Rewriting history. Crazy or Crazy Horse
Caught this item from Web Commentary:
Read it all here as authored by anti-Custer crusader Mike Graham.
Aside from the fact he's p.o'd at Republican Senator Stan Adelstein, what's at issue here? This Graham gentleman has been pushing for about a year now to rename Custer State Park because the terminology is offensive to him, as he considers it as a tribute to General George Armstrong Custer. He's had editorials printed in several papers, and the Custer County Courier newspaper has covered this issue in some depth.
I'm not sure I understand this guy's thinking. We're supposed to change the name because it's offensive to a guy who lives in an entirely different state? As I understood it, the park name is derived from the county it's associated with (Custer County) and not necessarily as a direct reference to General Custer. If he really wants to change it, shouldn't he start with the Custer County Commission and change the county name?
The man is certainly welcome to his opinion. But there are plenty of people who live in this state who probably think differently, and would prefer the name stay the same. If he truly wants it changed, maybe he should start with explaining to the people of South Dakota his justification, as opposed to the politicians.
Better yet, maybe he should start his crusade against injustice in Oklahoma, and leave the fight in South Dakota to South Dakotans.
South Dakotans and people around the world are calling on the South Dakota government to rename Custer State Park to Chief Crazy Horse State Park. United Native America founder Mike Graham and wife, Sharon, will be at the state capital this January 17th & 18th meeting with state representatives about the park's name change and other issues of concern to the state's Indian community.
State Senator Stanford M. Adelstein defiantly denied Graham a meeting with him concerning changing the name of Custer park. He did offer his time to hear Graham's concerns about Indian health and education issues. Senator Theresa B. Two Bulls and Representative Thomas J. Van Norman are aware of the Custer park name issue and agreed to meet with Graham on all issues. On Wednesday, January 18th, 2005, Graham will meet with Roger Campbell, Director of the South Dakota Office of Tribal Government Relations: http://www.state.sd.us/oia/
Read it all here as authored by anti-Custer crusader Mike Graham.
Aside from the fact he's p.o'd at Republican Senator Stan Adelstein, what's at issue here? This Graham gentleman has been pushing for about a year now to rename Custer State Park because the terminology is offensive to him, as he considers it as a tribute to General George Armstrong Custer. He's had editorials printed in several papers, and the Custer County Courier newspaper has covered this issue in some depth.
I'm not sure I understand this guy's thinking. We're supposed to change the name because it's offensive to a guy who lives in an entirely different state? As I understood it, the park name is derived from the county it's associated with (Custer County) and not necessarily as a direct reference to General Custer. If he really wants to change it, shouldn't he start with the Custer County Commission and change the county name?
The man is certainly welcome to his opinion. But there are plenty of people who live in this state who probably think differently, and would prefer the name stay the same. If he truly wants it changed, maybe he should start with explaining to the people of South Dakota his justification, as opposed to the politicians.
Better yet, maybe he should start his crusade against injustice in Oklahoma, and leave the fight in South Dakota to South Dakotans.
Comments