Log in

View Full Version : Not 1, Not 2, Not 3, Not 4, Not 5, But...



JohnnyMarzetti
03-26-2005, 08:25 PM
6!

The number of days it took George W. Bush to say something about the Minnesota school shootings.


Some American Indians have complained that Bush did not respond publicly to the shooting for four days. Just hours after the shootings at Colorado's Columbine High School that left 15 dead, then-President Clinton publicly expressed his condolences.

Bush's delayed reaction was in contrast to his swift intervention in the Terri Schiavo case. The president interrupted his vacation and hurried to Washington on Sunday to sign legislation allowing federal courts to consider the case of the brain-damaged Florida woman.

Aug. 6th PDB says "BIN LADIN DETERMINED TO STRIKE WITHIN THE US" and he doesn't move from his vacation. Court rules (Republican judges as well) that Terri's final wishes were to NOT live this way and should be upheld, Bush flies back instantly to sign a bill that applies ONLY TO TERRI SCHIAVO. School shooting in which 10 Native Americans are killed in Minesotta happens, Bush stays silent until leaders make a stink.

Bush continues to play politics with people's lives and since he's in his last term he don't give a damn.

timvp
03-26-2005, 08:37 PM
Truth in, the nation doesn't care. The reason Columbine got so much attention was it was in a rich neighborhood that rarely saw violence. The exact same thing could happen in an inner city poor 'hood, and it wouldn't have gotten even one-tenth the amount of attention.

American Indians? Ha. They are even lower on the totem pole. Most Americans don't even know where or even if Native Americans exist.

This will be swept under the rug ... if it hasn't already.

Clandestino
03-26-2005, 08:39 PM
honestly, i don't care either.

3rdCoast
03-26-2005, 08:53 PM
Bush is the man. He is in charge.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 09:13 PM
White women are important.

Native kids don't vote.

JohnnyMarzetti
03-26-2005, 09:18 PM
It's really horrible that it took Bush so long to respond. Along the same line the governor who went through the Columbine tragedy and who got lots of support from other governors at the time has also not done a thing or offered his support. He and Bush are two peas in a pod.

MannyIsGod
03-26-2005, 09:18 PM
Truth in, the nation doesn't care. The reason Columbine got so much attention was it was in a rich neighborhood that rarely saw violence. The exact same thing could happen in an inner city poor 'hood, and it wouldn't have gotten even one-tenth the amount of attention.

American Indians? Ha. They are even lower on the totem pole. Most Americans don't even know where or even if Native Americans exist.

This will be swept under the rug ... if it hasn't already.

Jess and I were talking about this the other night, and I agree with everything you just said. I got really pissed when I started thinking about it.

If this is equality I'm glad I wasn't around for segregation.

3rdCoast
03-26-2005, 09:20 PM
People like to talk a lot. What are you going to do about situations like this? Are you personally going to take any action?

desflood
03-26-2005, 09:43 PM
It occurred to me that when it happened in Columbine, it was a relatively new thing. That's why there was a big fuss made over it. Now, you can hardly turn around without another screwed-up kid shooting somebody. Could that be it? It's just old news now? (news flash: Everything is not about racism)

Bandit2981
03-26-2005, 09:45 PM
there isnt anything you and i can do really except offer your sympathies and condolences to the families who lost their children

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 09:47 PM
there isnt anything you and i can do really except offer your sympathies and condolences to the families who lost their childrenPreferably in a timely manner.

Bandit2981
03-26-2005, 09:50 PM
^^ true, if you are the president...but i was reponding to 3rdcoasts question :)

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 09:59 PM
Some Presidents go on the stump to show they are compassionate.

Some Presidents are just compassionate.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 10:02 PM
Some presidents don't give a shit until they're told saying they give a shit would be a good idea.

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 10:04 PM
Some presidents don't give a shit until they're told saying they give a shit would be a good idea.
Yeah, thank God he left office in 2001.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 10:04 PM
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

NameDropper
03-26-2005, 10:20 PM
That really is sad and pathetic. He is really a total waste of space. Why can't we have a real president? Someone that has a brain and compassion... someone like Bill. *sigh*
Remember the good ol days when all you had to worry about was if she blew him or not? I really miss that.

desflood
03-26-2005, 10:24 PM
:lol

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 10:28 PM
That really is sad and pathetic. He is really a total waste of space. Why can't we have a real president? Someone that has a brain and compassion... someone like Bill. *sigh*
Remember the good ol days when all you had to worry about was if she blew him or not? I really miss that.
Yeah, it was nice that he kept us all in the dark about selling nuke technology to China. Let Jimmy Carter blow the Korean nuke deal. Made token stabs at terrorism as it grew to behemoth proportions on his watch.

Yeah, if only it was that he was getting a blow job.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 10:29 PM
Bush broke the Korean nuke deal that was in place.

Good job.

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 10:32 PM
Bush broke the Korean nuke deal that was in place.

Good job.
There was never a nuke deal. Weren't you paying attention when Kim Jong Il told the world he just ignored the agreement he reached with Carter and went on his merry way? By the time President Bush came to the office, North Korea was much too advanced to deal with diplomatically.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 10:33 PM
There was never a nuke deal.We sure sent them alot of fuel oil. Bush even sent some after he said the deal was null and void.

Explain that.

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 10:45 PM
We sure sent them alot of fuel oil. Bush even sent some after he said the deal was null and void.

Explain that.
And that's related to nukes and how Jimmy Carter went over and had the wool pulled over his eyes and nailed to his chin exactly how?

Besides, I'm not sure to what you're referring anyway.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 10:46 PM
And that's related to nukesYes.
Besides, I'm not sure to what you're referring anyway.That's quite obvious. You shouldn't have brought it up.

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 10:52 PM
Yes.That's quite obvious. You shouldn't have brought it up.
I didn't. I brought up the fact that Jimmy Carter assured the nation he'd struck a deal with that dictator only to learn from the dictator himself, 6 years later, that he'd bamboozled Jimmy Carter.

President Bush is just the benefactor of 8 screwed up years by the Clinton administration.

Frankly, I haven't followed the fuel oil to North Korea program. Tell us all about it. Origin, purpose, how the Bush policy differs from that of the Clinton policy, etc... I'm sure you've got this pretty well covered in your notes. No?

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:00 PM
http://www.google.com/

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 11:03 PM
http://www.google.com/
A search engine?

I'm sure everything you've found there is factual.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:08 PM
I found that tidbit about the "null and void" stuff in the Naval College Review. Do you not like them?

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 11:09 PM
I found that tidbit about the "null and void" stuff in the Naval College Review. Do you not like them?
So, post the article. Let's review it.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:13 PM
It's 15 pages long. Read it yourself.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_3_56/ai_105210219

Then tell me why Bush sent the fuel oil.

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 11:15 PM
It's 15 pages long. Read it yourself.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_3_56/ai_105210219

Then tell me why Bush sent the fuel oil.
I intend to.

MannyIsGod
03-26-2005, 11:15 PM
Chump, you are in rare form tonight. I drink to you!

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:16 PM
As I to you. Busch isn't completely horrible (the beer, mind you).

NameDropper
03-26-2005, 11:17 PM
President Bush is just the benefactor of 8 screwed up years by the Clinton administration.


I've also heard it said that President Clinton was the benefactor of 12 screwed up years by the Reagan/Bush I administrations.

MannyIsGod
03-26-2005, 11:18 PM
As I to you. Busch isn't completely horrible (the beer, mind you).

Yes it is.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:19 PM
Well, Shiner was on sale at Diamond Shamrock, so on to the better stuff.

NameDropper
03-26-2005, 11:21 PM
weed?

desflood
03-26-2005, 11:30 PM
So, am I not the only one drinking tonight?

The Ressurrected One
03-26-2005, 11:30 PM
It's 15 pages long. Read it yourself.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_3_56/ai_105210219

Then tell me why Bush sent the fuel oil.
Okay, I got this far:

"With stunning rapidity, Washington and Pyongyang unraveled close to a decade of painfully crafted diplomatic arrangements designed to prevent full-scale nuclear weapons development on the Korean Peninsula. By year's end, both countries had walked away from their respective commitments under the U.S.-DPRK Agreed Framework of October 1994, the major bilateral accord negotiated between Washington and Pyongyang during the 1990s."
and we already have a problem.

There were no painfully crafted diplomatic arrangements. It was shortly after President Bush took office that Kim Jong Il announced he had totally and completely disregarded the agreement reached with envoy and former President Jimmy Carter in 1994 in, well, 1994.

If the article refuses to acknowledge this fact, up front, I'm afraid there's not much hope for the rest of it. I will, however, finish it...

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:33 PM
It was shortly after President Bush took office that Kim Jong Il announced he had totally and completely disregarded the agreement reached with envoy and former President Jimmy Carter in 1994 in, well, 1994.Where's your link for that?

NameDropper
03-26-2005, 11:37 PM
Where's your link for that?

If you'd been paying attention you wouldn't need a link.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:38 PM
There were no painfully crafted diplomatic arrangements.You think they just came up with the framework over a frappucino in an afternoon?

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:39 PM
If you'd been paying attention you wouldn't need a link.If you can't come up with one, admit it.

Nice double standard.

MannyIsGod
03-26-2005, 11:45 PM
So, am I not the only one drinking tonight?


No no, I'm trying my first Pinot Noir tonight. It's not bad, but I feel I should have spent more for a better bottle.

spurster
03-26-2005, 11:45 PM
I think the nuclear genie is out of the bottle. You can learn the basics from any credible Physics department around the world.

IMHO, Clinton delayed North Korea and Bush has simply done nothing but bluster, but whatever they did, NK was determined to become a nuclear power sooner or later. Pretty much any country that is determined enough can achieve this. Iraq and Saddam would have done it if Saddam had not invaded Kuwait. Iran is next. Do we really want to invade Iran?

Publicly, we will see a hard line against nuclear proliferation, but privately, I hope that we have some coherent policy for the new, however unpleasant members of the nuclear club.

desflood
03-26-2005, 11:46 PM
Nah. Spend less like I did, and stick to good ol' Corona.

MannyIsGod
03-26-2005, 11:50 PM
Blame it on Pakistan, Blame it on Pakistan.

Oh, and I'd rather drink Dos Equis than Corona.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:52 PM
Hey, are you drinking wine because of Sideways?

MannyIsGod
03-26-2005, 11:58 PM
No, actually my girlfriend, Jekka, is a pretty big wino. She's been drinking red's for a long time, and I never got into it untill maybe a month ago or so. We've been trying a new wine or 2 every week. Everything I had tried up untill tonight had been a Merlot, I liked some I haven't liked others as much. I think she's bringing a cab back tomorrow, so that'll be next

However, as a coincidence, we did see Sideways last night. But the wine thing started a while back. It was a hillarious movie though.

ChumpDumper
03-26-2005, 11:59 PM
Just asking. I wonder what the movie did for sales. Took me long enough to stomach beer.

MannyIsGod
03-27-2005, 12:14 AM
Yeah, I posted a thread about local wineries a while back and specificly noted it had nothing to do with Sideways.

It's uped them. I saw an article or news piece a while back, can't remember which, that talked about the impact it's had which has been very significant. The actual restaraunt used in the movie is now a huge tourist hot spot. Pinot Noir has gotten a lot of noteriety due to the flim as well.

It's interesting to see the effect it's had, but wine really is good.

desflood
03-27-2005, 12:15 AM
Haven't tried Dos Equis yet. Any good?

desflood
03-27-2005, 12:16 AM
God Manny, how much have you had? Your spelling is even worse than usual!

ChumpDumper
03-27-2005, 12:24 AM
The actual restaraunt used in the movie is now a huge tourist hot spot.Was that actually in Buellton or Solvang? I lived in Santa Barbara for years, but never felt the twinge to spend much time in either. The Firestones vintners in the area actually make really good beer too.

MannyIsGod
03-27-2005, 12:40 AM
God Manny, how much have you had? Your spelling is even worse than usual!

hahahah

I'm about done with the bottle, got maybe a small glass left to go.

Dos Equis is great, I love it.

Chump, I haven't the faintest clue, only that the locals were pissed because their little place was the trendy tourist hot spot now. But the shop and business owners were raking it in apparently, and they had a "sideways trail" now where you went to the same wineries.

samikeyp
03-27-2005, 01:07 AM
I think a big reason why their seems to be less reaction from the public is that, sadly, we have become desensitized to these situations.

Manny, how was the pinot?

MannyIsGod
03-27-2005, 01:26 AM
it was actually pretty decent. I dig it.

ChumpDumper
03-27-2005, 01:36 AM
A shorter read about the fuel oil shipment:
"We cannot continue to provide fuel in this manner in light of the North Korean violation of the understanding," the secretary said.

However, Powell said, a shipment that left Singapore on November 6 with 42,800 metric tons of fuel oil and scheduled to arrive in North Korea next week will be allowed to continue.

"We believe it was appropriate and prudent to send in this shipment, which is already on the high seas and is only a few days away from docking," he said. http://edition.cnn.com/2002/US/11/14/nkorea.oil/

Much less reading. I'm sure you can explain it.

exstatic
03-27-2005, 02:06 AM
For the folks thinking that this is being ignored by the media...from CNN's site, today:


BEMIDJI, Minnesota (AP) -- Three victims of the Red Lake High School shooting will have traditional Ojibwe funeral, intended to prepare the soul for a four-day journey into the afterlife.

The ceremonies, not freely discussed with outsiders, often includes a "spirit dish" to nourish the departing soul and rouge for a blush on the cheeks of the beloved.

CNN story (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/26/school.shooting.journey.ap/index.html)

MannyIsGod
03-27-2005, 02:10 AM
How nice of CNN to include them on their website along with the hundreds of other stories they post on there.

Please, the comparison between this shooting and the others in the past shows quite clearly that the level of coverage has been short of impressive.

3rdCoast
03-27-2005, 02:12 AM
because this stuff is becoming common.

Shelly
03-27-2005, 08:55 AM
Was that actually in Buellton or Solvang? I lived in Santa Barbara for years, but never felt the twinge to spend much time in either. The Firestones vintners in the area actually make really good beer too.


Ha! Solvang! No passport required.

FYI--You do not need to be a member of Costco to buy from their liquor store. Some decent prices on wine and booze.

Dos XX dark is good. Dos XX in the green bottle is meh.

Carry on...

exstatic
03-27-2005, 11:16 AM
Please, the comparison between this shooting and the others in the past shows quite clearly that the level of coverage has been short of impressive.

It's also in the middle of fucking nowhere. I don't recall the Jonesboro AR shootings getting the coverage of Columbine, either. Fucking hillybily discrimination. Why aren't you whining about that, or isn't that a cause worthy enough for you to fucking care?

Columbine is right the fuck outside of Denver, one of the largest and easiest airports to get a flight to in the country. When that asshole court shooter in ATL was on the loose, and they locked down all those schools, guess what? Those were CITY schools in Atlanta with lots of minority children in them, and that got HUGE live burn on TV. Again, major metropolis and easy airport access.

Don't attribute to malice what can be explained away by sheer laziness and lack of research, for example, your argument, Manny.

MannyIsGod
03-27-2005, 11:30 AM
Silly me, thanks for correcting me. I'll respond to this later, I don't have the time to do it right now.

exstatic
03-27-2005, 11:35 AM
How nice of CNN to include them on their website along with the hundreds of other stories they post on there.

By your argument, the Columbine coverage was irrelevant, too, since it was buried with hundreds of other stories on each website.

Have fun with your hangover, Manny.

MannyIsGod
03-27-2005, 11:40 AM
No hangover, Ex. Television time is more more valuable than webspace. It's a very simple point to make. I'm going to post facts to back up what I'm saying, but I don't have time right now because I have to leave in a bit.

Also I don't insult you when we disagree. However, if you want me to start, continue to be an asshole.

exstatic
03-27-2005, 12:22 PM
Don't attribute to malice what can be explained away by sheer laziness and lack of research, for example, your argument, Manny.

Was this the "insult" you refer to? I call it an "observation" based on this:


How nice of CNN to include them on their website along with the hundreds of other stories they post on there.

That was fucking weak, Manny. I calls 'em as I see's em.

Edit: BTW, it was your "argument" that was attacked, not you. There was no ad hominem element there.

JoeChalupa
03-27-2005, 01:42 PM
Man this thread took more turns than I don't know what.
For a minute I thought it was a wine thread.

Bush should have reacted much more promptly.

dcole50
03-27-2005, 05:17 PM
People like to talk a lot. What are you going to do about situations like this? Are you personally going to take any action?attempt to establish some form of preventive measures to prevent such a horrific act from occurring again.

Guru of Nothing
03-27-2005, 07:44 PM
Ha! Solvang! No passport required.

FYI--You do not need to be a member of Costco to buy from their liquor store. Some decent prices on wine and booze.

Dos XX dark is good. Dos XX in the green bottle is meh.

Carry on...

Holy Mother of Stuff. I never thought I'd use the word Solvang in an Internet forum, anywhere.

I remember Solvang, and all its windmills, like it was yesterday.

And I remember camping out at Lake Cachuma and listening to the World Series on a transistor radio as Tom Seaver pitched for the Mets against the A's back in 1973.

What a sweet flashback.

exstatic
03-27-2005, 09:17 PM
More non-coverage of Red Lake by the mainstream media...
TIME magazine online story (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1042470,00.html?cnn=yes)


Sunday, Mar. 27, 2005
Ashley Lajeunesse was doing math homework in study hall when she heard the first shotgun blast. She thought it was a student dropping a stack of textbooks. Then came another bang. Then another. The other students in the room looked up in sudden, knowing panic. No one could speak. The teacher in charge, Neva Rogers, walked to the door, turned the lock and shut off the lights. She too sensed what was happening. A gunman was in the school, and he was heading their way.

Spurminator
03-28-2005, 12:42 AM
I think the reason we've heard less about this case is that we're not sure if this kid listened to Marilyn Manson or played Doom video games.

About 75% of the Columbine coverage was related to people trying to figure out what "caused" such an act of violence. This case offers less fodder for the Focus on the Family crowd.

Basically, Columbine was a news story, then a Soapbox Topic for weeks after that. This case might be more of one if people weren't already crowded in the Schiavo Soapbox arena.

ChumpDumper
03-28-2005, 12:46 AM
Did they conclude that native kids just do that kind of thing as a matter of course?

Spurminator
03-28-2005, 12:53 AM
I just think people are probably a little less surprised by news of a poor angry native American kid than rich angry white kids.

ChumpDumper
03-28-2005, 12:55 AM
Agreed. Probably chalking it up to firewater.

Spurminator
03-28-2005, 12:56 AM
And to clarify, I've got no complaints about the coverage.

Clandestino
03-28-2005, 10:23 AM
what i see is the lack of a GUN on the security guards! wtf??? they saw him and knew what he was up to... if the security guards had guns they could prevented this and probably only the shooter would have been killed...

2centsworth
03-28-2005, 11:17 AM
6!

The number of days it took George W. Bush to say something about the Minnesota school shootings.


Some American Indians have complained that Bush did not respond publicly to the shooting for four days. Just hours after the shootings at Colorado's Columbine High School that left 15 dead, then-President Clinton publicly expressed his condolences.

Bush's delayed reaction was in contrast to his swift intervention in the Terri Schiavo case. The president interrupted his vacation and hurried to Washington on Sunday to sign legislation allowing federal courts to consider the case of the brain-damaged Florida woman.

Aug. 6th PDB says "BIN LADIN DETERMINED TO STRIKE WITHIN THE US" and he doesn't move from his vacation. Court rules (Republican judges as well) that Terri's final wishes were to NOT live this way and should be upheld, Bush flies back instantly to sign a bill that applies ONLY TO TERRI SCHIAVO. School shooting in which 10 Native Americans are killed in Minesotta happens, Bush stays silent until leaders make a stink.

Bush continues to play politics with people's lives and since he's in his last term he don't give a damn.
What's even more disgraceful is someone exploiting tragedy for political gain.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 01:30 PM
6!

The number of days it took George W. Bush to say something about the Minnesota school shootings.


Some American Indians have complained that Bush did not respond publicly to the shooting for four days. Just hours after the shootings at Colorado's Columbine High School that left 15 dead, then-President Clinton publicly expressed his condolences.

Bush's delayed reaction was in contrast to his swift intervention in the Terri Schiavo case. The president interrupted his vacation and hurried to Washington on Sunday to sign legislation allowing federal courts to consider the case of the brain-damaged Florida woman.

Bush continues to play politics with people's lives and since he's in his last term he don't give a damn.

The amount of abuse that the Native American community has taken in this country's history is appalling. Native American cultural values have been all kinds of mixed up and depreciated - Native American identity is hard to reconcile with mixed traditional values and modern American values - and the fact that on those reservations they usually live in poverty doesn't do anything to help. Native Americans have been a victim of racism just as much as any other minority group, if not moreso - they are a people that in general is still isolated from the majority population - reservations have some of the highest rates of alcoholism and suicide in the nation. This event, from our perspective, and even more from the Indian perspective, is tragic. This boy that shot all those people embodied the wreckage that modern reservation life can be, and all that history has led it to be - it's more than just a school shooting - it's a symbol.

The fact that Bush took so long to recognize what happened shows his obvious disregard and disrespect for the people that his country was founded on top of. It's extremely difficult for me to respect someone who has so blatantly insulted a people that his country has taken advantage of and effectively defeated without dignity.

desflood
03-28-2005, 01:36 PM
The amount of abuse that the Native American community has taken in this country's history is appalling. Native American cultural values have been all kinds of mixed up and depreciated - Native American identity is hard to reconcile with mixed traditional values and modern American values - and the fact that on those reservations they usually live in poverty doesn't do anything to help. Native Americans have been a victim of racism just as much as any other minority group, if not moreso - they are a people that in general is still isolated from the majority population - reservations have some of the highest rates of alcoholism and suicide in the nation. This event, from our perspective, and even more from the Indian perspective, is tragic. This boy that shot all those people embodied the wreckage that modern reservation life can be, and all that history has led it to be - it's more than just a school shooting - it's a symbol.

The fact that Bush took so long to recognize what happened shows his obvious disregard and disrespect for the people that his country was founded on top of. It's extremely difficult for me to respect someone who has so blatantly insulted a people that his country has taken advantage of and effectively defeated without dignity.
These are all things that the Native Americans can fix, and haven't. But as for the original idea of the thread, I agree. Bush absolutely should have addressed this immediately.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 01:44 PM
These are all things that the Native Americans can fix, and haven't. But as for the original idea of the thread, I agree. Bush absolutely should have addressed this immediately.

How do you "fix" something like that? How do you "fix" years of indoctrination by unfavorable media portrayal - these kids' parents and grandparents were shipped off to boarding schools where they were forced into Christianity and forced to abandon traditional spiritual beliefs, not allowed to practice any traditional culture and ceremony, and weren't even allowed to speak their native languages. They were taught growing up that being an Indian - or as they were often referred by racists, "Injuns" and "squaws" - was a bad thing, they were taught that they should assimilate - but why should they have to? Their lands were mostly taken away - lands that they connected to on a spiritual level - we're talking about a people that are still in the middle of this struggle - still reconciling the genocide of their people and the efforts to reclaim some of their lands. The Dakotas are still trying to get back the Black Hills - this is not the past, this is now - you can't just "fix" it.

desflood
03-28-2005, 01:55 PM
The cultural traditions are probably all but lost. Mostly, I was referring to the alcoholism, suicide, isolation - these do not have to be so. And yet, they are there. Why? All races have been beaten down by another at some point in history. Why have some pulled themselves up and others not?

Jekka
03-28-2005, 02:06 PM
The cultural traditions are probably all but lost. Mostly, I was referring to the alcoholism, suicide, isolation - these do not have to be so. And yet, they are there. Why? All races have been beaten down by another at some point in history. Why have some pulled themselves up and others not?

They're not lost though, many reservations are choosing to teach the native languages in schools, and there are still pow-wows and Sundances - the use of traditional medicine is coming back some. That's why it's so difficult to reconcile - because there is a resurgence of native culture, but it's having to mix with all of the other ideals.

It's just as hard to get out of a reservation as it is to get out of a ghetto. There's no money to start over, little money for schooling, and even less motivation. Just like every other group there have been people that have gotten themselves out - Wilma Mankiller and Devon Mihesuah among them - most of the people that get themselves out end up either in activism where they experience even more discrimination that's disheartening or they end up having to neglect their families (Annie Mae Aquash for example) or they end up teaching. There are efforts to get out, but it's not that easy - many parents have learned to be ashamed of their heritage and keep their children on the reservations without allowing them to be cultural participants.

You make it sound so easy to "pull yourself out", but when you are a people connected to the land it's so much harder to leave it, and there's no opportunity there.

ducks
03-28-2005, 02:20 PM
That really is sad and pathetic. He is really a total waste of space. Why can't we have a real president? Someone that has a brain and compassion... someone like Bill. *sigh*
Remember the good ol days when all you had to worry about was if she blew him or not? I really miss that.

yeah bill was the first president to liar to the grand jury and get away with it
and unzip his pants in office

desflood
03-28-2005, 02:27 PM
Of course it's not easy to "pull yourself out." But if you want to do it badly enough, it can be done. Which begs the question, do they not want to, at least not badly enough?

Jekka
03-28-2005, 03:00 PM
Of course it's not easy to "pull yourself out." But if you want to do it badly enough, it can be done. Which begs the question, do they not want to, at least not badly enough?

