Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: NAACP Disrespects George Washington

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    330

    NAACP Disrespects George Washington

    http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/18/naacp...outh-carolina/

    The annual MLK observance at the state house in Columbia SC had an interesting twist this year. The event is held on the north side steps of the statehouse. Prominent at that location is a large bronze statue of George Washington. This year, the NAACP constructed a “box” to conceal the Father of His Country from view so that participants would not be offended by his presence.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	NAACP Disrespect.jpg 
Views:	121 
Size:	67.2 KB 
ID:	4999  

  2. #2
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    All I have to say is...bunch of America-hating commies! If people are so offended by George Washington, they can get the F out of here, and find some other country to call home. I hear Russia is on the decline and could really use a population boost. This type of crap really pisses me off.

    Yes, it has been a rough ride for a number of groups of people in America over our history, but seriously, America is a work in progress, IMO. To cover up or deny symbols of America, yes, George Washington is a symbol IMO, is to reject America.

    Next year someone should construct a box around this America-hating group of people, and see how they like it
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  3. #3
    Regular Member usamarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    252
    Wow....huge turnout...fun fact....columbia, sc has the highest rate of hiv/aids in the country...its the africa of north america.

  4. #4
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    I read two quick Google hits on this subject:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_...on_and_slavery
    http://www.mountvernon.org/learn/mee...ex.cfm/ss/101/

    Both raise the question: What if George Washington had pressed the issue of slavery so early in the life of this country? We as a people had no great history together at that point, much more time spent apart than together.

    Nobody in the south, whose livelihoods depended on slavery, would have even thought twice about breaking away and rejecting the idea of a "United States."

    We could have easily ended up two countries, with the institution staying in place for many years longer than it did.

    No way to know, one way or the other, which was the best choice.

    TFred

  5. #5
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I read two quick Google hits on this subject:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_...on_and_slavery
    http://www.mountvernon.org/learn/mee...ex.cfm/ss/101/

    Both raise the question: What if George Washington had pressed the issue of slavery so early in the life of this country? We as a people had no great history together at that point, much more time spent apart than together.

    Nobody in the south, whose livelihoods depended on slavery, would have even thought twice about breaking away and rejecting the idea of a "United States."

    We could have easily ended up two countries, with the institution staying in place for many years longer than it did.

    No way to know, one way or the other, which was the best choice.

    TFred
    The ugly truth: America needed slavery in order to make it in the beginning. America had to assert its dominance over the Indian. Since the Indian could not be enslaved, nor subdued, they had to be killed, that was the only way they were going down. I am not going to make a moral judgment about a society that existed 200 years ago. I could say that it was wrong, but was slavery wrong then? Was the genocide of the Indian morally wrong? I would argue that neither were morally wrong then, but would be morally wrong now. But that is only because we are reaping the benefit of those policies from so long ago. We are reaping the benefits of atrocities, but that is part of the natural process IMO.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    The ugly truth: America needed slavery in order to make it in the beginning. America had to assert its dominance over the Indian. Since the Indian could not be enslaved, nor subdued, they had to be killed, that was the only way they were going down. I am not going to make a moral judgment about a society that existed 200 years ago. I could say that it was wrong, but was slavery wrong then? Was the genocide of the Indian morally wrong? I would argue that neither were morally wrong then, but would be morally wrong now. But that is only because we are reaping the benefit of those policies from so long ago. We are reaping the benefits of atrocities, but that is part of the natural process IMO.
    History is history I wish it would be taught right. Right or wrong we learn from the past. America didn't necessarily "need" slavery in the beginning, it was simply a common world practice at the time. Did you know even White Americans were slaves in northern Africa? We also had White "indentured" servants in this country.

    The main reason Indians went "down" was due to disease, thus the impression that Europeans had of a great empty land, because disease had spread, from Columbus's contact to the mainland and wiped out the population.

    There is at least one case were a Native man "gave" a village to European settlers, they pretty much figured it was what God wanted.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    History is history I wish it would be taught right. Right or wrong we learn from the past. America didn't necessarily "need" slavery in the beginning, it was simply a common world practice at the time. Did you know even White Americans were slaves in northern Africa? We also had White "indentured" servants in this country.

    The main reason Indians went "down" was due to disease, thus the impression that Europeans had of a great empty land, because disease had spread, from Columbus's contact to the mainland and wiped out the population.

