Snyder continues active defense of team name

AP

The debate regarding the name of the football team owned by Daniel Snyder has strengthened over the last two years because the employees of the football team owned by Daniel Snyder have legitimized and encouraged the opposition through P.R. tactics aimed at ultimately shouting down anyone who would disagree.

Now, Snyder himself has breathed extra life into an otherwise simmering controversy with multiple public comments this week.  The first wave came when he was interviewed by an employee of a radio station Snyder owns.  The next came in an interview with ESPN’s Outside the Lines.

A Redskin is a football player,” Snyder explained.  “A Redskin is our fans.  The Washington Redskins fan base represents honor, represents respect, represents pride.  Hopefully winning.  And it’s a positive.  Taken out of context, you can take things out of context all over the place. But in this particular case, it is what it is.  It’s very obvious.”

What’s also obvious is that when the word is stripped away from the football team, it becomes offensive in the eyes of many — including those charged with the responsibility of writing dictionaries.  It’s also obvious that Snyder’s narrow focus would justify any team name based on a word that otherwise would be regarded as being offensive.

Think of any potentially offensive term.  And then fill in the blanks with it.

“A ______ is a football player,” Snyder explained.  “A ______ is our fans.  The ______ fan base represents honor, represents respect, represents pride.”

Snyder also risks legitimizing a major portion of the current opposition to the name by reiterating the notion that Walter “Blackie” Wetzel, former president of the National Congress of American Indians, helped design and approve the team’s logo.  If Wetzel’s role as president of the National Congress of American Indians operated as a seal of approval for the logo when the logo was adopted, the current wishes of the National Congress of American Indians also should be respected.  And the National Congress of American Indians has made its views clear.

As conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer explained it last year, language changes and evolves over time.  Words that would have been acceptable if placed in the above blanks 40, 50, or 60 years ago have, over time, become words that aren’t considered to be appropriate for normal use.  Pointing that out isn’t an attack on Snyder or the team or its fans or an effort to get clicks.  It’s an attempt to have a frank, honest discussion about the word, about whether the word can be separated from its normal meaning when applied to a football team, and about whether the people to whom the word refers have a problem with a team carrying that word as its name.

Which leads back to the best point that has been made about the situation:  There’s no way the name could be applied to an expansion team.

96 responses to “Snyder continues active defense of team name

  1. Here’s what’s hilarious … it isn’t the sum of the whole Native American Indian population who is offended by the name. It’s a bunch of white bleeding heart liberal men, telling them to be offended. These are the same spineless idiots who have driven this entire politically correct load of garbage society. I hope they never change the name. Hail the Redskins.

  2. I don’t care anymore. If Snyder wants to change/leave the name, let him; it’s his choice. Not sure I care either way since I’m not a Skins fan.

    I just wish the social justice “activists” would go away with their fake outrage and the anti-PC people would shut up and get a life.

    It’s clearly obvious that those two groups are using this to spread their respective agendas to the masses w/o actually contributing to the discussion.

  3. Why are you running ads for “Redskins Facts” (A pro Redskins website paid for by Snyder) when you are opposed to the use of the team name? It’s ok as long as you are making money off of it?

  4. Snyder may as well say, “I’m rich, and I’ll call my toys what I want!”

    At least that wouldn’t be insulting to basic levels of intellect.

  5. “A shiny turd is a football player,” Snyder explained. “A shiny turd is our fans. The shiny turd fan base represents honor, represents respect, represents pride.”

    Too easy…

  6. I’m nearing 30. And lets say 50 years from now, the dreaded N-Word becomes less offensive. Or at the very least, doesn’t offend the majority of black people in our country. Does that mean it’ll be ok to name a team after it?

  7. You fill in the blanks with the “n” word and it gets awfully ugly. Way to prove your point Mike. Maybe these stubborn cro-magnonites will finally see some logic. Not holding my breath though.

  8. Oh he gets it alright… It’s the people who are against the Redskins name who don’t get it. The only reason why the Senate and others bring it up is because they are trying to win votes for their Democrat Party.

    End of story… Every National Poll out there has a 85% approval of keeping the team (Redskins) name. Get with it man, your dream of changing the team name is over.

  9. Which leads back to the best point that has been made about the situation: There’s no way the name could be applied to an expansion team.
    ———
    Same goes for the Yankees, Blackhawks, Chiefs, Seminoles, and others I’m sure.

  10. The Red Skins are making money for the owner, leave them be, the fans that support them have no problem with the name. Every one else needs to mind there own business, talking to you PFT. Bill

  11. Well, indignant jerks, perhaps you have to explain how it is that people who have never been called a Redskin get to set the standards for removing the name from a pro team?

    Since even the moderate Krauthhammer contends that languages, there is no reason to change the Redskins at all – if this was a slur long ago, it is not operationally one now. You can’t tell me someone goes up to an indian and calls them a Redskin like some people call a black person the “n” word. This just does not happen.

    I would also contend that it is inaccurate to call anyone who is NOT FROM another country with a hyphenated name – if you did not just arrive from Africa and then become a US citizen, you are NOT an african-american – you are an american.

    So if we are going to be accurate and sensitive, let’s be logical first and accurate.

  12. I would agree with everything written here except for one small thing……I’ve never, in my entire life, heard the word “Redskins” used in any other context outside of the NFL.

    It’s not a perjorative if no one ever says it, is it?

    Hail to the Redskins.

  13. Since when were NFL teams named out of disrespect?

    The Redskins are named the Redskins because it’s a name that generates pride and respect. That’s probably why multiple Native American high schools bear the Redskins name.

    Only the most racist among us even think about it in terms of a racial slur.

    Nobody names their football team the “moronic idiots” for good reason. That’s because it doesn’t generate pride and respect for the team. Same story with the Redskins; whether that be the NFL team or the multiple Native American High School teams that bear the Redskins name.

  14. So I was thinking about the Redskins controversy and there are a few things I didn’t understand. 1. Why do Native Americans care about an word that lies somewhere between archaic and rarely used in our society? 2. Why don’t they care that much about businesses or schools predominantly used by and run by Native Americans that use Redskins as their mascot? 3. Why are did they recently file a complaint with the patent office over the KC Chiefs which does not use any images or words that used to be or still are offensive?

    Then it dawned on me. Native Americans aren’t offended by the name Redskins. They simply don’t want any words or images relating to their culture and their history to be controlled by an ethnic group (Caucasians) that they despise. If Daniel Snyder and his employees were Native American then they wouldn’t care. They are going after the Redskins because that it the easiest target. They can the change they want because they can easily fool people into thinking the Redskins name offends them.

  15. Left wingnuts from the east obviously have no clue. The Redskin team name is not offensive. Once again, the liberals want to tell us all what is politically correct. How about you clean up the stereotype around the ‘Fighting Irish’ or the New Orleans Saints?

  16. I never really cared about the name, but it’s getting to the point where I am offended by Snyder’s campaign. How stupid does he think people are? If anything, this campaign is causing people such as myself to back the changing of the name simply because I am getting sick of Snyder putting his head in the sand and acting like everything is OK. Just stop already. No one is reading these biased webpages designed by the Redskins and thinking to themselves, “ya know, now that I think of it, the obviously racist name isn’t so racist when put in these terms”. It’s insulting to my intelligence.

  17. I’ll say again– There will be a govt bailout of the Redskins name:

    Snyder stands to lose tens of millions with a name change. The NFL won’t foot that bill. Politicians love to play PC games. Politicians love to spend our money.

    A government bailout of the Redskins name is coming.

  18. You’re exactly right…words do change meaning over time. However, that doesn’t mean that companies that have used a word in a context that is not offensive should suddenly have to change their name because suddenly the word is offensive. The only reason this case isn’t being laughed at by everyone is because “Redskins” isn’t a term used in pretty much any other context, this gets some backing. What if someone decided the Panthers were offensive because some group relates them to the Black Panthers? Would there be the same outcry? The Panthers were never intended to be offensive. The word itself was never offensive, except for that context. Would Florio never find anything else to write about if some group of people decided to make money pushing their agenda that the Panthers were now offensive?

  19. If definitions of words evolve over time, then the name “REDSKINS” will return to be a non-offensive name like it had been in the past in the next few years. If that is how it works, why are we wasting so much time and resources on something that is pointless?

    PS. Pre-Season started.. more articles about actual football please.

  20. The only time someone says redskin is to talk about the football team, I’m pretty sure I could come up with more offensive words to call a native then redskins, it’s just over the top PCness

  21. I really dont care if they change the name, I am not a fan, and if I was Snyder, I would change it just to steal millions of dollars from all of the fans that need to replace their old skins gear with new stuff (all while pointing blame at the NFL, liberal politicians, etc, pretending it is all on them).

