For most who were raised in the US 1940’s the video is a nostalgic look at the late 40s in Chicago (many in Pahrump are originally from Chicago and have a special nostalgia watching the Video). Others certainly also experience here the good time feel of the old times, when an apple was an apple and a peach was a peach and surely, with exceptions of course, most everyone, especially we youngsters, looked forward to realizing our American Dream where everybody got an even break. What happened to Tomorrowland?
Corporations became people in the law; but are allowed to conceal - with their corporate veil - their MOs, their way of doing business, sort of like BP hiding their Gulf of Mexico continually-spilling oil river with a covering of yet more untested chemical toxins so that the spill will appear that it has been diluted and has vanished although it has not vanished but gotten worse and much will suffer and die and only God knows what else, in its wake. Just another experiment in making big bucks. And the oil industry will profit.
Watch what happens to Pahrump if we allow the prison sewage effluent to be dumped on Pahrump contractors’ grassy fields. Do you believe that the private for-profit prison industrial complex cares more about the devastating contamination of Pahrump air and water than BP cares about the devastating contamination of the fishing waters off New Orleans or the coral colonies off Key West, Florida, or the world’s biologically-diverse oceans’ ecosystems? People care. Too-big-to-fail, monopolistic Corporations don’t.
The “nifty” old newsreel is something we can enjoy and share but keep in mind what we didn’t know and how we felt back then, how miraculous the new inventions, the music, the automobiles, the streamliners, the airplanes, TV. The future was bright. “What will the cars look like when we grow up? To where will we travel? What abundant foods will we know? What wilderness will we witness and enjoy? What will we learn?”
What should we be trying to preserve and trying to create now to have the better world that we imagined back then? Think, study, and inform based on knowledge of facts. I know that you can’t reason with psychotics, but you can at least spread the word to most people. Logic does work. Some people do listen to reason.
@harry, I was neither praising or detracting from Jackson when I made my "walked the walk" statement. All I was pointing out was the he worked for what said he would do. He was a tough son of a bitch, rather you like or dislike his policies, it doesn't change the man.
Heck Polk accomplished what he said he would, in four years, didn't even bother running for another election because he felt he was done. I can't say I agree with his policies, but enough of the American people did at the time and he had their support. Spotty Lincoln didn't support his policies either, but he fought to keep the Union and the land that Polk added to it, intact.
The issue with looking back at folk from prior times with the jaundice of current focus is it colors the true strides accomplished as charcoal gray.
Jefferson had a slave issue.
Jackson had competing culture versus land use issue.
Both issues were safety valves for their respective USAian societal infighting issues BUT both issues were tragedies . . . This is about context and content. The concept of the “Win-Win” is a Twentieth Century framework.
We must be careful to not blindly idealize and idolize folk from our past AS WELL AS we must not knee-jerk broad-brush paint them as evil.
Oh Boy- listen to that pass Bernie just gave that unqualifed, lacking environmental values or vision Ken Slay-the- natural -world-azaar. Salzaar is a dink. He should never have been selected as Secretary of Interior.
I would have to say that Jefferson and Jackson were the men that Americans wanted, that they could identify with. I think our Presidents reflect more of where the majority of Americans are at psychologically when they elect them then anything else. I think every successful campaign has always tapped into the current American psychology whether on purpose or by luck. I think our poor choices in Presidents in the last few decades says more about us then it says about our Presidents. Right now I would say psychologically that Americans really want to step away from the crude mentality of bully politics and want to make everything better, without really doing anything. That's why Obama still has sweet polls, he's placating our collective desire.
Why fund the DSCC when they are going to fund DLC candidates over actual Democrats. I send my $$$$ direct to the candidate of my choice. If they do a summation of direct candidate donations . . . I'm sure it will tell a different story.
Re: How did a Democratic Party member get included in that mix?
Unfortunately many Liberals have a blind allegiance to the Democratic Party, much the same as many Conservatives have a blind allegiance to the Republican party.
Clay Jenkinson of "The Thomas Jefferson Hours" says that both the Democratic & Republican Parties are Hamiltonian Parties.
BP rebranded itself to Beyond Petroleum in a hollow attempt to "greenwash" itself and seem more environmentally friendly. I say it's time for a re-rebranding before they "whitewash" this catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico.
New brands for BP:
Burst Pipes Billowing Plumes Bloody Psychotic Blowout Prevention .... NOT Backroom Pirates Buying Politicians Big Profits Bigger Piggies Biggest Parasites Burning Peril Beyond Principles Building Plutocracy
Jackson and Jefferson were opposites in a crap-load of respects . . . Jefferson was about enlightenment and uplifting . . . Jackson was about kicking the butts of those who would screw with folk BUT they both were about the best for flesh and blood folk and not about power and oppression of folk.
@rladlof, those guys are gagged and locked away, there is serious consideration of cutting out their damn tongues too. They're idealism is best left to history (and its best to spin their words to 180 when siting what they believed and what they meant).
Progressives were folk like Fighting Bob LaFollette and Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt . . . Hey!!!! How did a Democratic Party member get included in that mix?
Paul suggests that he would have voted against the “private business” provisions of the ‘64 Civil Rights Act IN 1964.
The men that staged the sit-in at the Woolworth’s lunch counter couldn’t “boycott” Woolworth’s themselves, as they weren’t allowed to be customers in the first place. Therefore, they were dependent “on the kindness of (white) strangers” to do the right thing and boycott the establishment FOR them… and didn’t THAT work out well?
Paul says he would boycott Woolworth’s “today”, and suggests many others would do the same. But in 1964, THEY DIDN’T. The REASON they staged that sit-in is because the status-quo wasn't working. People WEREN'T boycotting Woolworth's policies. And after 100 years, only an act of Congress could force them to change their ways.
So, when private businesses won’t do the right thing after 100 years, what choice do you have left but to force them by law?
Paul thinks people should “boycott businesses that don’t serve a minority group” to provoke social change (ask gay people how that’s going for them.) One wonders if Paul is boycotting establishments that won't serve gays?
@maxrotre:31 well, yeah...but...that's a lot of dead people in exchange. @Mysterious Floating Head re: #33 yer right. re:#34 yer right.
Boehner: Yeah, Let's Televise This Financial Reform Conference!
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/boehner-yeah-lets-televise-this-financial-reform-conference.php
Yeah, cuz this worked out so well for the Republicans during the Health insurance debate.
God, I love the braininess of the folk on this site at times . . .
@Foodfascist: Almost ALL of President Obama’s choices were the worse person for the job. It is a trademark of his Administration.
www.pahrumplife.org writes:
A Visit Down Memory Lane
Watch 1948 Chicago: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=ZaMGqzkNwLY
For most who were raised in the US 1940’s the video is a nostalgic look at the late 40s in Chicago (many in Pahrump are originally from Chicago and have a special nostalgia watching the Video). Others certainly also experience here the good time feel of the old times, when an apple was an apple and a peach was a peach and surely, with exceptions of course, most everyone, especially we youngsters, looked forward to realizing our American Dream where everybody got an even break. What happened to Tomorrowland?
Corporations became people in the law; but are allowed to conceal - with their corporate veil - their MOs, their way of doing business, sort of like BP hiding their Gulf of Mexico continually-spilling oil river with a covering of yet more untested chemical toxins so that the spill will appear that it has been diluted and has vanished although it has not vanished but gotten worse and much will suffer and die and only God knows what else, in its wake. Just another experiment in making big bucks. And the oil industry will profit.
Watch what happens to Pahrump if we allow the prison sewage effluent to be dumped on Pahrump contractors’ grassy fields. Do you believe that the private for-profit prison industrial complex cares more about the devastating contamination of Pahrump air and water than BP cares about the devastating contamination of the fishing waters off New Orleans or the coral colonies off Key West, Florida, or the world’s biologically-diverse oceans’ ecosystems? People care. Too-big-to-fail, monopolistic Corporations don’t.
The “nifty” old newsreel is something we can enjoy and share but keep in mind what we didn’t know and how we felt back then, how miraculous the new inventions, the music, the automobiles, the streamliners, the airplanes, TV. The future was bright. “What will the cars look like when we grow up? To where will we travel? What abundant foods will we know? What wilderness will we witness and enjoy? What will we learn?”
What should we be trying to preserve and trying to create now to have the better world that we imagined back then? Think, study, and inform based on knowledge of facts. I know that you can’t reason with psychotics, but you can at least spread the word to most people. Logic does work. Some people do listen to reason.
@harry, I was neither praising or detracting from Jackson when I made my "walked the walk" statement. All I was pointing out was the he worked for what said he would do. He was a tough son of a bitch, rather you like or dislike his policies, it doesn't change the man.
Heck Polk accomplished what he said he would, in four years, didn't even bother running for another election because he felt he was done. I can't say I agree with his policies, but enough of the American people did at the time and he had their support. Spotty Lincoln didn't support his policies either, but he fought to keep the Union and the land that Polk added to it, intact.
N
The issue with looking back at folk from prior times with the jaundice of current focus is it colors the true strides accomplished as charcoal gray.
Jefferson had a slave issue.
Jackson had competing culture versus land use issue.
Both issues were safety valves for their respective USAian societal infighting issues BUT both issues were tragedies . . . This is about context and content. The concept of the “Win-Win” is a Twentieth Century framework.
We must be careful to not blindly idealize and idolize folk from our past AS WELL AS we must not knee-jerk broad-brush paint them as evil.
Oh Boy- listen to that pass Bernie just gave that unqualifed, lacking environmental values or vision Ken Slay-the- natural -world-azaar. Salzaar is a dink. He should never have been selected as Secretary of Interior.
I would have to say that Jefferson and Jackson were the men that Americans wanted, that they could identify with. I think our Presidents reflect more of where the majority of Americans are at psychologically when they elect them then anything else. I think every successful campaign has always tapped into the current American psychology whether on purpose or by luck. I think our poor choices in Presidents in the last few decades says more about us then it says about our Presidents. Right now I would say psychologically that Americans really want to step away from the crude mentality of bully politics and want to make everything better, without really doing anything. That's why Obama still has sweet polls, he's placating our collective desire.
I don't know maybe I'm just way off on this.
N
DNC Outraises RNC In April -- But NRSC Outraises DSCC
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/dnc-outraises-rnc-in-april----but-nrsc-outraises-dscc.php
Why fund the DSCC when they are going to fund DLC candidates over actual Democrats. I send my $$$$ direct to the candidate of my choice. If they do a summation of direct candidate donations . . . I'm sure it will tell a different story.
Re: And they were white enlightened...
From what I have read, Thomas Jefferson thought that we had a lot to learn from Native American Indians.
Re: How did a Democratic Party member get included in that mix?
Unfortunately many Liberals have a blind allegiance to the Democratic Party, much the same as many Conservatives have a blind allegiance to the Republican party.
Clay Jenkinson of "The Thomas Jefferson Hours" says that both the Democratic & Republican Parties are Hamiltonian Parties.
And they were white enlightened; neither would mess with acknowledgment of rights for all.
@Maxrot: Jackson walked the walk? He didnt' walk the "trail of tears"...
@Mysterious Floating Head: Jackson screwed with the Native Americans big time.ie genocide.
BP rebranded itself to Beyond Petroleum in a hollow attempt to "greenwash" itself and seem more environmentally friendly.
I say it's time for a re-rebranding before they "whitewash" this catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico.
New brands for BP:
Burst Pipes
Billowing Plumes
Bloody Psychotic
Blowout Prevention .... NOT
Backroom Pirates
Buying Politicians
Big Profits
Bigger Piggies
Biggest Parasites
Burning Peril
Beyond Principles
Building Plutocracy
Yeah, Jackson was one of those guys that walked the walk.
N
@Maxrot: That is true in TEXAS school books . . .
Jackson and Jefferson were opposites in a crap-load of respects . . . Jefferson was about enlightenment and uplifting . . . Jackson was about kicking the butts of those who would screw with folk BUT they both were about the best for flesh and blood folk and not about power and oppression of folk.
@rladlof, those guys are gagged and locked away, there is serious consideration of cutting out their damn tongues too. They're idealism is best left to history (and its best to spin their words to 180 when siting what they believed and what they meant).
N
Progressives were folk like Fighting Bob LaFollette and Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt . . . Hey!!!! How did a Democratic Party member get included in that mix?
oops! I got Jackson confused with Hamilton.
Sorry!!
Jackson appears on a currency that lots of natives refuse to use. Remember the "Trail of Tears Golf Course."
Re: Where is Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson when we need them . . .
Didn't Jefferson & Jackson hold opposite views regarding government?
Rand Paul’s stupidity: A Historical Perspective.
Paul suggests that he would have voted against the “private business” provisions of the ‘64 Civil Rights Act IN 1964.
The men that staged the sit-in at the Woolworth’s lunch counter couldn’t “boycott” Woolworth’s themselves, as they weren’t allowed to be customers in the first place. Therefore, they were dependent “on the kindness of (white) strangers” to do the right thing and boycott the establishment FOR them… and didn’t THAT work out well?
Paul says he would boycott Woolworth’s “today”, and suggests many others would do the same. But in 1964, THEY DIDN’T. The REASON they staged that sit-in is because the status-quo wasn't working. People WEREN'T boycotting Woolworth's policies. And after 100 years, only an act of Congress could force them to change their ways.
So, when private businesses won’t do the right thing after 100 years, what choice do you have left but to force them by law?
Paul thinks people should “boycott businesses that don’t serve a minority group” to provoke social change (ask gay people how that’s going for them.) One wonders if Paul is boycotting establishments that won't serve gays?