Christopher Hitchens on Jefferson & Bush (1 of 8)

[Evolvedprimate]

Too bad no one figured out that his microphone is not connected and what we hear is from microphones to pick up audience reaction.

[cnestudy1]

@Evolvedprimate lol are you serious?

[FlavioJamesMockler]

3:29

[lector0003]

Hitchens looks most dashing in this clip ...

[xoxgodofgodsgodxx]

I would have had a ball editing that introductory speech.

[fr0ber]

3:14 Hitchens arrives to the podium 

[fdantheman]

@fr0ber arrives at

[Evolvedprimate]

For sure there was a christian audio engineer in the house.

[XieYali]

I can't believe Christopher Hitchens came to my former university!!!!

[PatchesRips]

@XieYali "my former university!!!!"

When did it stop being a university? :)

[XieYali]

@PatchesRips

I'm sorry. I might have said my former alma mater. I used to attend that university.

[MaskedMarvyl]

Poor Hitchens; he can't let go of his idealism regarding Jefferson, a slaveholder who raped his own underaged 14 year-old slaves, fathered multiple children on them, and never released them (or his own children) from slavery... until on his deathbed. Guess he was just hedging his bets in case the god he didn't believe in existed. I'm an atheist, but Jefferson was the worst of hypocrites. He wrote essays on freedom and the evil of tyranny, then raped young slaves at night.

what a guy....

[SIMKINETICS]

@MaskedMarvyl 'slaves'? Sally Heming was one person, and Jefferson's relationship with her may have been mutually agreeable. A bigger sin of his was support for expulsion of aboriginal people from occupied lands. In the balance, Jefferson was mostly a great person. You might pardon him for being human.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@SIMKINETICS, your response gave me the heebie-jeebies.

First, yes, slaves. He had many; please look it up.

Second - "may" have been mutually agreeable? Wow, I didn't know you had powers of seeing into the past; did you find her diary? That would be neat, since slaves were forbidden to read. Third, it's ok to rape just "one " slave? Whoa.

Jefferson was "mostly" a great person? I might "pardon him for being human"? I didn't know that raping your slave was being human.

Just evil.

[SIMKINETICS]

@MaskedMarvyl Please send my your documentation or links that claim he raped slave girls. Any good skeptic will allow more information for evaluation of credibility. My use of the word 'may' logically allows doubt for or against any statement; it's non-declarative, not anti-declarative. You inferred meaning that wasn't there. I don't surely know, either way until I see proof or a credible acount of Jefferson's rape of slaves. Simple as that!

[MaskedMarvyl]

@SIMKINETICS, it's always interesting to me when people ask for links to a subject that yields instant results when you search Google.

I got dozens of results on this particular top when I searched "Jefferson Sally Hemings". The first and foremost is "Frontline: Jefferson's blood", on pbs org,

which devotes an entire segment to it. Of course, I doubt very seriously, unless Hemings herself appeared and declared that he raped her, that you would believe it; and then I still doubt it.

[SIMKINETICS]

@MaskedMarvyl It's always interesting to me when people state as fact unverifiable speculation, based on innuendo. It is your responsibility (not mine) to defend your public statements with evidence when challenged; my responsiblity is to look at the evidence you submit. I looked at all of the Frontline piece and the top 10 non-blog articles under 'Jefferson as rapist' in Google Search. None states anything as other than speculation that Jefferson raped. You have been irresponsible.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@SIMKINETICS, It seems we have entered into a pissing contest. But I'll try to respond.

Responsibility, you say. Jefferson owned slaves. For years, apologists have denied he used any for sex; now, they are making the half-assed claim that since we can't PROVE it was non-consensual, it may have been.

Slaves cannot consent. Property cannot say no. That makes it abuse.

The truth is sometimes ugly. Jefferon's behavior was very ugly.

Accept the facts...or not. That's your responsibility.

[SIMKINETICS]

@MaskedMarvyl No pissing contest. Evidentiary rules of logic define validity. The word 'may' is inconclusive. There may have been dinosaurs on the moon. Jefferson's continued ownership of slaves was a choice driven by concern for them being put on the open market in those days; his debts would have forced him to sell slaves. As a man so fundamentally opposed to oppression, it's doubtful that he would rape slaves, property or not.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@SIMKINETICS, "Evidentiary rules of logic define validity". I cannot compete with your verbosity (nor pomposity), nor do I want to. I did not want to continue this, but your two irrationalities demand it: Jefferson was "concerned" for his slaves being on the "open market", so kept them?? He could have Freed them. He was the equivalent of a millionaire; he would have survived the financial loss.

Slaves cannot say "No". So it is rape.

Keep going around in circular denial if you want.

[SIMKINETICS]

@MaskedMarvyl #1) The Frontline piece (you recommended) explained Jefferson's debt problems. #2) Slaves can also say 'yes' willingly; there's the hole in your argument.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@SIMKINETICS, Hmm.... "slaves can also say "yes" willingly".

They can say yes willingly to a white man impregnating them at 14?

If you believe that, there is a hole alright; but I'm afraid it's in your head. Until you are an enslaved human being kept for unpaid work, and then your master comes and uses you for sex, you have no right to say so blithely that a slave can say "yes". Tell me, sir, can a slave say "no"? Plenty were whipped for that.

I'm afraid you're the one with the hole.

[SIMKINETICS]

@MaskedMarvyl You need to study logic & critical thinking. Innuendo is not logic. If you made these claims against a contemporary person, you'd be sued for liable and you'd lose.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@SIMKINETICS, that is your only response? Another non-response? It was a simple question: can a slave say "no" without punishment? If so, links and examples, please, as you would ask.

I need to study logic? Well, then I'd best not start with yours, because there is none there; just vague statements, "maybes", and circular arguments. However, you win; I cannot possibly prevail against your dazzling critical thinking. Have fun arguing and justifying to yourself (as I'm sure you will.....)

[PatchesRips]

@MaskedMarvyl A lot of the US Founding Fathers were hypocrites on the matter of slavery. George Washington himself owned dozens of slaves at the time of this death, despite the fact that he, like Jeffereson, reportedly grew increasingly uncomfortable with the obvious dichotomy between his public assertions and his private actions.

A more admirable figure who proves it's possible to rise above the limitations of the day is Ben Franklin. A slave owner in his youth, he became an abolitionist.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@PatchesRips, I couldn't agree with you more. Jefferson even raped his underaged slaves and made them pregnant; he never released them, including his own children he fathered, from slavery, until on his deathbaed.

Guess he was making a last -minute deal with God.

Imagine your own dad keeping you in slavery for life. He earned the "Father of the Year" award", as well as "Hypocrite of the Bicentenniel"....

Let freedom reign.......

[PatchesRips]

@MaskedMarvyl "He earned the "Father of the Year" award", as well as "Hypocrite of the Bicentenniel".... Let freedom reign......."

Yeah, somehow that never made it into Schoolhouse Rock, did it? :D

[BelfastAtheist]

@MaskedMarvyl

I'm read almost of Jefferson's works as well as most reliable historic accounts of his life. None of them mentioned a single occurence of him ever having impregnated one of his slaves, especially not an underage one. What you're saying is a vicious lie, undeserving of yourself and of the people watching this video whom (I presume) have studied Jefferson to some degree.

He did keep slaves, he bought hundreds of them. But you don't seem to be annoyed at that..

[singinghawk]

@BelfastAtheist , uh..... yeah. Somehow I don't think Jefferson was going to refer to his sexual exploitation of his underaged slaves, while writing essays on freedom. Just a wild hunch I have. As far as my "not being annoyed" at his buying slaves, these message boards don't give much room, so I had to pick the most egregious acts of hypocrisy he committed; that seemed to me impregnating a 14 year-old slave when he was 42, and never freeing his own children from slavery. What a role model...

[BelfastAtheist]

@MaskedMarvyl

Even so, this must be contextualized. Ad populam arguments are of course fallacious.But the entire ethos of Jefferson's time saw nothing morally reprehensible about slavery. This does not mean it was acceptable, it just makes it highly unlike that one mans Moral Compass is going to be so fine-tuned he disagrees with the very inception of one of the largest Social factors of his time. Hell, even Lincoln was a white supremacist who wanted to colonize the slaves before freeing them.

