Via the Washington Post...
One would think we could celebrate the recognition that Harriet Tubman will be given on future $20 bills without demeaning former president Andrew Jackson as a “monster,” as a recent Huffington Post headline did. And summarizing his legendary tenure as being “known primarily for a brutal genocidal campaign against native Americans,” as reported in The Post, offers an indication of how far political correctness has invaded our educational system and skewed our national consciousness.
This dismissive characterization of one of our great presidents is not occurring in a vacuum. Any white person whose ancestral relations trace to the American South now risks being characterized as having roots based on bigotry and undeserved privilege. Meanwhile, race relations are at their worst point in decades.
Far too many of our most important discussions are being debated emotionally, without full regard for historical facts. The myth of universal white privilege and universal disadvantage among racial minorities has become a mantra, even though white and minority cultures alike vary greatly in their ethnic and geographic origins, in their experiences in the United States and in their educational and financial well-being. (read the whole thing)
27 comments:
I'm like a little boy dressed in a red silk robe over my real clothes and pressed into line and arranged in a choir and I'm being preached to.
Here, we already wrote that speech ourselves. In comments, right here and elsewhere, all over the place, actually.
I'm still totally digging the drunken history. That's really the way to go, whoever thought of that is genius. The premise of drunken history is, the story will not change, it's the same story told in classrooms all over but this time they get the professor a little bit drunk. The same story then recited loosened up. That step one is brilliant. A loose delivery of dryly tracked subject that at its core could be interesting if only told interestingly. Then step two, act out the recitation precisely, costumed correctly, and lip-synched to the loose delivery. The result is a bit insouciant and lot more interesting.
Not everyone responds well. Legal Insurrection hosted the video too and their commenters are not appreciative. One called it junk or shit or something dismissive. Another linked to a British video that says the same thing except boring. Another filled in her association with Brown and her willingness to wage insurrection leading to a lot of deaths, how she managed to avoid prosecution and what else was going on at the time. He did not appreciate the video one bit for all it omits in favor of this one favorable appearing stunt.
And Jackson had his good points too and he operated in his own time.
Hay, you cows!
I meant to say, hey, you people, Wikipedia says,
After winning election to the Senate, Jackson decided to run for president in 1824. Although he won more electoral votes and more of the popular votes than any of the other three major candidates, he lost in the House of Representatives to John Quincy Adams, supposedly by a "corrupt bargain" between Adams and Speaker of the House Henry Clay, who was also a candidate. Jackson's supporters then founded what became the Democratic Party.
I did not know that. I knew he founded Dems, but I did not know that. Goodness gracious, it's like history's having that déjà vu thing happening to it.
Our country is going, bzzzzzt, bzzzzzt, this all seems so familiar, and that too, and that too, and aaaah, this is a solid one, that freaky double life reincarnation rethinky-thought thing is lasting.
Supposedly. He said. Nah, Braw, it's that they knew so much better than all the delegates put together and all the male citizens who owned property and bothered to vote, all them put together, the inside claque of elite knows so much more that's important. Even then. The period immediately following the founding fathers. All of this is immediate. He's only the 7th president. Boom. Democrats. The great American political catch basin. Oldest political party on Earth.
The first time something "supposedly" happened America got Jackson and Democrat party.
This time America gets Trump and _____________.
Stop rattling! Oh, those were my knees. They do that.
King Putt trolls again, pitting Americans against each other.
Last week he gave us all a brief respite and took his top notch troll game to foreign lands.
January next cannot come soon enough.
For once, he's right.
And Presodent Pissy who was once thought cool by some, shows what a dork he really is.
Would Webb be a good VP choice for Trump?
Webb is a dying breed.
Would Webb be a good VP choice for Trump?
I would think so. If it were Webb running for the Democrat side, I was fully prepared to cross over and vote for him. If he were Trump's running mate, I would certainly vote for him.
But then....all the whining Trump is not a conservative people would not vote because Webb is a Democrat. Old style Blue Dog, patriotic, populist, conservative Democrat. However, he wouldn't pass their narrow nose in the air litmus test. They'll stamp their little footsies and make sure that Hillary wins so they can then snottily say....I told you so....
His book Born Fighting explains a lot about America, the Founding Fathers and the dynamics that made our country great....at least it once was. Trump wants to make it great again. Webb has written books about it. Maybe they should team up.
No Webb just reinforces what Trump is. He would be a good Secretary of Defense. Trump could offer it to him to have him campaign for him.
Trump has two choices for VP.
He can try and get conservatives on board with a Ted Cruz or a Tom Cotton.
Or he can reach out to the general electorate by picking a token black or Hispanic. He could pick Condi Rice or Senator Scott or even Susan Martinez. Then he reaches out to the establishment and the independents and the Democrats who were Sanders fans and hate Hillary.
I personally think he should pick someone like Senator Scott who was against him in the primary but could come on board. Trump needs to reach out to the black vote. Specifically the black male vote. And the church ladies. If he concentrates on jobs and opportunity he can do really well. Or at least increase his vote from the abysmal numbers Romney got. He is not running against a black guy this time out. Hillary will not pick a black VP. She is going for Warren to try to appeal to Bernie voters. So that is a way for Trump to pick off a few states that would never have been in play if Cruz was the nominee.
If Trump is going to write off anybody it should be the far right conservative intelligentsia and the neocons. There are plenty of hard right alt cons like me or guys like Sixty who will support him.
The Mark Levins and Glen Becks will never warm to him because they can not deal with the fans following somebody before them. They think they are God and that Trump is a false idol that Edward G Robinson whipped up to fool the masses that they have been feeding off of all of these years.
The pivot he is making in the general will get him a lot more votes than kowtowing to the hard right. The hard right people will follow him. The hard right opinion makers will be crying in their beer.
Webb has certainly been positioning himself as the white man's Democrat and/or a Reagan Democrat, a so-called Blue Dog Democrat. When they have to keep coming up with new names for the same thing? Warning. It's a talking point, as he is white, male, and a Democrat, but that's all it is. Talk. He pretended to be a "Blue Dog" Democrat while he was serving but, of course, voted the party line, every time. Blue Dog Democrat = Same as Regular Democrat. Against 2nd Am, for Obamacare. Etc etc. He's Evan Bayh with a pick up truck. Zzzzzz.
Dems won't jump the fence for this guy.
Right, that's totally it. They're all just JEALOUS. Of Mr. Tells It Like It Is. Sir Art of the Dealmaker. Currently experiencing a bit of a hiccup with the actual making of deals.
I loved Drunken History, it was a blast.
Harriet Tubman could be fairly described as a terrorist co-conspiratory for supporting what John Brown pulled, but otherwise she was a woman who did some pretty heroic things at great risk to herself.
Andrew Jackson was a great military leader and a pretty good president on a lot of issues. The Indian Removal worked well for the people who profitted off the land they stole, not so well for the tribes relocated. The Cherokee could have lived with the settlers (and for the most part had done so) but other tribes were less accommodating and they all got pretty poor treatment in the end.
And Elizabeth Warren's family was involved, her direct relative helped round up Cherokee in Tennessee (hence her Cherokee family connection).
You don't think there is an element of that Amartel? I mean seriously. Put your Trump hate aside for a moment and think it through.
Levin and Rush and Beck and Coutler and O'Reilly are basically hucksters. They are selling a product. Books, radio shows or tv shows. Some of them are more honest about it than others. Rush is by far the smartest of them. He knows that it foolish to dis Trump and pick him as the hill to die on. He recognizes a huckster with a great rap. I don't deny that Mark Levin is a principled guy at times but he is also ultimately a media huckster just like all the rest. He knows what Trump is and he recognizes elements of himself in it. If he doesn't he is foolish. I don't think he is a fool.
