GENERAL

National Review Editorial Reasoning Against Slavery Reparations

Posted on by in Commentary, GENERAL, Race In Politics and tagged , , , .

A recent article published in the National Review by Graham Hillard convincingly argues that “Reparations Would Not Work and Would Go On Forever.”

He goes on to cite that:

…Since the money used to pay for them would have to be raised alongside “the taxes needed to finance [Democrats’] grandiose spending plans,” reparations would “totally wreck the economy,” sentencing Americans of all races to a future of “higher unemployment, slower wage growth, and less entrepreneurship.” Because potential awardees would have to prove their eligibility in some manner, reparations would “be an invitation to perpetual litigation” and would subject America to the spectacle of government officials deciding who counts as black. (Rachel Dolezal, your moment has come.)

In 2018’s oft-cited inequality tome The Divide, for example, anthropologist Jason Hickel obliterated all previous estimates by placing America’s debt to the descendants of slaves at a mind-boggling $97 trillion… Hickel (estimated a figure achieved by applying the U.S. minimum wage to every hour of forced labor performed between the years 1619 and 1865. Sensing enemies to her left, presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren has argued that Native Americans and same-sex couples ought to be given money, as well.

Perhaps most convincing of the arguments (as if the above is not enough), Hillard argues that reparations would do little to actually act to end the debate and settle America’s debt for It’s wronges. He points out that to do so, “…one has to believe that the political apparatus currently pursuing reparations would simply cease to exist upon their being awarded. That no further expiation of the nation’s sins would be necessary.”

The piece is well worth the read.

Absurd!

Tell us what you think by replying below! (Note: If there is no box for reply’s, please click in the title above and box should appear.)

Interview with Antonia Ottawa Litigious (“AOL”)

Posted on by in AOL, GENERAL and tagged , , , .
2

I want to be the first to welcome Antonia Ottawa Litigious (AOL) to the Political Absurdity (PA) team.  AOL will serve as a commentator representing alternative viewpoints.  She brings some excellent credentials to the team.  We understand that she graduated with a doctorate in political science from UC Berkeley.

PA:       Dr. Litigious welcome!

AOL:    Antonia please, but thank you.  Based on reading your post entitled, About Political Absurdity, you are going to need some real help!

PA:       So, Antonia, please tell our readers more about your background.

AOL:    Sure.  As you mentioned, we attended UC Berkeley working toward a PhD in Political Science with a special emphasis on Climate Change Policies.  We completed our undergraduate degree at Delay University in Corn Husk, Iowa, were we spent 9 years studying History, specializing in TV Programing.

PA:       Wow, so you bring some great educational background to the table.

AOL:    Clearly, we are not mentally challenged or anything!

PA:       Tell us about what you have been doing since college.

AOL:    We’ve been economically inactive over that period.

PA:       Well can you tell us how your personal experiences have helped to prepare you for this job as a commentator?

AOL:    First of all, we must insist that you refer to us as a compersontator!  Anyway, we bring a lot of alternative life experiences to the table, including life starting as physically male in appearance and currently identifying as female in transition.

PA:       Tell us about your views on American politics.

AOL:    Certain human persons have been tremendously underserved and underrepresented in the area commonly referred to as America, particularly those living in economically disadvantaged areas.  The police have brutalized them, even profiling those behaviorally challenged individuals engaged in wealth redistribution negatively.  The other night we saw a news story about a person of color identifying as male, attacking only with a hatchet and knife, who was shot by a police person.

Naturally, we absolutely want to revisit recently eaten foods when-ever we hear anything out of the Trump regime.  That racist white misogynistic male identifier… . What sort of basket of deplorables would vote for that guy? We mean, some sort of idiots praying to “Jesus“, how stupid!

Finally, this country has got to start having some real respect for the beliefs and traditions of humans in other nations. For some Islamophobic reason we keep trying to stop “terrorism”. Don’t these Humans have the basic right to express themselves and their beliefs?

PA:       What do you think of the of the Democratic party’s new socialist direction?  I assume that you identify with the left and are in favor of the proposals calling for the borders be opened, all student debt be forgiven, free health care, and generous income credits?

AOL:    Of course, what are we, fascists?

PA:       Do you think that you will be ok with people who disagree with and question some of your left leaning opinions?

AOL:    Of course…we are completely open to all points of view! We simply want that as a starting point there be an acknowledgement that policies and points of view held by those within, or in any way affiliated with the Republican Party are ignorant and represent an existential threat to those humans that are really entitled to express themselves. We certainly don’t want to give these types of stupid opinions credence in any way. It really is amazing that there has been no legislation to require some sort of basic intelligence test for registered Republicans before they enter the polling places.

PA:       Do you live in the ghetto so that you can mix, communicate with and assist the less fortunate?

AOL:    No, it’s way too dirty down there.  We live in Beverly Hills where we can mix with persons of our own social and educational standing.

PA:       Wow, that must be expensive, how do you afford it?

AOL:    Our familial unit is in the petroleum business and provides us with the economic support that we deserve.

Stay with us for more from AOL and her takes on our posts here at PoliticalAbsurdity.  We look forward to hearing from her and most especially from you!  Tell us what you think, like, don’t like, how we’ve got it right or wrong, or why we should be banned from the internet!

Absurd!

About Political Absurdity

Posted on by in GENERAL, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , .
1

”What a waste it is to lose one’s mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is.”

— Dan Quayle

I am Chris Foster and I am excited to tell you about PoliticalAbsurdity.net, where we will look at, analyze and hope to have some fun at the expense of topical issues of the day; some important and others not nearly so.  Political Absurdity will examine some of today’s key political issues. You won’t always agree with us, but we want you to join the conversation!

Our Political Leanings

Readers will soon note that we come from the conservative end of the political spectrum, thus our views are of that bent.  That said, we are equal opportunity insulters, so those from the right might find some of what we present way out of sorts with their more traditional “Republican” ideology.  We are certainly are not right-wingers in keeping with many of today’s conservative commentators and like to think that we are open to all ideas, truths and absurdities. We love irony.

Content and Policies

Before we get started, please allow us to briefly outline
some of the guideposts that govern Political Absurdity:

Content Types

  • Original opinion articles
  • Satire
  • Analysis
  • Reposting and analysis of/comment on content from
    other bloggers, news media, political candidates, YouTube, political cartoons,
    etc.
  • “Point/Counterpoint”

We are not reporters. We are commentators.

Policies

  • We invite input and love comments from people who disagree w us
  • “Hate speech” will not be allowed
  • Let’s avoid being too off-color or overly offensive
  • We do not believe in, nor will we tolerate racism. That does not mean that we won’t take issue with common notions in this politically correct world that we live in. 
  • To be clear, we just cannot stand “political correctness,” so long as our words are not rooted in “hate”, but rather in what we believe to be truth and, in an effort to shed light on a given circumstance.  Moreover, we believe that political correctness is often a disservice to those that are supposedly being protected.
  • We will try to investigate subjects from varying perspectives before publishing.
  • We want to avoid fake news.

Ok, let’s dive in a little to give our readers a taste of what we are talking about:

The Media

Yes, we think that the News Media has a strong bias toward the left, especially cable news outlets, like MSNBC and CNN which currently seem to exist for one purpose and one purpose only; to try to discredit Trump and to get him impeached.  Is there nothing out there to talk about other than the Muller Report??  A nuclear bomb could go off in Argentina and Rachel Maddow would still be talking about the Muller Report, or maybe about how Trump’s interference with the investigation caused the detonation.

Typical Trump Photo From The NYT

The more traditional outlets, like The New York Times and Washington Post are not a lot different.  Look at any front page on any given day and you will almost always see a negative report on Trump along with a photo of him looking like an idiot.  (I know, that’s not hard to find.  More to come on that in a minute.)  Rarely are both sides of an issue explored, and background information necessary to get context on a given story is most often nonexistent.

You don’t have to lie to be untruthful.  Telling only ½ the story is misleading, and the media is guilty of this every day.

Now, Fox News is a mirror image of the same story.  They can’t ever seem to find any fault at all with anything Trump.  However, I think Fox really shows its colors with respect to the border.  Is immigration really the cause of all ills in the US?  Perhaps worse, in my opinion, many, not all, of the far Right’s fits about immigration can be traced not to job losses, or crimes committed by undocumented workers, but sometimes outright bigotry. This is not to say that the left’s positions on immigration are not at times completely ridiculous.

Trump

Trump Is A Creation of The Left

We here at Political Absurdity are no big fans of Trump.  Yes, we agree with many or even most of his policies on taxation, holding the line on our trading partners, reduced regulation, etc., but the guy is nuts!  He is outright childish and perhaps even dangerous.  To think that he has his finger on the nuclear button is absolutely terrifying.  Why the heck can’t the Democrats and press (often one and same it seems) focus on that?

Abortion 

“I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.”

— Ronald Reagan

Warning! This will be enough to curl the toes of any true blooded Libber or Right to Lifer. 

I think that men should be able to demand an abortion

What????

I think that men should be able to demand an abortion.  If women have a right to choose, then men should have the same.  Think about it —  How is it that we justify a woman’s right to choose an abortion under the constitution?  The Right to Privacy, and thus a woman’s right to decide how and what to do with her body (and when it’s convenient to have a baby).

So, if the Right to Choose revolves around decisions on what one does with one’s body, then why shouldn’t a man have the same right?  “Well, it’s not his body you say,” – Oh but it is:

What happens when a woman makes the decision not to have an abortion and goes forward with having a baby?  She decides what to do with the next 9 months and what to do with the child from there.  What about the man?  He can be committed under law to support the child for the next 19 years.  Is the decision about what do for the next 19 years not a major decision about what he will do with his body?

Now, when I present this to my Libber friends, they all — I mean every one of them, retort the same way — “Well the man should have thought about that before he stuck his thing in there”  (or something to that effect).

Really, that’s the reason?  Ask yourself, what does a Right to Lifer say in response when a woman says, “I should have the right to choose”? 

“You made that decision when you chose to have sex…”

There is a lot more to talk about surrounding the subject and plenty of caveats that need to go along with this line of reasoning, but let’s save that for later…

Ok, now you are probably beginning to get it.  We are going to startle and maybe even upset you on a whole lot of levels.  We hope that you will be entertained and join us for lively discussion on the most topical issues of our times.  Heck, start now and send us your thoughts on what we have already said!

Absurd!

Follow us at www.PoliticalAbsurdity.com