Here are my 3 top picks for the most ridiculous ideas:

1 - Faith in "the invisible hand of the market"
2 - religion mixed with politics or business
3 - political extremism

Here are my 3 top picks for the most ridiculous ideas:

1 - Faith in "the invisible hand of the market"
2 - religion
3 - political extremism

1 - Faith in centralized government control.
2 - Calling budget increases "cuts".
3 - Believing that you can tax your way out of a recession.

BTW, what does religion have to do with either politics or the economy?

1. Communism
2. The Divine Right of Kings
3. Witch trials, and other religious trinkets

BTW, what does religion have to do with either politics or the economy?

I should have put "politics mixed with religion" instead of just religion, although I don't like religion in any forms whatsoever.

BTW, what does religion have to do with either politics or the economy?

I'm going to keep this one on hand for the next discussion of "Under God", 'In God We Trust", the 10 Commandments, governmental prayer, or any of that other right-winger hilarity.

I'm going to keep this one on hand for the next discussion of "Under God", 'In God We Trust", the 10 Commandments, governmental prayer, or any of that other right-winger hilarity.

Big difference between bringing religion into a discussion on politics and economics and the government allowing people to freely express their religious beliefs. Even you can see that.

Anarchism that assumes human nature allows peace and harmony in the absence of rules

1 - Feminism as an academic discipline (and not the taxpayer subsidized religion it is)

2 - Neoconservatism, within that broad term specifically the idiotic idea of creating "democracies" at bayonet point

3 - The insane idea, shared nowadays by both Dems and Repubs, that neither budget deficits nor trade deficits really matter

Anarchism that assumes human nature allows peace and harmony in the absence of rules

Good one.

1.) The propaganda induced delusion of "Freedom" in a Democratic/Rupublic run government that stresses a mantra of "Freewill" and "Freedom of Choice" that only applies if the Government dictates that that "Choice" is an acceptable one. i.e. - Smoking Pot is illegal because the Government says so. Not wearing seatbelts is illegal in some states but not others. Owning a corporation and not having the freedom to discriminate who I hire or sell to.

2.) Religion and Censorship. I tied these two together because I believe they are closely related. They both believe in hiding the truth in a veil of myth and fallacy. Religion teaches people to believe in an invisible man in the sky. Censorship teaches people that the word Poo is ok, but the word Sh** is not even though they mean the same thing. Both are ridiculous and shelter youth from the real world making them believe that everything is wonderful and sweet which is nothing but a lie.

3.) Political Correctness - Merry Christmas to all the wetback homos out there. ...and if that offended you to fukcing bad you namby pamby dirt pansy. Grow some balls and say whatever you want, I'm tired of this watered down carebear crap. Say what's on your mind, somebodies not going to like it, but that's the way the world works. You can never please everyone and it's pointless to try.

I'm going to keep this one on hand for the next discussion of "Under God", 'In God We Trust", the 10 Commandments, governmental prayer, or any of that other right-winger hilarity.
Which right-wingers put "In God We Trust" on our money? Why did libs fail to remove it? Let's see...Democrats had uninterrupted power to rule in the the Congress from 1954 or so until 1994. And, they controlled the presidency on occassion during that time (JFK, Clinton, and Carter come to mind). What gives?

1. Marx's Labor Theory of Value & economic determinism.

2. Libertarianism.

3. The belief that religious dogma makes a good foundation for the state.

Let's see...Democrats had uninterrupted power to rule in the the Congress from 1954 or so until 1994.

Only the House, not both branches of Congress...and the now just about extinct "Dixiecrats" would never have stood for removing it over much of that time, even though they were counted as Democrats.

Which right-wingers put "In God We Trust" on our money? Why did libs fail to remove it? Let's see...Democrats had uninterrupted power to rule in the the Congress from 1954 or so until 1994. And, they controlled the presidency on occassion during that time (JFK, Clinton, and Carter come to mind). What gives?

The man said that religion has nothing to do with politics. I'm just going to remember that for later.

The man said that religion has nothing to do with politics. I'm just going to remember that for later.Great, remember it then.

Only the House, not both branches of Congress....
I stand corrected.


and the now just about extinct "Dixiecrats" would never have stood for removing it over much of that time, even though they were counted as Democrats.So, some Democrats were/are actually right-wing extremists?:D

1) Socialism and faith in central government control
2) Sexual "liberation"
3) The homosexual agenda

1) Forced democracy or religious conversion

2) Political "correctness," especially when reflected in law

3) A "democracy" in which only PACs and corporate sponsors are represented

A "democracy" in which only PACs and corporate sponsors are represented

An oligarchy?

1 - The term "neo-conservative". They are neither “neo” (Trotskyites have been around for 100 years) nor conservative (admitted Troskyites)
2 – Equality
3 – Martin Luther King Jr. as anything but an energetic great speaker who was a communist, cheater, john and plagiarist.

An oligarchy?

yes, like that of America.

Martin Luther King Jr. as anything but an energetic great speaker who was a communist, cheater, john and plagiarist.
Not that there's any evidence whatsoever that he was a Communist, except in the minds of members of Stormfront. :rolleyes:

The "constitution in exile" judicial philosophy.
Privatizing government functions for the sake of privatizing, even when it costs more.
Limiting government involvement in health care to covering the poor, the disabled, the very sick, and the elderly - the most expensive groups - while bailing out corporations that default on promised health care benefits to employees/retirees, and also reimbursing hospitals and doctors for uncompensated care. Socialize it!

1.) The propaganda induced delusion of "Freedom" in a Democratic/Rupublic run government that stresses a mantra of "Freewill" and "Freedom of Choice" that only applies if the Government dictates that that "Choice" is an acceptable one. i.e. - Smoking Pot is illegal because the Government says so. Not wearing seatbelts is illegal in some states but not others.

I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. Take having sex with animals. It's illegal in 30 states. Are the other states sickies or have they never had one reported case where somebody commited bestiality? You don't create laws if it doesn't happened ie All children should wear a spacesuit on entering a vacuumed environment.

Or Montana's no limit speeding. It's 50-75 miles between cities. Most of the rural areas are ranchland and the highways are straight as piss (through ranchland). You will rarely see other cars on the highway. Let them drive as fast as they want to go, if they don't have a problem with it. I've drove through King Ranch here in Texas. 100 miles straight as piss driving 70 mph. BOR-RING! Almost fell asleep 4 times. They should let you drive 100mph to get you off that section of highway. If in 5 years, if nasty accidents have skyrocketed then cut it down to 70-80mph. Should Montana's law be the same as dense New Jersey's? No.

Maybe with the seatbelt laws, those states that don't enforce doesn't have a high collision rate.

They should let you drive 100mph to get you off that section of highway. If in 5 years, if nasty accidents have skyrocketed then cut it down to 70-80mph.
Hey mang, speed limits are also about fuel efficiency.

1. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

2. The belief that Government produces anything

3. Calling taxes revenue and tax cuts spending

2. The belief that Government produces anything

governments provide goods and services in an economic system. (different depending on which)

Quote:
Martin Luther King Jr. as anything but an energetic great speaker who was a communist, cheater, john and plagiarist.

Not that there's any evidence whatsoever that he was a Communist, except in the minds of members of Stormfront. :rolleyes:

As if being a cheater, john and plagarist wasn't enough, he was at the very least of strong supporter of communism (which in practical terms means he was a communist)

See here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/epstein9.html

The fact one member of his ministry was a reputed Communist does not mean he was a "supporter of Communism."

He denounced the Marxist belief system every chance he got & there's no evidence he ever supported it.

I would hope that the FBI would come out and say something that I think is much more significant and that is that is amazing that so few *****es have turned to Communism in the light of their desperate plight. I think it is one of the amazing developments of the 20th century. How loyal the ***** has remained to America in spite of his long night of oppression and discrimination.

Communism is based on an ethical relativism, a metaphysical materialism, a denial of human freedom, and a crippling totalitarianism that I could never accept.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/mlk/filmmore/pt.html

This isn't a thread for a "historical discussion" about MLK or other forms of race-baiting. Post your 3 ideas and get out.

Debate about other people's 3 seems relevant.

governments provide goods and services in an economic system.

Well, THAT ain't true...

My three are;

1-communism
2-socialism
3-the European Union

..oh, wiat. Those are all one and the same thing!

Not really my top three, but these are what I could think of off the top of my head:

- Political "moderatism" for it's own sake

- The anti political correctness movement

- Social darwinism (at least as it's been practised)


Edit: also, :w00t: Mobile Vulgus is back!

libruls x 3

Invisible hand.
Anarchy.
Manifest Destiny (and its derivatives, and not only in the US)

Edit: also, :w00t: Mobile Vulgus is back!

indeed.
WB, MV.

You guys crack me up!

1)Theocracy (talking to invisible people does not make for good government)
2)Neoconservatism (democracy cannot be forced, welfare for the rich does not help the poor)
3)Stalinism (economic, social and political insanity)

You guys know that unjust doesn't mean ridiculous right?

Like a government where Stalin holds absolute power makes sense for him.
It just sucks for everyone else

You guys know that unjust doesn't mean ridiculous right?

Like a government where Stalin holds absolute power makes sense for him.
It just sucks for everyone else
pravda

Smoking Pot is illegal because the Government says so. Not wearing seatbelts is illegal in some states but not others.

Laws protecting individuals from the consequences of their own actions are ridiculous. I’ve been comparing seat belt and drug law for ages so it’s nice to see someone else seeing parallels (though not quite in the same context as mine).

Who gets hurt if one has an accident where it was decided not to wear a seat belt? Whose responsibility was it? (I have to acknowledge that with rear seat belts the situation is not quite so clear cut as you’re likely to kill the person sat in front of you in the event of an accident).

Who gets hurt if one drives oneself to psychosis by smoking pot (or destroys one’s liver with alcohol or poisons oneself to death with heroin)? Whose responsibility?

Regardless of the numbers of lives saved by seatbelts – or the proclaimed lives saved by the prohibition of drugs, it’s not the legitimate role of government to prohibit such behaviour.

2. Libertarianism.

I’m intrigued. Being brought up in the UK where libertarianism is minute I’ve never come across someone who knows about it and dismisses it, let alone counts it as one of the most ridiculous ideas in politics. Would you care to elaborate?

1 - The term "neo-conservative". They are neither “neo” (Trotskyites have been around for 100 years) nor conservative (admitted Troskyites)
2 – Equality
3 – Martin Luther King Jr. as anything but an energetic great speaker who was a communist, cheater, john and plagiarist.

Good list. I'd say the most mistaken idea since the Enlightenment has been that human difference can be made not to matter. The notion of "racial equality" may end up causing more misery and bloodshed than communism. Pure insanity, fully supported by the system.