The Atlas Asylum of absurd/ignorant posts IX

[Big Abraham]

Johnson by a wide margin. While one may criticize the Tenure of Office Act on procedural grounds, it’s pretty obvious he violated it, and therefore deserved to be impeached.

Clinton was guilty of perjury, and I would have voted accordingly, but I also think the investigation into his sex life was irrelevant and bullsh–t anyway.

The two Trump impeachments were, in the first place, red-baiting; and in the second, an obvious attempt to silence and served as the pretext for blatant censorship, so they were HP moves.

Yeah holding a president accountable for inciting a terrorist attack on our capital and abusing his office to blackmail an ally into announcing an investigation into your political rivals son for political gain in an election are actually an attempt to censor critics 🙄

Your obvious falsehoods aside, how do you really get away with labelling something a "terrorist" attack when the protestors never even brandished firearms? It was a pathetic outburst that took up an afternoon, got dispersed within a few hours, and since then nothing has happened. Lamest "terrorist" attack of all time.

Original quote about January 6th also qualifies.

Banning a politicians and many of his followers from the entire network of digital platforms and prohibiting them from further association, is a far serious constitutional threat than the "attempted coup" which had a zero percent chance of ever successfully overthrowing the government, if that was indeed their goal, your claims of "absurd/ignorant" notwithstanding. You cannot create an alternative to the social network monopolies that are, in today's day an age, more powerful than most nation states.

The more extreme the characterization of the event, the more extreme the remedial action they're going to say is necessary

[Big Abraham]

Mr. Ramos questioned how the Texas Revolution, a six-month rebellion that concluded in the spring of 1836, could be associated with patriotism and freedom when the state’s new Constitution explicitly legalized slavery seven years after Mexico had abolished it.

Because a majority of the people in a given area rebelling against its authoritarian rulers and establishing a sovereign nation is inherently patriotic and free? Also, the idea that the men of the Texas Revolution were all fighting for slavery is an even greater denial of history than the idea that none of them were slaveholders. Have none of these people ever heard of Davy Crockett?

This was in a thread about Texas putting Confederate apologism into history books.

The quote in question was regarding the notion that Texas seceded from Mexico on the basis of slavery. It has nothing to do with the Confederacy.

[Big Abraham]

Mr. Ramos questioned how the Texas Revolution, a six-month rebellion that concluded in the spring of 1836, could be associated with patriotism and freedom when the state’s new Constitution explicitly legalized slavery seven years after Mexico had abolished it.

Because a majority of the people in a given area rebelling against its authoritarian rulers and establishing a sovereign nation is inherently patriotic and free? Also, the idea that the men of the Texas Revolution were all fighting for slavery is an even greater denial of history than the idea that none of them were slaveholders. Have none of these people ever heard of Davy Crockett?

This was in a thread about Texas putting Confederate apologism into history books.

The quote in question was regarding the notion that Texas seceded from Mexico on the basis of slavery. It has nothing to do with the Confederacy.

That doesn't change the substance of the post, and it's clear to anyone with a brain that the Southern slave power strongly desired Texas as a new slave state. In fact Tennessean Andrew Jackson was the one who supported its secession from Mexico, and another Tennessean and one of the worst presidents in history, James K Polk literally lied to start a war with Mexico (see: the Thornton Affair). The Texas Annexation was always about slavery and pretending it wasn't is historical revisionism.

Yeah, once again, this is about the Texas Revolution, not the Annexation. Want to try again?

[Big Abraham]

Are you not aware that a bunch of American settlers literally moved into Texas for the purpose of starting a revolution, just to get another slave state?

Are you aware that's literally not what happened? First off, the Texas revolution was one of many uprisings that took place against the Mexican government at this time, most of which white Southerners had nothing to do with. Even in Texas, many whites did not own slaves and native-born Tejanos played a major role in the revolution as well. There was massive resistance on behalf of many groups to the centralist government, which is why even today Mexico is a federation.

Sam Houston for instance was literally a Tennessee slaveholder, it's very clear what their intentions were.

Ok, and Davy Crockett, also from Tennessee and a major figure of the Revolution, did not own slaves and also opposed Jackson's Indian removal policies. What's your point?
(By the way, Houston was a very bad example to use. Although he did own slaves, he also urged the end of importation of slaves into Texas - and also opposed Southern secession. He had actual principled reasons to support Texan independence, which you seem to conveniently ignore)

Anyway, I'll end here. I don't want to debase this thread any further. However it does unfortunately seem you are quite misinformed about the history of my state - which I why I wanted to set the record straight.

[Big Abraham]

can't believe twitter would openly cancel a hispanic person of color like that smh

"Fuentes" is a Portuguese name, not a Spanish one, so it's not Hispanic. And Portugal is a country in Europe.

[Big Abraham]

can't believe twitter would openly cancel a hispanic person of color like that smh

"Fuentes" is a Portuguese name, not a Spanish one, so it's not Hispanic. And Portugal is a country in Europe.

Ignorant, sure, but is it so offensively ignorant as to belong here?

Too often this thread simply becomes a collective ridicule of a poster for expressing opinions that deserve to be actually debated but instead some here are just not ready to tolerate.

[Big Abraham]

Hodgkins got 8 months in prison.

8 years would be more appropriate.

[Big Abraham]

Although I understand why that thread was deleted, I wish it wasn't with my post that had 4 recommendeds on it.  

You can always just empty quote "if Ossoff or Warnock wins I'll leave for a year" the next time Woodbury posts something. The red avatars eat that up.

[Big Abraham]

Amazon is a highly productive, innovative, and successful company. Rather than being morally bankrupt, it is fundamentally moral

[Big Abraham]

Caucuses are far more effective voter suppression than any Republican law

[Big Abraham]

Anyway, one of the things I'd do is use the nuclear codes to bomb Pyongyang for several hours straight.

Surprisingly, not S019 this time.