elfman

you can see the kids' stall on the right in the background of the middle photo. Funny thing was that the Governor made a beeline for it - when he got his wallet out to pay the 50c they gave it to him free. Does that mean he'll have to declare it on some kind of register of donations or something?

simongb

Oh, it's you again. It seems whenever I post something, you're right there to tell me why 'it ain't so'. Re read my post. I do have some valid points.

cindyabs

Yes, it's me again.


I did read your post, and I thought about it, which I normally do when I see something that I am interested in. Those kind of posts, either positive or negative for me, deserve a comment from me that is not glib, or shallow but as sincere as the other poster expresses THEIR viewpoint. I did NOT say your opinon was invalid,I am merely posting MY opinion, as I see it. You are posting as a Brit, and I as an American. C'est tout.

ugacrew

I'd say it was entirely patriotic to exercise their First Amendment rights. They had the opportunity for a large audience to be heard. This argument/protest has my full backing since it makes sense and is in no way hateful against anyone. Unlike the protest at funeral homes that they had in the state of Kansas which I found quite despicable. The fact that they are in a country that allows them to do this is quite remarkable. Yes, I know we aren't the only ones in allowing this.

pejpm1

thats probably the most pathetic statement I have ever read on here. You are comparing what you would expect the level of knowledge to be amongst a population in the late 19th/early 20th century, with what someone should know now?? I dont deny that the british empire commited terrible things in the name of the uk of which the people were probably unaware, but to say that in this day and age being totally unaware of the wider world is acceptable is just ridiculous. I love america, but I think that the people have such a lack of knowledge about the outside world that its just embarassing. I was at a 4th july party today in NYC amongst educated people, and yet when I mentioned Qatar, pretty much none of them had ever even heard of it! Again, I'm not saying I dislike americans, but I dont see how you can be patriotic without having an awareness of the world. Comparing it to a hundred years ago is just lazy.

pejpm1

I presume this is 'tongue in cheek'?

pejpm1

I think you are talking about the westboro bapist church in topeka. Those people are evil scum, but they are such a tiny minority group who are universally hated. I just wanted to make that point as I dont want anyone to jump on it as a 'sign of the times'..they are lead by a crazy old guy named fred phelps and everyone who is a member of the church is a family member. They number around 50 members and their webiste is called 'godhatesfags.com' they basically say that everything bad that ever happens in america is because of the acceptance of gay people. They are classified as a hate group. I'm sure you know this, i just dont want anyone to think that its a wide spread thing in kansas...people such as the dickhead above might respond to it as a 'leftist' thing...

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

It's actually not right either ... the public's reaction to battles fought and the treatment of "natives" on the continent of Africa in that period was one of the factors in the beginnings of the downfall of the Empire.

robin1234

You say "the public's reaction"..... then, as now, the public did not speak with one voice. There were ignorant jingoists supporting imperial expansion & hatred of foreigners (egged on by the popular press -- 1900's equivalent of Fox News, maybe?), and there were more thoughtful people of the ruling classes and of the emerging labour & trades union movements etc., who urged restraint and democratic rights for subject peoples. You could say something similar about the USA now. So, actually I think I'm right, and you are wrong (if we have to see the world in black and white, that is!!)

robin1234

I'm not going to accuse you of making a pathetic statement, but I will argue that it is in error. I don't really see that folks in America in 2008 have more of a responsibility (or means at their disposal) to know about the world than folks in England in 1900. True, we have relatively inexpensive access to cable TV, public radio, and internet news & information sources. By contrast, people in Enland a hundred years ago had public libraries & reading rooms, and daily and weekly papers, both "popular" (i.e. very cheap and aimed at the working-classes) and elitist/middle class (more expensive and densely written.) I think even the poor had opportunities to keep abreast of current affairs at no expense in 1900. Now, the plethora of choices and the low, superficial quality of much of the media are a real barrier to knowledge. (In my opinion.)

robin1234

Yeah -- I guess so, you found me out!

cindyabs

Yes-by George I think he's got it. Excellent point about how a lot of crap trap passing as educational entertainment keeps people from expanding their minds, but then I'm a reader.

Good article in this week's Time magazine on patriotism btw:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...818195,00.html

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

I felt you were referring to the public opinion as portrayed in the media ... "The Daily Mail and it's ilk". Study of the social history of the time, I would argue shows that the publics reaction - as portrayed in the popular media, certainly for the most part, I should add - was one of abhorance and shock to the news from south africa rather than jingoistic support. Several decades before that may have been the case, Sudan for example, but the Boer era? I don't agree with your conclusions at all.

surly

Re US patriotism, Sometime Americans can laugh at themselves.

cindyabs

it's true you know, they've messed with milk too damn much.