Tea partier: "Had there not been slavery in the South, the economy would've fallen"

Tea Party activists in Tennessee are urging lawmakers to change that state's school curriculum to require schools to teach differently on slavery.

"My biggest concern is that important information is being omitted, which creates a negative light on our Founding Fathers," said Tea Party activist Brian Rieck.

Many members of the group are asking Tennessee lawmakers to tweak textbooks so that doesn't happen. Notably, they're hoping to make changes in how slavery and encroachment on Native Americans are portrayed to students. "Slavery is of course portrayed in the textbooks nowadays I'm sure as a totally negative thing. Had there not been slavery in the South, the economy would've fallen," Rieck said.

Emphasis mine.

These people want us to gloss over the very real human toll of slavery. They want us to believe that if the slave in the picture above hadn't suffered through that, the economy of this country would have faltered.

It's bad enough that history courses gloss over discrimination against Catholics, Jews, immigrants, and other groups. Even worse, students hear little mention of the brutality faced by Native Americans as they were forcibly removed from their lands.

Now this.

You know what is said about how those who don't learn from history. These people want to condemn our kids to repeat history.

CONGRATULATIONS PRESIDENT DUKAKIS!!!

Michael Dukakis, Forty-First President of the United States

Okay, so he's not President yet, but he's gonna win, because it's the end of July and he's dominating George Bush, 55-38%! So you might as well call him our next President!

In the aftermath of the Democratic National Convention, the party's nominee, Michael S. Dukakis, has expanded his lead among registered voters over Vice President Bush, the probable Republican nominee, according to a Gallup Poll.

This was among the findings of a national public opinion poll of 948 registered voters conducted late last week for Newsweek magazine by the Gallup Organization. The telephone interviews took place on July 21, which was the last night of the convention, and on the night after that.

Fifty-five percent of the 948 registered voters interviewed in the poll said they preferred to see Mr. Dukakis win the 1988 Presidential election, while 38 percent said they preferred to see Mr. Bush win. The poll had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus four percentage points.

This represented a shift in Mr. Dukakis's lead from the 47 percent to 41 percent advantage he held in the last pre-convention Gallup Poll, taken by telephone July 8-10. In that poll, 1,001 registered voters were interviewed.

It's refreshing to know that after eight long years of Republican rule, we will have a Democrat in the White House!

--------------------------------------------------

Except, of course, that Dukakis lost.

Granted, the poll was taken 15 weeks before the 1988 election, and we are less than 14 weeks from the 2008 election. Plus, this poll came on the heels of the Democratic National Convention, before the Republican convention started.

And yes, the Democrats are viewed in a much more favorable light than Republicans in 2008, something that couldn't be said two decades ago. And the Republicans are nominating a less-than-inspiring McCain to succeed an unpopular Bush, twenty years after an uninspiring Dukakis was nominated to succeed Mr. Likable.

However, Obama's lead over McCain is considerably smaller. And this poll form 1988 showed Dukakis above the all-important 50% mark.

My point is that so much can change in so little time. The election is 96 days away, which leaves plenty of time for fraud, Willie Horton-style attacks, and the like...

...and plenty of time for you and me to do something about it. Register some voters. Talk with your neighbors, friends, family members, etc. Write a letter to the editor.

Our nation - really, our world - need Barack, and Barack is counting on you and me. So please don't allow complacency to creep in.

Bits of Tid: June 6, 2008

• In case you haven't heard, the DNC will join the Obama campaign in not allowing lobbyist or PAC money.
• Powerful:
  
  
• My computer desktop:
  
  Get yours here.
  
• My aunt was laid off yesterday. In Colorado. And she's not alone. Some 'single-state recession' we're having in Michigan, huh?
• Operation Overlord - also known as the Invasion of Normandy - took place 64 years ago today.
• There will be two people on the ballot for New York's 13th District seat in Congress named Francis Powers. The Republican nominee's son is going to run as a Libertarian.
• How is this for a banished phrase?
  

  Now the Real Work Begins - As if all the work done up until this point wasn't real.

• President Bush is so dumb, he thinks the Stanley Cup is something Chris Osgood puts in his pants to protect himself.

McCain opposed bill making MLK Day a holiday

It was forty years ago today that Martin Luther King, Jr., was shot at a hotel in Memphis while supporting striking sanitation workers.

Michigan Congressman John Conyers was the person who introduced a bill to make Martin Luther King, Jr., a holiday.

Four days after Dr. King's death, on April 8, 1968, I introduced a bill that would allow this nation to celebrate the life and work of its greatest civil rights leader with a federal holiday. Though it would take 15 years, from 1968 until 1983, the King Holiday Bill was eventually signed into law through the efforts of friends on the ground and friends in the Congress. Unfortunately, John McCain was not one of those friends.

Conyers adds:

As we observe the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's assassination, I ask that we examine the principles and values on which Dr. King based his work, and apply them to our work today. It is 40 years later, and this country finds itself again poisoned by war, a war that is jeopardizing the civil rights and civil liberties of all Americans - and again, Senator McCain is complicit. From the Iraq War and a failing economy, to inadequate healthcare and unsatisfactory schools, it is up to us to finish Dr. King's work. So I ask Senator McCain that as he apologizes for his vote 25 years ago, that he may recommit himself to advancing Dr. King's legacy.

I Forbid: A brief history of presidential vetoes and overrides

In celebration of the recent override of President Bush's veto of a water projects bill, let's take a look at the presidential vetoes and overrides through the ages.

(NOTE: In case you're wondering why I'm posting this now instead of right after the override: I have been working on this post for a couple weeks now, but I've been somewhat busy.)

The word veto comes from the Latin for 'I forbid.' While not mentioned specifically in the Constitution, it has come to describe the President's right to reject a bill. The president's veto power - and Congress's power to override such vetoes - are two of the most well-known examples of checks and balances in US government.

Only seven US Presidents cast zero vetoes during their Presidencies (and two of those died early in their terms). James Garfield was the last President to not veto a single bill; that may have to do with the fact that he died of an assassin's bullet six months into office.

Thomas Jefferson is the only President never to have cast a single veto in two full terms in office. Bush's first term marked the first time since John Quincy Adams that a President went through a full four-year term without vetoing a single bill.

Only eleven Presidents went through their tenure without a single pocket veto. Pocket vetoes account for 42% of all Presidential vetoes.

By overriding Bush's veto of the water-projects bill, Congress used its override power for the 107th time in history - the first time in ten years (almost to the day). In so doing, it has made Bush the 24th US President to see Congress override at least one of his vetoes.

While five of America's first nine Presidents cast a total of 23 vetoes, none of those vetoes were overridden. Congress first used its power to override a veto on March 3, 1845, the day before President John Tyler left office (Inauguration Day back then was March 4). LBJ was the last President who never saw one of his vetoes overridden.

Here's a complete list of US Presidents, the number of vetoes they cast, and the number of vetoes which were overridden: