What's new

Voter Suppression and Why The Republicans Love It So Much?

You don’t have to convince me that we have arrived, never sleepwalk through that portion of History that is yours to live. See the present moment with utmost clarity.


The United States has burned before. The Vietnam war, civil rights protests, the assassination of JFK and MLK, Watergate – all were national catastrophes which remain in living memory. But the United States has never faced an institutional crisis quite like the one it is facing now. Trust in the institutions was much higher during the 1960s. The Civil Rights Act had the broad support of both parties. JFK’s murder was mourned collectively as a national tragedy. The Watergate scandal, in hindsight, was evidence of the system working. The press reported presidential crimes; Americans took the press seriously. The political parties felt they needed to respond to the reported corruption.

You could not make one of those statements today with any confidence.
 
Last edited:
The American Civil war was about the state's right to secede from the union. We know the war was about the state's right to secede because Abraham Lincoln put it in writing.
We know it was about slavery because that's what the officers of the Confederacy said, that's what the seceding states (the four that created a document) said, and that's what the people trying to avert the civil war were addressing.


Of course, as I said in that post, wars are complicated and have multiple reasons behind them. There were other reasons behind the US Civil War, but the primary reason was slavery.

The narrative of the American Civil War being about the abolishment of slavery came out of the Trent Affair.
It came from the mouths of the Confederates.

We can all celebrate that the American Civil War resulted in the end of slavery, but that doesn't mean we can't be honest about the version of history that has been taught to kids.
Apparently, you can't be honest about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
In speeches before the Civil War we would be called "These United States" while after the Civil War we were called "The United States".
Uh-huh. It's not like we have some founding document that starts with, "We the People of the United States...". If we did, your point would just look stupid.
 
You don’t have to convince me that we have arrived, never sleepwalk through that portion of History that is yours to live. See the present moment with utmost clarity.
There are certainly worrying signs reminiscent of the American Civil War. As I have pointed out, the American Civil War was about the transformation from a Union to a Country. New aggressors want to transform the United States again, this time from a Republic to a Democracy.

Are you sure you want to keep pushing us to war? Do you see that posting articles claiming our government is illegitimate and lamenting that people on the left aren’t more violent to right-wingers is pushing us to war?
It must abandon any imagined fantasies about the sanctity of governmental institutions that long ago gave up any claim to legitimacy. Stack the supreme court, end the filibuster, make Washington DC a state, and let the dogs howl, and now, before it is too late. … The left, meanwhile, has chosen infighting [instead of violence and solidarity] as their sport.

In the American Civil War 2.5% of Americans lost their lives. That would be over 8 million fellow Americans dead at today’s population. Before you dismiss those kinds of numbers as being from past wars that could never happen today, here is an article to chew on for a bit:
 
that's what the seceding states (the four that created a document) said
Not a single seceding state wrote a declaration of war. I've never said the southern states didn't secede to preserve slavery. What I said was slavery wasn't the reason the Union raised an army and went to war. Abraham Lincoln was crystal clear as to why the army was raised and it wasn't to end slavery.
 
Did you read the piece?
At the beginning of the War the Lincoln Administration’s primary goal was to preserve the Union. A year-and-a-half into the War the administration also made the destruction of slavery a war aim.
That is EXACTLY what I wrote. Abraham Lincoln was crystal clear as to why the army was raised and it wasn't to end slavery.

The same logic you guys are using could be used to blame the Civil War on women because if women hadn't given birth to those soldiers then the Civil War wouldn't have happened. It wasn't women and it wasn't slavery. The reason Americans were shooting their guns at each other was because some southern states wanted to Brexit and the leader of the Union was willing to go to war to prevent it.
 
Last edited:
Trout met him. Said he seemed legit but also that he was in fact weird AF. This was several years ago.
I had lunch with babe and his wife and daughters. Delightful family. His wife is an excellent conversationalist. Babe himself was a bit quieter in person than I expected, but I think he was just giving his wife room to speak her mind. He's a very down-to-Earth guy. His kids were very well-mannered and we had a great time all in all. Would do again.
 
Uh-huh. It's not like we have some founding document that starts with, "We the People of the United States...". If we did, your point would just look stupid.
Being that my point was before the Civil War the United States was a Union rather than a Country, I find it amusing the way you are playing dumb on the next eight words of the line you quoted.
 
Being that my point was before the Civil War the United States was a Union rather than a Country, I find it amusing the way you are playing dumb on the next eight words of the line you quoted.
Among other items, several of the Federalist Papers refer to "this country" as opposed to "this union". You are drawing distinctions ("these United States" vs. "this United States", union vs. country) that our founding fathers did not make.
 
It’s weird to claim that the United States wasn’t a country but A union of states when one of the major reasons why the articles of confederation were scrapped in favor of our constitution were because we were acting as different states. It made trade challenging, interstate commerce using different currencies challenging, and taxing to pay off war debts impossible. If the constitution didn’t unite the country as a nation then what was the point of scrapping the articles of confederation?

Al must go to Babe university for history. It’s just a weird brand of history that isn’t actually rooted in historical fact.
 
It’s weird to claim that the United States wasn’t a country but A union of states when one of the major reasons why the articles of confederation were scrapped in favor of our constitution were because we were acting as different states. It made trade challenging, interstate commerce using different currencies challenging, and taxing to pay off war debts impossible. If the constitution didn’t unite the country as a nation then what was the point of scrapping the articles of confederation?

Al must go to Babe university for history. It’s just a weird brand of history that isn’t actually rooted in historical fact.
There are two broad approaches available to human b eings when seeking knowledge. We can look for authoritataive teaching (God, university professors, political advocates, propagandists.....) or we can resortto using our own minds and experiences. Overall, I'd say either by itself is insufficeint.

I think thriller has demonstrated a pretty extreme example of authoritarianism.

I note that his bit about the history of China in the twentieth century is something that has been recently challenged by very thorough researchers, some of whom had direct personal experience with it. He gave a link to his source, I gave a link in support of my opinion.

In my life, I have been to the Philippines, married a filipina who had pretty severe intentions to forget her origins and make her way as an American. We basically went to college together. She was incredibly talented in social situations, had great leadership skills. While she thought I was old fashioned or "weird", she was still a friend for years after the marriage bit fell apart. She as of mixed ethnicity, being part German and part Chinese. But mostly ethnic Malay like a majority of Filipinos She was the last I heard, a corporate executive. She came from a rich family and felt bad about the way she had treated the servants. Her parents ran a casino, and she taught me how to play poker.

My second wife was a legal secretary to the head of the Utah State Democratic Party and the Salt Lake Council on Foreign Relations. She was one of the most sincere liberals I have ever known. I believe she would talk to me if I called, but I am married to a lady who doesn't want me to call...... lol. Funny thing, one of my cousins is the head of that law firm today. My ex- is at another law firm I believe, just as liberal.

My kids are fabulous. We home schooled them to about eleventh grade, then put them in public school for the sports and the labs, in advance placement on all subjects. Their teachers all said we were awesome.

They are both in college now. One is on track to become a nurse like her mother, the other is probably going to get famous for her music.

I work hard at being different and coming up with views and opinions nobody has fed to me.

I never really assume I'm right. It is interesting to see what people have to say about it. I learn a lot from people.

I am actually proud of being very likely a descendent of King George III, and the family that owned the pub where most of England's deals were made. Nobody thanks a king for being a dupe for a corporate like the British Far East Trading Company and willing to be an *** against his own subjects and deny them their rights or permit British Merchant ship to cruelly haul slaves to America. I think I would have felt powerless in his place to stand up to those interests. We have to learn from own mistakes and the history we have. That is why I am in here trying to change the way people think about honchos and the deals that are going down today.

That one thin strand of Brit royalty that came to America in 1845 is shared by over 1 million other Americans today, many of them very conservative Americans.

But, still, one of the best friends I ever had was a hard-drinking, pot-smoking, drug experimenting Marxist who would have given me the shirt off his back if I needed it. For two years we carpooled to work. He sacrificed his job during a strike, during negotiations, to tell the plant boss personally that he would not train strike replacement workers. He was fired on the spot, and I knew him later when he worked as a janitor at the U of U Medical Center, where I worked for many years as a lab tech. I never got a Ph. D. but hey, I did the same work a lot of those guys did up there.

Slavery is probably an older, and more extensive human institution than prostitution. The Ute band in eastern Utah supplied slaves to the Spanish in Albuquerque for many years. The Utes had horses, and guns, and they raided the little camps of the Paiutes at will.

My friend was a Paiute. Well, still..... not that he was ever Shanghaied from the sagebrush.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top