As Michael Jordon famously said "Even Republicans buy sneakers." You don't need to insult and denigrate your audience or a large segment of your potential audience. That is what the fools at NRO and the Weekly Standard are doing. Same with RedState and HotAir and Ace of Spades. Trump is a phenomena. A shooting star. He might go all the way. He might not. But you shouldn't stake everything on defeating him. Because you sure didn't do that on defeating Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Why is that?
It is because Trump is a threat to your rice bowl. To your audience. Hillary is not. You make money off of Hillary. Trump steals your fans and turns them against you. It is that simple.
As far as making deals you can't make a deal with Ted Cruz. The Governor of Maine is telling you that. He is stating that the Cruz campaign is reneging on a deal to split the delegates based on the vote. They put in their stealth candidates as Trump delegates who will vote for Cruz on the second ballot.
You can't make a deal with Lyn' Ted. So you have to beat him into the ground. He has never sacrificed anything in service of his ambition. If you trust him and accept his vows....why eventually you end up walking out into traffic.
Cruz is done for this year, maybe politically done permanently. His reputation is in tatters and all he's got is a lot of hotel rooms in Cleveland to show for it. The LePage business, I think, really finished him. He doublecrossed the governor of a state he won.
Trooper York said...
Trump has two choices for VP.
He can try and get conservatives on board with a Ted Cruz or a Tom Cotton.
Or he can reach out to the general electorate by picking a token black or Hispanic. He could pick Condi Rice or Senator Scott or even Susan Martinez. Then he reaches out to the establishment and the independents and the Democrats who were Sanders fans and hate Hillary.
I personally think he should pick someone like Senator Scott who was against him in the primary but could come on board. Trump needs to reach out to the black vote. Specifically the black male vote. And the church ladies.
Agreed, I do like the idea of Tim Scott - Trump seems to have picked up enough black support that it worries the Demos, although your choice of Cotton is good. I think Sessions gets SecDef or VP out of his work - if he wants it.
If Trump is going to write off anybody it should be the far right conservative intelligentsia and the neocons. There are plenty of hard right alt cons like me or guys like Sixty who will support him.
The sorehead Conservatives are going to stay home anyway. The Libertarians were never in the picture for the Rs likewise. Consider this thought from Last Refuge
If Ted Cruz does not win the GOP nomination, none of the Cruz Clan will vote in the general election, they never do. They have such a short-sighted narrow view of issues, if they don’t get “their leader” they stay home.
When you accept they will never vote for anyone else, you realize you can stop worrying about their always tender sensibilities. The GOPe have known this for years, and take a dismissive approach to the ‘nuts-over-there‘. When John McCain says “whacko-birds”, it’s the Clan of the Cruz he’s referring to.
Lonely people. Socially isolated.
And, of course, we now see another poll where Hillary and The Donald are in a dead heat (the other was NBC).
The last couple of weeks have really been decisive. The public has sided with Trump over the issues of delegate poaching and voterless elections. He was vindicated in the Michelle Fields thing.
Cruz is also being killed on issues such as authenticity and Maryland women prefer Trump by 24 points, similar to NY.
"Levin and Rush and Beck and Coutler and O'Reilly are basically hucksters."
Not Hannity or Savage, though. They just tell it like it is!*
*Spoonfeed Trump his conservative lines.
I don't "hate" Trump. Unlike some people, I don't feel the need to form emotional bonds with presidential candidates. That's coming from you and you alone, that interpretation. All I have ever said is he'd make an absolutely shitty president (assuming ... a yooge assumption, that he won) and we can't afford another shitty president.
"You don't need to insult and denigrate your audience or a large segment of your potential audience. That is what the fools at NRO and the Weekly Standard are doing. Same with RedState and HotAir and Ace of Spades."
Just read that back and think about the internal inconsistency.
"Trump is a phenomena. A shooting star."
How's his pants crease? Does he send a thrill up your leg? Is he going to roll back the oceans and reset foreign relations? No, of course not. Just calling back to another untested political candidate who thought the world of himself as did his loyal followers who are still adjusting to the possibility that he might not be entirely perfect. Worshipping political leaders is a dead end. Trump's phenomenon is media-driven and, when the rubber hits the road, they will turn on him. And you. Wah-wah. End of phenomenon. The shooting star will turn out to be a meteor headed for Your Town, USA.
This is your cue to say Trump's a douchebag but he's our douchebag. Sorry, but the United States of America has limped along for 8 years with President Douchebag and we don't need, or deserve, the services of King Douchebag II. And, as I've repeatedly pointed out in the past, and as Trump's new guy has brought up this week, he's preparing to "pivot" his principles. (And I say "principles" because who the f*ck knows what his policies are.) He's pivoting for the general election and adopting a whole new range of talking points in order to woo new suckers who want to believe. Hmm, who else is constantly pivoting? Ponder, ponder. Oh, right, the current monarch. Always pivoting. Trump's not your douchebag, he's just a douchebag.
The Governor of Maine is a Trump supporter. He's a bit stabby about the outcome of his state's primary.
Now we know who won.
Megyn Kelly will interview Trump May 17.
Amartel said...
All I have ever said is he'd make an absolutely shitty president (assuming ... a yooge assumption, that he won) and we can't afford another shitty president
And on what do we make such an assumption?
Frankly, I think, like Reagan, he has shown he can surprise us all pleasantly. And, yes, I think he could turn out to be another Reagan.
Maybe better.
PS LePage is a state governor who entered into a bargain with a US Senator and expected him to keep his word.
Sounds pretty damned reasonable to me. And I'll bet the polls are showing that.
The political infighting is far from over. It hasn't even really begun. So far, Trump threatens the very notion of there being a "donor class." Do you think they will give in that easily? They will get on board with Hillary who defines the notion of pay to play and "donor class." She will pivot after she's confirmed. Watch.
She'll try.
I don't think Hillary is all that agile or all that skilled. The issue is who created the Clinton Global Slush Fund, her or Willie? My money's on Willie, but that was years ago; even he isn't the ward heeler he used to be.
This is where she always gets left in the dust. The donor class will not give up that easily, but they're going to need somebody better than Hillary to be their weapon.
The governor of Maine had a hand shake deal with the Cruz people. Now they are denying him a delegate slot. The Governor who in most if not all states gets a delegate slot as a matter of course. Even though Trump won delegates they are shoehorning their people in.
Weak sauce baby. Of course Hannity and Savage are hucksters. I just didn't include all of them. I just included the people who are attacking their own audience. There is no internal inconsistency in that at all. You see people do that all the time. They want to be the only object of reverence and awe. They don't like when people talk back to them. Tell them they are wrong. Then they hang up on them. Or scream at them. Or close their comment sections. Or ban them the way Ace seems to be doing.
This is a natural human response. Not anything different than has gone on before. The difference is the scale of the response.
Listen my eyes are wide open about Trump. That is why I call him a douche bag. But you know what. Ted Cruz is an even bigger douche bag. A dishonest lying lawyer. He has done shady stuff over and over in this campaign. Pretty much everyone who has to work with him has a visceral loathing for him. So to think he can appeal to enough people to get elected is a joke.
You can certainly feel Trump will be a horrible President. Fair enough. I think Teddy would be much worse. I didn't think that before I got to know him. Like DBQ said I said I would vote for him if Trump lost. But he has squandered that goodwill. At least with me. He did it with most Trump supporters. I don't think he comes back from that.
One point on that issue of trust.
One thing that's hard to gauge is the authenticity of comments about who's a Cruz supporter is that you are now seeing people who claim to have been one, but have been turned off the way Troop (and I) have and who say they support Trump now.
How many are for real, I don't know, just as how many of the Cruz fanatics are paid trolls or something else. Same goes for people, as here, who may or may not be looking for One True Conservative and bought Cruz' rap uncritically and some who just hate Donald Trump for a variety of reasons - the idea he said something nice about Hillary to stay on her good side and that's all it took strikes me as thin gruel.
PS Coulter, whether you like her or not, is no Cruzzer. She has turned her considerable writing skills to defending him in her columns.
Post a Comment