Why, for the love of God, do we have not one, but TWO Dakotas? Was one Dakota not enough?
At least, South Dakota has Mount Rushmore. Which, if you think about it, is quite cleaver. If no one lives in your state then it makes logical sense that you should carve rock people out of a mountain. Then, during the next census, you can count the "rock people" as residents - thus, quadrupling the population of your state. Plus, there are not a lot of giant, rock people out there (at least not in this country), so YOUR rock people will suddenly become tourist attractions. Families who used to drive cross-country to see the giant ball made of string or the various attractions listed on the historic route 66 will now drive north to South Dakota to the see your state's rock people. It is also ingenious to carve the rock people in the likeness of past, great U.S. Presidents. It's not like any of those Presidents were originally from South Dakota or anything.
Poor North Dakota, though. All they have is Fargo (a town which, by the way, is famous because the winter weather sucks BIG TIME).
Personally, I have nothing against the Dakotas. If you are from one of the Dakotas, I did not mean to offend you in anyway. In fact, I think the Dakotas are beautiful, beautiful places and this has a lot to do with the fact that (in comparison to other states in the union) not many people live there. Please rest assured that I also have problems with the fact that we have multiple Carolinas and Virginas.
Someone realized that we probably didn't need an East AND West Nebraska. Where was that person when we got around to naming the Dakotas?
I guess my real issue is with the general lack of naming creativity. There are only 50 states, people! Why can't we give each one it's own distinct name?
5 comments:
I was born in Colorado... but I lived in Fargo, ND during my formative years.
Notice I said "lived in Fargo ND."
That explains much.
And were you jealous of SD and its giant rock heads? [different of course from "crack heads"] Is that why you left there?
when i read the word "Dakota" (which has become a popular human name), I always have to make the "o" sound really long and northern, like this:
Da-kohhhh-da.
yech! why do people talk like that?
Oh, my! People actually commented! How exciting (except I really think it is a conspiracy. I commented on the non-dominent twin's (NDT) BLOG earlier today because NDT disclosed to me at lunch that the dominent twin (DT) had informed her that it was "rude" not to comment on comments. I thought it would be funny to comment (if only to make NDT comment on my comment). However, NDT contacted DT and DT linked my BLOG to her BLOG, so others would comment (and, thus, I too would be forced to comment on comments as well). Smart duo, those two. Now if they ONLY could remember what important subject they are supposed to "discuss" at tonight's twin-to-twin meeting...)!
By the way, thank you NDT for helping me to spell "Dakota". The fact that I couldn't spell "Dakota" was only made more frustrating when SPELL CHECK didn't know how to spell it either (it's closest suggestion was "disclose" if anyone is interested). However, that said, I think SPELL CHECK's ignorance of the spelling of the word "Dakota" really drives home my original point (i.e. why do we need two states named "Dakota"?).
I agree with Msthang. I think I will now refer to "North Dakota" as "Wemtiusdt." Good, old-fashioned German-sounding name (not actually German, though; I just typed some random keys on the keyboard).
Post a Comment