Okay, but my above point should be clarified. There is a spiritual connection with the land itself - not just tribal affiliation. The traditional native way of life includes the physical community - the nuclear family, the extended family, friends, etc - the way their belief system is structured, they are incomplete without that community and the land - they depend on those things. It's a difference of culture, and they shouldn't be judged based on those differences.

sickdsm
03-28-2005, 03:01 PM
I'm pretty familiar with the reservations around here as i live in one. I think the reason this isn't as mainstream is bc the rez's here are the midwest ghetto. Honestly, There must never be any shootings/rape/bad things to happan in places like Compton bc i never hear about it. Get my drift? Locally its a huge thing, and when i say locally i live about 3, 4 hours away. The HS ONLY had 300 students. I don't know about the rest of the country but the security measures they had there are top nothch compared to other schools that size around here. Theres always going to be people saying shoulda, woulda, coulda. Again, i'm only speaking for the rez's around here. I find it puzzling that places like Pine Ridge are among the top five in poverty counties continously. I saw one statistic the other day that the unemployment level in one of these places were in the %30 level. Why? There's ALWAYS jobs in the midwest. Locally the tribe here provides free food, free college (not only that but your paid for living expenses while you go), free housing, etc....

The benefits are enormous. Therein lies the problem. Give a fish, feed a man for a day........... How do you plan on making things right between a nation and the rest of America? Our town about 3000 has two schools, two hospitals, two sheriff-type law enforcement agengies. One for the tribe and one for the public. How can you tell a black person that there ancestors being sold to slavery is nothing compared to a Native american's past?

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 03:19 PM
The cultural traditions are probably all but lost. Mostly, I was referring to the alcoholism, suicide, isolation - these do not have to be so. And yet, they are there. Why? All races have been beaten down by another at some point in history. Why have some pulled themselves up and others not?

Having a boot on your throat makes it a bit harder to pull yourself up. Tell me, Des, do you think you have any type of debt to Native Americans? Do you think you have benefited at thier expense at all?

desflood
03-28-2005, 03:25 PM
I can't help but think of the Irish. They came to the U.S. in the late 1800's, early 1900's with nothing. They left behind their country and families to come here to face hatred and more persecution (signs in business windows used to say things like "No Irish. No Catholics. No Foreign-Born"). Now, they're just counted among the "advantaged whites", when just 100 years ago they were social pariahs.

desflood
03-28-2005, 03:39 PM
Tell me Manny, what boots exactly are you referring to? I'll go back to sickdsm's post. There's free food, college, living expenses, housing... none of which I have ever been able to enjoy. And now I'm going to tell you something that I doubt you will ever believe - I have been discriminated against for being white! Several times! Amazing, isn't it. We all have "boots", believe it or not.

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 03:58 PM
Tell me Manny, what boots exactly are you referring to? I'll go back to sickdsm's post. There's free food, college, living expenses, housing... none of which I have ever been able to enjoy. And now I'm going to tell you something that I doubt you will ever believe - I have been discriminated against for being white! Several times! Amazing, isn't it. We all have "boots", believe it or not.

I believe it, reverse racism is a bitch too.

Des, arguing that Native Americans haven't been discrminated against is like arguing that we didn't land on the moon. It's a losing arguement. I'll be happy to elaborate more, but I probably won't do nearly as good a job as Jess will, she's the semiexpert on them.

However, while I formulate a long post citing examples, I pose my question again:

Des, do you think you have any type of debt to Native Americans? Do you think you have benefited at thier expense at all?

Guru of Nothing
03-28-2005, 04:04 PM
I don't possess great insight into race issues (and even if I did, I'm white, so my opinion would be immediately discounted), but I think casting blame inhibits progress as much, if not more, than any other contributing factor to issues such as poverty.

desflood
03-28-2005, 04:09 PM
Tell me, when did I ever argue that they haven't been dicriminated against? No putting words in my mouth, please. I'm saying that they can overcome that discrimination and are not, and I would like to know why. A question you've asked about minorities before yourself, I believe. As for debt and benefits... well, my family came here well after the Native Americans were shoved onto reservations for the government's own purposes, so debt? I doubt it. As for benefitting, hmm. Not sure. Probably as much as you, yourself have benefited.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 04:14 PM
I believe it, reverse racism is a bitch too.

Des, arguing that Native Americans haven't been discrminated against is like arguing that we didn't land on the moon. It's a losing arguement. I'll be happy to elaborate more, but I probably won't do nearly as good a job as Jess will, she's the semiexpert on them.



Now, now, Manny - it's not like the US government ever gave the financially destitute Sioux and Ojibwe blankets from smallpox hospitals to intentionally kill them. They haven't until recent decades supported sterilizing Native women. Oh wait, yes they did, nevermind. And now they won't let the families of the Sioux they killed have their sacred land back. They've offered the Sioux hundreds of millions of dollars if they will relinquish their claim to the Black Hills that they aren't even allowed to use - but the Sioux won't take it - their tie to the land is more sacred and important to them than the money - and you would think that the US would give it back to them instead of having to compensate them so heavily, but no. Native Americans did not even have religious freedom until the 1970s - they have been governmentally discriminated against in addition to all of the other kinds of discrimination.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 04:24 PM
Tell me, when did I ever argue that they haven't been dicriminated against? No putting words in my mouth, please. I'm saying that they can overcome that discrimination and are not, and I would like to know why. A question you've asked about minorities before yourself, I believe. As for debt and benefits... well, my family came here well after the Native Americans were shoved onto reservations for the government's own purposes, so debt? I doubt it. As for benefitting, hmm. Not sure. Probably as much as you, yourself have benefited.

Your family may have come here after the Native Americans were put onto reservations, but they still came here to a land founded on their defeat in search of opportunity. I'm not saying that you personally owe anything, I think it's the American people as a whole that owe something. Canada has already offered its natives an apology and minimal compensation - and it's not the compensation that most of them are looking for - it's the broad public acknowledgement that they were wronged.

Useruser666
03-28-2005, 04:31 PM
So which native Americans are the rightful land owners? It's impossible to say this tribe or that tribe is the rightful owner of any piece of property. There have been countless battles between tribes and warring parties before any europeans set foot in North America. This land that we call the United States today, has been fought over, lost and stolen a hundred times before the colonists ever got here. Sure people were treated wrongly.

One other note to make. How many movies have been made about the shooting on the native American land? How many have been made about Columbine.

desflood
03-28-2005, 04:32 PM
Thousands of years ago, Rome invaded what is now England. The English were quite the unevolved, barbaric people at that time. The Romans, through INVASION AND DEFEAT, civilised the English people and laid the foundation for what the country is today. I don't know if you'll allow the comparison to stand in the conversation or not, but it makes an interesting point on your "defeat in search of opportunity" statement. It is not necessarily a bad thing.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 04:40 PM
So which native Americans are the rightful land owners? It's impossible to say this tribe or that tribe is the rightful owner of any piece of property. There have been countless battles between tribes and warring parties before any europeans set foot in North America. This land that we call the United States today, has been fought over, lost and stolen a hundred times before the colonists ever got here. Sure people were treated wrongly.

One other note to make. How many movies have been made about the shooting on the native American land? How many have been made about Columbine.

Despite Hollywood's portrayal, most Native American tribes were fairly stable, and spread out enough to not have to war as often as they did in the movies. Most wars weren't even fought over territory, they were for population redistribution. Tribes mostly didn't fight for their land - sometimes they migrated, which is how the Chickasaw and the Choctaw split. Population density here pre-contact is not even comparable to that of Europe's (except for the civilations in Central America and the Andes), where the Western notion of war comes from. This doesn't account for tribes like the Apache, who were notorious for tribal raids, but they are the exception. The Sioux's history goes back thousands of years on that land - their traditions are tied to it, and there aren't any other tribes fighting to get the same piece of land. They know where their roots are - and many tribes have been displaced so they could be put on government approved land. Trail of Tears anyone? Not to mention the US government has the Arapaho and the Shoshone on the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming - two tribes that have been rivals as long as they can remember - but they stayed out of each others' way until they were stuck on the same crappy piece of land together. Now they occupy opposite ends of the reservation resentfully.

The fact that the Black Hills should belong to the Sioux is not an object for contestation really.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 04:42 PM
Thousands of years ago, Rome invaded what is now England. The English were quite the unevolved, barbaric people at that time. The Romans, through INVASION AND DEFEAT, civilised the English people and laid the foundation for what the country is today. I don't know if you'll allow the comparison to stand in the conversation or not, but it makes an interesting point on your "defeat in search of opportunity" statement. It is not necessarily a bad thing.

The Romans did not bring in diseases that the British had no immune system for. The land was also small enough so that the Romans didn't have much space to push them around in. The Romans sought to expand their empire, not to eliminate native populations. And why is "civilization" such a good thing? What is your definition of civility?

desflood
03-28-2005, 04:43 PM
HISTORIC RESOLUTION OF APOLOGY TO NATIVE PEOPLES
INTRODUCED IN U.S. CONGRESS
May 6, 2004

A Call for Prayer for Passage and Action by the President

An historic Resolution of Apology to the Native American peoples was introduced in the U.S. Congress by Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO) and Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI) on the evening of the May 6, 2004, National Day of Prayer.

In his remarks on the Senate floor, Sen. Brownback stated, "This is a resolution of apology and a resolution of reconciliation. It is a first step toward healing the wounds that have divided us for so long-a potential foundation for a new era of positive relations between Tribal Governments and the Federal Government. Before reconciliation, there must be recognition and repentance. Before there is a durable relationship, there must be understanding. This resolution will not authorize or serve as a settlement of any claim against the United States, not will it resolve the many challenges still facing the Native Peoples. But it does recognize the negative impact of numerous deleterious Federal acts and policies on Native Americans and their cultures.

This bill is currently in the Library of Congress awaiting review.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 04:46 PM
HISTORIC RESOLUTION OF APOLOGY TO NATIVE PEOPLES
INTRODUCED IN U.S. CONGRESS
May 6, 2004

A Call for Prayer for Passage and Action by the President

An historic Resolution of Apology to the Native American peoples was introduced in the U.S. Congress by Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO) and Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI) on the evening of the May 6, 2004, National Day of Prayer.

In his remarks on the Senate floor, Sen. Brownback stated, "This is a resolution of apology and a resolution of reconciliation. It is a first step toward healing the wounds that have divided us for so long-a potential foundation for a new era of positive relations between Tribal Governments and the Federal Government. Before reconciliation, there must be recognition and repentance. Before there is a durable relationship, there must be understanding. This resolution will not authorize or serve as a settlement of any claim against the United States, not will it resolve the many challenges still facing the Native Peoples. But it does recognize the negative impact of numerous deleterious Federal acts and policies on Native Americans and their cultures.

This bill is currently in the Library of Congress awaiting review.

I had heard about that, but was waiting to see if it would actually pass before commenting too much. We are, after all, talking about the same government that was alone with the nation of Somalia in refusing to sign the "Protection of Women and Children Act" in the UN.

desflood
03-28-2005, 04:46 PM
The Romans did not bring in diseases that the British had no immune system for. The land was also small enough so that the Romans didn't have much space to push them around in. The Romans sought to expand their empire, not to eliminate native populations. And why is "civilization" such a good thing? What is your definition of civility?
Do you think Europeans knew they were bringing diseases the natives had no immunities for? No. Do you think the Europeans came over with the intention of eliminating the natives? No. Were the Europeans looking to expand their empire? Yes. Otherwise, they wouldn't have bothered to claim the land. They would have looked around and left. Let me think about civility for a moment.

Jekka
03-28-2005, 04:51 PM
Do you think Europeans knew they were bringing diseases the natives had no immunities for? No. Do you think the Europeans came over with the intention of eliminating the natives? No. Were the Europeans looking to expand their empire? Yes. Otherwise, they wouldn't have bothered to claim the land. They would have looked around and left. Let me think about civility for a moment.

Of course they didn't intentionally come over wanting to eliminate the native peoples with diseases. They just wanted to come over, take over some land, make their fortunes, and go back to Europe. It didn't happen that way, people settled, and needed more and more land, and the native population was in the way of that. That's when the true genocide begins. There were all kinds of rewards documented for people who would bring back scalps of Natives to the government - and there's the Massacre at Wounded Knee and countless other examples of the efforts to eliminate the Native American population, or at least force them to assimilate into a society that never intended to treat them equally. They were taken advantage of from the start. I've read historical documents from both the native and European side talking about using alcohol to force Native people into handing over their lands. What did not start out intentionally as genocide ended up that way.

exstatic
03-28-2005, 05:26 PM
Des, do you think you have any type of debt to Native Americans? Do you think you have benefited at thier expense at all?

Casinos are N.A. karma. They are quite legally exploiting the greed of the (primarily) white man for money. I can't believe that Red Lake doesn't have one. I've been to a couple of N.A. casinos in Minnesota. There is even one in downtown Duluth. How is that on a reservation, you might ask? The local tribe threatened to sue, since apparently much of the Duluth area used to be tribal land. One city block was designated native land, and a casino went up.

From what I understand, the tribe doesn't even have to put up the money to build the casino. There is a whole industry around this, and the tribe still makes the lion's share of the profits. That would be one way for them to "pull themselves up".

