Mr. Yellow Bird Steele's 'remarks' are being highlighted because it was his tribe who were massacred by Custer should rightly be most offended by praise of Custer. And you're correct, the naming of Islamic terrorists after a Native American is also offensive. What is also offensive is Pat Roger's view that a governor of his current political party should've been unwilling to meet with tribes although required by law and the insinuation that we are communist. That Native American's are COMMUNISTS! In an election year, it is important to consider his party's tolerance of his remarks because if they were truly offensive or disagreeable to the party he would've been removed from position. Tribes to bond together because besides being of the same race and having similar cultures we share a history of oppression, the ongoing degeneration of culture, problems of crime, alcoholism, over-regulation, under education, ongoing racism(which Pat Rogers confirms) and too many still are living in poverty on and off the reservations. We need to help each other when we find ways to understand and solve these problems. Especially if we are to understand and improve our lands and find ways through rigged laws and regulations which are crippling us. Neither party has made much headway despite their rhetoric. We are trying to move forward and our networking, our reliance upon each other and our cultural belief in taking care of as many of us as possible does not make us communists. What confuses me about you is that you seem to have bought into one side this ineffective political dichotomy even though your comment points out the fallacy of the system: each party's selling principles have changed over time. Each side usually has half the answer, if that, of complex problems which aren't even meant to have solutions. Then we can keep fighting about the same hot button principles while the policies that effect our way of living are change unnoticed. Both parties...together...over decades have contributed to each decision which has weakened our country. These selling principles are secondary to the wishes of those with money and influence. We native people don't have enough of money or influence to be important to either party. Therefore, neither side is effectively helping the Native American Indian cause. Both sides are actually contributing to the oppression of other native peoples throughout the world. But if it is, like you say, a young trend at least the Democratic party has a stance of equal opportunities to people of color. Even if it's a trend, the trend is current. I won't support a current party who allows praises of a man who's mentality and politics of his time were the same as those who coerced my forefathers into signing treaties which crippled native economies by moving us onto what they deemed were wastelands and then impoverished, over-regulated, and put into place laws to endlessly make my people's lands dependent upon the government's substandard assistance. When they didn't complete the physical genocide they removed children, my grandmother included, from these wastelands and abused them into what they hoped would be a cultural genocide and forced them to take on another culture. A culture of selfishness and endless consumption without consideration for the future. It almost wiped out the buffalo and us. How can we undo the bonds, rally and move into the future as successful Native AMERICANS(yes we still are) when, if Pat Rogers has his way, these racists won't meet with us to legislate and do business? Republican's are saying help yourself, how can we when the system they keep is rigged to benefit an upper class that you, realistically and statistically, will never be a part of?
Sunday, September 2, 2012 - 22:14