Fetch Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 10-1 more college voters get that screwed up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 John Strand from the High Plains Reader in Fargo will be debating Al Carlson about the Fighting Sioux nickname law during the 6:30 news on KX4 in a segment called the Hot Box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 John Strand from the High Plains Reader in Fargo will be debating Al Carlson about the Fighting Sioux nickname law during the 6:30 news on KX4 in a segment called the Hot Box. If this opinion piece is any indication, he's going to use actual facts to make his argument and that should make him a heavy favorite. Unless of course Carlson just keeps repeating "It's the law, it's the law..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 If this opinion piece is any indication, he's going to use actual facts to make his argument and that should make him a heavy favorite. Unless of course Carlson just keeps repeating "It's the law, it's the law..." Whether you agree with him or not, John usually has a pretty good handle on the facts of the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 If this opinion piece is any indication, he's going to use actual facts to make his argument and that should make him a heavy favorite. Unless of course Carlson just keeps repeating "It's the law, it's the law..." Carlson will tell voters to vote no and stick it to the NCAA. Carlson doesn't give a crap about UND athletics. If he did he would listen to UND coaches, players, alumni, and the little thing called....FACTS! (losing recruits, banned from an Iowa track meet, no playing Minny, UW, in hockey starting in 2013-2014, no home football playoff games). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Video of the debate A couple highlights (paraphrased) Strand: We had an agreement, we should stick to it Carlson: The Sioux people weren't at the table for it <--He must have missed were that argument got tossed out in court. Strand: There is concern about hurting the University Carlson: Well I think that is an argument for the side to movingonasfastasicanchangethesubject... I wish Strand would have went into a little more detail but there wasn't much time for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Video of the debate A couple highlights (paraphrased) Strand: We had an agreement, we should stick to it Carlson: The Sioux people weren't at the table for it <--He must have missed were that argument got tossed out in court. Strand: There is concern about hurting the University Carlson: Well I think that is an argument for the side to movingonasfastasicanchangethesubject... I wish Strand would have went into a little more detail but there wasn't much time for that. Thanks for posting this link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Something that scares me is the fact that many of the same people that voted Al Carlson into office will also be voting on this measure..................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Video of the debate A couple highlights (paraphrased) Strand: We had an agreement, we should stick to it Carlson: The Sioux people weren't at the table for it <--He must have missed were that argument got tossed out in court. Strand: There is concern about hurting the University Carlson: Well I think that is an argument for the side to movingonasfastasicanchangethesubject... I wish Strand would have went into a little more detail but there wasn't much time for that. I hate Al Carlson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Something that scares me is the fact that many of the same people that voted Al Carlson into office will also be voting on this measure..................... There are probably quite a few people that voted for him that wouldn't do it again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 There are probably quite a few people that voted for him that wouldn't do it again. Like all of South Fargo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I have supreme confidence in Spirit Lake. Why? Because the NCAA is out of line and I have faith in our justice system. I can't believe this didn't pan out..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I can't believe this didn't pan out..... Who could have possibly guessed that legal system would follow the law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Who could have possibly guessed that legal system would follow the law? Blasphemy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Attention Alumni Association: I'm sure I'm not the only one willing to chip in some coin for the advertising campaign. How about a link on your home page to get this done? Make it easy. Someone is listening: Vote Yes 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Someone is listening: Vote Yes Cue the ranting in 3...2...1... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Cue the ranting in 3...2...1... I'll bring the beer and shotguns ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 So if the vote on June 12th comes back yes..will this finally be over or will Crazy Al start up a new law and try to talk the state into voting for it while keeping this issue alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 So if the vote on June 12th comes back yes..will this finally be over or will Crazy Al start up a new law and try to talk the state into voting for it while keeping this issue alive. There is still the Constitutional Amendment issue, the group is still working on getting signatures to put that on the ballot next November. Who knows what Al is going to do next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Reed Soderstrom was on KNOX radio and said that they are still working on the Constitutional Amendment. As far as he knows, they are still around 20,000 signatures. They need approximately 27,000 approved signatures, so they will probably need to get at least 32-33,000. They need them by early August to get on the November ballot, but he said that they could also turn them in by early December to get a special election next spring. The main reason he was on was to discuss the Forum poll. He continues to say that the warnings of harm to UND are just fearmongering. He said that the sanctions are marginal. He says that UND will not be removed from the Big Sky and part of his proof is that the schedules are made out until 2015. He accuses the people trying to retire the name of lying. And he is still promoting that people vote no to defeat the NCAA. Of course he is wrong about the potential damage to UND, the Big Sky has the ability to remove UND at any time they want, and we have seen mainly lies and partial truths coming from his group. The 1 question I have never heard anyone ask him is how a no vote will defeat or harm the NCAA. A no vote will not harm the NCAA in any way, but it will harm the University. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Reed Soderstrom was on KNOX radio and said that they are still working on the Constitutional Amendment. As far as he knows, they are still around 20,000 signatures. They need approximately 27,000 approved signatures, so they will probably need to get at least 32-33,000. They need them by early August to get on the November ballot, but he said that they could also turn them in by early December to get a special election next spring. The main reason he was on was to discuss the Forum poll. He continues to say that the warnings of harm to UND are just fearmongering. He said that the sanctions are marginal. He says that UND will not be removed from the Big Sky and part of his proof is that the schedules are made out until 2015. He accuses the people trying to retire the name of lying. And he is still promoting that people vote no to defeat the NCAA. Of course he is wrong about the potential damage to UND, the Big Sky has the ability to remove UND at any time they want, and we have seen mainly lies and partial truths coming from his group. The 1 question I have never heard anyone ask him is how a no vote will defeat or harm the NCAA. A no vote will not harm the NCAA in any way, but it will harm the University. Good grief. If anyone is stretching the truth its Soderstrom. Does this guy realize that schedules can be redone in a day? For football, the conference schedule could be redone in a second so any Big Sky team wouldn't have to reschedule any games. For every other sport, having an even number would make creating the schedules even easier and a team could keep UND on the schedule as non conference if they absolutely wanted. Its funny how far they will stretch the truth to try and paint their picture. Other schools have laid out the facts for UND and made painting their picture pretty easy. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 For a man with a $250k war chest, and the mission of protecting UND, we sure haven't heard much more from Tim O'Keefe of the UND Alumni Association ... yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Reed Soderstrom was on KNOX radio and said that they are still working on the Constitutional Amendment. As far as he knows, they are still around 20,000 signatures. They need approximately 27,000 approved signatures, so they will probably need to get at least 32-33,000. They need them by early August to get on the November ballot, but he said that they could also turn them in by early December to get a special election next spring. The main reason he was on was to discuss the Forum poll. He continues to say that the warnings of harm to UND are just fearmongering. He said that the sanctions are marginal. He says that UND will not be removed from the Big Sky and part of his proof is that the schedules are made out until 2015. He accuses the people trying to retire the name of lying. And he is still promoting that people vote no to defeat the NCAA. Of course he is wrong about the potential damage to UND, the Big Sky has the ability to remove UND at any time they want, and we have seen mainly lies and partial truths coming from his group. The 1 question I have never heard anyone ask him is how a no vote will defeat or harm the NCAA. A no vote will not harm the NCAA in any way, but it will harm the University. Someone please end this !@#$ now!!! This issue is over, its done, give up already. If this is defeated no one is going to vote for this in November because people are already sick of this issue. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Reed Soderstrom was on KNOX radio and said that they are still working on the Constitutional Amendment. As far as he knows, they are still around 20,000 signatures. They need approximately 27,000 approved signatures, so they will probably need to get at least 32-33,000. They need them by early August to get on the November ballot, but he said that they could also turn them in by early December to get a special election next spring. The main reason he was on was to discuss the Forum poll. He continues to say that the warnings of harm to UND are just fearmongering. He said that the sanctions are marginal. He says that UND will not be removed from the Big Sky and part of his proof is that the schedules are made out until 2015. He accuses the people trying to retire the name of lying. And he is still promoting that people vote no to defeat the NCAA. Of course he is wrong about the potential damage to UND, the Big Sky has the ability to remove UND at any time they want, and we have seen mainly lies and partial truths coming from his group. The 1 question I have never heard anyone ask him is how a no vote will defeat or harm the NCAA. A no vote will not harm the NCAA in any way, but it will harm the University. Big surprise there, living in denial and refuting everything that has happened or is on the verge of happening has become the rule for the nickname-or-die crowd, they absolutely will not get it until the roof caves in...but that will be someone elses fault too. The only thing they're gaining by continuing to spin the issues is screwing UND deeper and deeper into the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 For a man with a $250k war chest, and the mission of protecting UND, we sure haven't heard much more from Tim O'Keefe of the UND Alumni Association ... yet. Reed mentioned the $250k and said he felt good that it was so close since the other side had spent all that money on a campaign. Obviously, the Alumni Foundation has spent very little of that money. But I would watch for a campaign coming to a North Dakota newspaper near you within the next couple of weeks. 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.