Comments for

Comment on Black History Month – Yadda Yadda by Trip, continued «

Trip, continued « — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 03:13:23 +0000

[...] I had written that posed the question, “Is there a need for a Black History Month?” here. As he read the opening paragraphs aloud, some listeners hastily jumped to the [...]

Comment on So, Does Character Matter? by Ronald Court

Ronald Court — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:18:48 +0000

Well said, Bruce.
I also like the graphic headlining your website. Clever!

Comment on So, Does Character Matter? by Bruce

Bruce — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:06:49 +0000

Character does matter. Poor Tiger Woods….

Comment on Sad News by Ronald Court

Ronald Court — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:43:45 +0000

Actually, by today’s standards, Dr. Washington would be considered a courageous conservative who sought reconciliation between the races.
He correctly foresaw that it would take decades for whites and blacks to adjust to a “new world order.” Were it not for poor Southern (primarily) whites fighting economic equality ‘by any means necessary’ – and, later (even today), for liberal Northern black ‘elites’ continuing to maintain and augment a racial divide, chances are, a reconciliation to be desired by all responsible parties might largely already have taken place.
Sadly, our current President hasn’t yet acted like the figure of “post-racialism” so many have hoped for.

Comment on Sad News by linda tart

linda tart — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 04:58:45 +0000

By today’s standards, BTW would be considered an Uncle Tom. I have read quite a few articles and quotes and I am inclinded to feel as Ida B. Wells at BTW’s death. She Stated that his demise “closed the dark ages of civil rights.” There was one thing that always puzzled me about BTW and that was: He believed in industrial education for Negros but his children were kicked out of northern, liberal arts schools. It has been said that toward the end of his life, he was sorry about some of his decisions regarding industrial education. May the likes of Booker never return to this earth.

Comment on Small world… by Ronald Court

Ronald Court — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 01:10:33 +0000

I had no idea that the idea of a US Chamber of Commerce might very well have sprung from the example set by the National Negro Business League.

The world, and this country in particular, owes much to the effort and example that Booker T. Washington set as living proof that, in this country, even when the cards are stacked against you, it is possible to rise up from adversity to inspire others.

Thank you, William Craft, for sharing.

Comment on Small world… by William Richard Craft

William Richard Craft — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 20:12:55 +0000

the National Chamber of Commerce was preceded by the National Negro Business League in 1900 and may have given impetus to the founding of the national Chamber of Commerce

The U.S. Chamber’s History: The idea of a national institution to represent the unified interests of U.S. business first took shape when President William Howard Taft, in a speech before Congress on December 7, 1911, addressed the need for a “central organization in touch with associations and chambers of commerce throughout the country and able to keep purely American interests in a closer touch with different phases of commercial affairs.” Four months later, on April 12, 1912, President Taft’s vision became a reality when a group of 700 delegates from various commercial and trade organizations came together to create a unified body of business interest that today is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In 1925, construction on the Chamber headquarters was completed on property that had belonged to Daniel Webster (read the history of the building), and the U.S. business community made it a rallying point for promoting and defending free enterprise and individual opportunity. More than 90 years later, the Chamber has grown to represent more than 3 million businesses, nearly 3,000 state and local chambers, 830 associations, and over 90 American Chambers of Commerce abroad.The U.S. Chamber and the legacy of Daniel Webster share more than just the hallowed ground that is now 1615 H Street Northwest. This venerable institution and this statesman’s spirit share an unwavering commitment to democracy, individual opportunity, and free enterprise. They are forever bonded by the words of Webster, which were inscribed in stone in the original Chamber building: “Let us develop the resources of our land, call forth its powers, build up its institutions, promote all its great interests, and see whether we also, in our day and generation, may not perform something worthy to be remembered.” — Daniel Webster, June 17, 1825, Speech Commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, Charlestown, Massachusetts

Comment on The Horse’s Mouth by Ronald Court

Ronald Court — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:02:30 +0000

Here's a more brief yet direct response to understanding the intent of our Founding Fathers. Enjoy.

Comment on The Horse’s Mouth by Ronald Court

Ronald Court — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:45:31 +0000

Speaking of a "wall,' allow me to point you to a presentation by author and historian David Barton, the President of WallBuilders, a national pro-family organization which distributes historical, legal, and statistical information; and helps citizens become active in their local schools and communities. David’s exhaustive research (from original writings) on the Founding Era has rendered him an expert in this field. You can listen to a presentation of his here. Re Booker T.s view: Although (or perhaps because) he attended a religious Seminary for about a year, he did not have a high regard for organized religion. On the other hand, he made it a practice to read "a chapter or at least a few verses from the Bible every day."

Comment on The Horse’s Mouth by Alex

Alex — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:59:31 +0000

As I commented before, the Dubois quotation shows an ignorance of the realities of life under Stalinist rule. As the saying goes, in theory, communism works. I was not aware that DuBois visited the Soviet Union and Maoist China, that sheds a very different light on the quotation, which, given that I have not studied DuBois previously, I didn’t know.

Regarding the Rosenbergs, if your point was that DuBois defended them in the same way, he defended others based on the theory of their actions without regard for the reality, great. However, your original statement was that they were people of intelligence and power who used their capabilities for evil results. This is a different point. I’m just trying to make sure I follow your argument.

You wrote: “Final point: re architects of our constitution saw fit to provide for a separation of church and state. Not so. The Constitution enjoins Congress from making any law respecting the establishment of religion. To know what the founding fathers meant, one needs to look at how they lived and practiced.”

On the separation of church and state in the US, I’ll allow Thomas Jefferson to write for himself:

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”
(http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/jefferson_dba.html)

Great stuff to be digging into. I’m curious. What was Booker T’s view?