The thin-skinned uber sensitive culture that we see in the collegiate atmosphere is not unique to that area. It's prevalent in most aspects of our society. Here's a theory.

During the Depression, younger folks faced serious calamity and the real prospect of starvation. Then came WWII and the birth of the Greatest Generation. These folks gave birth to the Baby Boomers, who in turn also faced calamity during the Cold War and Vietnam. After Vietnam the Baby Boomers got down and created Generation X, who in turn have spawned Millenials. Generation Y. Generations X and Y saw the birth of the Internet, the death of the Cold War, and reaped the rewards of those who sacrificed in previous generations.

We now live in a time where individuals don't need to know things, they just need to know how to find the information. And that information is so readily available that even the laziest slobs can figure stuff out. There isn't much need for folks to know how to hunt, or fish, or protect themselves. It's now ensured that those needs (food, shelter, protection) can easily be met.

No strife, no real calamity, no prospect of major loss of life. So, life becomes boring. And bored people make shit up to not be bored. Hence the drama. So, things that didn't bother people before (because they had bigger problems to worry about) now are an issue.

Of course, I'm generalizing a lot here, and I'm purposefully not being 100% accurate in social generational history. But then this exercise wouldn't be fun. 


Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!

Trump is a complete amateur, a professional celebrity and little more.  He has placed mostly fellow amateurs in key positions around him.  I suspect the damage will be limited.  While his foreign policy will be a disaster I think the foreign leaders will soon learn to ignore him.

By "amateur" I assume you are referring to political status.  Yes, some of them may be political amateurs, but is that a bad thing?  Look where professional politicians got us.

But in general, you cannot call most of his appointees "amateurs".  They are largely very accomplished professionals in their fields.  Just like Obama was a professional agitator; and he proved to be very good at it at the highest level.

Traditionally, American presidents do not bow to kings. The tradition stems from the American Constitution, which states that all men are created equal.

The uproar about Obama largely stems from his deep bows to Saudi kings. You probably recall a date in 2001 when 19 Saudis attacked the United States horrifically.

The only people expected to bow to a king or queen are subjects of that king or queen.

wait, this is the interweb.  What's with the make nice stuff?

 

Dunno what came over me. Christmas spirit? Wait, I'm sorry, in lieu of "Christms" I really meant Nondescript-and-wholly-non-denominational-festivus-time. 

Lincoln was a criminal who wanted to subdue the South economically so the North would prosper.  He couldn't have cared less about the slaves, and their plight.  Look how long it took him to do the Emancipation Proclamation.  Why wasn't that done day one of the war?

Shhhhhhhhh!    Shhhhhhhhhhhh!   C'mon now!   Lincoln was "great"!   It was all about "slavery" and those terrible white supremacist southerners!

The link provided is a prime example of how a partisan can read whatever they want into a parsed-up quote.

Obama's remarks are simple: he'll give Trump room to govern without direct criticism. But he'll be happy to defend American ideals. This is no more or less than any of us would request. Anyone who has the ability to elevate themselves above blatant partisanship could accept that.

Which American ideals do you think Obama means?  Freedom of Speech?  Sure,  unless a non-profit makes a movie critical of a presidential candidate, in which case Obama felt emboldened to embarrass the Supreme Court, and his party's platform calls for a Constitutional Amendment to silence political speech?  That ideal?

How about the ideal of the right to keep and bear arms?  You know, the one where his party's platform calls for severe gun control measures, including renewal of an "assault weapon" ban?  That ideal? 

Show me a democrat who can elevate themselves above blatant partisanship, and I'll show you a liar.