The Oldiesfreak Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts III

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Rooney, did you not call Truman the "Mad Hatter of Independence" because you thought it was too cliche or because you didn't think to do it (Apologies for my failure to accent the e there)?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

It's a good post because it uses the delightful phrase 'Mad Haberdasher of Independence' and because aside from the welfare state stuff the things for which it criticizes Truman are very much legitimate criticisms, yes. It's a bad post because it uses the laughable phrase 'Mad Haberdasher of Independence', because of the welfare state stuff, and because the entire thrust of the argument is the, as you said, bizarre assertion that Truman's presidency was somehow the worst of all time or without significant redeeming qualities.

My post is a legitimate opinion backed up by reason and fact. You may disagree with it, Nathan, for that is your right. However, it does not belong here. The moderator should rename this thread "The Deluge of Posts that Red Avatars do not Approve Of." This whole thread is utterly disgusting and is a testament to close minded, anti-intellectual thought.

I respect libertarians and their belief in efficiency, as evidenced by you posting directly into the Deluge.

Libertarians do not have a monopoly on efficiency; teenage wannabe Marxists tend to be good at posting directly into the deluge as well.

[Vega]

Everything bronzwholebunchofnumbers wrights is all three of the OP.

[Lief 🗽]

hahahaha libertarians complaining about "anti-intellectual thought" rofl LOL hahaha

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's a good post because it uses the delightful phrase 'Mad Haberdasher of Independence' and because aside from the welfare state stuff the things for which it criticizes Truman are very much legitimate criticisms, yes. It's a bad post because it uses the laughable phrase 'Mad Haberdasher of Independence', because of the welfare state stuff, and because the entire thrust of the argument is the, as you said, bizarre assertion that Truman's presidency was somehow the worst of all time or without significant redeeming qualities.

My post is a legitimate opinion backed up by reason and fact. You may disagree with it, Nathan, for that is your right. However, it does not belong here. The moderator should rename this thread "The Deluge of Posts that Red Avatars do not Approve Of." This whole thread is utterly disgusting and is a testament to close minded, anti-intellectual thought.

While it's indeed a matter of opinion rather than fact whether or not 'wish[ing] to force socialist medicine of the United States' is morally comparable to, to name the criticism of Truman that I think is the most legitimate, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I don't think it's only red avatars who find it questionable, or who find the eventual conclusion that Truman was a worse President than, for example, the ones immediately before and after the Civil War bemusing. It's not a position that you've arrived at in ignorance, and it's entirely subjective whether or not it's a bad one, but I think that characterizing Truman's presidency that way is at a sufficient disconnect from most people's standards of presidential success or failure that 'absurd' can reasonably be said to apply. Describing the Fair Deal as 'deranged', even if one disagrees with it, is also almost certainly excessive hyperbole by about any definition that doesn't already assume strident libertarianism.

I actually agree that your post doesn't really belong in this thread, it's just...I do think that it demonstrates a set of priorities that people across large swathes of most ideological spectra would agree are somewhat quixotic, and I can see Mung Beans's rationale for including it.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

EDIT: Mistakenly quoted a post already here.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

We've been discussing that post for a good bit of this page now.

[LeBron]

Easy: Al Sharpton. Always have disliked him.

However, if you had included Ann Coulter, George Will and Rush Limbaugh, hell would freeze over from disgust. Compared to those three, Al Sharpton is an angel and not at all annoying.

Do people realize that Al Sharpton is a rabid anti-semite? The man has used the media, including his own media platforms, to incite violence against the Jewish community. He quite literally recreated Kristal Nacht on the streets of New York, and quite a few hate-crimes and murders have resulted from the lynch mobs he organized. In the most notorious incident, one of his lieutenants burned down a Jewish business with the owners and himself inside because they evicted a black tenant to expand their business.

The man is practically a bonafide Nazi.

Key part in bold. I can get why some Republicans hate Reverend Sharpton, but this is basic Tea Party/LaRouche rhetoric here comparing a black Democrat to Nazis, only it's Rev. Sharpton instead of President Obama.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Easy: Al Sharpton. Always have disliked him.

However, if you had included Ann Coulter, George Will and Rush Limbaugh, hell would freeze over from disgust. Compared to those three, Al Sharpton is an angel and not at all annoying.

Do people realize that Al Sharpton is a rabid anti-semite? The man has used the media, including his own media platforms, to incite violence against the Jewish community. He quite literally recreated Kristal Nacht on the streets of New York, and quite a few hate-crimes and murders have resulted from the lynch mobs he organized. In the most notorious incident, one of his lieutenants burned down a Jewish business with the owners and himself inside because they evicted a black tenant to expand their business.

The man is practically a bonafide Nazi.

Key part in bold. I can get why some Republicans hate Reverend Sharpton, but this is basic Tea Party/LaRouche rhetoric here comparing a black Democrat to Nazis, only it's Rev. Sharpton instead of President Obama.

So a black anti-semite can't be called out for being an anti-Semite because he is black? Would that make a Jewish democrat a racist for opposing Jesse Jackson?

[LeBron]

Easy: Al Sharpton. Always have disliked him.

However, if you had included Ann Coulter, George Will and Rush Limbaugh, hell would freeze over from disgust. Compared to those three, Al Sharpton is an angel and not at all annoying.

Do people realize that Al Sharpton is a rabid anti-semite? The man has used the media, including his own media platforms, to incite violence against the Jewish community. He quite literally recreated Kristal Nacht on the streets of New York, and quite a few hate-crimes and murders have resulted from the lynch mobs he organized. In the most notorious incident, one of his lieutenants burned down a Jewish business with the owners and himself inside because they evicted a black tenant to expand their business.

The man is practically a bonafide Nazi.

Key part in bold. I can get why some Republicans hate Reverend Sharpton, but this is basic Tea Party/LaRouche rhetoric here comparing a black Democrat to Nazis, only it's Rev. Sharpton instead of President Obama.

So a black anti-semite can't be called out for being an anti-Semite because he is black? Would that make a Jewish democrat a racist for opposing Jesse Jackson?

The Cato-Lifsh incident happened over two decades ago, and accusing Reverend Sharpton of being an anti-Semite for something he personally regrets deep down is not right. He just overreacted in a hostile manner to protect his race which was still being discriminated against back then in the 1990s and still to this day as he reflects on his show. Obviously, since he's a nationally acclaimed political figure now, he's moved on from the anti-Semitist rallies and break-ins and ever since then and as recently as 2008 has made efforts to become friendlier with in relations with Jewish leaders.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

How do you purport to know what a person, political or otherwise, feels deep down?

[DC Al Fine]

How do you purport to know what a person, political or otherwise, feels deep down?

Easy, leftists can read minds.

[Vega]

I am NOT annoying.
I am NOT a fool.
I am a concerned American.
The questions that I put are "what if questions" on the 2016 thread, because 2016 is A WIDE OPEN CONTEST. This is not a ONE-PERSON RACE.
I would support a Hillary Clinton candidacy, in 2016.
THE REPUBLICANS HAVE A WIDE OPEN FIELD!
Why wouldn't Pawlenty or Pence run?
IT'S THE AMPLE OPPORTUNITY!
Michael Reagan, Mike Pence, and Tim Pawlenty are all personalities with considerable political skill and NO ONE should be surprised if we wake up on Wednesday, November 9, 2016, and find out that one of these men are the 45th president of the United States.
I AM NOT ANNOYING.
IF I am annoying anyone, I AM SORRY BECAUSE I CARE FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS NATION. We need alternatives.
IM SORRY.
I'M TRULY SORRY.

LOL.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

I call sock.

[IceSpear]

None.

Glad to see you support the collapse of civil society. Wouldn't be surprised to find you approving of stealing or arson.

[Sopranos Republican]

None.

Glad to see you support the collapse of civil society. Wouldn't be surprised to find you approving of stealing or arson.

Someone with your sig is quoting a post about the collapse of a civil society? Oh the irony.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

None.

Glad to see you support the collapse of civil society. Wouldn't be surprised to find you approving of stealing or arson.

Someone with your sig is quoting a post about the collapse of a civil society? Oh the irony.

Quite frankly, the only thing I see "absurd" here is the fact that this gentleman chose to post my writing in the Deluge.

[IceSpear]

Quite frankly, the only thing I see "absurd" here is the fact that this gentleman chose to post my writing in the Deluge.

Hilariously awful non sequiturs most definitely fall under the umbrella of absurd, ignorant, and bad.

[free my dawg]

None.

Glad to see you support the collapse of civil society. Wouldn't be surprised to find you approving of stealing or arson.

Someone with your sig is quoting a post about the collapse of a civil society? Oh the irony.

Quite frankly, the only thing I see "absurd" here is the fact that this gentleman chose to post my writing in the Deluge.

I think being a Yankees fan in Vermont is pretty absurd myself, but then again that's just me.

[Mordecai]

The absolute worst senator in the United States Senate.  A mega HP. 

[ElectionsGuy]

lol

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Quite frankly, the only thing I see "absurd" here is the fact that this gentleman chose to post my writing in the Deluge.

Hilariously awful non sequiturs most definitely fall under the umbrella of absurd, ignorant, and bad.

I'm glad the Professor of Comedy is here to define what is and what is not funny.

[Joe Republic]

Re: NewYorkExpress

No. I find his threads informative, entertaining and amusing. He is one of this forum's best contributors.

[Paul Kemp]

Re: NewYorkExpress

No. I find his threads informative, entertaining and amusing. He is one of this forum's best contributors.

oh my god

[Paul Kemp]

God no, having universal education is a horrible thing, much like universal healthcare. Can you say "one size fits all"??