2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[ABV 8.3%]

Not sure what school you went to TLD, but this public school boy spent what at times felt like an excruciating amount of time on colonial and per-revolutionary war history.

The part we super-skimmed was between the LA Purchase and the civil war.

I am the product of a terrible school system. But really most American History is 1492, Jamestown and then a lead up to Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine, American revolution and then off to the races. I didn’t say the lead up to 1776 wasn’t covered at all. A lot of what happened in between is left out. A lot of good history. Not an airing of grievances type of history...

I'm an old guy, but I took a look at some of my old textbooks from elementary and middle school (yes, my parents saved that stuff!) and nope, scarcely a word on slavery until moving into the latter part of the first half of the 1800's.

Plenty on the Pilgrims, etc, (and yes I recall that as pretty darn tedious...though understanding that many who first came here were fleeing religious persecution in their home country did stick) but mum about slavery.

And my schooling was first rate.
Fortunately, by the latter part of middle school and into high school, we were getting exposed by excellent teachers to the full play of of history, not just the sanitized portions that fed the mythology of 'American Exceptionalism' without recognizing the mistakes made along the way.

I was lucky, but lots in my generation didn't get that exposure at all.

Let's see about that first rate schooling.

Why was Ben Franklin ticked at John Hancock ? Making him, Hancock, reimburse the EastIndia Co. for some "fake news" historic event.

Have you brought up the Boston Tea Party before ABV? I seem to have a recollection of you or someone else doing so.

Old Ben was far less radical than some of those involved in either the mob who raided the East India company ship or afterwards defended the action. He was trying to avoid a war, whereas some were trying to incite it. Franklin argued that the East India Company wasn't the enemy of the colonists, it was the actions of the government, so he argued for reimbursement for the losses. Hancock was on the other side of that debate as was Adams.

The British doubled down in response, and war became all the more probable.

I don't recall what you are referring to as 'fake news'. That some of the mob dressed as Indians? or are you questioning whether it happened at all?

Here's what we really do know that was 'fake' and that's the Tea Party of present times actually giving a hoot about fiscal responsibility. Yikes, what happened to their beliefs?

and......Hancocks PRIMARY source of income stream is from BellNhand foray's long into good nite.......or.....something else?

Nothing about taxes, first US government bailout........

[MDlaxfan76]

Old Ben was far less radical than some of those involved in either the mob who raided the East India company ship or afterwards defended the action. He was trying to avoid a war, whereas some were trying to incite it. Franklin argued that the East India Company wasn't the enemy of the colonists, it was the actions of the government, so he argued for reimbursement for the losses. Hancock was on the other side of that debate as was Adams.

The British doubled down in response, and war became all the more probable.

What was the name of the legendary U.S. History Teacher at Gilman. I want to say Schrader or Schroeder, but I'm sure that's wrong.
Well done to him and you.

Nick Schloeder was my US Government teacher in 9th grade. Golden Gloves boxer from Hoboken, big chiseled face and broken nose, basketball and football coach. Thick Hoboken accent. Made all of us work in a political campaign and report on it as part of that year's course. It was 1972 and I worked for Nixon, for which he didn't penalize me though he was himself quite involved as an advisor in Democrat campaigns.

One of the things he told us about America really stuck with me:

"America is Not a melting pot", he said in his Hoboken accent. "No, it's more like an Irish stew. You've gotya beef chunks, you gotya potatoes, you gotya carrots, and they all come togeddah, each adding their own flava to create a delicious stew..."

Priceless.

[MDlaxfan76]

Not sure what school you went to TLD, but this public school boy spent what at times felt like an excruciating amount of time on colonial and per-revolutionary war history.

The part we super-skimmed was between the LA Purchase and the civil war.

I am the product of a terrible school system. But really most American History is 1492, Jamestown and then a lead up to Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine, American revolution and then off to the races. I didn’t say the lead up to 1776 wasn’t covered at all. A lot of what happened in between is left out. A lot of good history. Not an airing of grievances type of history...

I'm an old guy, but I took a look at some of my old textbooks from elementary and middle school (yes, my parents saved that stuff!) and nope, scarcely a word on slavery until moving into the latter part of the first half of the 1800's.

Plenty on the Pilgrims, etc, (and yes I recall that as pretty darn tedious...though understanding that many who first came here were fleeing religious persecution in their home country did stick) but mum about slavery.

And my schooling was first rate.
Fortunately, by the latter part of middle school and into high school, we were getting exposed by excellent teachers to the full play of of history, not just the sanitized portions that fed the mythology of 'American Exceptionalism' without recognizing the mistakes made along the way.

I was lucky, but lots in my generation didn't get that exposure at all.

Let's see about that first rate schooling.

Why was Ben Franklin ticked at John Hancock ? Making him, Hancock, reimburse the EastIndia Co. for some "fake news" historic event.

Have you brought up the Boston Tea Party before ABV? I seem to have a recollection of you or someone else doing so.

Old Ben was far less radical than some of those involved in either the mob who raided the East India company ship or afterwards defended the action. He was trying to avoid a war, whereas some were trying to incite it. Franklin argued that the East India Company wasn't the enemy of the colonists, it was the actions of the government, so he argued for reimbursement for the losses. Hancock was on the other side of that debate as was Adams.

The British doubled down in response, and war became all the more probable.

I don't recall what you are referring to as 'fake news'. That some of the mob dressed as Indians? or are you questioning whether it happened at all?

Here's what we really do know that was 'fake' and that's the Tea Party of present times actually giving a hoot about fiscal responsibility. Yikes, what happened to their beliefs?

and......Hancocks PRIMARY source of income stream is from BellNhand foray's long into good nite.......or.....something else?

Nothing about taxes, first US government bailout........

I'm only guessing, but are you referring to Hancock's suspected smuggling, which many merchants had taken to doing to avoid the taxes?
This is definitely not my area of highest attention, so feel free to illuminate further.

On today's Tea Party, those who claimed to be incensed by profligate spending sure as heck have fallen silent now. Hypocrites.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Not sure what school you went to TLD, but this public school boy spent what at times felt like an excruciating amount of time on colonial and per-revolutionary war history.

The part we super-skimmed was between the LA Purchase and the civil war.

I am the product of a terrible school system. But really most American History is 1492, Jamestown and then a lead up to Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine, American revolution and then off to the races. I didn’t say the lead up to 1776 wasn’t covered at all. A lot of what happened in between is left out. A lot of good history. Not an airing of grievances type of history...

I'm an old guy, but I took a look at some of my old textbooks from elementary and middle school (yes, my parents saved that stuff!) and nope, scarcely a word on slavery until moving into the latter part of the first half of the 1800's.

Plenty on the Pilgrims, etc, (and yes I recall that as pretty darn tedious...though understanding that many who first came here were fleeing religious persecution in their home country did stick) but mum about slavery.

And my schooling was first rate.
Fortunately, by the latter part of middle school and into high school, we were getting exposed by excellent teachers to the full play of of history, not just the sanitized portions that fed the mythology of 'American Exceptionalism' without recognizing the mistakes made along the way.

I was lucky, but lots in my generation didn't get that exposure at all.

Most don’t realize that a policy decision was made to make slavery lifetime and generational. It wasn’t always the case. I always thought once a slave always a slave and kids were born into slavery. I didn’t realize until relatively recently that that aspect of slavery was implemented much later....and I am old....A lot of history has gone unwritten.

[MDlaxfan76]

Not sure what school you went to TLD, but this public school boy spent what at times felt like an excruciating amount of time on colonial and per-revolutionary war history.

The part we super-skimmed was between the LA Purchase and the civil war.

I am the product of a terrible school system. But really most American History is 1492, Jamestown and then a lead up to Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine, American revolution and then off to the races. I didn’t say the lead up to 1776 wasn’t covered at all. A lot of what happened in between is left out. A lot of good history. Not an airing of grievances type of history...

I'm an old guy, but I took a look at some of my old textbooks from elementary and middle school (yes, my parents saved that stuff!) and nope, scarcely a word on slavery until moving into the latter part of the first half of the 1800's.

