? Or abolishing the words? Or is the best solution to diffuse the problem so there isn’t one. Redskins carries no racial connotations IN MY OPINION it’s definition is Noun, An NFL franchise located in the Washington DC area. Plays its games in Raljon Maryland at FedEx field formerly known as Jack Kent Cooke stadium. In FACT Redskins was born of European settlers who upon contact described the Algonquins as Redskins due to their use of vermillion makeup using berries and ochre mixed with fat to produce bright red colors. You can stand on your ground to maintain a slur, I will get on board with more forward thinkers and diffuse and render inert the term. Redskins are a football team, nothing more nothing less. Johnnyballsack, if your argument is that it WAS a slur I agree, if your argument is that it IS a slur today, I disagree. Not to mention your argument is FEEBLE at best. Look in the mirror and ask yourself what ground it is you are fighting for, you seem conflicted calling people racist and ignorant while taking a stand to uphold THOSE very things.

  168. theclaim says: May 3, 2013 4:27 PM

    There was a time when the overwhelming majority thought that Women should not be allowed to vote and that supported slavery. Was the majority correct on those issues too?

    Apples and Oranges, do everyone a favor and throw your self off the edge of the earth! Lol

  169. theclaim says: May 3, 2013 4:37 PM

    @johnnyballsack, ATTN: The Flat Earth Society is holding a meeting in your HOMETOWN at The Stuebenville Civic Center, bring your candlesticks, divining rods and compasses refreshments will be served but due to a bad harvest gourds will not be provided, bring your own wooden goblet as well. As a chairperson your attendance is mandatory. LMAO

  170. johnnyballsack says: May 3, 2013 10:17 PM

    Sad. Bigotry is alive and well on PFT.
    @ theclaim…how did you find the time to write all that in between your Klan meetings?

  171. goodellisruiningtheleague says: May 3, 2013 10:18 PM

    I’m already dead. Must you keep beating me.

    -Horse

  172. red sky at night says: May 4, 2013 6:32 AM

    Some of you morons just likened this to Nazi Germany and slavery…I thought ESPN comment boards were dumb.

  173. saints4life57 says: May 4, 2013 4:39 PM

    Wow as much as I hate the Redskins it would be a complete shame to see them switch their name! That’s like calling your child Ben until he was 50 and then changing his name to Pete or something for no reason! Yeah this is gonna go over real well with their fans i’m sure! People need to relax man and just not make a issue out of every little thing!

  174. swagger52 says: May 6, 2013 10:07 AM

    I am guessing the American Indian organizations don’t have much Wampum, otherwise Obama would be involved to get their votes..I mean take up their cause.

  175. eaglesw00t says: May 6, 2013 11:18 AM

    As a principality, I hate the Redskins.

    But I am 100% behind them on this one. The team has been using that name for longer than most people have been alive.

    I fully support their right to keep using that name. Im behind you on this one Redskin fans.

    Im sorry if it offends people. Soak up your tears with your tampon and move on though.

  176. pick6ftw says: May 7, 2013 8:49 PM

    sort of sobering to think that so many of these people were slaughtered that they can’t even fight something like this or show an interest to attempt it. Probably #1290812931 on their lists of issues.

  177. bobdawg602 says: May 8, 2013 2:15 AM

    Though I am not Native American, it would seem that the attempted genocide of the Native people of this country and the unchecked Alcoholism and Drug addiction that is wiping out a huge percentage of its survivors, would be a bigger problem than what they call a crappy football team.

  178. titletownphipsi says: May 8, 2013 10:41 AM

    I need to call PETA about the animal cruelty this dead horse is receiving.

  179. triman1 says: May 9, 2013 3:54 PM

    BORing….
    The term was meant as a symbol of the brave and fierce nature of the players.
    Grow up, it isn’t all about liberal, left-wing PC.
    It’s about football.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!