Monday, June 19, 2017

Glimpses of History 2

This bit of historical truth arrived too late.  But throughout his presidency his words, behavior and deeds affirmed that he is a racist.  It was so even as a student per an unpublished manuscript Obama co-authored with a fellow Harvard student.  Quote: "A Pulitzer-Prize winning author says he discovered material in an unpublished manuscript Barack Obama wrote while in law school that was so damning it may have derailed his candidacy for the presidency in 2008.  In David Garrow’s new book, “Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama,” debuting May 7, he found the former president was obsessed with America’s racism, devoting some 140 pages to the subject with his co-author and friend Robert Fischer.

This history is real no matter what some people say.  Way, way too much evidence exists.  Quote: "Public discussion of three current topics shows how ignorant most Americans have become about religious questions that would have electrified their ancestors. Pope Pius XII and Patrick Buchanan were accused of pro-Hitler sympathies because their critics didn’t realize that Communist persecution of Christians would take precedence, for them, over all other considerations. And in New York, a tax-supported art show stirred controversy because it featured a blasphemous picture of the Virgin Mary, splattered with elephant dung; for liberals, as usual, the only issue at stake was “artistic expression.”  The great vice of liberal thinking is its failure of imagination with respect to Christians. For all their preaching of “sensitivity” and “multiculturalism,” they are belligerently ignorant of Christian culture and Christians’ feelings. In fact they seem to think that there is something specially “artistic” about offending Christians. Offending blacks, Jews, feminists, or homosexuals is “insensitive,” while offending Christians is “irreverent” — a word that has come to suggest a rather cute sassiness.

This is a bit of interesting history of the not so reluctant Wilson's entry into WWI.  Quote: "Wartime Allied propaganda had Americans believing the Germans were solely guilty, and that the conflict was a war for democracy, when the most autocratic country in Europe, Russia, was on the Allied said. American entry, of course, was a necessity.  Revisionist history in the twenties and thirties written by Barnes, Peterson, Borchard, Millis, and other American historians seemed ironclad in making the case that the United States was not “forced” to war, that American intervention led to higher death totals and a settlement that in many ways unhinged the world. In these works, Wilson’s decisions often looked misguided or plain wrong.  Yet from the late thirties, and with more momentum after World War II, American historians fell back on a positive interpretation of Wilson, the Man of Peace who was forced to War, with all the ancillary propositions that followed. Again, from the early sixties, the New Left historians — William A. Williams, Gabriel Kolko, Gar Alperovitz, and others — resurrected much of the old revisionist critique but with a more socialist and often Marxist spin. And a number of historians and others, especially psychologists, wrote more critical works about Wilson’s state of mind and his motives. But the picture of the upright and moral Man of Peace struggling with the necessity of war never disappeared in a long list of biographies, above all the Wilson studies by Arthur Link.
What does the say to the idea of Wilson's so called candor/honesty with the American people?  Revisionist history has distorted facts far too often to protect their selected political hero's.  But emerging facts disprove the revisionist's handiworks  An sexample.

This item has a bit of a tangential association with the previous two items.  Quote: "Except for the Cold War, conservatism has lost every battle it tried to fight. Some it lost without even a fight, and it is now firmly on the wrong side on race. Conservatives do not speak for us, and if we don’t speak for us no one will. Guillaume Faye believes that if the generation now in its 20s does not act, whites and their culture face oblivion. Even former Arizona governor Jan Brewer says that Donald Trump may be our last chance to save America. Because today’s conservatives have lost the will to conserve what most deserves to be conserved–the founding stock that built this nation–they are almost as dangerous as the left. Let us hope that many will join us as their movement collapses.  Whatever happens, it is remarkable that an American college professor has published a book with a mainstream academic press, in which he predicts not only the collapse of conservatism as we know it but suggests that “the radical right” could replace it. The sleeping giant is beginning to stir."

Quote:  "The Donald Trump of the 1856 presidential election was a celebrity explorer named John C. Frémont, nominated by the recently founded Republican party. The Hillary Clinton was a tired old perennial presidential candidate named James Buchanan, chosen by the Democrats—although they had to dump Franklin Pierce to do it. Pierce’s convention defeat marks the only time in American history a sitting president has lost a campaign for renomination by his own party. Meanwhile, the third-party spoiler candidate of 1856 was Millard Fillmore, the retired former president who found himself nominated by a party he hadn't much campaigned for, with a platform he didn't much believe in. He accepted the nomination of the American party, the "Know Nothings," anyway, and won 21 percent of the vote in the November election. Frémont managed 33 percent and 114 electoral votes from New England and a fringe of far Northern states. Buchanan cruised to a comfortable plurality, with 45 percent of the national vote and a count of 174 in the Electoral College.  And so the dashing young celebrity and the amusing-himself former president were turned away. The always-running workhorse of the Democrats took the presidency—a job at which, despite his training as secretary of state and ambassador to Great Britain, he proved a failure. Four years later, in Buchanan's final months as president, the Southern states began to secede and the Civil War arrived."

Here's more on the USS Liberty fiasco.  Quote: "President Johnson was very quickly informed – presumably by Defence Secretary McNamara – that the Liberty was under attack and that the Saratoga had launched planes to go to its assistance. Hence the order – from the President to the Defence Secretary – to recall the planes. In Findley’s account the Saratoga’s planes were hardly in the air when McNamara’s voice was heard over Sixth Fleet radios, “Tell the Sixth Fleet to get those aircraft back immediately![xvii]
Initially, President Johnson was – as Green put it – determined “that no U.S. aircraft would be thrust into an adversary role with the IDF, whatever the implication for the struggling U.S.S. Liberty.” Initially, and for the usual domestic political reason – fear of offending Zionism – this President was prepared to sacrifice the lives of 286 of his fellow Americans on board the Liberty."   Unfortunately these types of operations have occurred far too often throughout our history.  It serves as a warning that we cannot always trust our elected officials.   In my book no matter the circumstances this was murder, pure and simple.  Perpetrator consequences???  None.  Is that okay???   No!!! 

Interesting bit of British history which helps give us a feel for how cultural history evolves over time.

This item extends the previous discussion and brings it into the eight years we have just endured.

A history lesson.  Unfortunately communism is on the rise, again. 

This is history some revisionists do not want us to know.  It is a true tragedy and we all need to know the facts.

No comments: