Exposing Hillary So She Won't Get Elected

Despite Supreme Court Ruling, Washington Post Still Attack Redskins Team Name

Despite the ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court reiterating that the Washington Redskins have a right to trademark their team name, the Washington Post continues to attack the team for its name.

In a recent editorial, the paper again called the NFL team’s name a “racial slur” and demanded that owner Daniel Snyder change the team’s name:

Mr. Snyder can call his football team anything he wants without fear of losing the valuable trademark protection that is key to merchandising revenue. But just because the First Amendment gives him the right to use a racial slur, that doesn’t mean he should. Why would he even want to? We understand the affection Mr. Snyder and some team fans espouse for the history embodied in the name, and we have never thought there is racist intent when fans hail the team’s name.

None of that, though, changes the inescapable fact that the name is one that no one with any real sense of decency would ever think to call a Native American to his or her face. It is degrading. It does real harm, particularly in psychological damage to Native American children and teens. It should be changed—and then congratulations will be in order.

Many people aren’t offended by the name at all.

Indeed, even as it supported the Post’s anti-Redskins position, NBC Sports’ ProFootballTalk noted that the paper’s own recent survey doesn’t support its definitive proclamations that the team’s name is “racist” or offensive.

The recent survey found that only a small amount of Native Americans, ten percent, were offended by the team name.

On one issue, these anti-Redskins people are right: The same First Amendment that allows the NFL team to maintain its 60-year-old team name allows them to advocate for the team to dump the name.

But where they are wrong is trying to get the team to dump the name.