 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Elok
|
 |
Land of Ramen Dragons
Mar 2003 time: 00:19
|
|
It's mostly dead now, thank God, but I feel obligated to point out additional ways in which that Civil War analogy was stupid:
-The Republican Party (EEEEVIL!) was AGAINST slavery at the time. It effectively was represented by "the blue states." From that perspective the party situation has effectively flipped. The Democrats, or ancestors thereof, were populists who stood for "states' rights," i.e. slave ownership. America just "voted against the party that defended slavery." At least that's how I remember history, correct me if I'm wrong.
-The Civil War was over a century ago. None of those people who supported slavery in 1860 were alive to vote for Bush, even the first time. Honestly.
-If you look only a few decades before that, you see that England was in a war with America. You know that rotten Tony Blair hates us! Nuke London!
-Remind us again how stereotyping people, e.g. "Arabs and Muslims are all terrorists who hate America," is a bad thing?
-We're not quite there yet, but Godwin's Law looms.
And so on. This is absurd. I mean, I dislike Bush too, but people who defend civil liberties should in theory pretend to be "civil" about it. You know, environment of open-mindedness, respect for others' ideas, Voltaire's "I may not agree with what you say..."? And liberals are supposed to be the smart and tolerant party. No wonder the voting public is so apathetic. Bah.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ted Striker
|
 |
United States of America
Jan 1970 time: 21:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Elok
It's mostly dead now, thank God, but I feel obligated to point out additional ways in which that Civil War analogy was stupid:
-The Republican Party (EEEEVIL!) was AGAINST slavery at the time. It effectively was represented by "the blue states." From that perspective the party situation has effectively flipped. The Democrats, or ancestors thereof, were populists who stood for "states' rights," i.e. slave ownership. America just "voted against the party that defended slavery." At least that's how I remember history, correct me if I'm wrong.
-The Civil War was over a century ago. None of those people who supported slavery in 1860 were alive to vote for Bush, even the first time. Honestly.
-If you look only a few decades before that, you see that England was in a war with America. You know that rotten Tony Blair hates us! Nuke London!
-Remind us again how stereotyping people, e.g. "Arabs and Muslims are all terrorists who hate America," is a bad thing?
-We're not quite there yet, but Godwin's Law looms.
And so on. This is absurd. I mean, I dislike Bush too, but people who defend civil liberties should in theory pretend to be "civil" about it. You know, environment of open-mindedness, respect for others' ideas, Voltaire's "I may not agree with what you say..."? And liberals are supposed to be the smart and tolerant party. No wonder the voting public is so apathetic. Bah. |
I see that pic struck a nerve. 
It seems the coincidence is too much for people to handle. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000 time: 00:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Nebraska was a slave state? |
Nebraska wasn't a state at all, but after the Dred Scott decision, all of the territories were opened to slavery.
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 15-11-2004 at 03:33
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Wycoff
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MrFun
So are you a lawyer now? Completely done with law school? |
No, I'm in my first semester of law school. I'm 22, and I just graduated from undergrad this past May.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19. Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|