I’m afraid that by now most people who are still Republicans are in the second category. There used to be a fair number in the first.
The vast, vast majority of Republicans have not abandoned the party. They have embraced open racism and bigotry on top of the unmitigated greed that was already the hallmark of the party.
People keep missing this. There is only a tiny sliver of 2008 Republicans who when confronted with things they could not imagine embracing said “fuck this, I’m out”
Because basically since about Reagan, the Republican Party has been struggling to keep the bigotry and greed under a veneer or respectability. They’ve mostly been relieved that they don’t have to now.
I mean all the Republicans in my family and friends would have claimed in 2015 that they’d never vote for Trump. They all did both times. One guy formally resigned his position in the county GOP organization because as a brown person he couldn’t deal with the bigotry in 2015. In less than a year, he started “identifying as white” and was back in the fold. He didn’t have any real objection to racism as long as Asians were the model minority and the invective was directed toward Blacks and “Mexicans”.
Then on Jan 6, 2021 he said this is too much. But by May he was parroting the Stolen Election and Hunter Biden laptop lines. And strangely he’s become a gun rights nut, even if he’d never have the guts to pick up an UNLOADED gun, never mind use s loaded one. He’s convinced the yahoos he’s making nice with will have his back in the coming racial holy war.
Similar stories for most of the rest of the Republicans I used to know.
Down to my parents who are now reduced to claiming that Liberals manufactured the priest sexual abuse scandal in order to attack Christianity. People who were lifelong advocates of charity, social welfare, tolerance and acceptance, except for abortion. Now they are freaked out about satanism, transgenderism, “destruction of the sacrament of Marriage”, you name it.
I literally can identify one person who 20 years ago was a Republican and has now forsaken them. Only one out of dozens of people I’ve known most of my life.
Sorry about the highjack (is it one, though?), but this is also the most telling thing about the “discussion” regarding reparations for Blacks. Look how quickly reparations were enacted and paid for Japanese-Americans compared to the complete refusal to even consider it for Blacks. American society is racist as Hell, and the Republican Party is the Platonic ideal of that racism.
Great line! “Don’t be too sory; it’s the reason we had an opening.”
They need to adopt my mother’s motto: “My opinion may change, but not the fact that I am right.”
“Auschwitz was a weight loss camp”! 
Also, FWIW, the ranting description of slavery is excellent.
It seems Florida is backpedaling on this issue (still some uncertainties). While not specified I can only imaging even educators who are DeSantis stalwarts can see the writing on the wall here and had to back off. They’d make it clear to almost all universities that students from Florida need extra scrutiny for admission (especially those interested in psychology).
Annnnnd of course they are back in it. This is the problem…that it keeps being a problem:
All in all it was just a brick in the wall.
All in all it was all just bricks in the wall.
Depends on the contract with the Hotel / convention center, and if the “group” uses a 3rd party like Helmsbrisco or HPN to manage their initial booking for the group… large material Changes to the scope of the business may lead to additional costs such as attrition fees or changes to the F&B minimum and so forth… sometimes it is better to wait out a bad deal than break a contract.
“Slavery was a compromise!” Animated Frederick Douglass calls slavery a ‘compromise’ in PragerU video
And New Hampshire is considering using the PragerU stuff as well, so it’s spreading.
Also TIL that Adam Corolla is far-right now. I never cared for him but just so you know.
I’d have to see the video and what was actually said.
It looks as if this is a screwed-up attempt to portray the split that developed between Garrison and Douglas as to whether the Constitution itself is pro-slavery or not. Garrison did, and held that, this being the case, people should refrain from voting and that the Northern States ought to secede. Douglass, who was in Garrison’s camp for a decade, eventually was persuaded that the Constitution wasn’t pro-slavery, and that people ought to continue to vote and not secede. That might be the “lack of compromise” alluded to. But it’s not slavcery that was the compromise – iot was how to deal with slave-holding states that was the subject of compromise.
Today, the consensus is that the Constitution is a pro-slavery document as written. I can’t see how you could say otherwise, with the elaborate circumlocutions to get around saying “slave” and that “3/5 compromise”. But Douglass was looking for a way to move forward with opposing slavery. Not compromising with it.
See here for instance – https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/william-lloyd-garrison-frederick-douglass-disunionism
I suppose that would be the ‘correct’ thing to do.
But c’mon! This is PragerU! Rightwing fever-dream propaganda videos masquerading as ‘education’ is their bread and butter
If you need a reference, just check upthread!
Oh, I don’t doubt that PraegerU is sending a warped message, but I can’t comment on this particular video until I’ve seen it.
Have you read the Florida guidelines about teaching slavery? They’re actually surprisingly good and reasonable for the most part, and would present a more balanced and nuanced lesson than I was taught in my youth, when dinosaurs ruled the earth. Except, of course, for those two sentences that are outrageous, and that the media picked up and has been citing ever since, one being that slaves “learned things that could be of use to them in the future”.
But, of course, that’s the insidious way these things work – throw out a lot of reasonable guidelines, but include a couple of thorny assertions that really don’t fit, and which can act as propaganda points.
I have, and I would partially disagree with that assessment.
In a vacuum, this is a more or less correct stance. But that’s in a vacuum.
We should look at the standard they replaced last revised not that long ago rather than some rough idea of what we remember from our own experience back in the stone ages. The existing standards differed in many ways but were still a more balanced and nuanced version than what earlier generations learned. But without adding the troublesome language, which everybody knows/suspects was the point of this particular exercise.
If these new standards were replacing standards written in the 50s, I’d say they were a huge progressive leap forward and the ire misplaced. But they’re replacing standards written much more recently and revised on a regular basis and which were not a deliberate attempt at greasing the slope.
I haven’t read the standards these replace, but I agree with your assessment. I’m not defending the current standards – just pointing out that , aside from those two atrocious sentences, they’re not outrageous. Which makes them all the more insidious.
Yup. And then a couple of years from now, they’ll turn up the temperature on the frog another couple of degrees.
As the person who posted the link, I want to say that haven’t listened to it either, and I should do so before sharing it. I just saw the headline and reacted, and that’s not an honest way to share information.