Why do you have to insult other people simply for having a differing ideology?

jerseyhoya wrote:Wow, the delusional person liked the insane person's post. Soon you're gonna tell me that Charlie likes pinch running for Burrell.

Posts like this are absolutely not appreciated.

If he's insulting you--and PtK and Crashburn Alley, as far as I've seen, haven't insulted anyone at any point in this thread--that's one thing. This is just gratuitous, and obnoxious.

My apologies to Crashburn and PtK. That said, some of the consistently snide remarks pointed at my side (51% who voted for Bush should be indicted) are annoying as well, but those weren't personal, though I might have taken them personally.

I think this explains a lot about the Presidential election. Bubba McCoy may be a real person.

TenuredVulture wrote:Bubba McCoy may be a real person.

here's hoping the surreal McCoy

Sigh. So much for a "respectful campaign"

But wait... McCain himself expounds

Egads! Angling for a McCain/Duke ticket :?:



I think these folks are serious. On one hand, the ludicrousy is hilarious. On the other hand, it's also quite sad.

"Americans For John McCain - David Duke 2008"... I'm guessing the plurality of "Americans" is a rather small plurality.

For those just tuning in...

SUPER DELEGATES!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfTAXwhQURE&feature=related[/youtube]

Even funnier the second time around!!!!

Phan In Phlorida wrote:Sigh. So much for a "respectful campaign"

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mc3GQmGGms&eurl=http://rankandfilemonmouthrepublican.blogspot.com/[/youtube]

This might be old. It might even have been already posted. But it's funny.

CrashburnAlley wrote:
Would you have punished the U.S. if it was in Germany's position after World War I?

NO!!!!

Have you ever picked up a book? The Treaty of Versailles was the exact reason that a hundred million people died 20 years later in WWII.

Seriously, have you ever had a history class? Mind bottling.

pacino wrote:

mpmcgraw wrote:Yep.

Specifically not the President of the United States who has done nothing worse than stretching the power of the commander in chief. .

This is by far the worst thing he has done.

Other presidents have done this, but because most were well liked and probably viewed as competent there were less objectors.

Far from being illegal, at least as long as the other branches continue to allow it.

mpmcgraw wrote:NO!!!!

Have you ever picked up a book? The Treaty of Versailles was the exact reason that a hundred million people died 20 years later in WWII.

It was a factor, not the "exact reason." There's no one "exact reason" as there were many factors that added up.

And the reason why Germany was allowed so much wiggle room to recoup and be a huge factor in WWII was because the Treaty of Versailles didn't hold them accountable strongly enough -- the U.S. Senate refused to ratify it.

It's a perfect example of why countries should be held accountable by the rest of the world.

mpmcgraw wrote:Seriously, have you ever had a history class? Mind bottling.

Have you ever had an English class? It's "mind boggling."

CrashburnAlley wrote:

mpmcgraw wrote:Seriously, have you ever had a history class? Mind bottling.

Have you ever had an English class? It's "mind boggling."

careful - it can be hard to tell when mcgraw's yanking your change

CrashburnAlley wrote:

mpmcgraw wrote:NO!!!!

Have you ever picked up a book? The Treaty of Versailles was the exact reason that a hundred million people died 20 years later in WWII.

It was a factor, not the "exact reason." There's no one "exact reason" as there were many factors that added up.

And the reason why Germany was allowed so much wiggle room to recoup and be a huge factor in WWII was because the Treaty of Versailles didn't hold them accountable strongly enough -- the U.S. Senate refused to ratify it.

It's a HAMELS example of why countries should be held accountable by the rest of the world.

mpmcgraw wrote:Seriously, have you ever had a history class? Mind bottling.

Have you ever had an English class? It's "mind boggling."

No, Germany was poor beyond anyone's wildest dreams which led to Hitler taking power. Hitler's aggressiveness and Chamberline and the French just wanting peace led to Nazi Germany's rise to power. If the treaty had been less oppressive there is no way Hitler would have taken power.

If it was more oppressive Germany would have been a country of slaves working to pay off the debt for a war that wasn't their fault. It was their imperialistic leaders and the retarded system of alliances. Really Germany wasn't any more at fault for WWI as Russia and the rest of the allies.

Mind bottling, you know like someone put your mind in a bottle? Clearly someone isn't a Will Ferrell fan.

mpmcgraw wrote:No, Germany was poor beyond anyone's wildest dreams which led to Hitler taking power. Hitler's aggressiveness and Chamberline and the French just wanting peace led to Nazi Germany's rise to power. If the treaty had been less oppressive there is no way Hitler would have taken power.

If it was more oppressive Germany would have been a country of slaves working to pay off the debt for a war that wasn't their fault. It was their imperialistic leaders and the retarded system of alliances. Really Germany wasn't any more at fault for WWI as Russia and the rest of the allies.

I can't argue that the Treaty was too restrictive on Germany's economy (lost 16% of its coalfields, and 48% of its iron and steel industry, for instance). That was a huge blunder.

However, would you have preferred for the Central Powers not to be punished at all?

Thankfully we can only speculate on what would have happened if they weren't punished...

If you're not for such anarchy, how would you have punished the Central Powers after WWI?

mpmcgraw wrote:Mind bottling, you know like someone put your mind in a bottle? Clearly someone isn't a Will Ferrell fan.

I'm not a pop culture fan in general. I watch movies very sparingly. Sorry I didn't catch the reference.

CrashburnAlley wrote:

mpmcgraw wrote:No, Germany was poor beyond anyone's wildest dreams which led to Hitler taking power. Hitler's aggressiveness and Chamberline and the French just wanting peace led to Nazi Germany's rise to power. If the treaty had been less oppressive there is no way Hitler would have taken power.

If it was more oppressive Germany would have been a country of slaves working to pay off the debt for a war that wasn't their fault. It was their imperialistic leaders and the retarded system of alliances. Really Germany wasn't any more at fault for WWI as Russia and the rest of the allies.

I can't argue that the Treaty was too restrictive on Germany's economy (lost 16% of its coalfields, and 48% of its iron and steel industry, for instance). That was a huge blunder.

However, would you have preferred for the Central Powers not to be punished at all?

Thankfully we can only speculate on what would have happened if they weren't punished...

If you're not for such anarchy, how would you have punished the Central Powers after WWI?

Replace their governments with decmocratic systems and leave their economy alone. The best way for Britain and France to recover from the war economically was to renew trade with Germany and ride out the Great Depression as best they could, but they were retarded and strangled their economy to death which intern kept their economies in the crapper.

On that thought who knows if America would have ever come out of the Great Depression without WWII, but that's another argument I guess.

I don't believe any country has the right to alter another country's form of government.

You're right that the U.S. needed WWII to get out of the G.D.

HA. But you think the international community has the right to hold a U.S. citizen in a court of law, but we don't have the right to liberate a nation by giving them a voice in their government after that opressive government caused us to go to war in the first place?

I can't quite understand your logic here tex, but ok.