Negotiated Settlement?

[GeauxSioux]

And how long would it take for us to be called "Keebles and Bits"?

(I mean that with NO DISRESPECT towards the Keeble name or family)

Keebler Elves. I think not.

"Wild Nokotas"

[sioux7>5]

I still think that the new nickname should be the Fighting Cavalry

[Goon]

I think there should be a thought out discussion on what the name should be. It should be between the students and the Alumni. There should not be some in the dark of night or during the middle of the summer when the students have gone home for summer break.

[rochsioux]

NCAA vote increases power of committee that enacted Indian nickname, logo ban

UND's faculty NCAA representative Sue Jeno attended the January conference and said she was one of very few representatives to vote against the amendment.

The amendment was described at the convention as a minor clarification requested by attorneys, she said. No one spoke in opposition to the amendment at the convention, she said.

"Based on our experience with the logo issue, I felt that sometimes legislation gets through in that way when it may or may not have gotten through if it had been brought before the whole assembly. That's not necessarily in the best interest of the association."

Excuse me, but why didn't our faculty rep speak against the amendment ? Did we secretly want it to pass so we wouldn't be embarrassed about our surrender to the NCAA ?

I firmly believe that UND and the state board and do not want to keep the name. That's OK but have the guts to say it...they don't. They want to hide behind this "settlement" and place the blame on the Sioux tribes.

If they really wanted to keep the name they would have done more than the half-ass face saving gesture that was made. We schedule one lousy meeting with each tribe then go off and start forming committees to replace the nickname...and make no mistake, that is what the committee is going to do. Hell, it was obvious long before the settlement that Standing Rock's leadership was solidly against the name...there was absolutely no ambiguity in what they were saying.

We have three years before the deadline, why such a rush just four months after the surrender ? It's because we had no intention from the beginning of keeping the name.

If we want to keep the nickname there needs to be some pressure applied to the tribal councils. I am not saying that we do anything underhanded but the tribal council members are elected and from all indications the vast majority of their constituency is in favor or does not oppose UND's use of the Sioux name. We need to press for a vote of the full membership on this issue. Yes or No. If the vote is against the name then we should respectively retire the name as soon as possible.

There is too much history and pride in the "Fighting Sioux" to surrender this easily. An apparent small minority that happens to be in power should not decide this issue.

[Goon]

Excuse me, but why didn't our faculty rep speak against the amendment ? Did we secretly want it to pass so we wouldn't be embarrassed about our surrender to the NCAA ?

I firmly believe that UND and the state board and do not want to keep the name. That's OK but have the guts to say it...they don't. They want to hide behind this "settlement" and place the blame on the Sioux tribes.

If they really wanted to keep the name they would have done more than the half-ass face saving gesture that was made. We schedule one lousy meeting with each tribe then go off and start forming committees to replace the nickname...and make no mistake, that is what the committee is going to do. Hell, it was obvious long before the settlement that Standing Rock's leadership was solidly against the name...there was absolutely no ambiguity in what they were saying.

We have three years before the deadline, why such a rush just four months after the surrender ? It's because we had no intention from the beginning of keeping the name.

If we want to keep the nickname there needs to be some pressure applied to the tribal councils. I am not saying that we do anything underhanded but the tribal council members are elected and from all indications the vast majority of their constituency is in favor or does not oppose UND's use of the Sioux name. We need to press for a vote of the full membership on this issue. Yes or No. If the vote is against the name then we should respectively retire the name as soon as possible.

There is too much history and pride in the "Fighting Sioux" to surrender this easily. An apparent small minority that happens to be in power should not decide this issue.

No we are to believe that it is much more important to play Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa in sports than to keep the Fighting Sioux name, this is a bunch of crap because those teams have no intention of playing us whether he have the name or not.

[Chewey]

Excuse me, but why didn't our faculty rep speak against the amendment ? Did we secretly want it to pass so we wouldn't be embarrassed about our surrender to the NCAA ?

I firmly believe that UND and the state board and do not want to keep the name. That's OK but have the guts to say it...they don't. They want to hide behind this "settlement" and place the blame on the Sioux tribes.

If they really wanted to keep the name they would have done more than the half-ass face saving gesture that was made. We schedule one lousy meeting with each tribe then go off and start forming committees to replace the nickname...and make no mistake, that is what the committee is going to do. Hell, it was obvious long before the settlement that Standing Rock's leadership was solidly against the name...there was absolutely no ambiguity in what they were saying.

We have three years before the deadline, why such a rush just four months after the surrender ? It's because we had no intention from the beginning of keeping the name.

If we want to keep the nickname there needs to be some pressure applied to the tribal councils. I am not saying that we do anything underhanded but the tribal council members are elected and from all indications the vast majority of their constituency is in favor or does not oppose UND's use of the Sioux name. We need to press for a vote of the full membership on this issue. Yes or No. If the vote is against the name then we should respectively retire the name as soon as possible.

