Cheif illiniwek may be retired

[Brian in Boston]

JQK... As I pointed out in my last post, my grandfather, great-uncles and father-in-law served this country to preserve the right of EVERY American citizen - liberal, conservative, moderate and every gradation in between - to form, hold and share their opinions, regardless of ideaology. Your assessment that I'm disgustingly resting on the sacrifices of my in-laws means NOTHING to me, because I recognize that their sacrifices were made to insure that I - and EVERY other American - can speak our minds whenever we like.  

Where they would all draw the line is at hypocritical posturing, which is why I had to call NJTank on the statements he's made of late. NJTank can embrace the most stringent conservatism he wants. He's welcome to trumpet his pronouncements about the "evils" of liberalism and the Democratic party. Hundreds of thousands of American men and women have sacrificed their lives so that he might do so. However, he should refrain from "throwing stones in glass houses". He specifically bemoaned the supposed propensity of liberals to resort to name-calling and fear-mongering... then he engaged in that exact behavior.

As for "resting on the sacrifices" of my relatives, I'd advise you not to jump to conclusions. I've twice held public office... not as a means of lining my pockets, as running for and serving in the positions cost me far more money than I would have made in my private sector job. In both cases I saw problems that needed to be solved and felt that I had solutions for them. I believe that I left the communities I served in better shape than when I arrived. I serve in the U.S. Coast Guard Reserve. I volunteer with organizations ranging from my neighborhood school to a local senior center; from my church parish to programs benefitting children with special needs. I've entertained troops in Bosnia-Herzegovina as part of a USO tour. I've organized fund-raising events benefitting MDA, Parkinson's Disease research, breast cancer research, and AIDS research and hospice funding. Simply put, I was raised to believe that it was my responsibility as a citizen - as a HUMAN BEING - to serve my fellow man wherever, whenever and however I could.

Here's what I KNOW, JQK... my father-in-law is as proud of me as any man or woman he's ever served with; my grandfather and great-uncles are smiling down on me from heaven. They ALL know how much I LOVE THIS COUNTRY. The fact that you and I don't happen to see eye-to-eye on the Native American nickname issue - or, potentially, any other issue - doesn't change that fact one bit... no matter how much you might like to think so.

You're quick to claim that "The Left" will "smack" those they don't agree with with the "racist label faster than anything". But you're just as biased when you label my behavior as "disgusting" because I don't happen to share your view of the world.

Brian in Boston

[JQK]

you're just as biased when you label my behavior as "disgusting" because I don't happen to share your view of the world.

I never labeled you views disgusting... wow your just like the rest of 'em... And you seem to have many a label for my views...

Your so very quick to call Tank and me  hypocrites... when you yourself are one...

hmmmmm.......

[Brian in Boston]

Exactly what name did I call you Tank? I simply pointed out that you bemoaned the fact that liberals resort to name-calling and fear-mongering, only to engage in the same behavior yourself.

Furthermore, don't jump to conclusions about my political affiliations. You've never met me. You've never engaged in any sort of political discussion with me. The only subject, aside from logos/uniforms, that you can hope to deduce my opinion about based on my postings here, is the Native American nickname debate. So, am I to understand that you're then going to extrapolate what my political affiliation is based upon that lone issue?  That's a dangerously uninformed road to travel down, Tank. Those aren't assumptions you should leap to.

Brian in Boston

[Brian in Boston]

JQK...

You misquoted me. I never said that you labeled my VIEWS disgusting. I said that you labeled my BEHAVIOR disgusting.

You need only read the quote that you opened your most recent post with. I mean how exactly did you mean the following?

"Brian it's disgusting on how you are resting on the sacrifices of your grandfather, uncles and father in law..."

"Resting on the sacrifices of my relatives" would be defined as a behavior. You call it disgusting. How is that supposed to be interpreted? Educate me, please.

And what, EXACTLY, in my posts has struck you as "hypocritical". Again, I must be missing something, so please, educate me.

Brian in Boston

[JQK]

He didn't use far-mongering or name calling. It is a fact that leftists favor a more social form of government, thus making them Socialists. A distinction that is often misintrepreted is that of communist and socialist. It is a party line, that democrats favor big government and big spending. It is what you campaign on. It is why the welfare addicts always vote democratic, so they can still stay on welfare and not do jack.

Me and tank happen to think this form of social government is wrong, so we are against Socialists and any radical left-winger.

(P.S. just to let you know, i'm not a republican)

[Brian in Boston]

JQK...

Does it ever bother you to ignore the questions you have no answers for? How am I supposed to interpret the following comment?

"Brian it's disgusting on how you are resting on the sacrifices of your grandfather, uncles and father in law..."

I'd like an answer. You claimed that you never labeled my views disgusting. I reminded you that I had never claimed you did. My problem was with you labeling a behavior of mine disgusting. I'd like you to address that issue. Educate me, please.

Also, please don't join NJTank in jumping to conclusions about my political affiliation. I direct your attention to:

"... democrats favor big government and big spending. It is what you campaign on."

How exactly have you come to the conclusion that I'm a Democrat? I'd appreciate you not engaging in blind suppositions about my political beliefs. Thanks.

Brian in Boston

[Avenger]

For what it's worth, our media is not near as liberal as the right wants us to believe. Hell, compare our wartime news media to that of the rest of the world's, including our allies in the war against Iraq, and you'll see exactly how right-wing our media is. They were totally eating out of the hand of the Whitehouse. Especially Fox. They were a friggen' propoganda machine.

And if you want to talk about fear mongering, I've gotta agree with Brian here. Trying to be as objective as possible, you look at what the right was saying about going to war with Iraq and the Patriot act, and it's all based on a culture of fear. Fear of chemical weapons that didn't exist (or at least that didn't ever show up despite our military looking for them), and a fear of more terrorist attacks. And all Dubya had to do to push his agenda was bring up 9/11 and recall our fear.

And, as fiscaly responsible as the right is supposed to be, tell me that the war we just fought was a good use of tax dollars. We just dropped a ton of money on that conflict, and what did it really do? Maybe secure a little more oil for us to use and Bush & Co to make more money off of? Please! We could have invested a fraction of that money into education and research, and in a couple of years, we wouldn't have to be dependent on the Middle Eastern tools that want us dead to begin with.

Don't get me wrong- I don't agree with a lot of things the left does either, but recently, the right has been pushing an agenda that the majority of this country doesn't want, and it pisses me off.

Sorta makes me want a third choice. Too bad the status quo, both right and left has made that virtually impossible. Granted, Nader and Perot didn't really help the whole third party cause. :laugh: Crazy bastards!

[JQK]

Everything you have said is the same garbage that is spouted by every liberal, if it look like a liberal, sounds like a liberal, it's a liberal.

ANd that comment i made about you resting on your relatives sacrifices, it is disgusting that you are using them to try and give your argument more credibility. I salute your grandfather and others for their service to their country, but what does their serive have to do with your argument? It has nothing to do with it, you just brought it up to say "Look, my family fought for America, so whatever i say is right"

My father served... it has nothing to do with anything we were talking about, there is no need to bring up the service record of relatives... If you want to compare out families military history, i would be glad to, as i'm sure there is alot of stories we could share, but to bring that up in this conversation was pointless, and i stand by my statement that it was disgusting for you to do so.

[Brian in Boston]

JQK... In YOUR own words about ME:

"Everything you have said is the same garbage that is spouted by every liberal, if it look like a liberal, sounds like a liberal, it's a liberal."

Here we go again.

Talk about jumping to erroneous conclusions based upon one's own biases. You'd be having a fit if someone out here were to label you a reactionary, ultra-conservative bigot based solely upon your stand on the Native American logo issue. Once again, I'll kindly ask you not to make suppositions about my political affiliations.

As for "introducing" my family members into this debate, it was to illustrate the point that NJTank often structures his posts on particularly intense topics, as though his opinion is the last thing standing between the "American way of life" and total chaos. In point of fact, an individual whose opinion is diametrically opposed to NJTank's, may well believe that he or she has the best interests of America at heart. I was illustrating the fact that despite my supposedly ultra-liberal bias on the Native American logo issue, I am - in fact - someone who has been raised to believe in BOTH the opportunity AND responsibility inherent in being born an American. My grandfather, great-uncles and father-in-law have done more to teach me this lesson than any other people in my life. If bringing that up strikes you as "disgusting", so be it. If you'd bother to read my entire post, you'd realize that I was commenting upon NJTank's habit of often introducing what I've come to regard as his "Save America" platform into this debate. When things get heated, NJTank's posts would have you believe that if you don't agree with him, well, then you're Anti-American. As I told him, "don't wrap yourself in the American flag while you supposedly 'debate' the issue... because it's MY flag TOO!!!"

I notice that you completely ignored my follow-up post where I ennumerated the ways in which I have tried to serve the country I call home. I believe that it is safe to say that I haven't been "resting" on anything... most assuredly not my relatives' sacrifices. I suppose that you chose to ignore my efforts because they don't serve your purposes in painting me as some sort of garbage-spouting liberal who's efforts will end up bringing down the American way of life. So be it. However, I'd be very interested in knowing exactly what you've done to serve this country. Is the content of your CCSL posts the extent of your efforts on behalf of America and its values? I'd truly like to know.

(It's not so comfortable when a by-and-large anonymous poster questions your commitment to your country, is it?)

The bottom line on this issue is that you (and NJTank) and I are probably NEVER going to see eye-to-eye about it. What I find offensive is how the two of you will immediately steer "debate" of this topic towards an argument about how our American values are being undermined. What I find offensive is how the two of you were so ready, willing and able to label me - solely because I don't happen to share an opinion with you - as "disgusting", a "Left WInger", someone who would "lower tehmselves to name calling", "pointless" and "just like the rest of 'em". Who are "the rest of 'em"? And how do you know that I'm anything like them? How have you come to the conclusion that my behavior/actions are "disgusting"? That I'm a "Left WInger"? How have you come to any of these conclusions when you've never met me? Oh... that's right. They're not educated opinions; they're simply based on the fact that I had the temerity to voice an opinion contrary to yours.

So, let's agree to disagree. However, in the future, please refrain from questioning - either directly or indirectly - my patriotism or my commitment to what this country stands for. Please refrain from labeling me with a political affiliation that you're only guessing at. Please refrain from lumping me in with "the rest of 'em"... whoever they may be. Bottom line: you don't know me... you've never met me... you're never likely to meet me. Therefore, I see no reason to have you publicly presuppose what my political and/or social values are, how I vote or what my agenda is.

Brian in Boston

[Brian in Boston]

STL FANATIC...

I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to get around to addressing the question in your last post?

Your memory serves you well with regard to my being of Native American descent, as well as my disdain for the so-called "honor" of using Native American names, imagery and rituals as part of the representation of sports teams.

As for my not judging the University of Ilinois' "Chief Illiniwek" and "Fighting Illini" identity as harshly, I believe you're referring to my initial confusion over just how "authentic" the tribute was. Since my initial ambivalence, I've done my research and I can tell you that "Chief Illiniwek" - as well as his dress, fancy dancing and musical accompaniment - are a blueprint of just what is wrong with attempting to "honor" Native Americans in this manner.

The idea of having a representation of an Illini Chief performing at University of Illinois athletic events goes back to 1926. Ray Dvorak, the University of Illinois Director of Bands came up with the idea, and Lester Leutwiler - a student with an interest in Native American "lore" - was chosen to dance.

Leutwiler's original costume was homemade and based upon knowledge he gained as a Boy Scout. I believe that we can openly question the authenticity of this creation. In 1929, another student by the name of A. Webber Borchers visited the Pine Ridge Reservation in Kadota, South Dakota. His goal was to have an authentic Sioux war suit made for "Chief Illiniwek". He wanted the colorful regalia of the Sioux for several reasons, not the least of which was that the Native Americans of Illinois shaved the sides of their heads. Borchers couldn't picture himself - or future "Chief Illiniweks" - walking around campus with just a scalplock on their heads. Also, the Illinois Native Americans were woodland tribes and did not wear the dramatic war bonnets of the Plains tribes. To this day, the current rawhide outfit is a product of the Ogala Sioux tribe of South Dakota. Authentic? Yes... authentic SIOUX. Remotely related to the history and traditions of the tribes of Illinois? Not on your life. So, we can see that the costume is a misguided and flawed attempt to represent a unique culture. It has come to supposedly "represent" the tribes of Illinois NOT because it actually does, but because a student ignorant of Native American traditions decided that it was what he'd like to wear. Strike one.

The music set played during the performance of "Chief Illiniwek" consists of three separate works. Combined, they are referred to as the "3-in-1". The first segment is "Pride of the Illini" and was composed in 1928 by Karl L. King, a composer of traditional marching music. It is not Native American in origin. The second segment is "March of the Illini" composed by Harry Alford in 1922. It consists of a continuous ostinato rhythm, reminiscent of a so-called "tom-tom" beat. It is about as Native American in origin as the soundtrack of an early Hollywood Western. The third segment of the "3-in-1" is "Hail to the Orange", the University of Illinois alma mater. It was written in 1908 by Howard Green. Once again, the musical piece is not Native American in origin. So, the musical portion of this supposed "tribute" to Native American culture is as flawed as the costume. Strike two.

As for the "fancy dancing" which "Chief Illiniwek" performs, it did not originate from any TRADITIONAL Native American dance. It originated as a largely improvisational display of individual dance steps used as a method of entertaining visitors at Native American reservations in the 1920s. It belongs to no one tribe. This "fancy dancing" traces its roots to Oklahoma and is now performed all over the country. While certain steps and moves in the University of Illinois' "Chief Illiniwek" dances routine have been standardized to provide a continuity of "Fighting Illini" traditions, it is certainly not an accurate representation of any portion of the culture of the Native Americans who called Illinois home. Strike three.

And this bastardization of Native American culture, for the purposes of providing entertainment and instilling "spirit" at athletic events, is supposed to be regarded as an honor? How is it an honor to have your culture co-opted and inaccurately portrayed?

Brian in Boston

[STL FANATIC]

Overall, I'd like to say I understand why they offend you, but also the fact that the Majority do not seem offended. Also, I'd like to say that overall, the honor should just come in the fact that you name a team after something that shows enviable characteristics.

Point 1: While it being Authentic Sioux is not maybe as good as Authentic Illini, it's a good comprimise of Authentic American Indian and something actually feasible. However, I understand your point here.

Point 2: There is no reason for this to offend you. They don't claim that the music is Native American. It's just the music they play during the performance.

Point 3: So what your saying is many tribes did it, meaning they changed their tradition to entertain visitors. So they changed from their ancestors. They were no longer performing the same rituals. This may come off harsh, but I question the right of anybody to protest these names (or other ethnic names) because their distant ancestors are what these teams are named after. How can that offend you? You aren't what it's named after, it's named after those tribes from back then.

Brian, I had a hard time expressing what I was trying to say in that last paragraph, and it came off harsh. No matter what, I could get very in depth and into a heated argument about this thing. Even if that were to happen, I want you to know that it's just about this one issue, and I do respect you and your right to have your own oppinion.

[JQK]

I just dig that we have people on here with deep political thoughts... i love debating... good to see everyones opinion and arguments...