Thursday, December 5, 2013
'Rebels' proliferate up north, but what's their cause?
- 3 out of 156 total comment(s)
Tue., 09/24/13 - 09:18 AM
Seriously, bro. You need to EDUCATE yourself.
Start by reading any of the EXCELLENT books about the Constitutional Convention (my fave is Miracle at Philadelphia). Read about the context in which the words "slave" and "slavery" are used in teh document...
Oh, wait...those words AREN'T IN THERE.
Hmmm...I wonder why...
Perhaps because they would not have gotten 55 signatures if they were in there?
To be sure, the "peculiar institution" is "danced around" in the document - the 3/5 compromise, the slave trade laws, the fugitive slave laws - but it was VERY clear - both in the fiery debates around the issue that summer in Philadelphia, as well as in the SPECIFIC ways that these issues were represented in the document - that slavery was a HUGE issue that NOBODY wanted to deal with...and constitutional scholars would generally agree that, by not forcefully deciding the issue at time of the passage of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers, in fact, had sown the seeds that led to the Civil War.
Tue., 09/24/13 - 08:47 AM
The problem was - economically, at least - they COULDN'T end it. It would have meant the utter collapse of their entire economic structure. And it is not like the members of Congress from the South were doing anything on the legislative front to make the transition from a slave-based economy to more of a unified, industrial economy. For the most part, they voted against policies (and politicians) who pushed for "internal improvements" - as they believed that it favored the industrial North more...they were WOEFULLY behind the North in spending on education...if the SOuth was prepared and ready to move on from slavery, then why did they not elect politicians and support laws on education and economic development that would have allowed them to transition away from a slave-based economy? Why were the politicians of the South so INCREDIBLY concerned about whether new states would enter the Union as either free or slave?
If the people of the south were REALLY ready to move on from slavery, their political actions of the 20 years leading up to the Civil War sure did a good job of hiding it.
Tue., 09/24/13 - 08:34 AM
Absolutely PERFECT response. 1
People like Professor1982 clog up forums like this with their divisive rants, either ignoring or distorting FACTS just to get off stirring things up. Fortunately, posts like DiTurno's completely OBLITERATE these ridiculous screeds, shining the klieg lights of TRUTH and RATIONAL THOUGHT (two things that are frequently lacking on this board), and forcing posters like Professor1962 to scurry under the cracks in the floorboards.
The Civil War was about SLAVERY. It was inevitable, once the Constitional Convention chose to leave the issue out of the Constitution (they were having a hard enough time drawing up ANY kind of document that everyone would sign off on to deal with an issue like slavery) that it would become an issue. Many of the Founding Fathers thought that it would eventually die off, but starting with the 3/5th compromise at the Constitutional Convention, the South kept pressing for LEGAL protections for their "peculiar institution".
It would be nice if posters like Professor1962 would, you know, actually know the FACTS before posting, but - HEY - what fun would that be?
Legalize weed, says Dem Pa. gubernatorial candidate
- 2 out of 28 total comment(s)
Tue., 07/16/13 - 16:06 PM
Your argument makes ZERO sense. Actually, I am not even excactly sure what you are trying to say, but anyway...
These are two COMPLETELY separate issues. I do not understand how having stricter gun control laws have ANYTHING to do with the decrimilization of marijuana. The possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal consumption is ILLEGAL, and you can be SENT TO PRISON for purchasing or possessing marijuana for personal use....which leads to all of the issues that were discussed above (the costs to enforce and prosecute non-violant pot users, the amount of people in our state's prisons, etc...). The decrimilization of pot use by adults would simply turn it into an issue like alcohol - you need to be over 21, you can't make it or transport it over state lines, the sale of the substance would be under state juristiction...and - oh, yeah - in addition to reducing the cost of prosecution, you could actually TAX the sale of the product (wow - what a concept).
I don't even know how you would draw the parallel that you tried to draw to the gun control debate...you can own SIX GAZILLION guns...go into your local firearms shop and buy 10 handguns a day ("HEY! It's my SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT, you leftie pinko!!!")...and we can't even get a common-sense debate going about even the most basic of compromises (like limiting the number of handguns that someone can purchase over a period of time or restricting magazine clip sizes...
Actually the only parallel I see is - just as the "war on drugs" is good news for the for-profit prison industry (so we don't want to change those marijuana use laws, cause that will reduce the number of good-paying customers at those for-profit prisions - right?), any common-sense gun control laws would restrict the ability of the gun manufacturers to keep selling AS MUCH OF ITS PRODUCT AS POSSIBLE (to an ever-shrinking demographic of buyers, by the way).
Tue., 07/16/13 - 11:20 AM
So, saving $325 million a year and reducing the overcrowding in our prisons (by redmoving non-violent pot smokers) is not a plan that would benefit the state budget? Are you saying that taking all of the police manpower and bandwidth that is currently used to bust pot smokers and redirect it towards catcving and prosecuting violent criminals would not make our communities safer? Are you saying that removing the "scarlet letter" of being busted for small, personal possion of pot from people's employm,ent records would not improve the job outlook for tens of thousands of Pennsylvania residents - giving employers access to greater numbers of well-educated, talented employees...whose only mark on their record is they like to smoke a joint now and then?
We have SERIOUS issues to face in this state - funding health care, infrastructure and schools...keeping our talented young residents in-state (and in the communities where they can make a difference), so that PA doesn't turn into a state of Medicare recipients...the thinking that keeps this state from doing common-sense things like privitizing liquor stores and decriminalizing pot smoking - using the money and resources to actually have an impact on EVERYONE'S lives (as opposed to a handful of liquor-store employees and for-profit prisons) - will just make it harder to turn our economy around and do the things that we need to do to spur job creation (outside of prisons and state liquor stores, of course) and impact people's lives.
No worries - we can just frack our way to prosperity in Pennsylvania...right? Oh, sorry...even in the biggest growth industry in the state, we cut a deal with the energy companies so that they pay JACK in taxes. Yay!
Ladies And Gents, Your 2013 Eagles Starting Lineup
- 1 out of 50 total comment(s)
Sat., 04/27/13 - 21:01 PM
I think this starting lineup is spot on...and I think that both Vick and Cole will be gone by Opening Day.
View all comments
Elizabeth Warren slams GOP over filibuster of Cordray
- 1 out of 22 total comment(s)
Wed., 03/13/13 - 13:34 PM
Maybe we should stop protecting big banks and their lobbyists and support policies and structures that PROTECT the average consumer?
It never ceases to amaze me that Republicans/conservatives - many of whom would actually BENEFIT from programs that oversee the RIDICULOUS power that large banks and other corporations have in this country - continue to back a political party that DOES NOT CARE about them. Whether it is Tea Party nutjobs or the honest hard-working people of Philly's river wards, what EXACTLY do you gain from supporting a party whose policies EXPLICITLY benefit the rich and elite of American business? Huh?
(bebop slowly shakes his head and walks away...)
J. Christopher Stevens, 1960-2012
- 5 out of 143 total comment(s)
Wed., 09/12/12 - 15:30 PM
For those of you who think Obama is a terrorist-loving apologist, can you explain:
1) That Obama has essentially left Bush's anti-terrorist policy essemtially unchanged (to the consternation of liberals and human-rights supporters everywhere);
2) He has continued - and in some cases accelerated - the unmaned drone program that has killed both terrorists as well as untold innocent civilians in Pakistan and Afganistan (again, in the face of worldwide criticism);
3) He approved a counter-terrorism raid - into another soverign nation, and without that nation's knowledge or approval - to both kill Bin Laden as well as recover massive amounts of intelligence about Al-Quida...which continues to pay dividends in our anti-terrorism and national security efforts...
But...Obama is a terrorist sympathisizer and Muslin lover...right?
Honestly, guys - do you TRULY understand how silly you sound?
Wed., 09/12/12 - 14:45 PM
So...let me get this straight...the dittoheads and teabaggers who despise Barack Obama think that he is "soft on terrorism" and "sympathizes with Muslims"?
Are we talking about the guy who -
1) Has, basically, kept Bush's entire anti-terrorist policy in place (to the EXTREME displeasure to MANY liberals and human-rights supporters worldwide);
2) Continued - and in some cases accelerated - a unmanned drone policy in Pakistan and Afganistan that have killed both suspected terrorists and untold amounts of innocent civilians (again, to widespread global criticism);
3) Gave the go-ahead to a highly-sophisticated, daring counter-terrorist operation - within another country's soverign borders and WITHOUT either their knowledge or consent - that led to the killing of Osama Bin Laden (and the recovery of vast amounts of intelligence about Al Quida that would have NEVER been recovered had we simply blown the place up)...
And yet Romney/Ryan, the Republicans and the rest of the dittohead/teabagger/sheep that throw this crap out there and lap this stuff up want you to believe that Obama is this Muslim-loving, terrorist-sympathizing, "apologize to the world for America's sins" weakling...
Seriously, guys...do you know how ridiculous you look when you just FLAGRANTLY ignore the facts, and blindly eat up the lies that Romney and the Republilcans throw out there? Huh?
Wed., 09/12/12 - 12:19 PM
An embassy response that happened BEFORE THE ATTACK...yet Romney (and the head of the RNC, with his priceless Twitter response) chose to ignore FACTS to take a slimy political shot in the midst of a human tragedy.
I don't know what is more pathetic - that Romney and his campaign staff continue to show that they are morally-bankrupt liars, or that there is a material portion of the American people who support their divisive, fear-mongering tactics.
Wed., 09/12/12 - 12:13 PM
And the Embassy Response happened BEFORE the attack...the response had NOTHING TO DO with the attack...
But, for Romney and the ditto-heads and teabaggers and the pathetic sheep that will say ANYTHING (including LYING ABOUT THE FACTS of a tragedy like this) to slime people and get elected.
I don't know what I am more disgusted about - how utterly morally bankrupt Romney, the head of the RNC (whose Twitter response is in the gutter with Romney) and the rest of Romney's campaign is with their response...or the fact that people actually SUPPORT this guy.
Wed., 09/12/12 - 11:59 AM
You are kidding...right?
Even a casual glance of the timeline of the US Embassy's comndemnation/apology shows that it happened BEFORE the attack...a little factoid that is being reported by EVERY NEWS ORGANIZATION IN THE WORLD (other than Fox News, of course)...which, within that context, makes Romney's rebuke of "the Obama administration"'s response all the more pathetic.
No acknowledgement of the loss of life.
No condemnation of the terrorists.
Just a slimy, fact-twisting (nothing new for the Romney/Ryan ticket, natch) bit of politicking that they PRAY will stick enough to get their man in the White House in November.
I am just thankful that virtually EVERY major polling service is showing that Obama's lead is widening and we will keep the divisive fear-mongers out of the White House.
Cole Hamels' ever-increasing price tag: start at six years, $138 million
- 3 out of 126 total comment(s)
Fri., 06/01/12 - 12:36 PM
Meh. Hindsight is 20-20. Yeah, Howard's contract looks huge, but even if all he does is repeat the numers of the past couple of years for the rest of his deal - 30+ HRs, 100-110 RBI, and an .850ish OPS - we will get some value out of the deal...guys like that do not grow on trees. We also got TREMENDOUS value out of the front-loaded years of Utley's contract...and it only has one more year to run after this year. The real head-scratcher here is Rollins' deal - we had a guy who was close to ready in the minors (who we now know in fact WAS ready), and we could have signed a one-year stop-gap to buy Galvis a little more time.
The problem is the mother-lode (i.e. the new TV deal) isn't until after the 2015 season. If both the Phillies and Comcast were smart, they would rip up the existing deal this upcoming offseason, with the Phillies throwing Comcast a bone on the overall value of the contract, and Comcast giving the team the additional financial flexibility in 2013 to take care of Hamels before he walks. It is certainly in Comcast's best interest to give the Phillies the financial flexibility to keep this team together - good programming means good ad revenue.
It does NOT help the Phillies cause, however, if Comcast cuts a deal to help the Philles out this upcoming offseason...only to have RAJ sign idiotic deals like the one for Rollins.
Fri., 06/01/12 - 12:22 PM
It is the job of the GM to decide whether the players that he has in the minors are ready to take their lumps in "the show"...and a rational argument could have been made to sign someone to a one-year stop-gap contract at SS while Galvis got more seasoning at AAA. If it is clear to an internet hack like me that Galvis has the tools to play a high-level defensive SS NOW, then RAJ needed to know that as well, and let Rollins walk.
Fri., 06/01/12 - 12:17 PM
And how many of these guys have been a World Series MVP?
Let's go Bulls!
- 1 out of 32 total comment(s)
Tue., 04/24/12 - 15:27 PM
I would like them to get BLOWN OUT in four games, so ownership realizes that BIG changes need to be made to this roster. I also want to see Jodie Meeks continue his PATHETIC play, so we can FINALLY blow up Collins' bromance with this guy and give Evan Turner the ball back.
Sixers refuse to turn ball over
- 1 out of 10 total comment(s)
Tue., 02/14/12 - 23:07 PM
We also - according to the stats have the 3rd fewest shots between 0-3 feet (i.e. we do not take the ball to the rim), and we have the 3rd most shots from 10-23 feet (the dreaded "long 2's")...in our zeal to "value the basketball", we settle for jumpers versus taking the ball to the rim...which can lead to more turnovers, but it also gets youo to the line, gets the other team (and their players) in foul trouble, and other positive things. It is this philosophy - an offense that shoots more jumpers and de-emphasizes geetting to the rim - that works in favor of a guy like Meeks and against a guy like Turner ( who is much better than Meeks at creating off of the bounce).
For now, this strategy of Collins' is working, but when we get to April and May, and tems like the Bulls and Heat are going to make it hard to get any clean looks from the perimeter, the lack of taking the ball to the rim and getting to the linemwill be a problem for this offense...as we have already seen in our two games with the Heat.
Pence: 'It's World Series or bust' in 2012
- 1 out of 108 total comment(s)
Wed., 01/18/12 - 09:27 AM
Posting about spelling mistakes? Really?
So, what's left?
- 1 out of 86 total comment(s)
Mon., 12/19/11 - 12:18 PM
Not really sure why they need to improve on 102 wins, so other than Lee actually showing up and earning his paycheck in October, here is where they actually "improved"
Full year of Pence
Full year of Utley
Way, WAY better bench
I am not ready to call Mayberry in LF an upgrade, but there is a reasonable chance of that as well.
People want to rag on the Phillies offense, but it was one of the most prolific offenses in MLB in the 2nd half of the year - especially after they signed Pence. If there was a problem, it was Lee and Oswalt allowing 10 earned runs in 12 innings to the Cardinals...right?
76ers close to re-signing Young
- 1 out of 19 total comment(s)
Fri., 12/09/11 - 14:28 PM
Kate! Say it ain't so!
Oh, well. You were destined for bigger and better things. Our loss is espnW's gain. Good luck!
All signs indicate a Rollins deal is close
- 1 out of 66 total comment(s)
Wed., 12/07/11 - 21:15 PM
"lightning in a bottle"?
This team won 102 games last season...and if they hadn't shut it down after clinching, they would have won 105+ games last season.
That's a LOT of lightning in a bottle.
A 3+1 deal with an AAV in the $12m range is not that bad...he can play SS for the first year or two and , if Galvis is the real deal, he can finish up the deal at 3B. Hopefully, by 2015/16, some of the yung studs we drafted this year will be ready to step in.
Get 'er done, RAJ.
NBA lockout: Day 123
- 1 out of 21 total comment(s)
Mon., 10/31/11 - 21:59 PM
So, a very objective article written by David Aldridge that basically says that the union MUST accept what the league is offering...because if they don't, it will only get worse.
So...ummm...where was Aldridge's article from? The Washington Post? SI.com? ESPN?
Kate - you are better than this.
A team set up for failure
- 1 out of 107 total comment(s)
Tue., 10/04/11 - 11:18 AM
Do you mean the Terry "Tito" Francona who has two WS rings and was the first manager who brought a team back from a 3-0 deficit in MLB history?
Reid DREAMS of the success that Francona has had.
Phillies announce deal for Bowker
- 2 out of 60 total comment(s)
Wed., 08/31/11 - 12:38 PM
Brown is two service days away from qualifying for a full year of MLB service, so why would RAJ bring him up as bench filler for September and throw away a year of control?
If you were RAJ, would YOU do that?
Wed., 08/31/11 - 12:34 PM
Brown is two service days away from having a full year of major league experience...I don't think there is ANY way they are going bring him up for the balance of the year and lose a year of control.
If you were RAJ, would YOU do it?
Hopkins makes history with win
- 1 out of 34 total comment(s)
Sun., 05/22/11 - 01:50 AM
I do. If you don't, the why did you post?
Great fight by BHop...which is absolutely surreal when you factor in that the guy is FORTY-SIX years old. He landed the bigger, better and the most punches in the fight - which is usually a good thing.
Contrats to BHop - an ATG and a HOFer that represents Philly well.
Newspaper Ads Online
Advertise on Philly.com
Philly.com Media Kit
The Inquirer Digital Edition
Newspapers in Education
Daily News Digital Edition
© Copyright 2013 Interstate General Media, LLC