"The headline is a bit historically inaccurate"
maybe implying the modern republican party
not a big deal
> "The headline is a bit historically inaccurate"
maybe implying the *modern* republican party
not a big deal
No, that's legit, but it really means, "Invented the modern Republican party in North Carolina" considering the article stated that Helms really got the ideas from a 1970 speech by Nixon, who was, IIRC, a Republican.
I really hate headline writers!
No, that's legit, but it really means, "Invented the *modern* Republican party *in North Carolina*" considering the article stated that Helms really got the ideas from a 1970 speech by Nixon, who was, IIRC, a Republican.
I really hate headline writers!
well, it sort of grew from there
well, it sort of grew from there
Thanks for posting! interesting read. I must admit I knew nothing about the man, other than "old racist from the pre-war generation" akin to Robert Byrd and Strom Thurmond.
The headline is a bit historically inaccurate - considering the Republican Party was "invented" in the 1850's. *How Jesse hems CHANGED the Republican Party" might be a bit more accurate.
I only had one complaint, where the author stumbled and the article turned from presenting History to presenting a diatribe.
Why throw these lines in? Calling monologues "rants" is a pejorative term, which is unneeded. The article was excellent until this point. Let the READER decide that based on what you present. The facts are powerful enough. Minor criticism, but turned an excellent article into simply a good article.