Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
I think if the 50's had 24hr news, social media, and a general human feeling of distrust we wouldnt have the same view we do of the time period. Things were just done quieter and people didnt talk about things they didnt like, they just went on. Corporate greed and money before morals is what has changed----govt. has always been what it is now, just in different suits.
I think if the 50's had 24hr news, social media, and a general human feeling of distrust we wouldnt have the same view we do of the time period. Things were just done quieter and people didnt talk about things they didnt like, they just went on. Corporate greed and money before morals is what has changed----govt. has always been what it is now, just in different suits.
In the 1950's there was an almost universally accepted feeling of genuine patriotism resulting from victory in WWII. It was also almost universally believed that the US government was a force for good in the world, and most Americans of military age either had been in the military or would be in the military. We trusted our government, and Republicans and Democrats respected each other, and recognized that they were all on the same "team". They did not hate each other, and it would have been impossible for a Congressman to have interrupted an elected President as he spoke before the House of Representatives by shouting out "You Lie!".
Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
(WASPS???) Are we now stereotyping by race and religion, Gosh I hope not!
Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
(WASPS???) Are we now stereotyping by race and religion, Gosh I hope not!
Not stereotyping, but we can use acronyms with some degree of acrimony while wistfully waxing for the WASPY ways of days long past.
I think if the 50's had 24hr news, social media, and a general human feeling of distrust we wouldnt have the same view we do of the time period. Things were just done quieter and people didnt talk about things they didnt like, they just went on. Corporate greed and money before morals is what has changed----govt. has always been what it is now, just in different suits.
In the 1950's there was an almost universally accepted feeling of genuine patriotism resulting from victory in WWII. It was also almost universally believed that the US government was a force for good in the world, and most Americans of military age either had been in the military or would be in the military. We trusted our government, and Republicans and Democrats respected each other, and recognized that they were all on the same "team". They did not hate each other, and it would have been impossible for a Congressman to have interrupted an elected President as he spoke before the House of Representatives by shouting out "You Lie!".
I see where you're coming from, but I think what Vulchor was trying to say is that the more unappealing side of governmental affairs in the 1950's was kept more of a secret as it is now. Sure, it wasn't acceptable for a Congressman to interrupt a president during a speech, but it was also unacceptable to have nosy media involved in all facets of the inter-workings of the white house and congress. It's hard for any of us to really say how we would have perceived the time in it's true light, because social media wasn't what it is today.
Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
(WASPS???) Are we now stereotyping by race and religion, Gosh I hope not!
Not stereotyping, but we can use acronyms with some degree of acrimony while wistfully waxing for the WASPY ways of days long past.
FWIW I find yours and Vulchors comments distasteful and disturbing.
I think if the 50's had 24hr news, social media, and a general human feeling of distrust we wouldnt have the same view we do of the time period. Things were just done quieter and people didnt talk about things they didnt like, they just went on. Corporate greed and money before morals is what has changed----govt. has always been what it is now, just in different suits.
In the 1950's there was an almost universally accepted feeling of genuine patriotism resulting from victory in WWII. It was also almost universally believed that the US government was a force for good in the world, and most Americans of military age either had been in the military or would be in the military. We trusted our government, and Republicans and Democrats respected each other, and recognized that they were all on the same "team". They did not hate each other, and it would have been impossible for a Congressman to have interrupted an elected President as he spoke before the House of Representatives by shouting out "You Lie!".
I see where you're coming from, but I think what Vulchor was trying to say is that the more unappealing side of governmental affairs in the 1950's was kept more of a secret as it is now. Sure, it wasn't acceptable for a Congressman to interrupt a president during a speech, but it was also unacceptable to have nosy media involved in all facets of the inter-workings of the white house and congress. It's hard for any of us to really say how we would have perceived the time in it's true light, because social media wasn't what it is today.
That's true. My sister says that social media is the "great equalizer", and has the potential to neutralize vast sums of money in our electoral politics. I don't know if that's accurate, but it definately IS a force to be reconed with in a democratic society that respects and protects freedom of speech and the free exchange of ideas.
Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
(WASPS???) Are we now stereotyping by race and religion, Gosh I hope not!
Not stereotyping, but we can use acronyms with some degree of acrimony while wistfully waxing for the WASPY ways of days long past.
FWIW I find yours and Vulchors comments distasteful and disturbing.
Good for you. I'm glad you found my comments, but I have no idea how they got in the distasteful and disturbing drawer.
Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
(WASPS???) Are we now stereotyping by race and religion, Gosh I hope not!
Not stereotyping, but we can use acronyms with some degree of acrimony while wistfully waxing for the WASPY ways of days long past.
FWIW I find yours and Vulchors comments distasteful and disturbing.
Good for you. I'm glad you found my comments, but I have no idea how they got in the distasteful and disturbing drawer.
You dont?? why Its what you'll find in every drawer of the racist dresser.
Lollllllllll--------Its almost sad in a way to see these power hungry, aging, well to do, WASPS try so hard to go back to an imginary way live used to be a century ago.
(WASPS???) Are we now stereotyping by race and religion, Gosh I hope not!
Not stereotyping, but we can use acronyms with some degree of acrimony while wistfully waxing for the WASPY ways of days long past.
FWIW I find yours and Vulchors comments distasteful and disturbing.
Good for you. I'm glad you found my comments, but I have no idea how they got in the distasteful and disturbing drawer.
You dont?? why Its what you'll find in every drawer of the racist dresser.
Racist in what way? FYI WASP is an acronym for White Anglo Saxon Protestant, which is what our Congress and Executive and Judicial Branch was largly comprised of in the 1950's. No women, no people of color, gays weren't just in the closet, that closet was locked up in the basement, and Protestant Christians were the overwhelming majority. Period. It's just simple historical fact, nothing more, nothing less, and in this context, I believe Vulchor was just poking fun at those who would take us back to those days, and I completely agree with him on that point. If you see racism in that, well, you certainly have my sympathy, but not my apology. As a standing rule, I only appologize when I'm wrong.
Hmmm. I would say the term may be considered derogatory, or disparaging, and probably not used to refer to one's own self, but not racist it the true sense of the word. Just my opinion.
Comments