dagies

B E A U T I F U L

I probably should have used a

Wow. How come none of us saw this coming?

This is bogus. If the school nickname was the "Golden Gophers" and she was campaigning to have it changed, she would likely experience the same behavior. Does that mean "Golden Gophers" would be "hostile and abusive"? I think not. Treat the illness, not the symptoms.

I mentioned on another thread a co-worker of mine who is half-Sioux Indian. She said on the reservation she referred to herself as a "half-breed" and while even her husband (white) recoils when she calls herself that, she says that's just how they referred to themselves and it's no big deal.

I don't see anyone overtaking Kessel for ROTY but the Sioux have as many or more guys ready for 1st runner up than anyone else in the league. And that's not bad at all.

Maybe Hak has to play the "family" card.

Do you have to have "pure blood" to "count" as a Sioux now?

I think we just need a small, cartoonish representation of a Sioux Indian, and then we won't be "hostile and abusive" any more. At least, that's how I read Taken Alive's quote.

I don't even think Hakstol knows who that is. Zajac scored 3 goals in one of his first preseason games. It will be interesting to see how he does this year. Last year he scored 3 goals before Christmas, and 9 goals after. It would be fun to see another brother combo wearing the kelly green. There's a couple more after Darcy too, I believe.

One can go by what one reads in the press, can't they?

I'd heard the same, and that he's a great kid with very good character.

Hmmm.... Turtle Mountain Chairman says UND has done "a good job" Well....how about that?

1. Cokey and Phil, and I won't give last names on a public forum. 2. What about all the Sioux that don't live on reservations. In fact, what about the Sioux who live on reservations that agree with the name? Surely even you won't say 100% of them are against the name. 3. Then you can no longer be critical of the logo because it was created by a non-Sioux indian. So we're back to square one. The logo was tastefully created by an American Indian. What's "hostile and abusive" about it again?

1. Not the entire Sioux nation. I know at least 2 who have no problem with the name. And at least 2 polls, so conveniently ignored by you and others, show otherwise. 2. Why do you throw out the Fighting Irish as irrelevant. They have Fighting in their name. They have the name of real people in their name. The only thing is, they have a cartoon for a logo. UND has a very tasteful Indian head logo. Amazing to me that you say Notre Dame is irrelevant to the discussion. 3. You've already said non-Sioux opinions on this matter are irrelevant. Therefore, we're not listening to the National Congress of AI.

Good. We've at least established "Warriors" and probably "Braves" are not hostile and offensive.

NO! You MUST blame bigotry on the name. This man is SO misguided!

Have you ever heard about a Norwegian complaining about the Viking's mascot, Ragnar? Why do you suppose that is?

In fact, I'd like to take this a little farther. Please tell us what is inappropriate about the logo. What mistakes did the Chippewa artist make in his work? What part of the logo casts Sioux indians in a bad light?

Are you accepting the assistance of non-Sioux American Indians in this nickname fight?

God forbid anyone try and emulate something they respect. One of my problems with nickname opponents is the insistence on dwelling on any possible negative rather than look at the positive. You may get your wish, GK. The nickname may well go away. And in the long run, you'll find that it was wasted time, wasted angst.

Why would an American Indian create an "obnoxious logo" for UND to use?

I think you are "unclear on the concept". PCM's point is that these are examples of mascots. Compare, if you will, those cartoons to what UND has for a logo and ask yourself if it is really "hostile and abusive". I haven't yet seen or read or observed any evidence that it is. Nor have any points been made by opponents that reasonably explain how the logo causes harm. At worst, idiots that misuse the logo show symptoms of their own ignorance and racism. The logo itself is benign. I think the logo and nickname are convenient firebrands that activists can conveniently attack and feel that by doing so they are helping American Indians. I disagree.