|
|
| Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice (414756) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (415039) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 00:14:19 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Feb 15 00:05:31 2009. It's more than a little ridiculous to change state lines based on intermittent party affiliations, isn't it? |
|
|
| (415041) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Feb 15 00:37:58 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 00:14:19 2009. I don't see the problem given they are the 'minority' group. This way the majority no longer has a thorn in their sides from the ones without any power. It's a win win: get rid of the bickering dis-infranchised group and that group gets to be their own state.It's sort of the way NYC should split from upstate NY. Most of the revenues via taxes going to upstate don't always come back in terms of funds for our healthcare, education and transportation in full. NYC would be better off as its own state. |
|
|
| (415043) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 00:47:26 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Feb 15 00:37:58 2009. But that type of stuff can be transient and 50 years from now it may look very different. It makes no sense to change state boundaries every few decades. |
|
|
| (415044) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 00:53:14 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 00:47:26 2009. Congressional boundaries change every ten years ... :) |
|
|
| (415049) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:28:25 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 14 10:05:18 2009. It's very simple...and we love the fact that You can't see it...You are an idiot..one who loves to make a fool of him/her self... Its a joy watching you...Keep up the good work. |
|
|
| (415050) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 01:31:37 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:28:25 2009. Or the fact that you can't explain it because you don't understand it, or anything really. You're the only idiot in this thread. As usual. |
|
|
| (415051) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:36:40 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 14 10:22:34 2009. Not "scared off"..."Turned off" by rhetoric..exactly like the bullshit your spouting now. Yours is the party for those with necks that appear BRIGHT RED...HATERS OF BIG GOVERNMENT..[they hate it because they WATCH them like HAWKS] LESS GOVERNMENT[like what we had of the last several years]less watchdogs..well even YOU might understand what has happened to this place ....... Care to try again? |
|
|
| (415052) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:38:20 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Feb 14 16:56:58 2009. You cats USE them for cheap labor... |
|
|
| (415053) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Feb 15 01:38:26 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 00:53:14 2009. Yeah most notably the one in Texas a few years ago. |
|
|
| (415054) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Feb 15 01:40:27 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:38:20 2009. I don't use them at all. I would prefer to hire someone that has a legal business and not inexperienced laborers. |
|
|
| (415055) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:40:34 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by BMT Guy on Sat Feb 14 21:59:07 2009. Yes!...He's working on it right now... Give him time. |
|
|
| (415057) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 01:43:00 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:40:34 2009. At least you don't disappoint. You sound like a pathetic loser instantly. |
|
|
| (415058) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:44:53 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 14 10:13:56 2009. Does the TOPIC AT HAND MAKE YOU SO UNCOMFORTABLE THAT YOU HAVE TO CHANGE ITIf so..go outside and cut some grass...or smoke it..whatever it is that makes You..You. |
|
|
| (415059) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:55:04 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 01:43:00 2009. Oh..did I deflate your "roll"..there buddy?Im sorry..but Its actually painful to watch you constantly place a big fat stinky foot in your mouth..ALL the time.. How does it feel to be the VILLIAGE IDIOT...poked at by the passers by such as myself and/or others..or randomly laughed at,["not with", mind you].. Keep up the good work..I'm Almost Impressed. |
|
|
| (415060) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 01:57:53 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:44:53 2009. I didn't change it. Now go eat your fried chicken loser. |
|
|
| (415061) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 01:59:43 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 15 01:55:04 2009. You can't even discuss the thread topic because you're such an ignorant man. Instead, you just look for my handle, and go from there. Now go enjoy your friend chicken. |
|
|
| (415065) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 02:24:29 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Feb 15 01:38:26 2009. Whoever replaces Gillibrand will be the proud owner of one of those "poof!" districts. :) |
|
|
| (415067) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Feb 15 02:31:04 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 14 10:13:56 2009. George Bush has Latino relatives in his familia. Try again, pus for brains. |
|
|
| (415075) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 03:11:48 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by RonInBayside on Sun Feb 15 02:31:04 2009. Fuck you Ron you asshole. I've seen his "Latino" relative. He's whiter than rice, and can't speak a work of Spanish. Stick to the SAS threads. |
|
|
| (415078) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Feb 15 03:22:40 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 03:11:48 2009. ummm...Jeb's wife Columba was born and raised in Mexico and is not whiter then rice unless you mean brown rice.Columba Bush |
|
|
| (415080) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 03:27:22 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by SMAZ on Sun Feb 15 03:22:40 2009. What the fuck does any of this have to do with immigration policies? Jeb stated that the Republicans need to cool off on immigration, but Jeb(and the trolls in this thread) offer no suggestions for what our immigrations policies should be. |
|
|
| (415088) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 04:02:25 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by SMAZ on Sun Feb 15 03:22:40 2009. And who can forget Shrub introducing them as "the little brown ones?" :)For those who forgot, here's ONE source ... but if you're gonna diss me, there are others. Moo. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DF163EF934A2575BC0A96E948260 |
|
|
| (415089) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 04:03:28 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 03:27:22 2009. Let them IN ... that "policy" has made America the greatest nation on earth. Or perhaps we should agree with you and deport you. :) |
|
|
| (415098) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 04:26:27 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 04:03:28 2009. I'm only saying that we need a policy that makes sense. For the Republicans, it makes no sense to pander to the pro-immigration crowd, because the liberals own that issue in the minds of Americans anyway. Republicans can suggest amnesty for all illegals plus any 10 of their relatives anywhere in the world, and liberals would still be considered the immigration/latino party to most Americans. People have been programmed to think that way. |
|
|
| (415103) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 04:35:22 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 04:26:27 2009. Liberals? Dayum ... PASS that damn stogie over heah! :)Ummm ... why are they here? Hmmm. Corporations that don't want to pay minimum wage, want a populace that goes away and don't sponge off 'em when the harvest is in so's they can go home and not cost. Whoops. Do you REALLY believe that "illegals" come here to work on Mrs. Murphy's driveway and then go home? Sheesh. :( And WHO supports WHICH party? Is Halliburton or United Fruit or Del Monte or ADM a bunch of LIBERALS? Heh. |
|
|
| (415169) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Feb 15 09:08:22 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school choice, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 14 19:33:56 2009. One can be black and conservative...but for God's sake, use that minister skill...out of home advertising CANNOT be ignored, even in the offseason. |
|
|
| (415172) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Feb 15 09:14:11 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 02:24:29 2009. In 2012, NY is probably losing a district; NY-20, which was Gillibrand's, appears to be the top candidate.Similarly, in Illinois, a seat held by a young (26-year old) Republican (Aaron Schock - IL-18) is a prime candidate for being districted out in 2012. |
|
|
| (415173) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Feb 15 09:14:31 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Feb 15 09:08:22 2009. Do you know what out of home advertising is?Go to the Cuntington Post. They rag on Steele. He's a conservative first, black, well, distant second. You know that. |
|
|
| (415183) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Feb 15 09:50:06 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Feb 15 09:08:22 2009. Let's not forget that during the Civil War, it was the Republican party was what wanted to abolish slavery, but the Democratic party wanted to keep slavery.How the Democrats became the "party of minorities" is almost beyond me, as it certainly was the total opposite at the time of the civil war. It wasn't until around the Kennedy administration and the 1960's that the Democrats began to support racial equality and integration. |
|
|
| (415201) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 15 10:32:35 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Feb 15 09:50:06 2009. How the Democrats became the "party of minorities" is almost beyond me, as it certainly was the total opposite at the time of the civil war.They have Coolidge, Hoover, Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson to thank for that. Under the Democrats in that list, minorities saw progress being made in both civil rights as well as economic well-being for the bitterly poor. Under the Republicans in that list, the progress was minimal. |
|
|
| (415210) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 11:52:17 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Feb 15 09:50:06 2009. Let's not forget that during the Civil War, it was the Republican party was what wanted to abolish slavery, but the Democratic party wanted to keep slavery.How the Democrats became the "party of minorities" is almost beyond me, as it certainly was the total opposite at the time of the civil war. It wasn't until around the Kennedy administration and the 1960's that the Democrats began to support racial equality and integration. It wasn't so much gradual evolution as shifts in who the parties pitched their message to and shifting demographics. My thoughts follow. In the antebellum, Republicans forced the question of whether or not slavery should be extended to the territories. Democrats were strong in the South, so they were in favor of slavery in the new territories if those within the state were in favor of it. Republicans were absolutely opposed to the extension of territory to the territories, but they were split between those who only embraced that modest goal (like Lincoln) and others who were more radical. Lincoln didn't believe in racial equality. But he did believe that slavery was evil. Almost everyone conceded that, however. The Confederate States Constitution proscribed the slave trade, after all. But the southern states were also fearful that Lincoln was more radical than he was, and they seceded. Thus began, as schoolchildren know, the Civil War. Lincoln was a Unionist; he did not believe that a state could secede even if its people were in favor of secession by very, very large margins. Democrats were split on this - in the north and west, they mostly believed that the southern states couldn't secede, whereas in the south, of course, opinions went the other way. Republicans were the party of centralized control, of big government. This is, of course, in stark contrast, to the party's rhetoric nowadays. Their position was totally against so called states' rights of dual sovereignty. The Republican campaign through the south was brutal during and after the war. Democrats tapped into this anger to build a solid region for themselves while becoming a party of great interest in many urban areas. Republicans gave up their project of "Reconstruction" in a bargain to retain executive control. Eventually I'm sure that they realized that trying to change minds by force of arms was rather futile. The idea that people should be judged on individual merit was more of an idea for academia at this time, mostly in the north and west. Put back into charge in the south, Democrats there resolved on payback for the occupation by northern Republican forces, by targeting Republican proxies, especially Blacks. But at the same time, many Democratic party machines traded on the votes of recent immigrants, and northern Republicans like Theodore Roosevelt were sympathetic to meritocratic treatment of persons. Pushed by Democrats in the south, many Blacks migrated to cities outside of the south, mostly to precincts of Democratic party machines. There would not be another President interested in the plight of Blacks until Franklin Roosevelt, and he was mostly interested via his more progressive wife, Eleanor. The second phase of the New Deal, which never did happen because of Franklin Roosevelt's cutting the first phase short (which precipitated economic downturn he supported higher taxes and lower spending during the Depression), and then the War came, and then FDR died. But the political power of blacks in the Democratic party in urban areas had been growing, at the same time that many Blacks were still Republicans because of "Father Abraham". Woodrow Wilson was a disappointment to Blacks. But the latter group was mostly in the south, where their effectiveness politically was next to zero. Democrats succeeded in establishing a one-party state in the south, just as Republicans had succeeded in that effort during Reconstruction. Harry Truman provoked the biggest thing in race relations with Blacks in a very long time: he ordered integration of the military, which really exposed southerners to Blacks as human beings, as the guy in the trenches with you, very different from the picture they had of barely civilized monkeys put into human clothing by Republicans. Leading up to this, Blacks had been gradually revving up to a campaign in the courts to push for desegregation in the south. A very progressive Supreme Court ruled for desegregation, and this precipitated another crisis, albeit not on the Civil War level. Dwight Eisenhower was President but he was very ambivalent. Deep down, he simply did not believe in equality of Blacks with others. So he was not a very progressive force at a time when Blacks really wanted it. John Kennedy and Richard Nixon were each far more sympathetic. But Kennedy won. He was unable to push through the major legislation but for the first time, there was a Democrat with the will - but not the ability - to take on his own party over the issue of race. He died before real progress was made, but his successor was the greatest legislative leader in the history of this country, bar none: Lyndon Johnson. LBJ pushed that legislation through, but the libertarian hawk Barry Goldwater saw a chink in the armor and opposed the Civil Rights Acts, thus creating a chance for a radical reversal. Richard Nixon, a very astute political tactician, adopted a "southern strategy" to capitalize on racist sentiment in the south, in spite of the fact that he himself was working behind the scenes to bring affirmative action employment for Blacks and other racial minorities to new heights. But after Nixon, the transformation was really becoming complete: the south was becoming the party of Republicans, and the north was becoming the party of Democrats. George HW Bush stemmed the tide somewhat with his civil rights agenda, but only the more recent movement for the Democrats in each region to build up a national party has succeeded in making the Democrats into a nationally competitive party by pitching a different kind of Democrat to each region, while Republicans have been steadily losing by pitching the same kind of Republican to each region. The south is for the first time in generations politically competitive in many places, and if the Republicans can somehow figure out how to become a national party that can pitch viable candidates all across the country, maybe our country will be much better for it. But right now, the GOP has a huge problem: they are like dinosaurs. Can Republicans pitch candidates to the north and west while holding on to constituents in the south? Can Republicans make inroads with the exploding Latino demographic? can Republicans make inroads with urban voters? |
|
|
| (415211) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 11:56:04 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Feb 15 09:08:22 2009. Michael Steele is a talking head. He should have been the pick of the RNC to be its spokesperson. The Republicans need a manager who can build up a competitive party in every part of this country. Steele couldn't even cut it to marginally high office in Maryland, for heaven's sake. He wasn't a capable manager, he couldn't make it above Lt Governor in elections. I really hope that someone else is secretly working on a real Republican agenda to make them competitive again. |
|
|
| (415225) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 12:26:14 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 11:56:04 2009. I wonder why Steele was chosen given that resume? |
|
|
| (415229) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 12:30:58 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 12:26:14 2009. The RNC is just as PC as the DNC. Apparently, PC logic dictates that only a black man can criticize another black man.As I noted here, Katon Dawson was the more effective candidate by far. But good luck to Mr. Steele. He will need it..... |
|
|
| (415338) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 15 16:42:03 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Feb 15 09:14:11 2009. 20 is already planned. :) |
|
|
| (415384) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Feb 15 19:31:43 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 11:52:17 2009. Excellent summary of the reversal or roles. Its strange how it was all related to race except for the FDR Era.I mark the moment when the reversal really started was when Truman unambiguosly put his Presidency on the line as a matter of principle and principle only by integrating the military and so triggering Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat candidacy and by appointing the most liberal Justices to the SCOTUS before or since. He also offered the Secretary of State job to Ralph Bunche who would have been the first black Cabinet member in history had he accepted. |
|
|
| (415407) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 20:35:35 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by SMAZ on Sun Feb 15 19:31:43 2009. Its strange how it was all related to race except for the FDR Era.Yeah I don't think that one can leave out the urban/rural divide, and I also think that I left out suburbanization (although that had racial overtones in the postwar era). I mark the moment when the reversal really started was when Truman unambiguosly put his Presidency on the line as a matter of principle and principle only by integrating the military and so triggering Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat candidacy and by appointing the most liberal Justices to the SCOTUS before or since. Truman's stand on integrating the armed forces was brave. His appointments to the Supreme Court were quite mediocre, though. The great appointments were made by FDR and Eisenhower: Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, William Douglas, Robert Jackson, Wiley Rutledge, Frank Murphy, Earl Warren, William Brennan, and John Harlan. (There were others, but those were the great ones). To my mind, Harlan was the last great judge appointed to the Court. I didn't know that he had offered the Secretary of State position to Bunche. You learn something everyday! |
|
|
| (415445) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 21:41:20 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 11:52:17 2009. Lincoln didn't believe in racial equalityIf he didn't, he would have omitted any reference to it in the first sentence of his Gettysburg Address. |
|
|
| (415448) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 21:45:14 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 21:41:20 2009. He didn't and that first sentence was not directed at African Americans. And he was obviously mistaken regarding the intent of our forefathers anyway. |
|
|
| (415462) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 22:13:56 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 21:41:20 2009. I didn't say that Lincoln was not in favor of legal equality, or that he viewed blacks as non-persons (as the law did in his day).I don't believe, however, that Lincoln ever expressed the view that blacks are not generally inferior to whites. Historians suggest that his views on racial equality moderated as he got older. At the time of his debates with Stephen Douglas he explicitly stated his view that blacks were inferior to whites, and even after this he was supportive of the "Back to Africa" movement. He was not in favor of emancipation until well into the war, and indeed, he actually booted Vermont's Brigadier General John Woolcott Phelps, who issued the first Emancipation Proclamation in December 1861 in Mississippi, right out of the Army for being too far ahead of his time! (Vermont was apparently home to gun toting progressives even back then, apparently!). Given Lincoln's method of taking the evidence seriously (I base this especially on Lincoln's demands against President Polk regarding the illegality of the Mexican War in the 1840s), if he had been presented with a case for racial equality, he might have seized on it as correct. Perhaps if he had not been assassinated, he was very close to this. But it isn't apparent that he in fact ever held such a view although he arguably close to the end of his life approached a quite progressive (for his time) view of matters. |
|
|
| (415474) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 22:21:15 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 21:45:14 2009. And he was obviously mistaken regarding the intent of our forefathers anyway.The intent of a group is such a difficult thing to discern. The Founders had a variety of views on the subject. Washington freed his slaves, Adams was opposed to slavery, Jefferson was opposed to slavery but retained his slaves, Madison was opposed to slavery (I'm not sure if he had slaves) and was one of the early voices in favor of the "Back to Africa" movement, Franklin became the most famous early abolitionist in the country, but many others supported slavery. So the record was one of great ambivalence overall. Many of the most famous Founders thought that slavery was wrong, but they did not believe in racial equality. But many other Founders were enthusiastic slaveholders. |
|
|
| (415493) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:00:40 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 21:45:14 2009. He didn't"Fourscore and seventy years ago, our forefathers brought upon this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure . . ."that first sentence was not directed at African Americans There's only one definition for the word "all". To deny that definition makes your statement racist. he was obviously mistaken regarding the intent of our forefathers anyway Stop being un-American. |
|
|
| (415495) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 23:04:39 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:00:40 2009. Obviously those liberties were not extended to African Americans for decades after the founding. How am I racist for pointing that out? |
|
|
| (415497) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:05:38 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 22:21:15 2009. Abolition of slavery was not part of things in Europe, nor in Africa, frankly, where it still goes on. For abolition to have come about in the USA as rapidly as it did is quite remarkable. |
|
|
| (415499) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 23:08:15 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:05:38 2009. lol |
|
|
| (415501) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:09:41 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 23:04:39 2009. Obviously those liberties were not extended to African Americans for decades after the foundingTo many it was, and to many others, it was not; per Amendment X, it was left to the individual states. Abolition was not codified in the Constitution, thus superseding all state laws regarding same, until Lincoln. So it's not so obvious, and you need to look into not only the culture of Europe that was transplanted, but also the culture of Africa thus transplanted (slavery is still normal in Africa today, and it's more abject than at any time in history). How am I racist for pointing that out? You didn't point out the above until this post. You speculated on Lincoln's personal feelings, which is moot in light of his actions, and insulting in the same vein. |
|
|
| (415505) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 23:18:13 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:09:41 2009. The slavery in Africa isn't the same. It's not inherited for the most part. It's more debt related. |
|
|
| (415506) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 23:20:29 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:05:38 2009. Abolition of slavery was not part of things in Europe, nor in Africa, frankly, where it still goes on. For abolition to have come about in the USA as rapidly as it did is quite remarkable.In the US, it was a considerable, if belated, feat because of the sheer number of slaves. The US banned the international slave trade a few years before the War of 1812, but by that point we had more than enough slaves so that further importation was not required; after all, the descendants of slaves make up 11-13% of the national population today even after mass immigration. Quite a few European nations beat us to the punch by decades or centuries in banning slavery. Sweden is one, and Scotland another although I'm not sure how many slaves they had. Spain comes to mind too, although several of their colonies simply chose to ignore the edict from the home office. The big boom was in the 1830s when Britain abolished slavery (with the might of the Navy to back it up), paying out a whole lotta pounds to slaveholders in the New World too. Brazil is recalled by me as one of the latest to ban. Of course, in Africa itself, slavery was a way of life before European and Asian traders even offered more money for export business in human beings, and it still has not fully abated. |
|
|
| (415514) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 23:34:56 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 15 23:09:41 2009. Abolition was not codified in the Constitution, thus superseding all state laws regarding same, until Lincoln.Technically, not until after Lincoln: December 1865. (Lincoln died in April). Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was so legalistic sounding because he and his lawyers were somewhat unsure of his power, but the 13th amendment settled that (if not the means by which it was actually ratified). it was left to the individual states. Not entirely. There was some federal regulation, e.g., allowance for fugitive slave law, but by and large, it was a state matter. That said, I don't think that Easy's statement is racist. Most blacks in the US simply didn't live - and couldn't live - where slavery was illegal, because per the Fugitive Slave Law, by the power of federal law, back to their masters they went even if they made it up north (except all the way out of the reach of US jurisdiction). Moreover, Chief Justice Taney's opinion in the Dred Scott decision made it the law that blacks could not possibly become legal persons. (Thus the kicker in the case: Dred Scott didn't even have the right to have his case heard by a court). That decision was, of course, overruled by the Reconstruction amendments after the Civil War. We've made a lot of progress, but it was a slow, difficult, and painful process. |
|
|
| (415526) | |
Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Feb 15 23:59:00 2009, in response to Re: WSJ interview with Jeb Bush: GOP must be national party, moderate on immigration, push school ch, posted by Easy on Sun Feb 15 23:18:13 2009. The slavery in Africa isn't the same. It's not inherited for the most part. It's more debt related.In part. Historically, I understand that it's difficult to fully understand African slavery because of the lack of a written language and records for posterity in most respects, but apparently from what I have read, there was some extent - we aren't sure how much - of heritable slavery, usually via raids on the tribe that you didn't like in addition to things like serfdom and indentured servitude for a term of years (or more frequently, a sum of cash equivalent). Heritable slavery in the days of the slave trade also offered an incentive for African tribes to engage in more of what they did already anyway against other tribes (and thus to save the Jewish and Muslim, later European, merchants from a trip into the African interior). |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||