US Politics: “How did we come to this...”

[Jace, Extat]

6 minutes ago, Zorral said:

The SSB is searingly racist and pro-slavery.  Francis Scott Key made shyte tons of profit from proving people were escaped slaves and getting them back to their 'owners' as both a lawyer and a judge.  Slavery was central to the conduct of the War of 1812 -- which is the occasion of the words to the SSB (the music is much older and is a traditional glee, a drinking round, sung even with Benjamin Franklin when visiting Annapolis).  The British offered freedom -- and gave it, despite the revisionist historians who came along immediately, and the lies the plantocracy slaveocracy told the labor force -- to any escaped slave who would help and fight for them.  They were not sold in Jamaica.  The slaveowners were still trying to force the US government to get compensation for their lost slaves right up to the War of the Rebellion.

Put the words in the SSB in the context of this, its use of slave and free -- and it becomes more clear.  There are entire books written about this, with more thoughtful citizens objecting to the SSB as a the official US anthem from the beginning.

 

 

I didn't know the word slave was in the Star Spangled Banner. 

At least not the version I sit through. Not a protest or anything, I just often have fries or a drink and can't be bothered.

[Fragile Bird]

Hmmmm..

Stanzas 3 and 4 seem to suggest hirelings (soldiers hired by the British?) and slaves, guaranteed freedom by the British if they fought on their side, wouldn't be saved from the grave. In that light  "land of the free" does have a different meaning. 

And here I always thought the line meant "free of the British", and not "not slaves".

Quote

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation.
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

 

[Freshwater Spartan]

41 minutes ago, Zorral said:

The SSB is searingly racist and pro-slavery.  Francis Scott Key made shyte tons of profit from proving people were escaped slaves and getting them back to their 'owners' as both a lawyer and a judge.  Slavery was central to the conduct of the War of 1812 -- which is the occasion of the words to the SSB (the music is much older and is a traditional glee, a drinking round, sung even with Benjamin Franklin when visiting Annapolis).  The British offered freedom -- and gave it, despite the revisionist historians who came along immediately, and the lies the plantocracy slaveocracy told the labor force -- to any escaped slave who would help and fight for them.  They were not sold in Jamaica.  The slaveowners were still trying to force the US government to get compensation for their lost slaves right up to the War of the Rebellion.

Put the words in the SSB in the context of this, its use of slave and free -- and it becomes more clear.  There are entire books written about this, with more thoughtful citizens objecting to the SSB as a the official US anthem from the beginning.

 

 

An early favorite to be the National Anthem was My Country Tis of Thee. Southerners objected to the "Land of the Pilgim's pride" line and others didn t like that it was set to the tune God Save the Queen. The Star Spangled Banner was chosen instead.

I have no issue with The SSB  except that it is nearly impossible to sing well.

[Zorral]

38 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

An early favorite to be the National Anthem was My Country Tis of Thee. Southerners objected to the "Land of the Pilgim's pride" line and others didn t like that it was set to the tune God Save the Queen. The Star Spangled Banner was chosen instead.

I have no issue with The SSB  except that it is nearly impossible to sing well.

SSB is hard to sing because as I explained above, the music is a glee, which meant to be sung in groups, in rounds, while drinking, not a solo effort.

I myself do see the SSB as more than objectionable, and I particularly object to that abject, cruel racist, Francis Scott Key.

Why not America the Beautiful?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_the_Beautiful

Of course that might persuade more people to object to the gleeful and enthusiastic despoilation of the environment which might keep Big Oil from getting more oil that they already can't sell, and of course real estate developers from making another few more billion dollars, and we can't have that!  Totally blasphemous of the official religion of the USA which is Get RICHER however we can, even to selling babies and other people.

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/paul-petersen-pleads-guilty-to-human-smuggling-in-adoption-scheme

https://www.abc4.com/news/top-stories/former-arizona-official-to-plead-guilty-to-utah-adoption-scam/

Which pregnant women from the Marshall Islands he smuggled in and kept in a brothel and prostituted them until baby was born and sold -- some of them as young as 15.  But hey, $30,000 is $30,000 and we get it where we can, even to selling babies and other human beings, especially when rethugs and patriots -- and members of the LDS

https://ktar.com/story/3304903/paul-petersen-agrees-to-plea-deal-to-resolve-arizona-fraud-case/

But surely deathcultchief will pardon him.

