Well, since I grew up just 60 miles or so north of the brewery, I do know a little. The brewery, located in Bend, OR is named after the river. Their beers, like Black Butte often use names of local features or significance. I quickly found this wiki entry for you:
Prior to 80,000 years ago, the river ran along the east side of Pilot Butte and a lava flow from Lava Top Butte filled in this ancient channel. Previously, the Basalt of the Bend lava flow, associated with the Lava River Cave, had diverted the river westward to its present day location.
The Deschutes River watershed
The river was named Riviere des Chutes or Riviere aux Chutes, French for River of the Falls, during the period of fur trading. The waterfall it referred to was the Celilo Falls on the Columbia River, near where the Deschutes flowed into it. (These falls no longer exist, having been inundated by the lake behind The Dalles Dam).
Lewis and Clark encountered the river on October 22, 1805, and referred to it by the Native American name Towarnehiooks; on their return journey they gave it the new name Clarks River. Variant names include Clarks River, River of the Falls, Riviere des Chutes, Chutes River, and Falls River.
During the middle 19th century, the river was a major obstacle for immigrants on the Oregon Trail. The major crossing point on the river was near its mouth in present-day Deschutes River State Recreation Area. Many immigrants camped on the bluff on the west side of the river after making the crossing. The remains of the trail leading up to the top of the bluff are still visible.
So french it is. Nifty. A lot of place names in the old Louisana purchase seem to owe their origins to the French explorers who first mapped the areas.
The Laramie basin (La Ramie) and Cache la Pudre (named for a lost cache of gunpowder) areas have similar origins.
Okay Mr our nation is broke from two unfinanced wars and obscene tax cuts for millionaires, but Ima scream socialism and tie a bunch of teabags to my hat if someone even thinks about tacking 3.6% onto the capital gains rate.
GMAFB. The right would just assume see this country dissolve, as RG pointed out, into a theocratic loony bin.
The "right" want's no such thing.
The social re extremists among them, do however.
I have to wonder.
It is the tendency of revolutions to "eat their children" in that, once some major revolution has taken place, power tends to be consolidated in more and more extremist hands.
The French revolution, the American revolution, and many others show this.
Once the revolutionairies gain power, they then force ideological litmus tests on people, forcing them to adopt more and more "pure" ideologies. Those that fail to pass this tests have Bad Things happen to them. In France it was the guillotine, and in the US is was hanging.
Since the Republican "revolution" on the part of Gingrich et al, I think we have arguably seen a rough parallel.
Obviously no one is being killed, but is there any doubt that there is some real ideological purity tests being imposed on Republicans in general?
I have only to point to the sad political manuevering of John McCain's effort to retain his seat to support this thesis, and can readily find several other cases.
Just to be clear, I don't think everybody on the right is a slobbering extremist, but it sure seems to me like power is being concentrated in ever more rightward leaning individuals.
Oh, I think it started much earlier than the Gingrich frame, although it's undeniable he was able to wield the movement effectively. I think that this surge of the Uber Right is the fruition and arguably intended consequences of crafting a narrowly defined, power-demographic...the Moral Majority. When Falwell eschewed the traditional Baptist separation of religion and politics, he kicked off or tapped into an unrequited, almost collective, angst....angst ignited decades earlier with the emergence of the counter-culture. That this force continues, apparently unabated after the dissolution of the MM in the late 80's, shows the depth of this approach towards politics and a powerful meme to be exploited at will. , it's eerily similar to the Temperance Movement which was in no way limited to America only.
Summary: There is no such thing as "The New Conservative". They've been around awhile.
Brings to mind a great quote by Milton Friedman.
"Neither half of the statement expresses a relation between the citizen and his government that is worthy of the ideals of free men in a free society. The paternalistic "what your country can do for you" implies that government is the patron, the citizen the ward, a view that is at odds with the free man's belief in his own responsibility for his own destiny. The organismic, "what you can do for your country" implies that government is the master or the deity, the citizen, the servant or the votary."
If the idea of American progress is farcical, surely the opposite (ie. perpetual decline) should be held just as farcical, no?
Maybe at your age WH23, but there have been numerous studies/polls etc etc that show that younger people are, on average, less racist and more tolerant of other peoples. If you want, I can provide some proof to back it up.
I'm willing to hear a cogent argument that our society is worse off now than in past generations; I'd even agree in some areas (fiscal responsibility, literacy, moral equivalency). But I think if there's any area we've improved, it's social tolerance towards others of a different race/gender/sexual preference.
Maybe, maybe not. Improvement as reflected by self-reported at udes in polling data may not line up with the reality, and the judgment that we're worse off might be more aesthetic than socially measurable. Qualities can be elusive.
I would argue that polling data is at the very least a metric. You may claim that reality is worse, but without some form of evidence or logical argument to back up your claim, it is no more different to me than DarrinS claiming that Muslims are would-be terrorists; a dubious claim with no evidence to signify its veracity.
Another metric in my favor is the obviously real-world effect of laws that protect against discrimination, which can't be hand-waved away. If said racists are equal in amount today as the past (a hypothetical at this stage of the game), putting that equality into the books of law is still a large step up.
Get off my lawn.
Don't break your wrist patting the status quo on the back.
But I need my frisbee back!
Should I think negative of laws that recognize tolerance?
After all, it's not like I said we don't have progress still to be made, or that we are better in all areas.
You and Marcus are free to play the "Everything is worse" card, but you can't expect me not to call you on it.
You took my tongue-in-cheek comment about declinism at face value and overread MB. I call you on that.You and Marcus are free to play the "Everything is worse" card, but you can't expect me not to call you on it.
If I overread, mea culpa. MB often plays the part of concerned grump here, and it's not like you put on the persona of a spring chicken either.
No, I can't really blame you for holding up broad caricatures for ridicule instead of paying attention to what people actually say. What else are message boards for?
I'd just like to add, LnGrrr....shut yer piehole!
(btw, I'm 43, not 143.)
(btw, I'm 43, not 143.)
43? You're a pup!
maybe you'd like this money?(btw, I'm 43, not 143.)
Not to rub it in, but it's still pretty sweet. Physical creakiness is just beginning to set in.
I'll be cheering you on.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
