I don't need to ask to know you just made up your percentages. You have zero actual evidence for your claim.
Unfortunately for you, people have done the interviewing you suggest. The results prove you wrong:
67% of Indians say "Redskins" offensive
Tribal leaders unite against "Redskins"
Poll: "Redskins" is offensive to Indians
The truth is probably the other way around. Wannabes are the ones most likely to champion "redskins" as a proud tribute to their thin-blooded heritage. Many Indians on the rez may not care about the nickname, but they don't embrace the slur either.
And some of them are among the strongest anti-mascot activists. As you'd know if you followed the issue closely.
Indeed, your own Navajo Nation has taken a stand against the name. Since they disagree with you, I guess that makes them phony Indians too.
You can't even grasp what your fellow Navajos are saying--not to mention the hundreds of tribes you're not acquainted with. Freakin' hilarious if you ask me!
Meanwhile, the following article destroys your ridiculous contention that the controversy is a recent invention of a few white liberals and Indian activists:
The Great Redskins Name Debate of ... 1972?
Your claim that ICTMN is focusing on this subject to the exclusion of others is equally silly. It's literally--not figuratively but literally--one of a hundred topics they cover every week. They're on top of every issue you might consider important: language loss, cultural preservation, sacred sites, Cobell payments, land-into-trust, economic development, fracking, GMOs, climate change, etc., etc.
Really, give me an issue you think the Native media hasn't covered recently. As someone who works in that media, I'll prove you wrong or admit you're right. Put up or shut up if you're not afraid of the truth.