Thursday, 24 November 2016

Amistad

On this day of Thanksgiving I am offering a story from long ago. Amistad is a movie based on a court case from 1841 which was heard before our Supreme Court. It revolved around a group of people who were abducted from their native country of Sierra Leone. They were sold as slaves and were being transported to a Caribbean plantation aboard the ship Amistad when they revolted, killing the captain and the cook.


As I look at the uncertainty of our future I thought there might be some wisdom to be garnered from our past.

Two of my favorite scenes from this movie:



And this:




So today I am giving thanks for those who have struggled to overcome hardships, fought to uphold our Constitution, and tried to adhere to the principles that were envisioned when our country was created.

Happy Thanksgiving!


208 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 208 of 208
Petes said...

So, Renzi has lost the referendum in Italy. The first domino has fallen.

Petes said...

[Chumpy]: "Polls showed Hillary with a narrow lead; they were right. She came in 2½ million votes in the lead over Trump; just wasn't a big enough lead. That was more of a failure of analysis than a failure of the polls."

That's hogwash. Hillary won California by 4m votes and New York by 1.5m. That was a 5.5m lead in those two states alone ... which means she got soundly whupped everywhere else to the tune of 3m votes. Bloody right that was a major failure of the polls. But that won't be acknowledged by the whingers who blame Hillary's whuppin' on a quirk of the electoral system.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

  
David Petraeus' appearance on ABC's This Week show was widely viewed as an attempt to ‘plead his case’ for selection as our next Secretary of State.  (USAToday)  While he did not embarrass himself, Trump is apparently still disappointed that Romney has not yet expressed any interest in taking the job, and has supposedly ‘widened’ his search to include both John Bolton and Jon Huntsman (the latter being from an ol’ Mormon aristocracy family which has long feuded with the Romney clan), both of whom would likely horrify Romney as choices and either of whom's possible selection might compel Romney to publicly express interest in the job, if only to keep either one of them from getting the position.  (I think Bolton would likely horrify Marcus as well.

Anonymous said...

The very existence of the electoral college distorts the popular vote, and there is no way to know what the popular vote would have been absent the effect of the electoral college on voter behavior and campaign strategy.

In a safe Republican state like Texas, discouraged Democrats often don't bother to vote. Ditto California Republicans. (which, by the way, also distorts polls, since polling takes into account voting history)

In this election, a lot of never Trump Republicans, including my dear old dad, didn't cast a vote for Trump, safe in the knowledge that their fellow Republicans would put him over the top in Texas without necessitating sullying themselves. Had their vote counted, they would have flocked to the polls in droves to beat Hillary.

Campaigns would expend their resources in entirely different ways if the outcome depended on the popular vote. Prolly including expenditures devoted to greater scrutiny of illegal voters in California. :)

Deplorable Bridget #MAGA


   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "While he did not embarrass himself…"

He being Petraeus there.  Petraeus did not embarrass himself on TV today.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

   
I think Bridget ‘sort of’ laid her finger on the analysis error that caused the major papers to erroneously predict a fairly safe bet on a Clinton win.  Voting was down this year (by percentage of eligible voters).  They didn't expect that.  In low turnout elections the Democrats generally lose.  That's not complicated.  That's not new.  That's the way it usually works.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "Prolly including expenditures devoted to greater scrutiny of
      illegal voters in California. :)
"

That part I'd have to disagree with.  It's one thing to knowingly make bogus claims of illegal voters.   (The Republican base loves hearing them said out loud, even if it's not clear they actually believe them.)  It's quite another thing to toss away good money trying to hunt down a few actual illegal voters.  That money could be better spent.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

But honour killings have nothing to do with Islam.

Exactly. Yet there are those who will invoke religion to cover what are essentially crimes. There are members of Daesh who believe that rape of someone who is considered an apostate is acceptable in Islam.

From your link it appears that Iran does consider honor killings to be allowable under Islam.

As for "westernizing" Islam, it is more a desire for moderation and compliance to our laws. That is the least that should be expected. And I would expect it of any religious person, not just those who are Muslim.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 208 of 208   Newer› Newest»