Acceptable registrations in the queue through March 16 at 11:00a ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.

Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619

The 1619 Project

Debate and discussion of current events and political issues across the U.S. and throughout the World. Be forewarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**
Deleted User 12047

The 1619 Project

Post by Deleted User 12047 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:29 pm

Interesting discussion points here...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... avery.html

Thoughts? I'll post mine after a few others chime in.



User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 10100
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by TC Talks » Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:20 pm

I am happy we have a chance to face our blighted past. I am betting our more race ignorant posters will remain silent.


“The more you can increase fear of drugs, crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.”
― Noam Chomsky

Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.

User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7141
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by Bryce » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:28 pm

The N.Y. Slimes wont let me read it unless I subscribe. I think not.


New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.

Deleted User 12047

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by Deleted User 12047 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:46 am

Bryce wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:28 pm
The N.Y. Slimes wont let me read it unless I subscribe. I think not.
Name calling, so effective in making your point. BTW, I read both the NY Times and the WSJ so I get both sides of the story.

In brief, the 1619 Project from the Times contends that the history of slavery in America is important, relates to many things that are happening today and pretty much swept under the carpet in history books. Some pretty compelling arguments are made.. and to be clear, this is not about reparations or payments, just the history.

I find it very disturbing that in my lifetime, World War II veterans were beaten and lynched with no-one being held accountable.

Feel free to continue name calling, if that makes you happy.



User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7141
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by Bryce » Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:15 am

Radio Sucks wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:46 am


Feel free to continue name calling, if that makes you happy.
Most likely just as happy as saying Radio Sucks.


New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.

Circle Seven
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2015 10:53 am
Location: Fishing somewhere

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by Circle Seven » Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:29 am

Radio Sucks wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:46 am
Bryce wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:28 pm
The N.Y. Slimes wont let me read it unless I subscribe. I think not.
Name calling, so effective in making your point. BTW, I read both the NY Times and the WSJ so I get both sides of the story.
In defense of Bryce, asking folks opinion about a link that requires a subscription, well …
Same with WSJ really. Get to read about a paragraph and a half, then need to subscribe to see the rest of the article.



FET-500
Posts: 464
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:22 am

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by FET-500 » Mon Aug 26, 2019 12:16 pm

This was a weak troll which died. Try again.



Deleted User 12047

Re: The 1619 Project

Post by Deleted User 12047 » Tue Aug 27, 2019 8:51 am

Circle Seven wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:29 am


In defense of Bryce, asking folks opinion about a link that requires a subscription, well …
Impolite behavior should never be defended. I sometimes forget that I do have online subscriptions and don't run into the same paywall that others do. I will try to be more careful.



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic