Kratos wrote:It doesn't rule out that he could still be viewed as a good president, but with some "baggage".
You described Roosevelt as being perceived by the nation in the squalid epithet which we both recall. I responded that the casual racism of the nation was likely not that virulent. I've given my reasons--i now suspect you of arguing for argument's sake. If you want to do this, why not stop trashing this thread, and start one of you own. It would have the additional advantage of making it easier to ignore your obsession.
Quote:I'm not quite sure what the relevence is here. How does the Old South's refusal to vote for Republicans relate to them not being especially more racist than the rest of the country?
I made no such claim. What it does demonstrate is that the Wikipedia article's claim, and any claim, advanced on the contention that a racist reaction cost Roosevelt the votes of the Old South cannot be more than a notional contention. The Old South didn't vote for Republicans, period, until Eisenhower, didn't vote for any Republican in significant numbers until Nixon, and didn't abandon the Democratic Party until Reagan. So i reject the contention, and have explained why.
********************************************
Here, let's make this easy for your wounded vanity--you're right and i'm wrong. You are asolutely right, and i don't even have the slightest degree of justification for my remarks.
Happy now?
Walter Hinteler wrote:I'd never admitted it - only got my coming out with some ABBA-revival band
Naughty Wally!
I was in a duo with a girl for about 5 years, so I had time to mess with the vocal harmonies / counterpoint, it's a bit of work pull off with just two.
ABBA used more interesting chords changes than some more guitar oriented pop bands because of the keyboard orientation. But still, they had a kind of Euro-trashy-disco-slick-pop-vibe which kind'a grated at times given that I like Ozzy et al too.
Exactly that's what I wasn't keen on them during their active time .... their "Euro-trashy-disco-slick-pop-vibe" ...
How can a European court make a binding and perhaps superceding decision to the Norwegian courts? Simply because of Norway signing the European convention on human rights?
The European Court of Human Rights is charged with supervising the enforcement of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950; commonly known as the European Convention on Human Rights), which was drawn up by the Council of Europe. The convention obligates signatories to guarantee various civil and political freedoms, including the freedom of expression and religion and the right to a fair trial.
The convention obligates signatories to guarantee various civil and political freedoms, including the freedom of expression and religion and the right to a fair trial. It is headquartered in Strasbourg, France.
Individuals who believe their human rights have been violated and who are unable to remedy their claim through their national legal system may petition the ECHR to hear the case and render a verdict. The court, which also can hear cases brought by states, may award financial compensation, and its decisions often require changes in national law. Consisting of more than 40 judges elected for renewable six-year terms, the ECHR normally works in seven-judge chambers. Judges do not represent their countries, and there is no limit to the number of judges a single country may contribute. The court is also divided into four sections, the judges of which represent a balance of gender and geography and take account for the various legal systems. A Grand Chamber of 17 judges is sometimes used in cases where the seven-judge panel determines that a serious issue of interpretation is involved or that the decision of the panel might contravene existing case law.
In order to handle the growing number of cases more efficiently, a different court, bearing the same name, was established in 1998. It was merged with the European Commission of Human Rights, which was established in 1954, and enabled to hear individual cases without the prior assent of the individual's national government. The court's decisions are binding on all signatories. (from Britannica.com)
Free info about the European Court of Human Rights
at wikipedia.
@timberlandko,
Frida as a child had blonde hair
but she dies her hair a lot of different colors just like Agnetha keeps dying it blonde
Frida's eyes are blue/green not green
and her compexion is very fair only that like is well know she tanned a lot
and actually Frida's features are more refined than those of Agnetha's.
Also, her father was a soldier (not of the SS) who had an afair with Frida's mother. Frida is a war baby not a lebensborn baby.
I read the article, and the comments with great interest. However, one thing still puzzles me: apart from all the politically correct comments,... does any of you really believe in the master race theory, i.e. blue-eyed blond dudes were just born lucky? Is the physical appearance (fair, brunette, or whatever) the essential substance to a human being? What about the soul? Does it not matter at all? (and no, I am not black, I am fair-skinned myself, just in case you might be wondering). I have noticed that no matter what people say loudly to others is often not what they secretly think, as skin colour is still an important aspect of a person's identity, since those pretty afro-american ladies (mostly celebrities) shamefully bleach their gorgeous glowing skins, to look whiter and prouder????!!!! They certainly don't practice what they preach, and most people surely don't. Race is still a sensitive matter, when most cultures disagree on the terminology, of "black", "coloured" or "non-white", etc the list goes on, there is always some disagreeable connotation behind those words, according to the "brightest of minds". To me, they just can't get rid of the ghosts, being possessed by this superior/inferior race obssession.
The world is such a beautiful place and its habitants are so amazing, because it's all so diverse, and colourful, and yet so similar. How boring would it be if all looked the same, spoke the same language, and behaved the same way. It's all heading that way I know, with the globalisation and all, but it'd be nice to slow down a little and enjoy all the diversity and the fun of it, while we still have it, it will soon disappear, and then it's welcome to the clone-like age. Not looking forward to it, not at all.
There's only one thing I would want to change: some narrow-minded people's brains, so that they could wake up and see, what they are missing, being too busy generating despicable theories, and negative feelings, that eat them up until they die as miserable notorious little people. Who would want to be remembered in history for those mind-poisonous (rather "thick") theories? What a shame!
@Lash,
Just to clarify, the Lebensborn offspring were not necessarily rapes at all.
Germany was winning the war and many of these women were hedging their bets that they would be in the preferred class when the Nazi's won the war. Their offspring with Nazi officers promised them an elevated status.
When the Nazi's lost, these women were scorned, often heads shaved and shamed. Reality isn't so cut and dry.