HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » freshwest » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 11:36 PM
Number of posts: 53,661

Journal Archives

They are against equality, period. They're working on removing that from the Constitution...

From a Confederate philosopher, disputing that of Thomas Jefferson:

The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day.

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail.

That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal...

As I have stated, the truth of this principle may be slow in development, as all truths are and ever have been, in the various branches of science. It was so with the principles announced by Galileo it was so with Adam Smith and his principles of political economy. It was so with Harvey, and his theory of the circulation of the blood. It is stated that not a single one of the medical profession, living at the time of the announcement of the truths made by him, admitted them. Now, they are universally acknowledged. May we not, therefore, look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests?

It is the first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society.

Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so.

It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes, He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made "one star to differ from another star in glory." The great objects of humanity are best attained when there is conformity to His laws and decrees, in the formation of governments as well as in all things else.

Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders "is become the chief of the corner" the real "corner-stone" in our new edifice. I have been asked, what of the future? It has been apprehended by some that we would have arrayed against us the civilized world.

I care not who or how many they may be against us, when we stand upon the eternal principles of truth, if we are true to ourselves and the principles for which we contend, we are obliged to, and must triumph...


This part of the basis of their argument that 'liberalism is a mental disease.' The roots of their hatred of not living in a 'republic' and of a 'democracy' and even the use of the word 'democrat' goes back to the days of the Roman Empire and the assassination of Caesar as he returned from being a tool of the aristocracy with his legions, and it was feared he would reward them with privileges or land.

The nobles labeled those who support the masses instead the aristocracy as untrustworthy and morally suspect because they did not give the aristocracy their due, that is, they were the vile 'democrats.' Strip Randianism of its new garments and you see the love of aristocracy and the reduction of the less entitled to rags, desperation and slavery.

That is the Republican party of this day, and they promote their ideas of aristocracy based on a loose conception of aristocracy and royalty through religious language 'King of Kings, Lord of Lords, and He shall rule forever and ever.' You may deign to be kind to the poor as an act of charity for Heavenly Crowns, not for love of them, for God has put them in that place.

And you should have 'liberty' and 'freedom' to treat them as you will if you are upper class, or not, as God approves of your wealth. It is the Divine Order of things. If you are being taxed or told you must pay for the poor, you are enslaved and that is going against the natural order.

They transfer the spiritual to the material world, and want to see human beings playing the roles of masters and slaves, ruler and ruled. Anyone that interferes with that is morally deficient and must be opposed. And it doesn't matter what you do to beat them down, they are scum. So there is nothing that a GOP, who have rebranded themselves Tea Partiers, does to win in this arena that is too low, because you are simply removing the worst refuse of humanity from spoiling the world.

These people voted for Romney only because Paul was not going to get the final nod from the Koch brothers. They are a mix of Ron Paulites, Libertarians and all the rest, just packaged as the Tea Party as if their ideas are new.

They are working on this now, in every state. A video was posted in which someone filmed Paul Ryan, a Koch brothers lackey all the way, meeting his followers and put it on youtube.

He began with the anchor baby argument, but at :55 in the video, he says their goal is to turn enough states red to get them to pass a repeal of the 14th Amendment. He framed it in terms of illegals because of welfare, but this much more dangerous than it first appears.

Those people ate it up, because that's how they get the lower in society to vote for what they want, division based on hatred. But consider the other clauses in the 14th upon which many of our rights we expect, depend.

In addition to the parts dealing with the Reconstruction after the Civil War and franchising blacks, the 14th enshrines Birthright Citizenship, and the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses. We know what their intentions on voting rights have been; their assaults on the poor and every kind of 'minority' civil rights. They wouldn' stop at ending birthright citizenship, or any form of gender rights, labor or environmental protections. They speak openly of denying women the right to vote, to work, to get an education or to control the most intimate parts of their lives and bodies.

They want this country back to something far older, oppressive than most of us ever knew. Here is the video, the thread and my further comments. I hope that people will listen to this:

Paul Ryan Casually Drops This Slur And Shows The GOP's Effort To 'Reach Out' Is B.S.


My comment here:

First thing Ryan knows has to happen: 'You gotta get the state legislatures RED.'

And some still say there's no difference between parties, huh?

Ryan sure thinks so, and wants those state legislatures to ratify an amendment to end Birthright Citizenship.

He doesn't want to ratify the ERA, or end the electoral game of Citizen United. Unlike the Democratic Party, he has no interest in extending rights.

No, he wants to deny voting and other rights to people born here. Rights his ancestors were given. Anyone who thinks when that line is crossed it will end there, is a fool.

After that they'll go after the women's vote, the non-property owner's vote, and finally get back to the pre-Civil War way of voting. No social mobility, no right to vote to change policies that effect lives.

They've already proven their intent to disenfranchise the poor, elderly, disabled and all minorities. It won't stop there, so we have to stop them from dragging this country backward.

Think two steps ahead, this is not just about bigotry. They know that will garner attention of those who believe they need to discriminate and those who are resisting that. While we must resist, think long-term.

It's always about money and power with all the works of the Koch brothers, their candiates and ALEC.

This is what is being planned in the private rooms and country clubs across this nation. They have the money and a plan. We must mobilize and keep going, not get demoralized by every passing thing that the media tells us. They are playing for keeps.


Think about what the originators of our government wanted to see evolve here. The Tea Party are as much the traitors to the Constitution as the Confederacy was set up to be. This is an very different world view than most Democrats are comfortable with and something we have been in denial about it.

Rand Paul, the CPAC choice for 2016, IIRC.

To hell with him, his dad and all his fans.

Thanks, Sheshe! What a beautiful spirit he has!

I am sooo ready for that! Bring it on!

Boston Recieves a Gift from the Winner of the 2013 Boston Marathon

Boston Marathon winner Lelisa Desisa announces he will return his medal in honor of the marathon bombing victims, during a ceremony at the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on May 26, 2013. And recieves a hug from John Kerry.

Secretary of State John Kerry answering questions for the world wide BBC audience in Addis Ababa:

Here he is with another young man at a confrence in Addis Ababa:

Here's the video of the question and answer session there:

Zeinab Badawi hosts the show from Addis Ababa, as John Kerry also takes questions from the BBC’s global audience. May 29, 2013

HARDtalk is in Ethiopia for a special edition of the programme with US Secretary of State John Kerry. As the African Union celebrates 50 years, young people from across the continent put their questions on US foreign policy direct to him. Zeinab Badawi hosts the show from Addis Ababa, as John Kerry also takes questions from the BBC's global audience about his country's relationship with the rest of the world.

Pictures courtesy of The Obama Diary.


For more information about the work of our Secretary of State, John Kerry:


FYI: This is a post in the BOG, or Barack Obama Group, which is A SAFE HAVEN for supporters of our President and his policies.


Ricin suspect waives bail hearing
May 2, 2013, by Katrina Lamansky


Our libertarian patriot at home:

Ex-martial arts teacher charged in U.S. letters case


These cowardly criminals with too much time and money on their hands all look the same. They wear a smug expression as if they are sooo clever. Possibly from years of listening to Rush, O'Reilly and Beck. They need to do hard time for this shit.

Are not free fire zones still a violation of the Geneva Covention? Kerry contended that in Vietnam.

At least that's what I remember from hearings at the time, and found a link to what I'd seen. His statement at the Winter Soldier hearings is not for the squeamish, and is part of why I and others took to the street across the USA:



I insert this to my point that if soldiers were ordered to set up free fire zones in Iraq, they did not have the protections of GC. And for those who seem to think that atrocities in wars are a recent invention, or that the lives we live outside a war zone here in the USA, are a standard condition of the human race in other countries, at war or not. We have laws that give us rights that much of the human race as not concieved of, and are tossed aside in wars. But we still have laws about warfare.

Bush didn't obey the GC in his plans for warfare in Iraq. GWB's contention was that it was an unconventional enemy and the GC rules of war did not apply. Non-combatants were routinely being taken hostage, tortured and executed like Daniel Pearl as well as whole villages wiped out by forces in the region, or by Saddam Hussein himself, for political reasons.


Torture, Abu Graif, the bombing of Fallujah and so many other things were okay with Bush in that context. But we still have the testimony of those who came back from Iraq who said they followed strict rules of engagement with armed and non-armed persons there. And were not ordered or permitted to do such things as conduct a free fire zone.

Since Blackwater was doing those things, we cannot escape responsibility for what they did. No more than the actions of the British East India Company could be separated from the history of the British Empire. Most of us have seen video of Blackwater mercenaries acting as if they were imperial forces and just joyriding over humans. And some say they were in charge of what happened at Abu Graif - that was clearly a war crime by the GC and totally unnecessary and without use. It has damaged the reputation of the government of the USA in our own eyes and all the world.

I can see Bush's reasoning if one assumes the man was at all honest. I consider him unfit for the office that he attained, more on the level of a criminal and incapable of leading properly as he seems to have had no regard for the lives or the rights of anyone at home or abroad. The only thing I could possibly say in his defense was he was over his head in everything he did.

Most of the world and many DUers didn't agree with the Iraq War and that means everything that followed the invasion was illegitimate. Neither do I. But then, I didn't agree with the war itself, am still in sync with Kerry on this from years ago, so admit to possessing a strong bias, and unable or unwilling to support what was done in Iraq in my name, even though I support taking care of all the wounded. And there are many kinds of wounds that all soldiers have to live with if they survive the experience.

Some may consider holding to such concerns to be part of an antique world that is in the past. But that would disqualify us as a nation from having acted as a Constitutional republic acting legally through UN resolutions, acts of Congress to go to war, and a whole host of civil rights and traditions for which we claim to be protecting. If we act like an empire, we meet the fate of one, and the Constitution and the laws most of us live by are hard to defend, they are merely excuses. Most of us will not surrender that easily.

This is the downside of this type of whistleblowing. I don't stand up or look down on Manning.

Because I consider him to be an unstable person. He appears to be emotionally immature but very intelligent. Some geniuses become obsessed with an idea and get in big trouble, not looking at the big picture.

I am hoping he cared about who could be hurt by what he did - worst scenario, he may have convinced himself that any 'collateral damage' would be justly deserved by any person who aided the American side of the war. I don't know.

I think he was taken advantage of by others who profited by what he did and were not at risk. That angers me for his sake and those that might have been killed overseas.

IMHO, he did not think it all the way through, was caught up in an idealistic fantasy. Sadly, I do not see that his revelations changed much.

If he gave impetus to ending the state of war we inherited from Bush, good for him. Although I believe that was in the cards aleady. His contribution was overrated, but the horrors of war need to be considered in this world, always.

Humanity must stop rewarding those who profit from war, if possible. They have played this game for centuries, it's time for mankind to stop falling for it.

AFAIK I know he is not charged with treason, or any crime that would lead to the death penalty. I think glorifying or villifying anyone in this case is mental masturbation.

His crime was betraying the trust he was given. He was only in that position since he made a pledge to not do what he did do. That's his crime in my eyes, which is insubordination, but the military may not see it as simply as I do.

My disclaimer being, I am not in the military and cannot speak for his fellows. Some of them are furious at what he did.

Just remembered. I feel like your OP is saying:

(walking toward crashed alien plane)

THAT'S RIGHT! THAT'S RIGHT! That's what you get!

Look at you, ship all *banged* up!

Who's the man? Huh? Who's the man?

Wait till I get another plane! I'm-a line all your friends up right beside you!

(climbs on top of alien plane)

Where you at, huh? Huh?
Where you at?

(Hiller opens the spaceship. An alien pops up, and Hiller punches it in the head, knocking it back into the ship)

Welcome to Earth!

(sits on alien plane and puts cigar in mouth)

Now that's what *I* call a close encounter.

Y'know, this was supposed to be my weekend off. But no!

You got me out here, draggin' your heavy ass, through the burnin' desert, with your dreadlocks sticking out the back of my parachute.

You gotta come down here with an attitude, actin' all big and bad.

And what the hell is that smell?!

(screams and kicks the alien)

I could've been at a barbecue!

But I ain't mad...

Agreed! It's the END!

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22