And now... a few hundred well-chosen words from an alleged Cowlitz Tribal Member who seems to be offended by my Kondrat posts.

.
There is a commenter, identified by the name Mikst, who claims to be a Cowlitz Tribal Member.

Now, he is comfortable within his victimhood: his blog is replete with his positions and experiences on the subject, although he has not posted since last September, so I guess there isn't much happening in the racism biz these days.

As a member of the Cowlitz Tribe, he stands to gain materially from this rape of our laws, so I get that he views my positions through that particular filter.

As always, those who stand to gain materially from the imposition of THEIR projects where they are not wanted... as well as those who will not be personally impacted in any way, except with some version of a check in his or her mailbox every month, he or she has absolutely no problem ramming this thing down our throats.

He or she is a tribal member that reminds me of those democrats who wildly supported Bill Clinton: Had they seen our former president molesting a girl scout troop, it wouldn't have changed their support for him one iota.

He or she asks me a lot of questions. It would take some time to assemble the many answers.

Should I?

Because it would seem that, like most Cowlitz Tribal Members, this one doesn't give a damn about us or the impacts we would experience here in anyway, because, like most Cowlitz Members, THIS ONE DOESN'T LIVE HERE.

So what fact, or series of facts, would possibly make any difference to someone with a vested interest in the outcome, WHO WILL NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, CHANGE HIS OR HER MIND?

While extremely literate, the lies pouring out of his keyboard, his complete lack of concern for the many impacts in this county, and the fact that we, the taxpayers, will have to pay for the problems this massive criminal enterprise will cause make no difference to him or her.

He does not dispute most of my assertions with his own facts; he just says I'm wrong, and then demands some sort of proof, that he will never accept, to back my assertion. For example, in response to my claim that his tribe's recognition packet made absolutely no mention of any land south of Longview, he wants more proof.

Other than something you state as a “recognition packet” what further proof do you have of the non existence of Cowlitz people in Clark County?

I defer to his own Tribe's request, and he complains that I don't have other proof? What other proof do I need? And why can't HE (Or she) a Tribal Member, get access to the file and look for him or herself?

But more importantly, I again ask: what difference would it make?

If I proved each and every fact of my positions, Mikst, it would make absolutely ZERO difference to you. You're a "victim," you want your monthly check, and you don't give a damn how much it hurts the people of this county to get it... or how much it screws us personally, how much it hurts us financially, or how much it damages our economy or the pre-existing businesses that this monstrosity would put under.

In the end, I give a damn about the Cowlitz Tribe exactly as much as the Cowlitz Tribe gives a damn about me. That is not at all.

In fact, his idea of "proof" INCLUDES the Cowlitz casino web site, as if anything on there could be believed!

Regardless. I have stated my positions, he can feel free to state his, but the unassailable facts of the matter are these:

Building this massive corruption center will be a violation of our Growth Management Laws.

Mikst doesn't care because they wouldn't be subject to our laws, so that WOULDN'T be a violation of the law.

Mikst doesn't live here, so it's damned easy for him or her to tell those of us who do how to live and what WE have to accept.

Mikst seems incapable of research or using google.

Mikst believes that the phrase "medical benefits" somehow equates to state minimum wage, state industrial insurance and unemployment.

Here's a clue: It doesn't.

Mikst quotes a US Supreme Court decision to "prove" that an "Indian hiring preference" is NOT "racial discrimination."

This was the same US Supreme Court that declared in Dred Scott that slaves were property.

This is the US Supreme Court that just said that Tribes not recognized in 1934 could NOT have land taken into trust.

And that means the Cowlitz. Does he rabidly agree with THAT decision? Or is that just more of his situational ethics?

That a US Supreme Court decides that hiring or excluding someone, anyone, from employment based entirely on the accident of their birth is not some form of racial discrimination does not, of course, mean that it is neither race-based or discriminatory to engage in that activity. It just means that it's legal.

And this, of course, is just one of the many reasons that Mikst and those like him/her have to be stopped from building this massive economic black hole in Clark County. It is this attitude that because they happen to be born to certain parents, they are above the laws of this community and state that make it imperative that this project be killed.

Regardless... in the interests of full disclosure, here is the entirety of Mikst's unabridged, self-serving, victimized "it's OK for Indians to be racist" response. Enjoy. There's another one that I'll be putting up after I take care of a little business.

"Apparently, Justine Kondrat has stopped by to reply to a post I did last November 27: Note to Justine Kondrat."

1 Comment -
Show Original Post

Mikst said...

I noticed you referenced Initiative 200, which I am assuming you are referring to the one in regards to Washington SI noticed you referenced Initiative 200, which I am assuming you are referring to the one in regartate that passed in November of 1998. It states: (1) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting. Indeed, it does end preferences for job hiring by the public sector, which is not necessarily the private sector.

However, I would like to inform you about Morton v. Mancari (1), which is a Supreme Court case that was decided on June 17th 1974. It gives Native American tribes the right to have “Indian Hiring Preference” within the BIA as well as in their own tribal enterprises and administration. It was found that Native Americans were not necessarily a “racial” group but more like a sovereign political entity (i.e. Nation). Therefore it was not considered racial discrimination to have an Indian hiring preference. This is akin to the United States hiring policy that you must be a US citizen (for the majority of job positions).

As you can see, because of the Supremacy clause the case Morton v. Mancari overrules I-200.

Another fact you state is that 98% of Cowlitz people do not live in Clark County. I am intrigued to know where you get this figure.

Overtime, many Cowlitz people have lived in Clark County and continue to do so (which means they pay all state related taxes, just like everyone else). In fact my mother in law who is also Cowlitz grew up in Battleground. People are allowed to move freely about the state and country to pursue whatever interests they have whether it is for school or for a job. This is common for many Native Americans today. In fact some sources state that up to 70% of Native Americans live off reservation (2). Even if your given figure is correct it would mean that 2% of Cowlitz people do live in Clark County and that means we are still there just like we always were.

Other than something you state as a “recognition packet” what further proof do you have of the non existence of Cowlitz people in Clark County? I know that this is a major issue for everyone involved. I am not one to just believe whatever I am told so I have done my own research. One of several sources I found that states Cowlitz people were in this area prior to the present is, Indians of the Puget Sound, published in 1952 by University of Washington Press (4). This source is independent of the work by Verne Frederick Ray (Handbook of Cowlitz Indians).

I find it derisory that people seem to think that the boundaries of Clark County were here before present times and that Cowlitz people did not move freely about the state to travel and live as if some magical wall prevented them.

Like Justine, I too am a Cowlitz Tribal Member. However unlike Justine, I have lived in Clark County (and therefore paid taxes in that county) but moved away for school and desperately wait for the day to come back and live there. In order to live there again I would have to be able to find a living wage job to support myself and my family.

The most recent information I could find about unemployment for this county is from November of 2008. The unemployment rate was at 8.2% while the state average was 6.4% (3). This is very troubling. Given the state of the economy I am sure this number is now higher. A resort casino would bring many living wage jobs to the area. In addition to this it would include a wide array of jobs, everything from IT to Food and Beverage. I do not see how this could be a bad thing. From these jobs everyone would be required to pay wage taxes including tribal members.

In addition, you state that there would be no insurance and no minimum wage. Where are you getting this information from? I believe you are incorrect when it comes to insurance. According to the FAQ’s page on Cowlitz Casino.com “full medical benefits” will be available to employees (5). As a tribal member I would not have it any other way, because I believe health care is human right and should be required of all business.

Also if you are so concerned about people not paying taxes, what should be done about all those Washingtonians who go down to Oregon every day to shop and avoid the state sales tax?

I believe that building the resort will also attract other businesses to the area and lead to more jobs and increased sales tax revenue, instead of it being lost to Oregon. In addition, with more people working, that means more money being spent within the surrounding community and again, more tax revenue.

Lastly I want to add that your use of ad hominem in your argument only serves to undermine your entire argument.

Here are my sources:
1: http://www.utulsa.edu/law/classes/rice/USSCT_Cases/Morton_v_Mancari_417_535.htm

2:
Handbook of Social Work in Health and Aging
By Barbara Berkman, Sarah D'Ambruoso

3:
http://columbian.com/article/20081216/BLOGS02/812169979/-1/BUSINESSBLOGARCHIVE

4:
http://www.amazon.com/INDIANS-PUGET-Hermann-Gunther-Haeberlin/dp/B001894BZC/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1237275555&sr=1-20

5:
http://www.cowlitzcasino.com/faq.htm

1:37 AM