Washington Post stops using Washington team name, sort of

Getty Images

It’s not easy to cover an NFL team without ever mentioning its nickname.  But that’s precisely what the Washington Post will do, from this point forward.

Sort of.

The editorial board of the Post has announced that it will stop using the team’s name, most of the time.

“While we wait for the NFL to catch up with public opinion and common decency we have decided not to use the slur ourselves except when it is essential for clarity or effect,” the newspaper said.

While it’s unclear why or how the Post would need to use the name for clarity or effect, it’s smart to leave a loophole, since the newspaper is in, you know, Washington.  The broader loophole comes from the fact that the newsroom will keep using the name.

The Washington NFL team, through spokesman Tony Wyllie, called the move “no surprise.”

“The editorial board has been opposed to the Washington Redskins name for more than 30 years,” Wyllie said, inadvertently gutting one of the knee-jerk argument from the name truthers, who insist that opposition has arisen only recently. “We just wish they would have had taken us up on our offer to visit several reservations to see how much Native Americans embrace and value the name and use it as their own logo and mascots across this country.”

That position ignores the reality that the National Congress of American Indians actively opposes the name. Which is no surprise, since the franchise generally continues to ignore the fact that the NCAI actively opposes the name.  If the franchise had simply ignored the debate in 2013 instead of attempting to engage or debunk it, the franchise probably wouldn’t be dealing with an issue that has now grown to the point where the editorial board of the biggest newspaper in the team’s market now refuses to use the name.

170 responses to “Washington Post stops using Washington team name, sort of

  1. Are they going to edit or falsify direct quotes where someone uses the term? If a players says “we’ve got to get back to playing Redskins football” how will they report it?

    This isn’t very surprising or significant since the WaPo is liberal and has a staff that subscribes to political correctness and identity politics.

  2. The NCAI isn’t the Native American organization out there. They have their stance, and that is all that is cited in these articles. If the Post was “opposed for more than 30 years” then why is it all of the sudden disappearing from the paper? That totally solidifies the argument, it doesn’t “gut” it.

    This is totally “arisen recently.”

  3. we dont need them papers anyhow. if we dont want any of these new ideas of this century then we can stay back in the last century an the papers can leave us skins fans alone. we like it by ourselves.

  4. Dan Snyder is like the Clark Griswold character from the film “Vacation”.

    At some point, Clark should have just given up his quest to go to Wallyworld, just as Snyder should just give up on his attempts to keep calling this team the Redskins.

    The game is already over, Snyder just needs to figure that out.

  5. A friend is a coffee shop franchisee. Had to rename said franchise several years ago because the name was offensive to a certain ethnicity. He’s still there, and business is still good. Life goes on. Deal with it.

  6. Packers were the Indian packers before being the Acme packers, and now just the Packers. Football is an entertainment product and a game. Snyder & Co. should s top being babies, change the name, and move on.

  7. The Washington Post was also quick to send out a racist correspondent to Ferguson who spent the entire day there bashing cops on Twitter, talking about he felt safer with the mob, then not telling the cops there was a member of the media and disobeying their commands in an effort to get himself ‘arrested’ – which he failed at since he was only detained for like 45mins. The WP is your typical northeastern liberal toilet paper.

  8. so does this mean they were racist in ann the years prior when they chose to use the name? I think that since they are self censoring they should self punish themselves as well,
    oh and its still never going to change….

  9. You ignore the reality that many, many Native Americans don’t recognize the NCAI as a group that represents them. An overwhelming majority of Native Americans still support the Washington Redskins team and the name. Until that changes, I will support them as well.

  10. Haha talk about misrepresenting the facts. The Washington Post EDITORIAL** won’t use the name, the newsroom still will. So, basically, nearly everywhere.

    Oh, and they still print Redskins ads.

  11. I’m so tired of hearing about this, regardless of which side of the issue the story originates from.

  12. I’m not afraid to say the name. In fact, I will say it right now.

    REDSKINS REDSKINS REDSKINS REDSKINS!

