LaxPower Back-Up Stick

To set the Jefferson record straight:

Love has nothing to do with it. Rape is a legal construct. In 1800 it was not considered rape, she was his property (in Virginia). The question of love is irrelevant. Their sexual relationship had to have started before 1790. Before Hemings was at most 17, when her first child was born in Paris. Jefferson's wife Martha died in 1782, 8 years earlier when Sally (Martha's half sister) was 9 years old at most. Sally traveled to Paris with Jefferson and had a child when she was at most 17. There is a small discrepancy in her age at time of birth. Her son Madison Hemings claims 15 years old if I recall correctly. This based on his mother's (Sally's) telling. The child did not live long after birth.

By 1802 the relationship was well known in Virginia society.

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 11:59 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:11 am You are correct that I didn't agree with Trump , but I don't agree that his speech does not have differential power to intimidate relative to a non-POTUS's speech.

I am not suggesting that Trump has less legal right to to speak. That's a legal matter.

But the discussion was about 'wrongthink' and specifically the attempts to muzzle speech, dissent in specific...with the power of governmental authority behind that effort.

The danger is not the speech, but the authority behind it. I believe that was the discussion at hand when invoking 1984.

Again, Trump just proposed that flag burning have a 10 year sentence (SCOTUS be damned). Taking a knee?

And in the meantime, his 80 million followers are an enormous hammer...successfully kept Kaep off the field and intimidated scores of others.

Now, that's boomeranging around, but there remains the threat of the nut jobs.
Yes, Trump has a right to speak, but let's not kid ourselves about the differential in power.
And thus responsibility.

And, yes, elections do have consequences.
Elect someone who understands the responsibility that goes with the power.

The suggested law against flag burning - that is indeed bringing the power of governmental authority behind prohibiting speech and a fundamental assault on our Constitutional rights.

Tweets because they come from the President are not the same as bringing to bear the power of gov't authority - at least not in our country. And thank the founding fathers for that!

Kim Kardashian probably has just as many followers as Trump (I'm guessing here) do her tweets intimidate any more than Trumps? I think they carry the same degree of influence. Especially when you consider that (statistically) approximately half of Trump's followers are probably following him to keep an eye on him from an adversarial position.

And of course it is boomeranging around. The TRUTH will do that. That is precisely why we need free speech!

-- to quote (a now controversial(?) figure): "For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it."

You and I of course agree on the importance of free speech, including speech we don't like.

My point is that POTUS' speech is normally assumed to be a directive to his Administration and indeed his Administration frequently acts in response to even his tweets. So, I don't think this is merely a large follower base issue.

While much of his 'speech' as a candidate in 2015-16 was pretty awful, it did not carry the weight, including threat, of his governmental powers.

Of course, we also agree enthusiastically about the balancing powers of our government, indeed this is why it is so important to maintain those balances, versus any POTUS.

The specific concern that was being expressed was in reference to governmental control of speech, the governmental suppression of dissent, the governmental formulation of what is acceptable to say, including the truth.

These are all implicated when a POTUS, any POTUS, attempts to intimidate the speech of citizens dissenting.

When we see what Trump has recently done to Voice of America, removing its traditional independence from a particular political party or leader, we see the decision that the propaganda support of Trump now supplants the mission of providing a trusted source of truth for those living under the thumb of repressive regimes. Independent journalists replaced by loyal propagandists.

Does this matter?
Well, it certainly appears that Trump and crew wish to define what "truth" will be propagated rather than reality.

But hey, it's all 'speech'.

We do have a chance, potentially our last, at preventing authoritarianism. Vote.

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:03 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 1:19 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 1:16 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 12:45 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 12:40 pm
How do you know the story wasn’t passed down through the family?

Is all family folklore now a perfectly accurate retelling of history?

Well it was the Hemmings family folklore that made the FACT of Jefferson paternity the "worst kept secret" in the state of Virginia. It was a "secret" that anyone in the state paying attention to had known even 200 years later. The fact that it took DNA evidence to finally shut up the deniers is another matter. But, since the DNA proved the family claim, I am guessing that the family folklore is probably worth listening to.

