2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

After attacking Obama's wife, Bachmann declares spouses off limits. Funny how that works...

Mrs. Obama is a pubic figure. She lives in government housing. She rides in government cars. She is protected by the Secret Service. She has a staff paid for by the tax payers, including speech writers and spin doctors. She flies in government planes. She has office space in the west wing. She is waited on hand and foot 24/7 by a staff paid for by taxpayers. To use Hilary's phrase: she occupies "the office of First Lady." Most candidate spouses don't come close to that, even Bachmann's. Peeless, old darling, I'm guessing you knew that. And the libtard chorus accuses ME of being a troll.

 

[Rimbaud]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I think you're both trolls.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I think you're both trolls.

It's part of President Dangerfield's stimulus plan.

 

[TimP]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

All the debt ceiling hearings are making me giddy. Can 2012 get here fast so we can undo the damage from 2010?

 

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

all the debt ceiling hearings are making me giddy. Can 2012 get here fast so we can undo the damage from 2008?

fyp

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

fyp

If I hear the Fresh Prince of Back of the Yards whine about "corporate jet owners" one more time, I'm going to puke. This very small tax break, which he has demagogued endlessly for the last several weeks, WAS PART OF HIS STIMULUS PACKAGE. I guess he was for it before he was against it. Does anybody listen to or care what this presidential failure thinks about anything anymore?

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I'd prefer we stick with the tried and true over anything new.

Here is another suggestion.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Here is another suggestion.

Two or three graphs too long, IMO, but still hilarious.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Old Pio nostalgia alert:

I see where Edwin Edwards, fresh out of prison and a half way house, has married a chippie less than half his age. He's 84. He may not need the Viagra. Let me just pass along some stories about this charming rogue.

He was involved in something called Ricegate when he was a congressman from rice growing country in Crowley. It was alleged that he received $5,000 payments from a Korean lobbyist named Tongsun Park. The cash came wrapped beautifully in silk and Edwards claimed he couldn't remember them. Evidently there were so many payments wrapped in silk he couldn't keep 'em straight.

I was in a receiving line at the mansion with a really beautiful reporter we had on staff. And Edwards began hitting on her, hard, right in front of her husband. It was widely rumored (no evidence ever offered) that Edwards hit for both teams and had a secret hideaway in the Quarter for his assignations.

Edwards and his legisltive assistant, Camille Gravel, ramrodded through the legislature the first big expansion of Tiger Stadium. The money came from general operating funds of the state. And was justified as giving young LSU grads an opportunity to buy season tickets. Later, it was revealed that every member of the Louisiana house and senate had been given an option on 100 of the new seats (bribed). And that other favored groups were going to get the seats. When Gravel was asked in a news conference what about tickets for young dudes he replied: "I lied."

Edwards was (and may still be for all I know) a high stakes gambler who would occasionally call back to Baton Rouge from Vegas hitting up people who did business with the state for "loans."

Edwards did a "60 Minutes" segment once in which somebody was quoted as claiming as governor he had sold seats on the state highway commission for 10K. He told Ed Bradley, "As I recall, it was only 5K."

Then there was the bumper sticker in his final race for Governor, against David Duke: "Vote for the crook. It's important."

A rogue, a rascal, but utterly charming. Proudly calls himself a "coonass", and is. "Laissez les bontemps roulez."

(note: this won't be on the final. )

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Article on Fox is covering the South Carolina confederate flag deal:

South Carolina Governor Rejects NAACP Push to Remove Confederate Flag

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley isn't retreating from her decision to keep the Confederate flag atop the north end of the Statehouse in Columbia despite complaints from the NAACP, whose president this week said the ethnic minority governor is a "contradiction" for allowing the flag to fly.

The article points out the NCAA has refused to have playoff games there since 2001..and of course is careful to point out the importance of free speech.

IMO SC has full rights to have any flag over its capitol it wants. Yet, they should keep in mind that that entity killed more Americans than any in the history of our country's existence. So it does lead me to question where some southern patriots true loyalty lies.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Article on Fox is covering the South Carolina confederate flag deal:

South Carolina Governor Rejects NAACP Push to Remove Confederate Flag

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley isn't retreating from her decision to keep the Confederate flag atop the north end of the Statehouse in Columbia despite complaints from the NAACP, whose president this week said the ethnic minority governor is a "contradiction" for allowing the flag to fly.

The article points out the NCAA has refused to have playoff games there since 2001..and of course is careful to point out the importance of free speech.

IMO SC has full rights to have any flag over its capitol it wants. Yet, they should keep in mind that that entity killed more Americans than any in the history of our country's existence. So it does lead me to question where some southern patriots true loyalty lies.

I take your point, but I'm not sure "loyalty" is the right word, since a disproportionate number of southerners are serving in our military. In Richmond, they have a magnificent avenue of heroes with marvelous memorials to Lee and Stonewall Jackson. And when a similarly magnificent memorial was proposed for Arthur Ashe, some objected. One assumes some didn't want one of "them" honored for any reason. Some, however, may have thought a memorial for Ashe was not appropriately placed next to Lee and Jackson's. Anyway, now there's a beautiful memorial to Ashe and it's no longer much of an issue.

The irony in these flag flaps is that the boys and men who died for the Confederacy, generally weren't slave owners. They were farmers and shop clerks, and owning enough land to "justify" the use of slaves was an unfulfilled pipe dream. Some states put the "stars and bars" in their flags after SCOTUS ruled in Brown v. Board of Education. Okay, that's easy. Take it down. While I don't have deep feelings on this matter either way, I can understand how folks in some states might want to retain a reference to what they consider part of their glorious heritage. Do we really think the thousands of Civil War re-enactors dressed in gray actually support slavery? Are actually racists? Deep in their hearts some may be, but not many. That goes for the Sons of the Confederacy, too. So that leaves us with states like SC and this continuing flap. I don't know if a compromise is possible, but it's clear neither side is looking for one. And I believe it's wrong to suggest that those who wish to retain the flag are doing so primarily because of racism. And the NAACP, IMO, should make its argument without regard to the Goveror's heritage. That's below the belt. This is one I just wish would go away. An issue doubtless being demagogued by both sides.

One of the most prominent Civil War historians, E. B. Long, whose notes for the centennial history of the war are in the Library of Congress, once told me that as of the firing on Fort Sumter, there were over a thousand blacks who owned slaves. Presumably they inherited when the plantation owner died and they weren't in a hurry to free their "property." Does that factoid mean slavery wasn't evil? Or that we shouldn't have had the Lincoln/Douglas debates or the Emancipation Proclamation? Of course not. It's just one of those ironies of history. And shows, perhaps, that things aren't always, uh, black and white.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I take your point, but I'm not sure "loyalty" is the right word.

One of the most prominent Cival War historians, E. B. Long, whose notes for the centennial history of the war are in the Library of Congress, once told me that as of the firing on Fort Sumter, there were over a thousand blacks who owned slaves. Presumably they inherited when the plantation owner died and they weren't in a hurry to free their "property." Does that factoid mean slavery wasn't evil? Or that we shouldn't have had the Lincoln/Douglas debates or the Emancipation Proclamation? Of course not. It's just one of those ironies of history. And shows, perhaps, that things aren't always, uh, black and white.

Some valid points there. Some I'm not so sure about. Yes, the south has a good share of those in the military...but that reflects only a small fraction of the overall population. And regarding the mindset of the victims stuck fighting the war...I'm sure there were many who cared little about slavery and others who did.

Yet I disagree that the confederacy is an innocent happenstance that occurred at the same time as slavery became controversial. As such, I find slavery being the driver behind the confederacy being pretty repulsive...but as with flag burning, everyone has their right to free speech in terms of flag symbolism. The temptation is to gloss over the slavery issue...but more than just slavery, the confederacy was rooted in rebellion against the United States. The issue is downplayed in society today...because 'we all need to get along'. But in the end, it really comes down to this...

I don't understand admiration for an enemy that did more violence against the United States in terms of percent life than Tojo, King George, Kim Il Sung, Adolf Hitler, Kaiser Wilhelm, Ho Chi Minh and Osama Bin Laden...combined.

 

[Almington]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I take your point, but I'm not sure "loyalty" is the right word, since a disproportionate number of southerners are serving in our military. In Richmond, they have a magnificent avenue of heroes with marvelous memorials to Lee and Stonewall Jackson. And when a similarly magnificent memorial was proposed for Arthur Ashe, some objected. One assumes some didn't want one of "them" honored for any reason. Some, however, may have thought a memorial for Ashe was not appropriately placed next to Lee and Jackson's. Anyway, now there's a beautiful memorial to Ashe and it's no longer much of an issue.

The irony in these flag flaps is that the boys and men who died for the Confederacy, generally weren't slave owners. They were farmers and shop clerks, and owning enough land to "justify" the use of slaves was an unfulfilled pipe dream. Some states put the "stars and bars" in their flags after SCOTUS ruled in Brown v. Board of Education. Okay, that's easy. Take it down. While I don't have deep feelings on this matter either way, I can understand how folks in some states might want to retain a reference to what they consider part of their glorious heritage. Do we really think the thousands of Civil War re-enactors dressed in gray actually support slavery? Are actually racists? Deep in their hearts some may be, but not many. That goes for the Sons of the Confederacy, too. So that leaves us with states like SC and this continuing flap. I don't know if a compromise is possible, but it's clear neither side is looking for one. And I believe it's wrong to suggest that those who wish to retain the flag are doing so primarily because of racism. And the NAACP, IMO, should make its argument without regard to the Goveror's heritage. That's below the belt. This is one I just wish would go away. An issue doubtless being demagogued by both sides.

One of the most prominent Cival War historians, E. B. Long, whose notes for the centennial history of the war are in the Library of Congress, once told me that as of the firing on Fort Sumter, there were over a thousand blacks who owned slaves. Presumably they inherited when the plantation owner died and they weren't in a hurry to free their "property." Does that factoid mean slavery wasn't evil? Or that we shouldn't have had the Lincoln/Douglas debates or the Emancipation Proclamation? Of course not. It's just one of those ironies of history. And shows, perhaps, that things aren't always, uh, black and white.

While I agree with everything that you have said, I think that you are discounting the history of what the confederate battle flag has stood for since the end of the Civil War.

If you want to respect the history of states rights and individual freedoms and self-determination free from an oppressive federal government, display the original confederate flag and educate the people on what that flag stood for and what they were fighting for and you lose all the intolerance and hate that has corrupted and hijacked the confederate battle flag in the past 150 years.

5mn_Major: While the confederacy was rooted in a rebellion, the War of Independence was nothing more than a civil war with Great Brittan where the Americans are called patriots as opposed to rebels because they were the victors. To discount and dismiss the Confederacy as an enemy disregards the history and philosophy that resulted in American Independence and the recognition that in many way the confederacy was just an extension of that spirit. The Civil War established the supremacy of the the Federal government over the states and we don't have the country we have today (for better or for worse) without those events.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Some valid points there. Some I'm not so sure about. Yes, the south has a good share of those in the military...but that reflects only a small fraction of the overall population. And regarding the mindset of the victims stuck fighting the war...I'm sure there were many who cared little about slavery and others who did.

Yet I disagree that the confederacy is an innocent happenstance that occurred at the same time as slavery became controversial. As such, I find slavery being the driver behind the confederacy being pretty repulsive...but as with flag burning, everyone has their right to free speech in terms of flag symbolism. The temptation is to gloss over the slavery issue...but more than just slavery, the confederacy was rooted in rebellion against the United States. The issue is downplayed in society today...because 'we all need to get along'. But in the end, it really comes down to this...

I don't understand admiration for an enemy that did more violence against the United States in terms of percent life than Tojo, King George, Kim Il Sung, Adolf Hitler, Kaiser Wilhelm, Ho Chi Minh and Osama Bin Laden...combined.

This enemy was us. We're a century and a half beyond the Civil War, and I'm wondering when we're going to stop skirmishing. I understand and sympathize with those who see the flag as a symbol (on both sides) but I wonder if it's not time to move on.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

While I agree with everything that you have said, I think that you are discounting the history of what the confederate battle flag has stood for since the end of the Civil War.

If you want to respect the history of states rights and individual freedoms and self-determination free from an oppressive federal government, display the original confederate flag and educate the people on what that flag stood for and what they were fighting for and you lose all the intolerance and hate that has corrupted and hijacked the confederate battle flag in the past 150 years.

5mn_Major: While the confederacy was rooted in a rebellion, the War of Independence was nothing more than a civil war with Great Brittan where the Americans are called patriots as opposed to rebels because they were the victors. To discount and dismiss the Confederacy as an enemy disregards the history and philosophy that resulted in American Independence and the recognition that in many way the confederacy was just an extension of that spirit. The Civil War established the supremacy of the the Federal government over the states and we don't have the country we have today (for better or for worse) without those events.

Two excellent points. What's going on here, an outbreak of mature opinions?

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Two excellent points. What's going on here, an outbreak of mature opinions?

I can probably find a way to break that chain.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I don't understand admiration for an enemy that did more violence against the United States in terms of percent life than Tojo, King George, Kim Il Sung, Adolf Hitler, Kaiser Wilhelm, Ho Chi Minh and Osama Bin Laden...combined.

I can't imagine the reason...

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

5mn_Major: While the confederacy was rooted in a rebellion, the War of Independence was nothing more than a civil war with Great Brittan where the Americans are called patriots as opposed to rebels because they were the victors. To discount and dismiss the Confederacy as an enemy disregards the history and philosophy that resulted in American Independence and the recognition that in many way the confederacy was just an extension of that spirit. The Civil War established the supremacy of the the Federal government over the states and we don't have the country we have today (for better or for worse) without those events.

I think the point was not that rebellion is always bad. The point is...what's your priority? Rebellion or Great Britain. If you really admire the US...rebellion against GB can be understandable or even required as it was during independence. If you ask, rebellion or the United States? If you say rebellion...I do think thats revealing of your feelings towards the United States. Frankly the modern day version of rebellion vs the United States are the terrorist threats in the country today.

All I was saying is that you shouldn't think you're some great patriot of America if you worship the ideals of its enemies.

This enemy was us. We're a century and a half beyond the Civil War, and I'm wondering when we're going to stop skirmishing. I understand and sympathize with those who see the flag as a symbol (on both sides) but I wonder if it's not time to move on.

Its about perspective I suppose. The civil war enemy was not the United States, it was not us.

I agree though, its time to move on. In fact, that's been really the point all along. The flag is not moving on.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I can't imagine the reason...

Intelligent Design?

 

[Almington]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I think the point was not that rebellion is always bad. The point is...what's your priority? Rebellion or Great Britain. If you really admire the US...rebellion against GB can be understandable or even required as it was during independence. If you ask, rebellion or the United States? If you say rebellion...I do think thats revealing of your feelings towards the United States. Frankly the modern day version of rebellion vs the United States are the terrorist threats in the country today.

All I was saying is that you shouldn't think you're some great patriot of America if you worship the ideals of its enemies.

In both cases it was a rebellion against the current government because of the belief that the current government was violating basic rights and principles. In both cases the goal was to carve out an independent state from the larger whole that was free of an unwanted external influence. The parallels between the Revolution and the Civil war are great and the major difference is that in the Civil war, the rebels didn't get European recognition and direct support and thus didn't win the war. To claim that one is substantially different than the other is more a case of having history written by the victor than any significant different. It's a Revolution if the rebels win, it's a Civil War if the established government wins (or if no established government exists).

The Civil War was a war fought over the balance between the power of the federal government vs state's and individual rights. Slavery was the direct cause of the disagreement, but it was not the fundamental underlying question. The Federal side won the war and it established the superiority of the federal government over the states (effectively nullifying the 10th amendment) that has shaped how this nation has evolved over the past 150 years.


At the time of the American revolution, the colonist were British citizens and were far from united in opposition of British rule. An estimate 25% of the colonial population were British loyalist and many fought and died fighting against the Patriots. In fact many of the early acts of insurrection against the British would have been considered terrorism by today's standards: Threats against government officials, mobs destroying government and private property, intimidation and retribution against those suspected of supporting or assisting the British Army and Navy.

Terrorist today are not trying to form free and independent states, but to destabilize and overthrow current governments. To me that is different than a large group trying to form an independent state and free itself from a distant and external government.