[singinghawk]

@BelfastAtheist , "ad populum arguments are of course fallacious"? Don't disappear up your own asshole.

Since when is an "ad populam argument" automatically wrong?

"Ethos of Jefferson's time saw nothing morally reprehensible about slavery"? Whoa. Really. Then can you explain all of the writings and speeches At That Time condemning slavery as evil, by people that walked their talk unlike Jefferson? I think either you need to do historical research which you haven't, or find a better library...

[BelfastAtheist]

@singinghawk

''Since when is an "ad populam argument" automatically wrong?''

I'll let you figure it out for yourself.

Incidentally, Jefferson did talk out against Slavery..several times infact. However he gave up his efforts, unlike Wilberforce he just don't have the drive to take it as a personal mission. But really, look it up..if you think he never spoke out against it, you're entirely wrong.

.

[ltmaniac]

@singinghawk "Since when is an "ad populam argument" automatically wrong?" LOL Take Intro to Philosophy buddy.

[OatSharpener]

@singinghawk Ofcourse an argument based on an appeal to popularity is wrong. Use your brain.

There is no shortage of idiots on this planet who are perfectly willing to beleive stupid shit in great numbers. Simply pointing out a concensus needs more to back it up

eg, pointing out the scientific concensus for Evolution being true and explaining the strict limitations in which that concesus was formed (the scientific method)

[w119bjk]

Hitchens starts his speech at 3:30 for those interested in skipping the beginning BS

[w119bjk]

I hate these long intros on every Hitchens appearance anywhere

[equsnarnd]

A lonely impulse of delight

Drove to this tumult in the clouds;

I balanced all, brought all to mind,

The years to come seemed waste of breath,

A waste of breath the years behind

In balance with this life, this death.

[ShockOfTod]

I agree that Canada should not recognize the Queen, but being American would be worse.

[cshubs]

Hitch comes on @ 3:30.

[bnjones28]

Hitchens, as recently as 2009, has referred to himself as "a Marxist".

Why doyou people think this SOB is such a great guy. Please som one respond.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

@bnjones28 Because we don't watch or have a very high opinion of Glen Beck, or red baiting conservatives in general... or at least I don't.

He's a great guy... because you can learn more about history by listening to him than by taking most contemporary courses... unfortunately.

[Vomitonthecross]

@bnjones28 Well I'd have to respond by saying that I was personally enlightened by reading the works of Marx, and you shouldn't blame Hitchens for it either. Communism and Socialism are great things, and as Hitchens says of Marx in The Portable Atheist that Marx, "hoped in vain to do for political economy what Charles Darwin had done for the natural sciences." So I don't any reason to say "SOB" of a man who would cheer such a great ideology.

[bnjones28]

@Vomitonthecross Do you know the difference between Marxism, Socialism and Communism? What to you think are so great about Marxism, Socialism and Communism? So you hate everything about the US Constitution.

[hempartist420]

@bnjones28what does the US constitution say what about Marxism, Socialism, and Communism?

[Skillbus]

@bnjones28 Sauce please. Ensure that you can give me a quote from him saying he was a current Marxist in 2009, not a former one.

[hempartist420]

@bnjones28 we don't red flag someone because of one word like beck. you have to listen to someone AND UNDERSTAND THEM, before you just discard someone

[equallyeasilyfuqyou]

@bnjones28 you're an idiot.

[MaskedMarvyl]

@bnjones28 , I'm responding, because you seem kind of lonely.

However, after doing several searches, I can't find any Hitchens videos or quotes from him saying he's a Marxist.

Maybe he was referring to the "Marx Brothers". You know he's a huge fan, right?

[PatchesRips]

@bnjones28 I agree with a fair amount of what he says, particularly on the matter of religion, but he's so disagreeably caustic and far too given to absolutism and chauvinistic militarism for my liking. But as LBJ famously remarked, I'd rather have him in the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.

[JimmyMay1967]

Hitchens needs to keep up. The descendents of the child (Thomas Woodson) Sally Hemings concieved in Paris have been confirmed by 8 separate DNA tests to have NO link to ANY male Jefferson. The link to a A Jefferson Male is ONLY to the last child--when Jefferson was 64 and had prostate cancer (and almost certainly impotent). If there was a relationship (and it's not that probable) there's no evidence it started when Sally Hemings was 14 years old in Paris. Too bad Hitchens' doesn't report THAT.

[MrSalamander7]

Thug! Even Hitchens agrees we should annex Canada!

[procommenter]

It's the onerous task of army flunkies to fight logical appointment, follow the paths of least resistance, eat in formation, shower in 3 minutes. It's a difficulty what lacks worthwhile session, a traipse minus sashay, a point without puncture, a book without measure, despair lacking regret.

[ParadiseOnLand]

And through this portal (hidden within this pot-hole): We have the dabbler in homosexual deviance, the eugenics' quean Chrissy Hitchens, on his high horse proclaiming that George Orwell was of common intellect.

[Pitfytr]

@ParadiseOnLand You sir are an idiot

[ParadiseOnLand]

@Pitfytr : Take a Midol, sister.

[Illimitus]

On Canada, he is correct.

[procommenter]

It's Ted Bundy!

[rudenoodle]

haha

[auriciangelescu]

Too bad the audio is poor...

[adknerr]

Hitch starts at 3:30...

[Wedsheport]

@adknerr thank you for 3 and a half minutes of my life! (I'm so grateful i even devote half a second to you by writing this^^)

[scotttebben]

@adknerr thanks for the heads up. I have no time for retards.

[ewinbius]

@adknerr a gent you are

[wormdrink414]

Mr. Hitchens must be featured in more videos on youtube than any other non-fictional character. I typed in Thomas Jefferson biography and this video came up 2nd.

[eeClaytonification]

why do they inssit upon long and boring intros

[procommenter]

Where are the Clintons? Quick! Lob

in the Waco-strength tear gas!!!

[procommenter]

Hitchens might die soon. Keep

your fingers crossed!

[helmutoil]

He might but his legacy will out live you! Long live the real thinkers!

[procommenter]

Your crush on Hitchens isn't

any business of mine.

[freef49]

I hope we have a day of silence for him

[fomastephanovitch]

I'd feel nausious if I had to do an intro for anyone.

[july11867]

Haha, it's Billy Joe Hitchens

[procommenter]

The blood-lust of mothers knows no satiety...

[ivlfounder]

A Saint he was not and a devil he was not.

He was an impressive man though.

[procommenter]

I agree.

[TheReboundingWorld]

Ted Bundy lives under the name Gleaves Whitney.

[BrownBear019]

he looks damn good in this vid. rockin the red and black combo like a pro.

[MaxwellBennett]

if this bloke doesn't stop drinking he's gonna get a liver disease and then we'd never here his awesomeness again.

[Freshhhhh1982]

I know. I hope he lives a lon life.

[Ragnaros12345]

He's very healthy for his age. He turned 60 just recently.

[TheScrewOnHead]

I wish the audio wasn't so bad.

[procommenter]

This Gleaves fellow resembles Ted Bundy.

[procommenter]

It's been written that Thomas Jefferson maintained a Congo Harem in reference to the Sally Hemmings' affair. Jefferson wrote about many things and spoke French, Latin, Greek, with a smattering of Italian & Hebrew. If he were alive today he wouldn't align himself with atheists. He would find their sacrilege, & propensity to distort unappealing.

[angryafro]

procommenter: Stop posting, you moron.

[procommenter]

Thomas Jefferson was a contradictory, aggravating ambivert (one who is midpoint betwixt introvert & extrovert). He is not all things to all people. He was not a heathen, nor a hedonist, nor an "atheist," as he was far too bright for these stupefying/stultifying labels.

[ivlfounder]

You've written beautifully.

Jefferson was rather to the point though when he wrote of Jesus"

"To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself.'

[marsCubed]

procommenter, Much of Jefferson resolves very well in the context of Spinoza.

