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

[H. Ross Peron]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[H. Ross Peron]

probably santorum.

not a fan of populism of casey jr,

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/avatars/Republican/R_MA.gif

[H. Ross Peron]

The Confederacy was formed over states' rights. It was based on lifestyle, values and belief system. Its "way of life" became sacred to its adherents. Everything of the South became a moral question, commingling love of things Southern. Not only did national political parties split, but national churches and interstate. Families as well divided along sectional lines as the war approached. To say it was all a matter of slavery is both partisan and foolish. Brothers fought against and killed each other over this tragedy all because the north was aggressive in its politics to the point of making slaves out of the southerners as federal policies favored northern over southern economic interests. To this day it should be held that the federal government should not pick winners and losers. Helping a sector out in order to prevent other sectors from falling is one thing, but picking one sector to succeed over another based on politics isn't right. This is exactly what was going on. In a way it was 19th century earmarks. A century and a half later, I am one who holds the good fight to eliminate earmarks in order to prevent such travesties. The south wanted to have freedom because the north treated the south like second class citizens. I'm sure if those today who blurt out that the Civil War was about slavery knew what it was like to be treated like a second class citizen, they would wise up and appreciate the truth of history which was that the south was attacked by a viscous neighbor. Also how nationalistic are those who fought or would have fought for the Yankee states during the Civil War? The U.S. Constitution can be abandoned at any time by any state which chooses to do so. Across the world, the Confederacy was seen as a serious attempt at nationhood. Had the south won, international conflicts and even Hitler could've been stopped before the United States waited until it was politically convenient to become involved. Was it so much to ask for the south to ask for liberty from an oppressive government of oppressive policies towards them? All they wanted was their freedom. It was right for slavery to end though.

lol

[H. Ross Peron]

Misvoted as Marx is obviously far more influential. But policy-wise Hayek is infinitely preferable to Marx considering Hayek, despite his image and rhetoric, supported a welfare state.

Emphasis mine.

I prefer a social market economy in a capitalist framework rather than the total abolition of capitalism (either immediately or gradually). I see nothing abnormal with that sentiment.

[H. Ross Peron]

Do we charge people and send them to prison for coughing in public while suffering from influenza?

There was no malicious intent.  15 years per victim is a crime in and of itself and this will only serve to further stigmatize those living with HIV.

Be honest, be up front, USE A F**KING CONDOM.  But seriously... watch the prudes make this guy out to be some monster now in 3...2...1...

[H. Ross Peron]

And Obama is stupid enough to fall for it. He has no idea what's going on. If he does anything without congressional approval, then we should impeach him. Also, after bombing Syria, if they continue using chemical weapons, even though they haven't yet, then it would just go to show how ineffective Obama's use of force is. He has no business being in office. When George W. Bush was our president, we didn't have problems determining the enemy whether it be a dictator or rebels framing their government. I'll be a 10 year old could distinguish whether or not it was actually the government or rebels framing the government. If we don't stop Obama, then we're doomed.

[H. Ross Peron]

I'm strongly in favor of redefining abolishing marriage.

[H. Ross Peron]

Am I the only one who do the responsible thing if I caught HIV/AIDS?

Kill yourself (and the person who gave it to you). It's what any decent person would do.

[H. Ross Peron]

Jim Trafficant
Janet Napolitano
Joe Lieberman
Tim Ryan
Ed Rendell
Joe Manchin

[H. Ross Peron]

Note the bold in particular:

I stand with Cruz, Paul and their allies. They are the rational ones in the party. When will the rational Democrats stand up to the 60's radicals who have taken over your party.

[H. Ross Peron]

Cory on the principle I've made that every single person that supports same sex marriage is better than every single person that opposes it, and because Cory's repulsive views are of less influence in modern society than hifly15's repulsive views.

[H. Ross Peron]

There are not "two sides" to this story.

[H. Ross Peron]

Children ought to have a better upbringing than under a tribal Roma or Irish Traveller family.
The lack of concern among many families for the educational development of their children is a horrific indication of a backward culture which must modernise.

Is there anything specific about my post that irks you?

Mostly the racism and the implication that children of certain ethnic groups should be removed from their families.

The operative word is "tribal", which hifly15 intended to use to refer to Gypsies and Travellers who practice the nomadic lifestyle, I presume he has no objections to settled populations.

[H. Ross Peron]

Real conservatives are very ambitious and love to run in primaries. But that way we end up splitting the vote. The RINOs almost always automatically take 33% or so of the Republican electorate who will vote for the most RINO candidate possible.  These are the types that equate moderatism with electability, something that isn't true with Republican presidents in recent history.

This candidate is usually supported by elites and the donors. They are able to squeak over the finish line because the rest of us can't get our act together. The ONLY time real conservatives have won, such as Reagan, is when we united against the RINO candidate.

Christie is basically a liberal Democrat, and quite frankly, I am done with the RINOs.  I will stay home if a conservative is not nominated at this time, because I see no difference between the Republicrats and the Demicans anymore, it's AMERICA vs liberal one party oligarchy!!!

Look what's going on in Virginia. GOP elite want the Cuccinelli loss, that's why they starved him of donations against Moneybag McAuliffe.  They are salivating over the potential "Moderate, pragmatic people's man Christie wins big while right wing Christian Cuccinelli loses"

The RINOs control all the purse strings.  But we don't have to vote for them anymore just because they have an R after their name!

lol

[H. Ross Peron]

Is Cassius some sort of an 18th Century High Tory?

[H. Ross Peron]

Mandela faced far more obstacles in his fight.

No words express the level of distaste I feel towards this post...

Please explain why. This post wasn't meant to say that Dr. King never faced any obstacles but that Mandela struggled against a far more oppressive government opposed to rights for blacks then MLK ever did.

[H. Ross Peron]

On a thread regarding whether a non-Christian President would celebrate Christmas:

I don't believe I would ever vote for such a person, and I think they would be voted against handily in our country. But if they were to be elected--hypothetically, I would hope that they would not deny us the Christmas season.

[H. Ross Peron]

Horrible Practice. In an ideal world, everyone would live in their homelands.

[H. Ross Peron]

Until God, or perhaps more appropriately, Jesus, descends from the Heavens and nails to my door an exact definition of 'equality' and why it is an objectively good thing, I see no reason as to why I should acknowledge it as something that I should be helping society work towards.

That is the strangest argument I've heard all week.

Well, my point, if a little over-zealously expressed, was that I do not buy into your view that equality is something which is always good. Therefore, until an event occurred which could indisputably make clear that, in all cases, equality is an objectively good thing, there is no real reason for me to help society work towards your view of equality.

Is it an objectively good thing that if you broke the law you would be given a trial like the man next to you, or would you prefer that such equalities didn't exist so that you could be thrown in jail and forgotten about?

That is equality before the law. In my criticisms, I've tried to include the terms objectively and 'in all cases' to qualify my position. I do not believe that equality is objectively a bad thing, things like simple equality in the courts are by and large good things. However, my beef is with this idea that equality is some kind of 'light upon the hill', a societal state that should be promoted and striven for. We are not all equal, we are rendered different by circumstances of our birth, abilities, and, yes, occasionally the patronage that we may have received in life. Its not just things like equality before the law that flow from the broader idea of 'equality', no, there is a whole stream of BS that flows from it, from 'equality of outcomes' to the use of the phrase 'because equality'. I take issue with this idea that all humans, by simple virtue of their humanity and nothing else, are automatically able to access a laundry list of 'rights'. No, no, no I say enough. What 'rights' we have, or as I might call them 'privileges', are the gift of the state, the Church, whatever organisational unit we happen to be dealing with. We should mold ourselves to these boundaries, not expect them to fit us perfectly.

So then would you not complain about not being able to express your political views or to keep your property or worship openly if you lived in some sort of a totalitarian Stalinist state?

[H. Ross Peron]

Tough choice between McKinley and Harding. Whilst I'm not too keen on McKinley's violation of Spain's imperial holdings in Cuba, his generally sound domestic policy and character puts him ahead of Harding, whose general immorality I find rather distasteful.

Not to apologize for the U.S. taking Cuba from Spain here, but what "right" did Spain have to control and oppress the people of Cuba?

By simple virtue of the fact that Cuba had been an integral part of the Spanish Empire for centuries, and was a source of both economic and military (twas a good place to use to train troops) benefits for the Spanish state. Not that, neccessarily, I fault McKinley's reasoning for doing what he did, in the interests of the United States, but nevertheless, I feel that it was fairly unneccessary for Spain to lose Cuba, given that it's loss did some pretty grievous political damage to the Spanish state and monarchy. As for the oppression, well, it is undeniable. Nevertheless, such repression was a legitimate response to the bad behaviour of the Cuban populace, so I cannot fault the Spanish for that.

[H. Ross Peron]

What political party would you most be aligned with in other countries than your own?

Australia: Liberal Party of Australia
Austria: Freedom Party of Austria
Belgium (Flemish): Christian Democratic and Flemish [1]
Belgium (Walloon): Humanist Democratic Centre [1]
Brazil: Democrats
Canada: Conservative Party of Canada
Chile: National Renewal
China, People’s Republic of: Democracy Party of China
China, Republic of: Kuomintang
Colombia: Social Party of National Unity
Czech Republic: Civic Democratic Party
Denmark: Danish People’s Party [2]
Finland: National Coalition Party
France: Union For A Popular Movement [3]
Germany: Christian Democratic Union
Greece: New Democracy
Hungary: Fidesz
India: Indian National Congress [4]
Iraq: Iraqi National Movement [5]
Ireland: Fine Gael
Israel: Kadima
Italy: The People of Freedom
Japan: Liberal Democratic Party
Korea, Republic of: Grand National Party
Mexico: National Action Party
Netherlands: Party for Freedom [6]
New Zealand: National Party
Norway: Conservative Party
Poland: Law and Justice
Portugal: Democratic and Social Centre-People’s Party
Romania: Democratic Liberal Party
Russia: United Russia [7]
South Africa: Democratic Alliance [8]
Spain: People’s Party
Sweden: Swedish Democrats [9]
Switzerland: Swiss People’s Party
Ukraine: Our Ukraine-People’s Self-Defence Bloc
United Kingdom: Conservative and Unionist Party
United Kingdom (Northern Ireland): Ulster Unionist Party [10]
United States: Republican Party
United States (Puerto Rico): New Progressive Party

[1] I would if Belgian support Belgium’s sustained unity.
[2] They are not radically right-wing
[3] The National Front is closet racist and xenophobic
[4] The BJP condones persecution of Christian in India by Hindoo fanatics.
[5] No party in particular
[6] Party has a relatively sane response to the immigration although they may be overenthusiatic on that point.
[7] Putin’s a man I can respect and the other parties are Communist and ultranationalists.
[8] The Democratic Alliance is pretty much the only hope against the ANC who under Jacob Zuma are rapidly becoming the next Mugabe & Co with rampant corruption, AIDS denialism, and hostility to whites.
[9] Again they aren’t fanatical right-wingers contrary to what some may think
[10] Paisley is rather too anti-Catholic for my taste

[H. Ross Peron]

No, an election where everyone would lose is where the Democratic nominee is Brian Schweitzer. He's only a DINO.

As long as we get a real liberal like Hillary Clinton, Biden, O'Malley, Hickenlooper, Sherrod Brown, one of the Vermontans etc., it will be an active, vigorous campaign. As for Republicans, with Christie in hot oil now and pretty much doomed, if they could get Huntsman, a Hillary vs. Huntsman match-up would be highly competitive and worth getting into. Otherwise, Hillary would crush just about anyone else Republicans would attempt to throw at her.

[H. Ross Peron]

Robert Kennedy obviously. Humphrey was one of the worst Democratic Presidential candidates in the last century.

[H. Ross Peron]

No far-left is autocracy, communism, fascism, socialism etc.

[H. Ross Peron]

The Mad Haberdasher of Independence is the worst president in American history. He violated the U.S. Constitution on a daily basis, gave birth to the millitary-industrial complex, wished to force socialist medicine of the United States, used nuclear weapons for poor reasons and, above all, invented the police action which has been abused by power hungry presidents time and time again. He is worse than Wilson, FDR, Clinton and Reagan. Harry S Truman is the worse president in American history.

First we should examine how he harmed the nation in terms of foreign affairs. The dropping of the atomic bomb on civilians in Japan was inhuman, especially considering that the Japanese had sued for peace earlier on in 1944 an 1945. The atomic bomb that fell on Nagasaki on August 9, 1945 detonated in Urakami only 500 meters from the cathedral, completely destroying it. The mass of the Assumption of Mary (August 15) was approaching, thus the mass held on that day and was well attended. Due to heat wave and collapsed stones all were killed. The atomic bombing was inhuman and unjustified.

The Korean War gave birth to the undeclared war- "The Police Action." Truman's overzealous responses to the Soviet Union led to the unnecessary Cold War and the birth of the CIA police state. George F. Kennan, his National Security Adviser, gave birth to the idea of perpetual wars of "containment" that led to Vietnam, Nicaragua and Haiti throughout the Col War.

Additionally, Truman's modern military budgets during the the illegal Korean War helped give birth to the military-industrial complex. His recognition of the state of Israel has tied American interests to the Middle East and the countless, complex issues which affect that powder keg. Thus, Harry Truman's administration gave birth to the idea of undeclared "wars" and the American Middle Eastern policy that had killed so many and all sides.

Furthermore, Truman's outrageous corruption in his administration certainly hurt society. The IRS frauds and "mink coat bribery" were straight out of Boss Pendergast's Kansas City, however, they were being done in the White House, not a flop house. Truman was disgustingly corrupt. Also, his deranged economic theories in the form of the "Fair Deal" paved the way for the wasteful  "Great Society" of Lyndon Johnson (who is the second worst president in the United States).   

Thus, for dropping atomic bombs that killed thousands of Japanese non-combatants; for creating the CIA with a mandate to destroy undesirable democracy around the world via assassination and coups; for instigating the Cold War with the help of George F. Kennan; for his illegal, unjust involvement in the Korean War; and for playing a major role in the establishment of American policy in the Middle East and Israel; for his massive corruption and for paving the way for the modern welfare state Harry Truman should be known as the worst president in US history.