Plan B Forum

This may have been posted before:

Now ask the same questions of people at, say, your average gun show or NASCAR race and you will find the results aren't going to be all that much different.  It ain't just the young kids.  There's more than enough dum-dums to go around.

-"BB"-

Get out! NASCAR fans would be 100% on the Civil War (unless asked what caused it, of course)

Or whether it's over.

But in Texas the question about gaining Independence is not so obvious. What about the Alamo? Did not the Texans gain independence from Mexico, not Wise King George?

snailgate

Hey, they've been vaccinated. What do you want?

Meningitis Vaccine. The Texas Education Code, Section 51.9192 requires all students under the age of 22 years entering a public institution of higher education in Texas to provide documentation that they have had a meningococcal (bacterial meningitis) vaccine within the last five years. Visit http://www.admissions.ttu.edu/meningitis for more information.

And they're rated 168th by US News:

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandrevie ... rsity-3644

So there you go.

And they're not dropping as fast as most conservative colleges are:




Put 'em outside in a good Texas breeze and you wont hardly notice the smell.

yrs,
rubato

I'd say "both" (and they lost at the Alamo). After securing freedom from Great Britain, white US citizens moved to the territory belonging to Mexico; called themselves Texicans; discarded the governance of Mexico (1836) and applied to the US for admission as a state of the Union. The US declined. But in 1845 the US decided to annex Texas, a step agreed to and welcomed by the Texans. Texas was, possibly, admitted to the Union as a state in dubiously Constitutional circumstances.

I hate trick questions.

MajGenl.Meade wrote:Get out! NASCAR fans would be 100% on the Civil War (unless asked what caused it, of course)

Google Kansas Missouri Border War.

Now why should I do that? Do you have a point to make?

MajGenl.Meade wrote:Now why should I do that? Do you have a point to make?

http://www.historynet.com/americas-civi ... kansas.htm

Regardless of your opinion of the South then and now there is and were people in theSsouth that could read and there were news paper and people read those papers. What they learned from those papers was that Yankees killed Southerner for fun and profit; we were in fact already two different countries.

Admittedly the news papers contained a considerable amount of propaganda promoted by the wealthy planter class to advance their interest, but that does not change the fact the common people felt that war unavoidable. I feel that most of the common people would not have supported the war if they had felt they had a choice. There were some that did not support the war and would not fight; one was my great uncle who spent the rest of his life trying to prove he was not a coward or traitor.

As I thought, no point at all. I know more about the War of the Rebellion than you* if you read for a thousand years. Don't presume to teach me or make assumptions about my "opinion" of the South. The cause of the war is not opinion but fact - it was slavery, which was the exact cause of the Kansas/Missouri troubles.

And the most prominent Yankee doing the killing out that aways was the Ohioan, Quantrill - killing free soil citizens on behalf of the South after beginning his career using free blacks to entice slaves to run and then "recapture" them for rewards.

But all that arguing aside, NASCAR fans would know which two sides fought in the war; which side won and any number of other facts. Seems to me like I was pointing out that NASCAR fans are smarter than college kids.

*that's not a virtue in me, by the way - just another fact

MajGenl.Meade wrote:As I thought, no point at all. I know more about the War of the Rebellion than you* if you read for a thousand years.

Really a thousand years, that’s a lot, are you sure that is not more a hundred years? I am willing to admit that you might be a more knowledgeable of the War Between the States than I am. I have an interest in that war, but I also have an interest in a hundred other things too. You can’t do everything and be the best at everything, but that is the way I like it. I am not willing to limit the scope of my hobby activities to be better at a small number of things, because I am not doing them to impress anyone; I enjoy the activity itself. So I might be willing to admit you are more knowledgeable about the war than I, but a thousand years more knowledge, really?

I was thinking of adding an edit to point out that you are no doubt knowledgeable in some areas beyond my understanding or interest if I read about those for a thousand years. Yes, it's not the time span but the person doing the reading and the degree to which information is retained and understood.