American the Beautiful, unlike the SSB, also does not overtly glorify violence and keeping people in slavery.  Will not do for the USA's national anthem!

 

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Stop disrespecting the flag!

Is what a history major at Trump University would say to those suggestions.

America was founded by the flag in 1492, after leading Alexander (Hamilton) to victory over the persian at Issos in 333 BC, with aim to establish Christianity there, so that the land is ready, for when Jesus would show up.

Anyway. The anthem isn't going anywhere. For better or worse, and personally, I'd recommend not to push that issue with the election on the horizon, just for not giving the deluded bunch a song about a flag to rally around.

[Zorral]

3 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Stop disrespecting the flag!

Is what a history major at Trump University would say to those suggestions.

America was founded by the flag in 1492, after leading Alexander (Hamilton) to victory over the persian at Issos in 333 BC, with aim to establish Christianity there, so that the land is ready, for when Jesus would show up.

Anyway. The anthem isn't going anywhere. For better or worse, and personally, I'd recommend not to push that issue with the election on the horizon, just for not giving the deluded bunch a song about a flag to rally around.

Don't try and make book on any of that.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

11 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Don't try and make book on any of that.

I was more thinking of a musical, but ok. I grant you the book rights to that story.

[A True Kaniggit]

1 minute ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I was more thinking of a musical, but ok. I grant you the book rights to that story.

Epic poem is clearly the way to go. 

[S John]

15 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

 

Anyway. The anthem isn't going anywhere. For better or worse, and personally, I'd recommend not to push that issue with the election on the horizon, just for not giving the deluded bunch a song about a flag to rally around.

I also wonder to what extent do we allow symbols (and currently living people for the matter) to evolve?  Totally get it with the confederate statues and flag being removed and disused, but I would argue that when Americans sing the national anthem they are not thinking about slavery at all but about the country and the flag in a more modern present-tense context of whatever it means to be an American for that person - and I personally think that should be allowed to be OK regardless of whether or not we can pick apart it’s author.  

[Zorral]

15 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I was more thinking of a musical, but ok. I grant you the book rights to that story.

No jokes.  No jokes anymore.  Especially about race. Deathcultists have seen to that. Because for them it is a joke.

But not for the butt.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/opinion/confederate-monuments-racism.html

Quote

You Want a Confederate Monument? My Body Is a Confederate Monument
The black people I come from were owned and raped by the white people I come from. Who dares to tell me to celebrate them?

As for the SSB like other monuments not meaning slavery and violence to the singer, that is just frackin' bs.  Violence and slavery / inequality is exactly what this nation is supposed to be about -- as the Judge in Owen Wister's novel The Virginian tells us flatly -- "This is white man's country," in in the context of Wister's novel there is nobody more patriotic than the Judge -- unless it is the Virginian who pretty much was willing to die for slavery, but took his beating like a man and moved to where there were no negroes. Supposedly.  Though, wait -- what about those black cowboys?  But then they didn't get into the story.  Shyte, hardly even Native Americans got into the story except as beaten down miserable remnants who were considerately disappearing.

 

[DMC]

Surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet (at least I don't think), but the House passed the DC Statehood bill today for the first time ever.  Only one Democrat voted against it.  That's quite the sea change from Democratic support the last time the House took up DC Statehood in 1993.

[Guy Kilmore]

4 hours ago, Zorral said:

Further, as predicted, the deathcultists blame the spiking on the Protests, not flouting safety protocols and reopening way too soon, or in fact, never having shut down and instituted the protocols at all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/26/coronavirus-live-updates-us/

 

Infact they are finding that....parties are the cause and not the protests through contact tracing.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/24/npr-what-contact-tracing-may-tell-about-cluster-spread-of-the-coronavirus

[A Horse Named Stranger]

3 minutes ago, Zorral said:

No jokes.  No jokes anymore.  Especially about race. Deathcultists have seen to that. Because for them it is a joke.

But not for the butt.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/opinion/confederate-monuments-racism.html

 

?

Not sure where you gathered this was an intended joke about race. Joke was more about the rights obsession with symbols like the flag, without giving it too much though. Kaepernernick's taking a knee for them was about disrespecting the flag, which symbolizes American values, which are values, thus don't need to be defined further. Punchline, I don't think opening a discussion about the anthem or the flag are vote winners. All you achieve is faction widespread support, and looking at November the momentum has to be kept going. So don't get distracted by the flag or anthem for now.

[Guy Kilmore]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

Surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet (at least I don't think), but the House passed the DC Statehood bill today for the first time ever.  Only one Democrat voted against it.  That's quite the sea change from Democratic support the last time the House took up DC Statehood in 1993.

It only seems a matter of time now.

[Larry of the Lawn]

I don't really give a shit about the anthem, I think it's a pretty shitty song and the lyrics are dumb.  Wouldn't care if I never heard it again.  Same goes for the flag.  These things could be meaningless at best, but they are both really points for blind patriotism/nationalism and have become fetishes of the right wing.  I don't care if people want to sing the song or wave the flag, but if you do, just know I think less of you for it (and it's probably reciprocal, so everybody wins!)

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

?

Not sure where you gathered this was an intended joke about race. Joke was more about the rights obsession with symbols like the flag, without giving it too much though. Kaepernernick's taking a knee for them was about disrespecting the flag, which symbolizes American values, which are values, thus don't need to be defined further. Punchline, I don't think opening a discussion about the anthem or the flag are vote winners. All you achieve is faction widespread support, and looking at November the momentum has to be kept going. So don't get distracted by the flag or anthem for now.

I'm sure that's not what you intended, but that's how it came off, at least to one who isn't white. People of color are always being told, throughout US history, that what they want and need is a distraction, for now, so leave it alone.  Just like women are.

Though ya, your parody of a deathcultist history lesson is far too spot on.  Of course, Hamilton wasn't a big fan of slavery, one of the reasons Jefferson found him so threatening, along with his determination to put the US on a economic footing that wasn't dependent entirely on 'agriculture', i.e, slavery.

Just as saying protesting a national anthem that celebrates slavery and slaveowners is a distraction.  It's not. Not if one is sincere about attempting to change the systemic racism course this nation has been on and never deviated from hardly at all since 1619.  One cannot speak up for equality under the law in one place while retaining a national celebration of inequality in another area.

I'm not saying a balls to the all on the SSB right now is a great move -- there are so many other moves as well that are crying to be made.

But what the SSB celebrates cannot be ignored or pretended not to exist.

That's why the opening sentence to the NY Times piece about confederate monuments is so powerful -- and the SSB is as much a monument to them as anything cast in bronze or sculpted from marble.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/opinion/confederate-monuments-racism.html?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Guy Kilmore said:

It only seems a matter of time now.

Psh, read the details. Not gonna happen dude. I doubt the Senate breaks itself over this. 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Psh, read the details. Not gonna happen dude. I doubt the Senate breaks itself over this. 

Well, definitely don't want to put the cart before the horse, but both the CNN link and this one point out that the bill's proponents are demanding the Senate only require 51 votes for passage.  This could easily be done by changing the Senate rules for filibustering statehood bills just like confirmation votes - but still retaining the legislative filibuster.  I'm not sure that's wise, and would rather wait to discuss it if/when the Dems actually achieve unified government, but it's far more realistic than I think you realize.

[A True Kaniggit]

If they do get Washington D.C. done in the next couple years, I wonder if Puerto Rico wouldn’t be too far behind?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

12 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, definitely don't want to put the cart before the horse, but both the CNN link and this one point out that the bill's proponents are demanding the Senate only require 51 votes for passage.  This could easily be done by changing the Senate rules for filibustering statehood bills just like confirmation votes - but still retaining the legislative filibuster.  I'm not sure that's wise, and would rather wait to discuss it if/when the Dems actually achieve unified government, but it's far more realistic than I think you realize.

Easily done.

United States Senate.

Do those terms go together?

We both know the answer to that. Now, say 50+1 is all that matters in the Senate. That has a number of it's own problems, but maybe it's time to open that Pandora's Box. Does that deeply frighten me in a way that's hard to articulate. Yes. But sometimes you have to walk into the unknown without fear, even when you're deeply scared. And if the party wants this, I'd be willing to accept it, as scared as it makes me.

But what then wouldn't require 50+1? All the rules would change. And structurally this would overall probably be advantageous for Republicans in the Senate.

Are you sure this would be wise?