redarmy Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Cries of invalid voting.... a few recounts... a revote perhaps. I didn't know that Norm Coleman had a stake in this election?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloos Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 This vote is pretty meaningless, except to show what most people have known all along - most Indians approve of the name. The problem is not (nor has it ever been) with the tribes. The problem is the far left elitists. These people could care less about democracy. They think they are smarter than everyone else and need to "protect" the Native people who cannot determine what is in their own best interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 This vote is pretty meaningless, except to show what most people have known all along - most Indians approve of the name. The problem is not (nor has it ever been) with the tribes. The problem is the far left elitists. These people could care less about democracy. They think they are smarter than everyone else and need to "protect" the Native people who cannot determine what is in their own best interests. Chicken. Dinner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Sioux nickname, Morrie Lanning on 'McFeely Show'The results are in, and members of the Spirit Lake reservation in North Dakota support the University of North Dakota Fighting Sioux nickname. We'll open the Mike McFeely Show with that discussion today. (Noon to 2 p.m. on WDAY-AM 970).For those who want to discuss the issue....Phone numbers are 293-9000 and 1-800-279-9329. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 This vote is pretty meaningless, except to show what most people have known all along - most Indians approve of the name. The problem is not (nor has it ever been) with the tribes. The problem is the far left elitists. These people could care less about democracy. They think they are smarter than everyone else and need to "protect" the Native people who cannot determine what is in their own best interests. I had sent a letter to the editor a couple of years ago that was published on this very issue: that NA's in general supprot the name but people like Leigh Jeanotte and the leftist faculty at UND were the one's trying to change the name and are there not bigger issues among NA's than the nickname. Within 2 weeks of my letter being published in the paper, I had Leigh Jeanoote, some UND faculty and a civil liberties organization at UND calling the administration of the hosptial/clinic I work for asking them to fire me because I was a bigot and a racist. This anti-name sect is hell bent on getting their way and destroying anyone who disagrees with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 MplsBison, you have made it perfectly clear that you want to see the name dropped. Let me guess... you were sick and tired of seeing the Bison get beat by the Sioux in football up until the move to I-AA. Now that UND is in their transition to I-AA it's only a matter of time before they might play another football game against NDSU. If the name gets changed before the next UND/NDSU football game you won't have to suffer through another loss at the hands of the Fighting Sioux. Right? If there were a way to let UND keep the Sioux nickname AND get them into the Summit AND get Big Ten teams to schedule them in other sports AND prevent the tribes from ever pulling that support, I'd be fine with that. That will never happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I disagree, I think bowing to the "politically correct" minority does very little to "make a clear-cut line in the sand". If anything it's a step back, what if a handful of people don't like the next nickname, or the one after that. And exactly what do you mean "morally", if changing the name is "moral" to you, than keeping it, respecting the will of the majority, is immoral? I meant morally as in putting themselves above all the mud-slinging. Having the leadership to say "enough is enough, time to change". I no sympathy for cult Sioux hockey fans who would rather see the university burn to the ground than have to give up the Sioux nickname on the hockey uniforms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dj_hoime Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 This vote is pretty meaningless, except to show what most people have known all along - most Indians approve of the name. The problem is not (nor has it ever been) with the tribes. The problem is the far left elitists. These people could care less about democracy. They think they are smarter than everyone else and need to "protect" the Native people who cannot determine what is in their own best interests. Great Post. This is exactly what is going on. Select few that make this an issue and sadly majority doesnt count for anything anymore. Step out of your Hybrid cars and recycled houses and stop worrying. Happy Earth Day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choyt3 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I no sympathy for cult Sioux hockey fans who would rather see the university burn to the ground than have to give up the Sioux nickname on the hockey uniforms. Nice stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I disagree, I think bowing to the "politically correct" minority does very little to "make a clear-cut line in the sand". If anything it's a step back, what if a handful of people don't like the next nickname, or the one after that. And exactly what do you mean "morally", if changing the name is "moral" to you, than keeping it, respecting the will of the majority, is immoral? The politically correct minority is now running the show at our colleges, universities, and in turn the NCAA, unfortunately. So we keep up the fight and retain the nickname, what is gained? You're crippling the athletic department's ability to compete with it's peers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 The guy more or less spelled it out for you: this will never be over. Don't you get it? You might have won this time, but there are people on both reservations who will never let this issue die. They'll break contracts, go to court, etc. I have my doubts that the Standing Rock leaders will allow a vote, even if it was 99-to-1 for voting. We're at a point now where I think UND could really make a clear-cut line in the sand and put itself head-and-shoulders above this whole mess, morally, by announcing they will change the nickname.There is nothing morally wrong with the Fighting Sioux nickname. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 There is nothing morally wrong with the Fighting Sioux nickname. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 There is nothing morally wrong with the Fighting Sioux nickname. The mud-slinging/lying that's being used by the anti-nickname side is morally wrong. UND could put itself clearly head and shoulders above that by dropping the nickname now, after a tribal vote shows that the majority population of tribe supports the nickname. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 There is nothing morally wrong with the Fighting Sioux nickname. I agree with you. The settlement with the NCAA was reached. What next? I don't see Standing Rock letting this go to a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I agree with you. The settlement with the NCAA was reached. What next? I don't see Standing Rock letting this go to a vote. Standing Rock leadership will either: A) not allow a vote B) thumb their noses at a majority vote supporting the nickname and refuse any agreement Either way, the only result is dropping the nickname But I guess if you want to drag it out for another year+, the Summit will be there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I think it should be noted by the folks who have opined about dropping the Sioux nickname exactly what happens when the people are actually allowed to be heard on this issue at the ballot box. Further, does the result of this vote make the nickname any more or less hostile or abusive? The answer is no. It wasn't prior to the vote, and it isn't now. Kind of an "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it..." sort of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Standing Rock leadership will either: A) not allow a vote B) thumb their noses at a majority vote supporting the nickname and refuse any agreement Either way, the only result is dropping the nickname But I guess if you want to drag it out for another year+, the Summit will be there. I don't really think it's going to take another year to know what Standing Rock is going to do (if anything). I see nothing wrong with waiting at least a few more months. I'm not naive enough to think the issue is ever going to go completely away if the name is retained, but neither do I really want to disrespect the people on the reservations who have gone above and beyond to prove what we've known for some time--that the citizens view this issue quite differently from most of the politicians. I'd just like to avoid the inevitable backlash if it appears that the towel is thrown in prematurely, i.e. before the people of Standing Rock may have the opportunity to make their voices heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Do you want to muddy the waters even further...ND higher ed president runs into opposition for second termThe president of North Dakota's Board of Higher Education is running into some opposition for another term. The North Dakota Senate is scheduled to vote Wednesday on whether to confirm Richie Smith for his second four-year term. A Senate review committee voted 3-2 to support Smith's confirmation. Hazen Senator Randy Christmann and Bowman Senator Bill Bowman voted no.Not that the president of the SBoHE has the power to do anything unilaterally, but it does make things just a little more interesting. To say we are living in interesting times is an understatement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I'm not sure what the best thing for the University to do in the longterm is, but I'm greatly appreciative of those people who saw that the Spirit Lake tribe was able to vote and these results now become public. We've had polls, but now in the most democratic way possible the results are in for all the world to see, at least with this one tribe. All the bickering back and forth becomes secondary to the facts. 2/3 of Native Americans in the Spirit Lake tribe are in favor of the nickname. Not only that, but today's story in the Herald, IMO, makes it pretty obvious that for a lot of the people who are for the nickname within the tribe, it's not recent hot button topic, it's just something that they like. The NCAA, the nickname opponents, etc can say whatever they want. What we now have documented, again in the most democratic way, is that overwhelmingly the members of the tribe are in favor of UND using the nickname. And they like it. And they don't see the magnitude of problems others would like to ascribe to the nickname. What's best for the University longterm? I don't know. From this point on, however, it's pretty hard for the many charges against the use of the nickname to hold much water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Do you want to muddy the waters even further...ND higher ed president runs into opposition for second termNot that the president of the SBoHE has the power to do anything unilaterally, but it does make things just a little more interesting. To say we are living in interesting times is an understatement. Many people look at Ritchie Smith and all they see is JQ Paulsen and Joe Chapman. That situation has little to do with this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 If it can work for the likes of Florida State and Central Michigan, it can work for UND. That's the point that you either don't understand or don't want to understand. If UND was the only school in the nation with a Native American/American Indian nickname you might be on to something, but that isn't the case. It can and does work based on the precedent set by other schools. How is it that Florida State has no problem with the namesake issue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 All the bickering back and forth becomes secondary to the facts. 2/3 of Native Americans in the Spirit Lake tribe are in favor of the nickname....and...The NCAA, the nickname opponents, etc can say whatever they want. What we now have documented, again in the most democratic way, is that overwhelmingly the members of the tribe are in favor of UND using the nickname. And they like it. And they don't see the magnitude of problems others would like to ascribe to the nickname. What's best for the University longterm? I don't know. From this point on, however, it's pretty hard for the many charges against the use of the nickname to hold much water.(emphasis mine) That's the long and short of it for me. All the yelling (by a very small group of people both inside and outside of the NA community) doesn't prove anything. There was an up-or-down vote and one side won: and in a US Congressional or national election the vote would be described as a landslide win. Personally, I would LOVE, I repeat LOVE to hear some of the reactions today from not only the on-campus whiners but also the NCAA MOIC clowns. For a long time you arrogantly presumed to speak for this group of people: now that they've told you to mind your own #$%^, business, what do you have to say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 The mud-slinging/lying that's being used by the anti-nickname side is morally wrong. UND could put itself clearly head and shoulders above that by dropping the nickname now, after a tribal vote shows that the majority population of tribe supports the nickname.And another thing, Skippy, regarding this issue I'd much rather listen to Sioux hockey fans than 'SU fans. There seem to be an awful lot of 'SU fans here today offering advice. I find it hard to believe that they really have the best interests of UND at heart. I think it more likely that they are shitting themselves at the prospect that the Fighting Sioux moniker may yet live on. On second thought, let me correct myself - there isn't any issue on which I'd rather hear the opinion of 'SU fans over Sioux hockey fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 ...but that isn't the case. It can and does work based on the precedent set by other schools.And I hope that RIGHT NOW your AD or some other person in the University Administration is seeking out some of the leaders who pushed for yesterday's vote, to try and get a meeting scheduled to show them what the University is willing to do and talk about their concerns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 And another thing, Skippy, regarding this issue I'd much rather listen to Sioux hockey fans than 'SU fans. There seem to be an awful lot of 'SU fans here today offering advice. I find it hard to believe that they really have the best interests of UND at heart. I think it more likely that they are shitting themselves at the prospect that the Fighting Sioux moniker may yet live on. On second thought, let me correct myself - there isn't any issue on which I'd rather hear the opinion of 'SU fans over Sioux hockey fans. The guy has a reasonable point. Many Bison fans are also UND hockey fans. I would hate to come to this web site and find there is no place for discourse or debate. Anyone who thinks Bison fans would be all that concerned about the name issue are mistaken. Many enjoy the whining and fuss and the fact that it any negative publicity for UND is good for them. I would hope most UND hockey fans are simply UND fans. Anyone who might feel threatened by what someone posts on this website about the subjects here might need to get out more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.