bump later.
Bump.
Wow, that;s good.
interesting, but a little off the mark at least where Texas is concerned.
Don’t Mess With Texas - it was indeed selected as a slogan against littering. But what makes it a powerful slogan is it plays to the broad concept at already exists, which is Texas has a State Identity that is very strong, whereas, most other states have lost the concept somewhere after 1913.
The Alamo - please, the author needs to do more studying and stop thinking he is the smartest guy in the room - he is not. Like most rebellions, there were many causes. Texas was very sparsely populated and following Mexico’s independence from Spain, immigration into Texas from the US into basically unoccupied land lead to the majority of people have US culture and expectations. There were issues with Spanish and US racism, cultural issues, economic issues as well as governance issues. Yes slavery was one of many issues. But this author is not being accurate by pulling out one issue from 50 and trying to make his point.
Some interesting information here but I don’t understand why the Crazy Horse monument is on this list. The author believes that carving the mountain was a bad idea and quotes Russell Means as evidence that all native Americans feel this way. I don’t believe that is correct. Either way, the monument doesn’t mean the opposite of what people think it does because everyone knows that it was created to counter Mount Rushmore and give Indians a source of pride.
IMHO what Paine was probably talking about was the “landed” aristocracy, IOW, not pro-Marxist and anti-capitalist, but instead anti-aristocrat. So that part of this author’s criticism is misleading.
Yeah, and apparently someone from Texas peed in his coffee.
All of Mexico was in upheaval over the abolition of the 1824 constitution. Some factions wanted federalism, others wanted dictatorship.
The revolt wasn't just about slavery, and Texas wasn't the only province in revolt. More than anything else, Texas wanted separate statehood from Coahuila, and a new constitution based on the old one from 1824.
The central government of Mexico rescinded the lands granted to those who moved to Texas from the United States, intending to turf these folks off without compensating them for the improvements made.
Additionally the central government rescinded most rights of self-government in the state of Texas & Cohila, including trial by jury and the right to select local officials (including mayors). This led the Tejanos to make common cause with the Anglos. About one-eighth of the Alamo garrison were Tejano, as was one of the officers in the garrison (Juan Seguin — who was dispatched to carry a call for help prior to the final day of the siege), as were a company of the Texian Army at the San Jacinto.
Incidentally, the Texas War of Independence was the second of five revolts against the central government of Mexico, and the only one that succeeded in gaining independence for a Mexican state.
Heh heh heh... I just like that part. Land/mule redistribution program... ;D
History lessons from a moron. The phrase is "sidles up to the bar." Back to grade school for the idiot that wrote that.
Interesting.
Some good mixed in with the some horridly biased retellings of stories.
For example, Fawkes is indeed an anarchist, of a very long standing type. The type that sees a period of anarchy as a necessary phase between governments.
Thomas Paine was also right, by natural law, in insisting that a civilized society has a duty to the most poor in it. In our American ideal, that is, by the intent of the Framers of the Constitution, that duty was to be carried out by the STATES, and the Federal Government had no authority granted it to do so. Grover Cleveland’s famous rejection of Congress’ attempt to provide federal relief after a drought in Texas is a noted example of that lack of Constitutional authority to provide such social distress or local emergency relief. It was usual in the times of the Founders for counties, towns and states to provide poorhouses, paltry sustenance doles for the extremely old or poor.
Cool post
Bah! The real travesty is carving a massive monument in a mountain of someone whose people couldn't in a thousand years have done much more than scrape his stick figure onto the side of a rock.
Interesting article. Naturally freepers have pointed out a few flaws. :-)
I objected to the notion that Tea Partiers and Libertarians are saying there's too many brown people. That's nothing but slander.
bump for later reading
As to the Alamo, little pissants like him have been trying to insult the Alamo ever since it became a sin for Anglos to win a war. Santa Anna was part of a group that overthrew the elected President of Mexico. When he came to power, he dissolved the congress and set up a military dictatorship. So those EVIL TEXANS he's talking about who were so terrible because they rebelled against Santa Anna were rebelling against a guy who overthrew the ELECTED PRESIDENT OF MEXICO and had him executed. Santa Anna threw out the Constitution of 1824 (the original Texas battle flag was a Mexican flag with 1824 on it.) He invaded Texas, and executed the military prisoners who surrendered at Goliad, some 350 people. When he lost at the Battle of San Jacinto, he dressed as a private and hid in the marshes.
He also found time to try and launch an invasion of Cuba, but didn't have the money.
Cracked has a bunch of little twits who don't know sh#t from shinola that post these incorrect, nonsensical lists.
The rest of his article is about as trustworthy as the parts I bothered to rebuke.
Bump