Good News

Originally Posted by Darla

This is what these lunatics really believe. It's not a difference of opinion; they are stark raving mad.

Isn't it alarming, though, that there are so many of the weird nutters? I just hope some of them are cynical scoundrels putting it on, because no country could really carry so many idiots and survive!

Two lunatic dunces having a circle jerk; irony.
 
Led... The word is led. Lead is not like read where the past tense and the present tense are spelled the same but pronounced differently this is likely because lead (when pronounced led) is a noun for a certain type of metal while red is an adjective describing a color.

I would be interested in your viewpoint.
 
You remind me of someone who naively believes that dishonest partisan assholes are interested in honest debate.

It is much better to point at them and laugh rather than try to engage them in a dialogue they have no interest in. But I do admire your persistence.

I imagine the cut-and-dried simplicity of their viewpoints makes their lives much easier.

"Good. Bad. Good. Bad."

I expect a room full of them would sound similar to an Indian tribe in an old cowboy movie.
 
Led... The word is led. Lead is not like read where the past tense and the present tense are spelled the same but pronounced differently this is likely because lead (when pronounced led) is a noun for a certain type of metal while red is an adjective describing a color.

Thank you.

I find it interesting that you responded to my misuse and not Rune's.

Siding with the libs again. Typical mod. ;)
 
Robert E. Lee was the central figure, while Jefferson Davis was the President it was Lee whose surrender finally ended the war and without whom the war would have long been over. I would say that Lee led the rebellion rather than Davis who was more of a figurehead. Lee also didn't fight for the Confederacy, he fought for Virginia. This would be like calling the UN Secretary-General the leader of a war where the US led with a General...

It was Lee's surrender that finally took the spirit from the South.
 
Again, if you had any brains of note you would recognise her mental acuity as most here on the conservative side do. She is treated with respect by most members here, with rare exception.

Continue to make a fool of yourself though, by all means though.

You are so far beyond laughable as to be pathetic.

The rest of us will continue to respect those who deserve respect, regardless of ideology and dismiss those who don't, such as yourself, Nova, Right (aka SM, DY, Southern Man and Damn Yankee, Racist X (Storm X) and Racist Y (ILA).

Carry on.

Or you and the cabal of Liberal dunces on the left could just leave the forum and start your own forum where you can engage in your dimwitted little circle jerks free of us evil mean spirited Conservatives and drool all over yourselves?

But alas, that is a dream that can only be fulfilled when morons like you get yourself banned from a forum with so very few rules.

But your empty vagina man effeminate whine has been noted. I'm point at you and laughing; "look, an idiot."
 
I find it unfortunate that those who were defending state's rights were doing so because of the most vile, reprehensible, and indefensible actions known to free humankind. If it were not the case the North would never have had the support it would need to actually fight that war. Millions of US Citizens died in an unnecessary and useless (according to some in this thread as slavery was doomed anyway) war to defend or condemn the right of states to continue to allow people to be owned.

There was no "theft"... All men were created equal, that these people didn't care to follow the reality doesn't change what is. The States should never have allowed it, not while preaching those ideals. The idea that we could somehow have had a solution that would allow ownership of humans and kept a "free" nation whole without war is disgusting. The States have no right to violate human rights endowed by our Creator (per the founders) in that fashion. Not while remaining part of this union. If they had some benevolent right to own humans, it was indecent, more pornographic than images of naked men/women, and deserved to be nothing other than outlawed and turned into the most hideous and vile acts that ever existed in a nation that claimed to stand for freedom....
 
I find it unfortunate that those who were defending state's rights were doing so because of the most vile, reprehensible, and indefensible actions known to free humankind. If it were not the case the North would never have had the support it would need to actually fight that war. Millions of US Citizens died in an unnecessary and useless (according to some in this thread as slavery was doomed anyway) war to defend or condemn the right of states to continue to allow people to be owned.

There was no "theft"... All men were created equal, that these people didn't care to follow the reality doesn't change what is. The States should never have allowed it, not while preaching those ideals. The idea that we could somehow have had a solution that would allow ownership of humans and kept a "free" nation whole without war is disgusting. The States have no right to violate human rights endowed by our Creator (per the founders) in that fashion. Not while remaining part of this union. If they had some benevolent right to own humans, it was indecent, more pornographic than images of naked men/women, and deserved to be nothing other than outlawed and turned into the most hideous and vile acts that ever existed in a nation that claimed to stand for freedom....

They did not care about State's rights. That's just a lie told by historical revisionists.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Tennessee_Convention_of_1861
 
I imagine the cut-and-dried simplicity of their viewpoints makes their lives much easier.

"Good. Bad. Good. Bad."

I expect a room full of them would sound similar to an Indian tribe in an old cowboy movie.

Would it sound like this?


Willful brain dead twits aren't they? Looks very similar to a Nazi Party Rally, doesn’t it? I’m sure our founders would be rolling in their graves seeing such gleeful ignorance on display.
 
They did not care about State's rights. That's just a lie told by historical revisionists.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Tennessee_Convention_of_1861

Which changes the sentiments of my post, exactly, how?

I'll give you a hint, my post was a sardonic condemnation of idiots who say the South was fighting for "States' Rights" rather than slavery.

The States have NO RIGHT to violate the basic concept of human rights and say that they have some benevolent ideal. What they were defending, if such was the case, was the right of states to allow human ownership. It's disgusting to pretend that they were on the "right side".. States have no right to remove from you your natural rights endowed by your Creator, even if they were saying they were doing so to defend "States' Rights".

That war was about slavery, and the right side won.
 
Which changes the sentiments of my post, exactly, how?

I'll give you a hint, my post was a sardonic condemnation of idiots who say the South was fighting for "States' Rights" rather than slavery.

The States have NO RIGHT to violate the basic concept of human rights and say that they have some benevolent ideal. What they were defending, if such was the case, was the right of states to allow human ownership. It's disgusting to pretend that they were on the "right side".. States have no right to remove from you your natural rights endowed by your Creator, even if they were saying they were doing so to defend "States' Rights".

That war was about slavery, and the right side won.

I did not mean to imply you were in error in anyway.
 
Back
Top