Mt Rushmore Revised Version

[Gil Dobie]

So we take Washington and Jefferson off because they owned slaves. Roosevelt didn't have the African American's back during his term in office, therefore they switched to supporting the Democrats. Maybe we keep Lincoln, unless he has transgressions we can't live with. Who's left to put on Mt Rushmore, Obama and........

[Ibanez]

So we take Washington and Jefferson off because they owned slaves. Roosevelt didn't have the African American's back during his term in office, therefore they switched to supporting the Democrats. Maybe we keep Lincoln, unless he has transgressions we can't live with. Who's left to put on Mt Rushmore, Obama and........

SJWs...

Yes, let's ignore the fact that T.R. desegregated NY schools, sparked a controversy by inviting and dining with Booker T. Washington at the White House and had his administration supported the prosecution of peonage cases via his appointment of liberal judges. He publicly spoke out against racism and appointed black men Federal office.

Not to mention his support of fair trade, labor laws, anti-child labor, anti-monopoly, etc....

He was a politician in the decades following the Civil War and President at the turn of the Century...you have to understand him in that context.

[Gil Dobie]

So we take Washington and Jefferson off because they owned slaves. Roosevelt didn't have the African American's back during his term in office, therefore they switched to supporting the Democrats. Maybe we keep Lincoln, unless he has transgressions we can't live with. Who's left to put on Mt Rushmore, Obama and........

SJWs...

Yes, let's ignore the fact that T.R. desegregated NY schools, sparked a controversy by inviting and dining with Booker T. Washington at the White House and had his administration supported the prosecution of peonage cases via his appointment of liberal judges. He publicly spoke out against racism and appointed black men Federal office.

Not to mention his support of fair trade, labor laws, anti-child labor, anti-monopoly, etc....

He was a politician in the decades following the Civil War and President at the turn of the Century...you have to understand him in that context.

The Brownsville Affair changed African American attitude towards Roosevelt in that context at that time.

[CAA Flagship]

So we take Washington and Jefferson off because they owned slaves. Roosevelt didn't have the African American's back during his term in office, therefore they switched to supporting the Democrats. Maybe we keep Lincoln, unless he has transgressions we can't live with. Who's left to put on Mt Rushmore, Obama and........

SJWs...

Yes, let's ignore the fact that T.R. desegregated NY schools, sparked a controversy by inviting and dining with Booker T. Washington at the White House and had his administration supported the prosecution of peonage cases via his appointment of liberal judges. He publicly spoke out against racism and appointed black men Federal office.

Not to mention his support of fair trade, labor laws, anti-child labor, anti-monopoly, etc....

He was a politician in the decades following the Civil War and President at the turn of the Century...you have to understand him in that context.

No. It does not matter what era they lived in. They must be compared to today's standards.

[kalm]

SJWs...

Yes, let's ignore the fact that T.R. desegregated NY schools, sparked a controversy by inviting and dining with Booker T. Washington at the White House and had his administration supported the prosecution of peonage cases via his appointment of liberal judges. He publicly spoke out against racism and appointed black men Federal office.

Not to mention his support of fair trade, labor laws, anti-child labor, anti-monopoly, etc....

He was a politician in the decades following the Civil War and President at the turn of the Century...you have to understand him in that context.

No. It does not matter what era they lived in. They must be compared to today's standards.

Mussolini would have been comfortable in today's White House.

[CAA Flagship]

No. It does not matter what era they lived in. They must be compared to today's standards.

Mussolini would have been comfortable in today's White House.

Cuz the pizza?

[kalm]

Mussolini would have been comfortable in today's White House.

Cuz the pizza?

Yep. Probably a traditional, boring, single topping affair made by a large corporate chain too...

Italian fascism promoted a corporatist economic system whereby employer and employee syndicates are linked together in associations to collectively represent the nation's economic producers and work alongside the state to set national economic policy.[4] This economic system intended to resolve class conflict through collaboration between the classes.[5]

Italian Fascism opposed liberalism, especially "classical liberalism" that Mussolini and Fascist leaders denounced as "the debacle of individualism",[6] but rather than seeking a reactionary restoration of the pre-French Revolutionary world, which it considered to have been flawed, it had a forward-looking direction.[7] It was opposed to Marxist socialism because of its typical opposition to nationalism,[8] but was also opposed to the reactionary conservatism developed by Joseph de Maistre.[9] It believed the success of Italian nationalism required respect for tradition and a clear sense of a shared past among the Italian people, alongside a commitment to a modernised Italy.[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism

[Gil Dobie]

Cuz the pizza?

Yep. Probably a traditional, boring, single topping affair made by a large corporate chain too...

Italian fascism promoted a corporatist economic system whereby employer and employee syndicates are linked together in associations to collectively represent the nation's economic producers and work alongside the state to set national economic policy.[4] This economic system intended to resolve class conflict through collaboration between the classes.[5]

Italian Fascism opposed liberalism, especially "classical liberalism" that Mussolini and Fascist leaders denounced as "the debacle of individualism",[6] but rather than seeking a reactionary restoration of the pre-French Revolutionary world, which it considered to have been flawed, it had a forward-looking direction.[7] It was opposed to Marxist socialism because of its typical opposition to nationalism,[8] but was also opposed to the reactionary conservatism developed by Joseph de Maistre.[9] It believed the success of Italian nationalism required respect for tradition and a clear sense of a shared past among the Italian people, alongside a commitment to a modernised Italy.[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism

Mussonlini was opposed to social class discrimination, promoted public works, etc. May have been more comfortable the previous 8 years.

[Pwns]

I say we put Harriet Tubman, the Hidden Figures Woman, Beyonce, and Outkast on the revised version.

[Gil Dobie]

I say we put Harriet Tubman, the Hidden Figures Woman, Beyonce, and Outkast on the revised version.

[bandl]

I say we put Harriet Tubman, the Hidden Figures Woman, Beyonce, and Outkast on the revised version.

One of the dudes from Outkast is a vegan. So no.

[CID1990]

So we take Washington and Jefferson off because they owned slaves. Roosevelt didn't have the African American's back during his term in office, therefore they switched to supporting the Democrats. Maybe we keep Lincoln, unless he has transgressions we can't live with. Who's left to put on Mt Rushmore, Obama and........

Lincoln wanted to resettle the freed slaves... and he said that if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave he would do it, so he definitely wasn't "woke"