The quasi atheist/deist concept that everything is God. means that religions are seen as divisive and ignorant entities; 'Those who know not what they do'.

For if everything is unified as One, then all are worthy, property and authority lose all legitimacy, reason and honesty become the imperative; harmony in the garden.

Spinoza was at the heart of the enlightenment, this is still an intellectual challenge to religion.

[procommenter]

Man's perceptions are meager, therefor Man's assessment of the Universe is infantile.

[marsCubed]

It is more like, religion defends inequality and justifies brutality by saying there is a magic bad substance people should smite.

However if everything is God, then evil is ignorance, not knowing why to forgive.

Religion is a family united against the infinite other.

Religion is false, for it stands against that which is not itself.

but if God is everything then that is the reason to love one's enemy.

Jesus was obviously deist, killed by religion and property; Religion is the darkness.

[marsCubed]

All you do procommenter; testifies to you as someone who justifies the most awful torture being inflicted upon the majority of the garden for eternity.

Think about this, it is what you resolve to as action in this life. If God is infinite then you define yourself as a bubble against the infinity; opposed to life and garden as they are.

yours is the slithering way of deceptions and looking away, telling lies for the pride of your cult.

[marsCubed]

If God has meaning then it is everything, or God is finite.

Religion alone seeks to re-define God as limited, it lifts a part up to sits beside on throne.

God on a stick for authority.

Religion is drivel, it obscures light, reason, knowledge and connection for it's own glory,

religion is the sin.

As pride fades people come together.

without pride in religion; peace reigns, so we may be gardeners, not selfish religious thugs.

God as big as a country, skin, creed, street-gang;

religion is the sin.

[procommenter]

You should spend less time

playing Dungeons & Dragons.

[omgitsfed]

Why the FUCK does this comment have 9 thumbs down?

[fomastephanovitch]

Prescriptive teachings which all of us admire.

Truly.

[aboverise]

he means wikipedia ....weversonman

[hornybodhisattva]

chirs is my hero yeah!!!

modern day THOMAS PAINE!

[Lion117]

Yates!(another writer he knows) Hitchens truely is a men of letters :3

[riv3rrun]

Yeats. :)

[Lion117]

yes, you're right quite important distinction. there is a differnt writer named yates.

but he meant yeats

[weversonman]

Someone please tell me, why does Christopher Hitchens write for Vanity Fair, I thought it is just a fashion magazine?

[Scrapheap71]

Culture, fashion and politics.

wiki is your friend.

[weversonman]

what do you mean by that?

[Scrapheap71]

It took 15 seconds on wiki to find out why Hitchens writes for Vanity Fair.

Why ask questions that can be answered in less than a minute on wiki??

[weversonman]

I'm sorry I don't know what you mean when you say "wiki"

[stevenstreet483]

woo hoo

[sugmegpls]

he always starts off with that grudge comment...i dont see why.

[digitalwaylander]

Probably because his hosts always fawn over him for such an embarrassingly long time.  =)

[weversonman]

I know it's the most pathetic thing the way people lick the boots of their guests as if that really ingratiates them to that person.

[procommenter]

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."

-- Motto on Thos. Jefferson's seal [Circa 1776] -- p. 1002, "Familiar Quotations" by John Bartlett (1955)

[TechnoDevotee]

king and clergy are always getting in the way of science and civilization

[paxtonhume]

religion is a major obstacle to progress, some say without religion we'd have internet by 1600..., sounds a bit exaggerated but who knows?

[jimmbo13]

Ohhh yeaa, especially all those monks who saved and preserved written knowledge during the dark ages were probably the worst offenders against intellectual progress...

[carltb82]

You have a point. The church helped to form universities and translated important texts which laid a foundation for critical thinking BUT we should be most thankful to free-thinkers who stood against the absolutism of the church and sacrificed everything. Its because of generations of free-thinkers that from the renaissance have made christians feel ashamed of their traditional convictions and dogmatic nonsense.

[PeelTower]

All of the 'isms' are inadequate for the complexity of human existence. I have little time for any of them. Instead a principle: let it be done which bestows greatest benefit on the greatest number. This principle seems to agitate the self serving and selfish.