    There is at least one case were a Native man "gave" a village to European settlers, they pretty much figured it was what God wanted.
    Yes, there were white slaves. Every time slavery comes up, someone pulls "white people were slaved too" out of their butt. Let's face it, blacks were enslaved in America in HUGE numbers. Free labor benefited America collectively, and the individuals who owned slaves. Did we need slavery, yes, I believe we did, being a young nation, we needed to labor force, the free labor force.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 01-21-2011 at 03:45 PM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    523
    Newsflash people.............SLAVERY IS ALIVE AND WELL IN THE MIDEAST AND AFRICA. Black people in the heart of Africa are enslaved by Muslims from the north in the name of conversion. Also warlords and self appointed "Generals" routinely kidnap people from neighboring tribal areas and force them to either fight for them, or their families will be murdered. Let's also not forget the thousands a year who are forced to mine conflict diamonds.
    This site has been hijacked by leftists who attack opposition to further their own ends. Those who have never served this country and attack those who do are no longer worthy of my time or attention.

  9. #9
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Yes, there were white slaves. Every time slavery comes up, someone pulls "white people were slaved too" out of their butt. Let's face it, blacks were enslaved in America in HUGE numbers. Free labor benefited America collectively, and the individuals who owned slaves. Did we need slavery, yes, I believe we did, being a young nation, we needed to labor force, the free labor force.
    I am not denying that, am not denying the moral wrongs of slavery, but like you pointed out and I was adding to it was an accepted world practice at the time. You would be surprised how many people think this was solely an "American" problem or simply a "race" issue either. There were in the south Black folks who ran farms and owned slaves.

    But disagree we needed a huge "free" labor source. Did you know that many former slave owners actually saved money, after they didn't have to feed, cloth and house and take care of other basic needs of slaves. Also less than 2% of the southern population even owned slaves. I think it was more a status of being wealthy than being a farmer or business man.

    Again for those who might be slow to catch this I am not pro-slavery.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  10. #10
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by NRAMARINE View Post
    Newsflash people.............SLAVERY IS ALIVE AND WELL IN THE MIDEAST AND AFRICA. Black people in the heart of Africa are enslaved by Muslims from the north in the name of conversion. Also warlords and self appointed "Generals" routinely kidnap people from neighboring tribal areas and force them to either fight for them, or their families will be murdered. Let's also not forget the thousands a year who are forced to mine conflict diamonds.

    Not an American problem. Let them sort their own BS out, we have heaps of BS to deal with in the states.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  11. #11
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    I am not denying that, am not denying the moral wrongs of slavery, but like you pointed out and I was adding to it was an accepted world practice at the time. You would be surprised how many people think this was solely an "American" problem or simply a "race" issue either. There were in the south Black folks who ran farms and owned slaves.

    But disagree we needed a huge "free" labor source. Did you know that many former slave owners actually saved money, after they didn't have to feed, cloth and house and take care of other basic needs of slaves. Also less than 2% of the southern population even owned slaves. I think it was more a status of being wealthy than being a farmer or business man.

    Again for those who might be slow to catch this I am not pro-slavery.
    2%? No. Everything that I have read(e) has had the number at 10% (low end)- 50% (high end).

    Disclaimer: I am not pro-slavery, now. I would hope to have be an abolitionist all those years ago.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    2%? No. Everything that I have read(e) has had the number at 10% (low end)- 50% (high end).

    Disclaimer: I am not pro-slavery, now. I would hope to have be an abolitionist all those years ago.
    Did you know many abolitionist reason for being against slavery (including Lincoln) was they thought it disgusting that white folk and black folk mixing like that. Liberia was started (with lot's of backing from Lincoln as a senator) to get black folks out of "White" America. Being an abolitionist didn't not necessarily make you not a bigot. I think i read somewhere too, where there were more true abolitionist in the old south than in the north.

    Maybe that was the percentage of population but not ownership. I could see 10% but I though I read 2% but been awhile and could be mistaken.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  13. #13
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Did you know many abolitionist reason for being against slavery (including Lincoln) was they thought it disgusting that white folk and black folk mixing like that. Liberia was started (with lot's of backing from Lincoln as a senator) to get black folks out of "White" America. Being an abolitionist didn't not necessarily make you not a bigot. I think i read somewhere too, where there were more true abolitionist in the old south than in the north.

