• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Erase One Major U.S. Event

I have tried to think of an event I would erase, and while I thought of a good bit I don't think I would want them to be erased. My reason is because while they maybe distasteful and something I completely object to, like slavery or the internment camps, they are things that shaped our country to the way it is today. So, instead I choose to erase the New England Patriot vs. New York Giants Super Bowl. Damn game cost me 300 dollars.

Oh or Boston College being formed as a university. I hate that bastard school.
 
I don't really have an opinion on it myself, but I'm just curious why you say that?

While I think some of the social progress made during that time was beneficial(civil rights, women's rights, recognition of gays begins here too). Hippie culture and the ideals they espouse are inherently dangerous to the moral fabric of our society. I watched a documentary on hippies on the History channel one night, and my conclusion is that the whole movement is based on nothing more than access to, and the desire for illicit drugs and other peoples property. It's a very communist based system of ideals, which I find absolutely impractical and damaging to good order in society. People spoke of robbing food delivery trucks of their produce(theft), rampant use of illicit drugs and open sex(transmission of disease). These people obviously felt entitled to the fruits of other peoples labor, while providing no benefit to the society from which they robbed of those resources. The doc also mentioned an alliance of sorts amongst San Fransisco hippies and Hell's Angels to provide a sort of drug connection and protection for the hippies. I also view their naturalistic tendencies to be backwards and dangerous to the human race in the long term. While they might have some good ideas for living off the land in a sustainable manner, our species needs to move beyond that and focus on use of our resources to explore, and colonize space IMO. Hippie ideology would have us sitting here waiting for the next cosmic event to wipe us all out. I view them as a mostly mentally defunct portion of our society(mostly due to drugs, because some of them would be intelligent otherwise I think) that represents a regress of our human societies. Their ideals of peace, non-confrontation, and dissolution of states only put society at risk of being overrun by more powerful states who have no such respect for those ideals. I feel that overall hippies weaken society to the point that if we were to ever embrace their ideals, it would spell the end of western civilizations ideas of progress and scientific method.
 
While I think some of the social progress made during that time was beneficial(civil rights, women's rights, recognition of gays begins here too). Hippie culture and the ideals they espouse are inherently dangerous to the moral fabric of our society. I watched a documentary on hippies on the History channel one night, and my conclusion is that the whole movement is based on nothing more than access to, and the desire for illicit drugs and other peoples property. It's a very communist based system of ideals, which I find absolutely impractical and damaging to good order in society. People spoke of robbing food delivery trucks of their produce(theft), rampant use of illicit drugs and open sex(transmission of disease). These people obviously felt entitled to the fruits of other peoples labor, while providing no benefit to the society from which they robbed of those resources. The doc also mentioned an alliance of sorts amongst San Fransisco hippies and Hell's Angels to provide a sort of drug connection and protection for the hippies. I also view their naturalistic tendencies to be backwards and dangerous to the human race in the long term. While they might have some good ideas for living off the land in a sustainable manner, our species needs to move beyond that and focus on use of our resources to explore, and colonize space IMO. Hippie ideology would have us sitting here waiting for the next cosmic event to wipe us all out. I view them as a mostly mentally defunct portion of our society(mostly due to drugs, because some of them would be intelligent otherwise I think) that represents a regress of our human societies. Their ideals of peace, non-confrontation, and dissolution of states only put society at risk of being overrun by more powerful states who have no such respect for those ideals. I feel that overall hippies weaken society to the point that if we were to ever embrace their ideals, it would spell the end of western civilizations ideas of progress and scientific method.



Certainly True - but at the apoge of those times (1972) these same types (or those admiring them) actually THEN took over the Democratic Party as George McGovern was the nominee. They actually thought they could Win.

When they got clobbered the Real Hate set in by some segments. How many Progressive's Today (in their 50's/60's) and from that time would in retrospect be at all critical of the behavior of "The Kids) ???
 
Absolutely nothing.
 
Los Alamos. Just because one country has the power to destroy all of mankind doesn't mean that they should abuse it.
 
Los Alamos. Just because one country has the power to destroy all of mankind doesn't mean that they should abuse it.


65 years now. Even if the US had not made the Atomic breakthrough - others would have.
 
United States intervention in the First World War.



Without the US intervening odds are Imperial Germany would have prevailed even after 4 years of Slaughter. They would have lost their Colonies, but possibly the Nazi's would never have arisen.

Japan would have gone thesame way regardless.
 
The invention of the Atom Bomb. We shouldn't have the power to destroy the world in an instant. It's just too dangerous.
 
It was a multiple step process, involving decades of research by scientists all over the world. There was a great deal of science behind it. It was not as if it was like, bing bang, there's the bomb. You would have to erase much of the scientific development of the early 20th century to stop the "bomb".
 
Last edited:
Franklin D. Roosevelt's inability to produce the Second Bill of Rights and Bill Cinton's repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

I cheated. I declared two things and one isn't exactly erasing from rather than completing.
 
65 years now. Even if the US had not made the Atomic breakthrough - others would have.

You mean like Germany? Certainly they were well intentioned though and merely misunderstood.
 
The invention of the Atom Bomb. We shouldn't have the power to destroy the world in an instant. It's just too dangerous.

Sure, but erasing our creation of it, merely gives the creation first to Nazi Germany. It's not like we invented it and then passed it around. Sometimes the wrong thing is the wise thing and we merely won the race.
 
Bill Clinton getting a blowjob from Lewinski.

We would have likely ended up Gore for president and avoided a wasted decade or at least lessened the impact of some of the mounting problems.
Yeah, and Gore may have been groping some naughty White House intern who deserved it instead of some innocent little masseuse at a hotel. :mrgreen:
 
But seriously, a very interesting question. I would say the Spanish-American War. Reflective of a disturbing era of imperialistic goals in our history. While our territorial gains were relatively insignificant, we only succeeded in solidifying our "wordly" image as a proactively militaristic nation (some on the Left may say an agressor nation).
The territorial gains resulted in even further strained relations with Southeast Asia - as it led to yet another prolonged and bloody conflict with Aguinaldo's rebels in the Philippines. One could go on to say it led to further strained relations with Latin American entities such as Cuba, Venezuela, Panama, and Grenada as the US attempted to reinforce the perception that we were always acting in the "best interests" of the natives.
This period was also reflective of a weak Chief Executive (McKinley) who was "pushed" into a concocted war by the pressures of the yellow press - propagated by the likes of William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer - somewhat embarrassing. We now know that circumstances surrounding the Spaniards' "sinking" of the USS Maine were, well, questionable at best. In the end, the US probably would have annexed the Hawaiian Islands anyway, the OpenDoor Policy would have been applied as fervently as ever in the Far East, and we probably could have worked out a more diplomatic solution with our Spanish neighbors in CUba - perhaps a "purchase" or territorial "swap" of some sort.
 
Last edited:
Bill Clinton getting a blowjob from Lewinski.

We would have likely ended up Gore for president and avoided a wasted decade or at least lessened the impact of some of the mounting problems.

Personallly.... I don't see why Clinton getting a blowjob is anybody's business but his and Lewinski's. WHO CARES? I mean seriously ... we look at Clinton as a perv but he is NOTHING when compared to JFK.
 
Personallly.... I don't see why Clinton getting a blowjob is anybody's business but his and Lewinski's. WHO CARES? I mean seriously ... we look at Clinton as a perv but he is NOTHING when compared to JFK.

I agree, but I would add Hillary. I'm sure she cared.
 
The difference is the Location. It amazes me why some have no concept as to WHY that matters to others .
 
Because it really shouldn't matter to anyone that President Clinton got a blowjob from an intern in the Oval Office or where ever it was.
 
Last edited:
Because it really shouldn't matter to anyone that President Clinton got a blowjob from an intern in the Oval Office or where ever it was.



REALLY (????) How about considering the particular History of a Given location . Those who defended Clinton the most in 1998 would be outraged if 2 people got caught on top of MLK's Tomb in Atlanta really pounding & pumping away . Think not (???)
 
The creation of Fannie Mae by FDR.
I think if if that was possible, we'd have a much better economy today, and Obama wouldn't be president. :)
 
REALLY (????) How about considering the particular History of a Given location . Those who defended Clinton the most in 1998 would be outraged if 2 people got caught on top of MLK's Tomb in Atlanta really pounding & pumping away . Think not (???)

Don't care. Go for it.

The creation of Fannie Mae by FDR.
I think if if that was possible, we'd have a much better economy today, and Obama wouldn't be president. :)

I doubt it. Although the incumbent does generally tend to get voted out when stuff is going south, but McCain just got out campaigned. Plus it can be hard to tell how much influence one event would have affected the election.
 
Winning the 2010 Ryder cup. Oh no, that was Europe! :2razz:;):2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom