The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: RuralNc on September 11, 2022, 11:17:51 AM
-
Just a general observation. The Muppets and their denial about their obsession with The Royals, The Queen, The Monarchy, etc.
I took it upon myself to count how many threads were posted in the General Discussion about The Royals since the passing of the Queen on Thursday. Keep in mind, I DID NOT venture into Breaking News, or The Lounge.
I counted....
:rimshot:
89 threads pertaining to the Royals. Most of the threads pertain to how horrible the Monarchy is, or all the past deeds that caused so much strife. I dont recall which thread it was, but one directly blamed the Monarchy for us even having a Bill of Rights. That says a lot about the mindset of the Muppets. While that is true, the Founding Fathers believed that all individuals were granted rights by GOD, and not just a Royal Blood Line. But we know the truth about what the Muppets think. And "think" is a stretch.
Thats a hell of a lot of threads to discuss how much they hate those people. Or perhaps, they love the concept of the Royals. The idea of a chosen people to rule over the peasants, with absolute authority. Lest us not forget how many times the Muppets have proclaimed their hate for America. Their love for Europe. Their hate of our Founding Fathers. Their hate of our Constitution. Their hate of our "free-dumbs", as they like to say.
No, I believe if the Muppets could pick out the right person, lets say Obama, to rule from a throne, they would be a-ok with a Monarchy.
-
I guess you could sort of "blame" the British monarchy for our constitutional rights, but that's an understanding so shallow it makes a mud puddle seem profound. Much Constitutional and Bill of Rights language and concepts trace back to the Petition of Right, which was in response to (and to which he unwillingly agreed and then violated) Charles II's tyrannous governance and the English Bill of Rights, which co-regnant William III and Mary II willingly agreed to when they succeeded the ousted James II. That was in the 17th Century. The colonies rebelled against George III about a century later, because he and his government denied to the colonies their well established rights as English subjects *. IOW, the colonies fought for their rights as English subjects and then incorporated those rights into the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
* People in England were subject to the same taxes to which the colonies objected, but people in England were represented in Parliament, who voted for those taxes. The colonies had no representation.
-
I believe if the Muppets could pick out the right person, lets say Obama, to rule from a throne, they would be a-ok with a Monarchy.
They would absolutely be a-ok with it.
The co-chair of Barack Obama's Transition Team, Valerie Jarrett, appeared on Meet the Press this weekend and used, shall we say, an interesting word to described what she thinks Barack Obama will be doing in January when he's officially sworn into office. She told Tom Brokaw that Obama will be ready to "rule" on day one. It's a word that reflects the worst fears that people have for Obama the "arrogant," the "messiah," that imagines he's here to "rule" instead of govern.
Jarret told Brokaw that "given the daunting challenges that we face, it's important that president elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one."
Someone needs to get to Jarrett and inform her that American politicians are not Kings and do not "rule" from office.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/warner-todd-huston/2008/11/10/obama-spokesman-says-obama-ready-rule-day-1
-
They are okay with monarchy if it fits their leftist worldview.
-
I guess you could sort of "blame" the British monarchy for our constitutional rights, but that's an understanding so shallow it makes a mud puddle seem profound. Much Constitutional and Bill of Rights language and concepts trace back to the Petition of Right, which was in response to (and to which he unwillingly agreed and then violated) Charles II's tyrannous governance and the English Bill of Rights, which co-regnant William III and Mary II willingly agreed to when they succeeded the ousted James II. That was in the 17th Century. The colonies rebelled against George III about a century later, because he and his government denied to the colonies their well established rights as English subjects *. IOW, the colonies fought for their rights as English subjects and then incorporated those rights into the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
* People in England were subject to the same taxes to which the colonies objected, but people in England were represented in Parliament, who voted for those taxes. The colonies had no representation.
Thanks for the interesting read. Ill admit my knowledge of U.K./European Politics could fill a thimble. My main point without a lot of elaboration was that the Muppets think the U.S. basically exists because some King was a meanie. Probably a Trump relative! :rant: :lmao:
-
It’s their “hate of the day” moment.This is a good one for them because they’ll have the rest of this week, the day of the funeral, and a few days afterwards to spew their hatred of all things they hate. If it weren’t this, it would be something else.
And then in around 18 months they’ll be able to revisit this hate when Charles’ coronation take place.
Lots of hate to be expressed. This is the leftists time to shine!
.
-
Just a general observation. The Muppets and their denial about their obsession with The Royals, The Queen, The Monarchy, etc.
I took it upon myself to count how many threads were posted in the General Discussion about The Royals since the passing of the Queen on Thursday. Keep in mind, I DID NOT venture into Breaking News, or The Lounge.
I counted....
:rimshot:
89 threads pertaining to the Royals. Most of the threads pertain to how horrible the Monarchy is, or all the past deeds that caused so much strife. I dont recall which thread it was, but one directly blamed the Monarchy for us even having a Bill of Rights. That says a lot about the mindset of the Muppets. While that is true, the Founding Fathers believed that all individuals were granted rights by GOD, and not just a Royal Blood Line. But we know the truth about what the Muppets think. And "think" is a stretch.
Thats a hell of a lot of threads to discuss how much they hate those people. Or perhaps, they love the concept of the Royals. The idea of a chosen people to rule over the peasants, with absolute authority. Lest us not forget how many times the Muppets have proclaimed their hate for America. Their love for Europe. Their hate of our Founding Fathers. Their hate of our Constitution. Their hate of our "free-dumbs", as they like to say.
No, I believe if the Muppets could pick out the right person, lets say Obama, to rule from a throne, they would be a-ok with a Monarchy.
Wonder how they'd react to others expressing the same opinion of the Kennedys?
-
Just a general observation. The Muppets and their denial about their obsession with The Royals, The Queen, The Monarchy, etc.
I took it upon myself to count how many threads were posted in the General Discussion about The Royals since the passing of the Queen on Thursday. Keep in mind, I DID NOT venture into Breaking News, or The Lounge.
I counted....
:rimshot:
89 threads pertaining to the Royals.
How many Trump threads in that time? If the Queen-related threads outnumbered the Trump-related ones, that would be nothing short of surreal.
-
How many Trump threads in that time? If the Queen-related threads outnumbered the Trump-related ones, that would be nothing short of surreal.
Oh hell no, I aint wading through the trash bin again, to find out. :-)
Something I did notice in a few threads though, the Muppets were mad because the coverage was taking away from Biden. :panic: I shit you not. That is no exaggeration.
-
It’s their “hate of the day” moment.This is a good one for them because they’ll have the rest of this week, the day of the funeral, and a few days afterwards to spew their hatred of all things they hate. If it weren’t this, it would be something else.
And then in around 18 months they’ll be able to revisit this hate when Charles’ coronation take place.
Lots of hate to be expressed. This is the leftists time to shine!
Leftists love hate (as we all know).
I also think that monarchy is something which leftists are going to hate particularly. The republican (i.e., anti-monarchy) movement over here is tiny, but is uniformly left-wing; similarly in other monarchies it's always the leftists who want to tear down the system.
Monarchy stands for continuity with the past, tradition, respect, honour, family...basically all of the good and wholesome values which leftists reject.
We sang the prayer for the King and the (now revised) national anthem at the end of Mass yesterday; then in the afternoon I went to hear the mayor read out the accession proclamation - even in this small town there was a decent crowd to give a rousing cheer of 'God save the King' - the DUmmies would have hated every moment of it.
(https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/hbz-queen-elizabeth-badass-gettyimages-556638497-1497445659.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=980:*)
Her late Majesty serving as a mechanic during W.W.II
(https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/hbz-queen-elizabeth-badass-ap-9307150277.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=980:*)
Definitely one to 'trigger' the DUmmies.
-
^^ Oh, that's just awesome, Aristotelian. Delmar, I remember when V Jarrett said that, and I was shocked at the time. We are not "ruled." In theory, anyway. The leftists are always slipping up and saying that word, though.
-
I guess you could sort of "blame" the British monarchy for our constitutional rights, but that's an understanding so shallow it makes a mud puddle seem profound. Much Constitutional and Bill of Rights language and concepts trace back to the Petition of Right, which was in response to (and to which he unwillingly agreed and then violated) Charles II's tyrannous governance and the English Bill of Rights, which co-regnant William III and Mary II willingly agreed to when they succeeded the ousted James II. That was in the 17th Century. The colonies rebelled against George III about a century later, because he and his government denied to the colonies their well established rights as English subjects *. IOW, the colonies fought for their rights as English subjects and then incorporated those rights into the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
* People in England were subject to the same taxes to which the colonies objected, but people in England were represented in Parliament, who voted for those taxes. The colonies had no representation.
There was a lot more to it than just taxes. Taxes was halfway down the list of grievances.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
-
There was a lot more to it than just taxes. Taxes was halfway down the list of grievances.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
OK. I mentioned taxes as an example of English rights violated by George III's government]/i]. Forcibly quartering troops was another example, both specifically forbidden by the Petition of Right. The point of my post was not an enumeration of the colonists' grievances, but that their grievances were over rights guaranteed to English subjects, but denied to colonists. And that the US Constitution and Bill of Right incorporate those rights.