I guess so, according to Harry Reid, the good and fine people at ESPN and many liberal know nothings. lol

and the majority of them find the name offensive, then change it. It's their opinion that should count, not affluent white liberals.  I'm not convinced a majority of them have a problem with it. The Seminole Tribe embraces the Florida St name and logo, for example.

While there exists some racist americans,  it is rare that I find anyone who is truly racist and offensive.

I don't care what poll is taken, the term is offensive to the Native American community.  I'm sure if there were poll taken in the south during Jim Crow Days, they would have found overwhelming support for their current actions.  It's bullshit...period.

But, I got kind of curious about how Native Americans felt about the term, after you quoted your statistics. I had realized that, other than those who I know personally, who find it a pejorative term, I had no idea the percent of them felt that way. Seems like, from the article I've attached, about the same amount as those Americans who feel it's not.

They asked whether it was racist OR racial. Those two words mean vastly different things. I would have to answer with the majority on that specific question.  

It was an Annenberg poll, not Pew, and it was 90% of natives that said they were not offended by the term Redskins.

The university attended, also used a Tribe as their teams name and logo. They have pride in their tribe, but that's different from being called by a name one feels is demeaning.

They call themselves "The Redskins".

I'd say many of the people I know, who are non-white, equate racial with racist, even though they have different definitions. A racial term is often experienced, when said by someone from a differing racial group, as being demeaning and pejorative.  

People have been telling me for several years now that I should be offended at the use of the word "Oriental" Sorry, but I've got better things to do than be pissed off all the time over some perceived slight

Not too many take exception to the term "Redskins" especially when it comes to sports team names.
My late business partner, a Goldwater Conservative and full blooded tribal member, jokingly referred to himself as the Redneck Redskin.
But the one that boiled his blood, and apparently many others, is the term Amerind, or American Indian.

...had to get in the Wayback Machine to find that, didn't you?  Do you realize how dumb that makes you look?

"A recent study by the California State University, San Bernardino reports 67% of Native Americans find the Washington Redskins name and imagery racist."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/lindseyadler/native-americans-offended-by-racial-slur#4bol615

The article also goes on to say about YOUR poll:

"An oft-cited 2004 survey had claimed only 9% of Native Americans found the name Redskins offensive, but the methodology has been criticized. Tribal status was not verified and Alaska, which has a significant Native population was excluded."  Yeah, we know why it was 'oft-cited' don't we Jack?  Many righties like you are still citing it TEN YEARS LATER because it achieved the results you wanted, not necessarily the truth.

...of Frostbite Falls, MN.  Legend has it that the nickname was a tribute to Moishe Pipik who opened the first deli in Frostbite Falls.  His chicken soup was said to have saved the townspeople from freezing during the Great Blizzard of 1923.  Hokey smoke, Doc, he was quite a guy!

We know for a fact he is a Backstabber.

If the name really is racist, it would be racist in 2004 too, right? Especially with Native Americans I would think.  

Things can change a lot in 10 years. What was the acceptance of gays and lesbians, and their rights to equality under the law changed in 10 years? How many gay pride parades were there 10 years ago vs. today. Does this reflect upon how they view themselves now, or how they accept the terms used to address their sexual orientation. Do they now feel safer to express themselves and what they believe; what they find offensive when being addressed. Perhaps it's time to name a professional team by a gay/lesbian term. Let's rename to 'Golden State Warriors' to the Flamboyant State Warriors!  

by the term, and in large numbers, you think liberals and the media should drop this crusade for a name change, right?

Exactly!

If there was a poll taken with only asking white people if blacks should be called niggers, starting from the birth of the usa to the 1980s and I bet you would have a high percent of people saying it was okay to call black people niggers. Hell even President Lyndon B. Johnson would call black people niggers, to his credit he change over the years, and he bullied 2 civil rights bills through congress. Does it really matter if Washington changes their name and my answer is no because that is not what the lawsuit it about. I think people are forgetting or don't know that this is a trademark/copyright lawsuit not about forcing them to change their name, but about whether Washignton should have trademark/copyright protection of the name Redskins and the logo. If you look at history, then the answer is clear that the term Redskins is a slur simliar to nigger/nigga and thus is not allowed to be trademark/copyrighted. What gets me it seems to me that epsn is focusing on the Redskins as a slur about a person's skin color and not the real troubling aspect of it of killing native americans for money. I have not seen one interview where they bring of that fact that just because something is not allowed by trademark/copyright that you can still not make money off it. Look at all the rappers and music exercutives out there that make money off of the word nigger/nigga, which cannot be trademark or copyrighted.