Typical Horse Crap from WAPO

As we could expect from the Washington Post, comes this (courtesy of Breitbart Sports):

The Redskins' hometown paper has long called on the team to come up with a new nickname from its editorial-page perch. But the newspaper that brought down Richard Nixon hasn't been as effective in bringing down "Redskins." Impotent to get ownership to change the name, the editorial page has decided to stop using the word that they have long called on the team to stop using. And in true grandstander fashion, the Post uses the forbidden word to headline their editorial boasting that they refuse to use the forbidden word any longer. That's not a promising start to the Washington Redskins becoming the Washington Redacteds.

The Post announces that "the matter seems clearer to us now than ever, and while we wait for the National Football League to catch up with thoughtful opinion and common decency, we have decided that, except when it is essential for clarity or effect, we will no longer use the slur ourselves." Presumably, the 79 percent of Americans who disagree with the Post don't represent "thoughtful opinion," to say nothing of "common decency." 

This is so much BS, I don't know where to start. Let's see, should there be a movement to demand that New Orleans change its name because the "Saints" might be offensive to atheists? What about the Miami "Dolphins"? Isn't that an exploitation of a mammal that can't defend itself from accusations about being a violent football player?

Then again, how long might it be before all the leftists in this country take exception to the name of the New England "Patriots?" After all, doesn't that promote the ideals of the racist, slave-holding Founders?

Perhaps we should conjure up an appropriate nickname for Team ISIS. What might you suggest? How about the ISIS Wapos?