Wampum

I think a many of us would benefit from a condolences ritual because of this tragedy and others like it. Could you share some of its elements with us?

Meteor Blades,

I'll see if we can put a condolence song up, but the fundamental element is abandonment of false dualism, the posture of non-responsibility.

For lefty bloggers this means looking at Indian poverty and the difficulty of Indian Sovereignty as the beloved consequences of lefty progressive politics. Howard Dean's hostility towards Mississquoi Abenakis was, in the last cycle, like Madeline Albright's evaluation of Iraqi children killed by material conditions directly connected to the US Sanctions regimes, worth the cost of getting Howard polling with non-Indian Vermonters up to Presidential candidate levels. This is repeated at every level of the Party.

For righty bloggers this means looking at Indian poverty and the difficulty of Indian Sovereignty as the beloved consequences of righty conservative politics. Since Nixon no one in the Republican Party has embrassed self-determination policy and moved on to the next problems, repeal of PL 280 (Red Lake was one of the original exemptions from PL 280 -- federal grant of state criminal jurisdiction over tribes in some states), repeal of Oliphant and so on. The identical observation applies about Dean appealing to the expropriative interests of local non-Indians applies to almost all Republicans at the national level as well.

Whatever happend wasn't the product of alien abductions, at least not aliens from Mars, or a random solar flare. It was part of the settlement of North America at the end of the 20th, and the begining of the 21st century, and Red Lake (and quite a few other Indian communities) are a lot less well off then Palo Alto or the Hamptons by intent, not accident.

I'm sorry, but for you, a dKossak, a Democrat first, and Indian second, condolences start with owing up to having under-funded IHS, and over-funded DNC, and all their relations.

Abenaki condolences dances run on for a while. It allows time for the dancers to really get it.

I just sent some money through the link. It still indicates the Koufax Fund as the item, but I did want this money to go to the Red Lake folks.

Email me if there's any confusion. I'll let you know what the paypal account is.

Greetings.

I grieve for the unnecessary deaths of the Red Lodge people. The president's failure to respond to this event is yet another example of his persistent refusal to admit the difference between true morality and caring in our society and the frenzied ranting of his base, the moral majority. On issues they can use to hammer home thier skewed version of right and wrong he is clear. He agrees with their howling long into the night over Schiavo and gay marriage and stem cell research and with them he ignores the real moral issues in this country. While toadies in the congress pass a special House Bill urging the judicial branch to reconsider their decision to allow the removal of a feeding tube from Terri Schiavo, the current poster child of the Religious right, the president and his constituency turn their backs on the thousands of children in America, a large percentage of who live on Indian Reservations, who don't have enough food. They ignore poverty, the growing gap between the rich and the poor, failing education, racism, care for the elderly, funding scientific research to better the condition of man and woman kind, living up to treaties established centuries ago with the tribes, controling drug prices, addressing the soaring number of lost children on the streets, the need to provide complete and free mental and physical health services to every person in the country, and so much more because admiting those needs would mean admiting their responsibility to do something about them. That in turn would mean spending money on the poor and not giving it to the rich. It means making sure those who have much contribute to the prosperity of those who have little. They are not going to do this for a number of reasons. They aspire to the old Puritan ethic, an elaborate and institutionalized way to rationalize greed in my opinion, that God smiles on those who he loves and if you don't have riches and food and all the other marks of his love, then you have done something to deserve your condition. When faced with families in want they say the persons involved are at fault. They either ask why doesn't s-he get a job or go to school or they launch an attack such as those people are lazy or stupid or don't care as much about their children as "we" do. The poor, the tribesman, the abused woman, the old, the sick, the man in jail are the enemy who puts the lie to thier skewed vision of society and must therefore be dehumanized and marginalized.

George Bush has a choice with any such issues, either he makes his bosses happy or he responds spontaniously to an event. One really has to wonder what kind of parenting George got as a child, but he certainly learned to not care about anyone who does not subscribe to his warped view of "Human Values". He will never step out in front of the crowd to lead the way to change. Admiting that he "feels" for the loss in Red Lodge would mean he admits there is something wrong and that he knows his policy is flawed. He can't do that. To do so would mean changing the definition of "Moral" in the Moral Majority to mean $$$$$ need to be spent to alleviate poverty and not put more cash in the pockets of the rich. He will never make such a response because he is a bought man and never has an idea of his own he can afford to speak. 911 taught us he has been taught to wait, a day, two days, a week or a month for his handlers to tell him what to say and what he he thinks about an issue. Sometime it takes them quite a while to figure out what he thinks. Once he says something he is never wrong because the party line is never wrong.