    Maybe that was the percentage of population but not ownership. I could see 10% but I though I read 2% but been awhile and could be mistaken.
    What most historians DO NOT write is that Lincoln was bigoted against blacks.

    The main reason for the Emancipation Proclamation was military strategy. Lincoln wanted blacks in the south to cause problems behind the confederate lines and pull troops from the front lines.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  14. #14
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Yes, there were white slaves. Every time slavery comes up, someone pulls "white people were slaved too" out of their butt. Let's face it, blacks were enslaved in America in HUGE numbers. Free labor benefited America collectively, and the individuals who owned slaves. Did we need slavery, yes, I believe we did, being a young nation, we needed to labor force, the free labor force.
    Not quite correct. African Americans were enslaved in AFRICA by other African AmericanS and then sold to whomever would buy them.

    No labor is free, even from slaves.

    Several fallacies (probably based on misinformation received) in your statement.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  15. #15
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by OldCurlyWolf View Post
    Not quite correct. African Americans were enslaved in AFRICA by other African AmericanS and then sold to whomever would buy them.

    No labor is free, even from slaves.

    Several fallacies (probably based on misinformation received) in your statement.
    Slaves were worth a good sum of money back then. If they lived a long life, they would definitely have made their owner a good sum of money. I should have not used the word "enslaved," as if they were not slaves prior to being brought to America...they were enslaved before they came to America.

    "Roots" didn't describe their enslavement very well. They made it look like the white man came to shore, got himself some blacks, enslaved then, then brought them back to North America.

    Regardless of when they were enslaved, they were purchased because they had value. heck, you drop a thousand bucks on a really sturdy slave, and you get years of hard work out of them. When I say that it was free, of course, the owner would have to pay money for the slave, but the slave would be worked hard for their entire life, and they were able to do many more things than cattle. As I said in previous posts, IMO, the Indian did not make a good slave, they fought to the death...well, they were also starved, and slaughtered.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247
    I think the 2% figure for salve ownership applies to those who owned more than one slave. Many families owned one or possibly two "house" slaves that helped with the household chores such as washing or cooking. A second one, usually the husband of the house slave was used for caring of the horses and as a driver and what we would call now as a gofer. Usually these house slaves were treated more as a member of the family than the traditional slave. An example could be Sally Hemming who reportedly was actually the half-sister of Mrs. Jefferson.

    Slaves were not free labor as not only did the owner have a large investment in the purchase of the slave but also the care and feeding of him/her and they had to maintain their investment to recover their cost. One of the reasons that slavery died out so quickly in the North was that they found it much cheaper to use indentured servants than slaves as once the servitude was over they no longer had to worry with them. They also did not have to worry with the care and feeding of them as unlike slaves it was up to the person to maintain his own care.

    I am not pro-slavery or anywhere close to it but we have to put it into prespective and at that time it was a world-wide accepted practice and only a minority of slaves that left Africa during that time came to the US. The majority went to other areas of the world including Hatai, Cuba and many of the South American countries as well as othe parts of the world. We also need to remember that slavery is not dead but hundreds of thousand of people are still slaves in many parts of the world.

    As a young boy I grew up on the farm that many of the workers could almost be considered slaves. The big difference was that they were free to choose which farmer they worked for. However the farm owner provided them a place to live, looked after their health care, financial problems and too often their legal problems. I remember many a Sunday morning my Father or Grand-Father getting a call from the local police telling them to come get their fellow out of jail.

    Salvery in the South was dying when the war broke out and would have been done away almost completely within 10 years. But the conflict at the time was too wide for either side to terms and there were too many other underlying problems. Slavery was the cry but the whole thing was a war of economics, religion and politics. Slavery itself was not the actual cause just the catalyst.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Slaves were not "free labor." The problem with slavery is that the victims cannot freely negotiate their compensation. Slave owners did have to provide for their slaves, and there was a cost associated with that provision.

    That cost, of course, was significantly lower than what would have been negotiated had the slaves been free men and able to sell their own labor at market value.

    Lincoln was not "bigoted." He, like almost everyone of the day, was ignorant of the differences, or the amazing lack thereof, between the "races."

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Slaves were not "free labor." The problem with slavery is that the victims cannot freely negotiate their compensation. Slave owners did have to provide for their slaves, and there was a cost associated with that provision.

    That cost, of course, was significantly lower than what would have been negotiated had the slaves been free men and able to sell their own labor at market value.

    Lincoln was not "bigoted." He, like almost everyone of the day, was ignorant of the differences, or the amazing lack thereof, between the "races."
    Lincoln was a bigot!!! There are many quotes from him to support that.

    Whats odd is you find it amazing there are a lack of differences? Skin color is purely cosmetic there are no differences between the human beings on this planet.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Regular Member Mas49.56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Lincoln was a bigot!!! There are many quotes from him to support that.

    Whats odd is you find it amazing there are a lack of differences? Skin color is purely cosmetic there are no differences between the human beings on this planet.
    Not entirely correct, ask any Radiologic Technologist. I was taught in school that black patients of the same size as white or latino patients require slightly higher radiation dose settings to achieve the same picture quality. Black patients generally have greater tissue density and to not do them a disservice and expose them with a repeat Xray, use a little more dose in the first place. Their are a few more medical differences which I will not get into here. Oh, and I wonder what the media would say if the sons of confederate veterans celebrated Robert E Lee's birthday in a park with MLK's statue covered up.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Mas49.56 View Post
    Not entirely correct, ask any Radiologic Technologist. I was taught in school that black patients of the same size as white or latino patients require slightly higher radiation dose settings to achieve the same picture quality. Black patients generally have greater tissue density and to not do them a disservice and expose them with a repeat Xray, use a little more dose in the first place. Their are a few more medical differences which I will not get into here. Oh, and I wonder what the media would say if the sons of confederate veterans celebrated Robert E Lee's birthday in a park with MLK's statue covered up.
    There clearly are differences. My point was that there is that the lack of differences would amaze the folks of Lincoln's time.

    Some folks (not you) just want to twist what others say and don't know the meaning of the word "bigot."

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by OldCurlyWolf View Post
    What most historians DO NOT write is that Lincoln was bigoted against blacks.

    The main reason for the Emancipation Proclamation was military strategy. Lincoln wanted blacks in the south to cause problems behind the confederate lines and pull troops from the front lines.
    True. It is also fact that Lincoln offered any states who surrendered returned to the union the ability to keep their slaves. If they returned before the Emancipation Proclamation took effect.
    Last edited by NRAMARINE; 01-23-2011 at 12:00 AM. Reason: spelling error
    This site has been hijacked by leftists who attack opposition to further their own ends. Those who have never served this country and attack those who do are no longer worthy of my time or attention.

  22. #22
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    There clearly are differences. My point was that there is that the lack of differences would amaze the folks of Lincoln's time.

    Some folks (not you) just want to twist what others say and don't know the meaning of the word "bigot."
    Definition of BIGOT

    : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance


    Maybe you need to look up the definition because Lincoln definitely met the requirements. Actually seems to describe ......ahhh never mind.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Mas49.56 View Post
    Not entirely correct, ask any Radiologic Technologist. I was taught in school that black patients of the same size as white or latino patients require slightly higher radiation dose settings to achieve the same picture quality. Black patients generally have greater tissue density and to not do them a disservice and expose them with a repeat Xray, use a little more dose in the first place. Their are a few more medical differences which I will not get into here. Oh, and I wonder what the media would say if the sons of confederate veterans celebrated Robert E Lee's birthday in a park with MLK's statue covered up.
    Can you provide a cite for the medical issues? I have never heard of that. Maybe melatonin would hamper a bit but no idea, and that still is cosmetic. Although curious on a scientific note. My point was that we are all the same.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  24. #24
    Regular Member XD40coyote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    woman stuck in Maryland, ,
    Posts
    709
    The city is called WASHINGTON DC- where does the NAACP think the WASHINGTON part comes from?

    And why do they still insist on being called the NAACP? They like the term "colored"?

    >> shaking head<< and

  25. #25
    Regular Member Brimstone Baritone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Leeds, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    786
    You mean NAACP actually stands for something?

    I had a history teacher put it in perspective for me long ago. He said to the class "What would you do if the principal came in and said 'Starting tomorrow, we will all have to share our classes with dogs. They are no different from us, so treat them like you would anyone else'." We all though he was nuts, until he said "That's what it felt like when they desegregated the schools. That's what it felt like when they ended slavery. Sometimes people can believe something so strongly that, looking back, seems so foolish."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •