Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, so why change anything was my point. I don't like to revise history to suit.Who here would like the PC police to start censoring books to keep current with today's interpretations- rightly or wrongly? Yes folks, it is a very slippery slope. Farenheit 451. People who have "been offended" by evolution have tried to censor school books. And people who have "been offended" by certain words have tried to ban Huckleberry Finn. Where does this kind of effort end?
I don't think anyone is in favor of re-writing history we know now was correct. And, I could care less about literary profanities or statue nudity.
As for revising history we know in our time to be false & written to advance the privilege & power of a particular past: That's not called censoring, it's called truth. Take a look at some of the old school text books discussing the glorious (utterly sanitized) American history of slavery & our native american conquest. Just to call it "history" doesn't make it true.
"It’s understandable how the barriers around the zone—movable wood and plastic left behind by the police—and the hygienically masked sentinels standing at them could look intimidating to residents. But I passed through them perhaps a dozen times over three days and, like everyone I saw and talked to in the zone, was never stopped or asked my business. Even if this were the 'border wall' Fox commentators call it, it would hardly be impenetrable; people could still come and go through the park abutting the zone."
"The only disturbance...'was someone trying to pull the barriers apart. We asked her to stop.'"
"The barriers, other guards explained, were there to stop cars from driving into the occupied streets—a real fear. Last Sunday, a motorist drove into the protest at that very intersection and shot a man point-blank who tried to make him stop, hitting his shoulder. He then charged through the crowd, gun in hand and surrendered to police. According to charging documents, he told police he was a security guard, his brother worked at the precinct, and he’d come to the protest 'to see how bad it was,' with his Glock on the seat beside him."
"It’s understandable how the barriers around the zone—movable wood and plastic left behind by the police—and the hygienically masked sentinels standing at them could look intimidating to residents. But I passed through them perhaps a dozen times over three days and, like everyone I saw and talked to in the zone, was never stopped or asked my business. Even if this were the 'border wall' Fox commentators call it, it would hardly be impenetrable; people could still come and go through the park abutting the zone."
"The only disturbance...'was someone trying to pull the barriers apart. We asked her to stop.'"
"The barriers, other guards explained, were there to stop cars from driving into the occupied streets—a real fear. Last Sunday, a motorist drove into the protest at that very intersection and shot a man point-blank who tried to make him stop, hitting his shoulder. He then charged through the crowd, gun in hand and surrendered to police. According to charging documents, he told police he was a security guard, his brother worked at the precinct, and he’d come to the protest 'to see how bad it was,' with his Glock on the seat beside him."
It has nothing to do with "FOX". You guys are obsessed with FOX like it is the only place "conservatives" get their news from.
If you look at surveys, Liberals (these days) are actually in far more of a "news bubble", as they only get their news from liberal sources.
I, like most "New" Republicans get my news from all over the spectrum.
I just posted a video on the previous page that showed the "Warlord" handing out AR-15s to underage kids.
You mean to tell me that if those were Trump supporters the liberal media wouldn't be all over it? Or was it a simulation created by FOX News or the Russians? (snark)
The sad truth (and again - I speak as someone who was a Democrat all my life until recently) is that the mainstream media in this country really is appallingly biased and continually inaccurate.
Love Trump or hate him, that is one thing he is right about.
Once you accept that fact (and I know every bone in your body doesn't want to), a lot of other things start to fall into place and make much more sense.
It has nothing to do with "FOX". You guys are obsessed with FOX like it is the only place "conservatives" get their news from. I, like most "New" Republicans get my news from all over the spectrum.
Nothing like the political passion of a convert! Appreciate your journey. I became a "new" Progressive years ago after having been steeped in conservative republicanism growing up. I polished my early reading skills with William F. Buckley & National Review. Goldwater's 'Conscience of a Conservative' was my childhood bible. I was one of those. Go figure?
Nothing like the political passion of a convert! Appreciate your journey. I became a "new" Progressive years ago after having been steeped in conservative republicanism growing up. I polished my early reading skills with William F. Buckley & National Review. Goldwater's 'Conscience of a Conservative' was my childhood bible. I was one of those. Go figure?
Doesn't surprise me at all. Much of the former Republican establishment has embraced Democratic Politics now because they think it will hurt Trump.
I'm not so much a convert. What has happened is the Democratic Party has absorbed neoconservative ideas that ruled the roost in the Republican Party 15 years ago, combined with technocratic elites and social justice warriors; and the Republicans have been taken over by the MAGA crowd. Both parties may have the same names they have always had, but neither is actually the same Party anymore.
That is why you see people like Bill Kristol (William the Bloody) and Nicole Wallace on MSNBC, both of whom advocated for the illegal and destructive War in Iraq, They're on "your side" now. Or remember the lionization of Robert Mueller? He helped lie us into Iraq as well, and helped defend the infamous Cheney torture memos. You can have 'em.
Meanwhile, Trump literally won a Republican Primary by being the only candidate (besides Rand Paul) to criticize the Iraq fiasco. He was booed on live TV, but the silent majority were with him. That takes cahones.
And the Left now acts like Bush Jr. is absolved of being the worst President in my lifetime because, oh looky!, he hugged Michelle Obama.
Doesn't surprise me at all. Much of the former Republican establishment has embraced Democratic Politics now because they think it will hurt Trump.
Well, you should be surprised. I saw the light decades ago, so it had nothing to do with Trump. Rats are already fleeing a sinking ship. Come November 4th, don't be surprised to see tons of republicans return to the traditional fold - like from a bad dream saying: "Trump, Trump who?
We probably need to return to the thread's subject.
I said nothing about Fox. The Politico article specifically mentions Fox because it is in response to doctored images Fox produced.
Quote:
I just posted a video on the previous page that showed the "Warlord" handing out AR-15s to underage kids.
Funny how a "self proclaimed warlord" proclaims himself to not be a warlord.
Quote:
The sad truth (and again - I speak as someone who was a Democrat all my life until recently) is that the mainstream media in this country really is appallingly biased and continually inaccurate.
The mainstream media in this country tends to run what generates viewers for their advertisers and likes to fearmonger, but the only "liberal bias" I see in truly mainstream sources are those unfortunate times that facts and reality have a liberal bias. Non-mainstream right wing media, however, is not only appallingly inaccurate but also dangerous.
Anyone who gives AR-15s to children and terrorizes tax paying citizens/businesses/takes over a police precinct, I really don't care what they would prefer to be known as.
I don't think anyone is in favor of re-writing history we know now was correct. And, I could care less about literary profanities or statue nudity.
As for revising history we know in our time to be false & written to advance the privilege & power of a particular past: That's not called censoring, it's called truth. Take a look at some of the old school text books discussing the glorious (utterly sanitized) American history of slavery & our native american conquest. Just to call it "history" doesn't make it true.
But the truth is that the name of our state is the name of our state. It is history and it is true. It's also commonly known as Rhode Island.
Does anyone honestly think that the majority of blacks in this state sit around caring what the state's official name is? Have they moved out to another state because of it? Or is this is an attempt to score special interest points by using a false narrative? Wouldn't blacks in this state rather see a bigger effort to re-educate police (or any other pressing issue for them)?
As Jbtwinz said, how is wasting time with this and causing the state to spend more money going to help anyone's socio- economic status? And it will cost money having to revise everything that needs revising if the name changes.
I know YOU don't care about the statue- but let me reiterate my point in using the statue. The point was that anyone can pick something they "find offensive". For example, why is it the Independent Man, why not the Independent Man and Woman? Where are the RI statues of women? The only statue of Anne Hutchinson I know of is in Boston and yet she founded Portsmouth, RI. Or, why not a Narragansett Indian up there? Should we spend thin state money "correcting" this?
Let's focus on coming together and doing something truly pressing- get the legislature to actually vote on things that matter to the vast majority- jobs, housing, education, and so on.
Well, you should be surprised. I saw the light decades ago, so it had nothing to do with Trump. Rats are already fleeing a sinking ship. Come November 4th, don't be surprised to see tons of republicans return to the traditional fold - like from a bad dream saying: "Trump, Trump who?
We probably need to return to the thread's subject.
Are you saying the Democrats aren't a sinking ship as well? If they lose again in November, they have nobody to blame but themselves. Bet yes, back to RI now!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
