The W
Views: 98977713
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
17.9.07 1648
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - More Things Congress Wants to Waste Money On Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(1688 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (32 total)
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 1221/4700
EXP: 21497700
For next: 338962

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1233 days
Last activity: 1030 days
#1 Posted on 3.4.03 0627.18
Reposted on: 3.4.10 0628.09
African American Museum Plans Submitted

Wouldn't these kind of things be more appropriate in the American History museum, that recognizes the history of all Americans?

Actress Cicely Tyson, who served on the presidential commission, recalled visiting museums as a child, but not one focused on African American history.

"The young people today will finally have the opportunity to visit a national museum that conveys to them who they are, what they are, and why they are," Tyson said.

Promote this thread!
TheCow
Landjager
Level: 63

Posts: 422/948
EXP: 1988242
For next: 108921

Since: 3.1.02
From: Knoxville, TN

Since last post: 2414 days
Last activity: 2413 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on 3.4.03 0807.29
Reposted on: 3.4.10 0814.43
Maybe it's just me, but isn't there a little place called the Civil Rights Museum already up and running? Think it's been that way for close to 30 years now...
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1148/1759
EXP: 4910186
For next: 82684

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1280 days
Last activity: 46 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#3 Posted on 5.4.03 1820.48
Reposted on: 5.4.10 1823.55
But I thought segregation was wrong? Why can't these people focus their efforts on building museums that focuses on the history of ALL Americans, instead of propogating the very same segregationist focus they abhor? Don't they see the hypocricy here?
Cerebus
Knackwurst
Level: 108

Posts: 676/3459
EXP: 13373937
For next: 146606

Since: 17.11.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
#4 Posted on 5.4.03 1843.29
Reposted on: 5.4.10 1845.17
It's ok to have 'special' clubs for or groups for Blacks, Indians, Asians, Women but as soon as you make an exclusive white male group... you are a racist.
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 1797/5402
EXP: 27047645
For next: 84359

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 49 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#5 Posted on 6.4.03 0006.29
Reposted on: 6.4.10 0008.27
(deleted by spf2119 on 6.4.03 0006)
Lexus
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 242/1821
EXP: 5294057
For next: 138187

Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
#6 Posted on 7.4.03 0114.54
Reposted on: 7.4.10 0117.15
    Originally posted by TheCow
    Maybe it's just me, but isn't there a little place called the Civil Rights Museum already up and running? Think it's been that way for close to 30 years now...


Civil Rights are not the only accomplishments of African American People. There was also Jazz, which ultimately led to almost all modern genres of music, African American athletes such as Jesse Owens and Mohammed Ali, and African American inventors, such as George Washington Carver and the guy who invented the stop light. In fact, the first drive-through was invented by an African American.

Not only that, but the Civil Rights museum isn't really black exclusive, either. Granted, the movement for racial equality in this country was a major part of CR, but the suffragist movement in the 20's, along with any other sexual revolution, should be noted as well.

What we do need are two new Museums; the Latin American History museum (they always get skewed just because they kicked some honky ass at the Alamo), and the Irish American History museum (who were put through turmoils of their own, until we all rioted and/or became cops). Maybe getting plastered on Cinco de Mayo and St. Paddy's are enough of a salute though.

After all, what would you rather Congress do, give themselves another raise?

(edit)Oh, and by the way, they do have a few exclusive white history exhibits. One's called Stonehenge.

(edited by Lexus on 7.4.03 0218)

(edited by Lexus on 7.4.03 0220)
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst
Level: 68

Posts: 415/1136
EXP: 2606404
For next: 122410

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3713 days
Last activity: 3182 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on 7.4.03 0231.16
Reposted on: 7.4.10 0232.48

    Originally posted by Lexus
    Oh, and by the way, they do have a few exclusive white history exhibits. One's called Stonehenge.


We stole Stonehenge from the aliens. White people steal EVERYTHING!
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 1804/5402
EXP: 27047645
For next: 84359

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 49 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#8 Posted on 7.4.03 0253.02
Reposted on: 7.4.10 0253.23
I think something that is overlooked is the fact that most museums tend to focus on the "big events" kind of like history books do. If one is putting together an American history museum, what are the things one would focus on? The Founding Fathers. Our westward expansion and the pioneers. The Civil War and it's main battles. WWI and WWII. The Great Depression. The Industrial Revolution. Perhaps if you're doing culture exhibits you'll focus on the great American authors/poets such as Hawthorne, Poe, Whitman, Dickinson, Melville, Faulkner, Williams, Hemingway, Twain, and so on. Or perhaps the major innovators of thought in America, people like Ford, the Wright Brothers, Edison, Frank Lloyd Wright, Bell, Whitney and so on. All of this would seem to be fitting material for a museum, and it is rightly so for those were the major touchstones in American history.

However, it is a skewed picture. For the sake of argument let's say that since 1960 that the playing field in America has been totally level. That all systemic and legal obstacles of any sort to success have been removed and that every single person born in this country has totally equal opportunity to succeed, heck let's say that minorities have even more chance to succeed due to Affirmative Action and special scholarships and things of that ilk making it impossible for whites to compete. Considering that most discussions about America will tend to go from about 1650-1700 up until the near-present, that is about 80% or so of that time in which the contributions of many groups of citizens were systematically prevented. The story of the African-American experience is not adequately presented without context, as otherwise it simply looks like they took a collective nap for 200 years while white folks built the country. The experience is different and unique, and to attempt to shoehorn that into the same box and tell their tale in the same way would be as foolish as trying to combine an art museum and a science museum. Telling the stories of those whose tales are not adequately told in the current context is not racism or segregation. It is merely presenting history in a way which allows it to be better understood.

(edited by spf2119 on 7.4.03 0259)
Battlezone
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 38/696
EXP: 1192790
For next: 41087

Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2109 days
Last activity: 161 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on 7.4.03 1141.06
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1143.27

    Originally posted by spf2119
    I think something that is overlooked is the fact that most museums tend to focus on the "big events" kind of like history books do. If one is putting together an American history museum, what are the things one would focus on? The Founding Fathers. Our westward expansion and the pioneers. The Civil War and it's main battles. WWI and WWII. The Great Depression. The Industrial Revolution. Perhaps if you're doing culture exhibits you'll focus on the great American authors/poets such as Hawthorne, Poe, Whitman, Dickinson, Melville, Faulkner, Williams, Hemingway, Twain, and so on. Or perhaps the major innovators of thought in America, people like Ford, the Wright Brothers, Edison, Frank Lloyd Wright, Bell, Whitney and so on. All of this would seem to be fitting material for a museum, and it is rightly so for those were the major touchstones in American history.

    However, it is a skewed picture. For the sake of argument let's say that since 1960 that the playing field in America has been totally level. That all systemic and legal obstacles of any sort to success have been removed and that every single person born in this country has totally equal opportunity to succeed, heck let's say that minorities have even more chance to succeed due to Affirmative Action and special scholarships and things of that ilk making it impossible for whites to compete. Considering that most discussions about America will tend to go from about 1650-1700 up until the near-present, that is about 80% or so of that time in which the contributions of many groups of citizens were systematically prevented. The story of the African-American experience is not adequately presented without context, as otherwise it simply looks like they took a collective nap for 200 years while white folks built the country. The experience is different and unique, and to attempt to shoehorn that into the same box and tell their tale in the same way would be as foolish as trying to combine an art museum and a science museum. Telling the stories of those whose tales are not adequately told in the current context is not racism or segregation. It is merely presenting history in a way which allows it to be better understood.

    (edited by spf2119 on 7.4.03 0259)



I think that's said much better and eloquently than anything that I would have said, so I'll just add this:

During all of my years in school, my history books taught me that we were slaves, and then disappeared until Rosa Parks decided that she didn't want to move from her seat on the bus. And then we got one month out of the year where we talked about Martin Luther King. It wasn't until I was much older, when I discovered all of the great things Blacks have given to this culture and this country. And if there was a museum where we could learn about all of this, then maybe we can get past all of this segregationist thinking, and maybe we can get to a point where we wouldn't need the social programs that certain members on this board seem so anxious to get rid of.

And right now, I'm considering the irony of reading this post so soon after watching the "Brainbusters" sketch on SNL.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 1236/4700
EXP: 21497700
For next: 338962

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1233 days
Last activity: 1030 days
#10 Posted on 7.4.03 1147.40
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1148.32

    Paraphrasing spf2119
    I think something that is overlooked is the fact that most museums tend to focus on the "big events" kind of like history books do.......All of this would seem to be fitting material for a museum, and it is rightly so for those were the major touchstones in American history.

    However, it is a skewed picture.


I would say that civil rights, slavery, Nat Turner's rebellion, etc are pretty big events that should be covered by an American history museum. In that event then, other thing should be placed in an "American Obscure History Musuem"


    Quoting spf2119
    Telling the stories of those whose tales are not adequately told in the current context is not racism or segregation. It is merely presenting history in a way which allows it to be better understood.

I'm certainly not saying that the story should not be told. However the story should not be told in a new musuem costing millions upon millions of dollars. The appropriate place is with American history. Otherwise what we are doing, intentional or not, is segregating between Black History and White History when one cannot logically exist without the other.
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 1806/5402
EXP: 27047645
For next: 84359

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 49 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 7.4.03 1247.10
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1248.27
Grimis, it is not a segregation of the two, it is an expansion upon the main. In the United States for most of its history, you can take the basic term and put the unspoken word "white" in front of it. There is the general history of the United States, and then if one wants to tell deeper stories that cannot be adequately contextualized within the main, you create somewhere that those can be done. For instance, there is a Police Museum in Chicago that details the history of the Chicago Police Department. Also in Chicago is the very fine Chicago Historical Society. Surely these two are able to coexist without anyone saying that the Chicago Historical Society can't tell anything about police history, or that the police feel they can't have their history mingled with the rest. Rather it is saying that "yes, here is an overview of the history of Chicago. Now for those of you who would like to study something more in-depth than we can present in this forum, here is another place which can give you even more information." Indeed, the things you mention in your post are all basically either the actions of the system or momentary reactions against it for African-Americans. Most discussions about slavery will by the nature of museums and history focus more on Daniel Webster and John Calhoun and Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson than on the nameless slave they throw in pictures of. Everything that determined the course of slavery, for good or for ill, was basically done by white people. The Nat Turner rebellion is a small sidebar in the hypothetical exhibit on slavery, perhaps in a section about "rebellion" where you get some John Brown's Body a-moulding in the grave and mentions of Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass. But otherwise in most of the great trends of American history minorities merit a sidebar due to their systematic exclusion from the mainstream. Thus comes the need for supplementing, not replacing, what we already have in place.

I'm not really going to get into the argument about whether this is something good for our tax money to go into, as that's an argument no one will be moved on one way or the other. I like the idea of government spending on museums and things of that ilk. Grimis doesn't. However, I do disagree with the idea that such a museum is either intellectually offensive or unnecessary.

As for the notion of whether tax money should go to such a museum, well that's going to depend on your opinion of the role of government, and is not an argument I am going to have. However, to say that intellectually
Hairy Caray
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 47/100
EXP: 65896
For next: 1828

Since: 28.10.02
From: Wrigley Field hot dog stand

Since last post: 3658 days
Last activity: 3655 days
#12 Posted on 7.4.03 1348.20
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1350.13
I think Grimis's point spoke more to the fact that it seems at least counter-intuitive to strive against segregation based on skin color and then publicly fund projects that segregate history based on skin color. I would much rather see a wing added to an existing American History museum that addresses the same events. Otherwise my kids grow up seeing this:

Go to Museum A to see that white people did A, B, C, and D.

Go to Museum B to see that black people did E, F, G, and H.

Then I'm supposed to explain to them that we should judge people (ie categorize them) based on their character rather than skin color? I'd rather show them all the events and say, "This is what Americans have done; this is your heritage."

The difference between say, a Police museum, and a Black History museum is that being a policeman is a matter of choice and character. Policemen come from all ethnic backgrounds. I can take my kids there without worrying that I'm contradicting the lessons about equality I teach them.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 1242/4700
EXP: 21497700
For next: 338962

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1233 days
Last activity: 1030 days
#13 Posted on 7.4.03 1416.15
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1416.15

    Originally posted by Hairy Caray
    I think Grimis's point spoke more to the fact that it seems at least counter-intuitive to strive against segregation based on skin color and then publicly fund projects that segregate history based on skin color. I would much rather see a wing added to an existing American History museum that addresses the same events.

Exaclty. Comparing the history of Chicago to the history of the police is just a red herring to justify the segretation of the histories...
Battlezone
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 40/696
EXP: 1192790
For next: 41087

Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2109 days
Last activity: 161 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on 7.4.03 1425.12
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1425.17

    Originally posted by Hairy Caray
    I think Grimis's point spoke more to the fact that it seems at least counter-intuitive to strive against segregation based on skin color and then publicly fund projects that segregate history based on skin color. I would much rather see a wing added to an existing American History museum that addresses the same events. Otherwise my kids grow up seeing this:

    Go to Museum A to see that white people did A, B, C, and D.

    Go to Museum B to see that black people did E, F, G, and H.

    Then I'm supposed to explain to them that we should judge people (ie categorize them) based on their character rather than skin color? I'd rather show them all the events and say, "This is what Americans have done; this is your heritage."

    The difference between say, a Police museum, and a Black History museum is that being a policeman is a matter of choice and character. Policemen come from all ethnic backgrounds. I can take my kids there without worrying that I'm contradicting the lessons about equality I teach them.



The thing is, though, that right now, kids are learning:

White people did A, B, C and D.
Black people did E.

I'm having a hard time understanding why some of you are getting so offended over this. It's not like anyone's suggesting we tear down an existing museum to put this one up in its place. Why is it so wrong to celebrate your heritage, be it white, black, yellow or green?

And PLEASE, don't throw that "it's racist" argument out. Playing the race card is no more effective when whites do it as when Johnny Cochran does it.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 1244/4700
EXP: 21497700
For next: 338962

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1233 days
Last activity: 1030 days
#15 Posted on 7.4.03 1449.42
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1452.14

    Originally posted by Battlezone
    The thing is, though, that right now, kids are learning:

    White people did A, B, C and D.
    Black people did E.

    I'm having a hard time understanding why some of you are getting so offended over this.


I'm offended for two reasons;
1. Because it's a waste of taxpayer dollars;
2. Because we've spent exactly how long trying to create a color-blind society? It's amazing that those who allegedly want to bring us together always want to split us apart(affirmative action, quotas, etc)


    Originally posted by Battlezone
    Why is it so wrong to celebrate your heritage, be it white, black, yellow or green?

People can do whatever they want on thir own dime. But when Democrats want to spend MILLIONS on an unncessary museum, then proceed to bitch about the cost of the war, it raises a few eyebrows.
Battlezone
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 41/696
EXP: 1192790
For next: 41087

Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2109 days
Last activity: 161 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on 7.4.03 1559.16
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1559.31

    Originally posted by Grimis

    I'm offended for two reasons;
    1. Because it's a waste of taxpayer dollars;
    2. Because we've spent exactly how long trying to create a color-blind society? It's amazing that those who allegedly want to bring us together always want to split us apart(affirmative action, quotas, etc)



Good point. I thought that we were discussing the museum itself, not the fact that taxpayer money would be used to build it, especially in wartime. On that front, I agree with you. On a side note, are most museums publicly- or privately-funded? Just curious...

But if some private money popped up, and that private money wanted to build a African-American museum, then I'm still okay with it. Just as I wouldn't have a problem with a Confederate war memorial (wasn't somebody trying to build one of these already?).
Hairy Caray
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 49/100
EXP: 65896
For next: 1828

Since: 28.10.02
From: Wrigley Field hot dog stand

Since last post: 3658 days
Last activity: 3655 days
#17 Posted on 7.4.03 1615.06
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1616.07
    Originally posted by Battlezone
    The thing is, though, that right now, kids are learning:

    White people did A, B, C and D.
    Black people did E.




That has absolutely nothing to do with the building of a separate museum for people of a certain skin color. It just means we need to incorporate the contributions of people of color into existing curriculum, museums, etc.


I'm having a hard time understanding why some of you are getting so offended over this.


Offended? Frustrated is probably a better word. Some of us want a color-blind society so badly. I want my children to grow up living Dr. King's dream of that society. Things like this, while they spring from good motives, work against that dream.


Why is it so wrong to celebrate your heritage, be it white, black, yellow or green?


It isn't! The point is that it is our heritage. Just because you can't trace your ancestors to a certain person doesn't mean that person's experiences and actions are not part of your heritage, especially when he or she was a part of your country's history. I'm 3/4 white, 1/4 Cherokee, but my kids are going to grow up learning that the Revolution, the Trail of Tears, slavery, the Civil War--all of it--is part of their heritage, whether it involved a black American, a white American, a yellow American, a red American, a brown American, etc.


And PLEASE, don't throw that "it's racist" argument out. Playing the race card is no more effective when whites do it as when Johnny Cochran does it.


No one said it was racist. I certainly don't think that's the motive, anyway. But I'll use whatever argument I choose, thank you, and if it's not valid, please feel free to explain why.

//edit: spelling

(edited by Hairy Caray on 7.4.03 1715)
Battlezone
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 42/696
EXP: 1192790
For next: 41087

Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2109 days
Last activity: 161 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#18 Posted on 7.4.03 1706.44
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1715.41
"That has absolutely nothing to do with the building of a separate museum for people of a certain skin color. It just means we need to incorporate the contributions of people of color into existing curriculum, museums, etc."

That was my point-although I deleted it while I was making a different point. We DO need to do a better job of teaching our children the history of ALL Americans. However, I don't think anyone's suggesting that this museum be the beginning and end point for all discussion and teaching on the contributions of Blacks to society.

"Offended? Frustrated is probably a better word. Some of us want a color-blind society so badly. I want my children to grow up living Dr. King's dream of that society. Things like this, while they spring from good motives, work against that dream."

I'm going to attempt to make a point here that's crystal clear in my head, but might not transfer to print well. I'm sure you've all been there, so bear with me.

I don't know if we'll ever see Dr. King's dream come true. But it's not because we're fussing over Black History museums. And it's not because of White people, and it's not because of affirmative action, or any of that.

There is a mindset in this country-among Blacks and Whites-about what a "black" person is. I have a White friend-one of my closest friends in the world-who told me that I was the whitest black man he had ever met. He didn't mean it as an insult-he just was implying that I don't act the way most people "think" Black people "act". I had another young brother accuse me of being an Uncle Tom. Because, once again, I wasn't acting sufficiently "black" enough. Neither of these two men saw an accomplished, intelligent, well-spoken Black man. They saw someone who was "denying" himself his heritage. But my heritage is much more than that.

We need to educate ALL Americans-Black and White-that while Blacks may have had a harder struggle than most ethic groups in this country, we have also made great strides as a people. We need to educate all Americans that successful, intelligent Black men like Colin Powell are no longer the exception, they're the norm. And that's why I think this museum is important. To tell the side of Black history that isn't in the 15-page chapter of your kid's American History book. Once we've gotten there, then we can finally start to see Dr. King's dream. In my opinion.

And Hairy Caray, I wasn't suggesting that you were the one using "racism" as your argument. There are some people on this board that whenever a topic like this pops up, that argument inevitably gets thrown in there. And I personally don't think it's an effective argument.

edit: Damn, that was long. Sorry, I'll return the soapbox to the center of the room now...

(edited by Battlezone on 7.4.03 1507)
godking
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 30/274
EXP: 299128
For next: 8985

Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3869 days
Last activity: 3815 days
#19 Posted on 7.4.03 1820.45
Reposted on: 7.4.10 1826.06
1. Because it's a waste of taxpayer dollars;

America is the only place in the entire world where someone would suggest that a museum is a waste of tax dollars. Next up: libraries, the great drain on the taxpayer! "Free knowledge"? Son, you gotta PAY for it!

2. Because we've spent exactly how long trying to create a color-blind society? It's amazing that those who allegedly want to bring us together always want to split us apart(affirmative action, quotas, etc)

This is a completely specious argument. It's history. It's not one seamless whole and it never will be. That's because history is big. The Smithsonian isn't one museum - it's a collection of over thirty museums, each with their own specific task, and they don't overlap. Museums specialize as a matter of course anyway - complaining that one specializes along lines of race is just picking at bits, unless you're seriously going to suggest that jazz, the Negro Baseball Leagues, the experiences of black veterans from the first two world wars, and the western expansion of black settlers - along with all the other fascinating aspects of black culture - aren't worthy of study and display.
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 109/810
EXP: 1517289
For next: 60266

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 70 days
Last activity: 1 day
#20 Posted on 8.4.03 0846.02
Reposted on: 8.4.10 0847.22

    Originally posted by godking
    Museums specialize as a matter of course anyway - complaining that one specializes along lines of race is just picking at bits, unless you're seriously going to suggest that jazz, the Negro Baseball Leagues, the experiences of black veterans from the first two world wars, and the western expansion of black settlers - along with all the other fascinating aspects of black culture - aren't worthy of study and display.


But in this case, the Baseball Hall of Fame already has displays and exhibits for the Negro Leagues.

Also, why have a separate museum when you can instead use the money to expand existing museums and present everyone's achievement side by side. Personally, I would rather see the experiences of black veterans within the context of a WWI & II exhibit rather than standing alone in an African American museum. It's more educational and better highlights their contribution. Same thing with the western expansion--put it with a 'Manifest Destiny' exhibit to present a more complete picture of history rather than separate it.

Or, if there is not enough space to expand museums, I would rather see them split the American history museum into two museums, divided by time period (like the Civil War, for example). To me, it makes more sense to divide history and culture by time period rather than by race. Again, we'd be able to see the contributions of all Americans (white, black , hispanic, Asian, etc.) side by side rather than getting an incomplete picture from a bunch of ethnically exclusive museums.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: But we ARMED Iraq, right?
Next thread: That wacky Patriot Act..
Previous thread: War... It's Phantastic!
(1688 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - More Things Congress Wants to Waste Money OnRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.194 seconds.