Guard Dog

It's supposed to be Lucille Ball. It doesn't look anything like her. It looks like one of those horror movie statues that's in a slightly different position every morning. The story behind the dog statue is quite cool though: https://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/3625

@Gromnir: Don't worry, your knowledge of history is above reproach in my book. And I did not shrug off his role in the Klan. I mentioned it as fact and really did not dig into it. I did however shrug off the Ft. Pillow massacre as a qualification. If you want to include that then there were a lot of evil bastards running around in blue & gray uniforms. If you'd agree to that I'd go along with you there. All the more reason to not put up statues IMO. If were going to honor any of them then honor the ones who gained some credit from the whole bloody mess. The six names I mentioned before were good examples. There are others I'm sure but those are the ones that come to mind. As far as statues go, get rid of all of them. But for God's sake start with this one: That is just... just... Leave this one though:

That WAS sarcasm right? Not the reason, the justification. The reason is nearly free labor > hired labor and they were for sale. Personally I wish I could sit down with Madison and convince him to fix the whole slavery mess right from the get-go.and somehow convince the rest of the delegates to go along. But that would also be problematic. If for no other reason than there are a lot of really decent people living in the US today that never would have existed but for that. You can't undo what's done and no one alive today owes an apology for deeds done before they were ever born. All you can do is find the good that comes with the bad and hope that in the end things worked out the way they were meant to .

Gromnir, you and I have been talking past each other for two pages now. I should probably have the sense to let it go but it annoys me that you seem to think by pointing out NBF was not Hitler or not the Green Goblin I'm defending him. I believe I've also said he wasn't good and there wasn't anything admirable about him and certainly nothing that made him deserving of a statue. Which I have also said a number of time that they (the statues) were there to serve the "lost cause" re-write of history and they are defended by people who know next to nothing about the people the statues are of. OK, so why is NBF evil? Because of the Klan? Sure I'll go along with you there. It was not like that started as a support group for white farmers that got out of hand. It was pretty much the same thing on day one as it is today. Yes he did, years later, renounce and criticize it. You took that as me defending him. I only mention that it happened, something most folks don't know. Was he sincere? Did he mean it? Who knows. I doubt it. You didn't hear me say that made it all ok. The Fort Pillow Massacre for those who don't know came after Ft. Pillow was recaptured by a full corps of cavalry under Forest's command. The fort was manned by an artillery regiment ( all black troops) and a cavalry regiment under a Major named Bradford. IIRC he had overall command. Bradford and Forest exchanged notes asking for surrender of the Fort in return for POW stats, the usual thing for the time. Bradford refused, no surprise. The confederates stormed the fort and after a four hour intense battle took it. Then every man and woman in the fort, black, white, misc, was shot or bayoneted even after they had stopped fighting and tried to surrender. Did Forest order it? Who knows. Opinions vary. Probably I think. "Show them the Black Flag" was what they called it. Meaning take no prisoners. I'd probably be more in a twist about this if it were uncommon. It wasn't. Particularly in the western theater of the war. The North used this as a means to whip up public support for the war which was now in it's third year with no end in sight. That is likely why so much is known about Ft. Pillow while so many others are forgotten. Plus, who writes history? Were the artillery troops killed for being black? I'm sure that didn't help but Bradford's men weren't spared either. It's just one more awful chapter in an awful story that got more attention than others just like it. Let me ask you something Gromnir. Was Crazy Horse evil? The only men at the Little Big Horn that stood and fought to the death were Custer and his staff and whoever else was on the hill with them. The majority of the regiment broke and ran for the river and were ridden down and killed to the last man. Did that make Crazy Horse evil, or the rest of the Lakota, Arapaho, and the others with them that day? I wouldn't think so. I think a little bit of consideration is due to people fighting a bloody war against an invading force on their own soil. A war that had already seen atrocity pile up upon atrocity. Brutality begets brutality. Now, one other thing you said I'd take issue with. Africans were not enslaved because people thought they were inferior. They did think that. But that is not why they were enslaved. They were slaves because either they or their ancestors were sold as such to European traders by rival nations/peoples in Africa. That slavery was the lot of black people because they were "inferior" was just something slave owners convinced themselves of to make it OK for those few who just might wave wondered if the forced imprisonment and mistreatment of other human beings was really the "Christian" thing to be doing.

Your issues with others? He explained it in his next post, the only one on that list who was even a major figure, or Brass, was Gen. Longstreet. Also, while looking at wikipedia, John Mosby (actual spelling) did own a slave in NYC who he sent money to, but he personally didn't like it. Pretty much comes off as conflicted about the whole thing. Also have to remember that this was in an era where being loyal to your state was a much bigger deal than being loyal to your country. Kirkland, if you read his story, should be easy to see why he deserved to be mentioned. Longstreet objected to secession but could,never take up arms against his home & "kin and kind" as they said back then. I think it's fortunate Lee was placed in overall command and not Jackson or Longstreet. Lee was a good leader, and even a good general. But his flaw is he was a man out of time. He did no appreciate or understand the way warfare had changed during the years he was serving in the US Army in Texas. He still kept tactics learned in West Point and the Mexican war. He did not appreciate the greater range and accuracy of the rifled musket the Union was using. Neither Jackson nor Longstreet would have ordered the attack on the third day at Gettysburg. Longstreet was actually there and begged him not to do it. The CSA was broken that day. The rest was just a matter of time. If you ever go to Gettysburg and stand on Seminary Ridge and look over that field at the low point between Big Round Top and Cemetery Hill you'd wonder what he was thinking too. Moesby was a good leader and fighter. Brave but not a savage. Tough but not cruel. I haven't read one instance of anything he did that could be called an atrocity. Jack Hinson was a pro-Union southerner who was actually friends with Grant who even stayed in Hinson's home when the Union occupied the "land between the rivers" after the battle of Fort Donaldson. After Grant moved east the occupation was taken over by the 15th Iowa under the command of a man named William Belknap. Despite his reputation after the war he thought nothing of murdering southerners even suspected of being Confederate sympathizers. One of his commanders murdered Hinson's teen age sons and placed their heads on Hinson's gatepost with orders to leave them there of the whole family will be hanged. Hinson sent his family to Kentucky, burned down his house and took his rifle and went to the hills. For the next three years we waged a one man war against the Union. The US Army assigned three whole regiments to track him down and they could not do it. There is an excellent book about him: Jack Hinson's One Man War Raphael Painper was an artillery officer on convalescence in Sumter SC when scouts reported that some 2600 enemy troops were advancing on Sumter. Painpare volunteered to command one of two cannons with a Southern force of 154 defenders of old men, teenage boys and local militia. Some of the locals believed it to be hopeless. Lieutenant Painpare stepped up and told them "men your home is in Sumter. My home is in Louisiana, but I propose to fight my gun if anyone will help me.” One of the two guns was lost early. Painpare and the local defenders held the Federals off for almost a whole day After two enemy regiments flanked the defenders, Painpare ordered his men to take cover, as Painpare manned his cannon alone, firing on the enemy. Despite a federal officer’s call to “spare that man, don’t fire at him, he is too brave to die,” Painpare was already morally wounded. James Keelan was a 17 year old private in a Kentucky Volunteer Rifle regiment. He'd been left alone to guard a bridge near Strawberry Fields KY. After sunset a platoon of 19 Federal soldiers approached the bridge with orders to burn it and trap the Confederates on the wrong side of the river. He held them off single handedly and killed many of them. His relief found him the next day next to a pile of dead enemy and near death himself, with two sabre wounds, a bayonet wound and he'd been shot once. That tough SOB lived all the way into the 1920's.

Indulge me for a moment here. Suppose the United States were to attack Canada? Just suppose it started with militia forces in Buffalo attacking Hamilton with artillery. There are a few battles back and forth before the US invades into Qubec and loses near Montreal. The US retreats followed by the Canadian Army. They invade. Now they are in your state, atrocities real and rumored such as the ones I posted earlier are happening in places near you. And now they are near your town. Does it matter to you that the US was wrong to start the war? Does it matter to you Canada's cause is morally justified? I'd say no. Because now you have a home and family to defend against a foreign enemy coming to kill and take them. You don't have transportation. You have nowhere to flee to. Your option are to fight, be executed, or surrender and collaborate and still likely be executed. And even if that does not happen you are occupied and your life and all you have are not safe. What would you do? The soldiers who fought the war, especially those who fought on their home soil don't deserve to be painted with the same brush as Jefferson Davis, Alexander Stephens, etc.

wait what Do you eve read the posts I write?

If you want to know about Longstreet you should hear from the man himself: If you were closer I'd loan you my copy. No one on my list owned or dealt with slaves. But that is not why they are on my list. Valor and virtue, even in a bad cause, are worth honoring. Soldiers don't start wars.

smjames if it were up to me these are probably the only confederates I'd honor: Richard Rowland Kirkland Jack Hinson James Longstreet John Moesby Raphael Painpare James Keelan I expect you've probably heard of Longstreet but I'd be surprised indeed if you know any of the rest.

I didn't think I was defending him Grom. I was just pointing out he's not what anyone seems to think he was. I wouldn't have ordered a statue of him. There is nothing about him I find admirable. And yes he didn't just lie about his role in the Klan he lied to Congress about it. He wasn't evil, he wasn't good. And there were act of savagery enough to choke a maggot on a gut wagon all around done by both sides. I go to work near Fort Pillow every day so yes I know all about it. The man it's named for lost the war in the west single handedly at Ft. Donaldon due to incompetence and IMO made all of the blood shed in Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania pointless. The CSA lost the Mississippi and the Tennessee river completely after that and, again IMO, had no path to victory other than the North getting weary of it. Sherman had enough deaths on his hands his own army would have hanged him if it happened today. The massacre in Lawrence KS was a response to two separate massacres of Missouri civilians, the one at Osceola left the town burned and all of them dead . That whole "border war" was a really nasty business. The Iowa 15th Cavalry rounded up all the women and children of men suspected of fighting in the Confederate Army in West Tennessee and sent them to a prison in St. Louis. Most of them starved to death there. And Nueces the Confederate irregulars lined up and murdered every immigrant in the town. There were no saints. And no one had a monopoly on brutality. Like I said, there are only a handful of people who gained any credit in that whole mess and sadly none of them are having their statues fought over right now.

