The article basically states that by exposing children to 4th of July celebrations, that it makes children more likely to become Republican, and that it's not in the best interest of Democrats to expose their children to small-town 4th of july celebrations.
When I was a little kid living in Woodley Park, D.C.... my parents used to take me every year to the Washington Monument for the 4th of July celebration. We'd grab a huge blanket, set up in front of the monument with the lawn chairs, etc... and watch the fireworks go for nearly an hour. Then, we'd all cram back into the Metro to make our way back to our respective subway stops...
Definitely made me a Pro-Republican American...
I think it's funny though how some Democrats on the FAR FAR left really, REALLY don't like America, and seem to think being proud of your country is wrong.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I think it's funny though how some Democrats on the FAR FAR left really, REALLY don't like America, and seem to think being proud of your country is wrong.
When we were young, my assigned parenting units, Linda and Susan, would load us into the Subaru and take us to May Day celebrations in the People's Square. We would wear our uniforms and make signs for Gay Pride parades and burn American flags to heat the commune hall. I'm so glad that they didn't support the phallic rockets and warlike explosions, as they caused our gay Weimereiner to urinate on Susan's menstrual robes, so today I am free to hate America.
[This message has been edited by WhiteDevil88 (edited 07-05-2011).]
IP: Logged
09:08 AM
WhiteDevil88 Member
Posts: 8518 From: Coastal California Registered: Mar 2007
When we were young, my assigned parenting units, Linda and Susan, would load us into the Subaru and take us to May Day celebrations in the People's Square. We would wear our uniforms and make signs for Gay Pride parades and burn American flags to heat the commune hall. I'm so glad that they didn't support the phallic rockets and warlike explosions, as they caused our gay Weimereiner to urinate on Susan's menstrual robes, so today I am free to hate America.
Shoot... who are you kidding? All the gay people I know are hard-core Americans.
quote
Originally posted by WhiteDevil88:
By the way... Damn Socialist. I hope you enjoyed my tax dollars subsidizing your transportation.
Well.. that depends on how old you were. Back in 1979-1982, I was living in D.C... so unless you were of working age, then you weren't subsidizing it. But man... that DC Subway is awesome. I always remember as a little kid that the entire subway had a 2001 Space Odyssey feel to it. I mean, 80% of all the subway stations were underground.
I really, REALLY hate to admit this though... but... some of the Metro cars were made in France, although most of them were made in Italy, with a few of them being manufactured in California (although they stopped it due to union strikes in the 70s). You don't really see anything about France making the metro cars anywhere in the US, but if you look at the manufacturing plaque on the side of the cars, it will say where it was made, and when / if / where it was refurbished. Some of them say "France"...
IP: Logged
09:20 AM
WhiteDevil88 Member
Posts: 8518 From: Coastal California Registered: Mar 2007
Right or wrong, even the crazies get a voice... unfortunately, we seem to focus on the crazies, rather than the vast majority.
I'm quite sure the overwhelming vast majority of Democrats support America and her values... but man... Harvard has become more and more ****ed up every time I see them in the news.
IP: Logged
09:38 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Right or wrong, even the crazies get a voice... unfortunately, we seem to focus on the crazies, rather than the vast majority.
I'm quite sure the overwhelming vast majority of Democrats support America and her values... but man... Harvard has become more and more ****ed up every time I see them in the news.
yes - yes they do. and, being crazies - it gets news sources to listen.
so, does this guy speak for all Democrats, or just his own fruit-n-nut world? just wanna make sure....
IP: Logged
09:43 AM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
yes - yes they do. and, being crazies - it gets news sources to listen.
so, does this guy speak for all Democrats, or just his own fruit-n-nut world? just wanna make sure....
I'm quite sure they think they're speaking for all Democrats (article was co-authored). It's like when a president wins, and the radical says... "I don't know how he won, no one I know voted for him."
In the circles that the girl / guy authors hang out in, I'm sure they all actually feel that same way. When people like this allow politics to "become" who they are, they tend to envelope themselves in everything associated with whatever their belief system is. This becomes not only their being, but their hobby as well. Some of us like to work on cars, some of us garden, but then there are those who become political analysts in their own minds. This duo probably never looks outside of their own scope, and therefore every study they do, becomes inherently flawed, no matter how convincing the data they propose in their results.
Case-in-point... they make no consideration to the fact that while small towns are inherently more conservative, they are no more right-wing radical than they are left-wing-radical. These small towns are Reagan Democrats... but are also Clinton Republicans. Right now, they don't support Obama, because they believe firmly in several virtues that are incompatible with the radical left agenda. These very same people, many of them... would just as soon vote Democrat if they saw someone who was more in-line with their values.
Carter won the election because of these same small-town people back in what was that... 78??? because Carter was very religious.
Anyway...
IP: Logged
10:00 AM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20700 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm quite sure they think they're speaking for all Democrats (article was co-authored). It's like when a president wins, and the radical says... "I don't know how he won, no one I know voted for him."
In the circles that the girl / guy authors hang out in, I'm sure they all actually feel that same way. When people like this allow politics to "become" who they are, they tend to envelope themselves in everything associated with whatever their belief system is. This becomes not only their being, but their hobby as well. Some of us like to work on cars, some of us garden, but then there are those who become political analysts in their own minds. This duo probably never looks outside of their own scope, and therefore every study they do, becomes inherently flawed, no matter how convincing the data they propose in their results.
Case-in-point... they make no consideration to the fact that while small towns are inherently more conservative, they are no more right-wing radical than they are left-wing-radical. These small towns are Reagan Democrats... but are also Clinton Republicans. Right now, they don't support Obama, because they believe firmly in several virtues that are incompatible with the radical left agenda. These very same people, many of them... would just as soon vote Democrat if they saw someone who was more in-line with their values.
Carter won the election because of these same small-town people back in what was that... 78??? because Carter was very religious.
Anyway...
It was 76. But yes, the evangelical crowd were Democrat for a very long time.
The left is scared s***less. They had their big chance - their far, far left president got elected, they had the House and Senate...the leftist revolution was all set. Then, a funny thing happened on the way to the Kremlin. People discovered the emperor had no clothes. "Hope" and "change" had no real meaning, aside from a HUGE leftward swing toward big government. And the majority is rejecting this leftward swing, so the left is scared. Their big chance is slipping away. America is much more difficult to take over than they thought. Americanism runs deeper than they imagined. They are losing this battle, so we're seeing more and more desperate attempts to hold on. But it is failing. Thank God.
IP: Logged
10:30 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by fierobear: The left is scared s***less. They had their big chance - their far, far left president got elected, they had the House and Senate...the leftist revolution was all set. Then, a funny thing happened on the way to the Kremlin. People discovered the emperor had no clothes. "Hope" and "change" had no real meaning, aside from a HUGE leftward swing toward big government. And the majority is rejecting this leftward swing, so the left is scared. Their big chance is slipping away. America is much more difficult to take over than they thought. Americanism runs deeper than they imagined. They are losing this battle, so we're seeing more and more desperate attempts to hold on. But it is failing. Thank God.
yup - and this same applies to the righties. they already lost the battle.
Americanism may FINALLY emerge from the ignorance the extremists on both ends have drug the nation down to. may....
if we can ever get past the slamming back-n-fiorth, and get back to making a strong nation
IP: Logged
10:33 AM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25242 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
yup - and this same applies to the righties. they already lost the battle.
Americanism may FINALLY emerge from the ignorance the extremists on both ends have drug the nation down to. may....
if we can ever get past the slamming back-n-fiorth, and get back to making a strong nation
How much slamming do you think has taken place? Reagan and Clinton's terms seemed fairly un-caustic, and they both seemed to enjoy wide support. Even Bush Sr. between the two of them was pretty decent.
IP: Logged
11:28 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: How much slamming do you think has taken place? Reagan and Clinton's terms seemed fairly un-caustic, and they both seemed to enjoy wide support. Even Bush Sr. between the two of them was pretty decent.
as far as I can tell - it got ugly with the Iraq debachle. from then on - the nation has been divided. but - that was likely part of "the plan". divide the nation, crash the economy, wasn't that it? worked perfectly form that standpoint. But - who's at the bottom of the indian ocean?
IP: Logged
11:39 AM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: When we were young, my assigned parenting units, Linda and Susan, would load us into the Subaru and take us to May Day celebrations in the People's Square. We would wear our uniforms and make signs for Gay Pride parades and burn American flags to heat the commune hall. I'm so glad that they didn't support the phallic rockets and warlike explosions, as they caused our gay Weimereiner to urinate on Susan's menstrual robes, so today I am free to hate America.
That was the funniest thing I have read in a very long time! Just when I think the World can't get any more strange, you come along with that! Bravo, my good man!
IP: Logged
11:41 AM
PFF
System Bot
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
The left is scared s***less. They had their big chance - their far, far left president got elected, they had the House and Senate...the leftist revolution was all set. Then, a funny thing happened on the way to the Kremlin. People discovered the emperor had no clothes. "Hope" and "change" had no real meaning, aside from a HUGE leftward swing toward big government. And the majority is rejecting this leftward swing, so the left is scared. Their big chance is slipping away. America is much more difficult to take over than they thought. Americanism runs deeper than they imagined. They are losing this battle, so we're seeing more and more desperate attempts to hold on. But it is failing. Thank God.
Bear, you really really really really really really really really do just see two sides, don't you? The good guys & the bad guys. But your above statement betrays you and actually speeks the truth about what it really is.
You say; The left was ready to take over. They got their man elected. Everything was set to change America. But then the left realized that their plan would mean more intrusive Government. Now they want out.
But what you mean is; Some politicians told people some half-truths and down right lies. People bought into it. Then they found out everything was not as it seemed. Now they don't want anything to do with it.
See the difference? You use "The Left" as a catch-all for "The People" as well as "The Machine". When they are two separate things.
"The People" (whatever side you choose to assign them) want a better World. "The Machine" wants fame & fortune, through power.
YOU want a better Government, a better Country, a better World? Stop making "The People" the enemy, and put it where it belongs, on "The Machine".
IP: Logged
12:01 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Originally posted by Formula88: So he thinks exposure to patriotism, pride in your country, celebration of our independence, etc. makes someone more likely to become Republican?
Forget whether or not he's right. It says SO much more about his opinion of the Democrat party.
yes - this guy is about as effective as the Phelps are...... maybe if he went and spoke of how we are celebrating the liberal thinking of the founding fathers in creating this great nation
IP: Logged
12:19 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
yes - this guy is about as effective as the Phelps are...... maybe if he went and spoke of how we are celebrating the liberal thinking of the founding fathers in creating this great nation
Maybe what? Your post is a syntax error.
Besides, he knows the "liberal" thinking of the founding fathers isn't the liberal thinking of today. It would just make more kids Republican.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 07-05-2011).]
IP: Logged
12:35 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Besides, he knows the "liberal" thinking of the founding fathers isn't the liberal thinking of today. It would just make more kids Republican.
you are free to speculate all you like I have my doubts the founding fathers wanted the nation run by corporations but - I do agree they would be amazed/frightened/surprised by the ideals many try to apply to them
Yeah, I can only speak for personal experience, but both of my parents voted overwhelmingly democrat my whole life. I never missed a 4th of July parade, whether I was watching it or IN it , until I was at least 20.
Not only for our years in little league, but we were also part of creating our American legion float for years. We would precede veterans, some of them in their 70s and 80s, marching behind our wagon in the hot sun for miles. When we got back to the legion after the parade, we would make lunch for everyone who showed up afterward, serve food and drinks to our present veterans, and honor them with flag ceremonies and other patriotic displays.
I am the son of the former national poppy chairman for the American Legion. My father is ex military. I am ex military. I dont think this "study" has a single bit of merit, because I am NOT a republican and I was there every year not only to observe, but to work those parades. How many here have volunteered and stood out in the cold for hours over several days in the winter to sell handmade poppies, made by disabled veterans so they would have little things like glasses that aren't broken, and shoes that are not tattered? Would you say that is the act only a Republican would commit? 'Cuz I aint one.
I think the "study" needed more study.
[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-05-2011).]
IP: Logged
12:48 PM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
I have my doubts the founding fathers wanted the nation run by corporations
I actually do "thinking excercizes' about that very thing. If they were to gather in a room today to talk about this country , what would they say, or change?
quote
Originally posted by Pyrthian:
but - I do agree they would be amazed/frightened/surprised by the ideals many try to apply to them
Of THAT, I am sure. Kinda' like how God is disgusted with some of the things humanity does "in His name"...
IP: Logged
12:48 PM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25242 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
Bear, you really really really really really really really really do just see two sides, don't you? The good guys & the bad guys. But your above statement betrays you and actually speeks the truth about what it really is.
You say; The left was ready to take over. They got their man elected. Everything was set to change America. But then the left realized that their plan would mean more intrusive Government. Now they want out.
But what you mean is; Some politicians told people some half-truths and down right lies. People bought into it. Then they found out everything was not as it seemed. Now they don't want anything to do with it.
See the difference? You use "The Left" as a catch-all for "The People" as well as "The Machine". When they are two separate things.
"The People" (whatever side you choose to assign them) want a better World. "The Machine" wants fame & fortune, through power.
YOU want a better Government, a better Country, a better World? Stop making "The People" the enemy, and put it where it belongs, on "The Machine".
For all of Bear's faults, you seem to be very quick to judge him on them.
IP: Logged
12:51 PM
Doug85GT Member
Posts: 9891 From: Sacramento CA USA Registered: May 2003
I was at a small town Independence Day parade yesterday. There were processions from a lot of different groups including Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, several peace activist groups, the tea party, various societies etc.
The thing that really got my attention was the reaction of various members of the crowd. The "conservative" member would cheer for the military groups, Tea Party and Republicans. When other groups went by, they were silent. The "liberals" would cheer for the peace activists and Democrats. But when any group they did not agree with came by they would loudly jeer, boo and made their opinion known loudly.
When the colors passed, everyone was asked to stand. One woman in front of me, who was the loudest of the jeerers, refused to stand and had her 4 year old son sit with her. She said to her son, "we will do whatever we want to do." Yes, she can and did do as she wanted to do including show blatant disrespect for the country she lives in. If that is the type of person on the other side, I know I'm on the right side.
Originally posted by Boondawg: I actually do "thinking excercizes' about that very thing. If they were to gather in a room today to talk about this country , what would they say, or change?
well, take a look at what "corporations" were like back then. a fun starting point: shareholders were responsible for the corporations doings. just picture how that would play out today. every shareholder of BP would have been DIRECTLY resposible for helping clean up the Gulf of Mexico
obviously many problems with that approach - but - it is actually the proper way to be. The non-stop shirking of responsibility - while at the same crying for responsibility from others is an amazing show when watched from the outside.
IP: Logged
12:56 PM
PFF
System Bot
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25242 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
well, take a look at what "corporations" were like back then. a fun starting point: shareholders were responsible for the corporations doings. just picture how that would play out today. every shareholder of BP would have been DIRECTLY resposible for helping clean up the Gulf of Mexico
I know no such concept of shareholders having to be responsible for the misdoings of the company. Buying corporate shares is a concept that was created by the Dutch to help finance a corporation. In essence, every individual who buys corporate shares becomes a lender, and they expect a return on the investment. This corporate concept has existed from before the birth of our nation. My dad has owned stocks from well before I was born, and I don't remember him ever having to go do anything with any of those companies because they screwed up.
And for what it's worth, the majority of BP employees are unionized... the largest of which is the United Steel Workers Union... which comprises of about 20% of their total employees at BP. The rest of the workers are all under other smaller union organizations. They all own stock in BP as part of their union contracts. Yeah, they got overtime for clean-ups...
IP: Logged
01:09 PM
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9115 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Carter won the election because of these same small-town people back in what was that... 78??? because Carter was very religious.
Anyway...
Actually religion was not a large factor, Ford, the incumbent had pardoned Nixon and many others in the Watergate scandal, and Americans were fed up with the GOP at that time.
Much like 2008, when the public was electing Obama, cause they were "mad at Bush."
[This message has been edited by htexans1 (edited 07-05-2011).]
IP: Logged
03:03 PM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25242 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
Actually religion was not a large factor, Ford, the incumbent had pardoned Nixon and many others in the Watergate scandal, and Americans were fed up with the GOP at that time.
I'm not going to say you're wrong... because I was merely born in the late 70s and have no recolection of anything political back then. But besides that, I had read in numerous places that Carter won the bread basket of the US because he was very religious... and that the only reason why Reagan won back these Democrats that had voted for Carter originally, was because they felt that Carter was soft on fighting communism.
IP: Logged
03:05 PM
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9115 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm not going to say you're wrong... because I was merely born in the late 70s and have no recolection of anything political back then. But besides that, I had read in numerous places that Carter won the bread basket of the US because he was very religious... and that the only reason why Reagan won back these Democrats that had voted for Carter originally, was because they felt that Carter was soft on fighting communism.
You may be correct, I was just giving you "an alternative viewpoint." My history teachers in school brought up "watergate" constantly and downplayed religion.
Huh, wheras my school had a 3 week unit in 8th grade specifically on Christianity and no other religion was studied at all.
I never heard a word about Watergate in school until college, we spent so much time on the Revolutionary and Civil War in 11th grade US history, there was not a lot of time left after World War II before summer break. Must just be where you are raised, I guess... in Indiana, Christianity is studied in school at several grade levels, and we even had a bible study class in high school. (Not required, but availble)
Nothing about any other religions unless you took the single available senior year Humanities class.
[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-05-2011).]
IP: Logged
03:13 PM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25242 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
Huh, wheras my school had a 3 week unit in 8th grade specifically on Christianity and no other religion was studied at all.
I never heard a word about Watergate in school until college, we spent so much time on the Revolutionary and Civil War in 11th grade US history, there was not a lot of time left after World War II before summer break. Must just be where you are raised, I guess... in Indiana, religion is studied in school at several grade levels, and we even had a bible study class in high school.
Nothing about any other religions unless you took the single available senior year Humanities class.
We took a World Religion class where we learned about every other religion. It WAS a very interesting class, and at the time, I wasn't too bothered by the comment the teacher made... "We already know everything about Christianity, so we're going to skip that section..."
But now, it would kind of bother me...
As for US history, I learned NOTHING past the civil war. But... we did spend a couple of months learning about Dr. Martin Luther King... but other than that... nothing past the Civil War.
Everything I know now about US history, is from the History Channel... and then through some reading.
I went to elementary school in the south (Richmond, Virginia), went to middle school in New England, and went to High School in Northern Virginia / DC metro area (which is basically considered the "north"...
The article basically states that by exposing children to 4th of July celebrations, that it makes children more likely to become Republican, and that it's not in the best interest of Democrats to expose their children to small-town 4th of july celebrations.
When I was a little kid living in Woodley Park, D.C.... my parents used to take me every year to the Washington Monument for the 4th of July celebration. We'd grab a huge blanket, set up in front of the monument with the lawn chairs, etc... and watch the fireworks go for nearly an hour. Then, we'd all cram back into the Metro to make our way back to our respective subway stops...
Definitely made me a Pro-Republican American...
I think it's funny though how some Democrats on the FAR FAR left really, REALLY don't like America, and seem to think being proud of your country is wrong.
I vote Democrat, and I think this guy from Harvard is full of crap. I love my country as much as anyone does, and am a loyal patriot. Just as a point of reference...
IP: Logged
06:39 PM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25242 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
I vote Democrat, and I think this guy from Harvard is full of crap. I love my country as much as anyone does, and am a loyal patriot. Just as a point of reference...
Every once in a while, Formula88 comes out with a real nugget of wisdom that sticks with me. In particular, this one stands out too:
"Forget whether or not he's right. It says SO much more about his opinion of the Democrat party."
Seriously... it does...
Of course, I realize (as do most people) that these professors are the Westborough Baptist Church of the Democrat party... but still, it really speaks volumes about what THEY think their party represents...
you are free to speculate all you like I have my doubts the founding fathers wanted the nation run by corporations but - I do agree they would be amazed/frightened/surprised by the ideals many try to apply to them
That's cool, but perhaps the Government shouldn't view each person as a CORPORATION if we are not supposed to be ran by them.
If I was to hazard a guess, I would say our founding fathers wanted each of us to be left alone, with very little Government involvement, just the bare basics. Completely different from your view where we would just be cogs in a machine, bent on destruction.