Jekka
03-28-2005, 05:32 PM
Casinos are N.A. karma. They are quite legally exploiting the greed of the (primarily) white man for money. I can't believe that Red Lake doesn't have one. I've been to a couple of N.A. casinos in Minnesota. There is even one in downtown Duluth. How is that on a reservation, you might ask? The local tribe threatened to sue, since apparently much of the Duluth area used to be tribal land. One city block was designated native land, and a casino went up.

From what I understand, the tribe doesn't even have to put up the money to build the casino. There is a whole industry around this, and the tribe still makes the lion's share of the profits. That would be one way for them to "pull themselves up".

It hasn't worked yet - for some tribes, but not many. So many tribes are geographically isolated, and there aren't too many people who will drive out to the boondocks of North Dakota to go gamble at a little Native American casino. It has helped some tribes though - I think it's the Micmac tribe that has roots in Massachusetts/ New York that has a very successful casino business up. I think that in a way, casinos are karmic justice, but they are not the natives' "savior" I don't think.

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 06:08 PM
Tell me, when did I ever argue that they haven't been dicriminated against? No putting words in my mouth, please.


Fair enough, I jumped to conclusions and for that I apologoize.



I'm saying that they can overcome that discrimination and are not, and I would like to know why. A question you've asked about minorities before yourself, I believe.


Yes, but usually I ask in in a rhetorical sense. I believe there are many factors that have contributed to these situations including: governement actions and inactions, social situations, and general cultural differences.

However, I must say the reason I give the largest influence to is the first.



As for debt and benefits... well, my family came here well after the Native Americans were shoved onto reservations for the government's own purposes, so debt? I doubt it. As for benefitting, hmm. Not sure. Probably as much as you, yourself have benefited.

Well, my herritage and ancestry is actually very little European, if any. I have more slave and indian ancestry than anything else, but it really doesn't matter because I'm not looking for individual accountability, but accountability and redemption on a society wide scale.

I think it's pretty undisputable fact that most Americans have benefited from what happend to the Native Americans and continue to do so to this day. I would like to see the government take some serious steps to uplift those tribes through greater broad based programs designed to improve generations at a time, not individuals.

I'm not sure how to best intergrate these programs, or what kind of programs due to the cultural identiy Native Americans have, but it's something that should have been at the very least looked into a very long time ago.

You can self righteously preach about how they should be able to lift themselves up, but that means very little when it comes from a member of a society that has directly benefited from the destruction of the one they chastise.

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 06:11 PM
Conclusion
The Lakota people have a resilient culture with
vibrant civil institutions, but the basic economic deprivation
of their environment continues to stifle economic
development efforts. The housing situation on the
Pine Ridge reservation remains problematic, with an
abundance of substandard, overcrowded homes and a
shortage of access to affordable credit. Several HUD and
USDA Rural Development housing programs are being
implemented, with positive results, through intermediary
nonprofit organizations. Access to these programs must
be expanded, however, to meet the reservation’s needs.
The increased presence of private sector lending
institutions on the reservation in recent years is encouraging
and necessary. Unfortunately, it appears that there
has also been a related increase in the overall incidence
of predatory lending practices. Federal housing agencies,
the Oglala Lakota tribe, and the tribally chartered
nonprofits must guard against the possible financial
victimization of vulnerable tribal borrowers by some
for-profit lenders.
The poverty on the Pine Ridge reservation, and its
population’s subsequent high dependency on public
assistance, are emblematic of a dire absence of economic
opportunity. Despite the unforgiving economic
conditions that define their contemporary environment,
the Oglala Lakota are working to create solutions to
their own problems.

http://www.ruralhome.org/pubs/hsganalysis/ts2000/NativeCase.pdf

desflood
03-28-2005, 06:22 PM
I would like to see the government take some serious steps to uplift those tribes through greater broad based programs designed to improve generations at a time, not individuals.


Once again, referring to sickdsm's post: Free College. I'm sure you will agree that the best way out of poverty is education. Why don't more take advantage of that? This is only a small part of the argument, of course, but still a part of it.

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 06:30 PM
I would like to see the government take some serious steps to uplift those tribes through greater broad based programs designed to improve generations at a time, not individuals.


Once again, referring to sickdsm's post: Free College. I'm sure you will agree that the best way out of poverty is education. Why don't more take advantage of that? This is only a small part of the argument, of course, but still a part of it.

Ok, before I go any further, I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'm going to ask a question.

Do you think this society has done what it needs to do in order to pay a debt to the Native Americans?

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 06:34 PM
I don't possess great insight into race issues (and even if I did, I'm white, so my opinion would be immediately discounted), but I think casting blame inhibits progress as much, if not more, than any other contributing factor to issues such as poverty.

Ok, the shit about your insight being discounted is bullshit. You don't have to be brown, red, blue or purple to have a valid opinion. I think taking a clear look at the situation and acknowledging disparties is enough.

As for your second point, I see where your coming from, but I disagree enourmously. I don't think acknowledging the cause of situations and taking appropriate steps to right wrongs is going to keep a people down.

I think, if left alone the people in these situations will pull themselves up as was indicated they should do earlier in this thread. But it's just going to take longer.

desflood
03-28-2005, 06:43 PM
Ok, before I go any further, I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'm going to ask a question.

Do you think this society has done what it needs to do in order to pay a debt to the Native Americans?
Honestly, I don't know. I don't think anyone will ever know what the really appropriate reparations, if any, would be. But I believe that they do have the tools now to at least begin to... I don't want to say better themselves, that's not the phrase I'm looking for... raise themselves up, I guess. But as far as debt repayment goes, I don't really know what to do. Maybe you have an idea, since you asked?

desflood
03-28-2005, 06:45 PM
And actually, I think Guru is right! The majority blames the minority, the minority blames the majority, and nobody comes together to solve the problems, which would certainly make it easier on everybody.

mookie2001
03-28-2005, 08:27 PM
i commented on this 3 days ago. in the last post under
"shiavo case, the best place for information" thread

Guru of Nothing
03-28-2005, 08:29 PM
I don't think acknowledging the cause of situations and taking appropriate steps to right wrongs is going to keep a people down.


I guess my point was that "acknowledging the cause" detracts from "taking steps."

Pardon the faux-Zen, but the people who make the biggest difference get the least attention, and those who get the most attention make the least difference.

I will go so far as to argue that addressing problems and fixing problems are mutually exclusive.

Oh, and no matter how hard you try, dealing the guilt card will get you very little in return. The most it will net you is another soul or two who will stand by your side and dole out more guilt.

I've said this before Manny, and I will tell you again. You appoach these situations from the top-down. Within the context of this subject, if you want to make a diference in the lives of American Indians, gather a sample of individual Indians, and find out what specific actions would improve their individual lot - and see if a pattern emerges.

sickdsm
03-28-2005, 08:49 PM
Whether or not the Indians have been adequately compensated, why do they deserve so much more than a black person? How many cotton plantations or our founding fathers owned a slave? How much benefits are we paying to Africa or our Black population?

Wars happan. Countries expand. Have the Apache ever compensated the Sioux/Lakota/White trappers they killed's families? Probably not. I wouldn't expect them to. Did we ever provide compensation to France for screwing them over on the Lousianna purchase? Seward's Icebox? No.

As for the casino's, there a HUGE money making deal. Its really misleading bc of the sparesly populated areas, people will drive for hours to gamble. There really isn't much for the (mainly older people) to do otherwise. Some tribes CHOOSE not to based on ethics. I don't know about red lake. I know theres a decent sized one in Mahnomen, less than an hour away. Currently theres 3 good sized ones within 40 minutes of me. By good sized, one has an 18 hole golf course, hotel, convention center, concerts, all Vegas style gaming etc.... One's currently in plans to build a hotel and the other is 24 hours with blackjack/slots only. Theres many other opportunities though. Our local tribe has really got it together. Ice skating rinks, oil change places, rodeo grounds, etc.... Some tribes run banks. Theres really no limit. I BELIEVE its all tax free for them. I know south dakota is asking the tribe to raise there gas prices to make it fair for the independent stations. Tribal owned gas stations don't have to charge the 20-30 cent per gallon tax which means they usually undercut the competition. There's an endless limit of these sort of things. My faverite though is the tribes's ads for jobs in the paper. The bottom line always reads:

EOE/ Indian preference applied.

Me and my GF get into it once in a while about the unemployment/ghetto's in bigger cities. I say theres no excuse, the only plausible one is that its hard to WANT to get out bad enough. Her stepdad is a great example. He was a white guy living in a tough ghetto in southern chicago. He ended up moving to ND, free travel, food, housing to take a "job" with the college. He basically was a dietary study. He ate the food they provided for him and they in turn studied his health/body.

GoldToe
03-28-2005, 08:58 PM
I'd say because the Native Americans had their land stolen from them after treaty after treaty was broken by the US Government. I know African Americans had their land stolen too but I also think that all minorities have suffered injustice at the hands of the US government.

mookie2001
03-28-2005, 09:05 PM
minnesota blows

MannyIsGod
03-28-2005, 09:05 PM
Oh trust me, I think there are a lot of people htat have been stepped on in the name of our free land, and I've adressed most of the situatinons, including blacks.

exstatic
03-28-2005, 10:27 PM
How much benefits are we paying to Africa or our Black population?

Every time I hear about reparations for slavery, I automatically think about 45 years and multi-billions of dollars of welfare. It's like a reflex or something.

Useruser666
03-29-2005, 08:41 AM
I am totally against any type of reparations to either native Americans or African Americans. I am of the opinion that everyone is equal, and should be treated that way.

MannyIsGod
03-29-2005, 11:49 AM
Better late than never right Chris?

Useruser666
03-29-2005, 12:03 PM
Better late than never right Chris?

On this topic or reparations?

sickdsm
03-29-2005, 09:31 PM
I heard on the radio today that the Tribal Chairman's son was arrested for helping plan the attack.

Yikes

http://wcco.com/crime/local_story_087163856.html

Louis Jourdain's father is Tribal Chairman Floyd Jourdain Jr., who has been the public face of the Red Lake Band of Chippewa since the shootings.

Last week, Jourdain Jr. urged tribal members to pay more attention to their children.

"The one underlying theme of it all (is that) we need to spend more time with one another and pay more attention to our young people, to what they are doing, what they are saying," Jourdain Jr. said March 24.

Jourdain Jr. appeared to have a loving relationship with his son. On the Chairman's personal Web site, there is an image of Jourdain Jr. with his son. The caption on the photo reads, "My pride and joy Louie who always shares his school achievements with me."

"You would think being a chairman he would be able to control his kids, let alone control the reservation," Red Lake resident Shane May said. "If he can't control the reservation, then he can't control his kids. Then why is he in control?"

GoldToe
03-29-2005, 09:37 PM
I am totally against any type of reparations to either native Americans or African Americans. I am of the opinion that everyone is equal, and should be treated that way.

Too bad that's not the way people felt back when the Native Americans were having their land taken away or blacks were in slavery.

It is a known fact that the US government broke every treaty with the Indians and STOLE their land. How you can be against any type of reparations, at least in theory, is beyond me.
Do you honestly believe that Native Americans and blacks were treated "equal"? Please tell me you don't think that.

Guru of Nothing
03-29-2005, 09:56 PM
How you can be against any type of reparations, at least in theory, is beyond me.

Therein lies a problem. Do you want reparations? ... or do you want to get in touch with your inner-Oprah?

JoeChalupa
03-29-2005, 10:07 PM
There is an amount of money that would pay the reparations any way.
Some things you simply cannot put a price on.

Useruser666
03-30-2005, 11:27 AM
Too bad that's not the way people felt back when the Native Americans were having their land taken away or blacks were in slavery.

It is a known fact that the US government broke every treaty with the Indians and STOLE their land. How you can be against any type of reparations, at least in theory, is beyond me.
Do you honestly believe that Native Americans and blacks were treated "equal"? Please tell me you don't think that.

Did I say that? No. I didn't treat native Americans poorly for hundreds of years. I didn't treat African Americans poorly through out this country's history. Not even my ancestors treated them poorly. The problem with even thinking about reparations is very complex.

Who will pay the reparations?

Who will get the reparations?

How much will they be?

How do you prove that you were wronged?

Why should I have to pay for the crimes committed by others long before I was born? Why don't you go through your own family tree and payback anyone that has been done wrong by a family member of yours. When you've done that then you can start talking.

Should illegal immigrants from Mexico get reparations for the low wages or mistreatment by human smugglers that has gone on for so long?

Should the people who had their land taken during the Civil War recieve payments?

I have never argued that native Americans and African American slaves weren't mistreated, or they shouldn't recieve recognition of those actions. But the argument for reparations is like the table with one short leg.

Spurminator
03-30-2005, 11:32 AM
The biggest problem I have with the idea of reparations is that once they're set in place when is enough enough?

And who risks the political suicide of basically saying "I think we've done enough for African and Native Americans"?

MannyIsGod
03-30-2005, 12:32 PM
I'm not in favor of direct reperations, but government intervention to better though communities as a whole. I'm not talking about a 300 dollar check with "slavery" as the reason.

ChumpDumper
03-30-2005, 01:02 PM
I had no idea the tangental potnetial of this thread. Well done, everyone.