Cirsium
Cirsium's JournalDarrell, Woody, Joe, and Ara
I sense a few ghosts flying around.
Texas, Ohio State, Penn State, Notre Dame? What is this, the 1960's redux?
Darrell Royal, Woody Hayes, Joe Paterno, Ara Parseghian; RIP
Those schools share the award for "Fewest Changes to Traditional Uniforms."
Bring back the maize pants at the University of Michigan! Speaking of Michigan, how did they beat both Ohio State and Alabama in what was otherwise a mediocre season? Those were some ugly games.
Let's Go Back...to 1835
“Make America great again!” is the cry that rallied the mob, and the response was “not going back!” But what does going back or not really mean? Go back to when? More importantly go back to what and to whom?
Here are some powerful excerpts from speeches by Thaddeus Stevens from 1835 and running to 1866 that I believe have great relevance to the crisis we now face after recent events. Maybe the struggle is timeless.
Would advocacy for these causes as expressed by Stevens be welcome among Democrats today without rancor and dissension, without bitter disputes ad antagonisms? Where are the comparable advocates today for public education, for equality under the law, for the needs of working class people, and gender equality, in defense of the have-nots, the need for public programs to advance public health and well being? If advocacy for these causes is not welcome among Democrats, why is it not? If these causes are not to be championed boldly and unambiguously by Democrats, then by whom?
Enough from me. Here is Thaddeus Stevens.
If an elective Republic is to endure for any great length of time, every elector must have sufficient information, not only to accumulate wealth and take care of his pecuniary concerns, but to direct wisely the Legislatures, the ambassadors, and the Executive of the Nation – for some part of all these things, some agency in approving or disapproving of them, falls to every freeman. If, then, the permanency of our Government depends upon such knowledge, it is the duty of Government to see that the means of information be diffused to every citizen. This is a sufficient answer to those who deem education a private and not a public duty – who argue that they are willing to educate their own children, but not their neighbor’s children.
Many complain of this tax (to fund public education) , not so much on account of its amount, as because it is for the benefit of others and not themselves. This is a mistake; it is for their own benefit, inasmuch as it perpetuates the Government and ensures the due administration of the laws under which they live, and by which their lives and property are protected. Why do they not urge the same objection against all other taxes? The industrious, thrifty, rich farmer, pays a heavy county tax to support criminal courts, build jails, and pay sheriffs and jail keepers, and yet probably he never has, and never will have, any direct personal use of either. He never gets the worth of his money by being tried for a crime before the court, allowed the privilege of the jail on conviction or receiving an equivalent from the sheriff or his hangman officers! He cheerfully pays the tax which is necessary to support and punish convicts, but loudly complains of that which goes to prevent his fellow being from becoming a criminal, and to obviate the necessity of those humiliating institutions.
This law is often objected to, because its benefits are shared by the children of the profligate spendthrift equally with those of the most industrious and economical habits. It ought to be remembered that the benefit is bestowed, not upon the erring parents, but the innocent children. Carry out this objection and you punish children for the crimes or misfortunes of their parents. You virtually establish castes and grades, founded on no merit of the particular generation, but on the demerits of their ancestors; an aristocracy of the most odious and insolent kind – the aristocracy of wealth and pride.
...
I know how large a portion of the community can scarcely feel any sympathy with, or understand the necessities of, the poor; or appreciate the exquisite feelings which they enjoy when they see their children receiving the boon of education, and rising in intellectual superiority above the clogs which hereditary poverty had cast upon them. It is not wonderful that he whose fat acres have descended to him from father to son in unbroken succession, should never have become familiar with misery, and therefore should never have sought for the surest means of alleviating it. Sir, when I reflect how apt hereditary wealth, hereditary influence, and perhaps, as a consequence, hereditary pride are to close the avenues and steel the heart against the wants and the rights of the poor, I am induced to thank my Creator for having, from early life, bestowed upon me the blessing of poverty. Sir, it is a blessing – for if there be any human sensation more ethereal and divine than all others, it is that which feelingly sympathizes with misfortune.
...
In my youth, in my manhood, in my old age, I had fondly dreamed that when any fortunate chance should have broken up for a while the foundation of our institutions, and released us from obligations the most tyrannical that ever man imposed in the name of freedom, that the intelligent pure and just men of this Republic, true to their professions and their consciences, would have so remodeled all our institutions as to have rid them from every vestige of human oppression, of the inequity of rights, of the recognized degradation of the poor, and the superior caste of the rich. In short, that no distinction would be tolerated in this purified Republic but what arose from merit and conduct. This bright dream has vanished ‘like the baseless fabric of a vision.’ I find that we shall be obliged to be content with patching up the worst portions of the ancient edifice, and leaving it, in many of its parts, to be swept through by the tempests, the frosts, and the storms of despotism. Do you inquire why, holding these views and possessing some will of my own, I accept so imperfect a proposition? I answer, because I live among men and not among angels; among men as intelligent, as determined, and as independent as myself, who not agreeing with me, do not choose to yield their opinions to mine. Mutual concession, therefore, is our only resort, or mutual hostilities.
