And then… you pretty much agree with me. Do you agree that Arnold has it wrong when he claims that the tea party was a protest against high taxes?
The BTP was smugglers whose trade was going to be hurt by cheap English tea. There is no two ways about this. It wasn’t a protest by ordinary citizens who were mad that their tea was going to be cheaper.
No you can’t: as is standard practice, we’re not including water for consideration: everyone has to drink water, the question is what do people drink to enjoy, even though they don’t have to. The answer, far and away, was booze. Early Americans were some of the hardest drinkers the world has ever seen.
No, it wasn’t. As just about everyone in the know knew back then, even if they had representation, it wouldn’t have made a damn bit of difference, because the homelanders would, as in the past, vote as a block for the very sort of imperial things the colonies wanted out of. The reality still would have remained: supporting the colonies as part of the empire was extremely expensive, and yet colonists paid very little in taxes (in part because they weren’t as rich, which is doubly amusing, because Arnold is thinking of running a party whose current position would better align with taxing the wealthy homelanders less and the colonists more.)
In that sense, the revolution was far more like the Southern succession in that the revolutionaries wanted something they knew that even increased democracy within the British Empire could not give them. And the oft forgotten fact was that only a minority even actively supported the revolution in the first place: hardly a democratic outcome. Most people likewise forget that almost as many native Americans fought for the British as against them, and loyalists, before and after the war, were treated horribly. Putting our triumphalism backwards into those times, knowing that the nation worked out great, is a misleading mistake. The reality is that things were far more uncertain, and certainly the post revolutionary government was little to be proud of: it took time to build a great nation.
Yeah, every time I hear about Arnie the Male Chauvanist Pig running for Governor of California, I think: “A mediocre right wing actor for Governor of California. We have seen this movie before. It was bad with Ronald Reagan in the starring role, and it will be just as bad if not worse with Schwarzenegger.”
Just when I think that the political scene in the United States can’t possibly get any worse or any more absurd, something like this happens.
That is the only political office a naturalized citizen cannot hold in the US.
OR, it could be because he is attempting to do something, instead of just flapping his gums. Last I heard (and I could be wrong, because the Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, et al. thing has soured me so much I refuse to read what they think.) Arnold didn’t run around spouting off everytime he could get on camera.
Oh yeah, look at that brilliant intellect sparkle. Because he shares two qualities with Reagan - being an actor, and being from California - the two men are OBVIOUSLY exactly the same. Down to the last detail. They even share the same thoughts. In fact, the two are part of one bit California Actor Collective Hive Mind. You will be assimilated.
I have never heard of a direct link between the Sons of Liberity and the Holland smugglers, but yes I agree that Arnold was incorrect when he stated (from your OP) that the BTP was a protest against higher taxes. I agreed with the facts you stated but disagree that those facts were the primary reason. You also mised the fact that it was dark that night, which I would agree were true but again was not a primary reason for the event.
And like so maky times people feel the need to dress up like Indians, board a ship in the night and throw the cargo overboard, it is a radical group and not the general populus.
OK, OK I already said I’m not holding it against you.
Why after a war (and the destruction it brings) could the colonists make it on their own if they were really that expensive to maintain? The colonists had developed industires and was buying items from abroad for years, I really don’t understand the expense that the Crown had.
The colonies could make it on their own just jim-dandy. The enormous expense for the UK was primarily the cost of defending them in wartime - A defense that had to be projected all the way from the Isles ( the fleet for one, but also the army - the colonial militia, despite their considerable efforts, being not well-regarded by the British military establishment ). The French & Indian War ( and its continental counterpart of course ) was ruinously expensive for the British, an expense mostly not born by the colonists, as noted. One could make the argument that in one sense the American Revolution relieved Britain of a rather unwieldy and costly defensive obligation ( though whether that was offset in the longterm by Imperial trading monopolies is probably an open question - Likely they would have been, the major threat having been neutralized in aforementioned war ).
Right Tamerlane. Colonists hated being dragged into Imperial England’s problems, and they hated being asked to pay even a dime for it, because they already felt like they were the victims of it, rather than the beneficiaries.
The colonies could make it on their own because they wouldn’t be part of the British Empire anymore, and there would be no need to send hugely expensive ships back and forth just to make some random buerrecratic decision or wage a war.
I’d like to know what possible experience Schwarzenegger has in life that could relate to a career in politics. Is sitting in a fancy trailer ordering lackeys around and speaking other people’s words every now and then really good enough to let you take control of the destiny of millions of people?
At least Reagan had a lot of experience as President of the Screen Actors’ Guild before he went into politics. (Even in his youth he was very practiced at orchestrating anti-communist paranoia and protecting the interests of the rich.)
Well, I’m no Ah-nold fan, but to be fair, the guy does know a lot about life. He grew up poor in Austria under what would be considered an abusive father today. He arrived in America virtually penniless at the age of 21. He was a champion bodybuilder before he was an actor, and that does not involve sitting in a fancy trailer, barking orders or otherwise. It’s hard, painful work, and your chances of success are about one in infinity.
Yes, he’s a jerk. Yes, he’s arrogant. No, he’s not the type of guy I’d want to sit around drinking beer with. But I would say that he’s earned the right to be arrogant. I would also say that Arnold has the discipline, work ethic, and ability to make things happen.
Depending on the office he ran for, I’d definitely consider voting for him.
Just because one is an actor does not make one a moron not fit for office.
Since we don’t see a lot of his private life, I am not against an actor running for office. No one mentioned Clint Eastwood, the guy who played Radar on MAS*H, or the other people that were/are actors who run for politics. Apparently some of them were good at it. Although, I couldn’t completely tell you.
Remember that his wife’s family is on the other side, Democrats (although I find the line between Democrats and Republicans to be a fine one) and I gather that with that alone, he is very up on politics.
He has been involved with politics on a soft side with being Old Bush’s man to promote exercise and health.
He may not have perfect knowledge of US History but I would bet he knows more than 2/3s of natural born citizens. Some naturalized citizens couldn’t tell you much about the history of our country let alone tell you who is the current vice president of it.
