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

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

That timeline that Snowstalker posted gave me stomach pains just reading it. Literally the worst timeline ever written.

Wait, what? Has it been deleted?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

That timeline that Snowstalker posted gave me stomach pains just reading it. Literally the worst timeline ever written.

Wait, what? Has it been deleted?

Nope.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=174117.msg3743418#msg3743418

Enjoy.

Jesus f[inks]ing Christ. I wasn't paying attention to the avatars throughout the whole thing, so I thought half the posts were Charles complimenting himself until I realized some of them were Jack Enderman.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

It was more likely intended as a pun; Braves -> Braves, Red Sox -> Redskins

Nevertheless it's pretty clearly offensive nowadays and should probably be changed.

I'm not an expert on Native American history, but was it not racist back then? What if the Patriots changed their name to the New England N*****killers back in 1913?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

It was more likely intended as a pun; Braves -> Braves, Red Sox -> Redskins

Nevertheless it's pretty clearly offensive nowadays and should probably be changed.

I'm not an expert on Native American history, but was it not racist back then? What if the Patriots changed their name to the New England N*****killers back in 1913?

It would be more like the New England Negroes (also, the Boston Patriots would not be founded for years to come).  It was a word that didn't have especially negative connotations back then, the most offensive would probably have been "Injun."  It's similar to Asians in that all the words used to describe them then would be considered offensive today ("Yellows," "Mongolians," "Chinamen...").

Still, should today's New England Negroes change their names? It's still a racist term.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

"Braves" was hardly a neutral name to begin with. Ernest is correct; the name "Redskins" was chosen to appeal to fans of both the Boston Braves and the Boston Red Sox.

It's also a racist slur.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

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.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

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.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

One might say that groups like the Roma and the Travellers ought to ensure that their children have access to the educational resources of the broader culture and advocate for policies to make that possible, without forcing these groups to change their cultures more than is necessary to accomplish whatever standard of access is set (and certainly without forcing them to abandon the traditional manners in which they do educate their children).

That's basically a slightly more sympathetic version of my position; I believe that education, as one of the most basic human rights, must be provided to children, regardless of what culture they belong to. It is completely unacceptable for parents to withdraw their children from school (which is exactly what Roma and Irish Traveller families are guilty of, believe it or not) and this has to change.

So we shouldn't allow homeschooling? You did just say that "religious education doesn't count", no? And why does education have to be your specific brand of education?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Then it's simply a man.

If 'it' is a man then why are you using the pronoun for inanimate objects and animals whose gender isn't known or relevant?

Cheeky

I fail to see how that answers the question.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Wow. That's quite awful.

Wait, was that a quote or were you posting that in the Deluge? I really hope it was a quote.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Wow. That's quite awful.

Wait, was that a quote or were you posting that in the Deluge? I really hope it was a quote.

Whoops. I meant I agree with Tik.

Cool.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

When I clicked the link to Jack's post all I saw was the Doctor Who poster and I thought "wow, Olof Palme's gotten cheekbonier and less dead", fwiw.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Some people care to much.

Honestly, you'd think that this forum was ancient Rome 44 BC, in the aftermath of Gaius Julius Caesar's (Opebo) brutal death at the hands of his Senatorial colleagues (the moderators).

(Sorry for the bullsh**t analogy, but I thought I throw one in since other people seem to be doing it )

Perhaps a better analogy would be Jerusalem circa 30 CE.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Some people care to much.

Honestly, you'd think that this forum was ancient Rome 44 BC, in the aftermath of Gaius Julius Caesar's (Opebo) brutal death at the hands of his Senatorial colleagues (the moderators).

(Sorry for the bullsh**t analogy, but I thought I throw one in since other people seem to be doing it )

Perhaps a better analogy would be Jerusalem circa 30 CE.

I am as guilty as anyone here of making Christ analogues. That said, I beseech you to never even hint that you'd compare opebo to Jesus in the next million years.

I was simply suggesting an idea for Mr. Cassius, and we must admit that the similarities are uncanny - anti-establishment "preachers" with controversial views who are killed at the demands of their rulers. Interpret it how you will - I'll refrain from judging their respective social and political views for now, so I suppose the similarities are only skin deep.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Wow:

Yet another "white people are pure evil" movie made by Jewish Hollywood.

I was about to say "oh, that's a joke" but then I was like "oh it's RosettaStoned".

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I support capitalism. I also support socialism.

How  does that work?

There's no such thing as a pure socialist state or a pure capitalist state. Everything is a blend to some extent.

Explain to me, please, how this is ignorant, absurd, or bad.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I support capitalism. I also support socialism.

How  does that work?

There's no such thing as a pure socialist state or a pure capitalist state. Everything is a blend to some extent.

Explain to me, please, how this is ignorant, absurd, or bad.

Socialism means the ownership of the means of production by the people, either through the state, trade unions, or directly. IceSpear seems to be conflating "taxpayer-funded public services" with socialism, which is a totally ridiculous claim to make.

Can we not have free markets and nationalized industry, like many nations in the world today? What you call socialism seems to be closer to communism, though I'm no expert on either.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

FFs because I am one.
Jesus supported social justice in his time.
Democrats support social justice.
Therefore, Jesus would support Democrats.
It's simple logic.

'Social justice' means different things to different people.

Social justice is social justice. A=A. This is a very simple logical law.

Does the Catholic Church's Magisterium mean the same set of issues when it says 'social justice' as such-and-such dot tumblr dot com means when it says 'social justice'?

They are different in practice, but they ultimately mean the same thing.

See, the thing is, A=A is a very simple logical law, but it's not always true of the way people actually use language, so...

I don't know what you're getting at.

'Social justice' means different things to different people.

My retort to that was while their 'social justice' takes different forms, both are, at the core, the same thing.

Your retort didn't really help because it didn't explain how the Democratic Party has a monopoly on that core, as opposed to just certain manifestations of it.

The Democrats do have a monopoly, though. A good gage of the social justice scene is tumblr and when tumblr only supports one party it is the social justice party. There are no republican demisexuals for a reason.

FFs because I am one.
Jesus supported social justice in his time.
Democrats support social justice.
Therefore, Jesus would support Democrats.
It's simple logic.

'Social justice' means different things to different people.

Social justice is social justice. A=A. This is a very simple logical law.

Does the Catholic Church's Magisterium mean the same set of issues when it says 'social justice' as such-and-such dot tumblr dot com means when it says 'social justice'?

They are different in practice, but they ultimately mean the same thing.

See, the thing is, A=A is a very simple logical law, but it's not always true of the way people actually use language, so...

I don't know what you're getting at.

'Social justice' means different things to different people.

My retort to that was while their 'social justice' takes different forms, both are, at the core, the same thing.

Your retort didn't really help because it didn't explain how the Democratic Party has a monopoly on that core, as opposed to just certain manifestations of it.

The Democrats do have a monopoly, though. A good gage of the social justice scene is tumblr and when tumblr only supports one party it is the social justice party. There are no republican demisexuals for a reason.

Cross-posted to the Comedy Goldmine. Sr. Pollo is a strange fellow, isn't he?

[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)?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I think Mr Pollo is just a troll trying to mock others and be funny.

It must be said he succeeds on both counts.