Perverting history
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11432) 5 years ago
I am fascinated by the number of people who like to rewrite history to suit themselves. The Civil War was about 'state's rights.' The Republican and Democratic parties haven't switched points of view. I was recently told I should 'crack a history book' and then a revisionist history site was provided to prove their point. Hardly 'cracking a book,' when you go to a site where they make stuff up.

You can tell yourself up is down but it doesn't really change the world. I am sorry if reality doesn't agree with your firmly held delusions but that's hardly my problem.
Top
+5
Posted by heimer (+101) 5 years ago
Sounds like Amorette's delusions don't agree with someone else's delusions.
Top
+3
-2
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
Well, the constitution of the CSA is exactly the same as the constitution of the USA, with the addition of one small item - that chattel slavery would be forever and always legal.

So, the only "right" in question for the states, was if they should be allowed to own another human being and steal his or her labor for their own profit. THAT is the only 'southern heritage' promoted by nitwits who hoist the battle ensign of the Army of Northern Virginia. Everything else is just self-deluding nonsense.
Top
+5
-1
Posted by Brandy Allen (-2405) 5 years ago
John Peake Knight is credited with inventing the original traffic light in 1868. However in all colleges across this great land, it must be taught that Garrett Morgan a black man invented the first traffic light. In fact the black inventor wasn't even in the first 50 patent holder. I am not saying that blacks haven't made considerable contributions through out the history of the world, but this is just another way in which history is being perverted to fit someone's agenda.

It is funny Amoretti, that you recognize the perversion that are "perpetrated against your idealistic views", but not the ones perpetrated by your idealistic counterparts upon the ideals of others.
Top
+2
-4
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Hannah Nash (+2500) 5 years ago
I found the following history of the traffic light to be rather enlightening:
https://en.wikipedia.org/..._P._Knight

The ACTUAL truth appears to be less contentious than you would suggest, Brandy.
Top
+4
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11432) 5 years ago
Those darn facts just keep tripping you connies up.
Top
+4
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6170) 5 years ago
Brandy Allen stated that the wrong inventor of the traffic light is being taught "In all colleges across this great land" ? Where do you get this information? You can't make such broad declarations without backing them up. Well, I guess you can but nobody should believe you.
Top
+5
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
Oh, danny danny danny....

Lies, bullpoop and butthurt, THAT'S southern heritage in a nutshell.

Well, that and a seemingly endless stream of revanchist politicians willing to cater to the above.

[Edited by Bridgier (7/2/2015 8:11:20 AM)]
Top
+2
Posted by Oddjob (+187) 5 years ago
Amorette


As long as we are fixing "perverted history" you need to accept this reality. That the true evil behind slavery in the U.S. was and is the Democrat Party. The reality of history is that slavery was fully promoted, protected and defended by the Democrat Party for 175 years. Chattel slavery, the treason of secession, the Civil War, Jim Crow, the KKK, segregation and..Oh yes.. the Confederate flag...

All of it defined the Democrat Party until 1964, when they switched from endorsing chattel slavery, to providing entitlement slavery to the State.

Who's still being served?

Let's hear the revisionist history on this.......
Top
+1
-2
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6170) 5 years ago
I'm glad you brought this up, Oddjob. It's an example of how everything, even political parties, evolve over time. Fortunately everyone can rise above their prior transgressions and become a positive force. This is true of people, religions, and, indeed, political parties.
Top
+3
Posted by Brandy Allen (-2405) 5 years ago
Relying on wikis Hanna? not the best choice to back your citation. I hear max keiser (fruit loop) just edited one on the definition of algorithmic trading.

So follow along peps, many COLLEGES of today require different forms of pre-req's, one such class is race and ethniticity. This class teaches this wrong perversion, not the wikis or even Webster. My professor noticed that I had recognized this and corrected it to him for which I received extra credit and congrats for not accepting what was given, but finding hard facts to prove the new perversion of history wrong.

So if any of your facts can remain pertinent and stick to the perversion by the colleges, not by some other citation source, it would be nice.
However your "facts" are null and void, since they are citing a wiki, not the colleges that I claim are the source of the perversion., lets just call them non applicable poop.

I did not say that anyone other than a group of college proffesors are teaching this perversion, but they are teaching it, prove me wrong on what I said not what you think you can defend better.
Top
-1
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
Hmmm... where DID all of those southern gentlemen go after 1964? Or those who left in 1948 when the Democrats endorsed an anti-lynching plank?

Noted student of history Oddjob can surely fill in the details....
Top
+2
Posted by Oddjob (+187) 5 years ago
Reply to Bridgier (#360476)
Bridgier wrote:
Hmmm... where DID all of those southern gentlemen go after 1964? Or those who left in 1948 when the Democrats endorsed an anti-lynching plank?

Noted student of history Oddjob can surely fill in the details....


You're the expert on everything.

You tell me.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1664) 5 years ago
Brandy,

At first you said
However in all colleges across this great land, it must be taught that Garrett Morgan a black man invented the first traffic light.


Then you said
not the colleges that I claim are the source of the perversion., lets just call them non applicable poop.

I did not say that anyone other than a group of college proffesors are teaching this perversion, but they are teaching it, prove me wrong on what I said not what you think you can defend better.


I'm not sure which to believe. That ALL colleges are teaching this, or just the colleges you claim are the source of the perversion.

If you are sticking by the claim that ALL colleges are teaching this, it shouldn't be too hard to verify.
Top
+1
Posted by Elizabeth Emilsson (+790) 5 years ago
Odd job , for once was oddly right about the Democrats from the South for the pro- slavery and Jim Crow. How-ever they walked out of the Democrat party's convention When Harry Truman was nominated to run for president. They were known as "Dixie-crats" until the majority turned Republican. As Daffy Duck would say about Odd Job's assertion," What a revolting turn of events!"
Top
+2
Posted by Erin Timrawi (+59) 5 years ago
Well, I wasn't taught ANY history about traffic lights while in college (and yes, the institution was located in this great land). However, I did have a political science professor who tried to erase the reign of James VI of Scotland over England as James I. I was most offended and quickly pointed out to him the error of his ways.
Top
+3
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+16627) 5 years ago
When I attended Montana Tech, back in the early 1980s I took as an elective in Engineering Science the course ESC352 Traffic Lights: Fundamentals and Foundations. Our assigned textbook was Traffic Lights for Dummies, as there was no suitable technically written text book currently in print at the time.

On the first day of class, our professor instructed us to turn to page 24, where it read that Garret Morgan had invented the first traffic light. "Tear it out!" the professor howled, "and replace it with this." He handed us a mimeographed page detailing the work of John Peake Knight. "In this day and age of Ronald Reagan being president of these great United States of America, I won't have any of that liberal revisionist history bullpoop being fed down the throats of my students!"

I later looked at the credits of Traffic Lights for Dummies, and saw that the American Communist Party and the American Civil Liberties Union were the sponsors of our text book. Go figure.

Happy Independence Day!
Top
+4
supporter
Posted by Jeri Dalbec (+3138) 5 years ago
I thought that this was interesting and, not knowing one thing about it, did what I surmise all modern day college kids would do...and, that is check with Wikipedia. They say that John Peake Knight DID invent the first Street Light...BUT..then, they also said that Garrett Morgan invented the additional light..so now there are three..thus giving the two colors and a caution warning ?? Thanks for the subject, interesting.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
Erin Timrawi wrote:
who tried to erase the reign of James VI of Scotland over England as James I

Wait now what? Was he trying to pretend that James VI of Scotland/James I of England didn't exist, or that they weren't the same person? Forget stoplights, this is a much more interesting discussion...
Top
+2
-1
Posted by Oddjob (+187) 5 years ago
Well Ms. Emilsson, I have been waiting for pearls of wisdom from Bridgier, but he seems to have adopted an uncharacteristic pall of silence. I wish he would at least call me a few names. (I just love it when he talks dirty)....But, I digress..

So I am left to speculate.....

I'm guessing that he would agree with you because he, like you, believes most of the perverted history the Left throws out.

Let me throw this out for you to chew on.

You suggest that a bunch of racist, bigoted, cross-burning, segregationist Democrats who have absolutely despised everything the Republican Party stands for since it's inception (as in racial equality and Civil Rights), are jumping into the Republican Party because they are mad that their own party (did I say Democrat Party?) has abandoned it's support for the KKK and lynching.

Hardly...

I know, I know..... That's the story the Left and the Democrat Party have promoted for years to divert attention away from 175 years of Democrat hate and inhumanity, but; does that make sense to you on any level, that they would run to the Republicans?

Does that make sense to any rational human being, that these people would run to a Party that invalidates their core beliefs? Hell, their Grandpappys fought a WAR over this.

OK, so you admit they splintered off into the Dixicrats. But you have conveniently forgotten about them running to George Wallace and the American Independent Party (by which time most of them were in their 70's).

And then these guys died off Ms. Emilsson, and their legacy died with them.

The only "revolting development" to this is how LBJ, the Democrat Party and the spawn of the slavers created plan "B".....
Top
+2
-3
Posted by Brandy Allen (-2405) 5 years ago
Jerry, a wiki is not an allowed site to pull citations from, or definitions in most colleges today. Some think it is due to the easy to find cut an dry definitions. I think it is because wiki are notoriously unreliable.
Top
+2
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
That's pretty much exactly what I'm going to say, mostly because the things you say are ignorant and uninformed. The party of lincoln pretty much abandoned 'racial equality' (if in fact, they ever really promoted it. Freedom from slavery != equality before the law) with the compromise election of Rutheford B. Hayes in 1876. The price for southern support in the electoral college - then end of reconstruction. In the north, counties with a strong quaker demographic that had been calling for abolition a generation earlier where breeding grounds for the KKK - by the turn of the century, sundown towns existed in all 50 states.

But up until the 60's, there were conservatives and liberals in BOTH parties, as they were parties that were mostly partitioned along OTHER lines - Catholics: Democrat. WASP - Republican. Northeast: Republican, Southeast: Democrat, Plains States: Democrat. Free Silver: Democrat, Gold Standard: Republican. The two parties where heavily regional and tribal. Obviously, there are exceptions to this, but, by and large, these were the stereotypes.

AFTER 1964, the great shakeout of the Republican and Democratic parties began, as the NEW primary axis of partition was conservative vs. liberal. Senators like Strom Thurmond moved from the Democratic side to the Republican - and states that had been Democratic strongholds for well over a hundred years, such as North Carolina, suddenly began electing conservative Republicans such as Jesse Helms. In the Northeast, the 'Rockafeller Republican' has almost completely vanished.

So yes, I find your argument unpersuasive and honestly, little more than an exercise in question begging.
Top
+2
-1
Posted by Oddjob (+187) 5 years ago
Reply to Bridgier (#360476)
Bridgier wrote:
Hmmm... where DID all of those southern gentlemen go after 1964? Or those who left in 1948 when the Democrats endorsed an anti-lynching plank?

Noted student of history Oddjob can surely fill in the details....


You are exactly right in your analysis that shifting political positions are hugely complex and encompass any number of variables. That's why I respond when I see you and others here, imply or make direct statements to the effect that all the cross-burning segregationist Democrats switched their allegiance to the Republican Party when their Party leadership started moving away from the KKK and segregation. It didn't happen and you know it didn't happen.

But you said it; you own it, and why you play the fool, I'll never know.

From the above statement posted earlier, I can only surmise you do it to be a smart ass or because of unabashed arrogance.
Top
+2
-3
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5098) 5 years ago
Oddjob wrote:
All of it defined the Democrat Party until 1964, when they switched from endorsing chattel slavery, to providing entitlement slavery to the State.



That's AWESOME, oddjob!

Just like your fellow traveler Cliven Bundy, you equate government assistance with slavery. I bet you think that African Americans were better off as slaves.

"I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro..."

http://www.slate.com/blog...erent.html
Top
+2
-2
Posted by Oddjob (+187) 5 years ago
There you go again Bob, with the "fellow traveler" thing and now you are putting words in my mouth. Please don't assume you know anything about me.

As far as the slavery to entitlement goes, race has nothing to do with it. The Democrat Party only withholds free "Government" money and goods from those who won't vote for them.
Top
+3
-4
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5098) 5 years ago
Another fact free rant from my pal Oddjob.

Here are the 10 states most dependent on Federal largesse:

1. New Mexico
2. Mississippi
3. Kentucky
4. Alabama
5. Montana
6. West Virginia
7. Arizona
8. Louisiana
9. South Dakota
10. Maine

How many of those states vote Democratic? Not many...not many.

Try again, loser!

http://www.cheatsheet.com...?a=viewall

[Edited by Bob L. (7/7/2015 9:27:23 AM)]
Top
+4
-2
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
It didn't happen and you know it didn't happen.


Except that I'm saying that it DID happen, and we KNOW it did, because we can see the pattern happening right before our eyes over the last 40 years.

I'm not sure what you're getting at otherwise...

OH NOW I SEE WHAT ODDJOB IS SAYING.

Yes, you're right - not ALL of the KKK members left the Democratic Party. There are plenty of racist democrats still around, particularly in the appalachian corridor.

But if you thought that I was making a blanket statement regarding the sanctity and purity of the Democratic Party vis a vis the Republican Party since 1964, well, I don't know what to say. Nuance is hard, apparently.

[Edited by Bridgier (7/7/2015 11:45:53 AM)]
Top
+4
-1
Posted by UM Griz (+172) 5 years ago
As a recent college grad, I feel that I must weigh in on this. First, not once was I taught about traffic lights or who invented them. I can say I'm glad that I didn't go into debt to learn about some trivial bullpoop. Secondly, if I ever cited wiki, my professors would have slapped me square in the face. Lastly, the Democratic party of today and is obliviously not the same party that fought for slavery. That is all. You all are terrible people.
Top
+4
-1
founder
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Dave Roberts (+1493) 5 years ago
You all are terrible people


You win one internet!
Top
+2
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8970) 5 years ago
First, not once was I taught about traffic lights or who invented them

Well, yeah - MSU is the engineering school.
Top
+5
-2
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Hannah Nash (+2500) 5 years ago
The public kicking serves me right for posting a two-second reply illustrating how easy it was to find accurate information on the history of the traffic light that quickly refuted the claim by Brandy above. My apologies for not providing my usual standard of cited research.

To respond to the claim of "citing a Wiki": Wikis are useful aggregators of information; a collection of information linked back to the primary or secondary sources (which, on Wikipedia, you can find cited on the bottom of the page under "References"). The information on Garrett Morgan was cited from a publication called "An American Inventor: A Profile of Garrett Morgan" published by the Federal Highway Administration. The referenced BBC article on J.P. Knight is also a very good read (and properly cited; for your edification http://www.bbc.co.uk/nott...ture.shtml). A quick and interesting read on Morgan as an inventor can be found in "Inventors and Inventions, Volume 4" as captured by Google Books (his profile begins on page 1101) https://books.google.com/...&q&f=false

I failed to cite the original source material and just referred Brandy to the quick Aggregator. Mea culpa.

(And I won't make *that* mistake again... so you can all leave your sharks caged for the season.)
Top
+2
Posted by Bob Netherton III (+2778) 5 years ago
Now Conservipedia....THERE IS A RELIABLE SOURCE!
Top
+1