    But my only thought on this is that you have to base it on context. The name was never intended to be offensive. Now, 90 years later, the argument is that the english language has evolved and now it is offensive. Just for the sake of argument, I will buy that argument. And my response is, the Cleveland Browns must change their name. I am outraged that a team would be called the browns. It is clearly a disgusting name and is highly offensive to people with brown skin.

    We all know the Browns name is not offensive, nor is it intended to be offensive. It is no more or less offensive than redskins.

    Just saying

  22. Rob Brown says: Aug 6, 2014 11:31 AM

    I’m nearing 30. And lets say 50 years from now, the dreaded N-Word becomes less offensive. Or at the very least, doesn’t offend the majority of black people in our country. Does that mean it’ll be ok to name a team after it?
    —————

    Go google “false equivalence”.

  23. How did you miss Hillary saying the name should be changed last week? Thought you would be all over that. Someone is slacking

  24. Where is this idea coming from that “white liberal pc police” are pushing for the name change? As noted above, the national congress of American Indians is supporting the name change effort. Are they populated by white liberals? If it’s a conspiracy of white liberal media men, why didn’t this come to a head twenty years ago under the Clinton administration?

    Let’s just change the Cowboys name to “Palefaces.” That’s fine with everyone, right?

  25. Oh and why is there no post about your boy Peter King and his prediction about the Redskins this year?

  26. Yawn….the fake and unimportant PC argument dredges along, while those who are fomenting it do absolutely nothing at all to benefit the Native American populace. I guess it’s much easier to whine about a name instead of taking action to benefit America’s native people.

  27. boiler72 says:
    Aug 6, 2014 11:22 AM

    Here’s what’s hilarious … it isn’t the sum of the whole Native American Indian population who is offended by the name. It’s a bunch of white bleeding heart liberal men, telling them to be offended. These are the same spineless idiots who have driven this entire politically correct load of garbage society. I hope they never change the name. Hail the Redskins.

    ————————————————————

    Well, Snyder is certainly dead wrong about one thing — there’s no “respect” among certain _________ fans. Like ^ big time.

  28. Is argue the N word isn’t that bad, it is all over radios and movies as a term of endearment. I haven’t seen a pigment chart to show who is allowed to use it and who is not. If it is offensive like the c word women hate then it wouldn’t be used anywhere including as a high school team name or in a song lyric.

  29. thanks Florio…just keep in mind trying to prove your point in this forum (a bunch of fan boys readers of the team in Washington) you’re going to get a lot of negative comments…but yes I agree with you and danny boy is an embarrassment to the NFL…

  30. Whenever I hear him try to justify the name, as a symbol of pride, I always wonder “how many native american employees does he employ?”. And why no reporters can ever break away from the herd mentality of reporting to look into this.

  31. georgegsmiller says:
    Aug 6, 2014 11:34 AM
    Oh he gets it alright… It’s the people who are against the Redskins name who don’t get it. The only reason why the Senate and others bring it up is because they are trying to win votes for their Democrat Party.

    End of story… Every National Poll out there has a 85% approval of keeping the team (Redskins) name. Get with it man, your dream of changing the team name is over.
    ——————–

    You mean as over as fighting obamacare which conservatives still won’t let go????

    If Dems are using this issue for votes, wouldn’t it behoove Reps to keep their mouths shut and let the story die in the newscycle?

    Don’t you people notice that the Washington franchise name matter becomes an issue only when its dopey owner opens his mouth?

    #itschangingsodeal

  32. If you try to socialize political correctness in every corner of our society, then nothing is correct including our rights of freedom of expression. We have many other priorities that are productive and not derisive.

  33. I won’t be outraged until Al Sharpton organizes a protest against it. He sets the moral compass in this country.

  34. @RobBrown
    The N-word can’t be to damn offensive have you listened to a rap song lately?

    It’s funny to me that a word that (to me) is offensive (the n-word) is tossed around like it is nothing. The only time I have ever heard Redskins is when somebody is talking about a football team.

  35. If there is a name change then the name Redskins will only be used by native americans much like the N word can only be used by blacks, or am I the only one noticing that.

  36. This is all about money….on both sides. The offended parties are looking to sue Snyder/NFL. If he agrees to change the name, it amounts to admitting guilt. And it will cost him millions to change the name.

    Simple solution: Offended parties agree not to sue Washington/NFL, and NFL agrees to pay Snyder’s cost to change the name. Done deal.

  37. just bought a Red Mesa High School shirt…. go to prep sportswear and support them…

    also bought a HTTR shirt….

    let’s become more vocal in our support for Redskins and intolerance for the libs

  38. Who cares? how about renaming them the Washington Weasels in honor of their horrid owner as they haven’t won anything in 30 years….lol.

  39. Redskin is not meant to be a slur. Just because some people take it that way – while acknowleding that the Redskins are not intending to offend anyone, which should be a logic bomb – doesn’t mean anything needs to change. Actual racism needs to go away. An innocent football team’s name means NOTHING.

  40. People making this about “liberal vs. conservative” need to get a life. You’re looking for an enemy. This not a political issue. There are plenty of conservatives that agree the name is a racial slur. There was even one cited in this story…

  41. I’m still laughing about the time Florio tried to claim that the almost 80% who support the name are not a vast majority haha

  42. I just find it very ironic and puzzling that a team that has had it’s name for over 70 years is now offensive??

    Says alot more about this country than it does about football and mascots!

  43. Here’s the problem: Dan Snyder owns the team, and it is his decision and his decision alone whether or not to change the team’s name. He has said he is keeping the name “Redskins”, so the issue is closed.

    What we’re seeing now is the ultra-PC media hounds continuing to pound this issue in hopes of shaming Snyder into changing a name that the vast majority of fans and players do not have a problem with.

    This is no longer a story about the Redskins name; this is a story about whether a few self-appointed political correctness judges can generate enough “outrage” over their cause to prove to themselves that they can make a difference. It’s an ego trip on the part of these “smarter and holier than thou” PC police.

  44. It’s also funny to me that nobody points out that Snyder founded a charity that helps native americans on the reservations.

    I wonder if the all the pro name changers put their money were their mouth is. I wonder if Ms. Blackhorse is going to spread all the money around that she is suing the Redskins for.

  45. phinagain says:
    Aug 6, 2014 12:04 PM
    …If it’s a conspiracy of white liberal media men, why didn’t this come to a head twenty years ago under the Clinton administration?
    ————————
    The Redskins had their trademarks revoked once before by the US Patent Office back in the late-1990s…which was during the Clinton administration.

    D’oh

  46. Man, give it up already guys.

    Yes. You’re a good blogger. You support good things. You hate racism with every fiber of your white knight heart and soul. Your points are duly noted.

    “Can we just ignore this silliness and get back to football?” – signed everyone who ever visited your site ever.

  47. No PFT outcry regarding the Kansas City Football Team even though the same group that finds the term “Redskin” offensive finds the term “Chiefs” offensive…If it offends even one person then it has to change, right?

  48. slugbaitspace, are you saying that the US government has twice filed a trademark case against washington?

    Or that the US President is somehow stepping into the US Patent office to tell them to pass this?

    Or maybe, you just have no clue and would like to blame all of the world’s problems on Clinton and Obama..?

    D’oh

  49. I don’t doubt that the term Redskins was shouted at Native Americans as they were dragged off their land hundreds of years ago. I’m guessing many things were shouted at them. Words can be used in an offensive manner, but that does not mean the word itself is offensive.

    I’m guessing ‘get out of here you blankety blank Indian’ or ‘$&@# Chief’ was shouted. Does that mean those teams have to change their name too? And please don’t tell me about the whole ‘you would not walk up to a Native American and call them a Redskin’ argument.
    Of course you wouldn’t, you call somebody by their name, like any ethnicity. (or sir if you don’t know their name) ‘Redskin’ may be outdated, but that does not make it a slur.

  50. In this thread of comments you can find so many more examples of derogatory hate towards “PC Liberals” than you’ll ever find regarding the term Redskins towards Native Americans.

    I’ll count the Redskin examples and you count the others….I’m done. How about you?

    The fact of the matter is that groups of people in this country that have a bigger voice are ignored for fear of politcal damage and little things like this get blown up to the same level so our politicians and the ignorant see things are being done. If any agenda exists it’s from those with power who make sure this garbage stays in our face so you can’t see how little good they’re actually doing.

    Until more than a couple Native Americans are complaining and the native american opinions FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT are heard this is not an issue and should be treated as such. If you’re going to ignore the voice of everyone involved that’s not on your side then be prepared to be ignored.

    It’s really that simple.

  51. I am a life long Skins fan but have come to terms with the need for the name to change as much as it pains me to give up the name. We aren’t racists for rooting for the name Redskins. However if the name weren’t offensive to Native Americans why isn’t Dan’s foundation called the Original Redskins Foundation? For those who think this is a new issue a little digging will show that Native American organizations were pushing for a change in the 60’s. Also George Marshall gave an interview in the 20’s saying that the origin of the name was solely to distinguish it from the Boston Braves, not as the team would have you believe to honor the coach at the time.

  52. @slbasegame257
    ? 3. Why are did they recently file a complaint with the patent office over the KC Chiefs which does not use any images or words that used to be or still are offensive?
    ——————————————————-
    The reason this was filed was because the lady that is behind all this name change stuff said a few weeks ago that the term chief should not be used either.

    @balsagna
    You insult your own intelligence. I mean you just go with the name changers because Snyder stands his ground? I mean the (facts) that Ms. Blackhorse is using has never been founded. If I were you I’d do some research before just picking a side.

  53. trumb1mj says:
    Aug 6, 2014 1:01 PM
    slugbaitspace, are you saying that the US government has twice filed a trademark case against washington?

    Or that the US President is somehow stepping into the US Patent office to tell them to pass this?

    Or maybe, you just have no clue and would like to blame all of the world’s problems on Clinton and Obama..?

    D’oh
    —————–
    Nope. I’m saying that I’m a guy who likes to sarcastically highlight facts to people that post comments while having absolutely no idea what they are talking about as they go off on some wild tangent.

    D’oh

  54. I’m against changing the name because I feel that it celebrates Native Americans. But there is a point that should be mentioned. Our society has slightly dehumanized the NA community. Meaning, when we think “Native American”, we think feathers, face paint, and bows and arrows first, suit wearing lawyer, doctor, teacher second. Team mascots, Halloween costumes, etc have all contributed to the perspective of NA’s that we have. So if you change the name, it wouldnt be because it is derogatory. That’s ridiculous. You would do it so that NA’s can shed the involuntary facade that we’ve imposed on them. But then you would need to change the whole culture of our society. No more costumes, all the other team names changed, etc. So no, don’t change the name because the PC idiots said so. They make a ridiculous argument that most people don’t agree with. But just think about the perspective we have of NA’s

  55. “Words that would have been acceptable if placed in the above blanks 40, 50, or 60 years ago have, over time, become words that aren’t considered to be appropriate for normal use.”

    ————-

    OK, so let me know when the United Negro College Fund and the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) will be changing their names since they contain words that clearly aren’t acceptable for use anymore.

  56. If you stop whining about the name, people will go back to not considering if it is offensive.
    Because, until a handful of people decided to speak for everyone and tell us how everyone felt, the name was used in the same context as Saints, Raiders, Jets and Giants. It was just a team name that you loved if you were a fan and made fun of if you weren’t.

    The majority of Americans don’t have a problem with it.
    The majority of Native American’s don’t care either way. Most laugh at us for thinking its an issue.
    The majority of Native American’s that do care, don’t have a problem with it.

  57. There are many names that today would not be applied to an expansion team. But for the same reason PFT whines about the Redskins name.
    We have become a country controlled by a bunch of soft crybabies with no sense of self.
    So yes an expansion team could not be named the Redskins today. That does not mean that is how it should be.

  58. Didn’t blacks approve of the naming of the NAACP long ago. Now if you refer to them a “Colored People” you get called a racist.

  59. Here is some food for thought:

    The name Redskin is offensive, racist, & a slur. It doesn’t mean pride, respect, strength, honor or anything like that according to some right?

    Then maybe someone can explain to me why the Red Mesa High School and other schools like them would call themselves the Redskins? Which makes me think either Redskin means pride, strength, respect, & honor. That or Red Mesa & other schools like calling themselves a slur.

    Now which one of these statements is more likely?

  60. “Chiefs” and “Braves” are real words that convey position of authority or positive personality traits. “Redskins” doesn’t convey either. It’s not an honorific no matter how many times Snyder says it.

    If I start calling my football teams “the N-words” because I want to honor all the blacks who suffered under that name and want to convey their strength and perseverance against the bigotry and hatred that gave them that name, I don’t think folks would go for it. It would STILL be offensive.

  61. tnfire69 says:
    Aug 6, 2014 1:57 PM
    Here is some food for thought:

    The name Redskin is offensive, racist, & a slur. It doesn’t mean pride, respect, strength, honor or anything like that according to some right?

    Then maybe someone can explain to me why the Red Mesa High School and other schools like them would call themselves the Redskins? Which makes me think either Redskin means pride, strength, respect, & honor. That or Red Mesa & other schools like calling themselves a slur.

    Now which one of these statements is more likely?
    —————————————
    we live in an ignorant country with dummies that are oblivious to offensive slurs?

