Evan Hiltunen wrote:
Why are things looking up?

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 … enate-vote

Evan Hiltunen wrote:
Why are things looking up?

They aren't. If you follow more closely(or read the posted Guardian article), this decision does absolutely zero to further the cause of racial equality. Many want to replace the Confederate flag with a different symbol of the Confederacy. They're essentially replacing 'negro' with 'coloured' in flag form, and claiming that solves the problem once and for all.

"But mister-"
"Once and for all!"

Zack Zoll wrote:

They aren't. If you follow more closely(or read the posted Guardian article), this decision does absolutely zero to further the cause of racial equality. Many want to replace the Confederate flag with a different symbol of the Confederacy. They're essentially replacing 'negro' with 'coloured' in flag form, and claiming that solves the problem once and for all.

"But mister-"
"Once and for all!"

... hence my "flavor of the month" remark.

Zack Zoll wrote:

They aren't. If you follow more closely(or read the posted Guardian article), this decision does absolutely zero to further the cause of racial equality. Many want to replace the Confederate flag with a different symbol of the Confederacy. They're essentially replacing 'negro' with 'coloured' in flag form, and claiming that solves the problem once and for all.

"But mister-"
"Once and for all!"

Sad but true. The cognitive dissonance needed for a Republican politician to want to commemorate this spot because their ancestors fought for a racist cause championed by the Democratic Party of the time defies even irony. It is simply incomprehensible. Of course, the stances of the Elephant and the Donkey have mostly reversed since then but I still cannot understand this idea.

I am rooting for the Hindu statue, let it be built. Fresh ideas and commitments are badly needed. Let the wounds of the past heal, we are all America now.

Zack Zoll wrote:
They aren't. If you follow more closely(or read the posted Guardian article), this decision does absolutely zero to further the cause of racial equality. Many want to replace the Confederate flag with a different symbol of the Confederacy. They're essentially replacing 'negro' with 'coloured' in flag form, and claiming that solves the problem once and for all.

"But mister-"
"Once and for all!"

They love to act like the Democratic Party of today has a direct, unbroken lineage to the racist Dixiecrats of the Old South. So my solution is to make them lie on that bed they made and keep reminding them that General Lee, the Confederate Flag, and pretty much everything else they want to 'honor' is pure Democrat.

What are they going to do, start saying today's Democrats are unrelated to the Old South?

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:

They love to act like the Democratic Party of today has a direct, unbroken lineage to the racist Dixiecrats of the Old South. So my solution is to make them lie on that bed they made and keep reminding them that General Lee, the Confederate Flag, and pretty much everything else they want to 'honor' is pure Democrat.

What are they going to do, start saying today's Democrats are unrelated to the Old South?

You are a master of:

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
They love to act like the Democratic Party of today has a direct, unbroken lineage to the racist Dixiecrats of the Old South. So my solution is to make them lie on that bed they made and keep reminding them that General Lee, the Confederate Flag, and pretty much everything else they want to 'honor' is pure Democrat.

What are they going to do, start saying today's Democrats are unrelated to the Old South?

Men. Not worth the effort. When people get so worked up about something ingrained like that, pointing out technicalities doesn't do anything at all.

People read Bible passages to Conservative politicians in open meetings all the time, to point out what a 'traditional, Bible-based marriage' is. The politicians act like nobody is in the room; like the sound of the reader's voice is just the wind whistling through a door that someone has left open.

Not that it's a purely Conservative behaviour. I've learned to avoid discussing politics(at least in person), and to just do my research and cast my vote. It's not like you're going to rescue anybody from the Crazytown Express. You just end up sitting in the next seat.

Tony From Syracuse wrote:
Some people talk about the people on the south who fought on the side of the confederacy as if they are some kind of different creature. you dont know what side you would have fallen on on the slave issue had you lived in those days. even if you lived more north...you still dont know.

My post was directed towards the politicians who are NOW wanting to use state funding to memorialize a racist movement.

We should be beyond that NOW. Of course, they can post any memorial they want on their own property, using their own funds.

The people from back then are dead, if I was born back then I would be dead too.

So I have no idea what you are trying to say NOW?

Shadow Dancer wrote:
The people from back then are dead, ..

some have been reincarnated ..

Sen. Lee Bright: "Our governor called us in to deal with the flag that sits out front. Let’s deal with the national sin that we face today! We talk about abortion, but this gay marriage thing, I believe we will be one nation gone under, like President Reagan said. If we’re not one nation under God, we’ll be one nation gone under. And to sanctify deviant behavior from five judges, it’s time for us to make our stand, church! It’s time to make our stand, and we’re not doing it. We can rally together and talk about a flag all we want, but the devil is taking control of this land, and we’re not stopping him."

r T p wrote:

some have been reincarnated ..

Sen. Lee Bright: "Our governor called us in to deal with the flag that sits out front. Let’s deal with the national sin that we face today! We talk about abortion, but this gay marriage thing, I believe we will be one nation gone under, like President Reagan said. If we’re not one nation under God, we’ll be one nation gone under. And to sanctify deviant behavior from five judges, it’s time for us to make our stand, church! It’s time to make our stand, and we’re not doing it. We can rally together and talk about a flag all we want, but the devil is taking control of this land, and we’re not stopping him."

Many in fact. Sen. Lee Bright is an elected representative. It took the majority of voters to put him in office. That is their right whether I agree with it or not. Fortunately the United States Constitution is very specific about the role that religion may play in government. It is emphatically NOT given a place in Governmennt. That does not stop fanatics from attempting to force their cult on other people but it does provide legal leverage to push them back.

This is a major factor in a recent failed movement for states to secede from the Union. I can't say I oppose it, I would love to see Oregon, Washington and British Columbia secede from their respective Unions and become the nation of Cascadia for completely different reasons that do not involve cults or Invisible Friends. It will never happen either, so it goes.

Shadow Dancer wrote:
Fortunately the United States Constitution is very specific about the role that religion may play in government. It is emphatically NOT given a place in Governmennt.

thank god ..

r T p wrote:


thank god ..

Kinda creepy, isn't it?

I like the eyeball thing on top of the pyramid that the lizard people who own us put on some of the money, that is creepy too.

Hence, Cascadia.

r T p wrote:


thank god ..

Added in 1954 as a knee-jerk reaction to the "Godless Communists."  Remember the early 1950's?  Government sanctioned racism? Segregation? Repression of Women? Runaway pollution of air & water?  McCarthy witch-hunts in Congress?  Some people call those the good old days.

Jim Ball wrote:
Added in 1954 as a knee-jerk reaction to the "Godless Communists."  Remember the early 1950's?  Government sanctioned racism? Segregation? Repression of Women? Runaway pollution of air & water?  McCarthy witch-hunts in Congress?  Some people call those the good old days.

History of 'In God We Trust'

www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pages/ … trust.aspx

Shadow Dancer wrote:

Many in fact. Sen. Lee Bright is an elected representative. It took the majority of voters to put him in office. That is their right whether I agree with it or not. Fortunately the United States Constitution is very specific about the role that religion may play in government. It is emphatically NOT given a place in Governmennt. That does not stop fanatics from attempting to force their cult on other people but it does provide legal leverage to push them back.

This is a major factor in a recent failed movement for states to secede from the Union. I can't say I oppose it, I would love to see Oregon, Washington and British Columbia secede from their respective Unions and become the nation of Cascadia for completely different reasons that do not involve cults or Invisible Friends. It will never happen either, so it goes.

The fact that he was elected by a majority does NOT mean that the majority agrees with him on every issue.

It's very possible that he ran and won on an anti- gun control platform. Or any number of unrelated Conservative platforms.

Do you agree with everything that everyone you voted for ever said they want? Or have you voted for someone you disagreed with, because they support a cause that is much more important to you?

I know that I originally voted to put Cuomo in office in New York, because I agreed with what he said when he ran. But then he revealed himself to be a self-righteous asshat that cut corners to enact legislation without due process, and I wish I could have taken back my vote.

Shit happens.

r T p wrote:

History of 'In God We Trust'

www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pages/ … trust.aspx

Neither of us said anything about coins.  I erred on the date.  It was 1957.  The original motto, created by our Founding Fathers, did not mention god.  It was E Pluribus Unum.  Our original US coinage did not include the phrase.

Various legislation passed in Congress over the years, lobbied by Christian groups and backed up by Supreme Court justices with their own religious agendas, have lead this country very far from what our Deist founders envisioned for a secular government intended to recognize no religion (or god) above any others.  Christians almost universally confuse 'sect' with 'religion' when referring to the 1st amendment.  A male god (singular) is specific to Judaeo-Christian & Muslim beliefs (although Muslims object to being grouped with the former)  Other religions have no god (Buddist), two gods, or many gods.  Atheists, of course, have no god.  Christians think their opinions are the only ones that matter because "God is on their side."  Any attempt to make them realize that other viewpoints are as important and of equal value result in screaming, crying rants about Christianity being attacked.  They have no interest in having a neutral, secular government.  From putting their Christian motto on currency to placing it on Federal property to passing legislation protecting their views and forcing others to obey their religious laws, they act very much like their counterparts in ISUS and in Islamic countries operating under Sharia law.

Jim Ball wrote:
Neither of us said anything about coins.  I erred on the date.  It was 1957.  The original motto, created by our Founding Fathers, did not mention god.  It was E Pluribus Unum.  Our original US coinage did not include the phrase.

the link was only provided to offer further insight