“My Daddy Died In Iraq” Essay By Six Year Old A Lie – Endorsed By Her Mother
Another pathetic example of a parent teaching her kid to do the wrong thing – just to win a pair of tickets to a Hannah Montana concert:
GARLAND, Texas — An essay that won a 6-year-old girl four tickets to a Hannah Montana concert began with the powerful line: “My daddy died this year in Iraq.”
While gripping, it was not true — and now the girl may lose her tickets after her mom acknowledged to contest organizers it was all a lie.
The sponsor of the contest was Club Libby Lu, a Chicago-based store that sells clothes, accessories and games intended for young girls.
My disgust meter pegged out over this one. Teaching her kid to lie is bad enough, but teaching her to use something like an imaginary father’s death to get what she wants is way, way over the top:
The mother had told company officials that the girl’s father died April 17 in a roadside bombing in Iraq, company spokeswoman Robyn Caulfield said.
“We did the essay and that’s what we did to win,” Priscilla Ceballos, the mother, said in an interview with Dallas TV station KDFW. “We did whatever we could do to win.”
She had identified the soldier as Sgt. Jonathon Menjivar, but the Department of Defense has no record of anyone with that name dying in Iraq. Caulfield said the mother has admitted to the deception.
The company is considering taking back the tickets. Personally, I think the mother should be investigated by child protection for involving her daughter in a blatant crime – fraud.
Those tickets will probably have to be returned – should be, anyway. And this little girl’s first serious lesson in life won’t be a good one, thanks to her mother.
Incredible.
I meant to say that “I never said that fountains were segregated everywhere in the US.”
The strategist in charge of the Republican party in the early 70s have stated what the Southern Strategy was.
Oh how I love me some Gumbyism
Here’s the truth:
1954 – The beginning of the end of racial segregation in the United States. Done by Republicans over the opposition of Southern Democrats, also known as Dixiecrats. The Dems were the Party of segregation, while the Republican Party, founded to end slavery, consistently worked to end segregation. Fact.
Lestat: Your mischaracterization of the US as a generally segregated country is just flat wrong. It was only in a Democrat-controlled region of the US that segregation even existed over 50 years ago.
Which party was it that tried to stop the Civil Rights Amendment again? It was the Republican Party that cast the key votes (80%-20% in favor) not the Democratic Party (which went as low as 65%-35% in key votes). Had it just been desegregation, they would have been angry at the Republicans, not the Democrats. Certainly, disgruntlement of Southern Democrats went beyond the simple issue of desegregation I think it was a response to general leftward tilting of the Democratic Party…
.
It’s typical that the Democrats and their liberal allies in the press blame the Republicans over the loss of a key voter bloc, but it’s also typical of them to point the finger of blame to others for their own actions. That’s part of what “liberalism” has come to mean, in its current corrupted sense of meaning.
Whoop! My bad; it was the Civil Rights Act of 1957, introduced during the Eisenhower administration. It is true that segregated drinking fountains were not common in most of the US fifty years ago, unlike your mischaracterization, Lestat. You lied about that.
No problem for me at all, r108.
Agreed. You finally said something smart.
The company is considering taking back the tickets. Personally, I think the mother should be investigated by child protection for involving her daughter in a blatant crime – fraud.
Now you go and ruin the smart thing you said, with a really, really STUPID one! Two way over the top actions don’t make things right, ya big dope.
Oh wait, maybe you were being “funny” again?
Ellinas: I usually don’t correct spelling or grammar, but several times you have used the word succeed when I believe you meant secede, meaning to foormally withdraw from an alliance of some kind.
Proof: My apologies! Your past corrections were so brilliant I thought it was artificial turf!
Lestat:
Already have. States rights. As I mentioned this doesn’t seem important to you, because you wouldn’t be harmed by a lessoning of the power of the individual state, but rather would benefit from it. But it’s not surprising that those most negatively affected by it, would respond strongly to the imposition of a more centrally controlled government.
Part of the conflict also centered around the reality of the economic and social differences between the North and the South, and the perceived lack of shared interests between South and North, especially following 1848. Slavery plays a role in that, because it was a key component of Southern culture, and helped produce an elite class of Southern gentility reminiscent of south-of-the border social class structure.
In any case, it is a vast oversimplification to think of this strictly as a war fought over the “right to hold slaves”.
Sigh…
Once again Hannitized shows the world that his synapses simply don’t fire correctly.
Hannitized – to obtain or atempt to obtain something of value by misrepresntation or by other fraudulent means is fraud. Simple.
Sort of like when you attempt to present yourself as a rational, thinking human being, only in her case it’s a real crime, not an intellectual one.
Neiman: Keep cutting into my turf and I’ll start quoting large portions of Man of La Mancha from memory!
The old one person speaks for everybody logical fallacy. Except you don’t allow him to even speak, you distort it based on not understanding the distinction between civil rights and states rights.
As well as Bill Clinton’s mentor:
Imagine if a Republican like Trent Lott had said something like that.
Just another Racist Democrat in my book. Sorry for the redundancy.
LOL. Couldn’t be there was a general pattern of voting by the Northern Democrats that disenchanted Southern Democrats.
There is a distinction to be made between the concept of states rights versus the issue of desegregation and human rights.
Northern Democrats were, and continue to be, in favor of the loss of states’ rights in favor of more centrally controlled government. That’s the political vector responsible for the loss of conservative Democrats from across the country, not just the South.
Lestat:
Nice attempt to change the topic after you’ve gotten reamed on the previous one. But of course, you’re wrong again.
It’s not about the votes of the minority, it’s about the power of the central government. Typically of you socialists that you play the race card here. You can’t win on the truth, so you are forced to lie.
Lestat:
This is utterly silly.
The soldiers fought for the reason they chose to fight. They obviously knew their own motivations! As to the North invading… of course they were going to invade. What transpires for reasoning among you “liberals” is at times breathtaking.
Lestat:
What a laugh.
There is nothing abstract about who calls the shots over your daily life.
What a queer thing to say, r.
But I am not surprised.
You are after all a strict devotee of Gumbyism.
Are you accusing the corporately owned MSM of fabricating the convictions of these soldiers, because that would be quite a coup. You called them – “allegations of “cold-blooded murder“. I showed you that there were in fact actual convictions.
I am proud of our country when we adhere to the rule of law. Why not join me and support America for once in you life.
Exposing your rightie smears and non-truths is not hating, it is truth telling.
Wipe yourself Gumby, your own hate is dribbling down on to your white coat.
God Bless America
Why do you hate her so much?
Neiman, the declassified memo — you read it, right? — and the hearings- and the testimony of the soldier and the families and the pols, you googled them and read that too, right?
The inclusion of military convictions was meant in no way to smear them, but to help poor r-Gumby get a grip on what has actually happened. He feigns: bla bla leftie smears bla lies bla bla outright fabrications bla, without acknowledging the actual facts of the numerous military convictions. Tell the truth now Neiman, did you know about all these convictions? Sad as the facts may be, it is THE TRUTH.
Since the beginning of the war on terrorism in Iraq, the leftie MSM has been lying about it, and about our military, including false allegations of “cold-blooded murder”. Your two examples are nothing in comparison to what you lefties have done to damage the US, our efforts to defeat the terrorists, and our military. Shame on you!
You’re right, Harlem didn’t exist, Watts didn’t exist, Roxbury in Boston didn’t exist, Filmore didn’t exist. You’re revisionist history that blacks were equals outside of the South is BS.
Because Armitage knew nothing about how Libby lied to Fitz.
r-Gumby, if I do not include a reference, you call me out.
If I do include a reference you call it cherry picking.
And the identity politics thingy …oh that is soooo rich…
You so phunny, r-Gumby you should be on the TEEVEE.
Pat Tillman
Jessica Lynch
Wrong. It isn’t now, anymore than it was then. Nothing abstract about “wanting those people in Washington to stay out of our business.”
That’s the main reason that commoner in the Southern Army fought.
Really: Are you actually suggesting that the majority of white Southerners, who were actually harmed by the institution of slavery, would have fought to maintain it???
That’s just silly.
The tickets should be taken away from her, and her mother should give them both to a child whose father really has died in battle. And speaking of fathers, where is this girl’s dad? What does he think of the mother encouraging her child to be deceitful?
Scooter was convicted of 4 felonies and was his sentence commuted.
But ‘68-’91, huh.
Oh, you mean, Caspar Weinberger, Elliott Abrams, Robert McFarlane, Duane Clarridge, Alan Fiers, Clair George and Oliver North?
Scooter was convicted of 4 felonies and was his sentence commuted.
But ‘68-’91, huh.
Oh, you mean, Caspar Weinberger, Elliott Abrams, Robert McFarlane, Duane Clarridge, Alan Fiers, Clair George and Oliver North?
Yeah those traitors got away with some bad stuff.
I know what you mean, Chief “certain people” sure got out of jail for free, didn’t they.
Happy new Year to all.
Thank you for correcting me Neiman.
Lestat:
LOL. What the war was fought over, you dummy.
The federal government prevented the entirely legal succession of the Southern states.
There’s the lie; false premise, false conclusions.
Once again, your identity politics leads you astray, Gumbylover.
The Dixiecrats were a segregationist part of the Dem Party, who didn’t want to abandon the traditional Dem segregation and pro-slavery policies.
The Republican Party was founded to end slavery.
Barry Goldwater, despite your insinuation, never supported segregation. Another lie from you.
The “Southern Strategy” was designed to take advantage of the anger of the southern Dems toward the national party for abandoning the segregationist tradition of the Dem Party.
Republicans never supported segregation.
Sorry. I thought you were discussing the ramifications of the last fifty years of history.
Forgive me, if in a thread about a lying essayist, with a detour through Scooter Libby I mistook one of your full of shit assertions for another. My bad.
And whether the stone hits the pitcher, or the pitcher hits the stone, it is equally bad for the pitcher!
Lestat:
This is false. Economically the South would have been better off without slavery, which was very inefficient compared to free labor. It was more of an institution used to maintain a class division between the wealthy and the poor. (“Better to be a big fish in a small pond, than a small fish in a big pond” mentality.)
Give me a Civil War example of how the federal government was calling the shots in peoples daily lives.
And by the way, the fact that you have to give me an example proves that it is an abstract.
Your original statement:
Now you say:
Which is it?
You characterized the entire US by mentioning something that was a local phenomenon in some areas of the US fifty years ago, and you were wrong to do so. You have been thoroughly refuted on that, and instead of being a man and admitting your mistake, you continue to lie and bluster. Shame on you!
I think it’s sad that this happened, but please rememeber that both mother and daughter knew exactly what they were doing.
Plus, the mother forgot about MySpace and public records..
http://www.michaelcrook.org/blog/2007/12/29/texans-do-whatever-it-takes/
Neiman:
Beyond that, slavery actually harmed the average Southerner, because it undercut what he could ask for in terms of wages, and could negotiate for in terms of work hours.
In terms of Lestat’s other point, racism and prejudice have existed as long as humans have recognized differences between groups. Its hardly a new phenomenon, and it is a a curiously liberal notion that we can “legislate away” one of the less savory components of human nature.
And Robert KKK Byrd? He became a Republican? Dang! I guess somebody needs to brush up on their history!
Are you speaking from the stereotype that blacks are typically poor and housing in SF is so expensive?
SF is a liberal enclave. The fact that there is no affordable housing is due in part to the liberal green weenies who oppose building anywhere!
No person of any color would be denied the opportunity to buy a house anywhere in SF, as long as his money was sufficiently green!
Duh. Thank you Captain Obvious!
I never said that, so you lie again. You characterized the US as a place with segregated drinking fountains 50 years ago, and I correctly pointed out that it was a phenomenon peculiar to the Dem-controlled South.
I had a lot of good times in the Fillmore during the Sixties, and I’m “white”. Social segregation is, for the most part, voluntary. There was not legal segregation in the US fifty years ago, except in the Dem-controlled South.
Thanks for making my point that the trial was never about the leaking of Plame’s name, which was done by Fitz. It was a political hitjob that failed to get its real targets. It degenerated into a perjury trap. There was no lying from Libby, only faulty memory of insignificant events. The “significance” of the events was predicated on a phony justification of going after a leaker, but they never went after the guy who Fitz knew was the real leaker.
Al Gore Sr. became a Republican? When did that happen?
Don’t forget Jimmy Carter and Andrew Young. BCCI.
The economic threat was the end of slavery.
It’s not about the votes of the minority???
Voter caging, r-Gumby, a “state rights” strategy in use by these new guys you call the gop.
Sarah Taylor testified that Tim Griffin (Karl Rove’s Tim Griffin, later to replace a fired USA in Arkansas) was in charge of voter caging.
gop Kris Kobach is doing it right now and telling everyone about it
Ohio 2004
Florida 2002
Yes, voter caging is illegal.
Really r-Gumby get yourself some google.
I prefer to think of r as stretching like a Gumby.
There is a tad bit of hypocrisy here. You really think the Sponsor was in this for the “fatherless” girl? They were in it for the advertising and profits — not that there is anything wrong with that. If your going to spend money on advertising it might as well go to something worth while.
Extreme Home Makeover is a great example of this. Everyone gets all teary eyed and thinks the network is just the greatest and most generous ever. Truth is the network is in business and because the show is much watched, the advertisers line up with the big bucks. Again, nothing wrong with it and it is “good” business.
However, the networks don’t mind everyone thinking that what they’re doing is charity. They don’t advertise that their decision is a business decision and a profitable one at that.
Yep, it’s Hillary’s fault. I was wondering how long it would take for someone to blame Hillary for someone else’s lies. Hillary is a phony, pandering, lying corporate whore, but then so is Romney, Guliani, Bush, Cheney, and 90% of the Republicans in congress. Let’s just blame everyone (except the mother) for the child lying.
Dumbasses,
The Southern Strategy was not intended to have the politicians change parties, they already had their power base. It was to get the voters to change. It was a racist strategy that worked to make the Republican party a racist party. The current Republican party, intent on suppressing the votes of minorities, has no claim on the good deeds done by the party 140 years ago.
r-Gumby, if I do not include a reference, you call me out.
If I do include a reference you call it cherry picking.
And the identity politics thingy …oh that is soooo rich…
You so phunny, r-Gumby you should be on the TEEVEE.
Only in a few places in the Deep South. The Civil Rights Act was passed 53 years ago. Typical leftie propaganda.
Wrong. The South fought the Civil War over States Rights. Read that Tenth Amendment, along with the history of the Civil War and the Reconstruction, and learn something.
Your identity politics makes you stupid.
It is also a fact that the Republicans were instrumental in all the Civil Rights legislation, as Carrick has already documented. The Northern Dems broke from the racist tradition of the Dem Party.
I wasn’t wrong and the fact that it was only in the You want to combat everything I say so much that you don’t even pay attention to the point I was making. You argue facts incidental to the comment, not the substance of the comment.
Shame on you!
First, what this girl/mom did was wrong and if there is a legal consequence, she should be subjected to it.
Secondly Nieman:
Yep.
The Tillman hearing and the Lynch hearing were both on CSAN. Google the transcripts if you want more.
Socialist, there is a world of difference between pondering someone’s influence and blaming them for someone else’s choices.
r-Gumby, if I do not include a reference, you call me out.
If I do include a reference you call it cherry picking.
And the identity politics thingy …oh that is soooo rich…
You so phunny, r-Gumby you should be on the TEEVEE.
More identity politics: making allegations against those who disagree with you. It’s also called smear.
No convictions, only allegations.
I’ve already corrected that mistake; it was Brown v Board of Education in 1954 that ended segregation in the public schools, and was the beginning of the civil rights movement, which originated in the Eisenhower(R) administration. No civil rights legislation passed without the support of the Republicans.
How can you say that the Republicans did not support segregation when you admit their strategy was to get the segregationist in the Democratic party to become Republicans?
Barry Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, you know, the one that made segregation illegal in public places in the US.
You really are a little kid still playing with dolls!
Even for you, rbb, that is a completely stupid and ignorant statement! Maybe you need a new doll.
So, instead of admitting your mistake, you seek to revise what you said? Pure lying cowardice.
Your “point” was to bash the US over the existence of some segregated drinking fountains that existed fifty years ago in a few areas. That was actually symptomatic of the Dem Party hanging onto its roots in slavery, not of the US in general. You were wrong.
Your hate for America has made you stupid.
Carrick,
Over what states rights issue was the Southern Strategy formed?
You are just another historical revisionist.
Lestat: Read up on the Tenth Amendment, if you still don’t get it.
Gumbyboy: The original statement was a false claim of suppressing the votes of minorities, not “the votes of the minority”. duh.
Can’t read well?
States righs is an abstract. Nobody goes to war over an abstract. In the context of the Civl War when the term “states rights” is used what is meant is the right to determine their economic system, which was based on slavery. States rights is code for slavery. It is the same thing.
No dumbass, my point was to show how the country had not deteriorated. I was giving an example of something we have fixed in the last 50 years. It was an example of how the country is better now than it was 50 years ago.
You are the moron who is arguing that racism was just a minor problem outside of the south.
The reason for the “independent south” was the feeling that the Tenth Amendment was being violated, which was my argument. You also chose to ignore the many reasons, besides slavery, that were given for secession.
I never made an argument about racism in this country; I just refuted your untrue characterization of us as a racist country and that all the improvement in our society over the last fifty years was based on the existence of segregated drinking fountains.
You continue to be wrong, and are too stupid to know when you have been called out.
Sorry, problem with my touch pad. The above post should read:
I wasn’t wrong and the fact that it was only in the South was not germane to my argument. You want to combat everything I say so much that you don’t even pay attention to the point I was making. You argue facts incidental to the comment, not the substance of the comment.
And from you too, apparently. BTW, slavery wasn’t “hidden” from anyone in that time. Thanks for making our point.
It was over the issue of States Rights, as opposed to Federal control. It wasn’t some particular states rights issue. duh
You’re talking about Scooter, right?
yes yes r-Gumby the votes of the minorities yes r-Gumby yes
whydoncha google this: “After ten full years inside the gop, ninety days among honest criminals wasn’t really any great ordeal.”
Breakdown his statement: “Back in 2002, just about every Republican operative was so dizzy with power that if you could find two of us who could still tell the difference between politics and crime, you could probably have rubbed us together for fire as well.”
And get back to me about why he and others went to jail. Let us know what you find about his life inside the gop and why he is out.
Everyone benefits; it’s charity for the people who get a free house, and business for the TV program that enables the free house. People have jobs and make money from this. Why is that a problem for you?
Oh uh, out of context self identified half wit is here.
Lestat: I understood your point that our society has improved. You just used a leftie lie to make that point, and I called you on it. You could have cited hundreds of other instances that would have been politically neutral, but as a hate-filled leftie, you couldn’t resist trying to characterize the US as a racist country. The reality is that we are the least racist country in the world. You got caught and thoroughly refuted.
You were right about one thing: we have improved, and it is due to the rise of conservatism.
Ellinas, obviously they would stop it. I’m puzzled why you think that’s an interesting question. The US Civil War was among other things a consolidation of this federal power.
States rights issues had been around for along time, yet there was not a mass exodus from the Democrat party until desegregation. Is this a coincidence? I don’t think so. Mass numbers of people don’t change parties based on abstracts such as states rights. Most people don’t care enough, they need something more concrete. The Southern Strategy found that concrete issue and targeted the racist democrats to become republicans. All I can say is, Good Riddance.
But you didn’t; you played the leftie race card instead. It’s not what you say you meant later(after you’ve been caught), it’s what you actually said. You were wrong to mischaracterize the US that way, hater.
Examples are concrete. Wrong again.
No. He was not the person involved as you well know.
I was referring to the the era from 1968-1991 in the US military when “certain people” were given “passes” for bad behavior. These indulgences also occurred in public education from around 1968 until the present. I was there. Stop your political games. We are at war.
RRB:
I am getting ready to leave and don’t have time to read them now. Are you asserting that these memos disclose as an objective fact that The Republican Party, their candidates and elected officials in a substantial number knew all about the false cover story before the rest of America? Please leave me a direct quote to that effect and I’ll go to that document, or admit that perhaps your accusations against them all were painting with too far broad a brush and more than a little partisan partisan.
I am glad these people were investigated and convicted, if guilty, but I’ll add two things: (1) The Left has made things into criminal conduct by the military that never were, solely out of their hatred for the military and desire to destroy and/or make wholly impotent our military. (2) Yes, I knew many convictions were made and yet, I haven’t had the time to investigate whether or not the charges were based on facts or not. Like I said, if they do wrong they must be punished, but it is such a small fraction of our military as to be statistically insignificant and only reflects our population and human condition as a whole.
I unconditionally support our military because I served in the Marine Crops, in war, and I have a personal stake in this war. If they really screw up, they must answer for their misdeeds, otherwise I will not tolerate the constant, largely unwarranted criticism by the Left just out of hate for our wonderful fighting men and women.
Opps, I think Raygun pardoned those traitors in ‘92. I guess chief is talking about Nixon.
Still can’t admit your obvious mistake? In fact, you used the statment about water fountains to characterize how the US was fifty years ago, and you were wrong to do that. Admit what you did, and move on. When you pile one lie on top of another in a pathetic attempt to defend your ego, you fool no one.
That would be you. The South seceeded from the Union over the interpretation of the Tenth Amendment, which states:
The South maintained that the Federal govt had no jurisdiction over slavery under the Tenth Amendment.
While slavery was certainly one of the “hot button issues”, it was the interpretation of the Tenth Amendment as to the power of the central govt that was the cause of the Civil War.
It’s time to put away your dolls, I think. You have developed an unhealthy obsession.
Yeah, but you still had blacks drinking out of seperate fountains, so maybe it hasn’t deteriorated that much.
The facts of this case still are corruption of a child by an adult. In this case, her mother. The RBB attempts to distract morality to random acts outside LOAC do a disservice to our country and our efforts to defend ourselves. Shall we look up all the Article 15 violations during Somalia, Tuzla operations during the Clinton administration? Shall we review all the AWOLs for the New Orleans Police, the illegal confiscations of weapons from 58 year old grandmothers? Please. Human beings do make mistakes. The point is that they were all caught, prosecuted, and punished, regardless of race, creed or national origin. The Truth: I just finished talking to a veteran who left the service when the PC began. It should matter not what a person looks like, just his bad behavior. Yet, “certain people” are somehow allowed “get out of jail free” cards based on some other “card”… Enough said, and enough is enough! This mother is morally bankrupt. There have been friendly fire incidents since time has begun.
During my 29 years of teaching I encountered many parents teaching their children to lie. They also taught them to steal, sell drugs and engage in prostitution. Disgusting.
“Whatever it takes” to get “what’s in it for me” – the ME generation in action! This woman is disgusting in so many ways!
I hate to politicize the subject (although…not enough not to do it…:D ), but I can’t help but wonder what effect women like Hillary Clinton have on these people. She’s the epitome of “do whatever it takes” for personal gain yet a large segment of the country wants her as POTUS.
I wonder what the Mother would do, as Bob Barker would say, for ” A NEWWW CCCARRR.”
“Get off knees, bitch, you have a family to raise.”
Your namecalling doesn’t cover for you. Racism has always been magnified by the lefties for political purposes. It is leftie racism that keeps a high percentage of African-Americans voting for the Dems, despite their inability to do anything at all to benefit them. Instead, Dem racism has destroyed the family structure in the inner cities and has produced the crack cocaine/pimp culture there.
Improvements in the US are due to the spread of conservatism, not by Dems playing the race card.
The Civil War was fought over Slavery. The momentum to end slavery was gaining steam due to the addition of nonslave Western states. The Southern States foresaw that the end of slavery would ruin their racist economy. There was no other issue that was life changing enough that would of caused a war. You are revising history again.
The Civil Rights Act of 1954???
I can see that math was not your strong suit, but than again, neither is history.
Priscilla Ceballos – for shame!
What’s wrong with you?
Please answer. We will response back. We know that it is only a matter of time before you Google your own name and read this. What do you have to say for yourself?
RBB:
Pat Tillman
Jessica Lynch
Ah, you are saying the Republican Party, their elected officials and candidates knew the military was lying in these cases and knowingly fostered the lie? If you cannot prove they knew the facts were different than reported, you have knowingly misrespresented the truth.
That’s the lie; the presence of segregated drinking fountains in some areas of our country doesn’t make us “a racist country”, which I have pointed out over and over.
If you needed to use the subject of race to demonstrate improvement(among the hundreds of reasons you could have cited), you could have used the example of the Republican Party outlawing slavery in over 140 years ago.
Garrick:
Absolutely true! Both points!
Lestat:
Read more slowly, I mentioned that states rights and economic threats to the South were also major components, and will you tell me that if I think you are going to destroy my way to make a living and feed my family I would not want to kill you? Nonsense! Slavery, states rights and economic threats in the South were major contributing factors to the Civil War and to suggest otherwise is to deny the facts.
Check out those eyebrows, maybe fake and painted on like her morals.
Lestat:
Meaning you simply have no idea what you’re talking about.
Central control may not be a big deal to you, if you live in an urban region, because central control in practice means that urban regions get to call the shots for everybody else. But for people who live in less populated areas, a republican form of government is a big thing. They don’t want the people in Washington telling them how to live.
Robert108:
Yes this is absolutely correct.
Slavery was the defining issue, but there were other issues of the day associated with states rights that were in play at the time. The fact that RBB and Lestat are unclear about this just illustrates that we are debating with ignorance.
Obviously that’s pretty much a pointless activity unless they admit their ignorance and go obtain a more informed opinion.
I’d rather have some WIlliam Blake, if you don’t mind.
This is an outright lie. It would be more true to say that the Dems, through their Ministry of Propaganda, the MSM, has tried to capture the votes of minorities by lying to them. The fact is that the Dems have actually suppressed the votes of the US military by not counting the overseas ballots. They also slashed the tires of some Republican vehicles to prevent them from transporting voters to the polls.
Rob: It’s not unbelievable at all; lefties regularly lie to advance their agenda, because if they told the truth about what they want, America would reject them. They especially lie about the war and about our military. Examples abound.
Linking to a site where the leader claims that an independant south will benefit the European majority does not help in your argument about the racism in this country.
There you go again, rbb, spewing hate at the US and our military to try to justify the lies, half-truths and outright fabrications of your leftie MSM. Shame on you!
Let’s all find her phone number and prank call the crap out of her!
http://www.hannahmontanaconcert.net
“The next best thing to being there!”
It was the only one you mentioned.
more rightie smears.
RBB:
Now please pay attention: I DID NOT say that some in the military were not aware that the story told to the parents and the American public was a lie, did I? I DID NOT say that after the matter was finally disclosed that there were not hearings and then everyone knew that a cover story had been promoted by the military, did I? By the way, just for the record, I do not believe there were any selfish or mean spirited motives involved, it was an honest error by people that wanted to spare the family unnecessary pain and to preserve the heroic image of Tilman, as he left such a high paying career to defend America.
I asked you if the Republican Party, candidates, elected officials and while I did not ask it, if the President had foreknowledge that the false cover story was concocted by a few people, before it became common knowledge. Please give us exact, objective, documented information that any or all of these people were told about it before it became common knowledge that military lied. If you cannot, you having consciously, knowingly spread information negative to the Republican Party and the President for selfish partisan reasons. I could be wrong, so please put up facts or stop your deceptive practices.
By your including a list of the offenses by the Military in Iraq and/or Afghanistan, it was another case of your trying to decieve others by omitting critical information, in this case the comparative data on such incidences in other American wars. The military is a microcosm of America and so there will always be criminal acts by the few, it is inevitable. But, you meant to use this data only to smear our brave men and women in uniform and the only reason I can think of for why you or any American would do something so dastardly is because you are probably another America hating, military hating Leftist, an extreme partisan or you are absent any common decency. You may choose which!
After the criminal persecution by Fitz, after he knew who the real leaker was all the time. Justice would demand a conviction of Fitz.
I never said that this was the only improvement. It was an example of one. In fact the obvious connotation of that statement, which you choose to miss, is that the US has improved in race relations. You lie again.
Sandy Berger
Sorry r-Gumby, I just can’t let you stretch on this one
Fitz — a republican, appointed by republican John Ashcroft
Judge Walton — appointed by W himself, POTUS Chief Roberts appointed him to FISA — Rehnquist had appointed him to Law Committee — Raygun and GWH bush appointed him to the DC court — GWH bush had him in other executive office gigs —
May I suggest moving on to another vineyard, because the grapes you’re eating — they are just way too sour.
Your identity politics doesn’t explain why Fitz ignored the fact that Armitage was the leaker, and why he wrongly went after the President, Vice President and Karl Rove; he only settled on Libby with the perjury trap when he failed to get his real targets. For you, partisan identity politics is everything, but you lie, as usual. Deal with the facts, not your personal hate fantasies, kiddie cartoon character boy.
Fitz persecuted Libby, and you know it. Unless your hate has made you so stupid that you can’t understand simple facts.
It was about betrayal. Duh. The Republican Party didn’t support segregation; that was a fine old tradition of the Dems.
The Republicans promised the Southern Dems a voice in national politics, not segregation.
To summarize:
Dems=pro-slavery
Republicans=anti-slavery
Get it?
Thank you for your service. You have done something I have not. I am grateful to you for that.
It would be good for you to read for yourself the testimony of Kevin Tillman and everyone else that was empanelled that day and settle in your own mind what they and others have said.
Oh r-Gumby, you are too funny to be real.
Tell the truth now, you’re a Stephen Colbert impersonator, right?
No shit, go learn the difference between abstract and concrete. You give concrete examples of abstract principles. States rights is an abstract principle which will have concrete examples. Similarly “justice” is an abstract principle. I can give you examples of justice, but justice is abstract.
Of course everybody in the South knew of slavery and most probably supported it. But to get the soldiers to go to war they were told that the North was invading. They wer lied to.
Why do you use the term “legal segregation”? Because you know that in practice segregation was alive and well everyplace. Are you telling me that if a black wanted to they could of bought a house anyplace in SF? That the banks would of given them the loan?
Again, your grasp of reality and history is skewed.
There is no such thing as a perjury trap. If you tell the truth there is no perjury.
Your history fails you again. This act did not end segregation.
You spin like a top.
My whole point to Gene was that the US was not some sort of idyllic wonderland 50 years ago.
Of course you bring up some other stupid argument and manage to get your facts wrong.
Gumbyboy: Were you so enthralled with your dolls that you triple posted? Your “references” are so biased that they are meaningless. Your arguments seem to be entirely based on claims of party membership, which is what “identity politics” means.
Thanks for telling us about your favorite toy.
That’s your profane, racist opinion. You started by characterizing the US as a place with segregated drinking fountains 50 years ago, when the fact is that we had already declared segregation illegal 3 years before that, and even so, segregated drinking fountains only were present in one region of the US. You were wrong. In your desperate effort to deny your error, you are changing the subject.
What you actually said:
You see, you have already staked your credibility on the claim that slavery was the only reason for the war, so which is it? If there were reasons(plural) for the war other than slavery, that makes a liar out of you, doesn’t it? Besides, you are wrong about the Southern soldiers being lied to; they felt their way of life was at stake, and they were right. They were fighting for their beloved South, not because they thought they were being attacked. Read up on what Robert E. Lee had to say sometime. You might find it enlightening, since you have so little actual knowledge about the subject. States Rights was not an “abstract concept” to the South. Neither is individual independence for a conservative. The South was willing to fight over States Rights, to the last man. That’s concrete. As a leftie, you are unable to understand that, I know.
No, I am saying that they fought because the were told the North was attacking. You know “The War of Northern Agression.” Of course the true reasons for the war were hidden from the soldiers. It wouldn’t be the first or the last time in history.
Rob says:
I’m going all retro on you again. How did we ever get here? Would this have happened 50 years ago when I was 13? I don’t think so. Society has deteriorated.
Shame is at least some retribution. Thanks for posting her picture. I hope all of blogdom picks this up. I’ll hang it on the wall for dart practice.
Lestat: You are deliberately being obtuse! You are playing games in semantics and engaging in silly sophistry, because you know you are wrong on this issue. But, your being a part of the Liberal Racist Movement (Democrat Party) in this country, I don’t blame you for trying to point the finger elsewhere.
r-Gumby really likes to stretch the truth and give us pure hate filled rightie smear.
He’s good like dat.
The Dem Party was for slavery and segregation before there was a Republican Party. It is part of Dem history. Segregation started because the Republicans freed the slaves. It’s called US History. Read it some time. While you’re at it, read up on the Civil War and Reconstruction(which spawned the KKK in the Dem South).
We are discussing history of 50 years ago. You are full of shit if you think the institutions in this country would of allowed a black man to purchase a house in a white neighborhood back than. Almost nobody purchases a house with cash, they do it on credit. You are high if you believe that a bank would have given a loan to a black man to purchase a house in a white neighborhood back than, even in a liberal enclave.
Gumbyboy: Just keep up with your cherry-picking, appeal to authority and identity politics. You can’t change the facts.
That is why it is an example, so I don’t have to mention every instance. I could of also mentioned the fact that we know longer allow rivers in Cleveland to catch on fire. Or the fact that most senior citizens no longer live in poverty.
I don’t think I am going to take “The League of the South Institue” as an authoritative source. Why not just link to the KKK.
This might be the first time in history the poor and under educated were sent to fight and die for the motives of the rich.
Carrick,
Give me one other issue we would of gone to war over.
Judge Walton was wrong. Pure identity politics; what about the fact that Armitage was the leaker, and the fact that Fitz knew it from the beginning? Why didn’t he go after Armitage? Why was Armitage never called to testify?
r-Gumby:
So r-Gumby, let’s do a recap, shall we?
The racist dems jumped ship, started the states rights party and finally, joined the gop.
The Southern Strategy, which has been admitted to by Republicans, was to racially polarize the South to get the racist dixiecrats to switch to the Republican Party.
I never said that drinking fountains were segregated the US. I was just making the point to Gene that 50 years ago our country wasn’t perfect and maybe we haven’t deteriorated.
But your argument that the South was the only place that racist were and that they were all Democrats is ridiculous.
e: The legal question is fairly simple: The Tenth Amendment says that all powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution as belonging to the central govt shall reside with the States, or with the people. Since there is no specifically enumerated power or right for the central govt to prohibit a State(or a person) from leaving the Union, the action of the South was legal by default.
Lincoln did it anyway, and the South responded by invoking the Tenth Amendment and going to war to defend their States Rights as stated in the Tenth Amendment.
This is why the Civil War was fought over the Tenth Amendment. But then, Carrick and I have already stated that.
It is an artifact of govt schools that our history is taught otherwise.
Yes Carrick they WERE democrats and when segregation started to happen they BECAME republicans. Is that too hard to comprehend?
Half truths are always as dangerous as outright lies. The civil war: “It is a fact that when the armies for the North and South were first formed, only a small minority of the soldiers on either side would have declared that the reason they joined the army was to fight either “for” or “against” slavery. However, equally true is the statement: “Had there been no slavery, there would have been no war. Had there been no moral condemnation of slavery, there would have been no war.” The message here is that the reasons a nation goes to war are usually various and complicated. The American Civil War is no exception.
“The curious thing is that although slavery was the great moral issue of the nineteenth century that divided the political leaders of the land, the average American had very little interest in slaves or slavery. Most Southerners were small farmers that could not afford slaves. Most Northerners were small farmers or tradesmen that had never even seen a slave. But political leaders on both sides were very interested in slaves and slavery. The South’s economic system was based upon cotton-and slavery. If the South lost her slaves her entire socio-economic system would collapse.” So, my friends, in my opinion the Civil War, while slavery was without doubt the central component, was mostly about states rights and economic pressures that caused fear in the South.
It is a fact that although slavery was ended by the Civil War, racism takes a long time to die. As a fact of modern life, racism was much less a factor in the North and West since the late Nineteenth Century, while in the South it died a longer and harder hard death. The Sixties were a pivotal time in causing America to face her still lingering racism; But, anyone with the least intelligence would have to agree that for all practical purposes racism now is all but dead in America and it is equally true that such feelings will never completely die because there are always people that want to feel superior to others and such people must identify other people that they feel are inferior to them in order to advance their own feelings of superiority and people of color, blacks, Hispanics or Asians can fit that bill quite nicely.
Lastly, America is hardly a racist nation any longer, with admitted trace elements; and the proofs of that abound both at home and abroad. The only ones now interested in perpetuating the idea that we are a racist nation is the self-appointed black welfare pimps like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton, and pathetic race baiters like the current leaders of the Democrat Party; and an unfortunate number of perpetual victims looking for handouts rather than taking petrsonal responsibility for their lives. For the balance of America, we are perfectly happy to measure people based solely on merit and character.
I’t wasn’t a lie. It was an example of racism in this country and it was true. 50 years ago our country was a racist country. I used one example of this to show how our country has improved.
It wasn’t one of the hot button issues, it was the only one. If there is slavery and the tenth amendment doesn’t exist than there is still a war. If there is no slavery and the tenth amendment exists, there is no war. The Civil War was about the ending of a life style in the South due to the end of slavery. The tenth amendment was a best a pretext.
“Code word” is a code word for someone who needs to reframe the argument in different terms or lose it!
(Liberals use them all the time!)
RBB needs to lay off the troll juice.
He’s blathering again.
Silly r-Gumby, do you think you have more insight than the judge W appointed, the judge who presided over the trial, the judge trusted by SCOTUS CJ Roberts, by GWHB and by your high priest Ronnie Raygun?
Irving was the key to the real targets, he…what did the Republican Judge say… oh yeah – the evidence was overwhelming that Mr. Libby had obstructed justice and lied to a grand jury and F.B.I. agents investigating the disclosure of the identity of a Central Intelligence Agency operative, Valerie Wilson.
Had Irving not obstructed justice, (sand if the face of the umpire) justice might have led the republican appointed republican prosecutor to the magic list of names you so kindly provide.
But r-Gumby, this Dixiecrat thing you speak of intrigues me.
Can you give us the names of some prominent Dixiecrats and to which party they claim allegiance to today?
Wasn’t there a thing called “Southern Strategy”.
Oh please r-Gumby won’t you tell us more?
Not so much when you consider that they justify the terrorism on 9/11(and all other terrorism) by saying that we “invaded” the terrorist “Holy Land”. They blame the terrorism of the so-called “Palestinians” on the invasion of “their” land by Israel.
I would say they are simply being consistent…and wrong.
“Legal segregation” was segregation under law. Duh.
Social segregation was practiced(and still is) by all racial and ethnic groups, and is a different phenomenon. The original charge you made, segregated drinking fountains, were an artifact of legal segregation, and were peculiar to some parts of the South 50 years ago; they were not common anywhere else.
You lied about that.
At this still early part in our nation’s history (mid 19th century) the states hadn’t, as they have with deep regret since, surrendered lawful authority over matters only given to the states in the Constitution, to the federal government, so states rights were one of three primary reasons and at first it was much more important than slavery. While during the early stages of the war, even many in the South, including Bobby Lee, felt that having to try defend states rights while holding slaves made their cause far less honorable and less likely to succeed.
The South, wrongly using slaves to help their economy, were nonetheless fighting hard to preserve their economic prosperity and their way of life, which sadly included allowing many to own and use slaves (As had been permitted all over the country at one time and quite of our Founding Fathers were slave owners as well).
Of course, slavery did without any doubt become the focus of the Civil War, but really only after the Emancipation Proclamation was the North officially opposing slavery and there was no cause more dishonorable and vile for the South to support.
Lestat: Your problem is you want to focus only on the slavery aspects, as dispicable as slavery was, you want to brand America as a racist state today, and you choose to ignore the other two issues; and while slavery cannot be ignored in the Civil War, the states rights and economic issues were of very great importance then and states right issues still live with us today with liberals wanting pure federalism on the socialist model and conservatives wanting a minimum of federal authority over the states and average citizens on the Constitutional model.
The point was to find something50 yeas ago, because Gene said the country had deteriorated in the last 50 years. Again, you don’t pay attention to the argument, you just step in to be a contrarian. Your denial of this country being racist does nothing to help solve any problem. The South was not the only racist part of this country. Blacks couldn’t get certain jobs all over the country. Blacks couldn’t get mortgage loans all over the country. Until 1967 interracial marriage was illegl in parts of this country.
Your knowledge of history is extremely lacking. Did you grow up in a bubble that you missed all of this?
You’re really just a little kid who still plays with dolls, right? Does Mommy know you are on the computer?
kiddie cartoon character boy: It is a fact that Fitz knew who the real leaker was. Why didn’t he call him(Armitage) to testify? Why did he keep going after Libby until he trapped him into a phony perjury charge, when there was no underlying crime? How can you “obstruct justice” when you are going after the wrong guy? Identity politics answers none of those questions, Gumbylover.
The Dixiecrats are a fact of history. They were Democrats who resisted the Civil Rights movement. One of them was Al Gore’s father.
None of them are presently for segregation, because some of them have become Republicans, the Party of freedom and racial equality.
I understand you lefties hate them as much as you hate the Jews who have left your fascist plantation.
The federal government prevented the entirely legal succession of the Southern states.
Carrick on December 30, 2007 at 04:24 pm
Are you saying that if for example Alaska, Texas, Hawaii, California and North Dakota wanted to succeed the US there would not be a problem?
And would you support such action because as you say it is legal?
e: Saying it was legal isn’t the same as saying it was a good idea, or even that it was desirable. Don’t get ahead of yourself.
Neiman: Great post, with only one fiddle. It’s the power of the Federal govt over the States and the citizens, which isn’t “federalism”.
Lefties want all power in the hands of the Federal govt, unlike what the Constitution specifies. They have used incrementalism to implement this.
Pure leftie fantasy. You are wrong; get over it.
As to the issues(besides slavery) centering on the Tenth Amendment, go here:
http://www.lsinstitute.org/Phillips.htm
Carrick: Thanks for the factual help with the hate-filled lefties. Dealing with them is like going for a swim in a cesspool.
I don’t claim a perfect knowledge of history, but it’s far superior to yours. I don’t spread leftie US bashing propaganda, for one thing.
In contrast to you, I grew up right in the middle of all the stuff you don’t know about due to your leftie brainwashing. I repeat, if you want improvements in our society in the last fifty years, there are hundreds of instances that don’t involve anything to do with racism. Your example was not only wrong and misleading, it was unnecessary to anyone but a race-baiter, which is my point. Under the guise of praising our country, you played the race card to bash it. Shame on you!
Once again, your leftie brainwashing makes you ignorant. I linked to the reasons the South seceeded from the Union. There is no better resource for knowing the real reasons for the Civil War. Your prejudice keeps you from knowing the truth.
Tariffs, for one. The article I linked lists all of them, btw. Your ignorance is willful.
The problem with many of the arguments about this being a racist country 50 years ago is this, I was there, I was socially conscious and politically involved long before and after this time, before most of your were probably born. Yes, there were still many pockets of racism then, mostly still in the South and minor traces elsewhere in the country; but for the most part, and that is how you must look at the situation before you use that national racist label, we were since WW-II mostly a country that measured people on their character and abilities. That does not mean there was not a lot of work left to do, the last vestiges of our former racism had to be excised and it took the surgeon’s knife of social unrest in the Sixties to cut most of what was left out of the American patient.
To say that in the last almost 40 years we have been and are still in any significant way a racist country, is an attempt to use race for purely partisan political purposes. If there is any racism LEFT, might I suggest that the Democrat Party’s policies that view people of color to be inferior to whites, neeeding special government assistance and treatment to help their poor darkies to compete; and that Democrat Party racism became more deeply entrenched by the Democrat Party Welfare State that for all intent and purposes kept people of color enslaved to federal handouts, kept in the inner city plantations and looking to their white Democrat Plantation owners for their charity and condescension in order to live day to day.
If there is any racism left to any large degree in America, it is within and perpetuated by the Democrat Party, otherwise we are NOT a racist society at all.
To the contrary; your question has been answered, but you don’t comprehend it as the answer.
In all fairness, your first question was a hypothetical, posed as a question about what Carrick believes, and he has not chosen to answer it so far.
I did answer your second question.
Your overall question, which you haven’t asked clearly, is answered by what Carrick and I have both told you: The Civil War was fought over the Tenth Amendment.
If you still don’t get it, I may give you a detailed explanation of what you should already know.
e: Saying it was legal isn’t the same as saying it was a good idea, or even that it was desirable. Don’t get ahead of yourself.
robert108 on December 30, 2007 at 08:53 pm
Robert your answer sidesteps and iignores my question.
My question remains unanswered.
If you or Carrick don’t mind please answer my question.
This is the picture of the self-centered rodent:
This was never about her daughter. It’s all about her.