We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I'm far more concerned with the precedent the Court will set regarding the further expansion of the Commerce Clause. If the Court fails to declare a federal mandate of this type unconstitutional, that would be an enormous triumph for "progressives"---far beyond the momentary victory of the Court's upholding Obamacare.]
That is no big surprise. Most black Americans have some white ancestry. Most of the initial mixing of white and black genes came about from slave owners taking their liberties with their slaves. "Hijos de la chingada."
Like Claritas, I thought the article had its snarky moments.
Ironic that the article specifically picked her ancestors from Ireland. There were more white slaves brought to Africa then there were black slaves brought to America. Many of those white slaves were from Ireland. The African slavers would sail their boatrs up off the shores of Ireland for the favored slaves (White, fair haired women) and bring them back to Africa for their harems and to be sold as sex slaves. This slaving (agin ironically) was primarily done by muslims who also captured black Africans to sell as slaves to ships from Europe who would transport them to the Americas. So who were the worst? The African slavers? The European ship captains? Those who bought the slaves?
But really the more important question is why does an act by some unknown person 200+ years ago implicate anyone today, white or black, as either a victim or an oppressor?
Exactly...when does the statue of limitations expire? I say it expired officially after the great bloodshed of the civil war and effectively after ending the Jim Crow era.
I, like many, have absolutely no connection to slavery. My ancestry is rural English, Welsh, Danish, Swedish. The English side landed in New England where there was no slavery and migrated to South Dakota. My Danish and Swedish side immigrated to Iowa and Minnesota after the civil war. So why should I accept any guilt whatsoever, as if anyone at this point should?
It is time to end this nonsense. It is only good for two groups, the black race hustlers and the Democratic party.
With regard to Russian corruption and your request for information pertaining to crimes against the MF reader: In 2006 all of my bank accounts were emptied electronically. First withdrawal was from an ATM machine down on the docks in New Jersey. A few minutes later withdrawals were made from Vladivostok, Novosobirsk, Moscow, Leningrad and one other Russian city. Within 40 minutes time they had emptied all accounts, all credit accounts. While working with the fraud department of the bank in a western state, I was told that the Russians had "hit 250,000 accounts in the western states." Banks hit were B of A, Wells Fargo, First Interstate and Washington Mutual. The local news program announced the story with less than two sentences--one time. We never heard anything more about the Russian take over of 250,000 bank accounts. However, a few weeks later when President Bush went to Moscow to meet with Putin over economic issues, I could not help but think how he must have felt knowing that the Russians had just demonstrated their ability to destroy our banking system electronically.
We moved on with our lives and three years later while travelling in the east we met a gentleman who had had the same experience. He also reported that the local news station had only one mention of the event with no follow up. He reported that the fraud department of his bank (PNC) had also told him that there were approximately 250,000 accounts that had been hit in the eastern states. Would someone here like to investigate that story?
So, the Supremes bypassed the COmmerce and decided a financial penalty is the same as a rax and thus OK. Hmmm.
So, if the government wants us all to do something, it need only impose a fine for not doing it - or to make us buy something, impose a fine for not buying it.
Maybe the Court tooj a look at the possible "slippery slope" an is trying to put out an anchor before the lip of the cliff? I know the idea was pooh-poohed, but do we have driving licenses because they make us better drivers or because the government has penalties for driving without one no matter how well we drive? Or, since hand signals are still legal, wgy are we forced to have turn-signal lights?
"Debunking The Fast & Furious Gun Control Conspiracy"
This piece uses faulty logic, and I would encourage you to re-read it. The writer states (paraphrased) that the F&F scheme wasn't Obama's nor Holder's idea! It doesn't matter whose idea it was, if it was capable of being hijacked for their purposes. He also states that the blogosphere has been talking about the comspiracy for months; in fact, it has been talked about for years.