[drmodestoesq]

Yeesh, I didn't want to start an international incident or pissing contest with my initial comment. I was merely pointing out that Hitchen's was rather blithely talking about the failed invasion of my country by people of the imperialist persuasion like Jefferson. It should be quickly added that the war of 1812 was extremely unpopular in the U.S. especially in New England upon whose behalf the war was supposedly being fought. Also, why are so many conservatives watching this Marxist atheist?

[PeelTower]

Marx was a great thinker, not to be confused with Stalin who murdered his marxist rivals. Not a lot of Americans know that. You hear the word 'communist' and something reduces your brain to mush. I suppose you think that trade unions are the spawn of satan too and that banks should get 'commie' bail outs because they're rich? Complexity is inherent in the world, get used to it or be quiet.

[drmodestoesq]

I agree totally, Mr. PeelTower. Getting back to the subject at hand for example. Jefferson wanted to put something about the freedom of all Americans into the declaration of independence( I'm embarrassed to admit my source for this is the film "1776") but was forced to take it out. Of course Jefferson's personal behavior with regards to slavery is well recorded. As for Marx one thing which resonates with me currently is his description of consumerist fetishism. We shop instead of voting.

[highwind8124]

Wait a minute. Hitchens decided to dress like Satan for this?

[robtul12]

Hitchens cannot be more backward on the war in Iraq. He, like other neocons, detests international law and the World Court. He tries to justify this war, though he knows that there is no justification to attack a national that has not attacked you or is on its way to attack you. The U.S. policy in the middle east is lawless.

[jeffbrown8]

to all you America haters-you are losers. Should we want California and New Mexico to return to Mexico? Are you out of your minds?

[jamesjohnking]

We are all humbled by your relentless logic. You make a persuasive - nay, irrefutable - argument.

[polymath7]

A note to anyone who may be called upon to deliver the introduction to one of these debates:

Few will begrudge you your fifteen minutes, but please bear in mind that everyone else wishes it were fewer, and no one, aside from your family and friends, has the slightest interest in hearing what you have to say.

[Jakeblood240]

Amen...seriously. Fast forward to about 3:30 in order to escape witnessing the painful practice of a blow-hard loving his own voice. A refund of 1/3 the ticket price would not be out of order...

[polymath7]

Good lord, was that really only three minutes?

I was not speaking figuratively when I said fifteen.

[jamesjohnking]

Thanks for the heads up. You don't get that time back.

[meiitbe]

whew. what a tie

[drmodestoesq]

Yep, that slave raping, financially irresponsible, dilettante said that the annexation of Canada "was a mere matter of marching." Yet we are still here despite repeated invasions and terrorist attacks from our friends to the south. Maybe if he had the courage to serve in the army during the revolution he would have thought twice about invading Canada even if Great Britain's back was turned with the Napoleonic wars. My thoughts turn to poor Mexico and the territory she lost to U.S. invasion.

[Babaretro222]

the mexicans where defeated by 100 texans just like George W. Bush... now take all those big words and shove em up your ass BOO-2-THA-YAH!!!!

[drmodestoesq]

Precisely, the theft of 40 percent of Mexico is a warning to all nations. We must, absolutely must remain united in the face of American imperialism or face the consequences. When Canada was invaded for the second time by America in 1812, many Canadians simply wanted to give up. The brave and farsighted among us realized that no price was to high in the defense of our nation. As a result of this we remained independent and did not suffer the disasters which resulted from the Am. Revolution.

[zutroy1]

Saying that in 1812 Canadians wanted to just give up is extremely insulting and factually baseless.

If it were not for the militias of Canadian citizens delaying the American advances long enough for the Royal Army to come from Fort York to meet and defeat the US Army, history would have been very different.

No, Canadians resisted tooth and nail and fought and died for their freedom, not to mention the incursion into Washington where we burned the White House.

[drmodestoesq]

Read your history my compatriot friend. I said many Canadians thought resistance was futile, not all. Canadians reported to their militia duties in large numbers, whereas our American friends, especially those in New England (who the war was laughably started for) smelled an imperialist rat. They stayed home in droves. However, with patriots like you Zutroy1, I have no fears for the future or independence of our beloved nation. "Loyal she began and loyal she remains".

[drmodestoesq]

They may have been Texans but I very much doubt they were like George W. Bush. I seem to recall that he joined the National Guard to get out of serving in harm's way in Viet Nam. From what I hear Texas, despite stereotypes to the contrary is a pretty politically diverse state. Many Texans well remember what unethical behavior Bush engaged in when the Texas Rangers baseball stadium was being built. Texas under his governership also had the worst air quality in the U.S.

[Babaretro222]

did jeaneane garafola tell you this? do you democrats who cant support our president even when we are under attack live off of these talking points? does it help you sleep at night?

[dpjpike3000]

hell yeah! u tell em buddy

[jeffbrown8]

thank God for Jefferson buying the Louisana Purchase though

[drmodestoesq]

Most historians think that America would have moved west and annexed the west all the way to the Pacific ocean even without the Louisiana purchase. However, the American Indian populations would not have been thanking God; as they were ethnically cleansed and forced at the point of a gun onto reservations were they died in vast numbers.

[meiitbe]

I just returned from Canada and noticed a disturbing and pervasive tendency for them to equate their national pride with how "different" they were from Americans. Sounded a bit too much like the middle child who can only distinguish himself by doing something radically different than his siblings, while never ceasing to mention it in conversation.

Annoying and pathetic. History credits your quaint country with very minimal offerings to civilization, among them Bryan Adams and Martin Short.

[fctchk]

To name a few, try Joni Mitchell,Oscar Peterson,Alexander Graham Bell,Samuel Goldwyn,Glenn Gould,Wayne Gretzky,Michael J. Fox,Jack Warner,Terry Gilliam,Neil Young,Leonard Cohen,James Cameron,Michael Ondaatje,Gordon Lightfoot,Jack Kerouac,Peter Jennings,Mary Pickford "Americas sweetheart" and perhaps not the only one of the aforementioned you assumed to be American.

An annoying, pathetic and pervasive tendency of Americans is to assume that only theirs can be maximal offerings to civilization.

[meiitbe]

I have to admit - you caught me in a giant slip. You convey a list of major contributions, chief among them; Joni Mitchell, who has provided a rather morose subculture with innumerable albums of whining and death howls to compliment their gloomy lifestyles and failed, romantic entanglements.

And I never assumed any on your list were American, certainly not Bell - who was Scottish-born. Interesting, however, that all on your list remained in relative obscurity until coming to the United States.

[fctchk]

Bell carried out breakthrough experiments on one of his inventions - the telephone - in Canada.

But thanks for reminding me of another annoying, pathetic and pervasive tendency of Americans: the facile tendency to assume that unless a contribution to civilization has come from or to the United States it does not exist or, at best, is considered to have "remained in relative obscurity" as such deemed a "minimal offering" if an offering at all.

[meiitbe]

If you continue to quote me, or use my phrases, I'll feel as if I am talking to myself, or even better - proving my original point that those who desperately want to feel better about themselves resort to unoriginal comparisons and contrasts.

Regarding Bell. I took a shit in Italy once, but that doesn't make it an Italian piece of excrement, does it?

QED, I think. In any case, my original, immature comment has succeeded in irritating someone. Thus, my work is done.

[drmodestoesq]

I one hundred per cent agree Mr. Meiitbe. We should be comparing ourselves to Finland or Denmark not the US. If an American state is say, second lowest in income or educational standards they always whisper "Thank God for Mississippi." Similarly, Canadians are only being complacent by comparing themselves to America. Why not compare ourselves to Argentina, they went from 1st world nation to 3rd world. America also engaged in this mentality with respect to Britain right after the revolution.

[dgdfhfghgfhgfgffjhj]

Thanks for uploading this.

But I always want to smack the people who do these long blabbering intros. If it takes someone 3 minutes to introduce someone, they aren't very good at introductions.

[888berg]

totally.

[deadacc29343]

My hunter got level 64 while he was blathering.

Surely it's just a coincidence...

[DeusNova]

Thanks!