Plenty on the Pilgrims, etc, (and yes I recall that as pretty darn tedious...though understanding that many who first came here were fleeing religious persecution in their home country did stick) but mum about slavery.

And my schooling was first rate.
Fortunately, by the latter part of middle school and into high school, we were getting exposed by excellent teachers to the full play of of history, not just the sanitized portions that fed the mythology of 'American Exceptionalism' without recognizing the mistakes made along the way.

I was lucky, but lots in my generation didn't get that exposure at all.

Most don’t realize that a policy decision was made to make slavery lifetime and generational. It wasn’t always the case. I always thought once a slave always a slave and kids were born into slavery. I didn’t realize until relatively recently that that aspect of slavery was implemented much later....and I am old....A lot of history has gone unwritten.

And much more has gone unread by most.

[6ftstick]

How hard is it to understand their own words.

Come on Six. I'm calling BS on you.

We both know you've been commenting on what the NY Times is doing without actually reading anything that they've actually posted on the 1619 project website.

You're just letting the Red State website chew your food for you and give you uniformed talking points to amplify. Why don't you read it yourself and then give us some informed reactions?

I looked the site up -- has some interesting sounding essays. But have not had the time to read them yet. One, for example, talks about how the present day wealth gap among AAs stems from the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. Since I'm a sucker for quantitative analysis, I'm going to go back and see what it says.

If you'd be willing to do the same, then maybe we could have an online discussion about it?

Let me know.

P.S. The reason I brought up the moon landing (50 years ago) and D-Day (75 years ago) is that news organizations tend to cover historical events on their major anniversaries. You think the NY Times is covering the events of 1619 (400 years ago fyi) is just because of Trump and the 2020 election? Talk about derangement syndrome!

Try connecting the dots. Its usually hard for liberals to think in a straight line.

Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.

"We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story."

Baquet made the remarks at an employee town hall Monday.

Baquet vowed a transition to a new "vision" for the paper for the next two years. "How do we grapple with all the stuff you all are talking about?"

"How do we write about race in a thoughtful way, something we haven't done in a large way in a long time? That, to me, is the vision for coverage. You all are going to have to help us shape that vision. But I think that's what we're going to have to do for the rest of the next two years."

The New York Times should treat immigration disputes in the 2020 election as a racial issue, according to the newspaper’s executive editor, Dean Baquet.

The newspaper’s 1619 Project is an attempt to rewrite Americans’ history as a story of racial discrimination. “In the days and weeks to come, we will publish essays demonstrating that nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery,” said a tweet from a member of the newspaper’s editorial board, Mara Gay:“Don’t ignore the racism,” Gay tweeted June 27. “Go right at it. Talk about it for what it is: a threat to democracy, a campaign of terror, the biggest con-job in our 400-year history, and a cancer on the human soul.”

Nah can't be a strategy to defeat Trump and shame his supporters into not voting for him in 2020.

[Typical Lax Dad]

How hard is it to understand their own words.

Come on Six. I'm calling BS on you.

We both know you've been commenting on what the NY Times is doing without actually reading anything that they've actually posted on the 1619 project website.

You're just letting the Red State website chew your food for you and give you uniformed talking points to amplify. Why don't you read it yourself and then give us some informed reactions?

I looked the site up -- has some interesting sounding essays. But have not had the time to read them yet. One, for example, talks about how the present day wealth gap among AAs stems from the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. Since I'm a sucker for quantitative analysis, I'm going to go back and see what it says.

If you'd be willing to do the same, then maybe we could have an online discussion about it?

Let me know.

P.S. The reason I brought up the moon landing (50 years ago) and D-Day (75 years ago) is that news organizations tend to cover historical events on their major anniversaries. You think the NY Times is covering the events of 1619 (400 years ago fyi) is just because of Trump and the 2020 election? Talk about derangement syndrome!

Try connecting the dots. Its usually hard for liberals to think in a straight line.

Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.

"We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story."

Baquet made the remarks at an employee town hall Monday.

Baquet vowed a transition to a new "vision" for the paper for the next two years. "How do we grapple with all the stuff you all are talking about?"

"How do we write about race in a thoughtful way, something we haven't done in a large way in a long time? That, to me, is the vision for coverage. You all are going to have to help us shape that vision. But I think that's what we're going to have to do for the rest of the next two years."

The New York Times should treat immigration disputes in the 2020 election as a racial issue, according to the newspaper’s executive editor, Dean Baquet.

The newspaper’s 1619 Project is an attempt to rewrite Americans’ history as a story of racial discrimination. “In the days and weeks to come, we will publish essays demonstrating that nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery,” said a tweet from a member of the newspaper’s editorial board, Mara Gay:“Don’t ignore the racism,” Gay tweeted June 27. “Go right at it. Talk about it for what it is: a threat to democracy, a campaign of terror, the biggest con-job in our 400-year history, and a cancer on the human soul.”

Nah can't be a strategy to defeat Trump and shame his supporters into not voting for him in 2020.

Good looking out 6. I will be looking for the articles.

[ggait]

Six -- all that keyboard time today to vent about something you haven't even read. You have absolutely no idea what the NY Times is/is not reporting in its 1619 project. On what are you basing such strong opinions? Oh -- some blog post on Red State saying they are attacking history. Sheesh.

Why don't you go ahead and read something for yourself and then give us your own thoughts? Rather than merely repeating what some guy told you some other guy said. Are you afraid you might learn something?

Lame. Lazy.

[old salt]

MDLF76 -- read closely & don't project. a=/=my

I promise not to wear a MAGA ball cap when I attend the Central PA Sprint Car races.

[6ftstick]

Six -- all that keyboard time today to vent about something you haven't even read. You have absolutely no idea what the NY Times is/is not reporting in its 1619 project. On what are you basing such strong opinions? Oh -- some blog post on Red State saying they are attacking history. Sheesh.

Why don't you go ahead and read something for yourself and then give us your own thoughts? Rather than merely repeating what some guy told you some other guy said. Are you afraid you might learn something?

Lame. Lazy.

I've read the initial articles and everything online. Obviously you haven't or you'd know what I just posted was from multiple sources.

I'm not lazy or lame. Insults always your last resort.

This is all the left has left. Racism.

Or are you hoping for a recession too. Whats good for the country—bad for the left.

[ABV 8.3%]

I'm only guessing, but are you referring to Hancock's suspected smuggling, which many merchants had taken to doing to avoid the taxes?
This is definitely not my area of highest attention, so feel free to illuminate further.

On today's Tea Party, those who claimed to be incensed by profligate spending sure as heck have fallen silent now. Hypocrites.

True detective episode about you still forthcoming....too bad.


John had tea to sell. Tri-Cross design had tea. Johns tea was "illegal". Tri-cross design encompassing the letter E.I.C. was not. Johns margin was higher than EIC's. Especially AFTER the US government (at the time) gave North America's first welfare for the rich bailout. Or, rather tax relief. A tax REPEAL made EIC's tea now cheaper than Johns. Dump the tea, in the name of liberty. Nothing to do with "business", at all.

Deductive of dugginess.......run run duck go, rather learning new things, is why we are here, isn't it?

[Typical Lax Dad]

I'm only guessing, but are you referring to Hancock's suspected smuggling, which many merchants had taken to doing to avoid the taxes?
This is definitely not my area of highest attention, so feel free to illuminate further.

On today's Tea Party, those who claimed to be incensed by profligate spending sure as heck have fallen silent now. Hypocrites.

True detective episode about you still forthcoming....too bad.


John had tea to sell. Tri-Cross design had tea. Johns tea was "illegal". Tri-cross design encompassing the letter E.I.C. was not. Johns margin was higher than EIC's. Especially AFTER the US government (at the time) gave North America's first welfare for the rich bailout. Or, rather tax relief. A tax REPEAL made EIC's tea now cheaper than Johns. Dump the tea, in the name of liberty. Nothing to do with "business", at all.

Deductive of dugginess.......run run duck go, rather learning new things, is why we are here, isn't it?

You mentioned that on the old site.

[ABV 8.3%]

I'm only guessing, but are you referring to Hancock's suspected smuggling, which many merchants had taken to doing to avoid the taxes?
This is definitely not my area of highest attention, so feel free to illuminate further.

On today's Tea Party, those who claimed to be incensed by profligate spending sure as heck have fallen silent now. Hypocrites.

True detective episode about you still forthcoming....too bad.


John had tea to sell. Tri-Cross design had tea. Johns tea was "illegal". Tri-cross design encompassing the letter E.I.C. was not. Johns margin was higher than EIC's. Especially AFTER the US government (at the time) gave North America's first welfare for the rich bailout. Or, rather tax relief. A tax REPEAL made EIC's tea now cheaper than Johns. Dump the tea, in the name of liberty. Nothing to do with "business", at all.

Deductive of dugginess.......run run duck go, rather learning new things, is why we are here, isn't it?

You mentioned that on the old site.

Why teach.....ever?

[old salt]

MDLF76 -- read closely & don't project. a=/=my

I promise not to wear a MAGA ball cap when I attend the Central PA Sprint Car races.

...& you skipped this part :

...one of the few places I wouldn't be afraid to wear one, if I owned one.

[Typical Lax Dad]

MDLF76 -- read closely & don't project. a=/=my

I promise not to wear a MAGA ball cap when I attend the Central PA Sprint Car races.

...& you skipped this part :

...one of the few places I wouldn't be afraid to wear one, if I owned one.

[ggait]

I've read the initial articles and everything online.

So which essays did you read? And your thoughts on those were what?

So far, all I've heard is you repeating what can be gleaned from Red State and FNC.

I read the essay on the AA wealth gap. I learned two things I didn't know before:

1. Sherman issued an order in 1865 granting 40 acres of land to freed slaves. After Lincoln was killed, Andrew Johnson revoked Sherman's order and the land grants were never made. I never learned that in school. Did you?

2. The Feds administered the GI Bill in a discriminatory way after WWII. All Vets (like my Dad and all my uncles) were eligible for govt guaranteed mortgages with no money down. But while white and black Vets were eligible, the VA wouldn't lend in "risky" areas. Which meant, as a practical matter, that black Vets couldn't get mortgages under the GI Bill. I'd never heard that before either.

Interesting reporting, imho, by the NY Times.

So what did you learn Six?

[MDlaxfan76]

MDLF76 -- read closely & don't project. a=/=my

I promise not to wear a MAGA ball cap when I attend the Central PA Sprint Car races.

good parsing, Salty.
Except that's not the actual complete sentence, right?

[MDlaxfan76]

MDLF76 -- read closely & don't project. a=/=my

I promise not to wear a MAGA ball cap when I attend the Central PA Sprint Car races.

good parsing, Salty.
Except that's not the actual complete sentence, right?

ahh, you added the 2nd part.
Shame on me for thinking you have a MAGA hat.
Nah, you just want to whine about how it's dangerous to wear one.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I've read the initial articles and everything online.

So which essays did you read? And your thoughts on those were what?

So far, all I've heard is you repeating what can be gleaned from Red State and FNC.

I read the essay on the AA wealth gap. I learned two things I didn't know before:

1. Sherman issued an order in 1865 granting 40 acres of land to freed slaves. After Lincoln was killed, Andrew Johnson revoked Sherman's order and the land grants were never made. I never learned that in school. Did you?

2. The Feds administered the GI Bill in a discriminatory way after WWII. All Vets (like my Dad and all my uncles) were eligible for govt guaranteed mortgages with no money down. But while white and black Vets were eligible, the VA wouldn't lend in "risky" areas. Which meant, as a practical matter, that black Vets couldn't get mortgages under the GI Bill. I'd never heard that before either.

Interesting reporting, imho, by the NY Times.

So what did you learn Six?

Here is something else 6ft didn't read: https://www.americanprogress.org/press/ ... k-farmers/

What do these people have to complain about. The past is the past.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Another grievance program that we all learned about in school.