  13. Political correctness is not activism. Changing the name does not improve the living conditions of American Indians at all. Period.

  14. We’re finished as a country. Truth, freedom and liberty have been taken hostage by liberalism and political correctness.

  15. “If the franchise had simply ignored the debate in 2013 instead of attempting to engage or debunk it, the franchise probably wouldn’t be dealing with an issue that has now grown to the point where the biggest newspaper in the team’s market now refuses to use the name.”

    _____________________________________________

    Are you saying that if the team just plain ignored the media, it would have gone away? They wouldn’t keep pestering and bothering?

    Doesn’t that really hurt the media’s credibility?

  16. Again, a media outlet taking a stance on something that has nothing to do with them. I’m offended by the Cowboys, for killing Indians and wearing blue.

  17. I believe those that like the name “Redskins” should stop reading the Washington Post. Pretty simple – not sure why a name needs to be changed when 95% of people are okay with it.

  18. George Washington (who the city and therefore their newspaper is named after) owned slaves. Should they quit using that name as well? Perhaps they should just call their newspaper Post. But then again, is there anyone under 60 who actually reads the newspaper and cares what they do?

  19. LEAVE THE NAME ALONE it has been the same since 1952!!! Goodell is gonna ruin this game making it too sensitve!!! We’ll be watching the National FLAG football league

  20. I am not attempting to put forth my opinion on the team name, but this is a very misleading article. The Editorial Board of the Washington Post has decided to stop using the term “redskins” when referring to the team, not the entire Washington Post. As early as the third paragraph, it is explained that, “the editorial board is separate from the news-gathering side of the organization, which executive editor Marty Baron said will continue to use the team’s moniker.” The Sports section of WaPo, which primarily covers the team, will continue to use the team name, directly contradicting the hook you have for this post, as well as the majority of what follows it.

  21. As a longtime resident of the area, I assure you that the Post’s editorial board is infamous for its two election endorsements of President Obama, in which they applaud what they claim to be his amazing foreign policy credentials and laser-like focus on the economy. In the second one they make fun of Romney for warning us about Russia. Basically they have all the logic and emotional self-control of girls at a Beiber concert.

  22. “The editorial board has been opposed to the Washington Redskins name for more than 30 years,”

    And the evidence for this is where? Yeah, that’s what I thought…

  23. This post ignores the fact that it is only the editorial page that will not use the nickname. The sports columnists and readers who comment are free to continue to use the word as they see fit.

  24. Change is coming in DC just as it has with prep and college teams.looks like some folks will have to replace those old jerseys with new ones.

  25. If it’s offensive to a small portion of Native Americans then it is worth the discussion to change. If it offends newspapers and media sites…fight it for more publicity. I think Snyder is out for clicks.

  26. “That position ignores the reality that the National Congress of American Indians actively opposes the name.”
    So here’s my question, Florio. Does the fact that the National Congress of American Indians (which you cite in every article about this subject) opposes the name mean that my opinion to the contrary is invalid? Am I supposed to surrender my opinion because an interest group that supposedly speaks for the American Indians (as if there was one group that represented ALL of them) says they don’t like the name? If you don’t like the name, OK, I can respect that opinion. But please stop telling us what the NCAI says, as if their opinion closes the door on the debate. If you don’t want to hear contrary opinions, then stop publishing articles on the subject.

  27. Saying someone has reddish skin is a slur now? What about saying someone has reddish hair? That’s NOT a slur? Gee, wow, I can’t keep this stuff straight. Good thing the Washington Post and Mike Florio are here to teach me.

    p.s. So if the term Redskins is a slur because it mentions that someone has reddish skin, why do people refer to themselves as, say, “women of color”? “We need more women of color in management positions” etc.

  28. The name will be changing. This is a fact. The team owner should stop spending money to fight it and use that money for a design team for a new name and logo. He’ll make a ton of money selling new jerseys, hats, shirts, blankets, etc…

    He’s basically been given a licences to print money for a few months.

