- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/23/14 at 8:24 am to oldcharlie8
Your grandpa was part of a sleeper cell. Sorry.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 8:27 am to jimbeam
The pledge itself is a statist reinforcement tool.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 9:03 am to TrueTiger
Notice how most of the changes to the Pledge have seemingly reinforced loyalty to government:
quote:
Official versions
1892
"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
1892 to 1922
"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
1923
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States and to the republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
1924 to 1954
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
1954 to Present
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Posted on 2/23/14 at 9:17 am to weagle99
quote:
Notice how most of the changes to the Pledge have seemingly reinforced loyalty to government:
and to God in the latter, obviously.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 9:28 am to jimbeam
Their son is retarded.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:23 pm to jimbeam
quote:
Saw elsewhere someone saying their son refused to say the Pledge in Spanish in Spanish class.
What is the PT's view on this?
My view is that no kid should be forced by the state to recite the pledge.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 6:05 pm to DeathValley85
quote:Rome didn't have an "official" language either. How did allowing millions of foreigners to flood into their empire work out for them?
As a country we don't have an official language correct? If so then I think people shouldn't take issue.
Libs know what they're doing. They're fricking up America as much as possible. They never offer a logical answer as to why they want to flood Mexicans into the country. It's always their typical emotionally-driven bullshite about diversity and racism, which is how you know it's bullshite.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 6:18 pm to blueboy
quote:
Rome didn't have an "official" language either. How did allowing millions of foreigners to flood into their empire work out for them?
The US has never had one...are you saying we've just been lucky to date?
quote:
the Continental Congress saw a need to broaden the appeal of the Revolutionary cause by translating key documents into German and French. The ideas of political liberty were universal, after all, and there was no reason to restrict their expression to English. In that era the major language question was whether to set official standards for American English, as proposed by John Adams in his call for a language academy. A majority of early leaders rejected this idea, believing that government had no business mandating the people's language choices. Their reliance on private efforts like Noah Webster's speller and dictionary amounted to a deliberate "policy not to have a policy," Heath argues. In the main, English was regarded as a practical instrument rather than a symbolic unifier.
It's funny how I don't hear more sentiments like this from all of our "founding father" loving right-wingers.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 6:24 pm to Big Scrub TX
Lucky? No. I'm saying that the Mexicans weren't flooding into the US like they have been in recent decades, and the founders had no reason to believe that anything like this would ever happen.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 6:26 pm to blueboy
quote:
Rome didn't have an "official" language either. How did allowing millions of foreigners to flood into their empire work out for them?
I'm rusty on my history, but I'm pretty sure that Rome's downfall had nothing to do with this.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 8:10 pm to LordSaintly
quote:Yes you are rusty. People cite many factors in Rome's fall, but this is always one of them. Liberal academics don't like this fact, so I'm not surprised that you think it had "nothing to do" with the fall.
I'm rusty on my history, but I'm pretty sure that Rome's downfall had nothing to do with this.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 8:12 pm to blueboy
quote:
the founders had no reason to believe that anything like this would ever happen.
In their time it was the Germans.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 11:07 pm to jimbeam
quote:Did they also say they smacked their dumbass kid in the head? I assume the kid says it in English.
Saw elsewhere someone saying their son refused to say the Pledge in Spanish in Spanish class.
What is the PT's view on this?
Posted on 2/23/14 at 11:08 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:whether or not the Pledge is worth saying is another matter.
Still pledging to the Stars and Stripes.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 11:15 pm to blueboy
quote:
Yes you are rusty. People cite many factors in Rome's fall, but this is always one of them. Liberal academics don't like this fact, so I'm not surprised that you think it had "nothing to do" with the fall.
You got that off some right wing website didn't you.
Their wasn't any one factor that led to the fall of Rome(Western). Off the Top of my head
1) Constant Wars and Overstretched Military
2) Military Spending
3) Slavery/Unemployment/Welfare
4) Political Corruption
5) Christianity
6) Military makeup (Alot of German Mercs who didn't give a dam about Rome)
7) Barbarian Invasions (Now with Roman military expertise)
8) Failing Economy
9) Declining Population
10)Large Scale immigration of Germans because of the Huns
The Hun Invasions basically force something like a 100,000 Germans into roman territory over a relative short period of time. The emperor negotiated terms of settlement with entire Germanic tribes. The Germans were more like conscripted refugees than traditional immigrants. The empire basically gave large amounts of land to Germanic tribes in exchange for becoming vassal states to farm and defend the frontier. The Visigoths turned on Rome but still returned the Roman side again when the threat of the Huns came back.Once the Hun empire, collapsed the Germans said FU Rome.
However the empire was a shell of its former self long before the arrival of the Germans. The Germans put the final nail in the coffin. The Romans were negotiating with them to begin with out of fear of the inability to deal with the refugees and Huns. A few centuries earlier it was the Roman way or the Highway.
At least Rome(the city) itself would of never been glorious as it was without immigration. It had 1,000,000+ people and awe inspiring buildings for the time. Their wouldn't be another city with more than a million people for more than a thousand years.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News