Forums-->Off-game forum-->
<<|<|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23|24|25|>|>>
| Author | May 21, 2011-End Of The World? |
|---|
for Barbarian-Fishy:
Again, George Bernard Shaw? No comment? | But then the left didn't miss it back then either, as there was no left. By modern standards everyone was conservative. No gay rights, no civil rights, and it was a real fight for women to get the vote, let alone equal employment opportunities.
You can't move the boundary lines to fit them exactly where you need them. Accept you stuffed up. Chamberlain, the Great appeaser, was a conservative. Live with it. | for Barbarian-Fishy:
Oh nice try. George Bernard Shaw was a conservative? There were no socialists then? Socialism in not a trait of the left today?
lol | Left and right are measured by the center. To say there wasn't a left/right/center 70 years ago is a joke.
You can say the center was more to the right then than it is now and I would agree but to say there was no left is well, daft.
So we all shifted to the left today because the middle is far left of what it was in the 30s. So now I can say there is no right? Wonderful logic. | I haven't even looked at your George Bernard Shaw reference. It's just you trying to distract from the fact that Neville Chamberlain was right wing and he is the most famous Dove to get it wrong in history. You can give no answer that doesn't involve you changing the accepted definition of the majority of the populace.
Trying to turn post 382, which is obvious a parody of your "he's not a conservative because I say so" against me is just weak. Of course there was a left, just as Chamberlain was right wing.
You also didn't answer Kissinger being the 1st to back down against Russia. kissinger is still a conservative darling to this day. | just as Chamberlain was right wing.
So you fail to take into account that it was Churchill who was the loudest voice for action?
Did not Churchill found a government free of the likes of Chamberlain in the 50s? Yep.
So Lieberman while a Dem was pro-war. That makes the Dems pro-war? Hardly.
So Churchill was a righty because he was in the party with Chamberlain as you claim he was also a righty.
Then I ask you, what side tried to stifle Churchill? I mean, if he was on the right then that must mean, must mean...the left opposed him.
As seen in the Lieberman case, just because one idiot goes against the grain, doesn't mean his party can be shackled with his sins when he is parroting the OPPOSITE view. That means his party has left him behind and Churchill clearly opposed appeasement.
Now, do watch Shaw and tell me what side of the aisle he was? | I have the perfect example of what was going on with Chamberlain and what he really was.
In the US, we have two Senators from Maine, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe.They are both Republicans.
We call them RINOS, meaning Republican In Name Only. Why is that? Because they are nothing more than liberals that the vast majority of the party disagrees with on almost every single major issue.
You can count on those two idiots to cross and vote with Dems when you need them most. Maine happens to be a super-liberal state, making what they call a Republican still far to the left of the party.
We don't like them. We don't want them and we surely don't agree with them.
So can you look at their voting records and see what the party platform is? Uh, no because if you did that you would say they were Dems as that is they way they act and vote. | Look at this. The man who crushed Churchill in the post WWII election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Attlee
Obviously left wing. Responsible for having England join NATO, Responsible for England choosing to have it's own nuclear deterrant. Seems that he saw the Russian threat quite well. He was also part of Churchill's war cabinet and used his number to demand Chamberlain stand down in any coalition government his party was part of.
Also responsible for nationalising the trains, electricity, gas, steel, coal, and bringing in what was then called the welfare state and starting the national health Service. Want to define someone who had the government buy pritate property and establish the national health service as right wing. That's a stretch even for you.
I think I have now shown an obvious left winger as a hawkish defender of the West against the Ruskies, and an obvious right winger as a great appeaser. | | But Chanmberlain was the head of the party. I don't think a RINO will get to that position. Your example doesn't fit for the Chamberlain case. | http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/HistoryJewishPersecution/
Forgive me if I WON'T listen to anyone telling me I am paranoid. Gee, I wonder why Jews don't trust other races.
It couldn't be the past 2000 years of history showing we have every reason not to listen to bull,could it?
Last time we went unarmed into cattle cars. The people who survived are still alive to tell about it. The embarrassment felt by the haters wore off quickly, didn't it?
Watch the anti-Israel push this summer, leading to a crescendo in September. Should be very interesting.
OK Fishy, I will be a sport and not use what I claim as anti-Israel that you oppose. I simply don't need to because the action on the ground will prove me right. And just to keep things right, I will be providing an updated list so we don't get confused.
June 6th: Palis from Syria try to cross border.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/06/us-palestinians-israel-idUSTRE7541PF20110606
June 7th: Syria warns of more marches on Israeli border
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_SYRIA_ISRAEL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DE FAULT&CTIME=2011-06-07-08-26-10
Watch the list grow into a behemoth as the summer unfolds. | Want to define someone who had the government buy pritate property and establish the national health service as right wing.
Oh cool, then Hitler was left wing? Ok you got it. | But Chanmberlain was the head of the party. I don't think a RINO will get to that position. Your example doesn't fit for the Chamberlain case.
Oh really? Tell that to Republicans who call McCain a RINO and have for years. He was the head of the party in 08. Booyah! | @391. Homework time again Modi. Nazi was short for National Socialists. Nazism has the government ownership of property, just like many models of ordinary socialism, but instead of the normal socialist idea of using the national property to benefit all the populace, nazism was all about using it to support the select elite and remove the unwanted.
So, care to answer the Neville Chamberlain as right wing dove, and Atlee as left wing hawk, or you still can't?
Also, if the head of the party doesn't represent the party, then that's just messed up. Or the Republicans who are calling him a RINO are a lunatic fringe and don't represent the core of the party. I'll let you decide what group you and they belong to.
Let's say somehow Mexico captured California (they have a much more recent claim than the Jews to Israel). Are you saying on July 4th there wouldn't be protests? I've said before Pro-plaestinian is not necessarily Anti-Israel. You can't accept that. So be it, but don't put up articles about protests on the anniversay of the war as evidence. | National Socialists
Uh yeah, socialists. Nationalizing health care as you used.
So be it, but don't put up articles about protests on the anniversay of the war as evidence.
No crossing a border isn't anti-Israel, they just wanted to be friendly. Really they did.
No son, you don't get your way here. I was generous enough to not use my first article but you will have to eat invasions of borders. Don't like it? Too bad.
Lunatic fringe? Tell me some more. | And Fishy let me pin you down here. You may not have liked my answers to your opinion but I gave them.
Now give me yours on this point.
Martin Luther King. Is he an icon of the left? Can you dare speak anything negative about the man and not be called a racist?
Now he was a preacher so it is quite a bind for the left now days, is it not?
So is he yours, ours, or can everyone claim him. And if everyone can claim him, why does the left cry foul when the right refers to him? | | And George Bernard Shaw. | No, you have not answered my questions. You have danced around them, but not answered them.
So, I wont pick out the multiple non-answers, I'll just ask for two. The Genesis Contradiction. You've never attempted to answer it and Syrian's answer was basically, "there are other logical contradictions in the world, so what's your point". The point is, if Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis contradict, then it shows the bible has flaws (why the flaws are there doesn't matter too much) and thus claiming other parts of it as the infallible word of god makes no sense.
For the current discussion, Atlee is obviously left wing by nearly any person's definition and Chamberlain was clearly right wing by nearly any person's definition. You've basically called Chaberlain left wing, when nearly no-one else would, but I'll let that go. It is an answer, even if it's complete rubbish You have not answered that Atlee clearly saw the Hitler and Stalin threat which makes your comment "The dunderheads on the left have a history of not being able to spot danger" clearly wrong. Please answer that. | for Barbarian-Fishy:
Lets see, you don't believe in God, end of story. Now if you want to insist that I go through all the tired debate about your supposed contradictions, I can but then I will be using the same book as a title deed for the modern land of Israel. That's your call.
I already explained about the make-up of parties that existed 70 years ago and why we must look at each man to see where he would fit today.
We don't like appeasers here on the right but the left actually believes in appeasement today and actually uses it all the time.
You are avoiding Shaw because he was an evil leftist who made the mistake of placing his genocidal wishes on film that we all can see. He is a lefty and in fact, still held in high regard by the left.
Too painful?
Anyone reading this, please take a few minutes and see the posted video. Then you will know what the elitist left really thinks about you. Can anyone say "death panels?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93eir00rOho | Allow me to further my point about parties of the past and their deeds and what they are today.
The Democrats in the US have an utterly abysmal record against blacks. So to cover that up, they claim that what was once the Dem party is now the Republican party.
Or we can see one of the Dem superheroes here in action.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Franklin Roosevelt, the long time hero and standard bearer of the Democrat Party, headed up and implemented one of the most horrible racist policies of the 20th Century – the Japanese Internment Camps during World War II. Roosevelt unilaterally and knowingly enacted Japanese Internment through the use of presidential Executive Orders 9066 and 9102 during the early years of the war. These orders single-handedly led to the imprisonment of an estimated 120,000 law abiding Americans of Japanese ancestry, the overwhelming majority of them natural born second and third generation American citizens. Countless innocents lost their property, fortunes, and, in the case of an unfortunate few, even their lives as a result of Roosevelt's internment camps, camps that have been accurately described as America's concentration camps. Perhaps most telling about the racist nature of Roosevelt's order was his clearly expressed intention to apply it almost entirely to Japanese Americans, even though America was also at war with Germany and Italy. In 1943, Roosevelt wrote regarding concerns of German and Italian Americans that they t0o would share in the fate of the interned Japanese Americans, noting that "no collective evacuation of German and Italian aliens is contemplated at this time." Despite this assertion, Roosevelt did exhibit his personal fears about Italian and German Americans, and in his typical racist form he used an ethnic stereotype to make his point. Expressing about his position on German and Italian Americans during World War II, Roosevelt stated “I don’t care so much about the Italians, they are a lot of opera singers, but the Germans are different. They may be dangerous.”
Gee, looks like a racist to me. I wonder why the left hasn't utterly disowned the man? Hypocrisy maybe? | You are the one who likes to redefine history, not me. Rossevelt was considered left wing in his time and was no question, a racist based on that comment of his.
The founders fathers of America, who for their time were doing something incredibly radical and overthrowing the established order, which fits more on the liberal of the liberal/conservative spectrum, could somehow sign something saying "All men are created equal" but still have slaves. Slave ownership is anathema to the left and most of the right now, but yet those slave owners were liberal for their time. People who were considered incredibly Liberal for their times, would often be seen as conservative now.
But it all revolves around this from you. "The dunderheads on the left have a HISTORY of not being able to spot danger". That comment, due to the use of the word History, means you have to look at the figures how they were seen at their specific time in history. Atlee, left wing hawk. Chamberlain right wing Dunderhead. The biggest Dunderhead of modern history, and he was right wing. Kissinger, Right Wing appeaser To USSR. Still a darling of the right.
I wont insist for everything about biblical contradiction, just the one I've asked for since page 5. The genesis contradiction.
Also, I still haven't looked at the Shaw piece. But you mentioned genocide, so I'll apply Modi logic. Genocide is a thing that only tyranical power hungry madmen do, and by my world view, that means he must be right wing regardless of any and all other things he's done. Thus he's an evil righty and I'm surprised you'd bring something up to show how bad the right is. Just to clarify, parody to show the illogic of your previously stated position. |
<<|<|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23|24|25|>|>>Back to topics list
|