  29. I am impressed with this organization that they’ve turned the corner on this issue.

    But why didn’t you do this 30 years ago, dammit? You have shown yourself to be a follower instead of being a leader.

  30. Good move for a dying industry … alienate your dwindling readership by not mentioning the proud nickname of your home NFL team.

    Reason 1,287 that newspapers won’t exist in 10 years.

  31. I’m sure the Washington Post’s plan to not use Redskins (most of the time) will surely work to get them to change their name.

    Has anyone died or been physically harmed because there is an nfl team called the redskins? This isn’t news, it’s just annoying.

  32. Hail to the Washington Post Editorial Board. While it could be argued journalism should tell the narrative as opposed to writing the narrative, the narrative is one of a self-aggrandizing Washington Football Club with a long and storied history of institutionalized racism ingrained in EVERY one of its owners. Were the name “honorable”, as is the affirmative defense assertion of the current team owner, there would be no need to defend it.

  33. “Public opinion” – the VAST majority of the American public have no issue whatsoever with the Redskins name.

    “Common decency” – common decency suggests that the minority opinion doesn’t get to dictate what’s what to the majority. Nothing in our country’s constitution guarantees anyone the right NOT to have their wittle feelwings hurt. The slippery slope and precedent that would be set here would be absurd. Reality is, that there is always someone who will find ANYTHING offensive. In other words, grow up.

    Finally, opponents of the Redskins’ name continually appeal to the moral authority of the NCAI, but it’s a hollow entity – the reality is that the NCAI actually only represents a very small, very vocal, and very fringe/activist part of the Native population at-large.

    To give you a parallel – how many African-Americans would say, for example, that the Black Panthers organization alone wholly and accurately represents the will and the interest of ALL African-Americans?

    See the issue?

    What really grinds my gears about this whole (non)issue is the fact that we Native Americans have REAL problems – systemic problems – that people should actually be discussing and addressing: poverty, neglect, corruption, alcoholism & drug abuse, the slow eradication of our cultural identity, etc.

    Sadly, that leads me to believe this is more about attention-seeking in the media, than it is out of genuine concerns for real Natives.

    P.S. Redskins is not a “nickname”, either – it is THE proper name of a proud and historical NFL franchise (and one which honors Native Americans and our heritage).

  34. “While we wait for the NFL to catch up with public opinion and common decency we have decided not to use the slur ourselves except when it is essential for clarity or effect,”

    ___________________________________

    It has already been shown over and over that most of the public wants the name to be kept the same, so the NFL is already caught up with public opinion.

  35. They should change their name to the Pigskins.

    Sounds close to the Redskins
    Their nickname is the hogs
    Fans like to dress like pigs
    The ball is nicknamed a pigskin

  36. Chris Cooley, a former Redskin tight end, joined First Take this morning and shared his findings after doing extensive research (actually visiting reservations and performing interviews). In short, he said MOST were not offended and many actually took pride in it.

    None issue.

  37. Too funny. The WP has made this decision for EDITORIALS ONLY and not everyday team reporting stories. See, they know what is up but still trying to play both sides against the middle by jumping on Florio’s bandwagon. They wouldn’t want to anger the masses by eliminating the Redskin team name. Could result in a severe drop in readership and subscriptions. Prime example of the word “cop-out”. Stay classy WP.

  38. Amazing.

    And yet, PFT writers are still allowed to use the name.

    Mike Florio is actually more reasonable than the Washington Post editorial board!

  39. Lots of different reasons could come up such as if Mr. Snyder was producing a film with that in the title, otherwise if they abbreviated or substituted for it then that could confuse the reader into thinking that the actual title was what they printed in lieu of the word.

  40. And yet, in the name of their city and their newspaper, they continue to honor the father of the country that stole and desecrated Native American lands. I shall henceforth refer to it simply as The Post (except when necessary for clarity or effect).

  41. While I wait for the Washington Post to catch up to the fact that newspapers are supposed to relay the news in an unbiased manner to their readers I have decided not to use their name myself to prevent any misconception that they are actually a news agency except when it is essential for clarity or effect,” I said.

  42. About time Indians are acknowledged for having their land stolen, being forced upon reservations, with genocidal US policy towards Indians.

    This Snyder issue is a slap in the face towards every Indian…non racist my ***

  43. From the politicians, various groups of so called liberals, and the band wagon jumpers….it’s a Pandora’s box for attacking anything they see fit! What would be next if these people prevail? All that these people need to worry about is their own circle and not that of others.

  44. Redskins is a name of honor for honor and anyone not trying to social engineer for the purpose of divide and conquer or anyone that is not an idiot understands this.

  45. In a quick search of that “newspapers” website, 2970 instances of the acroynmy NAACP turned up. I guess to them it’s not ok for a team to honor it’s heritage but it is ok to call minorities “Colored People.”

  46. While I appreciate everyone’s opinions to change the name & I will make no effort to change or judge your stance on this topic. Is it unfair though to ask that you make your opinion, be done with it, and move on instead of rehashing it?

    Once again, if we as the public stop responding, it will get old and go away. Fires can’t stay lit, when they are not stoked or fed.

    My 2 cents.

  47. It’s funny that EVERYONE is jumping on the ‘ it’s a slur ‘ bandwagon now after several decades. How progressive all you must feel. The redskins name isn’t going anywhere. You liberals can scream and cry foul all you want but this is one instance where you won’t get your way. In the meantime, the rest of us with half a brain, will sit back and laugh and your hypocrisy and ill informed ways. HTTR!! – Proud Colts fan

  48. “When convenient” just like when Wilbon called them the “R-Word” a few months ago on PTI and then this week on the same show he called them the Redskins.

  49. If I’m the owner of “that team from Washington” I ban the Washington Post any access in covering the team…

  50. Perhaps Snyder should change the name to one of these: Washington Conservatives, Washington Right-Wingers, or Washington Republicans. That wouldn’t make anyone mad, right?

  51. I’m quite certain this comment will be removed because country ruining liberals only allow their own country ruining made up issues to be heard.. or in this case read.

    ^^^ This is a fix to my original statement. ^^^

  52. Just cancelled my $9.90 per month subscription to the Washington Post. Two can play this game. Taking my business over to the Times.

  53. Well since Columbus thought that he was landing in India.. is the reason why they are call Indians till this day. They are also referred to as Native Americans, however, they were here BEFORE this land was stolen to create this country. Neither name is appropriate, if you ask me… so let me ask, what were they calling themselves before all of this took place. Because it won’t be much longer before they become further offended by the monikers to which they are described.

  54. I must bring this up because it’s a serious matter of safety for our children, and we must protect the children. I would like everyone to boycott the St.Louis rams and let the NFL know the rams should change their name. Rams are an animal with thick skulls, and they compete for females by running at each other and bashing their heads together. This sets a bad example for our children. No one would want their child getting a serious concussion fighting over a girl like rams do, nor do they want that imagery on the field for their children. Imagine if children started butting their heads together either for females or to win football games. O the horror of it all. Please join me in boycotting this team and demanding the rams change their name. From now on they will be referred to “that team from St. Louis, formerly of Anaheim, formerly of Los Angeles, formerly of Cleveland.” Thank you for your support.

  55. Where was the outrage when the Redskins first entered the league? It would have been a lot easier to squash the name Redskins back then than it would be now.

    Oh, because back then we didn’t have a bunch of ultra liberal, ultra politically correct/insane people actively looking for reasons to be offended over inoffensive things? Interesting.

    You have to actively put effort into being ignorant of the meaning of the name and actively try to be offended by it enough to care and publicly cry about it. These offended people are essentially putting their hands over their ears, closing their eyes, saying “LA LA LA LA, I CAN’T HEAR YOU!” Grow up, people. The name is meant to honor Redskin warriors, it’s not a slur.

