The Tale of Two Tribal Leaders

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tribal Leader #2

Tribal Leader #2 looked over the crowd of angry tribal members. As usual, they were before the council because most of them had no respect for the chain-of-command. Tribal Leader #2 almost said, "You guys need to follow the damn chain-of-command," but thought better of it due to a number of his important supporters being with the group. And it was getting close to election time, so Tribal Leader #2 did not say anything. "Even if I told them to go back and follow the chain-of-command, they [tribal members] would ignore me anyway," Tribal Leader #2 thought. After all, it always has been done this way.

So, Tribal Leader #2 prepared for the humiliation that he would have to endure and for the blatant disrespect for council authority he knew would surely come. Especially since most of the accusations thrown back and forth were mainly to distract council members from the truth, and therefore prevent them from making a decision based in fact. Tribal Leader #2 thought, "I wish someone would try to control the shouting and mean spirited behavior that will come," never once realizing that he, himself, as a tribal leader, should try and control the behavior.

Sure enough, it didn't take long for the meeting to get out of control. Tribal Leader #2's conscience bothered him briefly, because a tribal member who had the courage and honesty to stand by his convictions was getting verbally abused and attacked from all sides. "But what the heck," Tribal Leader #2 thought, "that is how tribal politics works sometimes."

Tribal Leader #2 breathed a sigh of relief when the meeting was finally over and due to keeping quiet during most of the meeting, Tribal Leader #2 felt he did not alienate too many voters. Tribal Leader #2 knew tribal members would interpret his or her action as cowardice for letting the meeting get out of control and not standing up to the bullies in the crowd, but that would not matter. Tribal Leader #2's supporters would still vote for Tribal Leader #2, anyway. After all, Tribal Leader #2 supporters did not want Tribal Leader #2 to show any courage or honesty at these types of meetings. In fact, they did not vote for Tribal Leader #2 because of Tribal Leader #2's courage and honesty. Instead, they voted for Tribal Leader #2 for exactly the opposite reasons. They wanted a leader who could be counted on to let their group get away with their unethical cowardly behavior.

-----------------------------------------

Homework assignment: Identify which traditional values (courage, honesty, perseverance, and generosity) Tribal Leader #2 exhibited in his decision-making process when he decided how to approach the meeting.

Homework assignment: What is your opinion of Tribal Leader #2 as a tribal leader?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I expect to be finished with this course in three weeks and will start on the final report to our funding agency then. After two years of writing courses about ethics, or lack of, on Indian reservations, I am convinced these courses are needed. The biggest question mark is, will tribal organizations be willing to hire Spirit Lake Consulting to train their employees in ethical behavior in the work place?

Cultural diversity starts with respect, high self-esteem, (moral) courage, (self) honesty and a belief in equality. In my opinion, human beings are naturally ethnocentric, and it takes all the characteristics I listed above to overcome that ethnocentrism (At some point and/or in some cases, for whatever reason, ethnocentrism morphs into racism.).

Speaking at a large aboriginal conference, Chief Clarence Louie said, "I can't stand people who are late. Indian Time doesn't cut it. My first rule for success is 'Show up on time.' My No. 2 rule for success is follow Rule No. 1." He goes on to say, "If your life sucks, it's because you suck. Quit your sniffling. Join the real world - go to school or get a job. Get off of welfare. Get off your butt." (MacGregor, 2006, para.s 3-4, 6-10)

However, the comment I appreciated most was this, "Our ancestors worked for a living," he says. "So should you" (MacGregor, 2006, para. 14). This is exactly the point I try to drive home in Tribal Leaders Institute courses.

Who is Clarence Louie?

