But if he puts that 150 grand every year in that same modest investment, he would get, well its to early in the morning for Math, but he would have more than he would had he blown it on hookers and blow. :)
Don't agree at all. Many people gain wisdom in financial and other matters as they get older.
Football players are generally paid well, but they take a tremendous risk of serious injury. IMO, given the amount of money on the table and how integral the players are to the sport, they deserve to have a significant portion of the money guaranteed. Not all of it, but a significant portion of it.
I would say that Wilson is a little better at using his legs to escape rushers because he is a little smaller and and has a quicker first step. Cam is certainly better when it comes to designed runs, and running through or over defenders.
True, but what most don't realize is that Unionist actually won significant amounts of legislative seats in the 1860 election. A majority of voters seemed to favor staying in the Union, and in fact there was little doubt that NC would stay in the Union, at least until it became apparent that Lincoln was going to use force against the southern states. Reading the history of the secession movement in NC seems to indicate that a majority did not want to leave. On the other hand, it shows that many in that majority were extremely naive in that they believed Lincoln wouldn't use force to bring the Deep South states back into the Union.
Some of you should read the story behind North Carolina's succession. Its an interesting story. The governor tried several times to get the legislature to agree to succession, only to see it fail as the Unionist held sway in the legislature. It was only after Sumter and the succession of Virginia (which made NC position untenable) that he managed to get enough votes to pass succession.
Sure we can. General Forrest was an ardent supporter of slavery as were many others. But its a given that most career soldiers didn't own many slaves, since being a soldier was not exactly a path to the wealth required to run a large plantation.
I do find it ironic though that if you look at Lee and his Corps commanders at Gettysburg, they were not exactly hardened supporters of slavery. Lee would have freed the slaves to preserve the union. Longstreet said they should have freed the slaves, then fired on Sumter. Ewell suggested emancipating and arming them to win the war, and Hill was nearly an abolitionist. Opinions within the military clear cut.
Lee didn't despise slavery, although he did say that he would be willing to give it up in order to preserve the Union. He fought for the South for one and only one reason, that being that he was more loyal to Virginia than to the US.
Loyalty to the state over the nation was not uncommon in the first 80 or so years of the US. Many Northerners had similar loyalties. Had they still been alive, its probable that many of the founding fathers such as Jefferson, Madison, and Washington would have went with Virginia when she left the Union.
Personally, I am not fond of trying to project our own sense of right and wrong on figures in history. The reality is that slavery had a long history, and it took some longer than others to realize that its time was coming to an end.
Personally, I think that the formation of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and various other groups started with the rise of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia, and the Collapse of the Ottoman empire. While I wont say the rise of these groups was inevitable, looking back a hundred years or so with the benefit of hindsight, it certainly seems obvious that its been coming for a while. Of course, many of our own policies didn't help matters.
I spent a few years studying clandestine operations, and imo, people tend to greatly overestimate the impact an outside power such as the US has on events such as the Arab spring. An outside power can provide weapons, money, guidance etc..., but more often than not its the citizens of a particular nation or region that are the driving force behind these events. The US cannot create rebellions out of thin air. There already has to be an air of discontent within a region before such an event will take place.
Saying that the Arab Spring was a clandestine US operation is similar to saying that the American Revolution was a clandestine French Operation designed to weaken the United Kingdom. The French played a role, no doubt about it. But Americans were the driving force. And in the case of the Arab Spring, the US role was far less than that of the French in the revolution.
Haven't seen a lot about it, but I think the far more significant event in all of this is the accreditation punishment. UNC is one miss-step away from losing its accreditation as a college. While that is highly unlikely to happen, just being so close has got to sting, both in the faculty and the state government. We can talk about the unfairness of the NCAA rules, or what Duke did, or some other school, but when you start discussing accreditation, it gets really serious for UNC. A school that was ranked in the top 30 schools in the country academically has been put on probation by the agency that accredits them. They (either the University or NCAA or both) have put the hammer down on this one.