We sure have evolved...

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
The American presidency has evolved from "I cannot tell a lie" (Washington) to "I lie daily just for fun" (Trump) in less than 250 years.
 
The American presidency has evolved from "I cannot tell a lie" (Washington) to "I lie daily just for fun" (Trump) in less than 250 years.

Who are you trying to fool? If Washington were alive today and running you'd be smearing him as an old white elitist slave owner who's also anti-science and probably lied about that ridiculous cherry tree story.
 
I recognize the satirical intent, even if I don't appreciate it.
But in defense of principle, that's not evolution in the scientific sense.
Out of a population of hundreds of millions of eligible candidates,
there are likely to be a few liars, even masters of bombast like Trump.

Individuals don't evolve. Populations evolve." Macaroo
 
I recognize the satirical intent, even if I don't appreciate it.
But in defense of principle, that's not evolution in the scientific sense.
Out of a population of hundreds of millions of eligible candidates,
there are likely to be a few liars, even masters of bombast like Trump.

Individuals don't evolve. Populations evolve." Macaroo

In this Macaroo fellow's theory the US has evolved from Obama to Trump.
 
#6

Evolution seems to proceed both continuously, but also in spurts.
The problem is the word "bombast" predates * the U.S. Founding.

Why would there have been a word for something that didn't then exist?

So logic indicates there were masters of bombast in the 16th Century, just as there are in the 21st.

So if evolution is the issue, perhaps it's that the electorate is getting stupider, more gullible; for waiting until now to actually elect one president.

That too is evolution, albeit in retrograde.

BUT !!

Generally evolution doesn't do that. Thus it raises questions about whether it's really evolution at all.

So those that practiced or believed such a theory didn't use Darwin's Survival of the Fittest to make their case?
"That's correct. Broadly speaking, they used a term Herbert Spencer coined; not Darwin. Spencer drew a mistaken inference from "On the Origin of Species" and employed it as a prop for his economic ideas. Darwin later used the phrase in the 5th edition of his book as a synonym for natural selection, but he intended it to apply to local adaptations; not individual physical superiority. The only requirement for "fitness" in terms of evolution is that an individual live long enough to reproduce.
That's it." Macaroo


* http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=bombast
 
The American presidency has evolved from "I cannot tell a lie" (Washington) to "I lie daily just for fun" (Trump) in less than 250 years.

126dly.jpg
 
Who are you trying to fool? If Washington were alive today and running you'd be smearing him as an old white elitist slave owner who's also anti-science and probably lied about that ridiculous cherry tree story.

And too, those who liked his post. You know those lying Hillary and Obamabot supporters.
 
The American presidency has evolved from "I cannot tell a lie" (Washington) to "I lie daily just for fun" (Trump) in less than 250 years.

Myth: George Washington chopped down a cherry tree. Truth: The story of George Washington chopping down a cherry tree and then telling the truth about it probably did not happen. The story was written after Washington died by a man named Mason Weems in a book about the life of Washington.
 
Who are you trying to fool? If Washington were alive today and running you'd be smearing him as an old white elitist slave owner who's also anti-science and probably lied about that ridiculous cherry tree story.
He was also a far bigger real estate man than Trump. If Washington's wealth, in terms of property and not including slaves, were valued in todays money Washington would have been worth far more than Trump.

The problem with Jarod's argument is he's propagating a myth about Washington. Washington was as flawed as anyone else and he certainly wasn't no shrinking violet or Saint. The real man him self is far more interesting than the cult of mythology that was created around Washington after he died. Washington did things that were far more horrible than anything Trump has ever done. In 1779 He ordered General Sullivan to march across New York State and take Ft. Niagara. He also gave him orders to use methods of genocide to deal with the Iroquois league. Sullivan wiped out 40 villages, their homes, fields, stores and provisions, etc., through all of central and western New York. Ultimately the mission to take Ft. Niagara failed but Sullivan's tactics broke the back of the Iroquois league which had been, until relatively late in that period, the dominant military force in North America. Nearly 5000 Iroquois, mostly non-combatants, starve or froze to death that year. So here was a man who was willing to sacrifice 5,000 human lives for a strategic aim in which he failed to achieve. Doesn't paint a pretty picture of Washington does it? However like all wars we tend to forget the actual costs and mythologize the victors.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not demeaning Washington in any way. He is singularly one of the greatest men this nation has ever produced but in a real ugly time when he was asked to do a real ugly job he did some real ugly things to do that job. Ugly things that cost innocent people their lives.
 
He was also a far bigger real estate man than Trump. If Washington's wealth, in terms of property and not including slaves, were valued in todays money Washington would have been worth far more than Trump.

The problem with Jarod's argument is he's propagating a myth about Washington. Washington was as flawed as anyone else and he certainly wasn't no shrinking violet or Saint. The real man him self is far more interesting than the cult of mythology that was created around Washington after he died. Washington did things that were far more horrible than anything Trump has ever done. In 1779 He ordered General Sullivan to march across New York State and take Ft. Niagara. He also gave him orders to use methods of genocide to deal with the Iroquois league. Sullivan wiped out 40 villages, their homes, fields, stores and provisions, etc., through all of central and western New York. Ultimately the mission to take Ft. Niagara failed but Sullivan's tactics broke the back of the Iroquois league which had been, until relatively late in that period, the dominant military force in North America. Nearly 5000 Iroquois, mostly non-combatants, starve or froze to death that year. So here was a man who was willing to sacrifice 5,000 human lives for a strategic aim in which he failed to achieve. Doesn't paint a pretty picture of Washington does it? However like all wars we tend to forget the actual costs and mythologize the victors.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not demeaning Washington in any way. He is singularly one of the greatest men this nation has ever produced but in a real ugly time when he was asked to do a real ugly job he did some real ugly things to do that job. Ugly things that cost innocent people their lives.

CdiGV5vW8AAFyTV.jpg
 
Back
Top