Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Last night there was a special segement/feature story on the local news about Pekin, IL. Pekin is famous for its history of racism and intollerance. The story was about how the current mayor and city council are trying to move the city away from the past, trying to move forward, distance the city from its ugly past.

Pekin is an interesting place. The klan owned the local paper, used it as a platform for their views. Open klan meetings and rallies were held well up into the 40's and 50's. The nickname of the HS sports teams was the chinks. The girls teams were the chinkettes. The name and mascot were not changed until 1980.

What got to me was the fact that there were color photographs of the clueless inbreds protesting at a save the chinks rally in the HS gym. That puts it perspective for me. The evolution of our social norms occurs at a snails pace.

We today look back in almost total amazement at how our country treated blacks and other minorities, that women couldn't vote, or that racial slurs were not only tollerated, but were considered mainstream.

I look forward to the day when we can look backward with the same level of amazement and disbelief at hot topics of today such as gay marriage, health care, global climate change, etc etc etc. Social reform/change/evolution will always be resisted by those that desire to maintain the status quo, but will happen given plenty of time.

America is in an avalanche of irreversible decline.

However, having said that, one has to feel that some sort of magnanimous figure will emerge to "save" us. People say Reagan did that in 1980. From a superficial perspective, I agree with that. His stuff was manufactured by his handlers, but, still, America bought it, and for a moment or two, we felt good again. We need someone to do that again, but I fear we are way too polarized for it to happen in the Internet age.

There is no one in power or on deck who can accomplish this. Not Obama, not Romney, not Hillary, not Paul, no one. We're too filled with hate and disrespect.

Letting women vote was almost as big a disaster as letting them drive.

The old Pekin Chinks...
Interesting story on how they got the name - founders couldn't agree on name for new town. Had one of the wives stick a pin in a globe. Pin covered up the G in Peking, so they named it "Pekin". Since it was named after a Chinese city, calling the HS team the Chinks seemed logical to them

They are the Dragons, now, BTW.



Our Society is far advanced from where it was 20, 50, 100, 225, etc years ago, and only getting better.

Cap'n Cat wrote:America is in an avalanche of irreversible decline.

However, having said that, one has to feel that some sort of magnanimous figure will emerge to "save" us. People say Reagan did that in 1980. From a superficial perspective, I agree with that. His stuff was manufactured by his handlers, but, still, America bought it, and for a moment or two, we felt good again. We need someone to do that again, but I fear we are way too polarized for it to happen in the Internet age.

There is no one in power or on deck who can accomplish this. Not Obama, not Romney, not Hillary, not Paul, no one. We're too filled with hate and disrespect.

For someone who claims to be a well educated bibliophile, it is fantastically inaccurate to say that Reagan was either shallow or "handled" by his staff.

"I guess the point I'm making here is that ideas matter a lot, the underlying ideas that stand behind policies. ...when you have the right ideas — then you can get somewhere." - George P. Schultz speaking about Ronald Reagan.

Schultz was right, but it took Reagan years of hard work to hone the ideas. Before becoming President, Reagan was a leader who spent thousands of hours refining and communicating his own ideas. As President, he alone in my lifetime has had the vision, depth of character, and force of leadership to carefully articulate the right ideas at the right time to make a profound difference.

Unlike Kennedy, (EDIT: who had ghost writers even in college) Reagan conceived and wrote his own speeches for years before he became President. (EDIT: Of course, as President, Reagan had speech writers.) Reagan's vision and hands-on leadership are perhaps most aptly illustrated by the story of how he overruled his staff to include the line "Tear down this wall!" in his speech at the Brandenburg Gate. But that was only one speech of hundreds. For those who doubt his intellectual depth, consult the collection of Reagan's speeches with his own handwritten drafts and notes, "Reagan, In His Own Hand," edited by Skinner, et al.

Ron Paul has a lot of the right ideas, but sadly, you are quite correct that there is no one on deck to take the mantle of leadership. I would note, however, that Ron Paul himself is not hateful or disrespectful. He just lacks charisma.

Why the theme of hate and disrespect all of the sudden, when they have been the primary products in the vast majority of your posts?!?? Do you expect anyone to believe that your hateful and disrespectful posts of the past were just harmless and transparent sarcasm and parody??

Native, the Brandenburg speech was not written by Reagan. Nor was that line his. He just went against the advice to change it to something more subtle.

bobbythekidd wrote:Native, the Brandenburg speech was not written by Reagan. Nor was that line his. He just went against the advice to change it to something more subtle.

I am not claiming that Reagan wrote all of his own speeches when he was President. I am claiming that he spent years writing his own speeches, refining his own ideas, and honing his own message. Of course, as President, he had a room full of speech writers, but he had clearly already acquired the executive leadership skills and developed the wisdom, judgment and vision use them wisely, make his own decisions and chart the course. He was not "handled."

native wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:America is in an avalanche of irreversible decline.

However, having said that, one has to feel that some sort of magnanimous figure will emerge to "save" us. People say Reagan did that in 1980. From a superficial perspective, I agree with that. His stuff was manufactured by his handlers, but, still, America bought it, and for a moment or two, we felt good again. We need someone to do that again, but I fear we are way too polarized for it to happen in the Internet age.

There is no one in power or on deck who can accomplish this. Not Obama, not Romney, not Hillary, not Paul, no one. We're too filled with hate and disrespect.

For someone who claims to be a well educated bibliophile, it is fantastically inaccurate to say that Reagan was either shallow or "handled" by his staff.

"I guess the point I'm making here is that ideas matter a lot, the underlying ideas that stand behind policies. ...when you have the right ideas — then you can get somewhere." - George P. Schultz speaking about Ronald Reagan.

Schultz was right, but it took Reagan years of hard work to hone the ideas. Before becoming President, Reagan was a leader who spent thousands of hours refining and communicating his own ideas. As President, he alone in my lifetime has had the vision, depth of character, and force of leadership to carefully articulate the right ideas at the right time to make a profound difference.

Unlike Kennedy, Reagan conceived and wrote his own speeches.

Reagan's vision and hands-on leadership are perhaps most aptly illustrated by the story of how he overruled his staff to include the line "Tear down this wall!" in his speech at the Brandenburg Gate. But that was only one speech of hundreds. For those who doubt his intellectual depth, consult the collection of Reagan's speeches with his own handwritten drafts and notes, "Reagan, In His Own Hand," edited by Skinner, et al.

Ron Paul has a lot of the right ideas, but sadly, you are quite correct that there is no one on deck to take the mantle of leadership. I would note, however, that Ron Paul himself is not hateful or disrespectful. He just lacks charisma.

Why the theme of hate and disrespect all of the sudden, when they have been the primary products in the vast majority of your posts?!?? Do you expect anyone to believe that your hateful and disrespectful posts of the past were just harmless and transparent sarcasm and parody??

Pffffffft!


Native, dude -
You gotta do some reading to catch up on sh*t.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

native wrote:
For someone who claims to be a well educated bibliophile, it is fantastically inaccurate to say that Reagan was either shallow or "handled" by his staff.

"I guess the point I'm making here is that ideas matter a lot, the underlying ideas that stand behind policies. ...when you have the right ideas — then you can get somewhere." - George P. Schultz speaking about Ronald Reagan.

Schultz was right, but it took Reagan years of hard work to hone the ideas. Before becoming President, Reagan was a leader who spent thousands of hours refining and communicating his own ideas. As President, he alone in my lifetime has had the vision, depth of character, and force of leadership to carefully articulate the right ideas at the right time to make a profound difference.

Unlike Kennedy, Reagan conceived and wrote his own speeches.

Reagan's vision and hands-on leadership are perhaps most aptly illustrated by the story of how he overruled his staff to include the line "Tear down this wall!" in his speech at the Brandenburg Gate. But that was only one speech of hundreds. For those who doubt his intellectual depth, consult the collection of Reagan's speeches with his own handwritten drafts and notes, "Reagan, In His Own Hand," edited by Skinner, et al.

Ron Paul has a lot of the right ideas, but sadly, you are quite correct that there is no one on deck to take the mantle of leadership. I would note, however, that Ron Paul himself is not hateful or disrespectful. He just lacks charisma.

Why the theme of hate and disrespect all of the sudden, when they have been the primary products in the vast majority of your posts?!?? Do you expect anyone to believe that your hateful and disrespectful posts of the past were just harmless and transparent sarcasm and parody??

Pffffffft!


Native, dude -
You gotta do some reading to catch up on sh*t.

Of course Reagan had speech writers as President. I apologize for my over-reaching statement.

However, unlike Kennedy, who had ghost writers even in college, Reagan did indeed spend years writing his own speeches and honing his own ideas, which he successfully articulated as President. Again, I refer you to the collection of Reagan's speeches edited by Skinner.

native wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:America is in an avalanche of irreversible decline.

However, having said that, one has to feel that some sort of magnanimous figure will emerge to "save" us. People say Reagan did that in 1980. From a superficial perspective, I agree with that. His stuff was manufactured by his handlers, but, still, America bought it, and for a moment or two, we felt good again. We need someone to do that again, but I fear we are way too polarized for it to happen in the Internet age.

There is no one in power or on deck who can accomplish this. Not Obama, not Romney, not Hillary, not Paul, no one. We're too filled with hate and disrespect.

For someone who claims to be a well educated bibliophile, it is fantastically inaccurate to say that Reagan was either shallow or "handled" by his staff.

"I guess the point I'm making here is that ideas matter a lot, the underlying ideas that stand behind policies. ...when you have the right ideas — then you can get somewhere." - George P. Schultz speaking about Ronald Reagan.

Schultz was right, but it took Reagan years of hard work to hone the ideas. Before becoming President, Reagan was a leader who spent thousands of hours refining and communicating his own ideas. As President, he alone in my lifetime has had the vision, depth of character, and force of leadership to carefully articulate the right ideas at the right time to make a profound difference.

Unlike Kennedy, (EDIT: who had ghost writers even in college) Reagan conceived and wrote his own speeches for years before he became President. (EDIT: Of course, as President, Reagan had speech writers.) Reagan's vision and hands-on leadership are perhaps most aptly illustrated by the story of how he overruled his staff to include the line "Tear down this wall!" in his speech at the Brandenburg Gate. But that was only one speech of hundreds. For those who doubt his intellectual depth, consult the collection of Reagan's speeches with his own handwritten drafts and notes, "Reagan, In His Own Hand," edited by Skinner, et al.

Ron Paul has a lot of the right ideas, but sadly, you are quite correct that there is no one on deck to take the mantle of leadership. I would note, however, that Ron Paul himself is not hateful or disrespectful. He just lacks charisma.

Why the theme of hate and disrespect all of the sudden, when they have been the primary products in the vast majority of your posts?!?? Do you expect anyone to believe that your hateful and disrespectful posts of the past were just harmless and transparent sarcasm and parody??

It's amazing how influential Reagan still is to this day. He was a masterful orator who came along at the right time selling the highly desireable notion of self reliance while scapegoating the lazy and the government. His optimism and charm mixed in with the too complicated to be assailable economic views of Ayn Rand disciple Alan Greenspan made it so that even Democrats like Bill Clinton, Robert Rubin, and Lawrence Summers were singing the praises of the wonderous and magically self regulating free market.

That myth is now being busted.

Reagan was charismatic, his policies were damaging.