All Things Doug Phillips & VF, Including Lourdes's Lawsuit

[gustava]

But you are acting like the North was worse and more violent. I'm not saying the North was close to perfect. But don't act like they were the bad guys in the situation.

Saying the other side is equally sinful is the refuge of someone without a leg to stand on.

[J'ean Skirt]

I don't think they would have, but I do think that slavery could have been solved more like England did it - and without bloodshed - AND SHOULD HAVE been. I bet you with the money spent on that war, a lot of those slaves could have been bought and released and new McCormick plows given to cotton farmers to tell them to quit whining. I find that the arguments that ignore the consequences of the war and the expansion of national government are also and equally woefully "clueless."

www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/12/12840 ... evisionism

Professor Eric Foner: [it would have cost $3billion to buy the slaves from the south] ... but it should be noted that if you wanted to buy all the factories, railroads, and banks in the country at that time, it would have only cost you $2.5 billion. In other words, the slaves were by far the largest concentration of property in the country. They didn't have the money to buy up $3 billion dollars worth of slaves. And more to the point, the South was not willing to sell their slaves.

[Maxwell]

:popcorn2: so interesting! what's the story behind that?

IIRC, at one point VF sold an LHOP DVD set. I remember the issue being with the "In The Big Inning" episode which featured a baseball game between Walnut Grove and Sleepy Eye. The big game involved baseball (not a problem), cheating, and a drunken brawl. There was a bit of an outcry that this was being sold to the VF faithful and it was quickly pulled and an apology was issued.

I found it interesting that LHOP was even offered for sale as it was a secular, commercial TV show -- this from a man that was against watching TV.

[MissBitters]

It really surprises me VF sold the Little House DVDs! I think I read here once that a lot fundies dislike the series because of Laura, especially the book version. She works outside the home, would rather work in the fields than do housework, once had a temper tantrum about hating Sundays, and made sure the word "obey" was not included in her wedding vows. Definitely not their idea of the perfect woman.

[Maxwell]

It really surprises me VF sold the Little House DVDs! I think I read here once that a lot fundies dislike the series because of Laura, especially the book version. She works outside the home, would rather work in the fields than do housework, once had a temper tantrum about hating Sundays, and made sure the word "obey" was not included in her wedding vows. Definitely not their idea of the perfect woman.

I will admit... I could be wrong. Seems to me it was in the early 2000's and it wasn't offered very long. I'm almost positive that that is where we purchased our DVD set. But, I'm getting old and my memory is not as accurate as it once was. Would love it if someone out there could verify. I tried my magic with the Goog and the WaybackMachine -- no luck.

[Annbrookhaven]

All this junk about the civil war. Can we get back to the topic or start a new thread called the civil war? :angry-banghead: :angry-banghead:

[Elinor]

I will admit... I could be wrong. Seems to me it was in the early 2000's and it wasn't offered very long. I'm almost positive that that is where we purchased our DVD set. But, I'm getting old and my memory is not as accurate as it once was. Would love it if someone out there could verify. I tried my magic with the Goog and the WaybackMachine -- no luck.

I have most of the catalogs stored somewhere and I can verify for you. IIRC, they were only in 1-2 catalogs.

[gustava]

All this junk about the civil war. Can we get back to the topic or start a new thread called the civil war? :angry-banghead: :angry-banghead:

I note that you are a newbie to FJ, so I'll cut you some slack on your complaint. However, whether we like it or not, going OT is something that happens frequently on FJ. If you don't like it, don't read it.

[formergothardite]

Threads here have a tendency to meander about and have several different topics. Especially when things are slow with the original topic. If something interesting pops up I'm sure it will jump right back to being all about Doug Phillips and VF.

[Coco]

Threads here have a tendency to meander about and have several different topics. Especially when things are slow with the original topic. If something interesting pops up I'm sure it will jump right back to being all about Doug Phillips and VF.

exactly -- that was part of the fun of reading through all the DPIAT threads. (douching with lysol?)

viewtopic.php?f=93&t=20076&p=656908&hilit=douching#p656905

[formergothardite]

You can learn some crazy stuff on FJ threads and they often don't have anything to do with the original topic. This can be strange to people who aren't used to it, though.

[MissBitters]

I will admit... I could be wrong. Seems to me it was in the early 2000's and it wasn't offered very long. I'm almost positive that that is where we purchased our DVD set. But, I'm getting old and my memory is not as accurate as it once was. Would love it if someone out there could verify. I tried my magic with the Goog and the WaybackMachine -- no luck.

Oh, I don't doubt your story at all it just surprised me. Then again, Doug Phillips has proven himself to be a colossal hypocrite so I should not have been so shocked :D

[hoipolloi]

All this junk about the civil war. Can we get back to the topic or start a new thread called the civil war? :angry-banghead: :angry-banghead:

(1) The shite that VF & company peddle about the US Civil War & US history in general is actually very much on topic. These are core things that characterize these fucking assholes. As some excellent comments upthread pointed out, their twisted views on the US Civil War/history are part & parcel of the shite Rushdooney "preached" as is the related crap VF sold, like the Elsie Dinsmore books or those bogus Faith & Freedom History tours, narrated by Doug Phillips Is A Rapist and his boyfriend sidekick, Bill Potter. If you can't see these connections and why discussion of them is highly relevant, perhaps you need to do some more reading here & elsewhere on the intertubez.

(2) Thread drift is a given at FJ - if it bothers you that much perhaps you shouldn't read here.

[bean]

We can imagine how it was but we'll never understand completely. We aren't immersed in that world. We don't know who knew what when. Railroad moguls and oil moguls and every other force that can be put to bear on history, what were they doing? Powerful men's reasons for not wanting a peaceful resolution? The Civil War was only one lifetime removed from the Revolution and ratifying the Constitution. Napoleon didn't die until 1821. In 1866 Thomas Edison was just starting to experiment. There are so many layers.

Anyway. I get so pissed off at people who glorify the past, simplify history, or make stupid movies about the past. (looking at you, san antonio christian film festival lol) I bought an e-book the other day originally written in the 1800's about young women preparing a household. Their lives were freaking hard beyond imagination. Poor health care, nothing was simple or easy. Making soap from ashes??? :wtf: Pregnant women prepared their wills. We forget all the details when we try to figure out the past.

Glorifying the old South through our modern filter of history is about as valid a lifestyle as glorifying Narnia. It's mostly imagined :lol:

Coco, what book is this? Sounds fascinating!

[Maxwell]

We can imagine how it was but we'll never understand completely. We aren't immersed in that world. We don't know who knew what when. Railroad moguls and oil moguls and every other force that can be put to bear on history, what were they doing? Powerful men's reasons for not wanting a peaceful resolution? The Civil War was only one lifetime removed from the Revolution and ratifying the Constitution. Napoleon didn't die until 1821. In 1866 Thomas Edison was just starting to experiment. There are so many layers.

Anyway. I get so pissed off at people who glorify the past, simplify history, or make stupid movies about the past. (looking at you, san antonio christian film festival lol) I bought an e-book the other day originally written in the 1800's about young women preparing a household. Their lives were freaking hard beyond imagination. Poor health care, nothing was simple or easy. Making soap from ashes??? :wtf: Pregnant women prepared their wills. We forget all the details when we try to figure out the past.

Glorifying the old South through our modern filter of history is about as valid a lifestyle as glorifying Narnia. It's mostly imagined :lol:

Soap making requires 2 things: fat (or oil) and a base, like lye (Sodium Hyroxide) or Potash (Potasium Hydroxide), the latter of which is found in the ashes of hardwoods. Obviously, you weren't a homeschooler. You probably have never milked a goat either... or ground your own wheat. :lol:

[Coco]

Coco, what book is this? Sounds fascinating!

It's The Book of Household Management c.1859/1861 and currently still free for Kindle 8-)

amazon.com/gp/product/B0084BNUAO/ref=oh_d__o04_details_o04__i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

ETA: Sorry the book i was referencing was actually Civil War Household Tips :lol: (currently .99)

amazon.com/gp/product/B0089DQBK8/ref=kinw_myk_ro_title

But i have both books, and they're very interesting from a historical point of view.

[Coco]

Soap making requires 2 things: fat (or oil) and a base, like lye (Sodium Hyroxide) or Potash (Potasium Hydroxide), the latter of which is found in the ashes of hardwoods. Obviously, you weren't a homeschooler. You probably have never milked a goat either... or ground your own wheat. :lol:

:embarrassed: i just got lazy in my haste to post about the hardships of the past, i've never made lye soap but had a basic grasp of the ingredients.

It's astounding the practical skills our ancestors knew and had to do to accomplish basic tasks. The hubs and I heat with a wood-burning stove and after 8 months of dealing with ashes, i can't imagine using them to make something to clean with!

(full disclosure: i was a homeschooled SAHD, We were big into Y2K prep in the 90's lol i have milked cows and goats, made butter, sewn on a treadle, ground wheat for bread... canned, braided onions [that was fun actually]). Never made cloth, or learned to knit yet. Just another reason for my intense appreciation for all things modern!

oh talking about butter, have you seen the episode of I Love Lucy "Pioneer Women"? It is awesome. Lucy and Ethel try to save money doing things from scratch and spend like $25 making a pound of butter. $25 in 1950's money. And when she fights with the bread dough...

[Maxwell]

:embarrassed: i just got lazy in my haste to post about the hardships of the past, i've never made lye soap but had a basic grasp of the ingredients.

It's astounding the practical skills our ancestors knew and had to do to accomplish basic tasks. The hubs and I heat with a wood-burning stove and after 8 months of dealing with ashes, i can't imagine using them to make something to clean with!

(full disclosure: i was a homeschooled SAHD, We were big into Y2K prep in the 90's lol i have milked cows and goats, made butter, sewn on a treadle, ground wheat for bread... canned, braided onions [that was fun actually]). Never made cloth, or learned to knit yet. Just another reason for my intense appreciation for all things modern!

oh talking about butter, have you seen the episode of I Love Lucy "Pioneer Women"? It is awesome. Lucy and Ethel try to save money doing things from scratch and spend like $25 making a pound of butter. $25 in 1950's money. And when she fights with the bread dough...

Boy, did I get that wrong! :oops:

I grew up watching I Love Lucy reruns but hadn't seen that one. Veering further afield, have you ever listen to "Amish Paradise" by Weird Al? We happen to live in an Amish area which makes the song go from a cute/funny song to an absolutely histarical song!

[Coco]

I grew up watching I Love Lucy reruns but hadn't seen that one. Veering further afield, have you ever listen to "Amish Paradise" by Weird Al? We happen to live in an Amish area which makes the song go from a cute/funny song to an absolutely histarical song!

Love weird Al! Thanks for the reminder! :lol: :banana-rock:

my family spent some of those y2k-ing years in Ohio, (yay Lehman's!) so hearing weird al was definitely awesome. (it was wrong on so many levels for fundie kids to be laughing at Amish kids) :angry-banghead:

[bBvideo 560,340:170lc55z]

[/bBvideo]

[RosyDaisy]

Um, no. I've said it was bad, and will repeat it, but y'all are really blind to the other political implications of the conflict. The propaganda from both sides reminds me of the hypocrisy and bullying of the Tool.

CnD, take your Confederate flag and apologetics and stick 'em up your ignorant ass. And you comparing this discussion to DPIAT makes you even more ignorant.

The other political implications you speak of were whether or not to allow slavery in new territories, and whether or not the federal government should have any say in that. Thus making slavery the main issue. What part of that aren't you getting?

As far as wars with Native Americans, that was horrific as well. Nobody is denying that at all. You, however are using it as a diversion tactic. Nice try, but I see right through that.

[nelliebelle1197]

As someone born and reared in Virginia and South Carolina, I will state without equivocation that the Civil War was about slavery and that anyone who thinks otherwise (including my kinfolk who adore their "Rebel" flags) are either uninformed or delusional.

As someone whose Southern roots go back to Carolina settlement in 1698 and who actually has copies of wills in which one ancestor bestows

slaves onto another, among other documents, and who incidentally has an MA with a core focus and 400 page thesis exploring master-slave relationships in South Carolina rice country from 1780-1850 AND who has actually spent three years reading 20,000 million pages of primary documents, I must say that the states rights advocates are really wrong. The root of the Civil War was states' rights- the states' right to determine whether or not it would be a slave state. The economic advantage of slavery that a few select held - similar to that of our corporate masters today- is the foundation on which everything was built in slave states. Period. The culture, the economy, the laws, the class interaction, everything. Period. The tree of the south grew upward from the roots of slavery. Slavery was the economic system on which each state rested, even if it played out differently in make up from state to state. You cannot say it was STATES RIGHTS! AND MORE ISSUES! To me that simply points to an incredibly surface understanding of a complex system predicated and inextricably linked to slavery.

[bumblebee]

As someone whose Southern roots go back to Carolina settlement in 1698 and who actually has copies of wills in which one ancestor bestows

slaves onto another, among other documents, and who incidentally has an MA with a core focus and 400 page thesis exploring master-slave relationships in South Carolina rice country from 1780-1850 AND who has actually spent three years reading 20,000 million pages of primary documents, I must say that the states rights advocates are really wrong. The root of the Civil War was states' rights- the states' right to determine whether or not it would be a slave state. The economic advantage of slavery that a few select held - similar to that of our corporate masters today- is the foundation on which everything was built in slave states. Period. The culture, the economy, the laws, the class interaction, everything. Period. The tree of the south grew upward from the roots of slavery. Slavery was the economic system on which each state rested, even if it played out differently in make up from state to state. You cannot say it was STATES RIGHTS! AND MORE ISSUES! To me that simply points to an incredibly surface understanding of a complex system predicated and inextricably linked to slavery.

That reminds me of an old Daily Show I remember watching, where they're discussing a "Confederacy Ball" or something and They have that conversation:

"but wasn't the Civil War about more than slavery, like States Rights and taxes?"

"Yeah it was taxes about slaves!"

I don't think everyone who wants to romanticise the civil war or any other "olden days" era, I'm guilty of it sometimes and it's been going on since someone said "but wasn't life so much nicer in the back of the cave?!" But yeah it inevitably ends up having as much to do with what the actual history was like as playing Narnia (which I would have also loved to do if I had ever found an amazing enough wardrobe as a kid).

[nelliebelle1197]

I don't think they would have, but I do think that slavery could have been solved more like England did it - and without bloodshed - AND SHOULD HAVE been. I bet you with the money spent on that war, a lot of those slaves could have been bought and released and new McCormick plows given to cotton farmers to tell them to quit whining. I find that the arguments that ignore the consequences of the war and the expansion of national government are also and equally woefully "clueless."

Slavery was very different in the south. It was entrenched. In fact, there have been historians who deem slavery the "addiction" of the south. If you think that it would have been solved differently, you really don't know your history. Real history. You do not seem to have an understanding of the way the peculiar institution really worked in both law and deed.

And the Civil War was not the beginning of the end of "States' Rights". Andrew Jackson, southerner and slaveholder, was the first populist president (1824). "Jacksonian Democracy" is how we describe his platform and in its very essence was a move toward a stronger federal government and weaker congress. THAT is the true foundation of the move away from "States Rights" not the Civil War. It is long and complex continuum that cannot, like all history, be understood in a vacuum.

[ladyamylynn]

As someone whose Southern roots go back to Carolina settlement in 1698 and who actually has copies of wills in which one ancestor bestows

slaves onto another, among other documents, and who incidentally has an MA with a core focus and 400 page thesis exploring master-slave relationships in South Carolina rice country from 1780-1850 AND who has actually spent three years reading 20,000 million pages of primary documents, I must say that the states rights advocates are really wrong. The root of the Civil War was states' rights- the states' right to determine whether or not it would be a slave state. The economic advantage of slavery that a few select held - similar to that of our corporate masters today- is the foundation on which everything was built in slave states. Period. The culture, the economy, the laws, the class interaction, everything. Period. The tree of the south grew upward from the roots of slavery. Slavery was the economic system on which each state rested, even if it played out differently in make up from state to state. You cannot say it was STATES RIGHTS! AND MORE ISSUES! To me that simply points to an incredibly surface understanding of a complex system predicated and inextricably linked to slavery.

:clap: Hey CnD:

[CloakNDagger]

If you inherit a problem, it's a pretty sticky thing. All of the United States were originally responsible for slavery. It was morally wrong, but I believe that the solutions weren't the best. That's my belief.