Chamblee54

The Boston Tea Party Story

Posted in GSU photo archive, History, Politics by chamblee54 on February 4, 2015

LBP25-111az

LBP31-097ax

LBP46-057ax

LBP52-039cx

LBSCB01-042dx

LBSCB01-077ax


For better or worse (it’s ok to curse), the tea party is a part of the scene. The seminal event was the Boston Tea Party in 1775. The first post below is a look at what really happened in Boston harbor. It is tough to discern truth from fable at a distance of 236 years, but we will try. The tea party metaphor gets worked over in another post, would you like a refill?
The second part is a look at the phrase “founding fathers”. This phrase is “liberally” sprinkled into rhetoric of all persuasions. This author sees a square peg being forced into round holes.
In the first year of the Obama regime, America saw the rise of the “Tea Party.” These affairs are usually right wing, and have lots of clever signs. The general idea is that taxes are too high, government is too big, and that the people need to do something.
The namesake event was the Boston Tea Party. On December 16, 1773, crowds of people (some dressed as Mohawks) went on board the Dartmouth, the Eleanor, and the Beaver. The crowds threw overboard 342 chests, containing 90,000 pounds of tea. The crowds were unhappy because the East India Company was importing the tea into America, with a 3 pence per pound tax.

A website called listverse plays the contrarian. (spell check suggestions: contraction, contraption) According to them :
“American colonists did not protest the Tea Tax with the Boston Tea Party because it raised the price of tea. The American colonists preferred Dutch tea to English tea. The English Parliament placed an embargo on Dutch tea in the colonies, so a huge smuggling profession developed. To combat this, the English government LOWERED the tax on tea so that the English tea would be price competitive with Dutch teas. The colonists (actually some colonists led by the chief smugglers) protested by dumping the tea into Boston Harbor.”
According to Wikipedia, the Dutch tea had been smuggled into the colonies for some time. The Dutch government had given their companies a tax advantage, which allowed them to sell their product cheaper. Finally, the British government cut their taxes, but kept a tax in place. The “Townsend Tax” was to be used to pay governing colonial officials, and make them less dependent on the colonists.

In Charleston, New York, and Philadelphia, the tea boats were turned around, and returned to England with their merchandise. In Massachusetts, Governor Thomas Hutchinson insisted that the tea be unloaded. Two of the Governor’s sons were tea dealers, and stood to make a profit from the taxed tea. There are also reports that the smugglers were in the crowd dumping tea into the harbor.

The photogenic tea party movement seems to be destined to stay a while. The question remains, how much does it have to do with the namesake event?

LBSCB04-83ax

LBSCB05-007ax

LBGPNS01-014ax

LBP03-076ax

LBP20-158ax


People often try to justify their opinions by saying that the “founding fathers” agree with them. They often are guilty of selective use of history. A good place to start would be to define what we mean by the phrase founding fathers.

The FF word was not used before 1916. A senator from Ohio named Warren Harding used the phrase in the keynote address of the 1916 Republican convention. Mr. Harding was elected President in 1920, and is regarded as perhaps the most corrupt man to ever hold the office.

There are two groups of men who could be considered the founding fathers. (The fathers part is correct. Both groups are 100% male.) The Continental Congress issued the Declaration of Independence, which cut the ties to England. Eleven years later, the Constitutional Convention wrote the Constitution that governs America today. While the Continental Congress was braver than the Constitution writers (We must hang together, or we will hang separately), the Constitution is the document that tells our government how to function. For the purposes of this feature, the men of the Constitutional Convention are the founding fathers.

Before moving on, we should remember eight men who signed the Declaration of Independence, and later attended the Constitutional Convention. Both documents were signed by George Clymer, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, George Read, Roger Sherman, and James Wilson. George Wythe left the Constitutional Convention without signing the new document. (He needed to take care of his sick wife. Mr. Wythe later supported ratification.) Elbridge Gerry (the namesake of gerrymandering) refused to sign the Constitution because it did not have a Bill of Rights. Both Mr. Wythe, and Mr. Gerry signed the Declaration of Independence.

The original topic of this discussion was about whether the founding fathers owned slaves. Apparently, PG is not the only person to wonder about this. If you go to google, and type in “did the founding fathers”, the first four answers are owned slaves, believed in G-d, have a death wish, and smoke weed.

The answer, to the obvious question, is an obvious answer. Yes, many of the founding fathers owned slaves. A name by name rundown of the 39 signatories of the Constitution was not done for this blogpost. There is this revealing comment at wiki answers about the prevalence of slave ownership.
“John Adams, his second cousin Samuel Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Paine were the only men who are traditionally known as founding fathers who did not own slaves. Benjamin Franklin, a founder of the Abolitionist Society, owned two slaves, named King and George. Franklin’s newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette routinely ran ads for sale or purchase of slaves.
Patrick Henry is another founding father who owned slaves, although his speeches would make one think otherwise. Despite his “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” speech, he had up to 70 slaves at a time, apologizing a few times along the way, saying he knew it was wrong, that he was accountable to his God, and citing the “general inconvenience of living without them.”

Patrick Henry was a star of the Revolution, but not present at the Constitutional Convention. The author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, was in Europe during the convention. Mr. Jefferson not only owned slaves, he took one to be his mistress and kidsmama.

One of the more controversial features of the Constitution is the 3/5 rule. Here are the original words
“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” In other words, a slave was only considered to be 60% of a person.
That seems rather harsh. The truth is, it was a compromise. The agricultural southern states did not want to give up their slaves. The northern states did not want to give up Congressional representation. This was the first of many compromises made about slavery, ending with the War between the States. This webpage goes into more detail about the nature of slavery at the start of the U.S.A.

