The Dubious Logic of 'The Washington Times' on the Redskins Issue
In an editorial posted online yesterday, The Washington Times examined the recent news of Washington, D.C. Council member David Grosso proposing to introduce a resolution that would ask the Washington Redskins to change their name to Redtails. Grosso described the term as a "derogatory, racist name," which many Native Americans would agree with.
In "Hail to the Redtails?," the editorial board of the Times suggests that "This issue bubbles and squeaks from time to time because certain politicians are more concerned with getting their names in the newspapers than with the pain of the masses who are not offended by a name honoring the bravery and fighting spirit of the original Americans."
An Associated Press poll released yesterday indicated that the overwhelming majority of Americans would not change the Redskins name to something else.
Deadspin.com's Tom Ley took up the merits of the Times editorial, writing "This Editorial Defending the Redskins' Name Is Just so Goddamn Dumb." Ley highlights the dubious claim that "If 'Redskins' demeans Indians, why wouldn't 'Redtails' demean fighter pilots?" Perplexing.
Perhaps Ley sums it up best with "Buh? I don't...what? I don't even think Sarah Lee from Osceola, Ind., would be on board with that sentiment."