There is too much history and pride in the "Fighting Sioux" to surrender this easily. An apparent small minority that happens to be in power should not decide this issue.

What he said. That's very good and very true. We need to start calling the alumni office and, perhaps Goetz's office itself, and apply some pressure there.

[mksioux]

No we are to believe that it is much more important to play Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa in sports than to keep the Fighting Sioux name, this is a bunch of crap because those teams have no intention of playing us whether he have the name or not.

I don't understand why this theory that UND settled the nickname lawsuit because Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa wouldn't schedule us is becoming more and more popular (I'm not singling you out Goon as this theory is held by many on message boards). This recent vote by the NCAA members pretty much disproves that theory. I'm sure the scheduling ban played a role in some people's general outlook on keeping the Sioux nickname, but that's a separate issue than the settlement. The primary reason the lawsuit was settled was because the NCAA was going to amend its Constitution to specificaly give the Executive Committee the authority to enact policies such as the nickname ban. So even if UND had won in court, the Executive Committee, with its new authority, would simply have re-enacted the same policy and there's nothing UND could have done about it. So UND cut its losses and got what it could out of a settlement. There's nothing complicated or conspiratorial about it. UND would have settled the lawsuit even if it had no interest in playing Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa.

[82SiouxGuy]

I don't understand why this theory that UND settled the nickname lawsuit because Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa wouldn't schedule us is becoming more and more popular (I'm not singling you out Goon as this theory is held by many on message boards). This recent vote by the NCAA members pretty much disproves that theory. I'm sure the scheduling ban played a role in some people's general outlook on keeping the Sioux nickname, but that's a separate issue than the settlement. The primary reason the lawsuit was settled was because the NCAA was going to amend its Constitution to specificaly give the Executive Committee the authority to enact policies such as the nickname ban. So even if UND had won in court, the Executive Committee, with its new authority, would simply have re-enacted the same policy and there's nothing UND could have done about it. So UND cut its losses and got what it could out of a settlement. There's nothing complicated or conspiratorial about it. UND would have settled the lawsuit even if it had no interest in playing Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa.

I agree with you. The NCAA found a way to change the rules during the middle of the game. UND could very well have spent a lot more money and won the lawsuit. And less than a month later the NCAA would have legally recreated the ban. Continuing would have been a waste of time and money. UND would have won the skirmish and lost the war. The settlement created a window of 3 years to find a solution.

The current problem is how the SBoHE and the NDUS have approached the topic since the settlement. We have seen little leadership in trying to work on a solution. If that continues a select few in tribal government will make the decision and the name will be changed before the end of the 3 year window. If they actively try to find some common ground and a solution that works for the vast majority then the nickname still has a chance to survive. But the only way I see that happening is if it goes to a vote of the entire tribe on each reservation.

[Goon]

The current problem is how the SBoHE and the NDUS have approached the topic since the settlement. We have seen little leadership in trying to work on a solution. If that continues a select few in tribal government will make the decision and the name will be changed before the end of the 3 year window. If they actively try to find some common ground and a solution that works for the vast majority then the nickname still has a chance to survive. But the only way I see that happening is if it goes to a vote of the entire tribe on each reservation.

I think this needs to be brought up when the name is changed that it is a select few exacting their will on many. This is a perfect example of Political Correctness run a muck. Has anyone noticed that Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy have been missing in action on this issue? This needs to come up as well.

[Goon]

I don't understand why this theory that UND settled the nickname lawsuit because Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa wouldn't schedule us is becoming more and more popular (I'm not singling you out Goon as this theory is held by many on message boards). This recent vote by the NCAA members pretty much disproves that theory. I'm sure the scheduling ban played a role in some people's general outlook on keeping the Sioux nickname, but that's a separate issue than the settlement. The primary reason the lawsuit was settled was because the NCAA was going to amend its Constitution to specificaly give the Executive Committee the authority to enact policies such as the nickname ban. So even if UND had won in court, the Executive Committee, with its new authority, would simply have re-enacted the same policy and there's nothing UND could have done about it. So UND cut its losses and got what it could out of a settlement. There's nothing complicated or conspiratorial about it. UND would have settled the lawsuit even if it had no interest in playing Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa.

I was being sarcastic and arguing the absurd, but I really do believe some are going to be disappointed that when we change our name these still probably won't give us the time of day.

[choyt3]

I think this needs to be brought up when the name is changed that it is a select few exacting their will on many. This is a perfect example of Political Correctness run a muck. Has anyone noticed that Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy have been missing in action on this issue? This needs to come up as well.

