Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Recently Flagged Comments

Recently flagged comments from all news stories on this site. Users must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you want to retrieve a comment of yours that was recently deleted, visit your user page and click the Moderation link.

It's funny. Had the conversation been framed as derision of Trumpettes most of you on here certainly would have stated that Reps voted for this, elections have consequences, which I would agree with you. They did. I wouldn't have chased you down on "she wasn't elected, blah blah blah, Reps didn't vote for her". (And in case you haven't been following too closely, I didn't vote for Trump and I despise him...but I know not voting for Trump won't win me any points because I still have conservative listed on my profile).

I know the definition between elected, appointed, and confirmed. I also know that when I said "elected official" speak and lamp LEAPT at the opportunity to "correct" what I said...that's all they had left at that point. Just answer me one question. Did the Senate take a vote on confirming the SoT? The President appoints, but the senate a vote. Just because it's not a general public election doesn't make our SoT's status any less than that of someone who was voted in, elected by elected officials.

But I digress...I'll even say you're correct. The SoT of state isn't an elected official. He's an appointed official. So to the issue at hand...can we discuss this woman and the article? Face it...this lady, Jennifer, is a troll who got ---- slapped. She didn't have the class to address the issue. She took a swipe at someone she didn't even know calling her deplorable and being snarky about being a freeloader. She was trolling. And she was wrong, this wasn't a personal trip. But she expects the woman she trolled to respond with class. It's a freaking double standard. You call out some self-absorbed fashion princess and get mad when she calls you out on your BS? You. Got. Served. With a big helping of southern sass. This was a trip due to her husbands role as an elected official and SHOULD have been paid for by taxpayers. She, Louise Linton, posted the photo on her personal Instagram and gave recognition to the fashion designers...something actressses do all the freaking time. What is the problem? Why are you defending an internet troll who got slapped with the facts? Because you identify with the troll? Because it was condescending? So was calling Louise a deplorable. Pot meet kettle. And if you can't see that a woman saying "her friends probably own those companies" isn't rife with envy....Are you FREAKING kidding me? Buahahaha!!

What to Do With a Heinous Statue

Monuments are places where memory crystallizes. But what kind of memory that is, and who the memories belong to, depends on the context in which the monuments are placed. One of the most important considerations in these situations is the monument's original intent.

In Budapest, as in many of the countries of the Warsaw Pact, Stalin statues had sprung up everywhere in the decades between 1930 and 1950. When the statue was first built, the Hungarian state media described it as a symbol of Stalin's ever present influence in Budapest. "Stalin was with us earlier," one journalist gushed. "Now he will be with us even more...."

In honor of this moment, one of the centerpieces of Memento Park today is a modern recreation of the ruined statue, known as "Stalin's Boots." The new, recontextualized monument inverts the traditional role of the statue -- that of glorifying and celebrating. It points instead to an absence, with a note of humor. It makes ridiculous what once was a stamp of power.

In the years following World War II, German authorities grappled with the question of what to do with the monumental remains of the Nazi regime [...]
It's not too difficult to imagine a monument park one day existing in the American South. All the crumpled statues of Jim Crow can line its verges, along with pictures of their crimes and information about the age of slavery in the United States. Or perhaps the statues can remain in their current positions and be recentered around their true context. (See one suggestion for what that might look like here. [])

In Hungary and in Germany, these recontextualizations were only possible, however, because communities were able to agree on a new reading of history and a new way of seeing these monuments. Whether this will be possible in the United States amid the current atmosphere of extreme polarization is another question. And public memory, as it ever was, is a product of power: who holds it, who gets to remember, whose histories are privileged above others.

"I'm sure the Taliban found ample justification for demolishing Buddhas and churches and Nazis found equal justification in burning books."

Another example of the crushingly illogical? Equating the protestors who stood against the Nazi's with the Nazi's or Taliban? Do you even understand what you are saying?

Most of us are not advocating demolishing or destroying anything, These statues need to be relocated to museums and cemeteries. Cemeteries would be the perfect location for these statues so they could stand over the Americans they helped kill... forever. Today it is the Confederates the Nazi's and the KKK and tomorrow it will still be the Confederates, the Nazi's and the KKK. They have no place in our society.

The American People are obviously tired of your party's support of hateful and divisive rhetoric and since Nazi's and the KKK want to use Confederate statues as rally point for this hate it is logical to remove those rally points. Tens of thousands turned out to rally against this kind of hate speech in Boston.

The violence of the leftists activists does constitute a problem. As any violence does. But, THAT problem was not created in a vacuum and is in NO way comparable to white nationalism or white supremacism. If there was no white supremacists to mobilize against there less legitimacy for Antifa's actions.

The Antifa are fundamentally authoritarian about their claim that its activists -- who no one elected -- can decide whose views are too odious to be publicly expressed. They are indeed a moral problem that does need to be addressed (we have quite a few of those in America in case you haven't been paying attention lately). But, saying they are a problem is quite different from implying they are in any way equal to the problem of white supremacy and white nationalism in America. The Antifa do not celebrate a culture that worships a world that committed genocide and that enforced slavery of other humans.

And let's be clear... it was a Nazi sympathizer and not an antifa activist who committed murder in Charlottesville, VA.

The best way to undermine and reduce the Antifa "problem" is to condemn and end the hateful bigotry that Antifa, however counter productively, has reacted against.

"Thoughts & prayers are w/ our @USNavy sailors aboard the #USSJohnSMcCain where search & rescue efforts are underway. ... "


"Gotta sanitize the history of America so it will be palatable for human consumption."


It is possible to engage in broad, widespread study and recollection of history without the intervening static of special pleading. A challenge of the discipline (among others) is trying to account for and mitigate one's biases in favor of the evidence.

Do you think the emergence of, say, Women's History, African American History, Native American History, Gay History, etc., in the 1960s represented an effort to make history "palatable for human consumption"? I was there, and, I assure you, a lot of people went bonkers.

One of the most widely embraced tenets among legitimate historians - a group of which Trump and his white supremacist allies are most assuredly not a part - is the one Meacham raises: "Its ahistoric[al] to judge figures from the past by our own moral standards."

Ponder that one, a dictum that is, at once, both eminently commonsensical and intellectually demanding.

So, in terms of looking at history, was hanging-drawing-and-quartering - Braveheart springs to mind - barbaric? Probably not in William Wallace's time. Horrible? Terrifying? Of course, but part of that culture and that era. One may talk of it, while realizing that a bit farther down the road that punishment was well established as belonging in the "cruel and unusual" punishment category. Even then, in our early national period many punishments we as a society would not condone today were widespread. (Perhaps one day our existing laws condoning capital punishment might be seen in a similar light? Far stranger things have happened.)

The problems with the Confederate monuments are legion, and not confined to the slavery issue. There's also the unavoidable - but too often avoided fact (not supposition) fac - that solemn oaths of allegiance to the US - both implicit and explicit - were broken by traitors. Hence the need for the Myth of the Lost Cause, which quite literally whitewashed both issues.

Tell me what you think of this?

#4 | POSTED BY HELIUMRAT AT 2017-08-22 07:32 AM | REPLY | FLAG

"Fryer's analysis is highly flawed, however. It suffers from major theoretical and methodological errors, and he has communicated the results to news media in a way that is misleading. While there have long been problems with the quality of police shootings data, there is still plenty of evidence to support a pattern of systematic, racially discriminatory use of force against black people in the United States.

Breaking down the analysis of police shootings in Houston

There should be no argument that black and Latino people in Houston are much more likely to be shot by police compared to whites. I looked at the same Houston police shooting dataset as Fryer for the years 2005-2015, which I supplemented with census data, and found that black people were over 5 times as likely to be shot relative to whites. Latinos were roughly twice as likely to be shot versus whites."

Democrats oppose voter ID because they think blacks are too stupid to figure out how to get an ID. They think lacks need special considerations to get into college because they are to stupid to get in on their own merit.

Here is where I come from: All men (women and the other 53 genders) are created equal. They are free to succeed or free to fail based on their own hard work and desire for success. NO special handouts because of skin color. NO special considerations because of some fabricated victimhood. Now to stop you short on your claim that I don't care about these communities I volunteer at the Boys and Girls clubs tutoring, at a Salvation Army homeless shelter and donate a substantial sum to the last every year.

Don't bother with you virtue signaling or spewing more of your condescension at me. Your worldview is not superior to mine just because you hold it.

Now please work in homophobe in your next post and tell me how I don't love my gay child.

#13 | Posted by MOTGK

If you don't want to be called stupid, dont write such long posts describing your stupidity in detail.

All you just proved was how sheltered and spoiled you are.
INstead of saying there's no way that the black experience is any more difficult than the white experience, you should just drop to your knees and thank god you were born with less roadblocks and challenges than they have. To pretend they don't exist is to make yourself look like a self centered fool.

Yes I am superior to you. As is anyone with a brain. And no one with a brain thinks voter ID is about anything except preventing dems from voting.


Drudge Retort


Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable