It is glaringly clear American history is not being taught. If it was Teddy Roosevelt would be venerated rather than canceled. He was a tower of a man and a model person in every way. Our country owes a huge debt to him for the national parks alone. There would be no Natural History Museum had it not been for his father. His father …
It is glaringly clear American history is not being taught. If it was Teddy Roosevelt would be venerated rather than canceled. He was a tower of a man and a model person in every way. Our country owes a huge debt to him for the national parks alone. There would be no Natural History Museum had it not been for his father. His father was a good and decent man and a philanthropist. He worked tirelessly to raise the funds to build the Natural History Museum. The world of the intelligentsia is diseased and it has infected young adults. I am reading Gad Saad's The Parasitic Mind. We have to find a way to overcome this mind virus.
It's very clear that history is not being taught, at least not an accurate one (1619 Propaganda Project?). What we are seeing today in America is nothing less than a repeat of Mao's "cultural revolution" where centuries of Chinese history and culture were deleted almost overnight and dissenters ridiculed, tortured, and killed. Don't kid yourself this isn't the goal here.
BradK, how insightful of you; you’re correct. American history is not being taught accurately, Mao Tse-Tung would have approved. For at least the last century, slavery has been whitewashed, but I do have a question, do you believe black people are docile uncivilized, and lazy?
“The mainstream social studies curriculum, however, either largely ignored Black history or misrepresented the subject. Early renditions of history textbooks typically classified Black people as docile, uncivilized, and lazy.”
“Racist Textbooks Endured, Presenting Alternate ‘History’ to Alabama Students for 70 Years”
There are other statues venerating president Theodore Roosevelt; why are people so enamored with this piece of brass that shows him subjugating an indigenous American and a black man? Do we need to highlight that he was a racist and believed in eugenics?
He wasn't subjugating anyone. Another contributor to this thread gave the history of the others surrounding his statue. You may want to find it and inform yourself so you will stop making such ignorant ill formed statements. He was NOT a racist or a eugenicist.
You are so right. I am being stalked by a couple of Leftist agitators on these threads. They put out the most incredulous and false statements and attempt to provoke me to an angry exchange. Yes, I have come to the same conclusion that "Just Me," who must use a handle to hide his/her identity, is a jerk.
It is puzzling why people get upset with a straightforward, honest conversation! I respond in kind, but I’m not profane or obscene, like others; I am courteous to those who are courteous to me, and not rude like some are, but alas, some still take umbrage to my comments! Being polite and asserting one’s point of view seems to be upsetting for some.
Golfer, you’ve dressed me down, telling the Substack how despicable I am. The stones of chastising have been thrown. It reminds me of: He without sin cast the first stone!
Why is a piece of brass representing the subjugation of an indigenous human being and a black person by a Caucasian straddling an equine so important? Why do we want to preserve it? Is it the symbolism of racism? Or that Roosevelt believed in eugenics, besides being a racist? One can’t help but wonder if Malcolm X was portrayed astride a large black stallion, portraying the Caucasian standing below as inferior, would that piece of brass still be important?
Also, right next door at the NYHS there are two statues. Abe Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. Douglass is much higher than Lincoln and I've never heard a complaint.
LW212, are you the hall monitor today? Or did someone appoint you the enforcer of the day? No, wait a minute, you must be the Substack policeman, right?
The statue honors Roosevelt for being one of our nation’s greatest conservationists, a dedicated naturalist and of course, his family’s connection to the museum. The figures on either side are allegorical representations of the continents of North America and Africa, not people being subjugated.
A more accurate analogy would be an equestrian statue of black man in front of the museum he founded flanked by figures representing two continents, say Europe and Asia. You would also have to depict the European and Asian figures holding rifles like the Roosevelt statue. That would be a fine statue.
LW212, I stand corrected, bronze, not brass. Now onto your analogy. I think you meant Caucasian, not European. And one other detail, did the black men nation enslave the Caucasian and the Asian people? There are other statues paying homage to his accomplishments; it’s not like he’s being banished to the dustbin of history!
I don't know why the intelligencia sought to silence Teddy. No doubt it was for all the wrong reasons. But, there are very good reasons that he should be questioned.
First, his enthusiastic attack on Cuba, and the whole prosecution of the war against Spain in the Caribbean and Mexico was for greed and xenophobia. The faking of the sinking of the Maine should have been a black eye of the U.S. The U.S., as transformed by Lincoln and the radical Republicans, sought Cuba as a possession. And the war against Mexico was as glaring a landgrab as Putin's attack on Ukraine.
Second, Teddy's grabbing of land "for American parks and recreation" was to solidify D.C.'s wresting States' sovereign powers as delineated in the Constitution, to make the Federal government the cental controller of America. It was a bald theft of State's lands for DC bureaucrats and a flaunting of the unconstitutional centralized powers over the states and of the American people as the result of Lincoln's war of aggression against the agrarian southern states.
Roosevelt's aggressions paved the way for Wilson's and FDR's solidification of central power by the stealing of American's income, making them slaves of D.C., and pulling out the state's teeth, rendering them subservient as well as it had the people. Wilson's finagling us into Europe's war in 1917, plus aiding Lennin and Stalin's enslavement of Russian people under Communism, and FDR's follow up in 1939, put the U.S. permanently into debt, shoring up the FED's permanent control over our economy.
Teddy was a bear, though not a Teddy Bear. He was truly a beast roaming about seeking whom to devour. And the newspapers of the day, as the have ever since, helpfully covered up the truth and boldly proclaimed the lies of their handlers. Until we return America to a truly representative republic, we will continue to be controlled by the largest criminal conspiracy in history, the bureaucrats in D.C.
In 1788, the average size of congressional districts in the 13 states was 50,000. Now they are nearly a million on average. The original first amendment, of the twelve bills of rights, was the only item that George Washington addressed the constitutional convention about. It would have made the maximum number of people in any congressional district 50,000. The number of representatives would have grown to over 6,000 today. That number is not as shocking as it appears at first glance, for there are about the same number of state representatives among the fifty states.
The main point is, each member of the federal house of representatives would represent only 50,000 people, thus would truly represent the people. No one can adequately represent a million people. They can and do represent the special interests of the military industrial complex, the interests of foreign governments, the health care interests, bankers, real estate moguls, and all the rest that swarm all over Washington, D.C. writing all the laws and bribing congressmen to sponsor them and herd them through to the law books to steal from Americans and harass them with dozens of federal enforcement officers who are wholly subservient to congress, the supreme Court and the president--supposedly the servants of We The People.
Now, we're expected to bow and scrape to every petty appointed Czar who takes the notion to make us wear nasty face diapers and take untested, let alone approved, nasty vaccine that will further enslave us to the American Politburo that has taken over our duties to self-govern.
Gees Jesse...Regardless of what you stated, you seem to turn everything upside down when you give "Now, we're expected...further enslave (woo) , taken over our duties to self-govern". Seems that is the opposite of what took hold. No way was Rosey to account for dealings under any other.
Our life span went from 40 years to 80 years, meaning, some positives did...overall
I dunno much about history, so can neither say yay or nay.
HOWEVER:
"Until we return America to a truly representative republic, we will continue to be controlled by the largest criminal conspiracy in history, the bureaucrats in D.C."
That's one FACT. Dem or Repub, doesn't matter a lick. The bureaucracy is an equal opportunity Destroyer. Think there's one or two HUNDRED volumes of regulations that keep them in their jobs. And that's the ONLY thing they care about, right? Same as the politicians. The NUMBER ONE question in D.C.? (And elsewhere, as needed.)
How to get power. How to hold on to power. How to get MORE POWER. Yada, yada, right?
You and I obviously have very different takes on historical events. It is only recently that the cause of the Maine's explosion has been discovered. It was coal dust that exploded. At the time they would not have been able to ascertain this.
Teddy Roosevelt was a enthusiastic outdoorsman and hunter. He spent a lot of time out west after this first wife died in childbirth. He was devastated. He wanted to preserve the land for future generations. You seem to have missed that.
He was not a beast. He was a dynamic, energetic, intelligent man of his times.
I live not far from where the statue once stood. It was one of the most beloved statues in the city, so much so it was portrayed in movies by one of the most well loved actors of our time! The figures on either side of Roosevelt were never intended to be offensive or subservient, the artist called them a “heroic trio” and are both holding rifles. The fact that there is a petition to melt ANY artwork, even if controversial is ludicrous.
I once told my sister that the toppling and destruction of statues in the US was very similar to destruction of temples the Taliban did (which she was enraged about). Her response was, destroying American statutes was moral though.
Exactly. I’m sure that Isis argued it was morally imperative to ransack the Mosul Museum and level Jonah’s Tomb or when those “Yellow Vests” desecrated the Arc de Triomphe and the treasures inside or the destruction of historical sites during the Chinese cultural revolution. People love ripping down the past because it reminds them that something actually occurred in this world before they were born.
1. I will gladly put the TR statue in my front yard here in Los Angeles. Watching all of my woke luvvie neighbors stare blankly at it until someone tells them to be outraged will be amusing.
2. Nellie, your Friday roundup is my favorite news event of the week. Authoress! Authoress!
Unfortunately Gad Saad is a big fan of “no one cares” Tucker Carlson who has revealed himself as heartless and indifferent to the predictable suffering which has occurred as a result of this completely unjustified war of aggression. I watched every Carlson show after he replaced O’Reilly but have not watched him since he got bad advice from Douglas Macgregor instead of good advice from Keith Kellogg. Jesse Watters is doing a good job covering the war and the idiocy of the Biden administration on most domestic issues.
I like Tucker Carlson and am of the opinion we need him because he is unafraid to present his opinions and views on current events. He is a healthy antidote to CNN and MSNBC etc. Might he be wrong about some things? Sure, we all can be wrong. Only time and careful analysis will prove that. Is Tucker heartless? That depends on your point of view. If Ukraine had capitulated to Russia most of the damage and most of the deaths could have been prevented. Should Ukraine capitulate to Russia? That is a moral question that I don't feel up to deciding. Russia will eventually have to stop bombing Ukraine and may even pull back to the southern portion of the country. That will be a Pyrrhic victory at best because most of the cities will have been destroyed and unfit for human life.
I will not disavow Dr. Saad nor Tucker Carlson. We need their voices more than ever just as we need the voices of Common Sense Substack.
I've never watched any cable news, myself. Still, would venture this opinion. May not be true, but I saw two articles that said Carlson was acquitted on a charge of libel. Judges decision? That nobody would believe what Carlson said, so no damages.
What you read is not true because libel is a civil action not criminal so there would be no acquittal. If a civil jury did not find him liable for libel that means there was not even a preponderance of evidence to support the claim. Preponderance of the evidence is not a heavy burden of proof.
I missed that. Tucker has exposed a whole lot of corruption so I am not surprised someone would try to sue him for libel. My guess is Tucker would have his facts in a row and be able to back up what he said which would explain why the judge would dismiss the charge.
What I read wasn't that he had facts on his side. ICBW.
Me? It's not just the time I save, not having a TV. But not dragging along the emotional baggage that would come with the cable news (of ANY stripe) is a nice benefit.
I had to limit my news watching. It was stressing me out. I also don't like hyperbolic reporting so had to give up on Hannity a couple of years ago. I do watch Tucker, some Newsmax and some OAN. OAN has some excellent in depth reporting. However it looks like Direct TV is going to drop OAN in April and when that happens I am going to cancel Direct TV. I have a Foxnation subscription so I can watch Tucker that way. I have to support him because this is about our free speech rights. We can't let the cancel culture vultures take him out.
sometimes after I reply, i hit it again and then hit it on my own reply and they both show up. strangeness, personified. (oh! then I take it off-a mine, right?)
I'm not up on security, so would have no clue. But in this case, I think the email thing was intended to be a nice feature. Works anyway, so there is that.
I was a fan of Teddy Roosevelt for many years but over time have recognized some traits that were less appealing. He was jingoistic and militaristic. That being said there is no reason to take down his statue
TR was a man of his time. But give him his due. He wasn't just for the Spanish-American War but he fought in it unlike the armchair warriors of today. And the Battle of San Juan Hill, in which he repeatedly charged and exposed himself to Spanish fire was no joke. TR also was the first president to host both a Jew and a Black man for dinner and was a singular opponent of lynching in the South, as opposed to his successor, the odious racist Woody Wilson. Like all of us, Roosevelt had his faults, but he was a man in full and worthy of our admiration and love.
Agreed. But poor Teddy can't pass the radical progressive high bar because in the culture wars of today history itself is malleable and rewritten (witness the 1619 Project) where the faults of the past century's men or women are more important than their accomplishments. TR was ahead of his time, but he was also a product of it - and for that he is disqualified. As many other historical figures have been, and will be.
No one is perfect. No one person. Teddy Roosevelt had more admirable qualities than almost anyone else. Who in politics these days is not "jingoistic?" He believed in peace through strength. His motto was "speak softly and carry a big stick." Not a bad philosophy if it keeps us out of wars.
I agree except civil and criminal rights began, at least as far as our jurisprudence, with the Magna Carta and have evolved ever since. And I would add that the Arabs and African tribes themselves also played a significant role in the African slave trade.
It is glaringly clear American history is not being taught. If it was Teddy Roosevelt would be venerated rather than canceled. He was a tower of a man and a model person in every way. Our country owes a huge debt to him for the national parks alone. There would be no Natural History Museum had it not been for his father. His father was a good and decent man and a philanthropist. He worked tirelessly to raise the funds to build the Natural History Museum. The world of the intelligentsia is diseased and it has infected young adults. I am reading Gad Saad's The Parasitic Mind. We have to find a way to overcome this mind virus.
It's very clear that history is not being taught, at least not an accurate one (1619 Propaganda Project?). What we are seeing today in America is nothing less than a repeat of Mao's "cultural revolution" where centuries of Chinese history and culture were deleted almost overnight and dissenters ridiculed, tortured, and killed. Don't kid yourself this isn't the goal here.
BradK, how insightful of you; you’re correct. American history is not being taught accurately, Mao Tse-Tung would have approved. For at least the last century, slavery has been whitewashed, but I do have a question, do you believe black people are docile uncivilized, and lazy?
“The mainstream social studies curriculum, however, either largely ignored Black history or misrepresented the subject. Early renditions of history textbooks typically classified Black people as docile, uncivilized, and lazy.”
“Racist Textbooks Endured, Presenting Alternate ‘History’ to Alabama Students for 70 Years”
https://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/publications/articles/se_810117014.pdf
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/02/04/582468315/why-schools-fail-to-teach-slaverys-hard-history
https://birminghamwatch.org/racist-textbooks-endured-presenting-alternate-history-alabama-students-70-years/
Teddy Roosevelt is the reason we have anti-trust laws. But maybe that is why they hate him so much.
He was the quintessential man. Extraordinarily excellent in every way.
There are other statues venerating president Theodore Roosevelt; why are people so enamored with this piece of brass that shows him subjugating an indigenous American and a black man? Do we need to highlight that he was a racist and believed in eugenics?
He wasn't subjugating anyone. Another contributor to this thread gave the history of the others surrounding his statue. You may want to find it and inform yourself so you will stop making such ignorant ill formed statements. He was NOT a racist or a eugenicist.
Theodore Roosevelt was indeed a racist and a eugenics believer, and it would appear you are the ignorant one, not I!
https://youtu.be/eL2CW8bZ0to
You are so right. I am being stalked by a couple of Leftist agitators on these threads. They put out the most incredulous and false statements and attempt to provoke me to an angry exchange. Yes, I have come to the same conclusion that "Just Me," who must use a handle to hide his/her identity, is a jerk.
It is puzzling why people get upset with a straightforward, honest conversation! I respond in kind, but I’m not profane or obscene, like others; I am courteous to those who are courteous to me, and not rude like some are, but alas, some still take umbrage to my comments! Being polite and asserting one’s point of view seems to be upsetting for some.
Golfer, you’ve dressed me down, telling the Substack how despicable I am. The stones of chastising have been thrown. It reminds me of: He without sin cast the first stone!
Golfer, you have disparaged me, insulted me, and verbally abused me, but I can’t play on words? You need to ask yourself, am I a snowflake?
...Put Me, big Mack, up there with Teddy and even I would feel glamorous.
The privilege to share (Statue) with Ted is in itself "Wholesomeness".
https://youtu.be/eL2CW8bZ0to
Why is a piece of brass representing the subjugation of an indigenous human being and a black person by a Caucasian straddling an equine so important? Why do we want to preserve it? Is it the symbolism of racism? Or that Roosevelt believed in eugenics, besides being a racist? One can’t help but wonder if Malcolm X was portrayed astride a large black stallion, portraying the Caucasian standing below as inferior, would that piece of brass still be important?
