Another Stereotype of the Month entry:

Liberals Gamble Away Indians' Future

By David Yeagley
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 17, 2004

Washington has continued its blind policy of selling American Indian rights out to non-Indians during the 21st century. Most recently, the nation's government has stepped on tribal rights to make room for the corrupt "Indian" casino business.

I said as much at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Wednesday, May 12, I was invited to speak to leaders of Citizens Equal Rights Alliance, United Property Owners, Upstate Citizens for Equality, and One Nation. These organizations represent over a quarter of a million Americans citizens who have personally lost money, property, business, and basic civil rights as the result of aggressions by the Indian casino industry. (Not to mention the income counties and states lose to tax-exempt "Indian" casino business.)

As an American Indian, a Comanche from Oklahoma, I care about the public image of the Indian. I value being Indian. Though my tribe isn't guilty of encroachment on anyone's rights, it is a vital concern to me that, nationally, the "Indian" casino industry is destroying the pride and meaning of being Indian.

I therefore have a stake in the cause of these American citizens' organizations that met in Washington. I've called myself an American Indian patriot since I began writing as a FrontPageMagazine columnist, speaking for Young America's Foundation, and managing my own website, BadEagle.com. Therefore these citizens' organizations called me to Washington to talk with them, and to them. I wanted to know how they really feel, and what their real goals are.

Of course, most Indian leaders regard these organizations as the enemy, especially those Indian leaders involved in the casino industry. CERA is serious threat. "This group has a history of attacking tribes," said David Simmons, Director of Policy and Research for the National Indian Child Welfare Association. In a typically anonymous and inflamatory editorial in Indian Country Today, all these groups are called "anti-Indian organizations," and "hate groups," "focused on destroying the bases of Indian sovereignty on the basis of United States law."

But these groups are not anti-Indian. They are anti-casino.

They're against the federal government forcibly setting up a casino in their face when they didn't want it. They're offended that the federal government shows preference to syndicated contractors and managers, morally crippled politicians, and a handful of criminally-minded tribal leaders – instead of honoring the rights of honest American people. They feel betrayed when federal government completely denies the very idea of equal protection under the law, and suspends the whole concept of private land ownership.

These citizens' organizations are against the idea that through this syndicated, politically corrupt gambling industry, irresponsible Indian leaders suddenly acquire land and have power and jurisdiction over American citizens who have owned and developed that same land for generations, and have paid taxes on their lands, properties, and businesses for decades.

They are against the idea that their rights as American citizens should be taken from them, and that the federal government should declare them foreigners on what was their own land.

Indeed, they don't want what happened to Indians to happen to them!

And why should they? It's their people that created America, not Indians. Only a diabolically self-righteous liberal politician would take America out of the hands that created it, and give it to those who either lost it, or never had anything to do with it.

But this is what's happening. It's really an internal war, not between Indians and whites, but between whites and other whites. It is a desperate power struggle, and Indians are being used by liberals as the arrowhead to strike deep into the heart of American values.

Yet the white blood flowing is the purest I've ever seen. These citizens I met in Washington have no resentment towards Indians. There wasn't the slightest trace of animosity, nor a hint of anger or racism toward Indians

I heard rather a noble cry for America, a heartfelt prayer for the country.

That set my heart aflame. I was proud of them. I was proud to be with them. In a way, I was proud that Indians are the catalyst of a fundamental American reformation.

Casinos are ruining Indian country and America. Casino politicians and businessmen are the ones who are anti-Indian and anti-American. Skip Hayward and his Mashantucket-Pequot Casino club for Negroes have done more damage to Indian Country than Christopher Columbus ever imagined. The "black Indians" have made the very claim to be Indian a joke. And their casino precedent has spawned more social disease in America than pox-infected blankets.

*

Dr. David A. Yeagley is a published scholar, professionally recorded composer, and an adjunct professor at the University of Oklahoma College of Liberal Studies. He's on the speakers list of Young America's Foundation. E-mail him at badeagle2000@yahoo.com. View his website at http://www.badeagle.com.

Rob's reply
>> Most recently, the nation's government has stepped on tribal rights to make room for the corrupt "Indian" casino business. <<

"Corrupt"? By most accounts, Indian gaming is corruption-free. I hope Yeagley will provide evidence of this alleged corruption in his screed...but don't hold your breath.

>> I said as much at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Wednesday, May 12, I was invited to speak to leaders of Citizens Equal Rights Alliance, United Property Owners, Upstate Citizens for Equality, and One Nation. <<

Which are all known anti-Indian groups.

>> These organizations represent over a quarter of a million Americans citizens who have personally lost money, property, business, and basic civil rights as the result of aggressions by the Indian casino industry. <<

Yeagley doesn't have a clue if the "quarter of a million" anti-Indians have lost a penny. Many may have joined these organizations because they support their goals, not because they've lost anything personally.

"Lost" money and business is difficult if not impossible to prove, since you can't prove where people would've spent their money if an alternative hadn't existed. Lost property is something Yeagley could document, but undoubtedly won't. And lost civil rights? What lost civil rights?

>> (Not to mention the income counties and states lose to tax-exempt "Indian" casino business.) <<

I guess Yeagley believes that if people didn't spend their discretionary income on gambling, they'd spend in on other, taxable forms of entertainment. Unfortunately, this is another thing he can't prove. Another possibility is that if people didn't spend their discretionary income on gambling, they wouldn't spend it all. That means counties and states aren't necessarily losing anything.

Mascot lover "cares" about Indians
>> As an American Indian, a Comanche from Oklahoma, I care about the public image of the Indian. <<

Yeah, right. That's why Yeagley supports Indian mascots. Like the right-wing apologist he is, he thinks Indians are either savages or corrupt casino owners.

>> it is a vital concern to me that, nationally, the "Indian" casino industry is destroying the pride and meaning of being Indian. <<

Not according to the tens of thousands of Indians benefiting from Indian gaming. Don't take Yeagley's word for his unsubstantiated belief. Ask them if gaming is destroying their pride.

>> I've called myself an American Indian patriot since I began writing as a FrontPageMagazine columnist, speaking for Young America's Foundation, and managing my own website, BadEagle.com. <<

In other words, since he began promoting himself as an expert on Indian issues.

Yeagley calls himself an American Indian patriot and I call him an American Indian apple: red on the outside, white on the inside.

>> Of course, most Indian leaders regard these organizations as the enemy, especially those Indian leaders involved in the casino industry. <<

Yeagley could've stopped with "most Indian leaders regard these organizations as the enemy." Only a minority of Indian leaders are Indian leaders in the gaming industry. So if most Indian leaders oppose these organizations, it must be for reasons other than gaming.

>> In a typically anonymous and inflamatory editorial in Indian Country Today, all these groups are called "anti-Indian organizations," and "hate groups," "focused on destroying the bases of Indian sovereignty on the basis of United States law." <<

Most of any newspaper's editorials are "anonymous." They're supposed to represent the newspaper's official position, not the position of an individual on the paper's staff. Duh.

If Yeagley wants to know who might have written ICT's editorial, he can look on the paper's masthead. If one of these people didn't write it, they're responsible for it. There's no relevant distinction.

"Anti-casino" groups love Indians?
>> But these groups are not anti-Indian. They are anti-casino. <<

Yeah, right. Sure they are. Here's an article on One Nation from NewsOK.com:

Hmm. I don't see anything here about opposition to casinos. And if Yeagley were following the issues in Oklahoma, he'd know groups like One Nation oppose Indian smoke shops—which again have nothing to do with casinos.

But Yeagley doesn't have to guess. Cantrell's comment above is a direct attack on Indian sovereignty, not on Indian casinos. It's clearly anti-Indian, not anti-casino. The article's title says it all: "Should tribal sovereignty be rolled back?"

White people "feel betrayed"...boo-hoo
>> They feel betrayed when federal government completely denies the very idea of equal protection under the law, and suspends the whole concept of private land ownership. <<

Translated from wacko-speak, this means these groups oppose the concept of Indian sovereignty enshrined in the Constitution.

>> These citizens' organizations are against the idea that through this syndicated, politically corrupt gambling industry, irresponsible Indian leaders suddenly acquire land and have power and jurisdiction over American citizens who have owned and developed that same land for generations <<

Again, see Cantrell's comments above. Let us know if you find any mention of casinos there.

If it's the number of generations of ownership that matters, guess what? Indians owned and developed the land for generations too—before Euro-Americans stole it from them. By this "logic," the Indians win, and the Euro-Americans should return the land they took illegally. Theft is still a crime no matter how long you possess the stolen property.

Of course, many of Oklahoma's tribes haven't lived in the state much longer than its Anglo settlers have. That's because these tribes were forcibly relocated to Oklahoma from their original homes in Alabama, Georgia, and the Carolinas. Perhaps they'll give up title to their Midwestern lands when they regain possession of their Southern lands.

Not likely to happen? Gee, that's too bad. So now Oklahoma's non-Indians may suffer a fraction of the pain their ancestors inflicted on the nation's first inhabitants. Oh, well...that's the way the cookie crumbles. White folks caused the problem with their genocidal policies, and now they have to accept the consequences: Indian casinos in their midst.

>> They are against the idea that their rights as American citizens should be taken from them, and that the federal government should declare them foreigners on what was their own land. <<

No, it's Indian land, as recorded in countless treaties. Treaties that are the supreme law of the land, according to the US Constitution. This seems to be the source of Yeagley's confusion.

White people created America?!
>> And why should they? It's their people that created America, not Indians. <<

Here you see Yeagley's Uncle Tomism at its most naked. Europeans created America, which apparently was an empty void before invaded its shores. Europeans did something whereas Indians did nothing. Europeans are better than Indians.

>> Only a diabolically self-righteous liberal politician would take America out of the hands that created it, and give it to those who either lost it, or never had anything to do with it. <<

Indians didn't lose the land, it was stolen from them. Even Yeagley's choice of language shows his Uncle Tomism.

Unfortunately for him, he's still wrong about the makeup of the federal government. The president has been conservative for four years. Congress has been conservative for the last ten years. The courts are overwhelmingly conservative.

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was signed into law by Ronald Reagan in 1988. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is run by Republican appointees, as is the National Indian Gaming Commission. In California, Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing to expand Indian gaming.

If Yeagley doesn't like what's happening, he can blame it on conservative politicians. Again, they're the ones in charge these days. Conservatives have determined federal Indian policy for years.

As you can see, Yeagley has no evidence for any of his claims. This diatribe exists not to make a valid case, but to blame liberals for Indian problems. It may help his white business buddies who want to enrich themselves further by taking from Indians. But it implicitly hurts every Indian who benefits from gaming.

Gaming is un-American, but genocide isn't?
>> It is a desperate power struggle, and Indians are being used by liberals as the arrowhead to strike deep into the heart of American values. <<

What values would those be? The same values that caused Wounded Knee, Manzanar, and Abu Ghraib? The same values that have led us to eradicate, enslave, or oppress minorities since the beginning?

How is an Indian casino not consistent with American values? It's a money-making enterprise, which is perfectly consistent with American values. "The business of America is business," said President Calvin Coolidge.

>> Casinos are ruining Indian country and America. <<

Again, few Indians in Indian country think so. Ask them what they think. Don't go by Yeagley, who seems to aspire to be the Great White Father, telling Indians what's best for them.

>> Casino politicians and businessmen are the ones who are anti-Indian and anti-American. <<

According to Yeagley, if Indians build casinos and support the politicians who help them, they must be foolish and ignorant. They must be like children or pets, needing a wise caretaker like Yeagley to protect them. Talk about your patronizing pabulum!

>> Skip Hayward and his Mashantucket-Pequot Casino club for Negroes have done more damage to Indian Country than Christopher Columbus ever imagined. The "black Indians" have made the very claim to be Indian a joke. And their casino precedent has spawned more social disease in America than pox-infected blankets. <<

Now we seem to be getting to the root of Yeagley's screed. He doesn't like the decision recognizing the Mashantucket Pequots and giving them the right to pursue gaming. Is it because they have "Negro blood" also? It sure sounds like it, judging from Yeagley's semi-racist comments.

But what does the Pequot case have to do with the conflicts in Oklahoma? What does it have to do with the almost 200 tribes pursuing gaming? Does Yeagley believe hundreds of tribes are corrupt or lacking in pride or tainted with "Negro" blood? With muddled writing and thinking like his, who knows what he believes?

Related links
Yeagley the Indian apple
The facts about Indian gaming
The facts about tribal sovereignty

Join our Native/pop culture blog and comment   Sign up to receive our FREE newsletter via e-mail   See the latest Native American stereotypes in the media   Political and social developments ripped from the headlines

. . .