...
I have done what I deemed best for humanity. It is easy to protect the interests of the rich and powerful. But it is a great labor to protect the interests of the poor and downtrodden. It is the eternal labor of Sisyphus, forever to be renewed. I know how unprofitable is all such toil. But he who is earnest heeds not such things. It has not been popular. But if there be anything for which I have entire indifference; perhaps I might say contempt, it is the public opinion which is founded on popular clamor.
...
But I have another objection to the amendment of my friend from Ohio. His proposition is to apportion representation according to the male citizens of the states. Why has he put in the word 'male?' It was never in the Constitution of the United States before. Why make a crusade against women in the Constitution of the nation? Is my friend as much afraid of their rivalry as the gentlemen on the other side are afraid of the rivalry of the Negro?
So much for the Boomer bashing
Harris under-performed Biden with every age group except one, the 65+ bracket. Young people, on the other hand, went more for Trump this time than last.
Are we done with stereotyping people based on the supposed "generation" they belong to? X, Y Z, Boomer, Millennial, whatever.
That "garbage" garbage
Let's not buy into the false premise of the ongoing media frenzy over Biden's remarks about that racist opening act at the MSG rally.
Here is what the President said:
It is clear to me that President Biden was referring to that Hinchcliffe character. But even if Biden had been referring to all of Trump's supporters, so what?
The right wing propaganda machine will turn anything any Democrat says or does into a scandal and too many MSM reporters will repeat whatever nonsense the right wing comes up with. There is no way to anticipate or avoid that.
Trump and his supporters and sycophants and collaborators are constantly saying much, much worse things about all of us.
Let's stop saying that Biden made a terrible mistake, or should shut up, as one person actually said here. Just because the right wing wants to portray everything that Biden or Harris - or any other Democrat - as a blunder that doesn't mean we need to start worrying or apologize, ad we should never accept the premises of the right wing talking points without investigation. I saw one post that started with "I haven't read Biden's remarks, but" and then went on to say that Biden had made a terrible blunder that would hurt the Harris campaign.
The Republicans are constantly yelling "boo!" to get us to jump. Don't jump.
A Report from Earth
Above the 45th parallel north, October 20th, 2024. It is shirt sleeve weather.
The proper response should be:
A. Hit the beach
B. Gas up the power mower, weed wacker, edge trimmer and chain saw and do some chores
C. Shrug and say "hey I guess this is the new normal!"
D. Party like there is no tomorrow
E. Gas up the SUV and take a road trip
F. Plan to fly somewhere this winter to see something
G. Other
WTF MSNBC???
The Jonathan Capehart show started tonight with minute after minute after minute of Trump's Butler rally, raw and unfiltered. It went on and on. Even Fox isn't doing that for him anymore., are they?
That isn't news. That isn't political commentary. It's a campaign contribution.
Building on a solid foundation
Freedom, in itself and of necessity, suggests freedom from some restraining power. In 1776 we sought freedom from the tyranny of a political autocracy – from the eighteenth century royalists who held special privileges from the crown. It was to perpetuate their privilege that they governed without the consent of the governed; that they denied the right of free assembly and free speech; that they restricted the worship of God; that they put the average man’s property and the average man’s life in pawn to the mercenaries of dynastic power; that they regimented the people.
And so it was to win freedom from the tyranny of political autocracy that the American Revolution was fought. That victory gave the business of governing into the hands of the average man, who won the right with his neighbors to make and order his own destiny through his own Government. Political tyranny was wiped out at Philadelphia on July 4, 1776.
Since that struggle, however, man’s inventive genius released new forces in our land which reordered the lives of our people. The age of machinery, of railroads; of steam and electricity; the telegraph and the radio; mass production, mass distribution – all of these combined to bring forward a new civilization and with it a new problem for those who sought to remain free.
For out of this modern civilization economic royalists carved new dynasties. New kingdoms were built upon concentration of control over material things. Through new uses of corporations, banks and securities, new machinery of industry and agriculture, of labor and capital – all undreamed of by the fathers – the whole structure of modern life was impressed into this royal service.
There was no place among this royalty for our many thousands of small business men and merchants who sought to make a worthy use of the American system of initiative and profit. They were no more free than the worker or the farmer. Even honest and progressive-minded men of wealth, aware of their obligation to their generation, could never know just where they fitted into this dynastic scheme of things.
It was natural and perhaps human that the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over Government itself. They created a new despotism and wrapped it in the robes of legal sanction. In its service new mercenaries sought to regiment the people, their labor, and their property. And as a result the average man once more confronts the problem that faced the Minute Man.
The hours men and women worked, the wages they received, the conditions of their labor – these had passed beyond the control of the people, and were imposed by this new industrial dictatorship. The savings of the average family, the capital of the small business man, the investments set aside for old age – other people’s money – these were tools which the new economic royalty used to dig itself in.
Those who tilled the soil no longer reaped the rewards which were their right. The small measure of their gains was decreed by men in distant cities.
Throughout the Nation, opportunity was limited by monopoly. Individual initiative was crushed in the cogs of a great machine. The field open for free business was more and more restricted. Private enterprise, indeed, became too private. It became privileged enterprise, not free enterprise.
An old English judge once said: “Necessitous men are not free men.” Liberty requires opportunity to make a living – a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.
For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor – other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.
Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of Government. The collapse of 1929 showed up the despotism for what it was. The election of 1932 was the people’s mandate to end it. Under that mandate it is being ended.
The royalists of the economic order have conceded that political freedom was the business of the Government, but they have maintained that economic slavery was nobody’s business. They granted that the Government could protect the citizen in his right to vote, but they denied that the Government could do anything to protect the citizen in his right to work and his right to live.
Today we stand committed to the proposition that freedom is no half-and-half affair. If the average citizen is guaranteed equal opportunity in the polling place, he must have equal opportunity in the market place.
These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power. In vain they seek to hide behind the Flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the Flag and the Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjection; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the over-privileged alike.
The brave and clear platform adopted by this Convention, to which I heartily subscribe, sets forth that Government in a modern civilization has certain inescapable obligations to its citizens, among which are protection of the family and the home, the establishment of a democracy of opportunity, and aid to those overtaken by disaster.
But the resolute enemy within our gates is ever ready to beat down our words unless in greater courage we will fight for them.
For more than three years we have fought for them. This Convention, in every word and deed, has pledged that that fight will go on.
The defeats and victories of these years have given to us as a people a new understanding of our Government and of ourselves. Never since the early days of the New England town meeting have the affairs of Government been so widely discussed and so clearly appreciated. It has been brought home to us that the only effective guide for the safety of this most worldly of worlds, the greatest guide of all, is moral principle.
We do not see faith, hope and charity as unattainable ideals, but we use them as stout supports of a Nation fighting the fight for freedom in a modern civilization.
Faith – in the soundness of democracy in the midst of dictatorships.
Hope – renewed because we know so well the progress we have made.
Charity – in the true spirit of that grand old word. For charity literally translated from the original means love, the love that understands, that does not merely share the wealth of the giver, but in true sympathy and wisdom helps men to help themselves.
We seek not merely to make Government a mechanical implement, but to give it the vibrant personal character that is the very embodiment of human charity. . . .
In the place of the palace of privilege we seek to build a temple out of faith and hope and charity. . . .
Governments can err, Presidents do make mistakes, but the immortal Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted in different scales.
Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
There is a mysterious cycle in human events. To some generations much is given. Of other generations much is expected. This generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny.
In this world of ours in other lands, there are some people, who, in times past, have lived and fought for freedom, and seem to have grown too weary to carry on the fight. They have sold their heritage of freedom for the illusion of a living. They have yielded their democracy.
I believe in my heart that only our success can stir their ancient hope. They begin to know that here in America we are waging a great and successful war. It is not alone a war against want and destitution and economic demoralization. It is more than that; it is a war for the survival of democracy. We are fighting to save a great and precious form of government for ourselves and for the world.
I accept the commission you have tendered me. I join with you. I am enlisted for the duration of the war.
FDR Acceptance speech 1936 (excerpt)
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/acceptance-speech-for-the-renomination-for-the-presidency-philadelphia-pa
Things Tim Walz can do
Things Tim Walz can do, that Donald Trump cannot do.
Ice fish
Ride a snowmobile
Shovel snow
Spin the TriWheel
Prepare Lutefisk
Hunt Turkeys
Change a tire
Coach a football team
Mind his own damned business
Teach a class
Be faithful to his spouse
Care about his neighbors
Serve his country
Tell the truth
Also...
He knows that "hot dish" is something you eat, not someone you assault
He thinks of "Babe" as Paul Bunyan's blue ox, not as a person to start grabbing
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Jul 21, 2024, 07:20 PMNumber of posts: 3,412