Echoes of the past.

March 20, 2006 7:24 PM

Democratic presidential candidate rails against US imperialism."The platform . . . condemns the experiment in imperialism as an inexcusable blunder, which has involved us in enormous expense, brought us weakness instead of strength, and laid our nation open to the charge of abandoning the fundamental principles of a republic."
A prominent American author who initially supported the conflict, changed his mind, calling it "a mess, a quagmire from which each fresh step renders the difficulty of extrication immensely greater.” The US is “the kind of World Power . . . that a prairie-dog village is . . . it is the duty of our Government to stand sentinel, with solemn mien, and lifted nose, and curved paws, on top of our little World-Power mound.”
posted by insomnia_lj (25 comments total)

Haven't we been saying all along that those who fail to learn history are destined to repeat it, with similar results?
posted by zoogleplex at 7:29 PM on March 20, 2006

It's too bad Bryan was such a boob.
posted by OmieWise at 7:39 PM on March 20, 2006

1908 Election Results:

William Howard Taft, Republican: 7,678,395 popular votes, 321 electoral votes.
William Jennings Bryan, Democratic: 6,408,984 popular votes, 162 electoral votes.

Fun post though. Those anti-imperialists were great, including Bryan, before he went nuts.
posted by LarryC at 7:50 PM on March 20, 2006

I hadn't heard of this guy, but he's taking a more courageous stances than most Democrats.

But before I can support him, how's he on Intelligent Design?
posted by orthogonality at 7:53 PM on March 20, 2006

eerie, especially how the nation is currently embroiled in a debate on the gold standard.
posted by Falconetti at 7:53 PM on March 20, 2006

I hadn't heard of this guy, but he's taking a more courageous stances than most Democrats.

But before I can support him, how's he on Intelligent Design?
posted by orthogonality at 7:53 PM PST on March 20 [!]


*snort!*
posted by stirfry at 8:02 PM on March 20, 2006

It's worth pointing out that prairie dogs get killed and eaten a lot. A solemn mien doesn't help a damn when you're being digested.
posted by Malor at 8:11 PM on March 20, 2006

They also get shot a lot.
posted by Astro Zombie at 8:18 PM on March 20, 2006

"It's worth pointing out that prairie dogs get killed and eaten a lot."

Yeah, but whenever one falls down, another one pops up somewhere else.

Come on. People are fungible. You can have them here or there, right?!
posted by insomnia_lj at 8:19 PM on March 20, 2006

I had heard that "Cross of Gold" Bryan was a fiery orator but that first link was better than counting sheep.
posted by stirfry at 8:53 PM on March 20, 2006

Yogi Berra pointed out as he stole a Republican crumb basket, as Republicans were busy stealing Jelly Stone Park, "It's deja vu all over again."
posted by BillyElmore at 9:12 PM on March 20, 2006

Fungible? He keeps using that word. I do not think it means what what he thinks it means.
posted by Malor at 9:32 PM on March 20, 2006

"eerie, especially how the nation is currently embroiled in a debate on the gold standard.
posted by Falconetti at 7:53 PM PST on March 20 [!]" - well, it's about as "eerie" as cornflakes.

That is to say - a standard industrial process.
posted by troutfishing at 9:36 PM on March 20, 2006

We're off to see the wizard
posted by kirkaracha at 10:10 PM on March 20, 2006

I used to get a buck a throw for prairie dog tails, back in the day.
Interesting read, thanks insomnia!
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:11 PM on March 20, 2006

People are fungible.

Which explains athlete's foot.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:55 PM on March 20, 2006

Heh. I was going to say, we have a candidate?
posted by graventy at 12:49 AM on March 21, 2006

> Haven't we been saying all along that those who fail to learn history are
> destined to repeat it, with similar results?

But you've never tumbled to the fact that that's a half truth, the other half being that those who do know history are doomed to repeat it anyway.


> Heh. I was going to say, we have a candidate?

If it wasn't for this insane bigotry against dead guys you could have FDR or JFK or LBJ again. Oops, warmongers all. Hey, what about the sainted Jimmy Carter? Actually he's almost still alive, isn't he! Go with your core values!

posted by jfuller at 3:44 AM on March 21, 2006

orthogonality writes "But before I can support him, how's he on Intelligent Design?"

How can you ask that about someone Menken respected so much?
posted by OmieWise at 4:30 AM on March 21, 2006

Prairie dogs are over-rated.

And was it just my fevered imagination, or did GWB tauntingly challenge the democrats to stand up to him over warrantless wiretapping in this morning's news conference?
posted by squirrel at 10:15 AM on March 21, 2006

“Prairie dogs are over-rated”

You would say that as a close cousin, squirrel.

In fact prairie dogs are very kissable.

It’s interesting to see in retrospect a schism within Christian fundimentalist who literally interprets the bible and is opposed to the Republican party, war and imperialism.

Was WJB kissable?
posted by Smedleyman at 10:52 AM on March 21, 2006

Oops, warmongers all.

funnily enough, "warmonger" Kennedy lost less GIs in Vietnam than Reagan lost in Central America. but then, right-wingers are usually blissful in their impermeability to facts
posted by matteo at 12:40 PM on March 21, 2006

OmieWise writes "How can you ask that about someone Menken respected so much?"

Meet you at the revival tent!
posted by orthogonality at 2:07 PM on March 21, 2006

Am I the only one who thinks William Jennings Bryan's creationism is much more respectable than the modern advocates of ID?

It's understandable that a populist and progressive like Bryan would have been opposed to evolution, which was at the time widely used to legitimize racism, eugenics and social darwinism, all of which were espoused as fact in the textbook he fought against at the scopes trial. He may have been blinded to the facts of evolution by his faith, but he was also rightly disgusted by the evils that it was used to justify at the time.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 2:26 PM on March 21, 2006

than that of the modern advocates of ID

ack
posted by [expletive deleted] at 2:27 PM on March 21, 2006