Exactly. That is the problem. When you look at Forest's place in history I would not have picked him for a statue. I can name four, maybe five Confederate figures that were worthy of being memorialized. I unless you've been reading Shelby Foote's work there a good chance you've never heard of most of them.

Whenever I hear people talk about preserving history and then say something off the wall wrong I cringe. Read a book first. Nathan Bedford Forest was not evil, he was not a traitor, and he was not a hero. He was a very gifted military strategist and cavalryman. He was also soft spoken, self-educated, insecure, and more than a little fearful. That drove him to do big things on the battlefield and make big mistakes in his business dealings. He was one of the founders the Klan and later renounced them and publicly criticized them. He was a man living in his time, just like all the rest of them. Pulling him out of his grave now and castigating or lionizing him isn't just promoting one version of history or another, it's promoting ignorance. Don't apply modern mores to people from the past. You are not doing them or yourself any credit. Learn about the time they lived in, not just about them.

We have several. This one is the best: https://www.nps.gov/shil/index.htm

Impressive. Every word of that sentence was wrong. Anyway, I have spent many, many years studying the US Civil war. I figure I know more about it than most folks do, I think this whole statue business is a whole lot of night soil from a large male bovine. They were put up some sixty years after the war. No one who actually fought it was around to see this. And they have gone on to serve the whole "it wasn't about slavery" narrative that is as pernicious as it is wrong. It's also give a platform to call the Confederates traitors and whatnot which is also wrong because of a failure to understand the United States of 1861 bore little resemblance to the United States we live in today. The Confederacy is dead. It serves no purpose for people who have no understanding of it to pull it out of the ground and make it dance or lynch it (depending). Let it go. But anyway. This little kerfuffle is rooted in the same hubris as a lot of other heavy handed government BS these days: Ownership. Did those parks belong to the City of Memphis or not. If so they can sell them to whomever they choose and the only people they are answerable to is the citizens of Memphis. But on the other hand I pay taxes in Tennessee. Why does Memphis need $250k of the money me and my fellow Tennesseans worked for to have a f-----g party I wasn't even invited to? But whatever. My opinions of the gang in Nashville are hardened and not repeatable in mixed company. Although I wish I had known the parks were for sale. I'd have bought them, bull dozed them and sold them. And if any one complained I'd have shown them my Warantee Deed and said "this is my property and I can do whatever the hell I like with it!" Just like they should say to Nashville.

This is just creepy. Who do we have on the ground in Germany? Ben! We need to send Ben in with a hidden camera. Ben, you're number has just been called. We have a mission for you! https://foto.gettyimages.com/news/culture/germany-sex-doll-brothel/

Oh I agree with everyone on the absurdity of the "great space race" and the circumstances of Finn & Rose's little field trip. Poe's "mutiny" also fell flat. But visually it was a pleasure to watch. If you are looking to tight scripting, story & plot you've come to the wrong shop with a star wars movie. Or any sci-fi movie in recent memory except maybe the last bladerunner movie. But since Star Wars is the Skywalker story that part at least worked for me. And that was the important part. The visual of the sunken X-Wing and Luke throwing the lightsaber off the cliff were perfect. All the things he once found indispensable he's turned his back on. That is compelling IMO. It invests me in his story. I got through seven movies without doing that already. I don't really like Ren as a character. He is absolutely without any depth. Darth Vader did not set out to become Darth Vader. Ben Solo DID set out to be Kylo Ren. He's evil because he's evil? Nah, that doesn't work. As far as copying Empire Strikes Back this whole new trilogy is a all-but-in-name remake of the original three so that ship had already sailed. And really, pretend you've never seen the original three movies and go back and watch them with the eyes of the educated adult you've grown into since you saw them the first time and you'll realize they were pretty flawed in plot and story as well.

If you don't know who Ralph Wiggam is you might not laugh at this one.

I finally saw The Last Jedi last night on Blu Ray. I thought it was outstanding. There were a few logic fails in the plot but nothing you can't get past. I guess a lot of people were unhappy with what they did to Luke's character but to tell the truth this movie actually made him into a character for the first time. It's a classic element of tragedy that by trying to prevent the thing he feared would happen he set that thing he feared in motion. Revenge of the Sith did the same thing in a more ham fisted way. I find story of the failed "chosen one" to be a compelling one. Rather than finding a hero of legend Rey finds a burned out old man living alone away from everyone. A man who realized everything he spent his whole life believing was all BS. Kind of reminds me of someone actually.

Reading this. It is REALLY good!

I have to think someone in the locked room will have the good sense to break the arm sticking through the window trying to cut the cable lock.

Best video I've watched this week https://youtu.be/YlPnTIGU1ag

They REALLY should have applied for a patent!

The guy who played Dr. Huer passed away at 90: https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/tim-oconnor-star-on-peyton-place-and-buck-rogers-dies-at-90/ar-AAvPn8U?ocid=spartanntp If you know who that is congrats. You were a sci-fi fan in the '80s!