In time for the holiday, the Declaration..what it says, the purpose behind the document, who signed it and what it still means today.
We'll discuss the reasons we don't celebrate our national holiday on August 2nd, June 7th, or July 2nd, though one could make a case for anyone of those dates.
8 comments:
New talk has begun recently claiming Obama won't be the first Black president. They claim five presidents were black: Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln Coolidge and Harding.
There's at least one "credible" looking article on the topic at http://www.diversityinc.com/public/1461.cfm
Do you have any idea if any of this is true? I know critics could be very harsh in those times, so I'm wondering if some "white lies" of the past are now being treated as true.
I doubt Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln and Coolidge, though anything is possible. I guess its best to say I don't know.
Harding is one rumor that has been around and was certainly around in 1920, with a book coming out during that election year on the subject. The family disputed it heavily, as did Harding and the Republicans at the time.
The simple answer is I don't know. But then, I guess the question is, what does it all mean?
and could it be used as an attack
In any case, I don't think this could ever be used as anti-Obama. Obama (most likely) will be the first black President.
Race comes as much from society as biology; and so even if down the road DNA or something proves another president was partially black; I don't think the person coud be thought to have lived or experienced life as a black person; with society acknowledging them as black. Therefore there is no way that Obama's status as the first black major party candidate, and perhaps the first black President could be undermined.
After more research, it appears will never know on the Harding stuff. The guy that wrote the book in 1920 was a Democratic operative and while he did have affadavits from local residents of Ohio, that's no better than going to Little Rock and getting dirt on the Clintons. Harding made a comment to a reporter--he was a great man to get a quote from, very affable and willing to talk - that said one of his anscestors 'may have jumped the fence' This off-the-cuff comment caused the rumor to spread further than evidence would sustain.
Warren Harding had no birth certificate, as it was not required when he was born. This mystery also added to the speculation.
So, its a good point to bring up because I do see it floating around the internet. But it will probably remain no more than speculation. In any case, I'll stick to my speech about society vs. biology above.
I heard a good lecture about the Declaration and the Constitution. The Declaration, the lecturer said, was like a divorce bill, it explained to all why we were breaking away from the mother country. And the Constitution can be seen as a marriage contract between the nation and its people.
So could the Bill of Rights (to carry this analogy further) be considered the pre-nuptials? Just a lighthearted idea.
It actually has some of the feeling of a pre-nuptials, including the feeling of those who opposed it that 'oh, come on, we don't need this!'
I remember the Harding thing happening a few monthes ago mainly because of the vandilsm of wikipedia. In celebration of his new found heritage numerous people repeatedly changed his his middle initial from "G." to "Gangsta," it actually seemed to flow quite well with the text.
I guess it all depends on your outlook on race. Technically Obama is only half black, with that you can also look back at the story about him and Dick Cheney being distant relatives. But either way, if my memory serves me correct, he would be the only the second non-WASP president after JFK.
And as for the for the marriage analogy, I think the bill of rights could be more of a form of wedding vows: "I promise never to infringe on your right to freedom of speech, to assemble, to bear arms, et cetera." While any future amendments and any supreme court rulings could be viewed as some sort of renewal of those vows. Also the Civil War could be a separation, the entire metaphor appears endless.
I'm not sure anything could really serve as a pre-nup. From my limited world view that would have to entail the details of how a state would be able to secede from the union, I.G. the proper procedures for the possible reparations for the removal of federal assets from the state and/or payment for the services of the state's national guard, which would probable just be called the (insert state's name here) guard.
Also feel free to refute any of my (outlandish?)claims. Seeing as I haven't even taken high school government yet, I think it is safe to say I might easily be the least qualified person to make any of these Marriage-Governmental analogies.
AV,無碼,a片免費看,自拍貼圖,伊莉,微風論壇,成人聊天室,成人電影,成人文學,成人貼圖區,成人網站,一葉情貼圖片區,色情漫畫,言情小說,情色論壇,臺灣情色網,色情影片,色情,成人影城,080視訊聊天室,a片,A漫,h漫,麗的色遊戲,同志色教館,AV女優,SEX,咆哮小老鼠,85cc免費影片,正妹牆,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,聊天室,情色小說,aio,成人,微風成人,做愛,成人貼圖,18成人,嘟嘟成人網,aio交友愛情館,情色文學,色情小說,色情網站,情色,A片下載,嘟嘟情人色網,成人影片,成人圖片,成人文章,成人小說,成人漫畫,視訊聊天室,性愛,聊天室,情色,a片,AV女優
Post a Comment