Truth hurts
March 25th, 2006The Brits are completely and totally worthless ever since we defeated them in 1783. Aside from the exceptions of Churchill and Monty Python, I can’t think of anything worthwhile they’ve contributed to the world in over two centuries.
When I point that out, they attack. That’s fine. My people have fought them before. They’re all sissies and I’ll be glad to take all comers – whether it’s here in “cyberspace” or in the real world. Now that guns are illegal where you pansies live, how do you expect to come at me?
The entire thing is silly. It’s unarmed girls against men.
They’re not a whole lot better than the French.
What do I get at your inevitable surrender?
(BTW, If you don’t want to be labeled as European, stop posting from France. Not to mention that Brit still looks like European to me. It’s splitting hairs. And you lose!)
Hey Digital cowboy,
Just trolling over from VD’s out of boredom. What good came out of
GalileeGreat Britain? Well, for one, it’s a lot less PC and thought-controllish over here. No “Spring/Winter” break rubbish, it’s Christmas and Easter break. Faith-based organizations still recieve public monies to educate students, like America used to. Due to the market forces generated between the parochial, public(british for private), and state schools, the quality of education seems better than generated by the American model. There’s a genuine competitive national newspaper market, that’s devoid of the dull NYC-cartelism that dominates the US media. Thus I actually buy papers over here. The Dunblane massacre (which resulted in the removal of handguns, not all guns) was a blip of groupthink on their part, but that’s the exception, not the rule. Although I’m not a fan of parliamentary government, I think the fact the PM and the cabinent have to answer questions once a week from all backbenchers hold their feet to the fire. There was no minimum wage until about a decade ago. Perhaps most importantly, civil liberties have (up until now) been upheld more fiercly than in America. There’s never been the state-issued ID mentality here. It’s not perfect, but in many ways, it resembles the America most of us would prefer to the America we have.Thank you for a thoughtful response to a rhetorical question, abe. (That’s not sarcastic, but sincere. I’m so sarcastic so often that many times I have to “sell” my sincerity.)
I won’t take the time to answer all of your points one at a time, but suffice it to say, I don’t quite see the world the way you do. Some of the things you listed there as benefits are things I’m fighting to keep out of America.
The problem I’m complaining about is government. England has way too much and, unfortunately, your argument is compelling because the U.S. has been sliding down that slope ever since we liberated ourselves from it.
Government is usually the problem and never the answer. I don’t like people that embrace or extend it.
That’s why my daughters know that there are only two people on our money that were never president. One is a hero and one is a traitor. They also know that Abraham Lincoln was a cruel tyrant that killed the experiment that was America.
Alexander Hamilton is the latter of the two mentioned about money. His ideas are what corrupted Lincoln. He got exactly what he wanted with Lincoln and it was a sad few years for the U.S. Fortunately, the bastard didn’t live to see his evil dream come true. He deserved to die unfulfilled.
Now we have to live with this mess he made. What’s worse, we have a government run school system that teaches everybody that he was right.
And I have to look at him nearly every day because his picture is on my money. That’s fitting, since he invented it and it’s phony.
Hey DC,
Your basically preaching to the choir, not much to dispute with you on those points. It’s actually hillarious, the way you went on about Hamilton. A very bright, albeit old gaurd, Fabian left-wingwer (the kind that at least wanted to work) used argue with me over Lincoln, the civil war, Hamilton and the central bank. I would make nearly a verbatim arguement to your own. He always pointed out that it was Hamilton’s vision of the nation that won out. I always replied htat isn’t necessarily a good thing. He would point out the banking scares of the 19th century and I wold reply that was brought on by fraudulent banking practices and he would remind me that it’s human nautre to want easy money and that will always trump anything else. Although he’s wrong, he’s also right, in a way. Perhaps the sole thing I have in common with Hamilton is a distrust of the masses. He was never a democrat, always an outright aristocrat who believed mass man shouldn’t have a hand in the handling of federal affairs. I agree.