America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by Speyside. 261 replies replies.
Poll Question : How will DACA die?
Choice Votes Statistics
It's not even gonna get a vote 12 70 %
Failure in the Senate 1 5 %
It'll pass the Senate and fail in the House 2 11 %
Agent Orange won't sign anything 1 5 %
Pass the Senate but die by an Agent Orange tweet 1 5 %
Total 17 100%

6 Pages<123456>
Fool me once shame on me... fool me twice well I won't be fooled again...
DrafterX Offline
#151 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
His sore spot..?? Huh
SteveS Offline
#152 Posted:
Joined: 01-13-2002
Posts: 8,751
There is a great deal of confusion in SF about what constitutes being liberal ... Victor is represented in Congress by Nancy Pelosi who by an astounding feat of contortion claims to somehow be "main stream" ...
teedubbya Offline
#153 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Victor isn't a liberal. Some are eager to hang that label on anyone that disagrees with them on anything. One example, out of many, victor would rather piss on a hobo than help them. Another, while he believes in global warming on a scientific level he doesn't give a crap about it because he hates kids, doesn't want any and doesn't give a crap about what is left behind after him. There are many other examples if you really care.... which most don't.

he may be contrarian and argumentative but trying to hang the liberal label on him doesn't fit
frankj1 Offline
#154 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
teedubbya wrote:
I didn’t read everything so let’s see if I got this right.

If you want to eat lobster in a humain way make sure the cook is a Jewish chick.

The Georgetown Rugby team is anti slavery.

Jet has read 15000 books about Lincoln.

General Sherman is still considered every bit the manly man he was in his hay day. Vavavoom.

Oh yea. And frank walks backwards so his tail gives him balance.

speaking only for the Jew chick and me, seems right.
frankj1 Offline
#155 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
teedubbya wrote:
Victor isn't a liberal. Some are eager to hang that label on anyone that disagrees with them on anything. One example, out of many, victor would rather piss on a hobo than help them. Another, while he believes in global warming on a scientific level he doesn't give a crap about it because he hates kids, doesn't want any and doesn't give a crap about what is left behind after him. There are many other examples if you really care.... which most don't.

he may be contrarian and argumentative but trying to hang the liberal label on him doesn't fit

agreed. he's not a liberal. even wants everyone to have a rocket launcher in the garage.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#156 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
The Jew Chick and Me would be a great name for a folk duo...
frankj1 Offline
#157 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
it's all yours.
victor809 Offline
#158 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Your "issue" is that you just want to be offended and appear to be more enlightened.
There is no other reason to claim you're neither homosexual nor (snicker) liberal.

For someone who shows complete lack of character (getting humor from dead kids, for instance), you sure do condemn a lot of people for things that hit your sore spot.


I could ask why you wouldn't be offended. You claim to be a conservative....

I literally asked the question "... so... conservatives want to keep slavery?" and his answer was

"Now you’re catching on. Just like it was the Liberal in him that preferred having sex with men."


The answer could have been... "no". but it wasn't.

If you want to claim to be a conservative, maybe you should be bothered that he wants to lump you in with some group that wants to keep slavery...

...you could also choose whether or not you want to be offended that he's going to tell you what your sexuality has to be too... I know of two log cabin republicans (or were until trump...) who would be pretty pissed off that they were getting stereotyped too....

and stop being a sensitive sally about dead children. If you cared so much you'd actually try to do something.
DrafterX Offline
#159 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Well, i heard most Bronys are Liberal so I just assumed... Mellow
tailgater Offline
#160 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
I could ask why you wouldn't be offended. You claim to be a conservative....

I literally asked the question "... so... conservatives want to keep slavery?" and his answer was

"Now you’re catching on. Just like it was the Liberal in him that preferred having sex with men."


The answer could have been... "no". but it wasn't.

If you want to claim to be a conservative, maybe you should be bothered that he wants to lump you in with some group that wants to keep slavery...

...you could also choose whether or not you want to be offended that he's going to tell you what your sexuality has to be too... I know of two log cabin republicans (or were until trump...) who would be pretty pissed off that they were getting stereotyped too....

and stop being a sensitive sally about dead children. If you cared so much you'd actually try to do something.


Why would I be offended?
He wasn't saying what you claim he was. He made some generalities based on the time. I mean, would you be surprised to learn that conservatives of the mid 1800's were mostly in favor of slavery? Doesn't conforming to the status quo help identify conservatism?
Doesn't make it right. In fact, on this subject it makes them very very wrong.
But we can't over react when someone generalizes about 1860 conservatives and we can't extrapolate it out to mean that it's the same for 2018 conservatives.
We can't.
Unless we're an over sensitive snowflake, of course.

And I won't take your bait on the dead children comment.
I'll let your true character show itself without my influence.

teedubbya Offline
#161 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And yet some will play wif words to try to say it’s the libs that were pro slavery.

I heard hitler was a socialist and stuff and the wigs were cross dressers.
victor809 Offline
#162 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Why would I be offended?
He wasn't saying what you claim he was. He made some generalities based on the time. I mean, would you be surprised to learn that conservatives of the mid 1800's were mostly in favor of slavery? Doesn't conforming to the status quo help identify conservatism?
Doesn't make it right. In fact, on this subject it makes them very very wrong.
But we can't over react when someone generalizes about 1860 conservatives and we can't extrapolate it out to mean that it's the same for 2018 conservatives.
We can't.
Unless we're an over sensitive snowflake, of course.

And I won't take your bait on the dead children comment.
I'll let your true character show itself without my influence.



I think you're reading an awful lot into his statements.
There's a reason I phrased my posts as questions.
delta1 Offline
#163 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
Lotsa cons have taken to calling the GOP the Party of Lincoln, and wearing it as a badge of honor...Think

thanks Jet, I get it now....ThumpUp
jetblasted Offline
#164 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
My original point being that Lincoln was gay, and his sexuality had “something” to do with his politics can be sorta summed up in the last few posts. I specifically avoided debating Victor about this because he gets so G.D. twisted & angry in such situations. Everything has to be proven to the punctuated letter, to the point of a raging conclusion. I’d rather not expend that kind of energy over such a lame point. In other words, victor, you get waaaay too wound up about minor things. Conversation with you is extremely strained, because you seem like you’re always on the verge of blowing a gasket. It’s never fun to talk to someone like this.

How old is the term “bleeding heart Liberals”? 1930s? This personality trait isn’t something new. One thing is for certain sure. Some things change, and some things stay the same. And this board hasn’t changed a bit. Y’all will argue to the death over anything.

This got old, quick.

horse

I popped back in this thread to tell a funny story that I’ve noticed that routinely happens with my book collecting.

A couple of years ago I was at work on lunch break reading the news & there was a story how the students at UC-Berkeley wanted to expunge all memory of one of the Founders of the University of California, and the Sierra Club, Joseph LeConte, for his slave-holding past. I’d never heard of him before so I decided to look into him. He was such a fascinating person, that I really need to find a good biography of him. His life story doesn’t really get good until after the war.

It turns out that he was born on a Georgia plantation that was started by his forebearers many generations before his birth. He was the “owner” of the plantation, that never really held his interest, just a few short years before the war.

He later wrote several books, but right now I only have one he wrote in 1936 (?) called, ‘ware Sherman. It is the story of him being in the run, and one step ahead of Sherman’s troops in the winter of 1864/65.

At the beginning of this book he writes that he could have sold the entire plantation, and walked away a very rich man. It was something he was seriously tempted to do on several occasions. But the one thing that kept him from doing so, was knowing that the lives of his (slaves) and servants would be thrown into turmoil. And he did not want to do that. I thought that was interesting. On a side note, His Sister also wrote a diary of the seige of Colombia, SC.

All of that isn’t all that interesting. Joseph Leconte didn’t really come into himself until he reached California. I think it’s a shame modern day students sullied his life’s very imports work over what I (briefly) described above.

But to wrap this up, what struck me as funny, was when I ordered his book I noticed it was printed at UC-B, and had a bill of sale to a resident that lived in Berkeley.

I’ve also received several books that after purchase, I see they were part of the UC-Berkeley Library, and they had gotten rid of them. A lot of the books I buy are former library books. Spending $10 on a library book vs $50+ for a non-library Book makes sense sometimes. Many of these books I buy are coming from liberal school systems & universities.

I never fail to see the irony in this. But, I’ll glady give them a home. Ha!
victor809 Offline
#165 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
jetblasted wrote:
My original point being that Lincoln was gay, and his sexuality had “something” to do with his politics can be sorta summed up in the last few posts. I specifically avoided debating Victor about this because he gets so G.D. twisted & angry in such situations. Everything has to be proven to the punctuated letter, to the point of a raging conclusion. I’d rather not expend that kind of energy over such a lame point. In other words, victor, you get waaaay too wound up about minor things. Conversation with you is extremely strained, because you seem like you’re always on the verge of blowing a gasket. It’s never fun to talk to someone like this.

How old is the term “bleeding heart Liberals”? 1930s? This personality trait isn’t something new. One thing is for certain sure. Some things change, and some things stay the sam


The Politics forum is broken out for a reason. If you don't want to argue about politics, then post in the 500 thread or somewhere else in general discussion.

If you want to argue, then post something like:
jet wrote:

When you look at Lincoln as a gay liberal, everything he did starts to make sense.

in the politics forum....

I mean... seriously jet... maybe you didn't mean it that way, but that is word for word something I'd expect to see posted in some white power forum.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#166 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
victor809 wrote:


I mean... seriously jet... maybe you didn't mean it that way, but that is word for word something I'd expect to see posted in some white power forum.

I'm pretty sure he just admitted he definitely meant it that way...
jetblasted Offline
#167 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
Boy, victor, you’re really something else.
You really baffle the **** our of me.
You’ve got a one track mind.
And I’m on a completely different astral plane than you.

Wow.

Speak to the hand
victor809 Offline
#168 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
jetblasted wrote:

And I’m on a completely different astral plane than you.

Wow.

Speak to the hand


well... we can agree you're on a different astral plane than me.





of course, there is no such thing as an astral plane... so have fun there.
teedubbya Offline
#169 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I don’t think Vic gets angry in here. That could be projection.

Shrug.

Then again I don’t think Lincoln was gay despite what the log cabin republicans say and I think Sherman is a great American.

And MattieB sucks butt.
victor809 Offline
#170 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I don't get mad...

...but I am going to keep poking at someone who goes into the politics forum, posts about their conviction that Abraham Lincoln was a gay liberal, and that this explains his desire to free the slaves.... and then gets upset because people demand "Everything has to be proven to the punctuated letter, to the point of a raging conclusion. I’d rather not expend that kind of energy over such a lame point."...

You kinda should have expected the response you got. You're not a noob.

tailgater Offline
#171 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
Log Cabin Republicans might object.


What about Bohemian Grove?

tailgater Offline
#172 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
I don’t think Vic gets angry in here. That could be projection.

Shrug.

Then again I don’t think Lincoln was gay despite what the log cabin republicans say and I think Sherman is a great American.

And MattieB sucks butt.


You're kidding about Victor, right?

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate his zeal...
But if anyone ever trips upon something related to the gay? Watch out.
It's like he's a knight in shining armor saving the damsels in distress.

And it's not WHAT he says when he's puffing out his chest. It's how he tries to dismantle the opposition through wordplay.

Hell, much of the time I actually agree with him, but that wouldn't be any fun.

So don't kid yourself.

And MattieB really does suck butt.
Herfing
teedubbya Offline
#173 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
But what about General Sherman?
tailgater Offline
#174 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
But what about General Sherman?


My middle name is Sherman.
frankj1 Offline
#175 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
I don't think Mattie B ever met General Sherman
tailgater Offline
#176 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
How about a specific Sherman?
Speyside Offline
#177 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
What about Peabody? You know they go Wabac.
DrafterX Offline
#178 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508

Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand..
Peach top, Peach tails, never fails...
Must have been a dream I don't believe where I've been..
Come on, let's do it again..!!

Laugh
jetblasted Offline
#179 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
Victor ... you’re more dramatic than a teenage girl. Whistle

(Sherman killed 45,000 Indians).
victor809 Offline
#180 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
You're kidding about Victor, right?

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate his zeal...
But if anyone ever trips upon something related to the gay? Watch out.
It's like he's a knight in shining armor saving the damsels in distress.

And it's not WHAT he says when he's puffing out his chest. It's how he tries to dismantle the opposition through wordplay.

Hell, much of the time I actually agree with him, but that wouldn't be any fun.

So don't kid yourself.

And MattieB really does suck butt.
Herfing



I swear you won't be happy unless I just meekly accept any stupid thing said on this site.

I'm not married to you.
victor809 Offline
#181 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
jetblasted wrote:
Victor ... you’re more dramatic than a teenage girl. Whistle

(Sherman killed 45,000 Indians).


Said the grown man who posted a "look at me!" post in a politics thread and then complained and said he hated coming back here because people had some questions about it.

Heck. you come back to post about why you hate coming back. Don't call me dramatic in the same thread you do that.

frankj1 Offline
#182 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
it is funny.
maybe I'm warped.
tailgater Offline
#183 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
I swear you won't be happy unless I just meekly accept any stupid thing said on this site.

I'm not married to you.


Not yet.
But I'm in Massachusetts and you're in San Fran.
So I'm saying there's a chance.


DrMaddVibe Offline
#184 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,309
The $hit is bananas.

I haven't laughed this much at a thread since Magwitch posted.
HuckFinn Offline
#185 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044


I have jet to thank and blame for the few hours of research I did on Lincoln’s sexuality. Time well spent, mostly.

 Anyway, seems there are as many historians that agree as there are that disagree with the hypothesis that Lincoln was gay. The so-called love letters notwithstanding. 

Gonna try and keep this short. 

C.A. Tripp's book The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln posthumously published in 2005 has become the handbook for those who believe Lincoln was gay. Or at very least  bisexual. It's an exhaustive study of Lincoln’s relationships with his best friend Joshua Speed, his body guard and a couple of others. Keeping in mind that Tripp, a gay man, was a researsher with Alfred Kinsey, and specialized in all things homosexual for Kinsey, he was a guy with a personal stake in getting America to change their attitudes regarding homosexuality. Sstill his conclusions have become the last word on the subject. For some. During the 10 years of his research, Tripp shared his findings with other scholars. Many, including a Harvard professor emeritus David Herbert Donald, who is considered the definitive biographer of Lincoln, disagreed with him. In his book "We Are Lincoln Men," Donald disputed Tripp's findings. Another dissenter coauthor, Philip Noble, actually accused Tripp of fabricating evidence. 
Chit ton of people on both sides of this. Not uninteresting who falls where on this issue.

Do I think two straight men sleeping in the same bed for years is bizarre? Yes. So I researched that. Already mentioned, back in the 19thc men sharing a bed was normal. Especially young and frugal men. Both Lincoln and Speed were young but already a little late to the altar. Both were conflicted about getting married (as the 'letters' show). So Speed got hitched and Abe depressed but eventually married Mary Todd.
Abe wanted a career in politics so he probably had to. Looking fishy? Still not proof. These were really different times. Unimaginably different. Without sexual contact many people, for centuries, engaged in what is apparently referred to as "romantic friendships". Cuddling, massages, hand-holding, yeah, even kissing were considered socially acceptable between members of the same sex. Some trace these 'friendships' back to the Renaissance, Shakespeare ("Fair Youth"), some even back to the bible: David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi. There's even a ecclesiastical ritual called adelphopoiesis where men "become brothers". Still, no hankey-pankey. 
I've seen Carl Sandberg's comment "streak of lavender" regarding Lincoln and Tripp after he read the letters they exchanged when Tripp tied the knot, read a great article by Gore Vidal
(who argues that Abe was bisexual at most as he produced 4 children. ) yet the more I researched the more convinced I became that nobody knows.

Years ago we added a room to the house and my carpenter was having a hard time matching the pattern of stucco that was there from 100 years. He called a stucco expert friend of his and asked him what to do. His friend told him to get a shovel. "A shovel?" my guy asked, "yeah" he answered, "you're gonna have to dig up the guy who did it and ask him".

We're gonna need a shovel methinks.






delta1 Offline
#186 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
So...why did he free the slaves?
HuckFinn Offline
#187 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
delta1 wrote:
So...why did he free the slaves?

Only the historians explanation interests me personally.
The psychologist's? Who cares?!

In the final analysis it was the right thing to do.
That we live at a time when his possible secret sexual life is something to take in to consideration regarding his freeing the slaves says more about us than it could ever about Lincoln.
HuckFinn Offline
#188 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
jetblasted wrote:


Joseph Leconte didn’t really come into himself until he reached California. I think it’s a shame modern day students sullied his life’s very imports work over what I (briefly) described
I never fail to see the irony in this. But, I’ll glady give them a home. Ha!


The guy was a Renaissance man but you're kind of failing to mention why his legacy has fallen on hard times. Besides manufacturing explosives for the Confederacy, he said things like " the sudden enfranchisement of the negro without qualification was the greatest political crime ever perpetrated by any people" and wrote that slavery should've died long before it did, but he still did not accept racial equality. When he died he'd been working on a paper against suffrage.
It's understandable how people of color and women would not want to celebrate the guy.

His was a profoundly curious and powerful mind. No kidding! His list of accomplishments is stupifying!
So, I guess the moral of his story is, don't say even a few dumb things or you get voted off the island.
Or the bookstore.
delta1 Offline
#189 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
I'm glad he didn't free the slaves and start the Civil War as a deflection/distraction to prevent his possible "outing"...

That would be like Trump firing off a nuke at North Korea when Putin tells him he's going to release the photos of his little trump...
HuckFinn Offline
#190 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
I'm pretty sure he had mixed feelings about slavery until he saw it possibly expanding to more states. The Brits and French abolished slavery 3 decades earlier and were getting ready to recognize the Confederacy. That's when he put his foot down I think.
Speyside Offline
#191 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I'd say don't joke about something like that but...........
HuckFinn Offline
#192 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
He never hid the fact that he shared beds with men. Something that tells me anyway that he had nothing to hid.
Speyside Offline
#193 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I don't really care what his sexual orientation was. His actions were what mattered.
HuckFinn Offline
#194 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
ThumpUp ThumpUp
jetblasted Offline
#195 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
HuckFinn wrote:
he said things like " the sudden enfranchisement of the negro without qualification was the greatest political crime ever perpetrated by any people" and wrote that slavery should've died long before it did, but he still did not accept racial equality. When he died he'd been working on a paper against suffrage.
It's understandable how people of color and women would not want to celebrate the guy.

His was a profoundly curious and powerful mind. No kidding! His list of accomplishments is stupifying!

So, I guess the moral of his story is, don't say even a few dumb things or you get voted off the island.
Or the bookstore.


I'm not gonna lie . . . I had no idea he said that . . . And I have to thank you for enlightening *me* on that.



.

delta1 wrote:
So...why did he free the slaves?

HuckFinn wrote:
In the final analysis it was the right thing to do.


=d>=d>
jetblasted Offline
#196 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
One last comment about all this, and I'm going to let it die . . . In regards to C.A. Tripp, one thing I like about his analysis, is, with him being gay, and him being fully convinced that Lincoln was gay is . . . . "It takes one to know one".
HuckFinn Offline
#197 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
jetblasted wrote:
I'm not gonna lie . . . I had no idea he said that . . . And I have to thank you for enlightening *me* on that


To be fair he later recanted his statement about enfranchisement and actually said 'negros are an asset to society'

And along with explosives he also manufactured medicines for the Confederacy
teedubbya Offline
#198 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Or to every hammer.

He did have an agenda, and revisionist history is crap whether you like or agree with it or not.

At least no one is questioning Sherman’s sexuality. God bless his soul.
banderl Offline
#199 Posted:
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
teedubbya wrote:
Or to every hammer.

He did have an agenda, and revisionist history is crap whether you like or agree with it or not.

At least no one is questioning Sherman’s sexuality. God bless his soul.



I heard that he fathered 100s of babies with those southern belles.
Kawak Offline
#200 Posted:
Joined: 11-26-2007
Posts: 4,025
teedubbya wrote:

At least no one is questioning Sherman’s sexuality. God bless his soul.


Especially after moving on up to the east side. Weezie was happy!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages<123456>