The ND Republicans can't seem to come up with a candidate to beat any of these guys. If they are so inept, why is this the case? Do you seriously think the Sioux nickname will be the issue that puts someone over the top to finally beat these guys?

[octupus99]

The ND Republicans can't seem to come up with a candidate to beat any of these guys. If they are so inept, why is this the case? Do you seriously think the Sioux nickname will be the issue that puts someone over the top to finally beat these guys?

I honestly think it might. Congressmen and senior Senators are especially hard to beat. I think if one of them were to go to bat for the pro name crowd that they would reach cult status. I doubt they will for a number of different reasons. If the PC crowd wins this one, how long do you think it will be before we can't wear our jerseys because that is a form of hate speech. Let's draw the line now.

[Chewey]

The ND Republicans can't seem to come up with a candidate to beat any of these guys. If they are so inept, why is this the case? Do you seriously think the Sioux nickname will be the issue that puts someone over the top to finally beat these guys?

The answer...drum roll: The ND Republican Party is run pretty much by fools and they are reluctant to dig up dirt on the three; there's plenty of dirt there. They don't even need to do that. Here's a start for them:

1. Remind the west how Bryon Dorgan was in favor of Measure #6 in 1980. The tax on oil companies - intended to benefit the educators in the east - made it unprofitable to produce in ND. The oil market did not tank really until 1986. Therefore, the hard economic realities with respect to the oil markets hit the west 4 to 6 years earlier. Measure #6, along with Bryon Dorgan having state residents make their tax checks out to "Byron Dorgan, State Tax Commissioner", gave him the House seat.

2. Remind the Minot voters that when Kent Conrad beat Mark Andrews, Minot lost its fighter wing and Ted Kennedy brought that fighter wing to Massachusetts. Had Mark Andrews remained the Senator, that would not have happened. Remind the western voters that Kent Conrad did nothing to get the so-called "Rail Garrison" going for ND.

3. Remind the North Dakota voters that Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy could not keep the B-1B's in GRand Forks. The B-1B's went to Rapid City.

4. Remind the North Dakota voters that the three could not even keep missles in GRand Forks during the Clinton years. The missles went to Montana.

5. Remind the North Dakota voters that the three could not keep Grand Forks Air Force Base off of the base realignment and closure list.

6. Remind the NOrth Dakota voters that the three could not get funding for the big highway project that was to go up and down highway 83 or, alternatively 52, all the way to Canada, thereby, increase commerce and safety between Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Bismarck and Minot.

7. Remind them that it has taken over 20 years to get the appropriate funding to make highway 2 a 4 lane from Grand Forks to Minot.

8. Remind the voters that the three with all of their "influence" can not get the farm bill passed.

Just a start.

[octupus99]

I love it. Sioux fans need to remind these guys that they work for us and the majority wants that name. How do we contact these guys?

[Goon]

The answer...drum roll: The ND Republican Party is run pretty much by fools and they are reluctant to dig up dirt on the three; there's plenty of dirt there. They don't even need to do that. Here's a start for them:

1. Remind the west how Bryon Dorgan was in favor of Measure #6 in 1980. The tax on oil companies - intended to benefit the educators in the east - made it unprofitable to produce in ND. The oil market did not tank really until 1986. Therefore, the hard economic realities with respect to the oil markets hit the west 4 to 6 years earlier. Measure #6, along with Bryon Dorgan having state residents make their tax checks out to "Byron Dorgan, State Tax Commissioner", gave him the House seat.

2. Remind the Minot voters that when Kent Conrad beat Mark Andrews, Minot lost its fighter wing and Ted Kennedy brought that fighter wing to Massachusetts. Had Mark Andrews remained the Senator, that would not have happened. Remind the western voters that Kent Conrad did nothing to get the so-called "Rail Garrison" going for ND.

3. Remind the North Dakota voters that Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy could not keep the B-1B's in GRand Forks. The B-1B's went to Rapid City.

4. Remind the North Dakota voters that the three could not even keep missles in GRand Forks during the Clinton years. The missles went to Montana.

5. Remind the North Dakota voters that the three could not keep Grand Forks Air Force Base off of the base realignment and closure list.

6. Remind the NOrth Dakota voters that the three could not get funding for the big highway project that was to go up and down highway 83 or, alternatively 52, all the way to Canada, thereby, increase commerce and safety between Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Bismarck and Minot.

7. Remind them that it has taken over 20 years to get the appropriate funding to make highway 2 a 4 lane from Grand Forks to Minot.

8. Remind the voters that the three with all of their "influence" can not get the farm bill passed.

Just a start.

It sounds great but Team ND is untouchable, nothing will change, these guys don't even have to campaign to get their jobs back.

The GOP can do nothing to mount a challenge to replace any of these guys. The status quo will not change.

