"I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-08-2017, 12:17 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(17-08-2017 12:14 PM)reeveseb Wrote:  How much of this stems from the fact that many young minds can tell you all about the mole on Kim Kardashian's ass, but don't know who the current president and vice president are? Ask them about Kanye, Bruce/Caitlyn, or any of the other shit that constantly blasts through Entertainment Tonight or TMZ and they'll be able to have an "intelligent" conversation. But ask them their thoughts on entitlement reform or the fact that our social security coffers are almost bone dry and you get a deer in the headlights look.

I'm lamenting the loss of adequate education about things that matter and I'm not sure there's really anything that can be done at this point. We're headed on a fast track to Idiocracy. Brawndo anyone? I hear it has electrolytes!!!

What the fuck is a "Kanye"? Huh

More Min Gee Ziss
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like TSG's post
17-08-2017, 12:46 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
Nobody answer that what is a Kanye question, please. TSG is so much better off remaining blissfully ignorant! I wish I could say the same. Sadly, he's on my list of top 20 people I would like to see spun off of the world never to be heard from again.

DON'T google Kanye, TSG. Don't.

[Image: cool-no-smiley-emoticon.gif] [Image: shaking-no-smiley-emoticon.gif] [Image: fat-white-cat-shaking-no-smiley-emoticon.gif]

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes outtathereligioncloset's post
17-08-2017, 01:02 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(17-08-2017 11:57 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Yes, that is certainly another big part of the problem: of all the millions of people in this country, the best two candidates we could find were Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump? Really??? We've got to be doing something wrong.

And there goes one of the key arguments of the proponents of a two-party system. Back in my youth (roughly Jurassic Era or maybe a few years later) the idea was that each party could take a wide field of candidates, and winnow them out through primaries, eliminating (kinda like Political Survivor) those who could not manage their schedules, money, talking points, voter appeal,etc. until the best rose to the top. Then the two could meet in the general election and let the voters decide which of the two was the "best of the best" qualified for office. So much for that idea.

On the Democratic side, the party machine had already decided that Hillary Clinton was going to be the candidate, even though they had polls that showed how unpopular she was with voters. They ignored that, and did everything to slant things in her favor (Superdelegates, anyone?) while ignoring all other possible candidates. She was, in their minds, The Best Qualified and predestined to wow the world as our first Female President Extraordinaire! And the voting public be damned! They would just have to learn to like her, because Destiny! Woman! And she would have all of the women's vote because .. um.. because .. First Female President! (An idea that didn't work out so well for John McCain and his selection of Sarah Palin.)

And on the Republican side, the 3000 or so (it felt like) "serious candidates" ignored Donald Trump to concentrate on eliminating the "real competition" for the nomination. So they essentially formed a circular firing squad with Trump left outside, then opened fire. Meanwhile, Trump said seriously horrible stuff about all of them, and they just ignored him and pushed his words aside. So in the field of candidates, he was the only one who stood out, even if it was like the circle of crabgrass that stands out in an otherwise good lawn. And he won the nomination by being "different" from the pack.

And if there was ever a time for a good third party candidate, a Centrist, or an Independent to step in, this was surely it. But no one did, and we were left with bad choices.

Have I mentioned how much I hate both political parties? Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Rockblossom's post
17-08-2017, 01:32 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 01:45 PM)Dr H Wrote:  I'm with the prez on this one. Washington was a slave holder; we should take down his statues, too. Also those of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and the other 20-30 Founding Fathers who signed a document declaring "all men are created equal" while keeping their fellow men in bondage.

Is that what you remember them for? Me, I remember and honor Washington for holding a rabblearmy together, Jefferson for penning some eloquent words in defense of freedom even as he was hypicritical, Lincoln for his strength holding the Union together even as he was himself a racist.

I remember R.E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, et al for the culmination of their life's work, to wit, defending a nation devoted to a vile institution. A statue honoring Stalin for his work industrializing the USSR necessarily invites discussion about his hand in the murder of millions.

(16-08-2017 01:45 PM)Dr H Wrote:  Better still, let's stop putting up statues of dead people and use the money to support food banks and community clinics, eh?

No argument there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2017, 01:33 PM (This post was last modified: 17-08-2017 01:43 PM by Stefan Mayerschoff.)
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(17-08-2017 11:29 AM)Jeanne Wrote:  Yes, it probably is George Washington down the road.

Because it is more important to argue over this shit then it is to face the facts of the economy, the suicide of Europe, the problem of illegal immigration, the continuing terrorist activity driven by extremist religions around the world and at home, the changing climate to which we must adapt, the drug epidemic, the gang-driven crime, the apathy of the young concerning their future as responsible and strong adults capable of contributing to society, the ruination of our health care by the drive to socialized medicine and the failure of the SCOTUS to agree that The Slants and The Redskins must be forced to change their names.

All ethnic groups and races have been enslaved. All ethnic groups and races have been involved in the slave trade. Many have kidnapped and sold human beings who are among the same ethnic group and race. There are more human beings enslaved now than in the past.

There are many things that offend me, but because I am white I am not allowed to promote my offense. There are many things that offend me, but because I am a working person I am not allowed to promote my offense.

We can thank Barack Obama directly for helping to divide us into classes of victims who need the government to address their wants and needs. He was following the lead of Progressives since Woodrow Wilson. It is all turning out as planned.

Maybe if the Progressives had not attempted to provide cradle to grave entitlements, most of our citizens would have employment and be too busy living fulfilling lives to worry so damned much about the past.

Oh shit, am I a racist or an elitist? Well...I am white, middle-aged, self-employed member of the top 10% in my tax bracket. Maybe I am... Maybe I should just shut up and sit down and accept my sins...

This is a much broader issue with a much broader mission and I think our country is in deep shit.

-Jeanne

I applaud your ability to work so many tired and untrue cliches into such a short piece. Your cliche to original thought ratio is most assuredly one of the highest I've ever seen.

Allow me the small courtesy of a couple clarifying questions.

Are you in the top 10% of earners in your tax bracket? This statement is hard to parse, as without context (which bracket you reside in) it gives us no functional information about your earning status, which is apparently very important to you. Conversely, if you were trying to delineate your specific bracket (and not your place within said bracket) then "top 10%" is a non-sequitur since there are not 10 brackets that can be broken down into deciles and being in the 10% bracket would hardly be the bragging point you appear to crave.

Please describe the relationship between socialized medicine and collapse of our health care system. Please specifically cite the qualities and/or features inherent to our system that are absent from the nearly universally socialized systems of every other industrialized nation and why they have not suffered this same collapse. As a follow up, perhaps you can detail your objections to providing health care to all citizens regardless of ability to pay and/or explain how you came to see social darwinism as a morally sound societal position.

Finally, provide some examples of these "cradle to the grave" entitlements, "classes of victims" etc. At a superficial glance this entire diatribe sounds suspiciously like the infamous "welfare queen" argument that has been thoroughly debunked multiple times.

In summary, you sound like an idiot, your tax bracket not withstanding.[/i]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Stefan Mayerschoff's post
17-08-2017, 01:37 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 03:22 PM)Dr H Wrote:  There are people -- I've met some -- who believe that the Confederacy was primarily a big test of the alleged Constitutional guarantee of states' rights, and that slavery was a subsidiary issue to that. To them those statues commemorate not a stubborn defense of slavery, but people bravely fighting for their right to self-determination in the face of an overwhelmingly obtrusive federal government's attempts to quash it. Even though, yes, some of them did own slaves.

Do you see the difference there?

Those people are wrong. The Confederate Constitution specifically forbade a state abolishing slavery, and required constituent states to honor the slave-claims of all Confederate slave-holders.

In other words, their Constitution was not concerned about states' rights. Anyone alleging otherwise is a victim of revisionist history.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
17-08-2017, 01:39 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(17-08-2017 11:57 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(17-08-2017 11:54 AM)Jeanne Wrote:  Not holding my breath either...

I am a Democrat who switched parties to vote AGAINST Donald Trump. I will be switching back, but not because I like the Left. My state is "Progressive Maryland" and to work to make sense of our government, one must be Democrat. I remain a Conservative Libertarian no matter whom I vote for....just try to find the right candidate out of the ones we are given.

Yes, that is certainly another big part of the problem: of all the millions of people in this country, the best two candidates we could find were Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump? Really??? We've got to be doing something wrong.

Serious question. Can you tell me what (in your eyes) made Hillary such a terrible candidate?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2017, 01:49 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
I had a long reply, but....grrrr...

Times do change, an example might be that we don't really celebrate Columbus Day so much anymore. When I was a kid it was huge but now, as a light of history has been shined on him, people have slowly backed away from him and honestly rightfully so.

Part of the problem with the issue of slavery was that after the civil war and following Lincoln's assassination in an effort to pander and rebuild the south, many of the laws going through congress that would force equality were abandoned. It was like.."ok, we've done enough they're free". Just a month after the end of the civil war, the lives of black people were very similar to those under slavery. Sure, they had to be paid a wage, but those wages were often offset by food, lodgings etc. They might be allowed a plot of land to plant vegetables or keep chickens, but only if the owner of the land allowed it (usually their lodgings was simply their shack and that tiny plot it sat on) -- which they now had to pay rent for. The reparations they were promised didn't happen because congress was uninterested in keeping that bargain. Meanwhile Lincoln's successor Andrew Johnson reestablished a new good ol boy's network but appointing governors in the former confederate states that were of the same confederate mindset.