  56. In a separate but related story, John Post from whothehell cares USA is suing the washington post for the use of the Post name, he finds their coverage offensive……..

  57. Well considering the Washington Post ignores most news in favor of propaganda, they’ll have plenty of experience at pretending something doesn’t exist.

  58. It was a slur over a century ago. Nobody thinks of it as a slur today except for the thought police.

  59. This debate brings the geniuses out. “But I’ve heard from reliable sources some don’t mind it!!” Face it any term describing a human being by skin tone is inherently derogatory. It won’t hurt some to grow as people it’s not scary I promise

  60. Liberals higher groups all the time to do “Internet” work to engineer the masses towards an opinion to maintain created issues.

    No way to know for sure but this appears to be happening with the up and down votes. Even so the majority still vote that this is a non-sense issue, rightfully so.

    Liberals know though that this is just part of the nudge process called incrementalism and someday if the makers don’t do something about it this cause will be lost like so many before and many more to come.

  61. Hypocrites — lousy hypocrites.
    America is doomed. We are so preoccupied with catering to every fringe group that we fail to realize what made this nation great is standing together against anyone who would tear it down.
    American Indians, or Native Americans, or whatever you want to call them, or whatever they want to be called should step up and tell the truth. The Redskin name is meant to honor Native Americans, not put them down.
    I’m white skinned. If they changed Washington’s name to the Whiteskins, it wouldn’t offend me one bit.
    My great-grandmother was a full blooded Erie Indian. I never met her, but I’m sure the Redskin name wouldn’t have bothered her, either.

  62. I’m betting that Native Americans would be substantially more interested in having these media fools write about the rampant poverty and alcoholism that they deal with on a daily basis…..

  63. Obviously a racist name…

    Coined by a known, avowed racist…

    And now defended by one of the worst owners in the league and “fans” who are more afraid of a changed football team name than the reality of being racist…

    None of that matters. Take the under on 5 years.

    Tick tock

  64. So the local paper in Washington is bullying it’s home team, Snyder and ticking off it’s fans. I see a decrease in circulation…

  65. I am boycotting the Washington P__t name…because it’s offensive to anyone outside of the Liberal Media or without a personal agenda. You know, the remaining 359,000,000 people in this Country.

  66. keithhodges311 says:
    Aug 22, 2014 4:18 PM
    Just cancelled my $9.90 per month subscription to the Washington Post. Two can play this game. Taking my business over to the Times.

    3 0
    Report comment

    ——————

    NICE !

  67. Again I’ll point out, first team to win the Bowl with a black quarterback. Almost 30 years ago.

    Hardly a racist organization.

  68. A “Congress” of Native Americans that probably consists of 20 people who, I’m sure, DON’T speak for the majority of NA’s. Sounds a lot like our federal congress.

  69. It is not about what the majority of people want
    – it is not okay to offend a minority just because they do not have a strong voice.
    -And it takes quite a bit of money to pay off all the tribes that were first against the name but are now for it. Money tends to change opinions fast.

    It is okay for YOU to say what you want and use any words you like
    – freedom of speech should always be guaranteed.

    But any business that uses patent protection (our tax money is used to fund those protections should NOT be allowed for any derogatory names.

    Redskins SHOULD be allowed to continue to use the name- period. Snyder used his money to buy the team and he has every right to call it what he wants. However he SHOULD lose his patent, its the cost of doing business his way.

  70. TheWizard says: Aug 22, 2014 5:36 PM

    Again I’ll point out, first team to win the Bowl with a black quarterback. Almost 30 years ago.

    Hardly a racist organization.
    ————————————————–

    Washington’s first owner George Marshall gained infamy for his intractable opposition to having African-Americans on his roster. According to professor Charles Ross, “For 24 years Marshall was identified as the leading racist in the NFL”

  71. Well, people stopped buying the Washington Post 6 years ago. So what’s the difference.

    Washington Times it is. Time to honor the land kept by those first real Americans. Go Redskins!

  72. @firstroyal says: Aug 22, 2014 6:02 PM

    But any business that uses patent protection (our tax money is used to fund those protections should NOT be allowed for any derogatory names.
    __________________________________

    Tax revenue is generated from the masses, not the minority. So how it gets spent isn’t a tool for small minorities to say. In this case, the majority of people don’t agree with your determination that “Redskins” classifies as “offensive”. So, attacking the patent from that perspective is a misuse of Gov’t resources.

  73. So let’s see the PC will go after the Chiefs and Braves and change the name of the STATE Oklahoma next right? Then we will not be allowed to use the words Indian Giver or reservation or scalper next right? After that we will not be allowed to watch the Seinfeld episode where those same names/words are mentioned right?

    I have never seen such hypocrites in all of my life than the PC POLICE Left Wingers.

    Face it… you can write as many stories as you want about the Redskins but the NAME WILL NEVER CHANGE. Reason why? Because they are a private business. Snyder has his rights as well. All you PC folks will be watching the Redskins in less than 2 weeks… if you feel so strongly about the name change then don’t watch the NFL. They will be just fine without you… I bet a total number of ZERO will refuse to watch the games because of the Redskins name… hypocrites will write or say anything yet when it comes to actions then all of them will run and hide.

    As for the sportswriters, well if you were like the referee, then you wouldn’t cover/report on the Redskins games. If you are so against the name then back it up with actions and do the right thing. It’s PC correct right? Actions speak louder than words right?

    The Washington Post used to be a great Newspaper and cover the Redskins with class…outstanding sports writers as well (Wilbon, Kornheiser, Povich, Boswell just to name a few ). But this same Newspaper has had a vendetta against Snyder since he bought the team.

    Since new ownership (just recently) took over the Washington Post, the paper has gone downhill. More slanted with a certain vendetta against any organization/person that is against their views. Very sad and a dark blemish on a the Paper’s legacy and once fine history.

  74. Once upon a time in america the U.S. Government minted a coin most people call the indian head nickel. I sincerely believe the image was in tribute, in no way a slur, and esteemed by society as commendable, not derogatory. I sincerely believe all the same things about the team’s name. The next time a coin toss comes up at a Washington game, (for example overtime) I suggest they use an indian head nickel

  75. 109,600,000 people on welfare now. I’m sure that problem will be solved once we change the redskin name.

  76. Here’s what I predict will happen:

    -They will get their trademark back
    -The name will still be around in 30 years
    -The PC Police will give up and move to another matter to bully
    -Goodell will be long gone as a member of the NFL

    #HailToTheRedskins

  77. firstroyal says: Aug 22, 2014 6:02 PM

    It is not about what the majority of people want
    – it is not okay to offend a minority just because they do not have a strong voice.
    -And it takes quite a bit of money to pay off all the tribes that were first against the name but are now for it. Money tends to change opinions fast.

    It is okay for YOU to say what you want and use any words you like
    – freedom of speech should always be guaranteed.

    But any business that uses patent protection (our tax money is used to fund those protections should NOT be allowed for any derogatory names.

    Redskins SHOULD be allowed to continue to use the name- period. Snyder used his money to buy the team and he has every right to call it what he wants. However he SHOULD lose his patent, its the cost of doing business his way.

    Who are you to tell Native American’s that love it, that it’s offensive. That is racist is it not? White man telling poor ignorant Indians the term is Racist. The Navijo High School in NM already stated ( almost 100% Native Americans) They will not let white man tell them to change their high school name REDSKINS.

  78. Hail to the REDSKINS,
    Hail victory.
    Braves on the warpath,
    Fight for old DC!
    Scalp ’em, swamp ‘um,
    We will take ‘um big score
    Read ‘um, Weep ‘um, touchdown,
    We want heap more.
    Fight on, fight on, till you have won
    Sons of Washington
    Rah! Rah! Rah!

  79. dumbaseinstien says: Aug 22, 2014 6:26 PM

    Tax revenue is generated from the masses, not the minority. So how it gets spent isn’t a tool for small minorities to say. In this case, the majority of people don’t agree with your determination that “Redskins” classifies as “offensive”. So, attacking the patent from that perspective is a misuse of Gov’t resources.

    __________________________________

    There is a federal law that prohibits the protection of offensive and disparaging language and until you change the law to say, “offensive to some, or offensive to the majority.” Then any minority should have equal protection in enforcing those laws, including and not limited to revocation of a patent.

    That is regardless as to who pays the majority of the taxes or how many people you can pay to say the term is not offensive.

    You have the right to say whatever you want but companies that use the same language risks loss of business, boycott and or loss of patent and copyright. That’s the law and until you change it, its just the way it is.

  80. rbhttr says: Aug 22, 2014 8:37 PM

    Who are you to tell Native American’s that love it, that it’s offensive. That is racist is it not? White man telling poor ignorant Indians the term is Racist. The Navijo High School in NM already stated ( almost 100% Native Americans) They will not let white man tell them to change their high school name REDSKINS

    ——————————————————–
    I feel the same way, god bless em.. They have every right to keep their name just as Washington does. The company, individual or business have every right to name their rights to whatever they like. Unfortunately they do not have a right to a copyright or patent.

  81. In the south, “Yankee” is a slur which causes offense and even violence if hurled at a large segment of people. Is there a difference? No.

  82. When they got their name in 1933, the coach was native American and there were native American players on the team. Wouldn’t that have been the time to speak out against the name if they objected?

    It was OK then and it’s fine now too. Name is not changing get over it.

  83. How much is the Washington football team paying those “several reservations” to have them say they are happy with the team name? Does anyone believe there isn’t money involved here? It may be in the way of “donations”, but I would be shocked if they weren’t funneling some money to each of those reservations that are on their side.

  84. Ehhh, now that the Washington Time is the prefered paper of the Redskins I figured the post would do something like this. Time to cancel my subscription to the Post (do it for the Sunday Coupons mostly & reading of articles on the web). This decision has more to do with money and internal politics that it does the team name FWIW.

  85. Then no one else here in Washington is reporting the Post’s decision. Redskins fans and freedom loving Americans accept the name utterly. And Redskins gear is available in flagrant delecto in redskins stored in malls across the region

  86. And don’t forget all the supermarkets and other private enterprises that proudly proclaim in tv ads and front windows “proud sponsor of the Washington Redskins”

  87. I first went to a Redskins game in the late 40’s, they were Redskins then and are still to me, people don’t like it, to bad, get a life. If people are so upset then they can go on the hell holes we place them in and lend a hand to help them have a better life, bleeding hearts need to find a new cause. Bill

  88. There must be a time for common sense. It hasn’t been a big deal for how many years? Why now ? Because people are trying to make social issues a reason to elect there Candidate. Taking the focus off the real issues. And the PC correct are falling for it. This isn’t that important. ts not going to matter 5 yrs down the road.

  89. They are still using it as a subsection of the Sports section. Check it out. Click on Sports and it will bring up links for the “Redskins”, not the Washington Franchise, or any other stupid name

  90. You have two choices.

    1. Support the large majority of Native Americans who support the Washington Redskin team and the Redskins name.

    2. Force your opinion on Native Americans because you believe their feelings on the subject are wrong.

  91. The Washington Post and Dan Snyder have been in this weird pissing match since 1999.

    This has nothing to do with the nickname and more about pissing off lil Danny.

    If the paper REALLY wanted to take a stand, they would drop covering the team altogether and just report on the Ravens. That would speak volumes.

    But I guess money and clicks are more important than morality.

    Oh well, this is the America we live in.

  92. Well I’m all the way in Seattle…and I still have no problem call them REDSKINS! It’s their name and Redskins’ fans, you got my support. Keep da name!

Leave a Reply