Edited March 11, 2008 by Goon

[ScottM]

If Dorgan et al. haven't raised their objections to this mess by now, unlike the Florida crew, I really doubt they'll do it at all.

[Goon]

If Dorgan et al. haven't raised their objections to this mess by now, unlike the Florida crew, I really doubt they'll do it at all.

Scott is right Dorganoff et al have been MIA in this fight to keep the Sioux name, don't expect team ND to get interested now.

Like I said earlier if they actually had to fight for their re-election you would have seen them come out for this,

however, since North daktoa rubber staps these guys every election cycle it is no going to change anytime soon. The status quo is what ND voters has voted for and this is what your going to get. don't blame me, I have did my part and voted against them every chance I get.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

Scott is right Dorganoff et al have been MIA in this fight to keep the Sioux name, don't expect team ND to get interested now.

Like I said earlier if they actually had to fight for their re-election you would have seen them come out for this,

however, since North daktoa rubber staps these guys every election cycle it is no going to change anytime soon. The status quo is what ND voters has voted for and this is what your going to get. don't blame me, I have did my part and voted against them every chance I get.

Yes, these guys are a joke. But at the same time, the NDGOP needs to get it figured out. But regardless of the NDGOP, these guys need to go. I remember a trip I took to Washington, DC sponsored by the RECs. Either Conrad or Dorgan, I can't recall which one, but I think it was Dorgan, didn't even give my tour group time to talk. He was a complete jerk to us. Plus, all 3 of them have views not inline with those of North Dakotans.

[moser53]

Yes, these guys are a joke. But at the same time, the NDGOP needs to get it figured out. But regardless of the NDGOP, these guys need to go. I remember a trip I took to Washington, DC sponsored by the RECs. Either Conrad or Dorgan, I can't recall which one, but I think it was Dorgan, didn't even give my tour group time to talk. He was a complete jerk to us. Plus, all 3 of them have views not inline with those of North Dakotans.

Do you know what people are sick of. People who say they are fiscially responsible (Republicans). They put us into debt and sell the middle class to the lowest bidder. Plus they take bribes. Real classy bunch the last 10 years.

[Goon]

Yes, these guys are a joke. But at the same time, the NDGOP needs to get it figured out. But regardless of the NDGOP, these guys need to go. I remember a trip I took to Washington, DC sponsored by the RECs. Either Conrad or Dorgan, I can't recall which one, but I think it was Dorgan, didn't even give my tour group time to talk. He was a complete jerk to us. Plus, all 3 of them have views not inline with those of North Dakotans.

Why is that there are a lot of us that feel this way but they keep getting elected.

[Goon]

Do you know what people are sick of. People who say they are fiscially responsible (Republicans). They put us into debt and sell the middle class to the lowest bidder. Plus they take bribes. Real classy bunch the last 10 years.

Really like the current democratic presidential candidates aren't going to put us in debt.

What about Barrack Obamas $845 billion Global Poverty Act (S. 2433). Yeah that's not going to raise anyone taxes.

"...In addition to surrendering more dollars, the U.S. would also be required to surrender some of its own sovereignty over foreign aid by putting it under UN control. The bill would force the U.S. to sign onto the U.N.'s Millennium Declaration, which would commit us not only to "banning small arms and light weapons," but also to ratifying a series of objectionable treaties such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming), the Convention on Biological Diversity, and so on. Considering the magnitude of the legislation, one would think that the Senate would proceed with caution. Not so!...

[moser53]

Really like the current democratic presidential candidates aren't going to put us in debt.

What about Barrack Obamas $845 billion Global Poverty Act (S. 2433). Yeah that's not going to raise anyone taxes.

When I hear Allen Greenspan a republican applaude what the Clinton administration did for fiscal sanity it speaks volumes. What do you want fiscal sanity or as VP Cheney says deficits do not matter. All you have to do is watch Lou Dobbs on CNN to see how off the wall these Republicans have been.

[Goon]

When I hear Allen Greenspan a republican applaude what the Clinton administration did for fiscal sanity it speaks volumes. What do you want fiscal sanity or as VP Cheney says deficits do not matter. All you have to do is watch Lou Dobbs on CNN to see how off the wall these Republicans have been.

I love when people praise Bill Clinton, he had a Republican senate and house his last term. I am not sure you realized but since the 2006 elections the DNC has been running the show again and has the lowest approval rating on any congress. They were going to drain the swamp of courption and all we have gotten in the status quo. By the way both Obama and Clinton are a part of that congress/senate. Even their approval numbers are worse than President Bushes. So your believe we tax ourselves into propersity? I don't watch CNN or Lou Dobbs.

[iramurphy]

Is it my imagination or did we get off the subject here?

[Goon]

Is it my imagination or did we get off the subject here?

Possibly.