  62. Charles “Krauthammer”? “Kraut” has evolved into a derogatory term for Germans. Your name implies that you beat Germans. That is very offensive. When are you changing your name?

  63. Let me say this people can think whatever they like on this issue. I don’t think anyone is 100% right on either side. I happen to believe that the Redskins should stay just that the Redskins & I’m a cowboys fan. I feel that way mainly because of the research that I have done into the name. I think that people should also do research on this before just picking a side on this.

  64. axespray says
    we live in an ignorant country with dummies that are oblivious to offensive slurs?
    ———————————————————
    I happen to agree with that statement but I’m not sure which side you fall on. Because it seems like you missed the point. Name calling does not help make a change.

  65. BringBackTheFlex says:
    Aug 6, 2014 1:59 PM

    “Chiefs” and “Braves” are real words that convey position of authority or positive personality traits. “Redskins” doesn’t convey either. It’s not an honorific no matter how many times Snyder says it.
    ———————————————-
    Not to Ms. Blackhorse, you know the head of the Native American group responsible for the patent lawsuit against the Redskins. The word “Chief” is offensive. Don’t you love the subjectivity of the PC Police…

  66. BringBackTheFlex says:
    Aug 6, 2014 1:59 PM

    “Chiefs” and “Braves” are real words that convey position of authority or positive personality traits. “Redskins” doesn’t convey either. It’s not an honorific no matter how many times Snyder says it.
    ————————————————–
    Then you should tell them to Ms. Blackhorse who said that we should not use chiefs because it is just as offensive as the Redskins. She didn’t say braves but i’m sure she will get there.
    ———————————————–
    If I start calling my football teams “the N-words” because I want to honor all the blacks who suffered under that name and want to convey their strength and perseverance against the bigotry and hatred that gave them that name, I don’t think folks would go for it. It would STILL be offensive.
    ——————————————————-
    I mean as I said earlier have you listened to a rap song lately? I don’t think you can really throw too much shade if you use the word yourself. But that’s just me.

  67. A Redskin is a football player? What about the high schools that still use that nickname? Shouldn’t they be forced to drop all other sports than football then?

  68. History isn’t going to be kind to Snyder. Long after he’s dead his team’s ineptitude will be recounted by nothing more than empty stats on a grid in a Wikipedia article. But he will be remembered three or four generations from now as a racist.

  69. floreskins says: Aug 6, 2014 2:33 PM
    BringBackTheFlex says:
    “Chiefs” and “Braves” are real words that convey position of authority or positive personality traits. “Redskins” doesn’t convey either. It’s not an honorific no matter how many times Snyder says it.
    ———————————————-
    Not to Ms. Blackhorse, you know the head of the Native American group responsible for the patent lawsuit against the Redskins. The word “Chief” is offensive. Don’t you love the subjectivity of the PC Police…
    ==========================
    A person can be right about one thing and wrong about another. The word Chief denotes a position of authority and respect – a leader.

    Ms Blackhorse is not against the use of the word ‘Chiefs’ but about the behavior of the fans while using these mascots and names and the demeaning actions they display. Google amanda-blackhorse-is-confident-snyder-will-lose-his-redskins-appeal to read her interview.

    Or stay ignorant of the real issues. Your choice.

  70. “…the name of the football team owned by Daniel Snyder…” Doesn’t the author of this article mean “The Washington NFL Franchise?”

  71. A person can be right about one thing and wrong about another. The word Chief denotes a position of authority and respect – a leader.

    Ms Blackhorse is not against the use of the word ‘Chiefs’ but about the behavior of the fans while using these mascots and names and the demeaning actions they display. Google amanda-blackhorse-is-confident-snyder-will-lose-his-redskins-appeal to read her interview.

    Or stay ignorant of the real issues. Your choice.
    ————–
    So what is your position? Should all Native American names be taken out of professional sports? That is what Blackhorse wants, and she is representing those that are most important in this matter, right? You seem to be agreeing with her on the Redskins, but when she makes the same exact case for other teams, it’s “well we can agree to disagree on those”. Your argument doesn’t hold up. The people that are offended want it to be all or nothing. PFT doesn’t bother with that aspect of the debate though, they just focus on the “real racist team name” from Washington.

  72. @BringBackTheFlex

    you say: Ms Blackhorse is not against the use of the word ‘Chiefs’ but about the behavior of the fans….

    To this I say please check your facts; as reported by PFT…

    “Plaintiff in Redskins case urges Chiefs to change their name”

Leave a Reply

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