What The Heck Happened To Columbus??

[PoliticalChic]

The Left loves to denigrate men like Columbus, but when was the last time you heard them denigrate men like Stalin or Mao.

Hypocritical...no?

You forget Hitler

I don't remember the last time I heard someone from the left going on a rant about Hitler

Damn Leftnutter, WTF?

The Left considers Hitler a right winger, even though he was a national SOCIALIST. They dump on Adolf all the time, but seldom do his like minded buddies Stalin and Mao.

Hypocritical no?

Wait....you're asking the guy who lies in his avi if something is hypocritical???

Poor, poor Political Chic

She is still puzzled over whether I am actually Beaver Cleaver or not

I'm pretty certain you palled around with this guy....

"The 2000 Year Old Man"
by Mel Brooks and Carl Reiner

 

[rightwinger]

The Left loves to denigrate men like Columbus, but when was the last time you heard them denigrate men like Stalin or Mao.

Hypocritical...no?

You forget Hitler

I don't remember the last time I heard someone from the left going on a rant about Hitler

Funny that you bring that up.

I'd guess that you were old enough to recall the excellent relations that Roosevelt had with Hitler and Mussolini.

1. In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…” cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.

After all, they shared economic policies.

Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!

I knew PC would eventually get around to turning a Columbus thread into an anti-FDR rant

Actually, Left-Liar, you wrote this in post #71...."You forget Hitler"


There aren't even six degrees of separation between Hitler and Roosevelt....two guys who operated concentration camps.....

How could I miss the opportunity you provided?



But I do like chicken.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner

PC shows the true purpose of this thread

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Left loves to denigrate men like Columbus, but when was the last time you heard them denigrate men like Stalin or Mao.

Hypocritical...no?

You forget Hitler

I don't remember the last time I heard someone from the left going on a rant about Hitler

Funny that you bring that up.

I'd guess that you were old enough to recall the excellent relations that Roosevelt had with Hitler and Mussolini.

1. In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…” cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.

After all, they shared economic policies.

Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!

I knew PC would eventually get around to turning a Columbus thread into an anti-FDR rant

Actually, Left-Liar, you wrote this in post #71...."You forget Hitler"


There aren't even six degrees of separation between Hitler and Roosevelt....two guys who operated concentration camps.....

How could I miss the opportunity you provided?



But I do like chicken.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner

PC shows the true purpose of this thread

So.....where's my chicken????

Not another lie, I hope.


Hint:

 

[rightwinger]

The Left loves to denigrate men like Columbus, but when was the last time you heard them denigrate men like Stalin or Mao.

Hypocritical...no?

You forget Hitler

I don't remember the last time I heard someone from the left going on a rant about Hitler

Funny that you bring that up.

I'd guess that you were old enough to recall the excellent relations that Roosevelt had with Hitler and Mussolini.

1. In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…” cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.

After all, they shared economic policies.

Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!

I knew PC would eventually get around to turning a Columbus thread into an anti-FDR rant

Actually, Left-Liar, you wrote this in post #71...."You forget Hitler"


There aren't even six degrees of separation between Hitler and Roosevelt....two guys who operated concentration camps.....

How could I miss the opportunity you provided?



But I do like chicken.

Where PC gets her position on FDR

 

[hortysir]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

 

[Dot Com]

The Left loves to denigrate men like Columbus, but when was the last time you heard them denigrate men like Stalin or Mao.

Hypocritical...no?

You forget Hitler

I don't remember the last time I heard someone from the left going on a rant about Hitler

Funny that you bring that up.

I'd guess that you were old enough to recall the excellent relations that Roosevelt had with Hitler and Mussolini.

1. In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…” cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.

After all, they shared economic policies.

Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!

I knew PC would eventually get around to turning a Columbus thread into an anti-FDR rant

its what rw tinfoilers like her do

 

[hortysir]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Apparently the rest of the world wasn't past it.
It's not like the Amish were building them in their little workshops.
They had to come from somewhere.

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Apparently the rest of the world wasn't past it.
It's not like the Amish were building them in their little workshops.
They had to come from somewhere.

I'm sorry but I don't follow your reasoning

 

[hortysir]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Apparently the rest of the world wasn't past it.
It's not like the Amish were building them in their little workshops.
They had to come from somewhere.

I'm sorry but I don't follow your reasoning

It's just that slavery was a part of both cultures and eras.
True, we were at the tail end of it. But it was still a broadly accepted practice.
Not condoning it by no means.
Just looking for consistency, is all.
You can't vilify one and excuse the other

 

[gipper]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

 

[gipper]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

Well again my poor uninformed leftist, you don't know WTF you are posting.

To think the civilized world in 1865 comprised only Europe and N. America is not only dumb, but most insulting to the many civilized nations outside those areas.

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

Well again my poor uninformed leftist, you don't know WTF you are posting.

To think the civilized world in 1865 comprised only Europe and N. America is not only dumb, but most insulting to the many civilized nations outside those areas.

Name the countries you consider "civilized" in 1865 as well as their form of government

Are you going to claim Haiti was civilized?

 

[hortysir]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

Of the more than 10 million enslaved Africans to eventually reach the Western Hemisphere, just 388,747—less than 4 percent of the total—came to North America.
This Haunting Animation Maps the Journeys of 15,790 Slave Ships in Two Minutes

 

[HenryBHough]

When the left discovers some sort of fungus growing on the moon they'll be crucifying effigies of The Apollo Astronauts on The DC Mall.

 

[hortysir]

If you actually watch the animation, even the dots coming into America, the majority la d in the vicinity of Massachusetts not Georgia or the Carolinas

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus was a myth

He was neither as wonderful as he was portrayed for 500 years or as bad as he is portrayed today

He was a product of his times. 500 years ago, slavery was accepted. It was routinely acknowledged that white men were superior to the godless "savages". That he acted that way is not surprising. No other explorer would have acted differently than Columbus

But mostly, Columbus was in it for the money. He was looking to maximize the wealth he gained from his new discovery and was willing to do what it took to get it.

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

Of the more than 10 million enslaved Africans to eventually reach the Western Hemisphere, just 388,747—less than 4 percent of the total—came to North America.
This Haunting Animation Maps the Journeys of 15,790 Slave Ships in Two Minutes

No shit Sherlock

How many slaves went to Europe?

 

[gipper]

Yet you demonize the South over slavery and applaud Lincoln for being all about the money

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

Well again my poor uninformed leftist, you don't know WTF you are posting.

To think the civilized world in 1865 comprised only Europe and N. America is not only dumb, but most insulting to the many civilized nations outside those areas.

Name the countries you consider "civilized" in 1865 as well as their form of government

Are you going to claim Haiti was civilized?

Ever heard of China, India, Argentina, Brazil, Korea, Japan, Egypt, etc......................................................

 

[rightwinger]

Of course I demonize the south over slavery

We are talking 350 years after Columbus and the rest of the civilized world had moved past slavery

It was the American South that clung to their "peculiar institution" and went to war rather than end it
It was also the American South that instituted Jim Crow as their alternative to slavery and clung to it for the next 100 years

Leftnutter you should refrain who posting comments on history, because you apparently know little about it.

Slavery existed in much of Latin American AFTER the War of Northern Aggression. Slavery existed in many other parts of the world AFTER the War of Northern Aggression.

In fact my poor uninformed friend, slavery exists today.

Your hatred of the Democrat South could be construed as bigoted.

Hence I used the term "civilized world"

Show me who in Europe still had slavery in 1860

Well again my poor uninformed leftist, you don't know WTF you are posting.

To think the civilized world in 1865 comprised only Europe and N. America is not only dumb, but most insulting to the many civilized nations outside those areas.

Name the countries you consider "civilized" in 1865 as well as their form of government

Are you going to claim Haiti was civilized?

Ever heard of China, India, Argentina, Brazil, Korea, Japan, Egypt, etc......................................................

In 1865... What was their level of civilization? What industry did they have? universities? Hospitals?