Displaying 1,081 To 1,110 Of 3,237 Comments D-Day: My Dad and His LSM Bombarding Omaha Beach I left a list of the number of members, decorations and citations earned by the 442nd…the most decorated unit for its size and length of service in the history of American warfare. Patriots? You bet! » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:45 pm How many Germans were interned? And there really was an American Nazi Party! Race could not have been a factor could it? » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:43 pm Miles- when you in this world yet or born later? Are you of Japanese descent? What is your thinking regarding that internment? Have you read “When the Emperor Was Divine” or any of the other fine memoirs from the period. 442nd Service and decorations The 442nd Regimental Combat Team was the most decorated unit for its size and length of service in the history of American warfare. The 4,000 men who initially came in April 1943 had to be replaced nearly 2.5 times. In total, about 14,000 men served, ultimately earning 9,486 Purple Hearts. The unit was awarded eight Presidential Unit Citations (5 earned in one month). Twenty-one of its members were awarded Medals of Honor. Members of the 442nd received 18,143 awards, including: 21 Medals of Honor (the first awarded posthumously to Private First Class Sadao Munemori, Company A, 100th Battalion, for action near Seravezza, Italy, on 5 April 1945; 19 upgraded from other awards in June 2000).[27] Recipients include: 52 Distinguished Service Cross (including 19 Distinguished Service Crosses which were upgraded to Medals of Honor in June 2000) On 5 October 2010, the Congressional Gold Medal was awarded to the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, the 100th Infantry Battalion, and Nisei serving in the Military Intelligence Service. HOW CAN ANYONE BE ANYTHING BUT IMPRESSED. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:40 pm Your memories are as powerful as mine. My dad saw a lot of combat in WWII, had a support role in Korea and Vietnam. Your dad seems to have more battle experience. I spend my entire “growing up” as a navy brat. I did not know my dad in those days and am glad I took the time to find him out much later in life. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:31 pm I was more than a little puzzled when I saw your video embed..what the heck? And then I read your post and saw how well you made the case. After WWII and Korea, the haves made it pretty easy to exempt their own kin from laying it on the line. No draft, no need to take the job the military offered since there were no options in your own community, no doubt that college and post grad would be fully paid for and then some….SO haves and the superhaves send the havenots into war for…let’s face it neocon goals: ultra nationalism, jingoism, geo-political gain, oil, client states, big money for war profiteers. Oh, we make efforts to clothe it the language of doing the right thing….but please… » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:29 pm Thank you ST….I don’t fit all that well into his footsteps, his stride and impact are far larger than mine. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:23 pm So many connections….we have them and we seem to cherish them. I was at a memorial service today. I found myself thinking of how the vets there and those in my generation and yours are bound by their memories of “the good war” and how unclear all of that has become since Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. The closest we got was the Gulf War and thus was over in a blink once the campaign began. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:22 pm Fergie….I loved reading your narrative as well…the connections are powerful are they not? I think the WWII generation is united by the understanding that they were facing clearly identified evil and they were crusaders. While the horrors of war were real, the deep doubts about the rightfulness and efficacy of their efforts so present in Vietnam, Irag and Afghanistan vets is absent. Their war was necessary and just….period. I attended a service today and this was clear in the remembrances of the 18 men and 2 women attending. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 11:18 pm The Weekend Music Thread-Ticklin the Ivories Claire de Lune by Claude Debussy The third and most famous movement of Suite bergamasque is “Clair de lune,” meaning “moonlight” in French. Its name comes from Paul Verlaine’s poem of the same name which also refers to ‘bergamasques’ in its opening stanza: Votre âme est un paysage choisi / Que vont charmant masques et bergamasques / Jouant du luth et dansant et quasi / Tristes sous leurs déguisements fantasques. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea2WoUtbzuw THE POEM Clair de Lune is a French poem written by Paul Verlaine in 1869. It is the inspiration for the third and most famous movement of Debussy’s 1890 Suite bergamasque of the same name. Your soul is a chosen landscape All sing in a minor key With the still moonlight, sad and beautiful, Your soul is a chosen landscape All sing in a minor key With the still moonlight, sad and beautiful, » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 7, 2014 @ 12:18 pm Was Pvt. Bergdahl Choosing Suicide? Why thanks! It is mine and you are welcome to borrow it anytime. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 2:35 pm Again, absolutely on the mark. I am sure that I will be doing another version of my story sooner than later. When I do may I weave your insights into that effort. I think you may know his heart better than I do (or at least point out another interpretation for his actions that I missed entirely). » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 12:38 pm Thank you. Others here have disagree which is fine of course, and several have brought up other perspectives but none of us have taken the point of view of the right winters. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 11:02 am I suspect that your understanding will be the one that emerges….and that conscience without an avenue for positive action led him down a dangerous path. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 8:52 am You had a broader context and a wisdom figure to walk you through your withdrawal and your Dad was part of a generation that very much believed that their wars were crusades. I think that the case for both WWII and Korea is strong in that regard. In Vietnam it got murky but some, like you, came through because you walked with someone else. The Gulf War joins the list of small, good wars for most. But both Afghanistan and Iraq are different. Afghanistan’s first 16 months is much like the Gulf War and then it turned into a neo-con ploy for expanded national power and jingoism. Iraq was never anything but a cynical grab for geopolitical gain and oil. War is horror but war without any sense of its necessity and honorable outcome is a source of ongoing despair. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 8:51 am Excellent commentary. What caught my attention was his sending his personal effects back home combined with the tone of his notes to his family. You have added a couple of pieces of info that I did not see: his being captured in a latrine- one near his outpost? The idea that this walk was just like the others- except he was on guard duty he had to set aside his weapons, his ammo, his armor. I also have to wonder what he was thinking when he enlisted, and especially when he went to the combat school. It seems to me that he was an idealist but the army does not seem to be a good fit. His wandering off- did no one stop and consider what that might mean. I have also read a lot of speculation about how much the loss of his friend shook him to his roots. No, there is no evidence that points to desertion. No evidence of traitorous behavior. And yes, those who say there is, especially those who argued just a few months ago that everything should be done to get him released, are vile. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 8:44 am The Once and Future Impeachment of Barack Obama Sorry, I do not buy this. If they have a plan they have to put it on the table for all of us to look at. They have not. Why? They cannot. They cannot get an agreement. If they can’t now, why should I believe that they will later. Put up or shut up, GOP. You say you want ACA repealed. Ok. You put up. You voted to repeal it despite the fact that the repeal bill would not be taken up in the Senate. Suggesting that they cannot do the same with their replacement (remember their motto: Repeal and Replace), plan for fear of infighting is excuse making. Their fear is that fighting will get them no where. Again I cite the Ryan plan that made it into the 2009 budget and then had to be pulled out by the GOP because they could not get a majority of their caucus to support it. That is how you demonstrate that you have the capacity govern. Given how unproductive this House has been it is my belief that they are so deeply divided that the only governance that can come out of the House is bipartisan. GOP plus Dems. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 12, 2014 @ 4:14 pm AH HAH….found your reply. Yes the threads end after they step in three times. What you do is go back to the top of the thread and do what I am doing here….drop in early and an e mail alerts you that you have a reply. Here it is. My reply are ALL CAPS…. =====================here’s your comoment====== Weird, I can’t find a “reply” button on your latest post, so I had to use the “reply” button on mine above it. There’s probably a better way to be navigating around here that I haven’t figured out yet. Nowhere in my post did I say that GOP actions or inactions are the responsibility of the Dems. I do believe that both parties certainly take political realities into account whenever they do or don’t do something legislatively. A political reality, that you acknowledged in your response, is that the Dems won’t allow ANYTHING that repeals or replaces or amends any part of the ACA. Why did the GOP then vote ad nauseum for repeal? You contend it’s because that’s the only thing the GOP can agree on. I say it’s much simpler than that – it’s to make a political point that has an “upside” for the GOP with their voters. YOU ARE STILL AVOIDING MY QUESTION. THEY CAN MAKE THEIR POINT THAT THE ACA HAS TO GO. BUT WHY DID THEY NOT MAKE THE PONT THAT THEY HAD SOMETHING BETTER. BRING FORTH THE RSC REPORT, PUT IT ON THE FLOOR, SHOW IT OFF, AMEND IT, PASS IT AND THEN SEND IT TO THE SENATE….FORCE REID TO SAY NO….INDEED THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE DEMS IN THE SENATE COULD IGNORE THE REPEALS- ALL THEY HAD TO DO IS SAY: SO WHAT IS THE GOP PROPOSING AS AN ALTERNATIVE……CRICKETS IN THE WAY OF LEGISLATION. SOME NICE GENERALIZED STATEMENTS BUT NO LEGISLATION. AND THE GOD DID IN FACT SAY, AGAIN AND AGAIN- WHY BOTHER CREATING AN ALTERNATIVE WHEN THE DEMS IN THE SENATE WILL NOT CONSIDER IT. IF THAT IS SO THEN WHY PUSH THE REPEAL FORWARD 50 PLUS TIMES? Would there be infighting and political wrangling if the GOP proposed bill regarding health care actually had hearings? Of course, no doubt. And if it had a prayer of passing through the Senate and the President’s veto pen, that would be worth it. But it doesn’t, so there’s no political upside to having the fight and doing the wrangling. REFER TO MY PREVIOUS PARAGRAPH. IN 2011 RYAN PUT UP A BUDGET THAT ACTUALLY INCLUDED AN ALTERNATIVE AND THE ALTERNATIVE HAD TO BE CUT OUT BY THE GOP. WHY? THE COULD NOT GET ENOUGH SUPPORT FOR IT. THE BUDGET PASSED WITHOUT THE NEW HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE. As you stated, the Hastert rule is an “informal governing principle”. It’s not hard and fast, and exceptions are made. The establishment GOP decides when to bring things up for a vote or not, and when it’s something they feel needs to be passed and/or considered, they know whether or not they have the votes within the entire HOUSE to pass it. If they NEED the votes, they’ll arm twist within their own party. If they don’t, because enough Democrats will vote in favor, they’ll allow those GOP to vote how they wish for political cover with their voters. Not much difference than in the Senate, where votes by Landrieu and others against the Dem majority are overlooked or excused by “look where they come from”. But when push comes to shove, they make the deals they need to pass SOMETHING. That’s why you have the ACA, because not enough DEMOCRATS wanted single payer or anything different. They had enough votes, numbers wise, to pass anything they wished, disregarding the GOP entirely. But the political reality was that they had to appease their own party members because there wasn’t party unity on what should be done. So they had to fight it out amongst their own party, and the fight is still resonating today. THIS IS GENERALLY ACCURATE. HERE IS MY POINT- THE GOP IS UNABLE TO PASS ANYTHING OF SUBSTANCE ON ITS OWN. NOTHING. GOT AN EXAMPLE? But you think the GOP, without having the ability to actually set and pass the agenda, should bloody themselves up and do the same. Sorry, they’re not that gullible. When push comes to shove and it COUNTS, they’re better at standing in lockstep than the Dems are – just look at what they’ve been able to block in the Senate by doing so. That, of course, you call obstruction. THE SENATE REGULARLY PASSES BILLS THAT THEY KNOW WILL NOT PASS IN THE HOUSE. YOUR POSITION IS NOT LOGICAL. IF IT WERE THE WAY THINGS ALWAYS RAN THERE WOULD BE NO BILLS FROM EITHER HOUSE UNLESS BOTH WERE CONTROLLED BY ONE PARTY AND THAT PARTY HAD CONTROL OF ITS OWN CAUCUS. ON AVERAGE ONLY HALF OF THE BILLS PASSED BY EITHER CHAMBER BECOME LAW. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 11, 2014 @ 3:45 pm Thanks for responding and you did what is so often done- you made GOP actions the responsibility of the Dems. There is NO WAY that the Senate will take up an ACA repeal, yet the House GOP passed it 50 plus times. There is NO WAY that the President would accept an ACA repeal bill if it were to pass the House and Senate. BUT the House GOP continued to do it. Why? It is one of the few things the House Majority could actually vote for in the majority. You do do know that this House now holds the record for passing the fewest number of bills ever….ever…. Their majority cannot agree on an agenda. Until the can show they are capable of governing themselves they do not have credibility. There are six major measures that have been passed by the current house. Boehner says that he rises and falls on The Hastert Rule, the “majority of the majority” rule, the informal governing principle used by Republican Speakers of the House of Representatives since the mid-1990s to maintain their speakerships and limit the power of the minority party to bring bills up for a vote on the floor of the House. But the for the six bills in question here….Boehner could not make it happen. Boehner allowed a vote on January 1, 2013 on the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (also known as the “fiscal cliff bill”) with only 85 out of 241 Republicans in favor (a support level of only 35%) and the bill passed with the support of 90% of Democrats (172 out of 191). Two weeks later, on January 15, 2013, Boehner allowed a vote on aid to victims of Hurricane Sandy to take place without the support of a majority of the Republican caucus. The vote passed with 241 votes, but only 49 of the votes were from Republicans or a mere 21% of the majority.[23] Since then some notable Republicans have publicly questioned whether the “majority of the majority” rule is still viable or have proposed jettisoning it altogether. In spite of all the criticism, on February 28, 2013 Boehner brought a third bill for a vote on the floor of the house which did not have support of majority of Republicans. The bill, an extension of the Violence Against Women Act, received the vote of only 38% of the Republicans in the House of Representatives. On April 9, 2013, the “rule” was violated a fourth time, on a bill about federal acquisition of historic sites. The bill was passed with more than two thirds of the House vote but without a majority of the GOP caucus.[27] Shortly thereafter, Boehner said, “Listen: It was never a rule to begin with. And certainly my prerogative – my intention is to always pass bills with strong Republican support.” On October 16, 2013, Boehner again violated the rule by allowing a floor vote to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling. The House voted 285 to 144 less than three hours after the Senate overwhelmingly passed the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014. The “yea” votes consisted of 198 Democrats and only 87 Republicans, less than 40% of the conference. On February 11, 2014, Boehner broke the rule by allowing a floor vote on a “clean” debt ceiling bill. The bill passed the house 221-201, with only 28 Republicans voting “yea” along with 193 Democrats. I make a simple case. The GOP cannot govern itself. It cannot provide the country with statement of its agenda that it translates into action in the House where it can pass any bill it wants. Your argument here is not an explanation. It is an excuse. On principle alone, one would think that the best of the GOP alternatives, the RSC offering, would be walked through the legislative process. THEY HAVE NOT EVEN HELD HEARINGS. THEY WILL NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT IT. WHY? They their own party will splinter over any discussion. All that they can agree on is what they do not want. A GOP majority in the Senate will be just as troubled. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 9, 2014 @ 11:54 am Hello and major, jumbo sized, mega-greetings. You are a brave soul. I post at Fox, and Red State. I use a different screen name there. I want my progressive philosophy to have some voice. I must tell you that posts at both sites are often censored. Yep. They post and are taken down. I was banned from the Conservative Thinker. I posted there for nearly a year but eventually I was dismissed for being too negative. Well, I was very negative. That is what the word “opposed” implies does it not? Here at the Planet that will not happen in matters of content. Even the most liberal of us MUST abide by the rules of respectful public discourse. IF, you find yourself subject to anything else, you need to report that at the Help Desk immediately. Ad Lib, our primary admin, is about as even handed as you can get. Having said that….you also need to know that some folks are REALLY going to push back HARD while others will push back REALLY, REALLY HARD. So be prepared. When I post a Conservative site, I have three rules: 1) Provide a clear thesis; a easily understood controlling idea. SO…..let me begin. Why has the GOP not passed one its counter-ACA plans in the House? They have passed dozens of other bills, most pertinently its ACA repeals, which have had no chance of seeing light of day in the Senate. The pattern has been the same. A group of House members fashion their own reform measure. The measure gets trotted out with lot of hoopla by the member. The Speaker and Majority Leader acknowledge it. It goes to Committee and….nothing. The most recent example was last Fall when the Republican Study Committee, a very large group representing both wings of the GOP, the institutionalists and the tea party, proposed its “The American Health Care Reform Act” http://rsc.scalise.house.gov/solutions/rsc-betterway.htm It is in four committees now and there have been NO hearings, no action. WHY? The way I see it is this. They know that their own bill would not pass in their own GOP controlled House. They have no alternative to offer that they can get their own caucus to support. All they can agree to is to repeal what they do not like. The RSC bill has a number of aspect worth considering. I have written on this. A number of Dems in the House have referred