Recent Feed Comments
Recent Splice Original Comments
Recent Multimedia Comments
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 30, 2015, 10:04AM
    Thanks for this comment, Nicky! You know, I'm not actually opposed to or against marriage. I could *see* myself getting married or whatever so I can file taxes or bring my partner to the US if I'm with someone foreign. But I don't feel like I need to. It is so great to hear about all my gay friends who ARE getting married to the people they've been with for 5, 10 years. There is still work to do but that's because there is ALWAYS work to do. Progress means we are always progressing. There's no "end" to progress.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 06:37PM
    Not to mention upholding a very questionable drug for executing prisoners.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 04:23PM
    Agree with above comment. Although, there's not much of a peep from the left today as the Supreme Court essentially upheld gerrymandering and knocked down an Obama pet EPA rule.
    Responses to this comment
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 03:23PM
    Noah. This occurred to me after a couple of trips to Colonial Williamsburg. Take a week and your arch supports. One of the features is in the morning in the garden of one of the Big Shooters of the time. An actor comes out in costume and gives a talk of about fifteen or twenty minutes. He's Washington, Lafayette, Jefferson, etc. Then, remaiining in character, he takes questions from the audience. They're quick, articulate and knowledgeable as can be imagined. But most of them were slave owners at one time or another. And that means they must exude a kind of potential threat when dealing with slaves, if they never raise a hand or their voice. Yet in the discussions, they use the elaborate courtesy of the time. So I presumed, either connected or not, there would be a correlation, if only inverse. Old story about a Brit aristo a century and a half back riding into a small American town. Came to the smithy and asked the blacksmith: "Who is your master?" point being that in the landed aristocracy, the local big wheel quite literally owned the town. "Sumbitch ain't been born," said the smith, spitting on a highly-polished riding boot. His demeanor to high and low would probably not change much.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 02:24PM
    That's an interesting point about the status of gentleman and the South's hierarchy. I think there's definitely something to the idea that Lee's dignity/honorableness/virtue can't really be separated from his position as rich white dude in an extremely stratified society.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 12:04PM
    Cranks object to policy but a racist cuts straight to the heart of the matter. You need to get out more. As I told another writer, finding racism everywhere--or insisting it is where it isn't, is a lame, ineffective way of collecting moral superiority. Never works.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 12:01PM
    Cohen, in "The Great Warpath" muses on why Benedict Arnold is a vile traitor and Lee is not, even in the North. I don't recall he came to any conclusion. A friend of mine remarked that Lee got more Americans killed than Tojo and Hitler combined. That was out of a population roughly one-fifth of that facing the Axis. I have developed a theory that the more a man was, in the old days, required to be menacing to the lower orders, including slaves, the more elaborately courteous he was to his social equals. It is the latter that made the contemporary writings. It might be exaggerated. I've heard that even a demand for a duel to the death might be signed, "your humble and obedient servant".
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 11:55AM
    The benefits and rights granted to married couples - next of kin, hospital visits, money/tax woes and legalities, all that jazz - make the SCOTUS decision significant and absolutely worth celebrating. But like you Madison, I found out about the decision when the counter thread had already begun in full force - that this was not a victory for many of my queer and transgendered friends, who would never want to buy into or endorse such a mainstream and outdated convention. What makes me queasy is all the straight people turning their profile pictures into rainbows. Like, do you want a medal? But allies are better than homophobes. I'm optimistic about the future of LGBTQIA rights and understanding just through the way I heard about the decision - the discussion moves so quickly. Who would've thought in 2005 that we'd hear a black president in his second term heralding the legalization of gay marriage across the country? It's sort of mind-blowing. But there is so much more work to do, so much farther to go. I'm glad so many people are talking about that, and not taking this as the endpoint.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 11:54AM
    The flag has a democratic racist past. Everybody knows that. Now that republicans are in charge in the south, it seems there's a net in-migration by blacks to the south. Family, climate, jobs.... But, after knowing the flag has a democratic racist past, the fact is that anybody is free to see it as something else and any criticism of such is invalid, not to mention a really lame attempt at moral superiority. Never works. Every so often, it is reported, one may see a black guy on a bike or a pickup truck with the battle flag on it. What then? He's a self-rebel and all that democratic racist past stuff is irrelevant. But, FYI, the lame attempt at ginning up some, any, moral superiority isn't doing any good.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 10:22AM
    And you say: "nobody gets to tell anybody what anybody is supposed to think about anything." The flag has a historical meaning that can't be ignored. Somebody could believe that the swastika is just a Hindu sign for good luck. They can go on believing that, but the rest of us don't have to go along.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 10:17AM
    From my piece: "The Williamson response is to attack ... Democrats for being in favor of the flag—as they were back when racists voted Democrat and not Republican." So I didn't leave it out. You're just confused.
  • Go to comment.
    Jun 29, 2015, 05:44AM
    Hit too close, huh? 'specially that bit about north or south of the Ohio. No, not a scapegoat. That's completely different, almost the opposite, of insisting he's representative. WRT history, I just filled in the important part--it was the dems' flag for a couple of generations. Mostly with the beginnings of civil right after WW II. You probably figured everybody knew that--we do--and so you could leave it out. But the note about republicans made me wonder if you weren't, you know, interfering with the pooch on this thing. Sort of a reflex. Happens often enough. Anyway, point still stands, not having been addressed, that nobody gets to tell anybody what anybody is supposed to think about anything and that includes the flag. And if the self-rebel view is what somebody's what they have and you have no right to assign any other meaning to it. It's not my rule. But I thought I'd point it out. Liberal principles to be universally applied are frequently inconvenient when universally applied.