Also, right next door at the NYHS there are two statues. Abe Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. Douglass is much higher than Lincoln and I've never heard a complaint.
What within your intellect made you think this was an intelligent comment? Amazing!
Look, if you don't know anything about the history of the statue or have even seen it in person, you shouldn't be making a comment on it.
LW212, are you the hall monitor today? Or did someone appoint you the enforcer of the day? No, wait a minute, you must be the Substack policeman, right?
The statue honors Roosevelt for being one of our nation’s greatest conservationists, a dedicated naturalist and of course, his family’s connection to the museum. The figures on either side are allegorical representations of the continents of North America and Africa, not people being subjugated.
A more accurate analogy would be an equestrian statue of black man in front of the museum he founded flanked by figures representing two continents, say Europe and Asia. You would also have to depict the European and Asian figures holding rifles like the Roosevelt statue. That would be a fine statue.
Also the Roosevelt statue is bronze, not brass.
LW212, I stand corrected, bronze, not brass. Now onto your analogy. I think you meant Caucasian, not European. And one other detail, did the black men nation enslave the Caucasian and the Asian people? There are other statues paying homage to his accomplishments; it’s not like he’s being banished to the dustbin of history!
Your analogy missed the mark for an allegory!
https://youtu.be/eL2CW8bZ0to
Naomi..."overcome this mind Virus"...yepper.thanks for (Gad S.)
I don't know why the intelligencia sought to silence Teddy. No doubt it was for all the wrong reasons. But, there are very good reasons that he should be questioned.
First, his enthusiastic attack on Cuba, and the whole prosecution of the war against Spain in the Caribbean and Mexico was for greed and xenophobia. The faking of the sinking of the Maine should have been a black eye of the U.S. The U.S., as transformed by Lincoln and the radical Republicans, sought Cuba as a possession. And the war against Mexico was as glaring a landgrab as Putin's attack on Ukraine.
Second, Teddy's grabbing of land "for American parks and recreation" was to solidify D.C.'s wresting States' sovereign powers as delineated in the Constitution, to make the Federal government the cental controller of America. It was a bald theft of State's lands for DC bureaucrats and a flaunting of the unconstitutional centralized powers over the states and of the American people as the result of Lincoln's war of aggression against the agrarian southern states.
Roosevelt's aggressions paved the way for Wilson's and FDR's solidification of central power by the stealing of American's income, making them slaves of D.C., and pulling out the state's teeth, rendering them subservient as well as it had the people. Wilson's finagling us into Europe's war in 1917, plus aiding Lennin and Stalin's enslavement of Russian people under Communism, and FDR's follow up in 1939, put the U.S. permanently into debt, shoring up the FED's permanent control over our economy.
Teddy was a bear, though not a Teddy Bear. He was truly a beast roaming about seeking whom to devour. And the newspapers of the day, as the have ever since, helpfully covered up the truth and boldly proclaimed the lies of their handlers. Until we return America to a truly representative republic, we will continue to be controlled by the largest criminal conspiracy in history, the bureaucrats in D.C.
In 1788, the average size of congressional districts in the 13 states was 50,000. Now they are nearly a million on average. The original first amendment, of the twelve bills of rights, was the only item that George Washington addressed the constitutional convention about. It would have made the maximum number of people in any congressional district 50,000. The number of representatives would have grown to over 6,000 today. That number is not as shocking as it appears at first glance, for there are about the same number of state representatives among the fifty states.
The main point is, each member of the federal house of representatives would represent only 50,000 people, thus would truly represent the people. No one can adequately represent a million people. They can and do represent the special interests of the military industrial complex, the interests of foreign governments, the health care interests, bankers, real estate moguls, and all the rest that swarm all over Washington, D.C. writing all the laws and bribing congressmen to sponsor them and herd them through to the law books to steal from Americans and harass them with dozens of federal enforcement officers who are wholly subservient to congress, the supreme Court and the president--supposedly the servants of We The People.
Now, we're expected to bow and scrape to every petty appointed Czar who takes the notion to make us wear nasty face diapers and take untested, let alone approved, nasty vaccine that will further enslave us to the American Politburo that has taken over our duties to self-govern.
Gees Jesse...Regardless of what you stated, you seem to turn everything upside down when you give "Now, we're expected...further enslave (woo) , taken over our duties to self-govern". Seems that is the opposite of what took hold. No way was Rosey to account for dealings under any other.
Our life span went from 40 years to 80 years, meaning, some positives did...overall
Lincoln's 'war of aggression'? That's like looking at the Civil War through the lens of The Twilight Zone.
I dunno much about history, so can neither say yay or nay.
HOWEVER:
"Until we return America to a truly representative republic, we will continue to be controlled by the largest criminal conspiracy in history, the bureaucrats in D.C."
That's one FACT. Dem or Repub, doesn't matter a lick. The bureaucracy is an equal opportunity Destroyer. Think there's one or two HUNDRED volumes of regulations that keep them in their jobs. And that's the ONLY thing they care about, right? Same as the politicians. The NUMBER ONE question in D.C.? (And elsewhere, as needed.)
How to get power. How to hold on to power. How to get MORE POWER. Yada, yada, right?
You and I obviously have very different takes on historical events. It is only recently that the cause of the Maine's explosion has been discovered. It was coal dust that exploded. At the time they would not have been able to ascertain this.
Teddy Roosevelt was a enthusiastic outdoorsman and hunter. He spent a lot of time out west after this first wife died in childbirth. He was devastated. He wanted to preserve the land for future generations. You seem to have missed that.
He was not a beast. He was a dynamic, energetic, intelligent man of his times.
I live not far from where the statue once stood. It was one of the most beloved statues in the city, so much so it was portrayed in movies by one of the most well loved actors of our time! The figures on either side of Roosevelt were never intended to be offensive or subservient, the artist called them a “heroic trio” and are both holding rifles. The fact that there is a petition to melt ANY artwork, even if controversial is ludicrous.
https://youtu.be/eL2CW8bZ0to
No different from what the Taliban did in Bamiyan.
I once told my sister that the toppling and destruction of statues in the US was very similar to destruction of temples the Taliban did (which she was enraged about). Her response was, destroying American statutes was moral though.
Hmmm.... I am sure the Taliban thought the same.
Exactly. I’m sure that Isis argued it was morally imperative to ransack the Mosul Museum and level Jonah’s Tomb or when those “Yellow Vests” desecrated the Arc de Triomphe and the treasures inside or the destruction of historical sites during the Chinese cultural revolution. People love ripping down the past because it reminds them that something actually occurred in this world before they were born.
LW...clever. Gives them an attempt at Perfection...like me.
Steve...yep, right on target. done in the spirit of Love...so much fun...yikes
Xcellenta, right on Target, publius
1. I will gladly put the TR statue in my front yard here in Los Angeles. Watching all of my woke luvvie neighbors stare blankly at it until someone tells them to be outraged will be amusing.
2. Nellie, your Friday roundup is my favorite news event of the week. Authoress! Authoress!
I was gonna say same about M. Nellie!
Unfortunately Gad Saad is a big fan of “no one cares” Tucker Carlson who has revealed himself as heartless and indifferent to the predictable suffering which has occurred as a result of this completely unjustified war of aggression. I watched every Carlson show after he replaced O’Reilly but have not watched him since he got bad advice from Douglas Macgregor instead of good advice from Keith Kellogg. Jesse Watters is doing a good job covering the war and the idiocy of the Biden administration on most domestic issues.
I like Tucker Carlson and am of the opinion we need him because he is unafraid to present his opinions and views on current events. He is a healthy antidote to CNN and MSNBC etc. Might he be wrong about some things? Sure, we all can be wrong. Only time and careful analysis will prove that. Is Tucker heartless? That depends on your point of view. If Ukraine had capitulated to Russia most of the damage and most of the deaths could have been prevented. Should Ukraine capitulate to Russia? That is a moral question that I don't feel up to deciding. Russia will eventually have to stop bombing Ukraine and may even pull back to the southern portion of the country. That will be a Pyrrhic victory at best because most of the cities will have been destroyed and unfit for human life.
I will not disavow Dr. Saad nor Tucker Carlson. We need their voices more than ever just as we need the voices of Common Sense Substack.
I've never watched any cable news, myself. Still, would venture this opinion. May not be true, but I saw two articles that said Carlson was acquitted on a charge of libel. Judges decision? That nobody would believe what Carlson said, so no damages.
What you read is not true because libel is a civil action not criminal so there would be no acquittal. If a civil jury did not find him liable for libel that means there was not even a preponderance of evidence to support the claim. Preponderance of the evidence is not a heavy burden of proof.
You're probably right, Lynne.
I missed that. Tucker has exposed a whole lot of corruption so I am not surprised someone would try to sue him for libel. My guess is Tucker would have his facts in a row and be able to back up what he said which would explain why the judge would dismiss the charge.
What I read wasn't that he had facts on his side. ICBW.
Me? It's not just the time I save, not having a TV. But not dragging along the emotional baggage that would come with the cable news (of ANY stripe) is a nice benefit.
I had to limit my news watching. It was stressing me out. I also don't like hyperbolic reporting so had to give up on Hannity a couple of years ago. I do watch Tucker, some Newsmax and some OAN. OAN has some excellent in depth reporting. However it looks like Direct TV is going to drop OAN in April and when that happens I am going to cancel Direct TV. I have a Foxnation subscription so I can watch Tucker that way. I have to support him because this is about our free speech rights. We can't let the cancel culture vultures take him out.
I can't watch Sean Hannity either.
Each their own. I mainly read books, when I'm not "wasting" time commenting.
There's a glitch in the programming somewhere. I have found if I click the "like" in the email notification that seems to work.
yeah, the email always works for me, too.
sometimes after I reply, i hit it again and then hit it on my own reply and they both show up. strangeness, personified. (oh! then I take it off-a mine, right?)
Not necessarily. Those of us who use fluctuating IPs could be losing the sub cookie.
I'm pretty sure it's just a small bug. Or, as they say nowadays, "an undocumented feature." Haha.
I'm not up on security, so would have no clue. But in this case, I think the email thing was intended to be a nice feature. Works anyway, so there is that.
The former is a coding error, the latter is burglary tools.
Yeah.
I stand corrected. But it's a coding vulnerability that turns INTO a burglary tool, right?
I know what you mean. I want to tell him to cool it with the laugh because I don't want his message to be muddled by that criticism from someone.
I was a fan of Teddy Roosevelt for many years but over time have recognized some traits that were less appealing. He was jingoistic and militaristic. That being said there is no reason to take down his statue
If you judge historic people of the past by the ever shifting morals of the present, no person of history will ever be remembered.
Hold on to those old history books and biographies. They may be all we have left as the narrative continues to change.
well, the second part of that will always henceforth be true, because today's citizens have a 2-second attention span.
TR was a man of his time. But give him his due. He wasn't just for the Spanish-American War but he fought in it unlike the armchair warriors of today. And the Battle of San Juan Hill, in which he repeatedly charged and exposed himself to Spanish fire was no joke. TR also was the first president to host both a Jew and a Black man for dinner and was a singular opponent of lynching in the South, as opposed to his successor, the odious racist Woody Wilson. Like all of us, Roosevelt had his faults, but he was a man in full and worthy of our admiration and love.
agreed!
Bruce...nice put
Agreed. But poor Teddy can't pass the radical progressive high bar because in the culture wars of today history itself is malleable and rewritten (witness the 1619 Project) where the faults of the past century's men or women are more important than their accomplishments. TR was ahead of his time, but he was also a product of it - and for that he is disqualified. As many other historical figures have been, and will be.
Well said, Bruce. I tried to “like” but that button doesn’t always work (note to Bari).
I had the same problem.
I'm fairly certain it's a bug in the Substack system. Cretins probably programmed it.
You got that right!!!
No one is perfect. No one person. Teddy Roosevelt had more admirable qualities than almost anyone else. Who in politics these days is not "jingoistic?" He believed in peace through strength. His motto was "speak softly and carry a big stick." Not a bad philosophy if it keeps us out of wars.
I agree except civil and criminal rights began, at least as far as our jurisprudence, with the Magna Carta and have evolved ever since. And I would add that the Arabs and African tribes themselves also played a significant role in the African slave trade.