people who think america doesnt have culture dont know who thomas hart benson or henry david thoreau are. that is nobodys fault but their own. id suggest anything by ken burns if they ever want to know what theyre talking about. but people educating themselves is a lot to ask, i know.

A Random american should ask him the followin question:

"Name the presidents of USA in 1910, 1920 , 1930, 1940 and 1950."
HE won`t do it without wikipedia. Case close...

Yeah, that was kind of my thought. I would not consider a traveler to be stupid/uncultured if they visited Los Angeles but did not know the capital of California.

you'll find out a big irony there

Name the presidents of USA in 1910 1920 1930 1940 and 1950 not in 19xx`s.

No love for Woodrow Wilson? :(

No, he is legit one of the worst 5 presidents we've had.

This thread started due to our discussion in Alin{'}s thread{,} but {I}'m of the opinion we shouldn't pollute that thread and {WE SHOULD INSTEAD} make a new {ONE} for it.

My opinion is that if you do have arguments on some {DEL "THING"} idea{,} or {DEL "THAT"} if you try to be condescending or sarcastic of something or someone or even if you trash talk someone{,} you should use correct spelling and grammar{,} or it doesn't have any meaning at all{. NEW SENTENCE} {I}f you try {TO} be smart about something or act smart about something{,} you should do it all the way.

It isn't enough to have a smart argument or a correct idea about something if you are illiterate and show everyone that you are and don't care about it and give {DEL 'S'} {PEOPLE} a chance to spin your arguments (or even the sarcasm or trash talk) around. {NEW SENTENCE} {I}t doesn't help to get your ideas across to everyone if you act stupid{,} and {PEOPLE} think you are stupid. {NEW SENTENCE} {I}t only nullifies your ideas{,} rendering them useless.

If you act smart about something then be smart{NEW SENTENCE} {I}f you have an argument in a post on a forum then for fluff sake write correctly{,} and {I} mean spelling and grammar{,} especially if you have a correction line that helps you.

Also{,} if you want to change a point of view about a culture or race that you belong to and are fed up with racial comments like "you are Romanian so you are a gipsy" you should start with changing yourself and show{ING} people that there are exceptions from their generalizations {FIND SOME WAY TO BREAK THE NEXT 120+ WORDS UP INTO MORE THAN ONE SENTENCE. PREFERABLY FOUR OR FIVE SENTENCES} and not just act high and mighty and tell them not to generalize, {ITS} what people do, generalization is how the human {PSYCHE... UNLESS YOU MEANT THAT MIND READERS WORK THIS WAY} works for example if {I} travel a lot and meet a lot of French that have no idea of the geography, history or people of the places they visit or even of Europe for that matter and say Bucharest is the same as Budapest or Bruxelles is in France when {ITS} the capital of Belgium, {I}'m bound to generalize and say all Americans are stupid and have no culture, that doesn't mean that there aren't exceptions to my rule of thinking but as {I}'ve yet to see them and the general population falls into this category my rule stands. The more exceptions we meet the more our rules of thinking about a people will change.

{ITS} Thomas Heart Benton{,} and {I} think he was a painter.

Also{,} {I}'ve learned about Henry {D}avid Thoreau in {c}ollege. {FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, NEW SENTENCE!} {H}e was a{N} abolitionist and {DEL SECOND AND} fought against slavery{,} if {I} remember correctly.



{REWRITE THE ENTIRE FOLLOWING PARAGRASENTENCE} Of course i don't know all those presidents and there were time intervals for presidents in USA i do belive in the 1920's there were about 3 presidents 1 of which was Hoover, JFK was elected in 61 till 63 when he was assassinated after him was Jhonson then Nixon (also learned this in college) also the 1st president was George Washington don't know the date then there was Lincoln in 1861 but i guess that you didn't even know that Alin and was just arguing for arguments sake :) (ironic smile, in case you don't realise that).



Sacr{A}mento :)

{T}hose were just examples of how the human mind works{,} Kalick. {NEW SENCTENCE} {I}t wasn't meant to be taken {LITERALLY (?)} per se{,} but i guess you can just ignore the words "for example"

cnduo't bvleiee taht I culod aulaclty uesdtannrd waht I was rdnaieg. Unisg the icndeblire pweor of the hmuan mnid, aocdcrnig to rseecrah at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mttaer in waht oderr the lterets in a wrod are, the olny irpoamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rhgit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whoutit a pboerlm. Tihs is bucseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey ltteer by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Aaznmig, huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghhuot slelinpg was ipmorantt! See if yuor fdreins can raed tihs too.

CORRECTIONS BRACKETED BY '{' AND '}'