Media Stories on the Sioux Name

[PhillySioux]

Of course! Just like the SBHE is accusing the legislature and the people (16,000 of them) of a power grab. Remember, it's the SBHE that filed the lawsuit over the "power grab"---not the legislature.

I think what I said a year ago is holding up well.

PhillySioux

• 
  
• Members
  
• 827 posts
  

625]

Posted 17 February 2011 - 04:22 PM

I've said this before and I'll say it again, Al Carlson does not give two bleeps about the Fighting Sioux nickname. This bill has nothing to do with what is good for UND, UND athletics, UND's fanbase or UND's alumni. This bill has everything to do with his (and his caucus') overall disdain for SBoHE. They will eff with them anytime they can.

They now have the constitutional showdown they had wanted to begin with.

[ScottM]

They now have the constitutional showdown they had wanted to begin with.

Although I'm not sure Clueless Al is as sure of his "position" as he was last year. And the fact the Supremes snapped this up so quickly may indicate they have been paying attention to this mess and want it resolved for good.

[PhillySioux]

http://www.deseretnews.com/m/article/765553934

If you read Al's concerns I think he answers his own questions.

[MplsBison]

So there is going to be a vote in June asking people of ND if UND should be the Fighting Sioux (undoes the repeal of the law?) and then another vote in _____ asking people of ND if there should be a constitutional amendment requiring UND to be the Fighting Sioux?

And these two votes are the results of two petitions that collected enough signatures?

Now the state AG asked the state supreme court to rule the law that was repealed in November to be unconstitutional, which is the result of a lawsuit filed by the SBoHE? And just now Carlson's comittee has hired it's own lawyer.

Is there somewhere that a lay person can go to just read a straight facts timeline of this issue from the time that the law was enacted to now?

[PhillySioux]

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/230433/

More comments from Al and some of the committee.

They are telling to some degree. They seem to understand the complete mess they have created.

At the end of the day, the court has an opportunity (in my view) to deliver a well crafted opinion that pleases both Al and the Board.

[ScottM]

http://www.grandfork...icle/id/230433/

More comments from Al and some of the committee.

They are telling to some degree. They seem to understand the complete mess they have created.

At the end of the day, the court has an opportunity (in my view) to deliver a well crafted opinion that pleases both Al and the Board.

I find it interesting that Mr. Durick, while a very fine attorney, has absolutely no connection to UND. That's a rarity in the NoDak bar.

[PhillySioux]

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/352288/group/homepage/

Al Jaeger gets Dorsey attorneys.

[ScottM]

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/352288/group/homepage/ Al Jaeger gets Dorsey attorneys.

That ain't cheap. Maybe they can send the bill to Clueless Al.

[ScottM]

Old news, but now "official" I guess. Some of the comments are pretty interesting.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120227/NEWS/120227030/UI-declines-to-invite-North-Dakota-Fighting-Sioux-over-mascot-flap?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Frontpage

[Ranger]

Old news, but now "official" I guess. Some of the comments are pretty interesting.

http://www.desmoines...|text|Frontpage

How convenient of them not to allow potential Bowl games to get in the way of their nickname policy. Good for them.

[82SiouxGuy]

How convenient of them not to allow potential Bowl games to get in the way of their nickname policy. Good for them.

Since there isn't a potential opponent for a bowl game that uses a nickname on the sanctions list I don't see that as a big deal.

[Ranger]

Since there isn't a potential opponent for a bowl game that uses a nickname on the sanctions list I don't see that as a big deal.

Perhaps... but their policy still states as such. Incredibly hypocritical. Either play schools with native names, or don't.

[iluvdebbies]

Saw this on MSN.

Should UND change its nickname & logo?

1. 
   No. The university should keep them.
   
   
   
   72 %
   
   No. The university should keep them.
   53,824 votes
   
2. 
   Yes. The nickname & logo are offensive.
   
   
   
   6 %
   
   Yes. The nickname & logo are offensive.
   4,232 votes
   
3. 
   I don't care.
   
   
   
   22 %
   
   I don't care.
   16,458 votes
   

[Ice Arena Man]

Saw this on MSN.

Should UND change its nickname & logo?

1. No. The university should keep them.
   
   
   
   72 %
   
   No. The university should keep them.
   53,824 votes
   
2. Yes. The nickname & logo are offensive.
   
   
   
   6 %
   
   Yes. The nickname & logo are offensive.
   4,232 votes
   
3. I don't care.
   
   
   
   22 %
   
   I don't care.
   16,458 votes
   

Saw the same poll on MSN.

Did not vote ! Missing a choice

"Want them to keep the name but feel it should be dropped for the good of the University"

[darell1976]

"Want them to keep the name but feel it should be dropped for the good of the University"

Put me down for that choice.

[Ice Arena Man]

That wasn't given as a choice because it is basically the same as : "Yes. The nickname & logo are offensive."

can't you ever be POSITIVE about anything. This is the first time I have ever made my opinion known and you MR Dave K are the last person that I want questioning my opinion!

[darell1976]

That wasn't given as a choice because it is basically the same as : "Yes. The nickname & logo are offensive."

Actually no its not. I don't think its offensive, but its under the NCAA policy that it needs to be changed.

[darell1976]

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/45179-Kennedy-Battle-over-North-Dakota-Fighting-Sioux-nickname-ramps-up.html#disqus_thread

So ask yourself, Fighting Sioux supporters: What’s the name and logo worth if there’s no one around worthy enough to wear it?

So true!!

[BigGreyAnt41]

But either way you're still against keeping the name, which is why there was no need for another different choice in the poll. It's a simple yes or no question, no need to elaborate on why you're saying no. For one reason or the other, either way it is equally insulting to our Native American friends who are fighting so hard to preserve their proud name.

Nobody is forcing them to get rid of their name. They can continue to call themselves the Sioux as long as they want. For the good of the university, though, we should stop using it as a nickname.

[Snake]

But either way you're still against keeping the name, which is why there was no need for another different choice in the poll. It's a simple yes or no question, no need to elaborate on why you're saying no. For one reason or the other, either way it is equally insulting to our Native American friends who are fighting so hard to preserve their proud name.

Fail. They didn't frame it as a Yes or No question. The Yes answer included the qualifier "The nickname and Logo are Offensive." Therefore, if I don't believe the nickname to be offensive, but I still feel it should be changed because the University is between a rock and a hard place, I don't have a place to cast my vote. The third option "I don't care" is also not available to me because I do care.

[Snake]

From FoxNews this afternoon:

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/happening-now/index.html?playlist_id=86919&intcmp=features#/v/1485354033001/fight-over-fighting-sioux-logo

[UNDColorado]

Lis Wiehl gets it, Mark Eiglarsh doesn't have a clue.

It is pretty clear they are both lacking facts around this issue.

[johnsowe]

Thats what happenes when you try to get a complex issue in 3 mins. That guy had no clue and would not give the woman time to talk.

[BigGreyAnt41]

That's not what they're fighting for and you know it. They want their name to continue to be associated with the athletic programs at UND.

I absolutely know that, but since everybody here is nitpicking about every little thing, you said "fighting to preserve their proud name", and the fact is, their name isn't being taken away from them, and they have no legal ground to argue that somebody is required to call themselves "Sioux".

[yababy8]

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/45179-Kennedy-Battle-over-North-Dakota-Fighting-Sioux-nickname-ramps-up.html#disqus_thread

So true!!

yet another article that omits the fact that the spirit lake Sioux are fighting this.

Doesn't mention that the spirit lake Sioux have filed a federal lawsuit against the NCAA.

doesn't mention that the spirit lake SIOUX are leading the petition efforts.

.. oh I know all of you get rid of the name crowd think that the spirit lake Sioux involvement is not newsworthy. and the media just knowS that people don't give a crap about that and that it is not important, but it is a little interesting that this article states that they're going to give a history of everything and even included Ralph Engelstad's logo strategy. they just always forget to include how the native americans are the ones that are spearheading this fight. I know the irony in that is just not interesting right guys?!

come on get a f****** clue! it's called propaganda!!

go ahead ScottM and Sioux82 telus all how all this stuff shouldn't be in the articles and how its makes perfect sense.