Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

Geezer- Good article. Though I'd speculate that this is a view held more by traditional conservatives and less so the 'Trump conservatives'.

[Dr. Strangelove]

This is from the guy who writes the "Lexington" column in The Economist. Roy Moore stands a very good chance of being the next Senator from Alabama.

[ame]https://twitter.com/JamesMAstill/status/909120808177545216[/ame]

[hack]

You know what we need? More hurricanes.


http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/17/americ...ria/index.html

Tragedy of the commons. Free-rider problem. Solution: privatize the Environment.

[AlabamAlum]

What are you talking about, hack? I understand that your comment was supposed to be funny, but I feel like I am missing pretext.

[whodean]

Typical backlash against those who highlight government bureaucratic waste and inefficiency


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hack]

It sounds as if you, as has been said, "have no frame of reference here". People have been told to STFU for less. People with the same first name as the president.

But, to be sure, I am satirizing the far right's ivory-tower would-be response. Break government, insist it cannot be fixed, insist that the solution is the ceding of more governance to commerce. As if they can do any better.

[AlabamAlum]

It sounds as if you, as has been said, "have no frame of reference here". People have been told to STFU for less. People with the same first name as the president.

But, to be sure, I am satirizing the far right's ivory-tower would-be response. Break government, insist it cannot be fixed, insist that the solution is the ceding of more governance to commerce. As if they can do any better.

A guy named Donald has been told to shut up? Yeah, lost again.

Satire. Okay. The far right here have been served. Just an odd aside for an intended rejoinder to those forum members.

[hack]

STFU, Donny.

[iam416]

Geezer:

I was going to link that article, but meh, whatever. It's NRO! (Nordlinger is very good -- I'm not sure if it's in that article, but he recently had a post that mentioned his "beloved history professor Barbara Fields" -- that's usually a good sign he's not batshit).

Fields, incidentally, would appear to be against removing the monuments, letting them stand as an absolute reminder of what the US was (both in the Civil War and in the Civil Rights era) and, I'm sure, in her opinion, what the US is.

[Da Geezer]

In the article, George Will summarizes my view of the Confederacy perfectly: “The Confederates tried to destroy our country. That’s kind of a serious business. … And they tried to destroy our country in the name of the ultimate human evil, which is the complete annihilation of freedom we call slavery. So there’s no point in investing the Lost Cause with glamour and romance. It was an execrable movement with a hideous objective.”

But I can also see the point in leaving the statues. They are a reminder of our history, and that includes the progressive era in the early 20th century when many of these statues were erected, and during which the Klan was a political force. I've never seen a high school history book that deals with the eugenics movement (seeking death rather than slavery for blacks) or writes about Wilson re-segregating the military. In that sense, they do serve a purpose. And "but for" the way Lee surrendered, sending his troops back to their farms rather than taking to the mountains and conducting a guerrilla war as Jeff Davis and NB Forest wanted, the final outcome of the Civil War could have been dramatically different.

[THE_WIZARD_]

STFU, Donny.

Thief

[SeattleLionsFan]

If the conservative position is that the statues celebrate traitors who fought to preserve the worst thing in the world. And the liberal position is that the statues celebrate traitors who fought the preserve the worst thing in the world. Why is there a debate? Seems like everyone agrees...

[crashcourse]

I dont

start throwing the word traitors around and you'll be tearing down statues of Washington/jefferson etc all traitors to the british empire with slaves I might add

somewhere common senses needs to start entering in

instead of the mob mentality that seems to be prevailing--inflammed by the desire to get noticed by the press--why don't we adhere to the public sentiment which as a whole including minorities doesn't really give a hoot. they are works of art to some people--shall we start invading museums next and tear out everything from any controversial figures because we don't like how they lived in a completely different historical context then we would be judged today? lot of works of art would have to disappear. shall we burn books also? seems to me the next step by the butthurt

the logic and actions of the butthurt completely baffles me.

[iam416]

Seems like everyone agrees...

Well, I mean, Barbara Fields doesn't agree. But, whatever. It's a stupid, manufactured issue.

Crash:

Please stop with the slippery slope. It's vapid. If it's wrong it's wrong. It may be that the prog idiots will cross the line. Hell, that's a certainty. But that doesn't mean that we can't exercise independent judgment to sort out right and wrong. Removing confederate statues erected in the 1960s. Fair enough. Removing statues of Columbus or Jefferson or Wilson or the Gay Bear...STFU.

That's the beauty of being sentient beings -- we're able to sort out right and wrong and make judgments. So, either defend the confederate monuments on their own merits or don't. But don't defend the confederate monuments on the merits of Washington and Jefferson.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Best post in a long time Talent.