(01-12-2017, 05:49 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2017, 02:04 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, it's not that I didn't have positive experiences with professors at Columbia and other institutions where I took classes, but all in all I was very unimpressed. That class in particular was very bad.
I had my one bad experience taking an upper level elective in Constitutional History. This was 1991, so not yesterday but not ancient times either.
This was a class full of pre-law types, and I was the only one with a major outside the general field. Long story short, the professor made the class all about "the struggle", with everything so PC it was suffocating. Since he enjoyed calling on me thinking I would be good discussion fodder, I took him on about the entire PC thing. Most of the class cringed, but I only needed to pass the class not excel. After 20 minutes of verbal swordplay, the class ended and we all departed. To his credit, he didn't hold it against me.
Yeah, I was wrapping a history major since I only had a year left on my GI bill and I had enough history credits from before the Army to pull it off. I argued with him fairly regularly, and I knew he was anti-religious so I wrote my final paper on the use and reason for Protestant rhetoric in Tom Paine's pamphlets. He was not amused, but fuck him, anyways.
(01-12-2017, 05:54 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 07:51 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]The reason I like to bring up Woodard is that this election has caused a lot of people to start making broad over-generalizations about "rural vs. urban" that have begun to really get on my nerves. There are a lot of really ignorant people spouting nonsense since the election who think small town Wisconsin is little different from small town Alabama.
Have you spent any time in small town Alabama? It's different, but not to the extent you may think. Both cultures support insular thinking, because it's a feasible way to live. In a city, you are thrown into the tossed salad, like it or not.
I had an openly lesbian math teacher in rural Minnesota in the early 00s who went around in public normally with her partner. I can't see that same thing being true in rural Alabama.
(01-12-2017, 05:40 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2017, 11:18 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2017, 10:30 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2017, 09:40 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]I think there are some definite parallels with the Glorious Revolution building up. According to Colin Woodard a defining aspect of the Glorious Revolution in the American colonies, especially New England, was the determination to preserve their own local cultural and political autonomy in the face of centralization efforts from London. Right now we have a "Dixie" political alliance centered on the Deep South and Greater Appalachia trying to impose their will on the other cultures that make up the US, and resistance and anger is building. Trump may be our Edmund Andross.
The only thing that makes that clumsy is the difference between impressions and reality. The Dixie Alliance is built on the idea of self determination and freedom, but is actually highly authoritarian. It's hard to square that circle.
Yep. Greater Appalachia loves self-determination and freedom, while the Deep South is highly authoritarian and conceives of "Freedom" in the classical Greco-Roman republican sense of the autonomy of the ruling class. The two nations have been tied together by a shared "private protestant" religious heritage that sees tying to better the world as immoral and is focused on "saving one's soul", by a common belief in white supremacy, and a common dislike of Yankees. The oligarchs of the Deep South are always scared of the populist strain of Greater Appalachia, the kind that produced people like LBJ and used to be common in the Democratic Party, breaking out. I suspect it is a big reason the Right hates Bill Clinton so virulently, he is a charismatic good-ol-boy Greater-Appalachian and so reminds them of the populists they fear.
I lived among the cavaliers in the Virginia Tidewater, and among the Scots-Irish in Appalachia. The difference are more style than substance. The old aristocracy is hidebound and closed to the outside (I'll never be a Virginian in their eyes), but the Appalachians aren't any more inviting that the cavaliers. Both groups reject the imposition of authority fro outside, and both seek to set boundaries others must obey.
Wait, the Tidewater aristocracy still exists?
(01-12-2017, 08:16 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 09:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 07:54 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 05:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- both parties ran bad candidates, 1/2 the electorate didn't even bother to vote. l'm guessing it't bcuz they didn't like either candidate to the point they didn't really care who won, not bcuz they thought the hildabitch was gonna win. The media's nonstop pimping of her may have cause ppl to get out & vote for the Donald however.
I voted 4 Jill, btw
You voting for Dr. Crystal-Healing makes you part of the fucking problem. The Republicans will get out and vote no matter who their candidate is, our side has people like you has people who throw a fit when the candidate isn't perfect. 
-- l didn't throw a fit. l voted for the candidate who best represented me. How is that part of the problem? (you know where you can shove your fbombs, btw) lf Jill hadn't been running l'd of been in the 1/2 of the electorate that stayed home.
Voting is a civic duty, not a lifestyle choice for your own vanity. Voting for a candidate who cannot win and just acts as a spoiler for the Dems is essentially voting for Trump.
And you do know that there are more things to vote on than just the presidential election, right? 
-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
(01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
You are truly deranged if you think the DNC is the greater threat to this country than a president-elect that is a Kremlin puppet. The DNC did not "subvert democracy" or engage in "election theft", BERNIE LOST THE FUCKING PRIMARIES, and I say that as somebody who caucused for him!
Come on, guys, give Putin a chance! The borscht is delicious, and the women... Ah, love those cheekbones!
(01-13-2017, 09:16 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
You are truly deranged if you think the DNC is the greater threat to this country than a president-elect that is a Kremlin puppet. The DNC did not "subvert democracy" or engage in "election theft", BERNIE LOST THE FUCKING PRIMARIES, and I say that as somebody who caucused for him!
-- yes he did, unfortunately, due to the DNC's engaging in voter supression, including flipping some voters' party affiliation, flipping the votes themselves, suddenly changing caucus rules to disfavor Bernie.. & that's what l can think of off the top of my head. l read somewhere that their bs cost Bernie 184 delegates, which would of been enough for him to clinch the nomination. They screwed him over plain & simple. Oh yeah, & they manipulated the repug primaries to "elevate" the Donald to be their nominee. So yeah, they tampered with the elections.
Just bcuz the Donald wants good relations with Russia does not make him a Kremlin puppet. At any rate he's better than a warmongering cunt who was trying to start a war with them. l got teenagers, no way was l voting for that bitch. Aren't you of draft age, btw? Why on earth would you vote for a war whore? Seems to me that you're the deranged one, or @ least a suicide jockey
(01-14-2017, 01:14 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]Just bcuz the Donald wants good relations with Russia does not make him a Kremlin puppet. At any rate he's better than a warmongering cunt who was trying to start a war with them. l got teenagers, no way was l voting for that bitch. Aren't you of draft age, btw? Why on earth would you vote for a war whore? Seems to me that you're the deranged one, or @ least a suicide jockey
Yep, you're a tool. If, God forbid, it comes to a war with Russia I have no qualms with serving my country and defeating Fascism just like the GIs did.
(01-14-2017, 11:06 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2017, 01:14 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]Just bcuz the Donald wants good relations with Russia does not make him a Kremlin puppet. At any rate he's better than a warmongering cunt who was trying to start a war with them. l got teenagers, no way was l voting for that bitch. Aren't you of draft age, btw? Why on earth would you vote for a war whore? Seems to me that you're the deranged one, or @ least a suicide jockey
Yep, you're a tool. If, God forbid, it comes to a war with Russia I have no qualms with serving my country and defeating Fascism just like the GIs did.
-- :lol: that's the best you can do, tool?
News flash- pacifism does not make one a tool. Refusing to goosestep behind $Hitlery definitely does not make one a tool. Spouting the DNC's bogus talking points otoh...... now that's being a pathetic tool
(01-13-2017, 09:20 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-12-2017, 08:16 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 09:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 07:54 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]You voting for Dr. Crystal-Healing makes you part of the fucking problem. The Republicans will get out and vote no matter who their candidate is, our side has people like you has people who throw a fit when the candidate isn't perfect.
-- l didn't throw a fit. l voted for the candidate who best represented me. How is that part of the problem? (you know where you can shove your fbombs, btw) lf Jill hadn't been running l'd of been in the 1/2 of the electorate that stayed home.
Voting is a civic duty, not a lifestyle choice for your own vanity. Voting for a candidate who cannot win and just acts as a spoiler for the Dems is essentially voting for Trump.
And you do know that there are more things to vote on than just the presidential election, right?
-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
What do you mean by election theft? If you are referring to the DNC playing a favorite, well duh. Hell, both political parties used to choose their candidates in smoke filled rooms, with no transparency whatever. At least we get to vote in primaries.
-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem
elevated the Donald, ie
manipulated your primaries?
(01-15-2017, 01:00 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 09:20 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-12-2017, 08:16 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2017, 09:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- l didn't throw a fit. l voted for the candidate who best represented me. How is that part of the problem? (you know where you can shove your fbombs, btw) lf Jill hadn't been running l'd of been in the 1/2 of the electorate that stayed home.
Voting is a civic duty, not a lifestyle choice for your own vanity. Voting for a candidate who cannot win and just acts as a spoiler for the Dems is essentially voting for Trump.
And you do know that there are more things to vote on than just the presidential election, right?
-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
What do you mean by election theft? If you are referring to the DNC playing a favorite, well duh. Hell, both political parties used to choose their candidates in smoke filled rooms, with no transparency whatever. At least we get to vote in primaries.
-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem elevated the Donald, ie manipulated your primaries?
He may not be aware of it. A lot of people ignored the content of the DNC and Clinton emails.
(01-15-2017, 12:47 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2017, 11:06 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2017, 01:14 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]Just bcuz the Donald wants good relations with Russia does not make him a Kremlin puppet. At any rate he's better than a warmongering cunt who was trying to start a war with them. l got teenagers, no way was l voting for that bitch. Aren't you of draft age, btw? Why on earth would you vote for a war whore? Seems to me that you're the deranged one, or @ least a suicide jockey
Yep, you're a tool. If, God forbid, it comes to a war with Russia I have no qualms with serving my country and defeating Fascism just like the GIs did.
-- :lol: that's the best you can do, tool?
News flash- pacifism does not make one a tool. Refusing to goosestep behind $Hitlery definitely does not make one a tool. Spouting the DNC's bogus talking points otoh...... now that's being a pathetic tool
Pacifism in the face of Fascism is cowardice.
(01-15-2017, 10:34 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 12:47 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2017, 11:06 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2017, 01:14 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]Just bcuz the Donald wants good relations with Russia does not make him a Kremlin puppet. At any rate he's better than a warmongering cunt who was trying to start a war with them. l got teenagers, no way was l voting for that bitch. Aren't you of draft age, btw? Why on earth would you vote for a war whore? Seems to me that you're the deranged one, or @ least a suicide jockey
Yep, you're a tool. If, God forbid, it comes to a war with Russia I have no qualms with serving my country and defeating Fascism just like the GIs did.
-- :lol: that's the best you can do, tool?
News flash- pacifism does not make one a tool. Refusing to goosestep behind $Hitlery definitely does not make one a tool. Spouting the DNC's bogus talking points otoh...... now that's being a pathetic tool
Pacifism in the face of Fascism is cowardice.
-- paraphrasing George Orwell? jeez if that's the best you can do then l guess we're done here.
ps. Here's another one for you- 4 legs good , 2 legs bettahhhhhhh (my personal fave)
(01-17-2017, 02:29 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:32 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:00 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 09:20 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
What do you mean by election theft? If you are referring to the DNC playing a favorite, well duh. Hell, both political parties used to choose their candidates in smoke filled rooms, with no transparency whatever. At least we get to vote in primaries.
-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem elevated the Donald, ie manipulated your primaries?
He may not be aware of it. A lot of people ignored the content of the DNC and Clinton emails.
Wrong.
-- so are you upset or not?
(01-17-2017, 08:31 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-17-2017, 07:37 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-17-2017, 02:29 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:32 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:00 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem elevated the Donald, ie manipulated your primaries?
He may not be aware of it. A lot of people ignored the content of the DNC and Clinton emails.
Wrong.
-- so are you upset or not?
The rules allowed it. Being upset about cross overs would be pointless.
Now, am I upset about some GOP people and indies voting for the Orange Clown in the primaries? Yep. A bunch of dupes.
-- but that is pointless too. You can't fix stoopid
(01-17-2017, 02:28 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:00 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 09:20 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-12-2017, 08:16 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]Voting is a civic duty, not a lifestyle choice for your own vanity. Voting for a candidate who cannot win and just acts as a spoiler for the Dems is essentially voting for Trump.
And you do know that there are more things to vote on than just the presidential election, right?
-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
What do you mean by election theft? If you are referring to the DNC playing a favorite, well duh. Hell, both political parties used to choose their candidates in smoke filled rooms, with no transparency whatever. At least we get to vote in primaries.
-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem elevated the Donald, ie manipulated your primaries?
Yep, in certain states, Dems crossed over and voted in GOP primaries for the Orange Clown. And? ....
Maripoza, is that what you were talking about? I thought you were talking about Clinton's "Pied Piper" strategy of manipulating the press to get Trump nominated, because Clinton thought Trump would be easiest to beat:
In February, emails obtained by Gawker showed that the Clinton campaign was literally allowed to ghost write portions of the influential “Playbook” newsletter published by Politico.... [In one] memo, the Clinton campaign sought to enlist the help of the DNC to encourage the media to treat the campaigns of Ted Cruz, Ben Carson and Donald Trump seriously, in an attempt to damage the rest of the Republican field:... "We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously."
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/10/09/...seriously/
Or for those who prefer left wing sources:
http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hill...-strategy/
Of course, the press was in the business of doing everything Clinton wanted, so the result was ... President Trump.
(01-17-2017, 08:54 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ] (01-17-2017, 02:28 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:00 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 09:20 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2017, 06:31 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- voting for the Dems was not an option last year. A vote for their candidates meant you approve of their election theft, which will give them license to do it the next election, & the next, & the one after that. The only way to stop that is to stop voting for their candidates until they either stop fixing elections or wither away. We can survive the Donald. We cannot survive the DNC's subversion of democracy
What do you mean by election theft? If you are referring to the DNC playing a favorite, well duh. Hell, both political parties used to choose their candidates in smoke filled rooms, with no transparency whatever. At least we get to vote in primaries.
-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem elevated the Donald, ie manipulated your primaries?
Yep, in certain states, Dems crossed over and voted in GOP primaries for the Orange Clown. And? ....
Maripoza, is that what you were talking about? I thought you were talking about Clinton's "Pied Piper" strategy of manipulating the press to get Trump nominated, because Clinton thought Trump would be easiest to beat:
In February, emails obtained by Gawker showed that the Clinton campaign was literally allowed to ghost write portions of the influential “Playbook” newsletter published by Politico.... [In one] memo, the Clinton campaign sought to enlist the help of the DNC to encourage the media to treat the campaigns of Ted Cruz, Ben Carson and Donald Trump seriously, in an attempt to damage the rest of the Republican field:... "We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously."
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/10/09/...seriously/
Or for those who prefer left wing sources: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hill...-strategy/
Of course, the press was in the business of doing everything Clinton wanted, so the result was ... President Trump.
-- yes that was what l meant. Actually the publicity in general, including paying trolls to incite violence @ his & Bernie's rallies. But X is right too- they were encouraging Clintonistas to vote for the Donald in repug primaries since they were vote flipping/purging the Bernie votes in their own primaries, & banking votes for her (ie, $hillary having yay many thousands votes in a county w/0 precincts reporting in. huh? wtf?)
(01-18-2017, 01:15 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-18-2017, 12:33 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ] (01-17-2017, 08:54 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ] (01-17-2017, 02:28 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2017, 01:00 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- exactly. What's the point of even having primaries if the DNC is gonna fix & manipulate them? They may as well go back to their smoke filled rooms.
I seem to recall you being very upset that the Donald won your primaries. You aren't the least bit upset that the DNC, how did they put it?- ahem elevated the Donald, ie manipulated your primaries?
Yep, in certain states, Dems crossed over and voted in GOP primaries for the Orange Clown. And? ....
Maripoza, is that what you were talking about? I thought you were talking about Clinton's "Pied Piper" strategy of manipulating the press to get Trump nominated, because Clinton thought Trump would be easiest to beat:
In February, emails obtained by Gawker showed that the Clinton campaign was literally allowed to ghost write portions of the influential “Playbook” newsletter published by Politico.... [In one] memo, the Clinton campaign sought to enlist the help of the DNC to encourage the media to treat the campaigns of Ted Cruz, Ben Carson and Donald Trump seriously, in an attempt to damage the rest of the Republican field:... "We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously."
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/10/09/...seriously/
Or for those who prefer left wing sources: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hill...-strategy/
Of course, the press was in the business of doing everything Clinton wanted, so the result was ... President Trump.
-- yes that was what l meant. Actually the publicity in general, including paying trolls to incite violence @ his & Bernie's rallies. But X is right too- they were encouraging Clintonistas to vote for the Donald in repug primaries since they were vote flipping/purging the Bernie votes in their own primaries, & banking votes for her (ie, $hillary having yay many thousands votes in a county w/0 precincts reporting in. huh? wtf?)
All of the above. And it was all legal. Dirty? Sure. But legal. Politics is a dirty business.
I don't think paying people to incite violence is legal. Accepted maybe; legal no.