The research for this feature turned up a rather cynical document called The myth of the “Founding Fathers” . It is written by Adolph Nixon. (The original post is no longer available. Here is a partial substitute.) He asks :
“most rational persons realize that such political mythology is sheer nonsense, but it begs the question, who were the Founding Fathers and what makes them so great that they’re wiser than you are?”
Mr. Nixon reviews the 39 white men who signed the Constitution. He does not follow the rule, if you can’t say anything nice about someone, then don’t say anything at all. Of the 39, 12 were specified as slave owners, with many tagged as “slave breeders”.

The Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, have served America well. However it was intended, it was written so that it could be amended, and to grow with the young republic. It has on occasion been ignored. (When was the last time Congress declared war?) However fine a document it is, it was created by men. These were men of their time, who could not have foreseen the changes that America has gone through. Those who talk the most about founding fathers often know the least.

A big thank you goes to wikipedia Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives,Georgia State University Library”. This repost was written like H. P. Lovecraft.

LBP03-142az

LBP03-142aza

LBP03-142azb

LBP05-054ax

LBP19-141aza

LBP20-108ax

Bad Monkey

Posted in Book Reports, GSU photo archive, Undogegorized by chamblee54 on February 3, 2015

LBGPNS4-086cz

LBGPNS5-029az

LBGPNS5-039az

LBGPNS5-039bz

LBGPNS7-139az

LBGPNS7-211az

LBGPNS8-085bz

LBGPNS8-085bza


When getting started on this book report, PG copied the title. The initials are BM. A certain school of thought has it that the expression your mother uses for feces has an impact on your life. For PG, this is BM, as in short for bowel movement. Someone told PG’s mom that this was the “proper” word for animal waste. BM has a smarmy, slightly uppity taste that is missing with “poop.” BM has none of the onomatopoeic utility of “shit.” BM can also stand for black male.

Is this Carl Hiassen novel, Bad Monkey, similar to BM in more ways than one? It is not the best book by Mr. Hiassen. There are a few too many coincidences. The plot twists are just a bit on the implausible side. It is quite possibly word factory product. There is a demand for Carl Hiassen stories, and the market demands that they be written. Maybe this one was a contractual obligation.

Still, it is not a shitty book. The devil is in the details. When the teenage lover of one character comes to Florida with his old lady, the told is gleefully told. Loverboy is now fat and bald, and has a bite mark above his left nipple. The hero wants him to put his shirt on.

Readers of Mr. Hiassen know the formula. There is a disgraced law officer, who in this story is a restaurant inspector. There is a hideous crime, which the DLO gets involved in, even though it is totally none of his business. The perpetrators are unconventional, sadistic, greedy, and not terribly bright. The developers are fouling the Florida landscape, which is hot, buggy, and hurricane prone.

The usual quota of weirdos is present. Mr. Hiassen says he does not make up anything, but waters down what happens in what is facetiously known as real life. Skink and Chemo are resting. They will probably return for future stories.

At some point in the investigation, the DLO winds up with a girlfriend. In Bad Monkey, it is a Miami coroner. There is a sex scene on a metal autopsy table. The gf gets involved in the investigation, and nearly gets fed to the sharks. GF is saved when Bad Monkey puts the bite on crime. This is not a story for hate the sin, love the sinner.

Should you buy this book? Probably not. PG found it at the library. It was copy 8/13 for the Dekalb county libraries. You can probably find a copy without paying for it, which someone makes it more fun. It is worth your time, unless you just want to read something that will change your life. The only thing this book will change is the diaper worn by Bad Monkey. Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.

LBGPF1-015az

LBGPF1-065az

LBGPF2-086az

LBGPF7-009az

LBGPF7-009aza

LBGPNS2-163ez

LBGPNS3-004az

LBGPNS3-004bz

LBGPNS3-113az

Diamond Jack

Posted in Poem by chamblee54 on February 2, 2015

01y

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22a

Jesus Gets A New Nickname

Posted in Library of Congress, Music, Race, Religion by chamblee54 on February 1, 2015

1a34608x

1a34623x

1a34670xa

1a34671x

1a34709x

1a34771x


There is a video making the rounds now. The title involves Jesus, and a certain racial slur, delicately known as the N word. The video is embedded above. You can feel the magic for yourself.

Here is a story about the song, with the edgy language bleeped. “One pastor is trying to spread the word of God with an edgy rap song. The rapping pastor and his wife claim they have “Christian swag” while tossing around the n-word. … The video of the rapping pastor was recently uploaded to YouTube but it’s not clear when it was filmed. It was taken at a church in Iowa which closed in 2004.” Another helpful interneter has the lyrics.

In case you didn’t know, Pastor Jim Colerick, and Mrs Mary-Sue Colerick, are melanin deficient. They are, as Bette Midler once said about Karen Carpenter, so white they are invisible. It is not considered good manners for Caucasians to use this word, with or without salvation.

There is another angle to this equation. Many Jesus worshipers see not using cusswords as a sign of righteousness. As a result, many Jesus worshipers use the words G-d, and Jesus Christ, as tools of their anger. This violates the third commandment. Now, this use of a sacred name, as profanity, is being extended to using a sacred name as a racial slur. Someone is always ready to manipulate language to serve an agenda.

When you call a book “the word of G-d”, you give certain words too much power. When you designate the lazy way of saying black as a super duper naughty word, you give those six letters way too much power. Now, we see the convergence of these two taboos. Let the party begin.

This is a repost. Pictures of Pastor and Mrs. Colerick are taken from the video. The other images are from The Library of Congress.


1a34808xa

1a34808xb

1a34808xe

1a34873x

jcn047

jcn140