HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » cyclonefence » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 28 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Mon Dec 5, 2016, 05:05 PM
Number of posts: 3,129

Journal Archives

Why would any reporter or anybody else ask Trump

if he was going to "accept" the results of the November election if he lost? As if it's up to him whether the election was valid. "I'll have to see." Kiss my ass.

By asking him this we give him a chance to encourage his supporters to make trouble when he loses, and we reinforce his insane belief that his "acceptance" has anything to do with it.

"Respect Our Heritage"

Trump wants to protect these Confederate statues and flag because they are part of "our" heritage.

Whose heritage, Trumpy? Your family came from Germany. Protecting *your* heritage, following your logic, would mean we should erect statues honoring Hitler, Himmler, Mengele--all those brave patriots--who represent the heritage of your culture.

And they lost to the USA, too.

I guess he just loves losers.
Posted by cyclonefence | Mon Jul 6, 2020, 10:35 PM (8 replies)

This country became great on the backs of enslaved people

because of cotton's leading role in the world economy.

From ttps://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/why-was-cotton-king/

<snip> Slave-produced cotton “brought commercial ascendancy to New York City, was the driving force for territorial expansion in the Old Southwest and fostered trade between Europe and the United States,” according to Gene Dattel. In fact, cotton productivity, no doubt due to the sharecropping system that replaced slavery, remained central to the American economy for a very long time: “Cotton was the leading American export from 1803 to 1937.”

What did cotton production and slavery have to do with Great Britain? The figures are astonishing. As Dattel explains: “Britain, the most powerful nation in the world, relied on slave-produced American cotton for over 80 per cent of its essential industrial raw material. English textile mills accounted for 40 percent of Britain’s exports. One-fifth of Britain’s twenty-two million people were directly or indirectly involved with cotton textiles.”

And, finally, New England? As Ronald Bailey shows, cotton fed the textile revolution in the United States. “In 1860, for example, New England had 52 percent of the manufacturing establishments and 75 percent of the 5.14 million spindles in operation,” he explains. The same goes for looms. In fact, Massachusetts “alone had 30 percent of all spindles, and Rhode Island another 18 percent.” Most impressively of all, “New England mills consumed 283.7 million pounds of cotton, or 67 percent of the 422.6 million pounds of cotton used by U.S. mills in 1860.” In other words, on the eve of the Civil War, New England’s economy, so fundamentally dependent upon the textile industry, was inextricably intertwined, as Bailey puts it, “to the labor of black people working as slaves in the U.S. South.”

End quote.

Furthermore, US slave labor produced other high-value crops for trading, including tobacco and indigo. But cotton was king.

I urge you to read this entire piece. The ultimate credit for creating the powerhouse that became the United States is due almost entirely--I would say entirely--to enslaved African American people. The notion that they have been treated so cruelly after the end of slavery (I recommend the book "Slavery by Another Name" is obscene. That any white person in America feels he or she has not benefited from the fact of slavery simply because "my family didn't own slaves, so it has nothing to do with me" is delusional. Descendants of Irish, Italian and other countries that sent large populations to this country who say "My predecessors were discriminated against, too, and we made it to prosperity in the New World" don't know what they are talking about and are fools.

The idea that any kind of reasonable reparations can be made at this point is dumbfounding. How in the hell can we white people begin to even think of how to compensate descendants of enslaved people when we are still allowing our police to kill them? Allowing the display of flags and statues honoring those who fought to retain and spread their enslavement? There are so many things we need to do right now to simply stop abusing our benefactors, and yet many of us drag our heels at the very notion.
Posted by cyclonefence | Thu Jul 2, 2020, 09:04 AM (3 replies)

If not for enslaved people, there would have been no President Washington

Because his plantation was sustained by free slave labor, George Washington was able to leave home to lead the Continental Army and serve as President. Otherwise, he'd have had to stay home, supervising his (paid) workers and running his farm.

Because his plantation was sustained by free slave labor, Thomas Jefferson was able to leave home to become a Founding Father, write the Declaration of Independence and serve as President. Otherwise, he'd have had to stay home, supervising his (paid) workers and running his farm.

Et cetera.

Masks and abortion rights

Explain to me the difference.

Justification for restricting or banning abortion is to protect innocent life.

Justification for wearing a mask is to protect innocent life.

My body, my decision?

Consistency may be the hobgoblin of small minds, but my god Republicans are famous for being small-minded already, so what's their problem?

Never thought I'd need this

Am I the only old lady who has decided maybe wearing a mask

is a good idea, even after the covid-19 precautions are officially lifted? I don't mind wearing it--I wear gloves, too, and they don't bother me. I am sure staying home has been the main reason I've had *zero* colds this year, but I wonder if continuing to wear a mask, once this virus is less rampant, will have sort of the same results?

Would the cops have been called if he had been white?

Rayshard Brooks had fallen asleep in the drive-through line at Wendy's, forcing other customers to drive around his car, which sounds dangerous. Someone called the cops. What I want to know is if an effort to wake him up was made before the police were called--I imagine he was honked at, but did anyone--another customer, an employee--come out and knock on his window? We saw that it wasn't easy to wake him up from the cop's camera, but he was not belligerent or even annoyed. If someone had been able to wake him so he could move along in the line, he'd be alive today.

When so many black men were being killed by cops in incidents that began with a traffic stop over a burned-out light bulb, or failing to signal a turn, again, a situation that could have been handled in a non-threatening way led to someone's unnecessary death.

I understand that Mr. Brooks was drunk and should not have been on the road, but he was able to pass the road sobriety tests, failing only the breathalyzer. I understand that the cops were following the rules by trying to bring him in to sleep it off in a cell.

If Mr. Brooks had been white, considering that he passed the road sobriety test, would he have been allowed to drive himself home--seeing that he was already trying to sleep it off--escorted by the cops, and given a warning?

High heels vs lifts in Trump's shoes

I like to point out photos that show how stupid Trump looks with his body inclining forward because of the lifts in his shoes. Inevitably somebody posts "well, women wear high heels and they don't incline forward like that," I guess because they don't think Trump wears lifts.

I knew high heels and lifts were different; for one thing, when I wear heels, my weight is shifted so that it's almost all on the balls of my feet. If I wear shoes with lifts--like my old tap shoes, which have a thick metal heel but a fairly normal sole--my weight isn't redistributed the same way. I have found a website I can quote at that lift-deniers who point out well what about high heels:

For many men who are considering trying elevator shoes, a question arises: will wearing them be like wearing high heels, which women complain about? The short answer is ‘no’. That’s because properly constructed height increasing shoes don’t have the problems that mere high heels have.

First of all, high heels are made with the specific purpose of enhancing the shape of a woman’s leg, by emphasizing the calf muscle, along with raising them up higher. Tall shoes for men have less of this extreme standing-on-the-toes construction. The entire structure of the shoe lifts the man up, with less emphasis on moving the weight to the balls of the feet. This means that, long term, wearing elevator shoes is much more comfortable than the high heel style.


Lastly, there’s the physical changes to the leg muscles that can come with wearing high heels. Too many women report that their Achilles tendon has become thickened and foreshortened by wearing heels. Even with physical therapy, that condition can become permanent. For the wearer of bespoke elevator shoes, that will never happen. The entire shoe raises the height, in balance, without stressing the Achilles tendon. This holistic approach to increasing height, without sacrificing surefooted comfort, is the hallmark of the best elevator shoes in the World.

Visiting graves

Over on General Discussion, someone posted about visiting and decorating graves this Memorial Day, and it brought back memories from my childhood. There'll be no grave visiting in my parents' generation--they're all cremated and scattered. I do have deeds to a couple of cemetery lots--wonder if they're zoned for industrial development?

Anyway, when I visited my grandmother for weeks and weeks every summer, we made a trip several times out to the cemetery to mow and trim the grass on the family plot. I guess my grandmother is there now, too, with no one to mow and trim her grave.

My grandfather's grave was remarkable--it was a place where four-leaf clovers grew. I have never found one (except once when I found one pressed in an old book) except at his grave, and I found at least a couple of them every summer. I guess it makes sense; the four leaves must be a genetic mutation, so it stands to reason that there would be a good chance of their growing in a small area, like Amish people and maple-syrup-urine disease.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 28 Next »