Black people couldn't just leave. Most were prevented of travel and if not employed could just be arrested and fined for new vagrancy laws. They were precluded from buying their own land unless they had the cash in hand to do so. and then only of the state they resided in allowed. it. Children could be taken and forced to apprentice to cover debts owed by parents/family members...What debt? Living expenses after the civil war if the crop failed.

In northern areas because of astroturfing thanks to Jefferson Davis funneling money into northern newspapers during the civil war building a network of anti-war sentiment (believing he could persuade the north to just give up), blacks who never had huge issues in the northern states were suddenly being treated like second class citizens there too. Then there was the rise of klan, which people like Frederick Douglass warned about and his warnings fell on death ears, spreading like a cancer across the country.

The civil war was just about slavery. You can read it in their constitution. The states overwhelmingly agreed that slavery was their number one reason for succession. What's really funny is that poor white people supported slavery because without the slaves they'd fall to the bottom of the social ladder, instead of being next to the bottom.

Our ideals to do change when we feel safe to accept change. It wasn't that long ago that being gay could land you in jail and now we're celebrating gay marriage. Maybe in time we will divorce ourselves from the hero worship of the past and see these people as flawed humans we all are.

When I was a little kid I was taught in a history book that George Washington never told a lie. Christopher Columbus was a great guy who discovered America. Today, I think we've pretty much accepted both are false.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
17-08-2017, 01:51 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 03:47 PM)Dr H Wrote:  It is, as are many things, not as simple an issue as some would like to make it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/style/2...59c95cf9eb

"Joseph McGill, founder of the Slave Dwelling Project, spends nights in former slave quarters to draw attention to what they represent. He slept in one in Greensboro, near. He favors saving Confederate statues, but reinterpreting them, because he says they are part of history, too."

"Why should black history and white history be compartmentalized? Isn’t that a source of some of today’s problems?" More to the point, he asked: "Why should sins receive the forgiveness of forgetting? Those folks who support Confederate monuments, they find an ally” in me, he told the museum audience. “Because I say, leave them right there. But if you leave them, you’re going to have to reinterpret them.”

"How many slaves were owned by Confederates represented in statues?" he asked. "Does their DNA turn up in black descendants, possible evidence of nonconsensual relationships? What was their role during the postwar rise of lynching, the Ku Klux Klan and white suppression of black aspirations?"

Moreover, he said, simply taking down a statue, or not putting one back up, conveniently obscures a more collective national guilt. “I want people to know that these Confederate generals, or whatever their rank may have been, they were just defending what was passed down to them,” McGill told me later. “And you’ve got to think about who passed it down to them. Eventually you’re going to get to all those 12 slaveholding presidents” — he was including those who owned slaves while not in office — “and their roles in all this. What are we going to do then? Are we going to take the Washington Monument out of Washington, the Jefferson Memorial out of Washington?”

“This was a system that we as a nation allowed to exist,” he continued. “And to hold those military officers and folks whose monuments were taken down responsible, to put the weight on their shoulders, that’s wrong. We’ve got to accept that we were a nation of people who condoned enslaving others and not lay the burden at the feet of these Confederate officers.”

No one here is arguing in favor of an Orwellian memory-hole. Put those statues in a museum, where the context of their lives can be elucidated.

Putting and keeping the Confederate statues on public land was and is a message to blacks that in some states, if the South rises again .... When the greatest deeds of their lives were in the defense of the Peculiar Institution, what honor do they merit?

I've got no problem with remembering, but simple statues in public squares do not typically mention why those guys are notable. They're notable for their treason committed in defense of the indefensible. And keeping their monuments on public property reminds those whom these generals fought to subjugate that such subjugation was -- and perhaps still is, given that the monument is still standing -- worth fighting and dying for.

In short, the excerpt you've quoted is a fancy tu quoque ... except that those twelve presidents did not take up arms against their own nation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
17-08-2017, 01:56 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(17-08-2017 01:32 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  A statue honoring Stalin for his work industrializing the USSR necessarily invites discussion about his hand in the murder of millions.


He had more than hand in murder but discussion might be not pleasant given that Stalin is remember positively by about half of Russian population. Not really my concern but fact that Russians, greatest victims of mustached Georgian regime remembers him fondly makes me sad.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: