Imagine if this were your nightmare.
Daniel and Cindy are young parents whose world has been turned upside down because Daniel is transgender. He transitioned over a decade ago when he was 19, and few people know that he is transgender. When Daniel and Cindy decided to have children, they told Cindy’s parents that Daniel is transgender because they were conceiving in vitro with donated sperm. And, I suppose, they must also have trusted that her parents would continue to accept their son-in-law.
This was a mistake.
Cindy gave birth to healthy twins 2 ½ years ago, and Daniel and Cindy and the twins have been very happy – except for one problem. Cindy’s parents make rude comments about Daniel being transgender, and they do it in front of the twins. Requests for them to stop are met with mirth. Daniel and Cindy put up with this behavior for a long while, but as the twins are getting older, they worry that the negative comments are harmful, and they don’t want to be forced to try and explain concepts to their young children that are beyond their ability or need to understand – in vitro, transgender.
Daniel and Cindy made the difficult decision that the grandparents are no longer welcome in their lives. The grandparents got angry and sued for custody of the children. The twins have two loving parents. Child Protective Services have never been called; there have been no police reports of abuse; neither parent has a criminal record.
Last week, a court removed the twins from their home and gave custody to the grandparents. The reason? Their father is transgender.
Daniel and Cindy are working with a lawyer to try and get their children back. Will they get them back? Who knows? What we do know that the children have pulled out of their home and are living with two people who demean and ridicule their father.
And if they do get the children back, their lives will never be the same. Everyone in town either knows or soon will know that Daniel is transgender, and he will likely lose his job. If the children are gone too long, they may not trust their parents when they return. Daniel and Cindy will either spend savings or go into debt to pay legal fees. And they go to bed every night distraught because their children are not with them. They don’t know if their children are crying for them, but surely their children must be confused.
This isn’t a story made up as an example of what might happento someone who is transgender. This is really happening to a young couple and their twins. I’ve changed the names because the case hasn’t hit the news, so perhaps the family will be able to maintain some privacy.
The take away? While it may not be discrimination for the grandparents to be hateful to their son-in-law; it certainly is discriminatory for the Court to make a custody decision based on the father’s transgender status. Transgender non-discrimination laws would give these parents and their children better legal protections to be a family free from government interference. Also, if Courts are permitted to take children from otherwise good parents because one parent is transgender, who’s next?
Support the passage of anti-discrimination legislation in support of transgender people, whoever you are, wherever you live.
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
Court takes couple’s children because father is transgender 14
Monday, May 7, 2018
worldhistoryfacts:Agreement for indentured servitude between... 14
Agreement for indentured servitude between Patrick Larkin and Thomas Blood, 1766. Agreements like this – to work for seven years for a master, often in exchange for passage across the Atlantic – were common in colonies like Virginia. This agreement came late in the history of indentured servitude – by 1766, most labor on Virginia plantations was done by enslaved Africans.
Monday, May 22, 2017
Gov. Albert G. Porter, Harrison’s Former Law Partner, Nominated Him in 1888 11
What follows is the address that nominated Benjamin Harrison for president in 1888. It contains many stories that were part of Harrison’s public image: his ability as a campaigner in a doubtful state, his Civil War service, and his illustrious name.
When, in 1880, Roscoe Conkling visited Indiana to take part in the memorable campaign of that year, he was asked on every hand, ‘How will New York go at the Presidential election?’ ‘Tell me,’ replied the great orator, ‘how Indiana will go in October, and then I can tell you how New York will go in November.’ In October, Indiana’s majority of nearly 7,000 for the Republican candidate for Governor informed the county how she would go, and in November New York and the Nation echoed her October voice. Indiana is no longer an October State. Yet not, in 1888, as before 1880, she seems largely to hold the key of the position. She is always regarded as being a close State; but when the Republican party is thoroughly organized, when it has done the preliminary work of the canvass well, and when its spirit is kindled into flame, Indiana seldom fails to elect the Republican candidates. She have never been better organized for a successful Republican contest than now; the preliminary work has never been more complete and thorough, and the Republican masses seem never to have been more highly roused and eager for the struggle.
Give Gen. Benjamin Harrison your commission to lead them, and they will immediately fall into line and press forward with enthusiastic confidence to victory. The convention that lately met at St. Louis disappointed the Democracy of Indiana by refuse to place an Indiana candidate on their ticket. There is a tide in the affairs of parties, as well as of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. The present condition of Indiana is the Republican party’s opportunity. Why risk shipwreck on any shallows when the full and welcoming sea invites your sails?
Benjamin Harrison came to Indiana in 1854 at the age of twenty-one. He came poor in purse, but rich in resolution. No one ever heard him make a first reference to his ancestors. Self-reliant, he mounted the back of prosperity without the aid of a stirrup. The hospitality of his ancestors had given their property to those whom they had served. The core had gone to the people, the rind only to them and their families. He received, indeed, something from them–their talents, their integrity, their fitness for public trusts, and what to some persons would have seemed a misfortune, but to a heart so stout as his was the highest good fortune, he received from them the inestimable legacy of penury.
Upon his arrival in the State he entered at once upon the practice of law and immediately achieved success. Amplitude of preparation, a large view of questions a mind marvelously prompt in yielding up its stores, and so exhaustive in its power of reasoning that no argument that would help his cause was ever found to have been omitted–these gave him rank at once in his profession. In union with these was found a fairness that sought no mean advantage and an integrity that never could be shaken. The young lawyer leaned on nobody’s arm for help. Modest but self-confident, his manner seemed to say, ‘I am an honest tub, standing on its own bottom.’ It was perceived from the start that in web and woof he was of heroic stuff.
While he was engaged in the practice of law and was rapidly rising to distinction, the great rebellion raised its head to strike down the Union. Relinquishing his profession, its emoluments, and the fame to which it was beckoning him, he yielded to the imperative demand of duty, raising a regiment and receiving from Morton the commission of a Colonel. He marched with Sherman to the sea; he was in the thick of the fight at Resaca and Atlanta, and his gallantry and the efficiency of his well disciplined command were so conspicuous on those fields as to draw from the heroic Hooker, in a letter to the Secretary of War, the highest possible commendation of his industry as a disciplinarian, and skill and intrepidity as a soldier.
He was not unknown to the people of Indiana before he entered the army. At a State election they had chosen him to the office of Reporter of the decisions of the Supreme Court. His opponents took the office from him while he was serving as a soldier in the field. The people, while he was yet in the field, re-elected him, and on returning home on the disbandment of Sherman’s forces he received his commission.
On account of his eloquence as a speaker and his extraordinary power as a debater, Gen. Harrison was called upon at an uncommonly early age to take part in the public discussions of the mighty questions that had begun to agitate the country, and was early matched against some of the most prominent speakers of the Democratic party. None who ever felt the point of his blade desired to engage with him again. Possessing oratorical powers of a high order, he has never spoken for mere rhetorical effect. He seems to have remembered the saying of the great Irish orator and patriot, O’Connell, that a good speech is a good thing, but that the verdict is the thing. He therefore pierced the core of every question he discussed, and fought to win in every contest in which he engaged.
He has taken part in every Presidential campaign since he came to Indiana, except the one that occurred during his service in the army, and he threw his sword into that. In recognition of his services in the ardent and prolonged struggles of the Republican party for the rights of man and for the restoration and integrity of the Union, the Republicans in the Legislature of 1881 chose him to be a Senator of the United States.
I have not time to enter into any detailed narration of his services in the Senate. His rank was among the highest. The delegates from Dakota will bear witness to the unremitting energy of his efforts to have that Territory admitted as a State into the Union, when, for the crime of being faithful to Republican principles, the Democratic party resolved to keep it out.
Everybody will recall his complete exposure of the civil service reform sham in Indiana under the present administration. He possesses all that you should desire in a President–soundness in Republican doctrine, a comprehensive grasp of mind, a calm judgement, firm principle, unquailing [sic] courage, and a pure character.
The eloquent gentleman from Illinois has commended to your favor another distinguished citizen of Indiana. A State’s place in civilization is denoted by the manner in which she treats whose who have served her faithfully. I have always honored old historic Massachusetts for the manner in which she cherishes the fame of those who, in whatever department of service, have reflected honor upon the Commonwealth; how she calls the roll with prides; how impatient she becomes when their names are unjustly aspersed or disparaged. I have not come here to disparage that honorable gentleman, brave and just judge, and heroic soldier whom the gentleman from Illinois has commended. If the roll of all of Indiana’s sons were called who led in battle or carried the knapsack, she would bid me honor them all.
There is no need that I should strive to dwarf others in order that Gen. Benjamin Harrison may stand conspicuous. He stands breast to breast with the foremost of Indiana’s soldiers; distinguished also in civic trusts; heroically faithful to public duty; skillful in marshaling men, to the sound of whose bugle they quickly rally and fall into ranks, whom they have followed in fierce canvasses, and more than once to the desperate charge crowned with victory.
Standing here, on behalf of a man who, disdaining all adventitious helps, has risen to distinction by the force of his own merits, I should regard myself unchivalric [sic] did I not recall, at least in brief review, some of the worthy public achievements of his ancestors. Whatever tends to show that a life which has been strong and useful has a foundation in traits have have long clung to the stock from which the man sprang, is in the nature of a guaranty that he may be trusted under all trials. It is something that the public, who are interested in being faithfully served, are entitled to know. We stand here to-day in the imperial city of the Northwest. The name of no family has ever been more identified with the Northwest than the family of Gen. Benjamin Harrison. It is woven into the very fabric of the history of her people. I need only give a passing reference to that sturdy Benjamin Harrison from whom he takes his name, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He was the Governor of Virginia when the possessions of Virginia embraced the whole of the Northwest. When the Northwest was formed by Congress into a Territory, William Henry Harrison was, first, its Secretary, and afterward its Delegate to Congress. When the Indiana Territory was formed, embracing all the territory of the Northwest except Ohio and a part of Michigan, he was appointed its first Governor. He held commissions as Governor successively from Adams, Jefferson and Madison. He was a man of deeds. While a Delegate in Congress he obtained the passage of a law requiring the sales of public lands to be made in smaller subdivisions than have ever been allowed before, so that the first time a man of humble means might now buy from his Government a home.
The historian McMasters, in his admirable history of the people of the United States, has said with reference to this measure that it did far more for the good of the country than even his great victory over the Prophet at Tippecanoe, or his defeat of Tecumseh at the battle of the Thames. He negotiated treaties with the Indians, while Governor, by which their titles to 70,000,000 acres of land was extinguished and the land was thus opened for settlement. In a single one of these treaties the Indians relinquished lands which embrace a third of Illinois and a vast section in southern Wisconsin.
He fought the battle of Tippecanoe, and, defeating the plans of the great statesman and warrior, Tecumseh, kept the portals of the West open for the admission of the emigrant, and what, though less shining, was not less welcome to the settlers of the Territory, scanty in means and struggling with difficulties, he procured the passage of laws that made the burdens of taxes lighter upon the poor. The language of the farm and the practice of hospitality were native to him. After the battle of Tippecanoe, when parting with a regiment of his soldiers, he said: ‘If you ever come to Vincennes you will find a plate, and a knife, and a fork at my table, and I assure you that you will never find my door shut and the string of the latch pulled in.’ And what he promised he faithfully lived up to.
We hear of civil service reform as if it were some quite new suggestion. But President Harrison, in a single month that he held office, directed the heads of the several departments to give information to all their officers and agents that partisan interference by them in the popular elections, whether of State officers or the Federal government, or the payment of any contributions or assessments on salaries, or official compensation for party election purposes, would be regarded by him as cause for removal. The old war Governor, the hero of Tippecanoe, having left Indiana in 1813, to enter a larger field of activity, and when, twenty-seven years afterward, he was a candidate for President of the United States, Indiana, though a Democratic State, gave him a majority of nearly 14,000 votes. He died in a month after he entered upon his great office, but not the memory of his services, which will ever remain fresh and imperishable.
And now to-day in Indiana, among a people estimating highly the character and services of Gen. Benjamin Harrison, and holding in affection the memory of ‘Old Tippecanoe,’ the latch strings of the people are hospitably out to you, and their doors are waiting to fly open at your touch to let in the joyful air that shall bear upon its wing the message that Benjamin Harrison, their soldier statesman, has been nominated for President of the United States.
From the Proceedings of the Ninth Republican National Convention, 1888, pg. 121-125.
There are a few factual errors in the address. Col. Harrison did not march with Sherman to the Sea. He was called back to Indiana on furlough for the 1864 campaign by Gov. Morton. Porter claimed that Harrison did not take part in the 1864 campaign, but he was on hand giving speeches that season.
Thursday, March 23, 2017
March 23rd 1933: Enabling Act passedOn this day in 1933, the...
March 23rd 1933: Enabling Act passed
On this day in 1933, the German Reichstag passed the Enabling Act, which essentially secured Adolf Hitler’s position as dictator of Germany. The law gave Chancellor Hitler legal powers to establish his dictatorship as it gave the Cabinet the power to enact laws independently of the legislature - the Reichstag. Its formal name was ‘Law to Remedy the Distress of People and Reich’. Hitler had been appointed Chancellor on January 30th and just before the scheduled election, the Reichstag fire occurred. The Nazis used the incident to suggest a Communist revolution was imminent and passed the Reichstag Fire Decree which suspended civil liberties and habeas corpus. The Nazis failed to gain an absolute majority in the Reichstag, so Hitler drafted the Enabling Act to secure his position. The Nazis pressured and threatened representatives of the Reichstag to pass the bill, positioning SA men and Nazi swastikas in and around the building. With the bill’s passing, Hitler’s dictatorship was assured, and thus began a brutal regime which would last until 1945.
“The authority of the Führer has now been wholly established. Votes are no longer taken. The Führer decides. All this is going much faster than we had dared to hope”
- Joseph Goebbels after the passage of the Act
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
March 20th 1852: Uncle Tom’s Cabin publishedOn this day in 1852,...
March 20th 1852: Uncle Tom’s Cabin published
On this day in 1852, American author Harriet Beecher Stowe’s novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin was published. Previously published as a serial in the anti-slavery periodical the National Era, Uncle Tom’s Cabin tells the story of a black slave and recounts the harsh reality of his enslavement. Stowe was an ardent advocate of the abolition of slavery, and wrote the novel in response to the passage of the controversial 1850 Fugitive Slave Act which was part of the Compromise of 1850. The Act ordered Northern citizens to assist in the return of runaway slaves from the South, thus forcing the generally anti-slavery North to become complicit in the continuance of the ‘peculiar institution’. The popular discontent over the slavery issue helped make Uncle Tom’s Cabin the best-selling novel of the nineteenth century and saw its translation into sixty languages. The novel helped keep the flames of anti-slavery sentiment alive, and is therefore sometimes attributed with helping start the American Civil War. While still hailed as a great anti-slavery work of its day, the novel falls short of modern expectations with its stereotypical portrayal of African-Americans.
“So you’re the little woman who wrote the book that started this great war”
- what, according to legend, Abraham Lincoln said upon meeting Stowe in 1862
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
March 7th 1965: Bloody Sunday in SelmaOn this day in 1965, a...
March 7th 1965: Bloody Sunday in Selma
On this day in 1965, a civil rights march took place from Selma to Birmingham, Alabama; it became known as ‘Bloody Sunday’. At this stage, the Civil Rights Movement had been in motion for over a decade and already achieved legislative success with the Civil Rights Act. However the focus of the movement now became making the promise of equal franchise guaranteed in the Fifteenth Amendment a reality. While African-Americans exercised the right to vote in the years after the amendment’s passage in 1870, discriminatory measures like literacy tests, poll taxes, and grandfather clauses were soon implemented across the country to deprive them of the vote. Thus in 1965 civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. made voter registration the core of their efforts, centering the campaign on the particularly discriminatory Selma, AL. On March 7th - ‘Bloody Sunday’ - as the six hundred unarmed marchers were crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they were descended upon by state troopers who viciously beat the protestors. The violence encountered by these peaceful marchers, which was captured on television and broadcast around the world, led to national outcry and caused President Johnson to publicly call for the passage of his administration’s proposed voting rights bill. After securing the support of federal troops, another march was held on March 21st, and with the protection of soldiers the marchers managed to arrive in Montgomery after three days. The marchers were met in Montgomery - the epicentre of the movement and the site of the 1954 bus boycott - by 50,000 supporters, who were addressed by King. Their efforts were rewarded when, in August of that year, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act that ensured all Americans could vote. This was one of the crowning achievements of the Civil Rights Movement, and the Selma to Montgomery march is commemorated as one of the most important moments of the struggle.
“We are on the move and no wave of racism can stop us. The burning of our churches will not deter us. The bombing of our homes will not dissuade us. We are on the move now…not even the marching of mighty armies can halt us. We are moving to the land of freedom”
- King’s 'Address at the Conclusion of the Selma to Montgomery March’ - 25th March, 1965
Sunday, February 19, 2017
aishawarma: A heart patient from Gaza has died after he refused an Israeli offer to spy on... 14
Seventeen-year-old Ahmed was born with a congenital heart defect and had undergone a number of operations. He regularly made the trip from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank for treatment and underwent 18 operations in Israeli hospitals.
The operation to have his heart valve replaced was postponed a number of times until finally he was asked to meet an intelligence officer at the Erez crossing, the only border passage open for Gazans to enter Israel.
During the meeting, Ahmed was explicitly told that in order to have his operation, he would have to cooperate with the security forces and spy for Israel.
According to Ahmed’s father, Hassan Shubeir, the Israeli intelligence officer told Ahmed that he wanted him to help by giving Israel the names of specific locations in Gaza. He said he would send him to an Israeli hospital in exchange for the information.
Ahmed refused.
The Israeli officer told him that if he doesn’t provide the information he would not be allowed to cross the border.
Ahmed chose to stay in Gaza even if it meant signing his own death warrant.
Back in Gaza, Ahmed’s health deteriorated and he passed away last month.
this is by no means a new practice. israel has been doing this to many gaza patients who need to cross through erez to get treatments outside of gaza including cancer treatment requests which usually get denied, medical equipments are regularly not allowed into gaza and recently israel banned anaesthetic gas from entering as well. this is yet another method by which israel carries out its genocidal plan against the besieged civilians of the gaza strip.
Monday, February 6, 2017
February 6th 1858: Brawl in the House of RepresentativesOn this...
February 6th 1858: Brawl in the House of Representatives
On this day in 1858, in the early hours of the morning, a fight broke out in the U.S. House of Representatives. The altercation began between Laurence Keitt of South Carolina and abolitionist Galusha Grow of Pennsylvania. The two had been engaged in a particularly fraught debate over the Kansas controversy. Since the passage of the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act, the territory had become a hotbed of sectional violence between Northerners and Southerners who rushed to the area to claim the land as free or slave respectively. Keitt and Grow were debating the merits of the Lecompton Constitution, the pro-slavery document drafted by the fraudulently-elected Kansas convention that President Buchanan wanted Congress to support in order to admit Kansas as a slave state. Keitt had a history of involvement with violence in the halls of Congress. In 1856, he prevented others from coming to the aid of abolitionist Senator Charles Sumner as he was savagely beaten by South Carolina Representative Preston Brooks. The 1858 conflict began when Grow crossed to the Democratic side of the chamber to consult a colleague, causing Keitt to become incensed and call Grow a ‘black Republican puppy’. Grow shot back calling Keitt a ‘negro-driver’, and with that the House descended into an open brawl. The Speaker and Sergeant-at-Arms, wielding the ceremonial mace, failed in their attempts to restore order. The fight finished in a particularly absurd manner, with Wisconsin Representative John Potter pulling the toupee from Mississippi Representative William Barksdale’s head, causing the floor to erupt in laughter when he put it back on the wrong way round.
“Hooray, boys! I’ve got his scalp!”
- What Potter supposedly said when he seized Barksdale’s wig
Friday, January 20, 2017
January 20th 2009: Inauguration of Barack ObamaOn this day in...
Obama's first inauguration, 2009
Crowds in DC for Obama's first inauguration
Obama's second inauguration, 2013
January 20th 2009: Inauguration of Barack Obama
On this day in 2009, eight years ago, Barack Obama was sworn into office as the 44th President of the United States. That day, Obama made history as the nation’s first African-American President, having successfully defeated Republican candidate John McCain in the 2008 election. January 20th has been the official presidential Inauguration Day since the ratification of the 20th Amendment in 1933; previously, new presidents were sworn in on March 4th. Obama’s inauguration was one of the most observed events in global history, with millions watching in person, online, or on television. The day’s theme was ‘A New Birth of Freedom’, which derives from President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Lincoln’s birth. Obama was sworn into office by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, who administered the oath of office required by the Constitution in Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight. However, the oath administered to Obama strayed slightly from the exact words specified in the Constitution, and he thus retook the oath the next evening. Obama was re-elected to office in 2012, defeating Republican Mitt Romney. The Obama presidency will be remembered primarily for the historic passage of the Affordable Care Act, the normalisation of relations with Cuba, and his appointments to the Supreme Court. His years in office were also marked by increased partisanship and division in America, and continued instability in the Middle East. Obama leaves office today, to be replaced by Republican Donald Trump, with high approval ratings, leaving a legacy of grace and statesmanship that will not be soon forgotten.
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
December 6th 1865: 13th Amendment ratifiedOn this day in 1865,...
Thomas Nast's 'Emancipation' - redesigned following Lincoln's death to feature him more prominently
African-American soldiers of the 107th Infantry Regiment (http://ift.tt/2gLxamW)
December 6th 1865: 13th Amendment ratified
On this day in 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified by the states, formally banning slavery in the United States. Ratification does not require unanimous approval, and some states rejected the amendment; Mississippi only ratified the 13th Amendment in 2013, 148 years after the amendment’s passage. The 13th amendment marks the first of the three so-called ‘Reconstruction’ amendments, which secured civil and voting rights for African-Americans after the Civil War. The amendment was proposed by the Lincoln administration following the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation - which was a temporary war measure abolishing slavery in the Confederacy - to assert that the ban on slavery was to be permanent. Lincoln did not initially intend to free the slaves, and always prioritised saving the Union, but emancipation became intriscially tied to Union victory. This was due to the actions of slaves, who fled to Union lines and tried to enlist in the army. The Reconstruction period that followed the American Civil War was largely a contest over the implications of the 13th Amendment and the emancipation of four million slaves. Radicals in Congress pushed for equality of the law and opportunity, while white Southerners, with assistance from violent groups like the Ku Klux Klan, sought to maintain racial subordination and white supremacy. Reconstruction ultimately failed to truly implement freedom for African-Americans, and it was not until the Civil Rights Movement one hundred years later that America again tried to come to terms with the legacy of emancipation.
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Trump's Cabinet 14
White House chief strategist:
Steve Bannon (CEO of Breitbart News)
National Security Advisor:
Michael Flynn (Disgraced former General)
Attorney General:
Jeff Sessions (Alabama Senator)
- Q: “Did you refer to him as the N-Word? Yes or no?”
- A: “I am not the Jeff Sessions my detractors have tried to create.”
Secretary of Education:
Michelle Rhee (Owner of a multi-billion dollar Charter school lobbying group)
- She fired 266 teachers who were members of the union and justified it saying, “I got rid of teachers who had hit children and who had had sex with children.” After public outrage into the comments over why she would fire teachers who were pedophiles instead of having them arrested she refused to provide any evidence the 266 union teachers had ever abused children and refused to apologize for her comments.
- She has been accused of making the school district worse on purpose to help lobbyist groups justify their stance that public and free education is a failure.
Secretary of Agriculture:
Forrest Lucas (Billionaire owner of the company Lucas Oil)
I have done extensive research to try and find out why anyone would support these things. And why someone would go as far as to spend millions of dollars so people don’t go jail for beating their pet dogs, and the closest answers I have gotten from interviews is that Forrest Lucas seems obsessed with the idea, “That a man has a god given right to do with, what he pleases to his property.”
Secretary of Energy:
Harold Hamm (Billionaire Oil Tycoon)
Secretary of Homeland Security:
Michael McCaul (Texas Congressman and the 2nd Richest U.S Politician before Trump with $300 million dollars)
Secretary of the Treasury:
Steven Mnuchin (Worked for Goldman Sachs and produced American Sniper)
Secretary of Commerce:
Peter Thiel (Billionaire Trump donor)
Director of the Office of Management and Budget:
Tom Coburn (Former Oklahoma Senator)
- Back when he was a doctor he committed medicare fraud according to the State Attorney General. (Ironically he wants to end Medicare because he says it’s used primarily for fraud.)
- He used legal loopholes to attempt to prevent several bills from coming to the Senate floor. Some of the bills includes one that would assure Veterans get health benefits. The law that criminalized online child pornography and one law that would cut funding to the Ugandan terrorist group, The Lord’s Resistance Army. Who are famous for massacring entire villages but letting the young children live so they can be used as child sex slaves. The LRA currently is killing more people each year than ISIS is.
Director of the Environmental Protection Agency:
Myron Ebell (Lobbyist for Climate Change Deniers)
CIA Director:
Mike Pompeo (Congressman who was elected thanks to The Tea Party)
Friday, October 21, 2016
A Plea for the Renomination of General Benjamin Harrison by Frederick Douglass 11
The edited copies provide insight as to Douglass’ thinking. For example, in the third paragraph, Douglass crossed the line “blood of the negro” out of the phrase “Where under the whole heavens does human blood utter such piercing cry from the ground as the blood of the negro in the states of the rebellion?” He inserted the word “late” before rebellion, which has the overall effect of toning down the passage toward racial reconciliation, allowing the “blood” to refer to humans generally. This lends more efficacy to the emotional passage on lynching that follows.
Douglass relates on two points to the president: on race relations and on foreign policy. Harrison advocated for two failed pieces of legislation that would have improved the living conditions of African Americans and ensured their access to voting rights. He also appointed Douglass as minister to Haiti. On the former point, Douglass stresses that the measures failed to due traitorous Republicans, and urges his listeners not to blame the President. Harrison will continue to do all he can for black citizens in the South. On the second point, Douglass credits Harrison with running the State Department entirely, as Secretary of State Blaine was ill for most of the 1890-1893 period.
The overall effect, in this reader’s opinion, is a somewhat measured enthusiasm. After more than thirty years of supporting Republican nominees, and incomplete success, Douglass was, after 1892, weary of broken promises. He passed away before the 1896 contest, which would mark the first time that a Republican platform omitted its foundational civil rights plank.
Read the complete speech below the cut:
A plea for the renomination of General Benjamin Harrison
by Frederick Douglass
To no class or condition of people in the United States is the nomination and election of a just, wise and able Republican President more important and imperatively indispensable than to the newly made citizens of this Republic. Coming into the body politic against the fierce resentment of the men who once enslaved them; being compelled by circumstances over which they have no control to remain in the presence of those inimical to them; living under the blighting shadow of a popular prejudice which is kept alive by a fancied necessity; encountering difficulties in the race of life met with by no other class of Americans; holding their freedom and citizenship against systematic and unrelenting persecution; passing through the inevitable hardships of a transition condition; they need at the head of the government the fostering care of a strong man, who is in perfect sympathy the that new order of American freedom and justice, the order which has clothed them with citizenship and the elective franchise. With them the choice of a President involves in some measure the question of liberty and slavery, happiness and misery, peace and war, life and death.
They are now the helpless victims of a system of lawless violence and bloodshed unsurpassed in horror by any crimes perpetrated in the darkest corners of the earth.
True, the election of a wise and strong man for the presidency may not entirely stay the hand of violence and put an end to its stupendous horrors, for such crimes will be committed until the spirit of slavery is wholly banished from the South, and for this time and _____ must do their part. But it makes a vast difference whether the rulers of the nation are in sympathy with the criminals or with the class against whom crimes are committed. There are powers other then that of swords and bayonets, and among these is the firmly settled judgment of the nation in favor of justice to the negro citizen, and one expressed in the national choice of a president. The persistent election of such rulers cannot but be followed in the end by peace and good order in the South. That section of the country is great, but the whole country itself is greater. Let it be once understood, North and South and everywhere else, that in its march from slavery and barbarism to the liberty and enlightenment, the nation at large will take no step backward, and that the negro who helped to save the country from dismemberment and ruin will have the sympathy and support of the government, and will be protected, even the barbarous South will be in this time become ashamed and dragged into line with this new order of American liberty.
It may be charged that I view the presidential question simply in its relations and bearings touching the colored citizen. In the name of justice and a merciful God, how can I view it otherwise? What is there paramount to this view? Where under the whole heavens does human blood utter such piercing cry from the ground as in the states of the late rebellion? Scenes are transpiring in that section which haunt me night and day and fill the souls of men with bitterest anguish. What to me are the questions of silver and gold, or tariffs and currency, while my people are torn from their little cabins, snatched from jails by furious mobs with no chance to establish their innocence of crimes imparted to them—shot down, stabbed, hanged and burnt to death without judge or jury. While these hell black atrocities shall continue no man with a drop of colored blood in his veins should allow himself to think of any other politics than those relating to his people. I am free to say that my choice of a candidate for the presidency is dictated by my desire to arrest these outrages just now so rampant and flagrant in the South. My choice may seem illogical, since it is none other than President Benjamin Harrison, with whose knowledge these outrages have been perpetrated with impunity. It is however easily shown that the fault has not been his. No man in public life hates fraud and abhors bloodshed more than does President Harrison, and had he been supported, as he should have been, by Congress, murder and rapine would not now be running riot in the Southern states. As much as any other man likely to receive the nomination, Mr. Harrison is in favor of law and force for the protection of the colored man from this lawless violence. There are other good men not less fit for the place than Benjamin Harrison, but none more likely, if any is likely, to be elected should any of them be nominated. I named Gen. Harrison for the Presidency more than six months ago, and have seen no reason, in the events that have since transpired, to change my views.
In commending him for the place, I lay no stress upon what might be considered as a graceful and proper tribute to a faithful public servant. Though he has richly deserved such a tribute at the hands of his party, I leave that ground to others. They may well enough demand for him such an expression of national confidence and approval as renomination and a reelection would imply. It would simply be fulfilling the injunction of “honor to honor”.
But, as a colored man, identified with the destiny [?] intensely of colored men and believing that their cause will be best served by the continuation of General Harrison in the presidential chair, I earnestly urge his renomination. I stand for him because I know him and have studied his character and have found him to be human, wise and strong. It is not enough that the man at the head of this nation be a good man. He must be strong, as well. It was the strength, as well as the wisdom, of Abraham Lincoln and General Grant, that made them successful Presidents. No man in the country could for a moment forget who was President in the case of either. The same is true of President Benjamin Harrison. He has never allowed the helm of the Ship of State to slip form his fingers. By those who knew him as a private citizen and as a member of the bar of his state, and especially as a member of the United States Senate, where he held an equal place with the ablest Senators of the nation, his election to the Presidency was easily viewed with confidence and expectation that his administration would be a success. That confidence has not been falsified and that expectation has not been disappointed. But to those who did not know him, the success of his administration has been a great and gratifying surprise.
During the three years of his Presidency, questions of vast moment have confronted him, requiring for their solution the highest wisdom, ability and statesmanship, and he has proved himself equal to every occasion. Though deprived for the most of his time of the assistance of the eminent head of the State Department who has been much disabled by ill health, no question of home or foreign policy has been allowed to suffer. The archives of the nation furnish no papers on foreign affairs, abler than those that bear the stamp and authorship of Benjamin Harrison. He had to deal with Italy, Chile and England, and his wise, firm and dignified course has wrung from reluctant opponents highest commendation. Neither the honor of our country nor the good relations that should subsist between these nations and ourselves, have been sacrificed. When the arrow struck the heart of the tyrant in Switzerland, though the archer was behind the rocks unseen, it was known from the accuracy of the aim that his name was William Tell. So as we read the voluminous and able discussion in these papers on international questions, we know that the hand and brain that produced them were none other than those of Benjamin Harrison’s.
I am not only for Mr. Harrison for what he has done, but I am for him for what he has left undone. He has never stooped in any wise to the devices of the demagogue. He has never flattered the old rebel class by his presence or his praise. He has had no compliments for the men who fought to destroy the Union. He has never courted political support by paltering in a double sense, or by openly sacrificing his principles. He has never thought to compassionate the murderers of the negro by whining about the so called difficult race problem with which they have to struggle. His trumpet has never given an uncertain sound. He has simply insisted upon justice, fairplay and obedience to constitutional obligations as the solution of the race question.
It is always important to know just what a man stands for in this world, and where to look for him in any important emergency which may arise. The latter can be easily and always known when the former is known. Just this is one strong reason for urging the nomination of General Benjamin Harrison. We know precisely what he stands for, and we also know that, having carefully selected his ground, we may expect to find him where we have in any emergency, heretofore found him. He has been weighed and measured, tried and tested, and has suffered loss at no point. Individuals of his party have flinched and failed us in trying hours, but General Harrison never. He was ever true to us on the Blair Educational Bill, so much needed. He was true to us on the stigmatized Force Bill, and he has been true to us in recognizing our right to be represented in the offices and emoluments of the Government. Of course in this latter course he has not escaped complaints, for it is impossible for a President of any party to satisfy all the demands of this kind that will be made upon him, but no man has gone further or done more in the recognition of the claims of colored men to office, than has General Harrison. He has upon the whole given larger, higher and better positions to colored men, than were ever given before.
I am not among those who profess to be indifferent to the possession of office by colored men. In a country like ours, no class or condition of men can afford to be entirely ignored and excluded from a share in the administration of the government. They need it for themselves and for the standing of their class. But, important as this is, in our case, incomparably more important that means be provided for the protection of liberty, and person, and for the promotion of general education. In favor of these fundamental interests, no man is stronger, more reliable or more earnest, than President Benjamin Harrison. In the Republican platform adopted at Chicago, it is affirmed “that the supreme and sovereign right of every lawful citizen, rich or poor, native or foreign born, white or black, is to cast one free ballot in public elections, and to have that ballot duly counted.” … “It is further asserted, that the free and honest popular ballot and the just equal representation of all the people, is the foundation of our Republican Government and demands effective legislation to secure the integrity and purity of elections, which are the fountains of all public authority.” Upon this platform, President Harrison was elected, and no man can say that he has ever deserted it. If Republicans in Congress have failed to stand by it and enact proper legislation to carry out this grand object, the fault has not been Benjamin Harrison’s. Unhappily for us, there have been found, in this case, just enough of half hearted men wearing the livery of Republicanism to serve the Democracy in and to defeat the honest purpose of the President. But for these, both the Blair Educational Bill and the Lodge Bill would now be on the national statute book.
I have been asked how I could reconcile my advocacy of the nomination and election of General Harrison with that I have had to say about the negotiations for a coaling station at the Mole St. Nicolas. At this point I have no difficulty whatever. The high opinion I have formed of General Harrison is, in a measure, due to his friendship for Haiti and the advice he gave me in connection with my mission to that country. I have found in him no trace of the vulgar prejudice so rampant against Haiti and against colored people everywhere. He sent me to that country to represent the best sentiments of loyal and liberty loving Americans and the noblest qualities of human nature. The spirit of his humane advice was worthy of his lofty character. He charged me to do all I could for the peace and welfare of Haiti, so far as that was consistent with my duty to the United States, and he especially urged me to persuade her to value and preserve her institutions, and thus to remove all ground for the reproaches now hurled at her and, through her example, at the colored people in the United States. He instructed me as would any man too generous to profit by the misfortunes of others; too proud to stoop to meanness; too honest to practice duplicity; too strong to menace the weak, and too great to be small in any respect. NO! There is nothing whatever in my relations with General Harrison to make it difficult or inconsistent for me to advocate with all my heart his renomination and election to the Presidency of the United States.
Sunday, August 7, 2016
"Ben was the only Republican in the family and the more shame for him." 11
-
John Scott Harrison, Jr., brother to the future president, quoted by an unknown family member (likely sister Jennie Harrison Morris) in a letter dated July 23rd, 1860.
Benjamin Harrison belonged to an old, distinguished, and conservative Whig family. When the Whig party dissolved following the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, the larger portion of the family threw in with the American or “Know-Nothing” Party. Only Ben joined the Republicans and advocated for the abolition of slavery.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
June 15th 1897: Henry ‘Box’ Brown diesOn this day in 1897,...
June 15th 1897: Henry ‘Box’ Brown dies
On this day in 1897, American former slave Henry ‘Box’ Brown died in Canada. Born into slavery in Virginia in 1815, Brown spent most of his enslavement in a tobacco factory. In 1848, his wife and children were sold to North Carolina; the injustice fuelled his desire to escape from slavery. Brown plotted his escape carefully, working with a friend from his church and a white contact to arrange his being shipped as cargo from Richmond to the free city of Philadelphia. On March 23rd, 1849, Brown’s arduous journey began. Hiding in a box labeled ‘dry goods’, with just a single hole for air, Brown travelled 27 hours to the headquarters of the Philadelphia Anti-Slavery Society. When the box was opened, Brown emerged, said “How do you do, Gentlemen?”, and recited a psalm, thanking God for his deliverance from slavery. Abolitionist leaders were divided on whether to publicise Brown’s story. On one hand, it provided an inspiring story to enslaved people, but it also alerted the authorities to the possibility of similar attempts; indeed, Brown’s accomplices in Virginia were arrested for attempting to ship more people to freedom. Brown decided to go public, and toured Northern states with his courageous story, publishing a narrative in 1849. The passage of the Fugitive Slave Act in 1850 alarmed Brown, and he fled to England, where he remarried. Brown returned to America in 1875, after the Civil War brought about the aboltition of slavery, and worked as a magician. Little is known about Brown’s latter years, except that by the late 1880s he was performing in Canada. However, recent research suggests that he died on June 15th 1897 in Toronto. The remarkable career of Henry ‘Box’ Brown demonstrates the great lengths to which people were willing to go to escape the horrific institution of slavery.
“Buoyed up by the prospect of freedom and increased hatred to slavery I was willing to dare even death itself rather than endure any longer the clanking of those galling chains”
Thursday, May 5, 2016
Puck and the Harrison’s administration’s legacy.The cartoonists... 11
Puck and the Harrison’s administration’s legacy.
The cartoonists at Puck laid into the Republican Party’s platform in earnest once voters turned the Executive and Legislative branches over to the Democrat Party. The 53rd Congress and President Cleveland wasted no time in repealing both the McKinley Tariff (replaced with the Wilson-Gorman Tariff in 1894), and the Sherman Silver Purchase Act (all silver coinage ceased in 1895).
Puck and other commentators hoped to lay blame for the Panic of 1893, the worst recession that the US would experience before the Great Depression, squarely at the feet of Harrison, Reed, McKinley, Sherman, and the whole Republican Party. Puck supported the notion that Cleveland’s repeal of the Republican program had set the nation’s finances back on sound footing, and that recovery was inevitable. But the economy continued to worsen, and the Democrats suffered enormous losses in the 1894 midterm elections. The Republicans under McKinley took both houses of Congress and the Presidency in 1896, and held them for the next fourteen years.
Economists today doubt that the Silver Purchase Act or the McKinley Tariff directly caused the Panic of 1893. Nevertheless, Harrison’s legacy has had to contend with the fact that he entered the White House with a budget surplus, and left with a deficit. Historians have for decades repeated the idea that Harrison let Congress misspend the people’s money, in stark contrast to Cleveland’s fiscal restraint.
When historians repeat this tired line, they commit two mistakes. Firstly, they mischaracterize Harrison as a passive man. Benjamin Harrison was as dedicated a public servant as the country ever knew. In fact, his failure to delegate often caused friction within his party, and caused him immense personal stress. Harrison was instrumental in the passage of the Dependent and Disability Pensions Act, in addition to the rest of the Republican program. Secondly, they fail to account for what Harrison spent the county’s money on.
Today, we would take for granted that the government should provide for out-of-work veterans. The Pension Bill provided for honorably discharged Union veterans and their families. During the Panic, the public’s view on this bill likely changed. Union veterans received 37% of all Federal dollars spent in 1894. This came during a time when views on the Civil War were rapidly changing, away from the Union cause and toward a more reconciled tone. Nevertheless, the 1890 Pensions Bill stayed on the books. Cleveland, who had vetoed it, did not repeal it. Later, Theodore Roosevelt expanded it to include all Union veterans over the age of 62.
Friday, April 15, 2016
April 15th 1865: Abraham Lincoln diesOn this day in 1865, after...
Lincoln's belongings when he was shot (https://twitter.com/BeschlossDC/status/719295643215347713
April 15th 1865: Abraham Lincoln dies
On this day in 1865, after being shot the previous day, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln died aged 56. Lincoln’s election in 1860 on an antislavery platform prompted the Southern slaveholding states to secede from the Union. The new President led the Union during the subsequent American Civil War, and furthered the abolition of slavery by issuing his Emancipation Proclamation and encouraging the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment. Almost a week after the Confederacy’s surrender to Union forces at Appomattox, Confederate sympathiser John Wilkes Booth shot the President while he was attending a performance of ‘Our American Cousin’ at Ford’s Theatre in Washington D.C. Booth shot Lincoln in the head at point blank range, and the injured President was immediately taken across the street to Petersen House. However, the wound was clearly fatal and after a nine hour coma, Lincoln died at 7.22am on April 15th. When he was shot, the President was carrying in his pockets a pocket knife, a watch fob, a handkerchief, a wallet, spectacles, newspaper clippings, and, interestingly a new Confederate five-dollar bill; Lincoln’s face now appears on the five-dollar bill. Upon Lincoln’s death, Vice President Andrew Johnson was swiftly sworn in as seventeenth President of the United States. Booth was soon tracked down and killed, while Lincoln was widely mourned in the North as the steadfast leader who had seen the nation through its bloodiest war. The nation’s sadness was coupled with shock in the wake of the first presidential assassination; three of Lincoln’s successors would meet the same fate.
“Now he belongs to the ages.”
- Secretary of War Edwin Stanton after Lincoln’s death
Saturday, March 5, 2016
March 5th 1933: Nazis win German electionsOn this day in 1933,...
Communists arrested after the Reichstag fire
The passage of the Enabling Act
March 5th 1933: Nazis win German elections
On this day in 1933, the Nazi Party won 43.9% in the German federal elections, more than any other party. The National Socialist German Workers Party (the Nazis’ official name), capitalising on German frustration by promising ‘work and bread’, won 37.3% in the July 1932 elections. The party leader, Adolf Hitler, was appointed Chancellor by President Hindenberg on January 30th 1933, but the Nazis only had one third of seats in the Reichstag. Upon becoming Chancellor, Hitler announced new elections, while the Nazis secured considerable donations to fund their campaign and stacked the police with their supporters. Just before the scheduled election, the Reichstag fire occurred, and young Dutch Communist Marianus van der Lubbe was immediately arrested. The Nazis used the incident to suggest a Communist revolution was imminent, and passed the Reichstag Fire Decree which suspended civil liberties and habeas corpus. Nazi henchmen arrested electoral candidates from the Communist Party, and began a campaign of violence against left-wingers. This climate of intimidation allowed the Nazis to increase their support and win 43.9% of the vote, but this only translated to 288 out of 647 seats - not an absolute majority. In order to secure the party’s position, the Nazis drafted the Enabling Act, which gave Chancellor Hitler legal powers to establish his dictatorship by giving the Cabinet the power to enact laws independently of the Reichstag. The Nazis pressured and threatened representatives of the Reichstag to pass the bill, positioning SA men and Nazi swastikas in and around the building. With the bill’s passing, Hitler’s dictatorship was assured, and thus began a brutal regime which would last until 1945. The March 1933 elections allowed the Nazis to consolidate their rule, and marked the last election to be held under Hitler’s rule.
Monday, February 1, 2016
February 1st 1960: Greensboro sit-inOn this day in 1960, four...
The second day of the sit-in, with McNeil and McCain joined by William Smith and Clarence Henderson (http://ift.tt/1wjY33h)
A protest in New York supporting the NC sit-in (http://ift.tt/1dAEeqL)
A statue commemorating the Greensboro Four at the NC A&T campus, where they studied (http://ift.tt/1Sn80Zp)
February 1st 1960: Greensboro sit-in
On this day in 1960, four African-American college students walked into the Woolworth store in Greensboro, NC. and sat at the whites-only lunch counter. By 1960, the Civil Rights Movement was gaining momentum, especially following the successful Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955-6 which was prompted by Rosa Parks’s defiance of the city’s segregated public transport. Activists calling for black civil rights, influenced by Martin Luther King Jr’s nonviolent tactics, employed peaceful protest. The power of this approach was exemplified by Joseph McNeil, Franklin McCain, Ezell Blair Jr. and David Richmond on February 1st, 1960. Inspired by previous sit-in protests, the black students were refused service in the segregated diner, but continued to sit patiently and wait to be served. As they sat, the students were threatened and harrassed by the white patrons, but they refused to respond with violence. The sit-ins continued for the next few days, with hundreds of demonstrators eventually joining the protest. The heroism of the Greensboro activists inspired a wave of sit-ins across the south, with 54 taking place by February 7th. By the end of 1960, over 1,500 black demonstrators had been arrested for taking part in sit-ins. However, their efforts were not in vain, and the sit-ins - along with widespread boycotts - prompted restaurants across the south to desegregate. Additionally, the Student Nonviolent Co-ordinating Committee (SNCC) was formed that year to organise future grassroots protests. The decade that followed was characterised by stoic protests by African-Americans, despite the ever-present threat of violence. The first freedom ride occurred in 1961, followed by protest marches including the iconic March on Washington in 1963. With the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965, important steps were made towards racial equality. The Greensboro sit-ins were not the first of their kind, but they mark a major moment in the Civil Rights Movement as they drew attention to the injustices of Jim Crow and inspired a youth-led movement to challenge segregation across the United States.
(Sources: http://ift.tt/1xMJalb, http://ift.tt/1Sn81fD)
Monday, December 14, 2015
December 14th 1911: Amundsen team reach South PoleOn this day in...
Amundsen and the dogs at the South Pole
A,mundsen (centre) and his team back aboard the Fram
Scott's party reach the South Pole, only to discover the Norwegian camp
December 14th 1911: Amundsen team reach South Pole
On this day in 1911, a team led by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen became the first people to reach the South Pole. Born in 1872, Amundsen got his first taste of adventure at the age of fifteen, when he embarked on a sea voyage. In 1899, he had his first encounter with the Antarctic, and a few years later became the first person to travel the Northwest Passage. He then planned a trip to the North Pole, but after that was reached by Robert Peary in 1909 he redirected his efforts to the South Pole. Amundsen’s expedition was kept secret, and he sought the pole less for the scientific achievement than as an effort to alleviate his mounting debt. Amundsen was not the only person headed for the pole, however, as in September 1909 British explorer Robert Scott had announced his own expedition. The Norwegian crew were locked in a race with the Scott team, each attempting to make history by being the first people to reach the planet’s South Pole. Scott’s team were using motorised sledges, whereas Amundsen’s were pulled by dogs and they used skis. Tensions were high in the Amundsen team, and the party split up in October, with Amundsen, Olav Olavson Bjaaland, Hilmer Hanssen, Sverre H. Hassel and Oscar Wisting headed for the pole. At 3pm on Friday, December 14th 1911, they arrived at the site of the South Pole. With frostbitten and aching hands, the five men placed the Norwegian flag in the ground. They celebrated with a meal and cigars in the camp, and departed soon after, but not before leaving a message for Scott in the tent. The British party arrived five weeks later, only to discover they had been beaten by the Norwegians. In a sad turn of events, the entire Scott party died on the return journey, and they have since become national heroes in Britain for their bravery and fortitude. Amundsen, unaware of this, was able to telegraph the news of his success to his brother in March, 1912, and his achievement was widely celebrated. Roald Amundsen later took up flying, and disappeared in 1928 after his plane went missing during a search for a lost aircraft.
“And so at last we reached our destination and planted our flag on the geographical South Pole, King Haakon VII’s plateau. Thank God!“
- Amundsen’s diary entry on December 14th 1911
Saturday, December 5, 2015
December 5th 1933: Prohibition endsOn this day in 1933,...
December 5th 1933: Prohibition ends
On this day in 1933, Prohibition officially ended in the United States upon the ratification of the 21st Amendment to the Constitution. Utah was the final state to ratify the amendment, which gave the measure the required 75% of state approval. The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment of 1920 which had imposed Prohibition - a situation where alcohol was banned in the United States. The amendment was the result of a lobbying campaign by conservative Protestants of both major political parties, who argued that alcohol was debilitating to both health and morality. The prohibition movement stemmed from long-running temperance campaigns against alcohol which have their origins in the nineteenth century. The alcohol ban raised considerable protest, and led many to brew their own bootleg alcoholic drinks which in turn gave rise to an increase in organised crime and the power of gangsters like Chicago’s infamous Al Capone. As well as widespread opposition, the Great Depression contributed to the end of Prohibition as the ban withheld sorely needed tax revenue from the government during that economic crisis. The momentous passage of the 21st Amendment marked the only time in American history when one amendment has overturned another.
LinkWithin
