Read this earlier this morning; "crap" is far too polite a word. I used to have a modicum of respect for the ACLU. They've done some good work over the years. But they now seem rather determined to negate that with BS like this.
I also see where they've taken up a free speech case involving the NRA while very publicly saying they in no wa…
Read this earlier this morning; "crap" is far too polite a word. I used to have a modicum of respect for the ACLU. They've done some good work over the years. But they now seem rather determined to negate that with BS like this.
I also see where they've taken up a free speech case involving the NRA while very publicly saying they in no way agree with or support the NRA's mission. The NRA, while having unsuccessfully tried to claim bankruptcy, has resources of its own to fight whatever legal cases come its way. So, WTF??!! But then this is an organization that once fought for the free speech rights of the KKK. (I was an NRA member a lifetime ago and absolutely loathe what LaPierre and the rest have done to that once decent organization, but to be clear, I'm absolutely not equating the NRA to the KKK.)
Send your $$ somewhere more deserving, like the Southern Poverty Law Center. They seem to have their collective heads screwed on straight and show no sign of losing them for the foreseeable future.
Well, except the SPLC has never responded to my numerous attempts to communicate as to why they persist in labeling Ft Bragg, California, as a “Public Symbol of the Confederacy” though named in 1857 for a Federal soldier long before the Civil War. While I’ll agree the optics are bad, the fact remains it is not a symbol of the CSA any more than Austria remains a Symbol of the Third Reich because Hither was Austrian.
In perusing the link you posted, I found nothing about Ft. Bragg, California. Not saying there isn't something there, since I don't have time to read every word of the rather lengthy piece. I did find a reference to the much better-known Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, a huge U.S. Army base which started life as Camp Bragg in 1918 as an artillery training facility, long after the end of the Civil War. Both locations were named after Braxton Bragg, who graduated West Point and served as an artillery officer in the United States Army until resigning his commission in 1856. He then chose to serve the Confederacy as an officer in its army when the Civil War started.
The best I can determine, Ft Bragg, Ca., began as a military garrison in 1857. Its military use eventually ended, and it became incorporated as a city in 1889, retaining the name, and it's a popular tourist destination today.
I certainly understand the objection to a U.S. Army base being named after a Confederate army general. (Ft. Bragg, N.C., is in fact now Ft. Liberty.) But if the SPLC is opposed to the place name of the historical city of Ft. Bragg, Ca., that's rather lame. At the time of its naming (4 years before the Civil War), Bragg had only been a U.S. Army officer, there is no longer any American military association with the city (other than historical, as far as I can see), and if the citizens are ok with the name, so should be the SPLC. But any organization actually working for the "public good" can't be expected to get *everything* right, every time. But better to screw it up about something as relatively innocuous as a place name than a policy that will be detrimental to employees and working people everywhere, such as the ACLU is undertaking.
As an aside: there are 119 counties in this country named after Confederate military figures or prominent Confederate politicians. We can't rename every damned thing in this country associated with the Confederacy. Nor should we. That would truly be "whitewashing" our history.
Expand the map, and look at coastal Northern California. What’s really lame about the SPLC is they aren’t willing to listen to facts, and in my view, libeling Ft Bragg. Trust me, everyone in Ft Bragg is aware of its ugly younger sibling, as the mail sometimes goes there! BTW, there was never a garrison in Ft Bragg, CA, and nothing remains honoring the CSA, except perhaps Lee’s Chinese Restaurant… lol
Taking down flags, removing Confederate statues or memorials etc. from public property? Sure. Fine. Good idea. But renaming or 'disappearing' *everything* Confederate-related? You going to rename every town or city south of the Mason Dixon line? Every place name for every Civil War battle that happened on then-Confederate held ground? There's no honor in what the Confederacy did, but what you're apparently advocating is surely a lost cause.
Were we not on Tom’s substack, I’d thank you for the mansplaining as I usually find the comments analytic. As it is I’ll assume you realize that ‘disappearing’ has been achieved by voters.
being very old and, happily, very unhip about what the young folks say, I am mystified by what the fuck "mansplaining" means. if it means (as I THINK it means) a man explaining something to a woman in a condescending or patronizing manner, the whole thing strikes me as very, very subjective. and IMHO, it is part of what I feel is a degradation of language we don't rally need. I know I can be an asshole about this, but I've been an English Major all my life and every day, I find more evidence that people just don't give a fuck about this. I could start with "fulsome" and the pronunciations of words like "electoral" and "formidable." and then it gets work. my friend Ruth will have no truck with "my bad" (which I use, but with obvious sarcasm) and "so fun" (which just sounds dumb).
it just occurred to me that this could be construed, probably correctly, as a mini-tantrum.
I apologize for the tantrum, but not for the shit I'm angry about.
I've had any number of people disagree with me about different things. But mansplaining? Never been accused of that one before, Gail. So, thanks. Glad to finally check that one off my list. Would say I'm sorry to disappoint you on the analytical front, but I write what I mean in my comments here and elsewhere. So, while you seem to be offended by what I wrote to the point of needing to resort to this type of reply, I want to assure you that no offense has been taken on my part from it. And since you've given me no reason here to change my mind, I'll just end this (and any further comment) by saying that I stand by what I wrote.
The Southern Poverty Law Center uses smear tactics in an attempt to discredit policy opponents so that the latter will not be taken seriously. Here’s more information on that, from an open letter to a New Yorker writer who cited the SPLC in calling the Center for Immigration Studies a hate group.
Read this earlier this morning; "crap" is far too polite a word. I used to have a modicum of respect for the ACLU. They've done some good work over the years. But they now seem rather determined to negate that with BS like this.
I also see where they've taken up a free speech case involving the NRA while very publicly saying they in no way agree with or support the NRA's mission. The NRA, while having unsuccessfully tried to claim bankruptcy, has resources of its own to fight whatever legal cases come its way. So, WTF??!! But then this is an organization that once fought for the free speech rights of the KKK. (I was an NRA member a lifetime ago and absolutely loathe what LaPierre and the rest have done to that once decent organization, but to be clear, I'm absolutely not equating the NRA to the KKK.)
Send your $$ somewhere more deserving, like the Southern Poverty Law Center. They seem to have their collective heads screwed on straight and show no sign of losing them for the foreseeable future.
Good suggestion.
Well, except the SPLC has never responded to my numerous attempts to communicate as to why they persist in labeling Ft Bragg, California, as a “Public Symbol of the Confederacy” though named in 1857 for a Federal soldier long before the Civil War. While I’ll agree the optics are bad, the fact remains it is not a symbol of the CSA any more than Austria remains a Symbol of the Third Reich because Hither was Austrian.
https://www.splcenter.org/20190201/whose-heritage-public-symbols-confederacy#findings
There you go, John, trying to reference Reality again. :-)
The point might just be that he BECAME a Confederate.
My point, above, was that Austria is not vilified for starting WW2. It’s the all too common logical fallacy of genetics.
In perusing the link you posted, I found nothing about Ft. Bragg, California. Not saying there isn't something there, since I don't have time to read every word of the rather lengthy piece. I did find a reference to the much better-known Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, a huge U.S. Army base which started life as Camp Bragg in 1918 as an artillery training facility, long after the end of the Civil War. Both locations were named after Braxton Bragg, who graduated West Point and served as an artillery officer in the United States Army until resigning his commission in 1856. He then chose to serve the Confederacy as an officer in its army when the Civil War started.
The best I can determine, Ft Bragg, Ca., began as a military garrison in 1857. Its military use eventually ended, and it became incorporated as a city in 1889, retaining the name, and it's a popular tourist destination today.
I certainly understand the objection to a U.S. Army base being named after a Confederate army general. (Ft. Bragg, N.C., is in fact now Ft. Liberty.) But if the SPLC is opposed to the place name of the historical city of Ft. Bragg, Ca., that's rather lame. At the time of its naming (4 years before the Civil War), Bragg had only been a U.S. Army officer, there is no longer any American military association with the city (other than historical, as far as I can see), and if the citizens are ok with the name, so should be the SPLC. But any organization actually working for the "public good" can't be expected to get *everything* right, every time. But better to screw it up about something as relatively innocuous as a place name than a policy that will be detrimental to employees and working people everywhere, such as the ACLU is undertaking.
As an aside: there are 119 counties in this country named after Confederate military figures or prominent Confederate politicians. We can't rename every damned thing in this country associated with the Confederacy. Nor should we. That would truly be "whitewashing" our history.
Expand the map, and look at coastal Northern California. What’s really lame about the SPLC is they aren’t willing to listen to facts, and in my view, libeling Ft Bragg. Trust me, everyone in Ft Bragg is aware of its ugly younger sibling, as the mail sometimes goes there! BTW, there was never a garrison in Ft Bragg, CA, and nothing remains honoring the CSA, except perhaps Lee’s Chinese Restaurant… lol
I see I misspoke - nothing there ever honored the CSA, for obvious reasons.
Why not? History is in books, not memorials to lost causes.
Taking down flags, removing Confederate statues or memorials etc. from public property? Sure. Fine. Good idea. But renaming or 'disappearing' *everything* Confederate-related? You going to rename every town or city south of the Mason Dixon line? Every place name for every Civil War battle that happened on then-Confederate held ground? There's no honor in what the Confederacy did, but what you're apparently advocating is surely a lost cause.
Were we not on Tom’s substack, I’d thank you for the mansplaining as I usually find the comments analytic. As it is I’ll assume you realize that ‘disappearing’ has been achieved by voters.
being very old and, happily, very unhip about what the young folks say, I am mystified by what the fuck "mansplaining" means. if it means (as I THINK it means) a man explaining something to a woman in a condescending or patronizing manner, the whole thing strikes me as very, very subjective. and IMHO, it is part of what I feel is a degradation of language we don't rally need. I know I can be an asshole about this, but I've been an English Major all my life and every day, I find more evidence that people just don't give a fuck about this. I could start with "fulsome" and the pronunciations of words like "electoral" and "formidable." and then it gets work. my friend Ruth will have no truck with "my bad" (which I use, but with obvious sarcasm) and "so fun" (which just sounds dumb).
it just occurred to me that this could be construed, probably correctly, as a mini-tantrum.
I apologize for the tantrum, but not for the shit I'm angry about.
Apology accepted.
I've had any number of people disagree with me about different things. But mansplaining? Never been accused of that one before, Gail. So, thanks. Glad to finally check that one off my list. Would say I'm sorry to disappoint you on the analytical front, but I write what I mean in my comments here and elsewhere. So, while you seem to be offended by what I wrote to the point of needing to resort to this type of reply, I want to assure you that no offense has been taken on my part from it. And since you've given me no reason here to change my mind, I'll just end this (and any further comment) by saying that I stand by what I wrote.
How erudite! Odd you ignore the premise
The Southern Poverty Law Center uses smear tactics in an attempt to discredit policy opponents so that the latter will not be taken seriously. Here’s more information on that, from an open letter to a New Yorker writer who cited the SPLC in calling the Center for Immigration Studies a hate group.
http://cis.org/kammer/open-letter-new-yorkers-jonathan-blitzer-pt-1
And still more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-labeling-my-organization-a-hate-group-shuts-down-public-debate/2017/03/17/656ab9c8-0812-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html ?utm_term=.dcdc0566965e
This one's about how SPLC is mainly about the money
https://www.thenation.com/article/king-hate-business/