He is "chief - and CEO - of the Osoyoos Band in British Columbia's South Okanagan. He is 44 years old [now 50], though he looks like he would have been an infant when he began his remarkable 20-year-run as chief. He took a band that had been declared bankrupt and taken over by Indian Affairs and he has turned it into an inspiration." (MacGregor, 2006, para. 17)

According to MacGregor (2006), "Chief Louie is tough. He is ... proud of the fact that his band fires its own people as well as hires them." He understands that there will always be those who disagree with him, but that does not prevent him from making courageous and honest decisions. As tough as he is, he says he is nothing compared to his mother. Especially, when it comes to how to deal with what she calls today's lazy aboriginal male youth. "Rent a plane," she told him, "and fly them all to Iraq. Dump 'em off and all the ones who make it back are keepers" (para.s 21-22).

When competent leaders in Indian country hold their tribal members accountable, one thing is for certain; their own people will attack them. Chief Louie's situation is no different. He is accused of abandoning their traditions in favor of money. Some people say he is "... sacrificing traditional First Nations culture and values at the altar of capitalism ..." (Findlay, 2009, para. 3). Chief Louie's response to this accusation is, "You're going to lose your language and culture faster in poverty than you will in economic development" (MacGregor, 2006, para. 27). To further defend his actions, he asserts his people come first. "I won't go to a meeting these days unless it has to do with creating jobs and making money," he said. "I spend my time on economic development and I don't care what you say; everything costs money. Even our traditional ceremonies cost money" (Findlay, 2009, para. 2). He goes on to chide fellow aboriginals "who claim to be following the 'red road' (adhering to traditional values and spirituality) while collecting a social assistance cheque" (Findlay, 2009, para. 3). Ironically, as a result of his focus on economic development, his band was able to build the beautiful Nk'Mip Desert Cultural Centre that promotes First Nations aboriginal culture.

Chief Louie does not discriminate. Nobody - First Nations people or the federal department of Indian affairs, which he says is "an inept bureaucracy that has perpetuated a First Nations welfare state" - is immune to his criticism (Findlay, 2009, para. 3). The bottom line is that he wants aboriginals to move "beyond entry-level jobs to real jobs they 'earn' - all the way to the boardrooms. He wants to see 'business manners' develop: showing up on time, working extra hours. The business lunch, he says, should be 'drive through,' and then right back at it" (MacGregor, 2006, para. 6).

I often point out in my Tribal Institute courses that most Indians love courageous and honest leaders and will follow them anywhere. This seems to be the case with Chief Louie. The audiences love his speeches. They are not turned off by his tough talk at all. And judging from the success his band has experienced over the last 20 years, I would say they have definitely followed his leadership. According to Findlay (2009):

"The Osoyoos Indian Band Development Corp. currently owns nine businesses, with annual revenues topping $13 million, including the award-winning Nk'Mip Cellars, the first First Nations-owned winery in the world. Every Christmas, 12 per cent of profits are distributed to band members. In 2005, more than 1,000 First Nations and non-First Nations were employed by OIB businesses and joint ventures. That same year, OIB Holdings generated nearly $2 million in lease payments from non-First Nations companies such as Calgary-based Bellstar Hotels & Resorts, which is putting the finishing touches on a four-star property - Spirit Ridge Vineyard Resort and Spa - on the shores of Lake Osoyoos. Not too shabby for a band that has fewer members than your average urban high school has students" (para. 5-6).

REFERENCES:

Findlay, A. (2009, December 11). Ruffling feathers: The tough-talking, no-bullshit genius of Chief Clarence Louie. ibrii. Retrieved from http://www.ibrii.com/n/95v6t

MacGregor, R. (2006, September 21). Indian Time doesn't cut it' for innovative chief with on-the-edge humor. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/article844275.ece

The North Dakota Supreme Court created this commission to study ethnic and racial bias in the North Dakota State Court system.  In the next two years, we will be traveling to different locations where significant populations of minorities reside.  Naturally, this includes the state's four reservations, the cities of Grand Forks, Fargo, and probably Bismarck and Minot as well.  We will hold public meetings to obtain testimonies from minorities who felt they were treated unfairly by the court system due to their status as a minority.  We will also create surveys that we hope people who come in contact with the court system will fill out.  After the study is completed, we will write a report that contains recommendations to improve the courts' handling of minorities.

This is an excellent opportunity for all you minorities out there, especially you Native Americans, who feel you have been slighted by the state courts, to stand up and speak up.  If you are not a public speaker, there will be people at these meetings to help you either write your testimony down or assist you in some other way so your voice will be heard.

Keep in mind our two traditional values of courage and honesty if you choose to provide testimony.  Have the courage to speak up, no matter how scared you may be.  Your courage may be the key to identifying an extremely harmful racial practice within the court system.  And do not lie when you give testimony.  If you do, your lie will be discovered and will end up hurting all minorities.

After the meeting, I drove to Fargo and attended the Democratic state convention.  It was a new experience for me.  It reminded me a little of our powwows.  I was extremely impressed by the passion and dedication exhibited by delegates and candidates to the Democratic Party's causes.  There were plenty of good speakers.  The keynote speaker was Paul Begala who now serves as a political contributor for CNN.  He was a former advisor to President Bill Clinton.  And there were lots of people I knew.  My old friend and mentor Dr. Berg was there as well as Phyllis Howard and several other Indians I knew.

I attended the candidates' breakfast on Sunday; listened to Dorgan, Conrad, and Pomeroy talk (again).  I thoroughly enjoyed the camaraderie displayed by all the people at the convention.  I now look forward to my campaign to become the next person who will represent District #23 in North Dakota's House of Representatives.

Unfortunately, "good values" are not the only values that are passed on to the next generation.  I find it amazing that the same unethical behaviors and tactics I have observed used years and years ago, when I first started working for the tribe, are still in use today. Only the people have changed... or in some cases, I will say the family members have changed.

In many instances, unethical behavior appears to be passed down from parent to child.  There is a core group of tribal members who commit unethical workplace behavior over and over again.  Typically, they are tribal workers who are not at the very top of the chain-of-command in an organization.  Most of the time, they are your average tribal workers who are nice to people outside their jobs, and who are usually involved in community and/or social events.  But, do not underestimate their influence.  While they quietly go about committing unethical work behavior, they often befriend a lot of people in doing so.  They do this for a reason.  They are cunning enough to know they might get into trouble at some time in the future, and they will need all the help they can get.  This is why they pick the ones they befriend very carefully.  They want people who will ignore their unethical behavior and support them regardless.

The membership of this unholy group is usually very fluid.  Its members come and go depending upon whatever the issue is.  Some of the characteristics they share are: cowardice, greed, and dishonesty, and they are inclined to defend nepotism and favoritism.

As I said, most of the time, they go quietly about their unethical behavior, but watch out if someone tries to reform them, or if they are recruited by another member of their group to help protect one of their kind who is in trouble.  Then, they can turn as mean as snakes.  They are not afraid to intimidate people by banding together and ganging up on whoever opposes them; and it doesn't matter who.  Other workers, supervisors, CEOs, and tribal council persons, alike, are all subject to their unholy wrath.

Probably, the most common example of the cowardly, dishonest, bullying type of behavior that this group is capable of is when one of their own who is in an influential position is fired or has to resign from his or her job.  Here is what usually happens:

1.  Once the person is fired or resigns, this group immediately, but quietly (some might say sneakily), begins to work to get it reversed.  Why?  Is it because they are true friends with the individual?  Is it because of loyalty?  Absolutely not!  It is because the individual was in a position to do them favors with the program or the position's resources.  They are very skillful in the art of schmoozing anyone who has the influence to reverse the decision.

2.  When Step 1 doesn't work, they ignore the fact that the person deserved to be fired.  Instead, they talk about all the "good" this person has done on the job and how no one else "will be able to" do the job as good as him or her.  By now, they are becoming vocal and a little threatening.

3.  When Step 1 and 2 doesn't work, they do the next best thing - they blame someone else. Although this claim is so obviously a ploy, they do it with a straight face and a lot of passion. After all, they have a lot to lose.

4.  When Steps 1, 2, and 3 do not work, the gloves come off.  They lie.  They threaten.  They organize groups of tribal members to protest, and they schmooze everyone and anyone who they think will help them.

Some of their unethical ways were learned on the job, but most were passed down to them from someone older than them, usually, from someone they admired and respected.  Because of that, some of them really do not fathom that what they are doing is just plain wrong.  They are incapable of self-honesty.  This is why this group of unethical tribal workers is as strong today as they were over 20 years ago when I first started working for the tribe.  And this group will continue to exist.  They will continue to hold the tribe back from making progress in all areas, unless you have the courage and honesty to stand up to them.

I know it is easier said than done.  But these people have feelings, too.  Many of them are not exactly courageous types and will back down when someone stands up to them.  And although it may not seem like it, most of them do know the difference between right and wrong and will listen to a strong honest voice.  I hope this voice will be you.

Response to Article: "An Admirable Display of Courage"

Written by: Erich Longie, Spirit Lake Consulting

Response submitted by: Dr. Leigh D. Jeanotte, Director, American Indian Student Services at the University of North Dakota

March 16, 2010

It was with great interest that I read "An Admirable Display of Courage" by Dr. Erich Longie.  I wondered what this long-time very vocal opponent of the Fighting Sioux nickname at the University of North Dakota (UND) would have to say about the rather historic meeting he attended of the North Dakota State Board of Higher Education (NDSBHE) held on the UND campus.  I use the word "historic" to describe this meeting because according to news reports, for the first time in this decades-long controversy, leadership within the NDSBHE and at an administrative level at UND voiced loud and clear their desire and the need for the nickname to go - the sooner the better. 

Dr. Longie addressed this historic turn of events within the framework of organizational theory and behavior, and did so in way that gave credit - even praise - to the leaders who dared to publicly speak out in favor of immediately retiring the outdated tradition of Fighting Sioux athletics at UND.  Longie credited UND President Robert Kelley, Chancellor William Goetz, Board member Mike Haugen, and Athletic Director Brian Faison with moral courage and credited them for inspiring local Grand Forks Herald reporter Tu-Uyen Tran to make the following honest admission via the headline of his Herald story: "Tide Seems to Turn Against Nickname," which was, by all accounts, a change of perspective from this nickname supporting newspaper reporter.

My sister, April, who had discovered Mark's body, mentioned when she found him, he looked really peaceful. Mark had really struggled with his demons the last couple of years, and it showed on his face this last year of his life. When his casket was open, and I went up to view the body, I thought he looked really peaceful, too.

After they closed the casket, Mark's preacher conducted the service, and he mentioned how he knew Mark during his (Mark's) better times, and he talked about how Mark struggled with his problems the last couple of years. As preachers tend to do, he said there was a lesson or a message in how Mark died. When he finished, I stood up and spoke:

I mentioned how various people talked about knowing Mark at different times in his life. "But, I knew him my whole life... his whole life," I said. There were ten of us in our family. I was the fifth one, and Mark was the sixth one. We had shared a single mattress together, which we had to sleep sideways on up in the attic of our log cabin. We ate oatmeal, cheese... commodities together. I talked about how we had the same sense of humor, how we read the same books; we liked the same food... People would come up to me and mistake me for Mark all the time. "I am not Mark," I would say. "I am not 6'3" and I don't weigh 300 pounds. Maybe, it is because we share the same Spirit or our Spirits are so close that people think we look alike," I said. I mentioned how he helped me out when my son, Joel, passed away several years ago. He would let me talk for hours on the phone with him during that time. He was very generous with his time. I mentioned his generosity toward my son, Marshall. Right after Joel died, he gave my son, Marshall, two to three hundred dollars when Marshall had to go on a trip (Today, Marshall's mother, Leona, reminded me that Mark gave each of us $200 when our son, Joel, passed away. "He must have been one of those quiet ones who never tell anyone when they help someone," she said.). Finally I said, "People have talked about the circumstances of his death, and at first it bothered me, too. But, you know what? One morning, I woke up and realized it didn't matter, not knowing how he died (or why) because knowing would not lessen or increase my grief for him. It doesn't matter to me anymore," I said.

After I spoke, my nephew came to the mike and spoke. He recalled how Mark went all the way to Carlsbad, New Mexico, to pick him up -- just like that -- when he needed a ride to North Dakota. Next, a lady stood up and spoke fondly about Mark. Then, two members of the drum group (one who is our relative) came up and sang a beautiful prayer song in front of his casket. Then, Mark's sister-in-law spoke about how Mark came into their family. Then, the mother of a man who Mark pulled from a burning car at the risk of his own life came up and said a prayer. Finally, a Marine who is a member of the local VFW club said a prayer for Mark in Dakota.

Several of Mark's wife's family drove from Bozeman, Montana, and a couple of them came from Minnesota, which I thought was very nice.

During the Giveaway, we made sure all his wife's family who came down received a gift. We actually had enough gifts for everyone. After we had given away all the gifts, we had a round dance, and almost everyone participated in it, even the White relatives from Minnesota and Montana. It helped lighten everyone's mood. I have to say, us brothers and sisters put aside our petty differences, and we worked together planning Mark's wake and funeral. We showed each other a lot of mutual respect and love, which helped us cope with the hurt of losing Mark. And, I was so proud of my children (especially my daughter, Angie), and my nieces and nephews. For those of you who have not attended a Native American wake and funeral, there is a lot of work that needs to be done prior to the services. Our children are all young adults, now, and their help in getting ready for the wake and funeral was invaluable. They did a lot of the legwork for us older ones. I have to say, they respectfully listened to us elders and did what we asked them to without complaint. In spite of burying my beloved younger brother, Mark, it was a good weekend in some ways.

In tribal politics, liars have an advantage over honest tribal members.  Liars are better politicians because they have no shame or pride as opposed to honest tribal members.  Liars are able to schmooze tribal leaders (CEOs, tribal board members, and tribal council members or members of their family) without batting an eye; even though they may not like the tribal leaders they are schmoozing.  On the other hand, honest tribal members have a hard time schmoozing anyone - well, because they are honest.  They can't bring themselves to act insincerely.

Is it a form of lying when a liar schmooze's a tribal leader?  I think so.  First, he or she is not sincere when they are schmoozing a tribal leader.  Insincerity is a form of lying.  A schmoozer will probably make a lot of flattering comments that they don't mean to a tribal leader.  They will laugh at jokes that they don't think are funny and give the impression they really admire the person, when they really don't.  In addition to lying, this type of behavior is also called deceitfulness, false pretenses, and hypocrisy.

Ask any former tribal council member or former tribal board member and they will tell you, they don't have as many friends (schmoozers) and not nearly as many people coming up to them and telling them how terrific they are as they did when they were elected/appointed to a tribal official position.

So let's say you are a tribal leader, and there is a big fight in one of the tribal organizations.  At a social event, one of the individuals (let's call her Ann) who is on the losing side of the fight, makes it a point to say hi to you and your spouse.  Ann has never made any attempt to talk to you or your spouse before.

At first you may think it is no big deal because this has happened many times ever since you became a leader.  However, half way through the event, Ann walks over to your table and strikes up a lively conversation with you.  She is very animated.  She hangs on your every word.  She laughs at all your bad jokes.  She constantly praises you, and she agrees with everything you say.  During the course of the conversation, she hints at the problem she and her cronies are having with other tribal members.  When you remain noncommittal, she moves on to your spouse and visits at length with her.  When you and your spouse return home that night, your spouse immediately begins to tell you about Ann and the problems she is having with some no good, crooked, mean tribal members who she works with and could you help her out?

What would you do?  After all, Ann is your constituent, and she has every right to come to you for help.

Before you answer the question, let me tell you a true story.  A few years ago, a friend of mine told me Duke (not his real name) told her that I was not as good of a politician as I thought I was.  Duke was referring to a couple of issues that did not go the way I wanted them to.  Unknown to Duke, I was pleased that he viewed me as an unskilled politician.  Here is why...

Although the correct definition of a politician or political leader (from Greek "polis") is an individual who is involved in influencing public decision, in Indian Country, the title of politician immediately conjures up an image of someone like my fictional characters, Joe, The Tribal Worker, or John, the Tribal Board member.  Both Joe and John are unethical, cowardly, and have no loyalty to anyone except to themselves, and they will make up any lie to get their way.  This is how many tribal members view their politicians.  So, I was glad I was not identified as a good politician.

Let me get back to my question: What would you do if a tribal member who had never made any attempt to make small talk or to socialize with you in any way all of a sudden treated you like you were his or her long lost friend, simply because you were in a leadership position and he or she wanted your help?

Here is what I would do - nothing.  Why?  Because I do not like to be taken for a fool!  If that person thought I was dumb enough or gullible enough to fall for insincere flattery, than they do not know me very well.

On the other hand, if a person came into my office or approached me in a sincere, honest respectful manner and told me of his or her concerns, I would take the time to listen closely to his or her concerns.

Unfortunately, many tribal leaders are too cowardly and/or unethical to worry about doing the right thing when a liar comes to them and tells them nothing but lies.  Instead, they weigh the liar's political clout against the political clout of the individual(s) the liar is complaining about.  If the liar has more clout, tribal leaders often audaciously promise to support the liar without regards to fairness or worry that they might be taking action against someone who is innocent, or that a leader's support for a liar might not be what is best for the organization and/or tribe.

So tell me, are you the kind of leader who will listen to and support a liar?

I was against the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo before I attended the University of North Dakota.  While a student there, I observed it didn't take long for Indians indifferent to the nickname to realize what I already knew, that there is no sincerity behind the honor and respect the nickname and logo are supposed to represent.

As a doctoral student at UND, I tried very hard not to be drawn into discussions about the Fighting Sioux issue.  I learned early on those types of discussions didn't resolve anything, so I usually kept quiet when the subject came up.  However, occasionally a comment would be made where I just had to respond.

I remember vividly a class where a couple of Native Americans were arguing with several non-Indians about the logo.  One non-Indian scornfully asked, "Why do you guys always blame us for something that has happened 150 years ago?"  Interrupting him, I replied, "Because you are doing the same things to us today that was done to our ancestors 150 years ago."

One of the "things" I was talking about is the divide and conquer tactic that works so well with some Native Americans.  In 1887, the Dawes Act was passed because of this tactic.  Many of our ancestors were against the Act, but unscrupulous officials promised more annuities, education, etc., to gain support.  This divided our ancestors.  The Act passed resulting in over 80 percent of reservation land being "sold" to non-Indians.  The promises made were forgotten, and many of our ancestors starved.

The same old divide and conquer tactics that have historically worked so well against Indian people are now being used on Standing Rock.  It is my understanding that six of the eight districts on the reservation have overwhelmingly voted against the logo and nickname.  Now Tom Iron, who is known to represent the Ralph Engelstad Arena (REA), and his followers are attempting to divide the tribe by collecting signatures to override the people's wishes.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council's official position has been against the nickname since 1992.  It reaffirmed that stance in 1997, 2001, and 2005.  Ironically, Tom voted against the name in 1997 and 2001 when he was on the council.

One aspect bothers me most with divisive strategy.  Tribal members have to know full well that they are being patronized; yet, they choose to cooperate with the REA.

It is amazing how people can disguise their perception of the truth.  What do they expect to gain?  Paid tuition for their spouses, children, and grandchildren?  Free Fighting Sioux shiny leather jackets?  A chance to stay in nice hotel rooms and receive a significant travel allowance?  Is this why they fail to see - or worse, choose to ignore -- how the issue is dividing people from and within respective tribes?

This isn't even politics anymore.  It is just plain old, "Take advantage of the Indian."  It is a matter of a few trying to exploit our weaknesses with bribes of freebies and promising the spotlight.  Gifts and freebies are not always opportunities!  Apparently, non-Indian logo advocates believe if you give an Indian gifts and freebies, he will eat out of your hand, do anything, sign anything.

The old "divide and conquer" mentality is as active today as it was 150 years ago.

Why doesn't Tom Iron and his band of followers get a petition that has some significance and real-life meaning for tribal members?  It would be nice if they fought so hard for and carried around a petition for more jobs for tribal members, more housing, better health care.

This vote is about a name that will not improve the quality of life for even one tribal member.

I am not against this issue simply because I am Indian.  I am against this issue because exploiting my tribe, my people, and my culture for the sake of a collegiate hockey team is simply wrong.

Our superintendent, our principal, our tribal council secretary, and I presented testimony.  Our rational for lifting the ban on our basketball's post-season play was our students didn't do any wrong, so why should they be the ones who pay the penalty.

A lively discussion ensued, and after the comment session was over, a motion was made by the superintendent from Devils Lake to lift the ban.  When the vote was called for five NDHSAA board members voted to lift the sanction, and six voted against lifting it.

As I sat and listened to the discussion by NDHSAA board members as they decided our fate, one thing became clear.  They were disgusted with the unethical acts of our former athletic director, and their contempt for him came through via several veiled comments.  It is my opinion that is what turned the tide against us and caused us to lose the vote by one board member.

As I said, I was mad when I left the meeting, but I wasn't mad at the NDHSAA board members who voted against us.  I was mad at the one person who put our school, our students, in this predicament in the first place - our former athletic director.  "There is only one person (former athletic director) responsible for this," I told no one in particular after the meeting.  "It is because of him, and no one else, that our basketball team cannot play post season," I said as I continued to vent.  "He cheated not once, but twice, and that is why we lost the vote," I said.

Those who are familiar with my blog, and/or my courses, will probably say, "There he goes again..." when they read this sentence: "Among the Dakotas lying and stealing from other tribal members was a capital offense.  A person who was capable of lying was believed to be capable of committing other cowardly crimes against the tribe and was put to death to prevent the evil from doing more harm.  If a person stole from another tribal member he was forever after called Wamanon (thief) and this distinction followed him for the rest of his life. " - Charles Eastman, Dakota 1858 - 1939

The more I research and write about ethics, the more I see the profound wisdom in Charles Eastman's words.  Let's apply his wisdom to our former athletic director's actions and see if it fits: 

Athletic director admits to tampering with documents to change student eligibility -- after he is caught he resigns leaving others to clean up his mess and face the consequences of his unethical acts -- his supporters attempt to blame others, which leads to arguing and fighting among tribal members -- school forfeits district, regional, and state trophies won two years ago -- fighting and arguing among tribal members and school employees continues -- school's reputation is tarnished to a point where the appeal to lift the ban on post season play is denied -- our student athletes will be denied a chance to participate in the district and possibly regional and state tournaments which could have been the experience of a life time for them.

Yup, I would say it fits.

As usual it is the young and innocent who suffer the consequences.  Hmmm, I see now why Charles Eastman said, "A person who was capable of lying was believed to be capable of committing other cowardly crimes against the tribe and was put to death to prevent the evil from doing more harm."

Now I am sure there will be some individuals who still idolize our former athletic director and will stand by him... and that's fine with me as long as they do not try to put the blame on any one else.  His unethical behavior has brought enough anger, sorrow, sadness, disappointment, and fighting to our community.  We don't need anymore.