to elements in the bill they like. But……it goes no where. On the page I cited earlier there is this interesting tidbit. In a large black box at the top of the page, the RSC notes that Obama has said he would work with anyone on good ideas in a December statement. Now, the RSC bill was submitted to the House in September. The RSC places the responsibility for the bill not making progress on HIS not having sat down and spoken with them. What’s missing. They claim that a majority of the their house caucus supports the bill. Ok. Prove it. Bring it to the floor. At that point, a bill, approved by the majority of the House (which I think could well include a number of Dems), would provide a sound counter-proposal to weaknesses in the ACA and the basis for Obama working with their leadership and with the Senate leadership. Why aren’t they doing that? 1) When push comes to shove, they will not enough votes from their own caucus to pass the bill which means they would have to look to the Dems AND THAT IS FORBIDDEN by the most conservative, the tea party. 2) It contains a number of items that most of their members really do not want to passed. For example: The bill has provision that “Spurs competition to lower health care costs by allowing Americans to purchase health insurance across state lines and enabling small businesses to pool together and get the same buying power as large corporations.” Bottom line: the big insurance companies and their lobbies do not want this as it will cut into their bottom line. They are among the big money donors and their clout is enormous. 3) If the bill moves forward and becomes the basis for a Senate reconciliation bill then the GOP will be seen as working with the Dems, being bi-partisan. For many of their incumbents that is a death curse. 4) By creating another false narrative- Obama and the Dems are stopping us- they get to raise more money off of it and continue to lift up their targets of choice: Obama, Pelosi, Reid. Ok, your turn. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 9, 2014 @ 7:35 am There is not a thing here that I disagree with…in fact I endorse every single thing you have to say….and now we are stuck trudging up hill until 2020 AND unless we have a wave election in 2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020 that climb will remain very difficult. Having said that, I do fault the Obama administration with continuing to cooperate with the GOP after year one. Their intention was clear and the intelligence about the billionaire bullies was right there. Obama’s problem was the Blue Dogs in the Senate. Had they cooperated ACA would not have been the horror it was; and many of the 135 bills passed by Pelosi’s House would have passed the senate including a reworked voting rights act. To do that Obama and the Dems would have had to channel the spirit of LBJ and put extraordinary pressure, at first private and then public, on the Blue Dogs. I think the result would have been an inspired left and far better turnout on our side the aisle. It would have been war with the right but that was already started anyway. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 6, 2014 @ 9:21 am You need to chat with Ad Lib our site administrator….. I will happily join in. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 10:08 pm Power and Money are twins in their ability to be both source of and result of the corruption of the body politic. Well said. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 7:49 pm I heard a “joke” in SC in late 2008 after Obama was elected- “What’s that black man going to be doing in the White House anyway unless he’s serving coffee, cleaning up a restroom, or driver a car for someone else.” Folks laugh. That Obama was being “uppity”, was “an angry black man from the hood”, was an “alien”, an “other” sitting in the Oval Office brought every nascent and dormant strain of racial, ethnic and class based anger, anxiety and fear to the fore. Obama is the poster child for “them” taking over “our country.” How often have we heard these words: “I want my country back.” Back from whom? Back from “them.” Yes the impeachment is an expression, one of many, of this sentiment. Miles, you should be doing posts/articles here. This last comment would be a fine example of this. Add a headline, an image, a couple of tags/labels and you’ve got it. Interested? There are folks here willing to help. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 7:48 pm In those early days Obama and his coalition thought that this was the road to GOP cooperation AND the way around the difficult issue of Democratic complicity in the whole mess. It turned out to be a bad strategy. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 7:40 pm How does this speak to the impeachment story? Interested in your perspective on that…. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 7:39 pm Begin with the electorate….Yes in 2010- a bunch of dems sat on their hands in the midterms because they always do ; some decided to voice their discontent with Obama and the Dems for not pushing the full liberal agenda hard enough, and some were won over to anti-ACA argument… That election created the census based gerrymandering in the House we are stuck with until 2020. The electoral map always favors the GOP in the Senate since so many small states (by population) are red. And now the new crusade is to link Electoral College votes to Congressional Districts and we know where that takes us. I have expanded my list a bit. The five great allies the GOP have are: 1) The low information base common to most voters. NOW- you bring up an additional point- the Dems in the House and Senate who kept insisting on making deals with the GOP and who appealed to the Blue Dog Nature of their constituencies as the need for that- states and districts that leaned right and voted both Dem and GOP. What good did that do. Obama is often accused of having squandered a super majority in the Senate. 9 of those Senators fall into the Blue Dog category. Most are gone. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 6:17 pm Yes in 2010- a bunch of dems sat on their hands in the midterms because they always do ; some decided to voice their discontent with Obama and the Dems for not pushing the full liberal agenda hard enough, and some were won over to anti-ACA argument… That election created the census based gerrymandering in the House we are stuck with until 2020. The electoral map always favors the GOP in the Senate since so many small states (by population) are red. And now the new crusade is to link Electoral College votes to Congressional Districts and we know where that takes us. I have expanded my list a bit. The five great allies the GOP have are: 1) The low information base common to most voters. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 6:14 pm Hope and No Change- The GOP motto. Yes, I want my country, the country that elected Obama and a Dem House and Senate in 2008 back….but the thing is- it was Democrats who let the other side grab it away from us. AND they want more. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 6:08 pm Wemble- The five great allies the GOP have are: 1) The low information base common to most voters. Your illustration of what happened in Wi in 2010 is spot on. Equally as troublesome to me is that in the recall process Dems LET Walker stay in office. And that is what they did. Stupidty from many; idealism from others. Disaster. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 6:06 pm Bergdahl plays to so many of the anti-Obama memes that it is a perfect storm for them. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On June 5, 2014 @ 6:01 pmComments Posted By MurphTheSurf3
Barney F. Hajiro
Mikio Hasemoto
Joe Hayashi
Shizuya Hayashi
Daniel K. Inouye
Yeiki Kobashigawa
Robert T. Kuroda
Kaoru Moto
Sadao Munemori
Kiyoshi K. Muranaga
Masato Nakae
Shinyei Nakamine
William K. Nakamura
Joe M. Nishimoto
Allan M. Ohata
James K. Okubo
Yukio Okutsu
Frank H. Ono
Kazuo Otani
George T. Sakato
Ted T. Tanouye
1 Distinguished Service Medal
560 Silver Stars (plus 28 Oak Leaf Clusters for a second award)
22 Legion of Merit Medals
15 Soldier’s Medals
4,000 Bronze Stars (plus 1,200 Oak Leaf Clusters for a second award; one Bronze Star was upgraded to a Medal of Honor in June 2000. One Bronze Star was upgraded to a Silver Star in September 2009.)
9,486 Purple Hearts
Where charming masqueraders and bergamaskers go
Playing the lute and dancing and almost
Sad beneath their fanciful disguises.
Of victorious love and the opportune life,
They do not seem to believe in their happiness
And their song mingles with the moonlight,
That sets the birds dreaming in the trees
And the fountains sobbing in ecstasy,
The tall slender fountains among marble statues.
Where charming masqueraders and bergamaskers go
Playing the lute and dancing and almost
Sad beneath their fanciful disguises.
Of victorious love and the opportune life,
They do not seem to believe in their happiness
And their song mingles with the moonlight,
That sets the birds dreaming in the trees
And the fountains sobbing in ecstasy,
The tall slender fountains among marble statues.
2) Build a case making fact based statements in support of my thesis.
3) Provide a real world narrative with sources when necessary.
2) Plenty of money to fill the ether with propaganda.
3) A zealous and energized base.
4) The apathy of some Democratic voters.
5) The ideology of other Democratic voters that complains the Party is not Liberal enough.
2) Plenty of money to fill the ether with propaganda.
3) A zealous and energized base.
4) The apathy of some Democratic voters.
5) The ideology of other Democratic voters that complains the Party is not Liberal enough.
2) Plenty of money to fill the ether with propaganda.
3) A zealous and energized base.
4) The apathy of some Democratic voters.
5) The ideology of other Democratic voters that complains the Party is not Liberal enough.
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats