The Final ‘Redskins’ Defenders in Politics

Only for use with the Inner Loop article that sppears in the 7/19/2014 National Journal issue. An illustration depicting a politician waering a Washington Redskins helmet.
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Simon Van Zuylen Wood
July 18, 2014, 1 a.m.

Ben Trib­bett is feel­ing a little per­se­cuted. “I don’t ap­pre­ci­ate see­ing the one or­gan­iz­a­tion that brought this com­munity to­geth­er be­ing used now as a wedge to tear the com­munity apart,” says the 34-year-old Demo­crat­ic strategist, from his home in Fair­fax County, Vir­gin­ia. “And for those of us who were raised Red­skins fans, I don’t think we’ve ever done any­thing wrong.”

Un­til re­cently, Trib­bett, a maven of Vir­gin­ia polit­ics, was best known for his pop­u­lar blog and nom de Twit­ter, “Not Larry Sabato.” Last fall, however — as the move­ment to force the NFL team to aban­don its name was pick­ing up steam — he began to agit­ate more openly on so­cial me­dia in fa­vor of the monik­er.

Then, a month ago, Trib­bett shuttered his web­site and as­sumed a new role: He went to work for the team it­self, to help with its in­creas­ingly chal­len­ging PR ef­fort. But it didn’t take long for oth­er pun­dits to start at­tack­ing him. Trib­bett happened to be the man who — in his role as a Demo­crat­ic polit­ic­al op­er­at­ive — had years ago un­covered the in­fam­ous “macaca” video that doomed Sen. George Al­len of Vir­gin­ia. That fact led many to pro­nounce Trib­bett a gi­ant hy­po­crite for de­fend­ing the Red­skins. Mak­ing mat­ters worse, one web­site tracked down a hand­ful of off-col­or Nat­ive Amer­ic­an jokes Trib­bett had made on Twit­ter in 2010. Say­ing he didn’t want to be a “dis­trac­tion,” he resigned his post after just two weeks.

In the wake of the mini-scan­dal, Trib­bett re­mains un­bowed. When we spoke after his resig­na­tion, I asked him how he could re­con­cile his “macaca” past with his cur­rent stance on the Red­skins. He re­spon­ded that the premise of my ques­tion was wrong. “The ‘Red­skins’ is not an epi­thet,” he said. “The only people I’ve ever heard called ‘red­skins’ in my life are mem­bers of the Wash­ing­ton Red­skins.”

(Kris Connor/Getty Images for Microsoft) National Journal

(Kris Con­nor/Getty Im­ages for Mi­crosoft)But there’s no ques­tion that, with­in the na­tion’s polit­ic­al class, all the mo­mentum seems to be against Trib­bett’s side. In May, 50 sen­at­ors signed an open let­ter ur­ging the Red­skins to ad­opt a new name. In June, the U.S. Pat­ent and Trade­mark Of­fice re­voked the team’s trade­mark, deem­ing it “derog­at­ory.” This past week, At­tor­ney Gen­er­al Eric Hold­er joined the chor­us, as Barack Obama and Harry Re­id had be­fore him.

Of course, as polls sug­gest, there is a si­lent ma­jor­ity of Red­skins fans who might break out in­to mass re­volt should the name change. In the realm of polit­ics, however, those voices are now few and far between. If you fa­vor the name “and you’re at a Geor­getown cock­tail party talk­ing about this is­sue,” Trib­bett notes, “you prob­ably don’t really want to pipe up.” So I wondered: Who, oth­er than Trib­bett, are the last polit­ic­al types will­ing to speak out on be­half of the Red­skins name? And how, ex­actly, do they ex­plain them­selves?

THE POLIT­IC­AL WORLD’S most vis­ible de­fend­ers of the name can be found 100 miles south of Wash­ing­ton in Rich­mond — where the “Red­skins Pride Caucus” of the Vir­gin­ia Gen­er­al As­sembly claims more than 30 mem­bers. The group, which strives to sup­port the team’s “com­mer­cial free­dom,” was formed last month by three state le­gis­lat­ors who were pushed over the edge by the pat­ent of­fice’s trade­mark de­cision.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 5093) }}

“Or­din­ary people I talk to are uni­formly in sup­port of the name,” says one founder of the caucus, Chap Petersen, a Demo­crat­ic state sen­at­or who gave Trib­bett his start in loc­al polit­ics. He and his fel­low co-chairs are in­dig­nant over the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment’s sud­den fo­cus on the is­sue. “This is equi­val­ent to liv­ing in a house for 60 years and some­body comes in and says, ‘I’m go­ing to take away your prop­erty, your land, be­cause I don’t like the style of the house,’ ” ar­gues Del. Dav­id Ra­madan, a Re­pub­lic­an who says he was a diehard Red­skins fan grow­ing up in Beirut. “This is a private Vir­gin­ia busi­ness that is now be­ing per­se­cuted by the trade­mark of­fice and 50 U.S. sen­at­ors who have noth­ing bet­ter to do.”

{{third­PartyEmbed type:magazineAd source:magazine_mid}}

Mean­while, Ra­madan’s col­league, Re­pub­lic­an Del. Jack­son Miller, spe­cific­ally frames his ar­gu­ment around the Nat­ive Amer­ic­an plight. “Is Harry Re­id go­ing to go and say the ‘Apache’ heli­copter is of­fens­ive?” he says, pre­dict­ing that he would not. “From the same mil­it­ary that des­troyed the Apache Na­tion?” (Con­ser­vat­ive com­ment­at­or Dana Loesch, drop­ping an An­drew Jack­son ref­er­ence, made a sim­il­ar point on Twit­ter: “Demo­crats like to pre­tend Amer­ic­an In­di­ans don’t ex­ist ex­cept when they want photo ops or their land. Peri­od.”)

Be­sides Trib­bett and a few mem­bers of the Red­skins Pride Caucus, there is scant Demo­crat­ic sup­port for the name. All 50 sen­at­ors who co­signed the open let­ter op­pos­ing the name were Demo­crats (or left-lean­ing in­de­pend­ents). None of the U.S. sen­at­ors from Vir­gin­ia or Mary­land — Dems all — pub­licly fa­vors “Red­skins.” Nor, ap­par­ently, do any of their D.C.-area col­leagues in the House of Rep­res­ent­at­ives — many of whom have already come out against it, and none of whom, as far as I could tell, have spoken out in fa­vor of it.

The most sig­ni­fic­ant Demo­crat­ic en­dorse­ment I could track down came from Vir­gin­ia Gov. Terry McAul­iffe, who told a loc­al ra­dio sta­tion, “You don’t want gov­ernors or oth­er gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials telling people what to do with a private-sec­tor busi­ness.” Either that, or the “present” vote D.C. coun­cil mem­ber Yvette Al­ex­an­der cast for an oth­er­wise un­an­im­ously passed res­ol­u­tion con­demning the name. Ex­plain­ing her vote, Al­ex­an­der told me by email, “It is up to Dan Snyder. Case closed.”

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 5092) }}

On the Re­pub­lic­an side, loc­al pols have been less shy. “The Red­skins should de­cide for them­selves what their name is,” Ken Cuc­cinelli, the man McAul­iffe de­feated last Novem­ber, told me in a state­ment. “If this is a real prob­lem, and not a D.C. man­u­fac­tured prob­lem, then fans will stop pur­chas­ing the team’s mer­chand­ise and their rev­en­ues will suf­fer.” Bill Bolling, Vir­gin­ia’s former lieu­ten­ant gov­ernor, chimed in too. “Hon­estly, no one I know of is of­fen­ded by the name Wash­ing­ton Red­skins,” he wrote in a state­ment. “Un­for­tu­nately we live in a day and time when some people are simply overly sens­it­ive to these sorts of things, and they think they can in­tim­id­ate people in­to chan­ging the name of the team if they com­plain long enough and loud enough.”

{{third­PartyEmbed type:magazineAd source:magazine_bot­tom}}

Fi­nally, there re­mains an­oth­er class of “Red­skins” de­fend­ers: the team’s paid PR con­sult­ants. In ad­di­tion to Trib­bett, Snyder has at one time or an­oth­er hired Belt­way vet­er­ans Lanny Dav­is, Ari Fleis­cher, and Frank Luntz to de­fend the team’s pub­lic im­age. Dav­is, whose of­fice says he is no longer speak­ing about the is­sue “in any ca­pa­city,” ten­ded to base his ar­gu­ments around polling data. Luntz, who re­fused to con­firm wheth­er he was still be­ing paid by the team, told me, fa­cetiously, “The name should be re­placed. They should be­come the Wash­ing­ton Smurfs. And then each week play­ers can come on in Smurf cos­tumes.” Later, he ad­ded, “I’m fed up with re­spond­ing if one per­son is in­sul­ted about any­thing. Every­body else has to change what they think, what they say, or what they do.”

If there was an un­der­cur­rent I found to the vari­ous pro-Red­skins ar­gu­ments cir­cu­lat­ing in the polit­ic­al arena, it was pre­cisely this re­vul­sion at al­leged hair-trig­ger sens­it­iv­ity — which has now, it seems, in­vaded even the foot­ball sta­di­um, a last refuge of openly boor­ish be­ha­vi­or. And that, in turn, brings us to per­haps the most fam­ous polit­ic­al sup­port­er of the Red­skins name: a man who has nev­er shown any fear of wind­ing up on the wrong side of his­tory. “Like, where do we go with this?” Toronto May­or Rob Ford told a D.C. sports ra­dio show last Decem­ber, amid his crack-re­lated trav­ails. “How long have the Skins had their name for? How long have the Chiefs had their name for? How long have the Clev­e­land In­di­ans had their name for? Years and years and years, and all of a sud­den the polit­ic­ally cor­rect people have to come out now?” He con­cluded, “I think everything’s fine, and I’d just stick with the name.”


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.