I have not read what the family is saying today about the relationship between Hemmings and Jefferson. But the story that I consistently heard was that the relationship was consensual and perhaps even love based - to the extent that consensual could exist between two people occupying their particular stations in life at the time. And even more to the extent that love could truly occupy that space in that context....

Democrats can’t tell you if Ralph Northam was the guy in blackface or the guy in a KKK hood, from 30 years ago, but they also want you to know that Thomas “raped” Sally 200+ years ago. Got it.

You are just a walking bag of contradictions.

Pete, FFS, think for a change. If you're telling us that you can't be sure about history's truthfulness, you understand that door swings both ways, right?

In other words: if you really believe this, then you wouldn't give two figs about pulling down statues of historical figures, since we're not sure of what they did or didn't do in the first place.

You're whining about "erasing history" in one post. Then claiming we have no clue what history is in another. Par for the course that you can't pick a lane. Which is it??

Uhhhhh what?

What I think is your confidence when cherry-picking DNC narratives of people from 200 years back who aren't here to have their say strikes most normals as transparently partisan not to mention arrogant.

I don't know what George Washington did in his bedroom, nor frankly do I care. We do know he was our first president; let's keep his statues up, not tear them down, k? I don't know if Thomas Jefferson was a sexual deviant, nor does anyone here. I do know he was an eloquent defender of freedom; let's keep his statues up, not tear them down, k?

We don't know personal 'stuff' really of anyone prior to maybe 50 years ago. If you say you do, normals tune you out cause you're faking because you have some bullshirt to sell, in our cases here all DNC idiocy ('I hate America's Founders!' Howard Dean scream).

No one, let alone Fanlx Dems, knows anything about anyone's personal story from 50+ years back other than apocryphal tales. That won't stop you from cherry picking the one narrative that soothes your liberal mob game.

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 1:16 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 12:45 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 12:40 pm
How do you know the story wasn’t passed down through the family?

Is all family folklore now a perfectly accurate retelling of history?

Well it was the Hemmings family folklore that made the FACT of Jefferson paternity the "worst kept secret" in the state of Virginia. It was a "secret" that anyone in the state paying attention to had known even 200 years later. The fact that it took DNA evidence to finally shut up the deniers is another matter. But, since the DNA proved the family claim, I am guessing that the family folklore is probably worth listening to.

I have not read what the family is saying today about the relationship between Hemmings and Jefferson. But the story that I consistently heard was that the relationship was consensual and perhaps even love based - to the extent that consensual could exist between two people occupying their particular stations in life at the time. And even more to the extent that love could truly occupy that space in that context....

I'd be interested in what TLD's relative says the family lore suggests about the relationship, albeit with all the caveats you suggest.

IMO, there's no ability to truly 'consent' in such a relationship, albeit, as one might say "we weren't there".

Absent some more definitive evidence, probably the best we have may be family lore.

That said, I heard two of Jefferson's descendants talking about this, one 'white', one 'black', and they mentioned that Hemmings' room is not much more than a "cave", not exactly the sort of thing one might think if the relationship had truly been loving. Is that dispositive? Nope.

BTW, it was a great conversation.
They focused on how well Monticello tells the story of slavery as well as their ancestor in common.

And both suggested that statues and monuments to Jefferson which do not also fulsomely tell that history should not remain for veneration as is. There may well be ways to adapt existing such to do so, however absent that, they say they support replacing or removing them.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:25 pm Uhhhhh what?

What I think is your confidence when cherry-picking DNC narratives strikes most normals as transparently partisan not to mention arrogant.

I don't know what George Washington did in his bedroom, nor frankly do I care. We do know he was out first president; let's keep his staues up, not tear them down. I don't know if Thomas Jefferson was a sexual deviant, nor does anyone here. I do know he was an eloquent defender of freedom; let's keep his statues up, not tear them down.

He defended freedom for some, Pete. They rebelled over, among other things, taxation without representation...and then turned around and made it so that over half the residents were taxed without representation in government. You and your team wants to erase that part of our history. I'd rather tell the full, actual, factual story, thank you very much.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:25 pm We don't much personal 'stuff' of anyone prior to maybe 50 years ago. If you say you do, normals tune you out cause you don't but you pretend to because you have some bullshirt to sell.

No one, let alone Fanlx Dems, knows anything about anyone's personal story from 50+ years back other than apocryphal tales. That won't stop you from cherry picking the one story that soothes your mob game.

"The Normals".

Conform. Don't think. Difference is bad. Accept everything the government tells you.

Got it, comrade.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:17 pm You and I of course agree on the importance of free speech, including speech we don't like.

agreed and of course

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:17 pmMy point is that POTUS' speech is normally assumed to be a directive to his Administration and indeed his Administration frequently acts in response to even his tweets.

I don't know that I have seen any evidence of this. Have you? I tend to think (or perhaps merely wish to believe) that his administration is going to wait good a long between seeing a Trump tweet and taking any action - in fact I expect that they wait for a very specific directive and perhaps even then slow play it....

And as an overall comment on the topic - we all know you could sail the US Navy between what any politician says and what they or their administrations actually do!

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:33 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:25 pm Uhhhhh what?

What I think is your confidence when cherry-picking DNC narratives strikes most normals as transparently partisan not to mention arrogant.

I don't know what George Washington did in his bedroom, nor frankly do I care. We do know he was out first president; let's keep his staues up, not tear them down. I don't know if Thomas Jefferson was a sexual deviant, nor does anyone here. I do know he was an eloquent defender of freedom; let's keep his statues up, not tear them down.

He defended freedom for some, Pete. They rebelled over, among other things, taxation without representation...and then turned around and made it so that over half the residents were taxed without representation in government. You and your team wants to erase that part of our history. I'd rather tell the full, actual, factual story, thank you very much.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:25 pm We don't much personal 'stuff' of anyone prior to maybe 50 years ago. If you say you do, normals tune you out cause you don't but you pretend to because you have some bullshirt to sell.

No one, let alone Fanlx Dems, knows anything about anyone's personal story from 50+ years back other than apocryphal tales. That won't stop you from cherry picking the one story that soothes your mob game.

"The Normals".

Conform. Don't think. Difference is bad. Accept everything the government tells you.

Got it, comrade.

a fan: Jefferson is not perfect, so screwge him; (you forgot he masturbated once too). a fan says off with his head, the big head!

What are you seeking a fan, besides bs excuses for the DNC mob to tear down history? Do you need perfection? Should we just do away with beauty? Should we let the mob dictate public discourse? Seems so for you.

Have you ever masturbated? Should we hold that transgression against you? I don't think anyone needs to respect you if you did.

I mean, come the eff on. I don't care if you'd be honest and simply say, hey I'm a Democrat, screwge everyone, I make the rules as I go, but enough with the silly pandering excuse making of America sucks. If you think our history sucks, just say so. By the way, like all history, it is both good and bad, the same with everyone you'll ever know in life.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:10 pm To set the Jefferson record straight:

Love has nothing to do with it. Rape is a legal construct. In 1800 it was not considered rape, she was his property (in Virginia). The question of love is irrelevant. Their sexual relationship had to have started before 1790. Before Hemings was at most 17, when her first child was born in Paris. Jefferson's wife Martha died in 1782, 8 years earlier when Sally (Martha's half sister) was 9 years old at most. Sally traveled to Paris with Jefferson and had a child when she was at most 17. There is a small discrepancy in her age at time of birth. Her son Madison Hemings claims 15 years old if I recall correctly. This based on his mother's (Sally's) telling. The child did not live long after birth.

By 1802 the relationship was well known in Virginia society.

thanks 72. but i will pose the concept- rape or not, he's still a slaveholder. and that's bad!!!

ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:52 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:10 pm To set the Jefferson record straight:

Love has nothing to do with it. Rape is a legal construct. In 1800 it was not considered rape, she was his property (in Virginia). The question of love is irrelevant. Their sexual relationship had to have started before 1790. Before Hemings was at most 17, when her first child was born in Paris. Jefferson's wife Martha died in 1782, 8 years earlier when Sally (Martha's half sister) was 9 years old at most. Sally traveled to Paris with Jefferson and had a child when she was at most 17. There is a small discrepancy in her age at time of birth. Her son Madison Hemings claims 15 years old if I recall correctly. This based on his mother's (Sally's) telling. The child did not live long after birth.

By 1802 the relationship was well known in Virginia society.

thanks 72. but i will pose the concept- rape or not, he's still a slaveholder. and that's bad!!!

yes - he was what he was, a man of his times, a flawed human being. He benefited from the era in which he lived. He is still an interesting character, with considerable meaning to the entire world - more through his words than actions. Today he would be considered a deadbeat as well, although in some quarters today deadbeats seem to be greatly admired.

Another misconception about Jefferson was that he never freed Sally Hemings. Some hold this against him. The truth of the matter is, Virginia law at the time said that a freed slave had to leave the state and not return. Which would have meant she would have had to leave her home and children and "husband" if she had been freed. Jefferson did what was called giving her "her time". She no longer had anything to do, other than what she wanted to do. After Jefferson died and the children grown, one of his daughters (Poly, I think) freed Sally (and I believe the children).

You can see in his history the tradeoffs he made living in a slave society, that by the end of his life he certainly considered an abomination. But that doesn't change the fact that he owned slaves and benefited from them his whole life. He certainly had no moment where he said I am going to free my slaves, impoverish myself, and get on the right side of history.

People need to read Ken Stampp's book, "Peculiar Institution" to really understand southern history and its people both white and black.

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:37 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:17 pm You and I of course agree on the importance of free speech, including speech we don't like.

agreed and of course

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:17 pmMy point is that POTUS' speech is normally assumed to be a directive to his Administration and indeed his Administration frequently acts in response to even his tweets.

I don't know that I have seen any evidence of this. Have you? I tend to think (or perhaps merely wish to believe) that his administration is going to wait good a long between seeing a Trump tweet and taking any action - in fact I expect that they wait for a very specific directive and perhaps even then slow play it....

And as an overall comment on the topic - we all know you could sail the US Navy between what any politician says and what they or their administrations actually do!

Well, here's an example today:

CDC issues guidelines for opening schools, Trump immediately tweets that those guidelines are too tough and too expensive, and threatening to withhold funds from any school system, regardless of specific environment of refusing to have 100% in person classes. A couple of hours later and the Task Force including CDC is in full retreat, "explaining" that the guidelines should not prevent any school system to not open, the are not to be taken as 'proscriptive' and that the Task force 'stands ready' to work with any governor and system to get the schools open...and that they will be working with Congress to put in place "incentives" to do so. Open the Economy.

Now, the Task Force made all sorts of perfectly valid explanations about why the goal to get as many kids as possible the various benefits of going to school, academic, social and mental health, nutrition, etc. but they were in full retreat on whether these guidelines actually should be considered as serious...nope, you should ignore them if they conflict with opening up...

Another example, a couple of days ago Harvard and some others announced they were going to do 100% online learning this fall, but would have up to 40% of students able to live on campus, most notably international students who can't or shouldn't go back to their home. Trump furiously tweets and within hours, Homeland Security issues a new administrative order that international student's visas would only be valid if they go to a school with in-person classes, meaning the Harvard and MIT etc students need to go to another school or be forced to leave the country...

Yeah, his Administration know what his tweets mean.

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:33 pm
He defended freedom for some, Pete.

ding ding ding ding ding
tell afan what he's won

perhaps even back then, we are not all the same.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:58 pm

ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:52 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:10 pm To set the Jefferson record straight:

Love has nothing to do with it. Rape is a legal construct. In 1800 it was not considered rape, she was his property (in Virginia). The question of love is irrelevant. Their sexual relationship had to have started before 1790. Before Hemings was at most 17, when her first child was born in Paris. Jefferson's wife Martha died in 1782, 8 years earlier when Sally (Martha's half sister) was 9 years old at most. Sally traveled to Paris with Jefferson and had a child when she was at most 17. There is a small discrepancy in her age at time of birth. Her son Madison Hemings claims 15 years old if I recall correctly. This based on his mother's (Sally's) telling. The child did not live long after birth.

By 1802 the relationship was well known in Virginia society.

thanks 72. but i will pose the concept- rape or not, he's still a slaveholder. and that's bad!!!

yes - he was what he was, a flawed human being. He benefited from the era in which he lived. He is still an interesting character, with considerable meaning to the entire world - more through his words than actions. Today he would be considered a deadbeat as well, although in some quarters today deadbeats seem to be greatly admired.

tough but fair.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:42 pm a fan: Jefferson is not perfect, so screwge him; (you forgot he masturbated once too). a fan says off with his head, the big head!

What are you seeking a fan, besides bs excuses for the DNC mob to tear down history? Do you need perfection? Should we just do away with beauty? Should we let the mob dictate public discourse? Seems so for you.

Nope. As usual, you don't read a single word your fellow posters write. Not one.

Show me where I said one word about wanting Jefferson torn down. Go ahead. I'll wait.

(pssst. I said no such thing)


All I did was tell you what, factually, Jefferson actually did. We have his work in writing, Pete.

And what is your reaction to this news? You don't want to hear it. Jefferson is perfect.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:10 pm To set the Jefferson record straight:

Love has nothing to do with it. Rape is a legal construct. In 1800 it was not considered rape, she was his property (in Virginia). The question of love is irrelevant. Their sexual relationship had to have started before 1790. Before Hemings was at most 17, when her first child was born in Paris. Jefferson's wife Martha died in 1782, 8 years earlier when Sally (Martha's half sister) was 9 years old at most. Sally traveled to Paris with Jefferson and had a child when she was at most 17. There is a small discrepancy in her age at time of birth. Her son Madison Hemings claims 15 years old if I recall correctly. This based on his mother's (Sally's) telling. The child did not live long after birth.

By 1802 the relationship was well known in Virginia society.

+1. Part of the family moved to Ohio and one of the brothers moved on to Wisconsin, and blended into the wider society under a new name.

An update on Amy Cooper.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 4:35 pm An update on Amy Cooper.

He is the lone voice of sanity here. Even Mr. Cooper is not as loony as most Dems who want to hang this woman in the public square. He won't cooperate to help the Mayor fo NYC make an even grander spectacle of this woman who has paid enough of a penalty at this stage.

And for the record, I despise her for many reasons not the least being she practically choked the poor animal to death.

As usual we find out in these events, this woman is a DONOR to the Democratic Party (surprise surprise) and is a closet racist not to mention an entitled arrogant jerkwad. You can spot these Democrats a mile away. The arrogance oozes out of her pores.

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 3:21 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:42 pm a fan: Jefferson is not perfect, so screwge him; (you forgot he masturbated once too). a fan says off with his head, the big head!

What are you seeking a fan, besides bs excuses for the DNC mob to tear down history? Do you need perfection? Should we just do away with beauty? Should we let the mob dictate public discourse? Seems so for you.

Nope. As usual, you don't read a single word your fellow posters write. Not one.

Show me where I said one word about wanting Jefferson torn down. Go ahead. I'll wait.

(pssst. I said no such thing)


All I did was tell you what, factually, Jefferson actually did. We have his work in writing, Pete.

And what is your reaction to this news? You don't want to hear it. Jefferson is perfect.

Thomas Jefferson wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence, Became President of the United States, Founded the University of Virginia, designed and built Monticello, was Ambassador to France and made the Louisiana Purchase doubling the size of the United States. You?

You prefer to think of him instead as his weakest alleged flaw.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 4:35 pm An update on Amy Cooper.

"Based on a misunderstood 60 seconds of video, she lost her job, her home and her reputation.

No its because she's an azzho

Amusing Trumpnista painters charged.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 4:43 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 3:21 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:42 pm a fan: Jefferson is not perfect, so screwge him; (you forgot he masturbated once too). a fan says off with his head, the big head!

What are you seeking a fan, besides bs excuses for the DNC mob to tear down history? Do you need perfection? Should we just do away with beauty? Should we let the mob dictate public discourse? Seems so for you.

Nope. As usual, you don't read a single word your fellow posters write. Not one.

Show me where I said one word about wanting Jefferson torn down. Go ahead. I'll wait.

(pssst. I said no such thing)


All I did was tell you what, factually, Jefferson actually did. We have his work in writing, Pete.

And what is your reaction to this news? You don't want to hear it. Jefferson is perfect.

Thomas Jefferson wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence, Became President of the United States, Founded the University of Virginia, designed and built Monticello, was Ambassador to France and made the Louisiana Purchase doubling the size of the United States. You?

You prefer to think of him instead as his weakest alleged flaw.

… which flaw was his alleged weakest?