UNDColorado Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Not disagreeing with much of anything in this thread. But does anyone else see how this whole ongoing nickname fiasco is just a total cluster **** and is really no more than a microcosm of what is wrong with our country in it's current state. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Not disagreeing with much of anything in this thread. But does anyone else see how this whole ongoing nickname fiasco is just a total cluster **** and is really no more than a microcosm of what is wrong with our country in it's current state. You're referring to smart people being vastly outnumbered by..... uh...... less smart people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 One of two groups could end this now: 1. The NCAA. They could back away from their policy. That would mean admitting they were wrong. Not going to happen. 2. Spirit Lake. They could take away their approval. Any basis for retention of the name goes away. There's a "strong possible" to end it group: 3. Standing Rock: They could approve which would put a lot of pressure on the NCAA to approve the moniker. Beyond those three, all we'll have is an ongoing sucking chest wound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 could SL sue SR to try & get them to vote ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Oxbow6 Posted February 9, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted February 9, 2012 You're referring to smart people being vastly outnumbered by..... uh...... less smart people? That's the polite way of saying it. If most people had to continually, and on a daily basis, had to deal with the "general public", most would be shocked at how inept, unaccounatable and delusional most people are. Frickin' unbelievable. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 could SL sue SR to try & get them to vote ? On what grounds? They are separate, independent nations. What you're asking for is the equivalent of France suing Argentina to make Argentina vote on whether or not they like red wine. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 That's the polite way of saying it. If most people had to continually, and on a daily basis, had to deal with the "general public", most would be shocked at how inept, unaccounatable and delusional most people are. Frickin' unbelievable. See it all the time ... whenever I read SAB, read some of the comments on this forum or go to my local Hooters. Then I laugh, and thank the stars people like that exist since they afford me a pretty decent life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Has anyone thought of this.....could the Tribal Council of Spirit Lake hold a vote of just their council and unapprove the use of the nickname? Even thought it would create an outrage of supporters on their reservation. There is no 30 year deal its just an approval because the tribe voted...couldn't the tribal council unapprove it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 You're referring to smart people being vastly outnumbered by..... uh...... less smart people? Don't forget the NCAA brass and quite nearly all of the university presidents no doubt believe themselves to be part of the group of "smart people being vastly outnumber by ... uh .. less smart people." Many of that sort of group of such "smart people" actually advocate for voting rights for only the "educated." Probably not such a smart group after all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAS4127 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Has anyone thought of this.....could the Tribal Council of Spirit Lake hold a vote of just their council and unapprove the use of the nickname? Even thought it would create an outrage of supporters on their reservation. There is no 30 year deal its just an approval because the tribe voted...couldn't the tribal council unapprove it? I think it would take one of those "less smart people" others are talking about to even think of this . . . . . . . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Not disagreeing with much of anything in this thread. But does anyone else see how this whole ongoing nickname fiasco is just a total cluster **** and is really no more than a microcosm of what is wrong with our country in it's current state. Yes I do believe that the nickname fiasco has become a charlie foxtrot. There is no other way to say it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I think it would take one of those "less smart people" others are talking about to even think of this . . . . . . . . . . Jesus, so you disagree with him. We get it. He's not a supporter of the petition process so he'd probably qualify for your smart group in another context. Obviously, you have a unique perspective on the recruiting side of things having played football - heck you were even captain of our "Rough Justice" squad and a good one at that :~) From your perspective, you could certainly throw me in with the "dumb people" though because I support the petition process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAS4127 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Jesus, so you disagree with him. We get it. He's not a supporter of the petition process so he'd probably qualify for your smart group in another context. Obviously, you have a unique perspective on the recruiting side of things having played football - heck you were even captain of our "Rough Justice" squad. You could certainly throw me in with the "dumb people" though because I support the petition process. I don't recall the term "dumb people" being used!! Also, I didn't realize there were "enforcers" on this board!! Lastly, I wouldn't catergorize all petition supporters as being "less smart people"; rather, I think it is a mixed bag, including those who don't subsribe to the PC BS, those who are simply enamored witht the "name", those that don't think it will be overly detrimental to UND athletics, and those who are delusional because their emotions are overwhelming their ability to otherwise think lucidly. Me personally, I think it would be devestating to all of UND athletics if the BSC were to in fact jettison UND. Will they? Not sure? Would I want to take the chance? No; but to each their own!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Thanks CAS for posting my thought on Bisonville...its nice to see it on two message boards instead of one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAS4127 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Thanks CAS for posting my thought on Bisonville...its nice to see it on two message boards instead of one. Sorry, Darrell, but I just didn't feel your proposal was a even a considerable option. Also, when I did that, I didn't realize you were not a petition supporter--->that puts things in a perspective for me a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Sorry, Darrell, but I just didn't feel your proposal was a even a considerable option. Also, when I did that, I didn't realize you were not a petition supporter--->that puts things in a perspective for me a bit. Now, the world is set aright again...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Sorry, Darrell, but I just didn't feel your proposal was a even a considerable option. Also, when I did that, I didn't realize you were not a petition supporter--->that puts things in a perspective for me a bit. No problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Has anyone thought of this.....could the Tribal Council of Spirit Lake hold a vote of just their council and unapprove the use of the nickname? Even thought it would create an outrage of supporters on their reservation. There is no 30 year deal its just an approval because the tribe voted...couldn't the tribal council unapprove it? Why would they do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 The more I think about this, the more I come to the conclusion that the SBoHE has to take control of this issue. It cannot be left up to a statewide vote. You have the nickname supporters, the folks who want to see UND harmed and the ones who go to a voting booth without studying an issue and vote for it. That it a recipe for disaster for UND. I live in Florida and about 10 years ago, there was actually a vote for a constitutional amendment regarding pregnant pigs in a cage. I laughed when I first read about and obviously voted against it. It had no business being placed on the ballot. It passed and is now part of Florida's constitution. Maybe someone should start a petition that NDSU should be called the ______ (fill in the blank). Get enough signatures and put it out for vote. This whole fiasco is just plain stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Why fight it now...like other said it will just encourage the nickname supporters and help drive the numbers to get it into ND constitution...and then there is really nothing UND or the SBOHE could do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Why fight it now...like other said it will just encourage the nickname supporters and help drive the numbers to get it into ND constitution...and then there is really nothing UND or the SBOHE could do! The Contract Clause appears in the United States Constitution, Article I, section 10, clause 1. It states: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 The Contract Clause appears in the United States Constitution, Article I, section 10, clause 1. It states: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. Having the State of ND have a university be the "fighting Sioux" is impairing a contract? To much legalese crap for me. But we all know the United States Congress passes many things "unconstitutional" that seem to stay "law"...."obamacare," etc etc etc http://wiki.answers....nconstitutional The thing about "law" and what that means is it always changes and is just peoples "opinion" (federal judges) and changes with the times (liberal vs conservative judges being appointed).....odd isn't it that one court finds obamacare unconstitutional but another court might not? (supreme court vs the rest)....my point...its a crazy lawed world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Having the State of ND have a university be the "fighting Sioux" is impairing a contract? The settlement agreement signed by the state of North Dakota with the NCAA is a contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 The settlement agreement signed by the state of North Dakota with the NCAA is a contract. And no where in that contract does it say UND can't be known as the Fighting Sioux. So it wouldn't be impairing any contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 And no where in that contract does it say UND can't be known as the Fighting Sioux. So it wouldn't be impairing any contract. Step 1: UND/North Dakota signed a contract agreeing to drop he nickname. Step 2:North Dakota passed a law prohibiting UND following through on that contract. That is a problem. State Senator David Nething -R, spoke on the floor of the senate the day the Sioux Bill was passed. He explained in detail this constitutional problem with the law. He then took the rare step of having his comments published in the Senate Journal as he was quite confident that the legislature running afoul of the contracts clause. 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.