Re: So Austin
- Original Message - From: Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:54 AM Subject: Re: So Austin Robert wrote: You wonder why Texans think of themselves as tough?G Yesterday I was moving, packing boxes into a Uhaul, lifting furniture and all that for over 10 hours. Houston is much more humid than Austin and the temp where I live was 104F. About 2 hours into the moving I pulled a muscle in my back. But the show must go on. I feel WONDERFUL this morning! G I'll bet. I was humping sod all morning Saturday, and digging in the mud in the afternoon. I didn't hurt anything, but I was as stiff as a board this morning. I hope you aren't hurt too badly. The back is feeling a bit better, but now I'm getting terrible leg cramps. I suspect all that sweating has depleted my electrolytes so its orange and banana time.G * You Yankees just don't get it!G I'm know that you are aware that the Civil War was a particularly bloody conflict and many young lives were lost on both sides. Do you think that even on the losing side people would not memorialize those who fought for their cause? You have to remember that slavery was just the tip of the iceberg of reasons why the war was fought. OTOH, if you are under the impression that the reason the North fought in the Civil War was to free those poor slaves, you need to review your history. At that time there were slaves working at The White House (among other Northern locations), so you have to wonder what was up with that. The reason the war was fought initially was to preserve the Union, but the reason the South broke that union was to preserve slavery. Slavery was not the tip, but the root of the problem. Ask the question if there had been no slavery would there have been a Civil War? Every single cause forwarded can be traced back to the peculiar institution. It was really one of those things where it was both ways simultaneously. There is a good parallel with our modern situation. The freeing of the slaves would have had an economic impact on the South that would have devastated in a manner similar to what would happen if all foriegn oil were suddenly embargoed away from the US today. And that is pretty much exactly what happened. If there had been some time to allow the industrial revolution to catch up with the needs of the South, the war would not have been necessary. So to my mind the war was on one hand morality vs economic necessity, and on the other one of political hardball. (The South knew that abolition was inevitable, so the slave state vs free state battle was essentially a battle for control of Congress) As I said, there was slavery in the North prior to the Civil War, but it was not economically necessary as it was in the South. It much like the way Illegal immigrants are hired these days to increase profits by keeping labor costs low. I have no problem at all with a memorial for those that fell in the Civil War. What I have a problem with is the idea that they were fighting for some noble cause like state's rights. Well, I think you have to consider that the majority of those monuments were built long ago when attitudes were quite different. The social inertia that supported the building of such is pretty well spent and is unlikely to ever build momentum again. I'd go so far as to say that with regard to the subject of racism, the South is in better shape than the North or the West. Things have changed a lot here. Lincoln himself believed in the right of states to secede, but he believed that the cause for the secession had to be just and that the preservation of the institution of slavery was not a just cause. xponent Apologies If My Tone Appears UncivilG Maru No apology necessary. I know many people really believe that slavery was an ancillary cause for secession, I know that's what they teach kids in the South; I've had this discussion before. The bottom line is, had slavery been abolished at some earlier juncture, the conflict would not have occurred. I think a later juncture would have preserved the peace, or a much much earlier juncture. Slavery was just too integrated into the Southern economy even at the time of the American Revolution to have been outlawed (easily) and until the advent of machinery that could do the work required, you would still have had great resistance to getting the South to do the moral thing. If OPEC cut us off from oil you would see the same resistance to loss of affluence. It is a matter of greed in some respects and in others it is not. So the situation is and was complex, and when I say it was not *just* slavery I am pointing out that there was social, political, and economic momentum that had to be overcome before justice ruled the day. And the task is still
Ding Dong The Witch is dead!
Karl Rove plans to resign. Check your news! xponent Roving Reporter Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: So Austin
Doug wrote: Robert wrote: Yesterday I was moving, packing boxes into a Uhaul, lifting furniture and all that for over 10 hours. I'll bet. I was humping sod all morning Saturday, and digging in the mud in the afternoon. Boy, those sound *way* more fun than my day yesterday, spent drinking beer and taking in a Trenton Thunder baseball game. You guys are lucky. :-D Jim Rubbing it in Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Perseids
At 03:03 PM Saturday 8/11/2007, Mauro Diotallevi wrote: On 8/11/07, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 09:17 AM Friday 8/10/2007, Mauro Diotallevi wrote: This is the weekend that the Perseid meteor shower should peak. So give it a peek. If it's cloudy, you may be piqued. http://www.earthsky.org/radioshows/51468/the-2007-peak-of-the-per seid-meteor-showe (no r at the end) Maybe that means it's a really big showe . . . I have some friends who are going camping this weekend so that they can watch the show(e) -- that is, if they can still see straight by dark. They're taking an obscene amount of beer along. My wife and I may be taking a little romantic drive out into the country late tonight to take a look. It should be lots of fun. There was some haze and high, thin stuff here this morning, but I did see a handful which equaled or surpassed Mars in brightness. One of them was clearly a non-shower member, as it was going the wrong way (across Cassiopeia toward the head of Perseus). Sunday morning the air was more transparent, and though I didn't get out until it was starting to get a little light I saw a few fainter ones. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: So Austin
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Doug wrote: Robert wrote: * You Yankees just don't get it!G I'm know that you are aware that the Civil War was a particularly bloody conflict and many young lives were lost on both sides. Do you think that even on the losing side people would not memorialize those who fought for their cause? You have to remember that slavery was just the tip of the iceberg of reasons why the war was fought. OTOH, if you are under the impression that the reason the North fought in the Civil War was to free those poor slaves, you need to review your history. At that time there were slaves working at The White House (among other Northern locations), so you have to wonder what was up with that. The reason the war was fought initially was to preserve the Union, but the reason the South broke that union was to preserve slavery. Slavery was not the tip, but the root of the problem. Ask the question if there had been no slavery would there have been a Civil War? Every single cause forwarded can be traced back to the peculiar institution. I have no problem at all with a memorial for those that fell in the Civil War. What I have a problem with is the idea that they were fighting for some noble cause like state's rights. Lincoln himself believed in the right of states to secede, but he believed that the cause for the secession had to be just and that the preservation of the institution of slavery was not a just cause. The thing is, the rank-and-file who were fighting weren't fighting for slavery, they were fighting for their homeland. State loyalty was higher in the south, and national loyalty lower. So yes, the main impetus of the war was the preservation of slavery, but that's not the reason that was in the minds of many of the people doing the actual fighting. I mean, my great-great grandfather didn't charge up a hill with Pickett at Gettysburg for the sake of slavery, but for the sake of Virginia. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: So Austin
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Jim Sharkey wrote: Doug wrote: Robert wrote: Yesterday I was moving, packing boxes into a Uhaul, lifting furniture and all that for over 10 hours. I'll bet. I was humping sod all morning Saturday, and digging in the mud in the afternoon. Boy, those sound *way* more fun than my day yesterday, spent drinking beer and taking in a Trenton Thunder baseball game. You guys are lucky. :-D Jim Rubbing it in Maru If I hadn't decided I really didn't want to spend $30 for the priviledge of going to County Line for barbecue, I probably would have bought beer for the guys that actually got the 1500-lb. cart into and out of the van there. (And if I'd had sufficient cash on me, I would have just handed it to someone reliable to do the beer-buying for me.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Perseids
On Aug 13, 2007, at 4:46 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 03:03 PM Saturday 8/11/2007, Mauro Diotallevi wrote: On 8/11/07, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 09:17 AM Friday 8/10/2007, Mauro Diotallevi wrote: This is the weekend that the Perseid meteor shower should peak. So give it a peek. If it's cloudy, you may be piqued. http://www.earthsky.org/radioshows/51468/the-2007-peak-of-the-per seid-meteor-showe (no r at the end) Maybe that means it's a really big showe . . . I have some friends who are going camping this weekend so that they can watch the show(e) -- that is, if they can still see straight by dark. They're taking an obscene amount of beer along. My wife and I may be taking a little romantic drive out into the country late tonight to take a look. It should be lots of fun. There was some haze and high, thin stuff here this morning, but I did see a handful which equaled or surpassed Mars in brightness. One of them was clearly a non-shower member, as it was going the wrong way (across Cassiopeia toward the head of Perseus). Sunday morning the air was more transparent, and though I didn't get out until it was starting to get a little light I saw a few fainter ones. That about matched the experience of Ryan and I around midnight Saturday. Not peak viewing, but a small handful of bright ones that left nice glowing trails for a second or so, including a pair that went in dead-opposite directions a couple of minutes apart -- clearly, someone didn't get the memo. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Fw: The top 100 reasons it's great to be a guy
Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://darrel.knutson.com/jokes/men-women/guys.html 1.. Phone conversations are over in 30 seconds flat. 2.. Movie nudity is virtually always female. 3.. You know stuff about tanks. 4.. A five day vacation requires only one suitcase. 5.. Monday Night Football. 6.. You don't have to monitor your friends sex lives. 7.. Your bathroom lines are 80% shorter. 8.. You can open all your own jars. 9.. Old friends don't give you crap if you've lost or gained weight. 10.. Dry cleaners and haircutter's don't rob you blind. 11.. When clicking through the channel, you don't have to stall on every shot of someone crying. 12.. Your ass is never a factor in a job interview. 13.. All your orgasms are real. 14.. A beer gut does not make you invisible to the opposite sex. 15.. Guys in hockey masks don't attack you. 16.. You don't have to lug a bag of useful stuff around everywhere you go. 17.. You understand why Stripes is funny. 18.. You can go to the bathroom with out a support group. 19.. Your last name stays put. 20.. You can leave a hotel bed unmade. 21.. When your work is criticized, you don't have to panic that everyone secretly hates you. 22.. You can kill your own food. 23.. The garage is all yours. 24.. You get extra credit for the slightest act of thoughtfulness. 25.. You see the humor in Terms of Endearment. 26.. Nobody secretly wonders if you swallow. 27.. You never have to clean the toilet. 28.. You can be showered and ready in 10 minutes. 29.. Sex means never worrying about your reputation. 30.. Wedding plans take care of themselves. 31.. If someone forgets to invite you to something, he or she can still be your friend. 32.. Your underwear is $10 for a three pack. 33.. The National College Cheerleading Championship 34.. None of your co-workers have the power to make you cry. 35.. You don't have to shave below your neck. 36.. You don't have to curl up next to a hairy ass every nite. 37.. If you're 34 and single nobody notices. 38.. You can write your name in the snow. 39.. You can get into a nontrivial pissing contest. 40.. Everything on your face stays its original color. 41.. Chocolate is just another snack. 42.. You can be president. 43.. You can quietly enjoy a car ride from the passenger seat. 44.. Flowers fix everything. 45.. You never have to worry about other people's feelings. 46.. You get to think about sex 90% of your waking hours. 47.. You can wear a white shirt to a water park. 48.. Three pair of shoes are more than enough. 49.. You can eat a banana in a hardware store. 50.. You can say anything and not worry about what people think. 51.. Foreplay is optional. 52.. Michael Bolton doesn't live in your universe. 53.. Nobody stops telling a good dirty joke when you walk into the room. 54.. You can whip your shirt off on a hot day. 55.. You don't have to clean your apartment if the meter reader is coming by. 56.. You never feel compelled to stop a pal from getting laid. 57.. Car mechanics tell you the truth. 58.. You don't give a rat's ass if someone notices your new haircut. 59.. You can watch a game in silence with you buddy for hours without even thinking (He must be mad at me) 60.. The world is your urinal. 61.. You never misconstrue innocuous statements to mean your lover is about to leave you. 62.. You get to jump up and slap stuff. 63.. Hot wax never comes near your pubic area. 64.. One mood, all the time. 65.. You can admire Clint Eastwood without starving yourself to look like him. 66.. You never have to drive to another gas station because this one's just too skeevy. 67.. You know at least 20 ways to open a beer bottle. 68.. You can sit with your knees apart no matter what you are wearing. 69.. Same workmore pay. 70.. Gray hair and wrinkles add character. 71.. You don't have to leave the room to make an emergency crotch adjustment. 72.. Wedding Dress $2000; Tux rental $100. 73.. You don't care if someone is talking about you behind your back. 74.. With 400 million sperm per shot, you could double the earth's population in 15 tries, at least in theory. 75.. You don't mooch off others' desserts. 76.. If you retain water, it's in a canteen. 77.. The remote is yours and yours alone. 78.. People never glance at your chest when you're talking to them. 79.. ESPN's sports center. 80.. You can drop by to see a friend without bringing a little gift. 81.. Bachelor parties whomp ass over bridal showers. 82.. You have a normal and healthy relationship with your mother. 83.. You can buy condoms without the shopkeeper imagining you naked. 84.. You needn't pretend you're freshening up to go to the bathroom. 85.. If you don't call your buddy when you say you will, he won't tell you friends you've changed. 86.. Someday you'll be a dirty old man. 87.. You can
Fw: What's with LaRouche?
Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been hearing LaRouche's name frequently after not having heard of him for years. His orgs have some Impeach Cheney First movement going on ATM and is getting some press. Last Friday some of his supporters were demonstrating (or something like that) at our local Post Office (Next to the Lutheran Churchfor added topicality) and my Wife starts talking to them, and ends up donating $25. She comes home with a load of literature and is very excited. I really hated telling her LaRouche is something of a nutcase. The bad news is she gave them our email addresses. YIKES!!! xponent Former Communists For $100 Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Fw: [Repost] What Is Maru?
Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A while back Debbie asked for this and I finally found it! Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is Maru? H..good question. Maru is a ship, a Japanese ship. Maru is also a defense against the cultural imperialism of the Culture mailing list with their GSVs and ROUs.(Thats a different discussion thoughG) Maru is a way of adding remarks at the end of a message in a way that is distinctive and exclusive to Brin-L. If you see someone who uses a Maru shipname, they are from Brin-L. Maru is a means to crack a joke, make an observation, or poke a stick in someones eye. And below is the background from which it was derived. *** The word maru originated in the seventh century and has since come to serve as a popular name for a host of Japanese vessels. The first ship to use the suffix is said to have been the 16th century ship called the Nipon Maru, built by the legendary Toyotomi Hideyoschi. However, despite its widespread use, the word has never been graced with a definitive definition. Our attempts to muster a universal meaning of the term maru have all ended in frustration, with each possibility smothered in a down-pour of vaguery. For instance, one Japanese reference worker gave as many as fourteen meanings for maru, while another offered at least five additional meanings without including all the other fourteen. These misunderstandings and discrepancies have arisen from the fact that maru is a word laced with suggestiveness. Here is a selection of some of the explanations we have found. Possible meanings The term maru originally seemed to act as a form of compliment when attached to certain personal names. For example, people seemed to be bestowing respect upon the eighth century poet Hitomaru Kikinomoto by attaching the term to his name. It could also be seen as a term of endearment rather like a diminutive, as in the juvenile name Ushiwakamaru, of the twelfth-century general Yoshitsune Minamoto. Gradually the word was thrown to the dogs, literally, as people became accustomed to bestowing it upon their pet animals. Other names which received the maru blessing included a precious utensil used perhaps in some kind of tea ceremony or even the favoured tool of a deft craftsman. Another example of this maru phenomenon can be found in the mighty sword Mura-same-Maru; this famous blade of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was supposed to be so potent that whoever owned it, regardless of his own intent, was destined to kill somebody sooner or later. The term maru also became associated with the concept of a circle. This circular affinity suggested completeness, entirety, wholeness; notions which the image of a circle seems to symbolise. Indeed, the connotation of 'wholeness' perhaps led to the use of maru to mean 'one entire hour' and also as a term for the fanciful frying of a 'whole' animal, as opposed to a mere handful of giblets. In addition to all these other meanings, it also has an association with 'dust', while at the same time referring to 'those naive in love', hence the wistful phrase dusty lover. Maru and ships Having sashayed through the multifarious meanings of maru, it is now time to cut to the chase, examining it in the context of ships. The use of maru in a ship name would seem to express the hope that the ship will defend those aboard against all perils of the sea, being as complete as a circle, as trustworthy as a sword and as virile as a master craftsman's favourite tool. In addition to this, it also carried a feeling of attachment or endearment, such as that felt by one dusty lover for another. Also, unlike most other countries, a ship in Japan is referred to as a male and in adding maru to the ships name, as was done with young boys in olden times, the ship was protected from harm. In the 1905 edition of Basil Hall Chamberlain's Things Japanese he says of `maru' It is often asked: what does the word Maru mean in the names of ships ...? His answer is: a.. the real meaning is obscure b.. it is probably merging of two words: `maru' and `maro', which was a term of endearment. c.. it used to be used for swords, armour, parts of castles, etc. too. *** From India, the Sanskrit manu also traveled east. In Japan, manu became maru, a word which is included in the name of most Japanese ships. In ancient Chinese mythology, the god Hakudo Maru came down from heaven to teach people how to make ships. This name could well relate to Noah, the first shipbuilder. The custom of including maru in the names of Japanese ships seems to have started between the 12th and 14th centuries. In the late 16th century, the warlord Hideyoshi built
Re: Ding Dong The Witch is dead!
Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Karl Rove plans to resign. Check your news! Hmm, is it rats, or have the Munchkins finally wised up? Me, I'd like to see Rove, Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld massive snarl, and Wolfowitz et al sent to Eyerack, and made to patrol the streets of Bagdad until the next presidential election, or IED, whichever comes first. Debbi Still Energy Sapped From All The Lil' Pony Pals Maru Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. http://farechase.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Belated: After Midnight
Ronn! Blankenship wrote: That era started about 11:15 last night... I'm so sorry to hear that, Ronn- Debbi Our Buddies Maru:( Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
[Books] What's The Matter With Kansas
Just finished this for a book club - rather dry going, but informative. Depressing, actually, but Frank's analysis of why folks are voting for politicians and policy which hurt them economically seemed valid to me. Of course, I think others wrote/reported similar things before, but the account of his personal odessey from youthful 'conservative' to disillusioned adult is rather affecting. He is certainly no fan of Brownbeck, and documents why clearly. Debbi who will probably not catch up with List posts anytime this month, or next... sigh Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Fw: Global Warming Mistake
Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/08/revised_temp_data_reduces_glob.html 1998 was not the hottest US year ever. Nor was 2006 the runner up. Sure, had you checked NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) website just days ago, you would have thought so, but not today. You see, thanks to the efforts of Steve McIntyre over at http://www.climateaudit.org/, the Surface Air Temperature Anomaly charts for those and many other years have been revised - predominately down. Why? It's a wild and technical story of compromised weather stations and hack computer algorithms (including, get this - a latent Y2K bug) and those wishing to read the fascinating details should follow ALL of the links I've provided. But, simply stated, McIntyre not only proved the error of the calculations used to interpret the data from the 1000 plus US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) weather stations feeding GISS, but also the cascading effect of that error on past data. You see, as Warren Meyer over at Coyoteblog.com (whose recent email expressed a delight we share in the irony of this correction taking place the week of the Gore / Newsweek story) points out: One of the interesting aspects of these temperature data bases is that they do not just use the raw temperature measurements from each station. Both the NOAA (which maintains the USHCN stations) and the GISS apply many layers of adjustments. It was the gross folly of these fudge factors McIntyre challenged NASA on. And won. Today, not only have the charts and graphs been modified, but the GISS website includes this acknowledgement that: the USHCN station records up to 1999 were replaced by a version of USHCN data with further corrections after an adjustment computed by comparing the common 1990-1999 period of the two data sets. (We wish to thank Stephen McIntyre for bringing to our attention that such an adjustment is necessary to prevent creating an artificial jump in year 2000.) But, as only the Gorebots actually believe the hype that recent year to year temperature shifts are somehow proof of anthropogenic global warming, why is this significant? As explained by Noel Sheppard over at Newsbusters: One of the key tenets of the global warming myth being advanced by [GISS head James] Hansen and soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore is that nine of the ten warmest years in history have occurred since 1995. Additionally, as broken by Rush Limbaugh on his radio show this afternoon, Reuters is now reporting in a piece entitled Scientists predict surge in global warming after 2009 that: A study forecasts that global warming will set in with a vengeance after 2009, with at least half of the five following years expected to be hotter than 1998, which was the warmest year on record. As so deftly observed by El Rushbo, who wonders how long NASA has been aware of the errors, many greenies have spread their nonsense using 1998's bogus distinction to generate angst amongst the weak-minded. Yet - thanks to a Blogging Scientist -- that's all changed now - check the newly revised GISS table. 1934 is now the hottest, and 3 others from the 1930's are in the top 10. Furthermore, only 3 (not 9) took place since 1995 (1998, 1999, and 2006). The years 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 are now below the year 1900 and no longer even in the top 20. So, we're not really on a roller-coaster to hell, then? Of course, eco-maniacs will argue that it's the global readings that count, not those of the USA alone. Nuts to that. It's nearly impossible to believe that when put to similar close scrutiny, global mechanisms will stand the heat any better than ours. Besides, as GISS hosts the reference database of choice for all manner of enviro-mental-cases, one would think such a significant content correction itself would spark huge news and greenie-card reevaluation, right? Well -- as Noel asked and answered his readers: Think this will be Newsweek's next cover-story? No, I don't either. Perfect. xponent Global Steadiness Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Fw: Put Some Hair Around It!
Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/10/old_new_yorker_ad_fo.html The Goof Button found this ad for a fur-lined auto ignition keyhole in an old copy of The New Yorker. http://www.goofbutton.com/2007/08/tired_of_groping.html xponent As Heard At Work Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fw: Global Warming Mistake
On 13 Aug 2007 at 8:54, Robert Seeberger wrote: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/08/revised_temp_data_reduces_glob.html As usual... check Realclimate first? http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all- that/ AndrewC Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fw: Global Warming Mistake
On 8/13/2007 5:55:40 PM, Andrew Crystall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On 13 Aug 2007 at 8:54, Robert Seeberger wrote: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.americanthinker. com/blog/2007/08/revised_temp_data_reduces_glob.html As usual... check Realclimate first? http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all- that/ Ahhh! Good link! Thanks for that! xponent Aiming For Accuracy Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Civil WAr
-Original Message- From: Dan M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:22 PM To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' Subject: RE: So Austin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Seeberger Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:59 AM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: So Austin It was really one of those things where it was both ways simultaneously. There is a good parallel with our modern situation. The freeing of the slaves would have had an economic impact on the South that would have devastated in a manner similar to what would happen if all foriegn oil were suddenly embargoed away from the US today. Well, it would have had an impact, but I don't think it would have been that great. First of all, they could still have the labor of the slavesjust as tenant farmers...as they did later. As I said, there was slavery in the North prior to the Civil War, but it was not economically necessary as it was in the South. It much like the way Illegal immigrants are hired these days to increase profits by keeping labor costs low. But, it was abolished during the early 19th century. Indeed, slavery was close to being abolished throughout the Union during that time, with Virginia coming within one vote of abolishing slavery on several occasions. some noble cause like state's rights. Well, I think you have to consider that the majority of those monuments were built long ago when attitudes were quite different. The social inertia that supported the building of such is pretty well spent and is unlikely to ever build momentum again. I'd go so far as to say that with regard to the subject of racism, the South is in better shape than the North or the West. Things have changed a lot here. They have...I also agree that Texas has made more progress than many northern states, but DWB is still an offense. Lincoln himself believed in the right of states to secede, ??? quote I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the express provisions of our National Constitution, and the Union will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not provided for in the instrument itself. 12 Again: If the United States be not a government proper, but an association of States in the nature of contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it? One party to a contract may violate it-break it, so to speak-but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it? 13 Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was to form a more perfect Union. 14 But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity. 15 It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. 16 I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself. unquote Lincoln's 1st inaugural adress Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Civil WAr
- Original Message - From: Dan Minettte [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:24 PM Subject: Civil WAr -Original Message- From: Dan M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:22 PM To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' Subject: RE: So Austin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Seeberger Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:59 AM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: So Austin It was really one of those things where it was both ways simultaneously. There is a good parallel with our modern situation. The freeing of the slaves would have had an economic impact on the South that would have devastated in a manner similar to what would happen if all foriegn oil were suddenly embargoed away from the US today. Well, it would have had an impact, but I don't think it would have been that great. First of all, they could still have the labor of the slavesjust as tenant farmers...as they did later. And they certainly did, but at the cost of their former affluence, so I don't think you can minimize the impact of freeing the slaves. How many decades did it take for the agricultural South to recover? http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/ransom.civil.war.us Quote: Whatever the effects of the war on industrial growth, economic historians agree that the war had a profound effect on the South. The destruction of slavery meant that the entire Southern economy had to be rebuilt. This turned out to be a monumental task; far larger than anyone at the time imagined. As noted above in the discussion of the indirect costs of the war, Southerners bore a disproportionate share of those costs and the burden persisted long after the war had ended. The failure of the postbellum Southern economy to recover has spawned a huge literature that goes well beyond the effects of the war. To avoid wandering too far from the original point, I think you have to understand the reasons why the political and economic entities of the South decided to fight in order to understand why there was such patriotic fervor (Confederate) in the region and why it persisted for so long. As I said, there was slavery in the North prior to the Civil War, but it was not economically necessary as it was in the South. It much like the way Illegal immigrants are hired these days to increase profits by keeping labor costs low. But, it was abolished during the early 19th century. Mostly abolished. In 1860 there were slaves working at the White House. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9076827/White-House Quote: Until the Civil War, however, most White House servants were slaves. http://www.newstatesman.com/200607100033 Quote: The atmosphere was such that black people were still being bought and sold as property in Georgetown as late as November 1861 - even though President Lincoln signed a local law the following year to free slaves eight months before his landmark Emancipation Proclamation of 1862. The white slave owners of Georgetown, DC (as it was then known, because it was not officially absorbed into Washington, DC until 1895) demanded compensation, and an Expert Examiner of Slaves was brought in - this was a local phenomenon that did not happen elsewhere in the country - who, after examining the slaves' teeth and health in general, assessed their overall value at $300,000. Indeed, slavery was close to being abolished throughout the Union during that time, with Virginia coming within one vote of abolishing slavery on several occasions. I know that is official, but not strictly accurate: http://www.slavenorth.com/index.html Quote: Slavery in the North never approached the numbers of the South. It was, numerically, a drop in the bucket compared to the South. But the South, comparatively, was itself a drop in the bucket of New World slavery. Roughly a million slaves were brought from Africa to the New World by the Spanish and Portuguese before the first handful reached Virginia. Some 500,000 slaves were brought to the United States (or the colonies it was built from) in the history of the slave trade, which is a mere fraction of the estimated 10 million Africans forced to the Americas during that period. some noble cause like state's rights. Well, I think you have to consider that the majority of those monuments were built long ago when attitudes were quite different. The social inertia that supported the building of such is pretty well spent and is unlikely to ever build momentum again. I'd go so far as to say that with regard to the subject of racism, the South is in better shape than the North or the West. Things have changed a lot here. They have...I also agree that Texas has made more progress than many northern states, but DWB is still an offense. Yes,
Re: Ding Dong The Witch is dead!
On 8/13/07, Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Karl Rove plans to resign. Check your news! I did a double-take -- figured from the subject this email came from my Gold Star family friends... but look, it's on Brin-L. Rove's plan for world domination is thoroughly discredited. As another GOPer said today, his huge mistake was that he tried to destroy the opposition, forgetting that for democracy as we know it to work, the 'winners' have to work closely with the 'losers' to accomplish anything. As long as we're on this subject... I see that Cindy Sheehan is running for Nancy Pelosi's seat. I hope and pray that San Francisco isn't looney enough to elect her. Aside from losing the Speaker, Cindy is a destroy the opposition sort coming from the other direction, which is just as useless. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
maru
Maru is also a defense against the cultural imperialism of the Culture. are you referring to ian banks? http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~stefan/culture.html what are GSVs and ROUs? Maru is a way of adding remarks at the end of a message in a way distinctive and exclusive to Brin-L do you know the derivation of when the apellation san is added to names e.g. momotaru-san? Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=listsid=396545469 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: maru
jon wrote: Maru is also a defense against the cultural imperialism of the Culture. are you referring to ian banks? http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~stefan/culture.html That's the one. Several people here are also members of the Culture list. what are GSVs and ROUs? Ship types. If my memory serves, General Service Vehicle and Rapid Offensive Unit. Maru is a way of adding remarks at the end of a message in a way distinctive and exclusive to Brin-L do you know the derivation of when the apellation san is added to names e.g. momotaru-san? Nope. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
