I'm looking forward to the times when our royal household will be
declared useless.

The president alternative doesn't seem all that appealing nowadays. We have a rather scary example across the pond...



..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

I'm looking forward to the times when our royal household will be
declared useless.

The president alternative doesn't seem all that appealing nowadays. We
have a rather scary example across the pond...

That is an undisputable fact.

The person in that office overthere is granted too much power and can rule by decree in a political system which is not geared to change that.

There is a word for that.

When one thinks about it then the parallels between that country and North Korea are striking, they also have a supreme leader who rules without being challenged.

But a monarchy? Our royals are related to a person who ranks very high on the hitparade of greatest massmurderers ever and they now still bask in the wealth reaped from the backs of 12 million or more murdered black people ...

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 4
* Origin: If you build it he will come (2:292/854)

But a monarchy? Our royals are related to a person who ranks very high
on the hitparade of greatest massmurderers ever and they now still bask
in the wealth reaped from the backs of 12 million or more murdered black people ...

LOL! Point taken. The Swedish royalty have been rather civil since we got one of Napoleons generals as king 200 years ago.

And, of course monarchy is a blast from the past. But, just as democracy is the worst form of Government except for all the others, so is monarchy IMHO. If for nothing else, the royal families keep megalomaniac presidents away. That alone is worth the extra millions in tax money.



..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Bj”rn,

I'm looking forward to the times when our royal household will be
declared useless.

The president alternative doesn't seem all that appealing nowadays. We have
a rather scary example across the pond...

The vice president's closest aide.
The president's valet.
The president's daughter's very best friend forever.
How many other White House staffers unknown.
None of them wearing a mask.
All testing positive for coronavirus.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden showed the world he has a mask.
And is still hiding in the basement, waiting until it
is safe to come out and play.

--Lee

--
We Make Your Wet Dreams Come True

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Ward,

I'm looking forward to the times when our royal household will be
declared useless.

The president alternative doesn't seem all that appealing nowadays. BF>We

have a rather scary example across the pond...

That is an undisputable fact.

Well, it is true his hair is quite a mess. Not that it is real hair.

The person in that office overthere is granted too much power and can rule by decree in a political system which is not geared to change that.

The presidency (in the US) is a very weak office. Had you bothered
to read the US Constitution, you would have known that.

There is a word for that.

Are you calling Donald J. Trump a weakling?

When one thinks about it then the parallels between that country and North Korea are striking, they also have a supreme leader who rules without being
challenged.

The US Constitution only specifies the creation of the Supreme
Court, leaving the creation (and dissolution) of other federal courts
to Congress' discretion.

We all know what happened the last time the Congress challenged
Donald J. Trump. The Senate held a trial, without calling witnesses,
and declared Trump a saint (or something to that effect).

But a monarchy? Our royals are related to a person who ranks very high on the hitparade of greatest massmurderers ever and they now still bask in the
wealth reaped from the backs of 12 million or more murdered black people ...

Up until Abraham Lincoln, almost all our presidents owned black
people as property. These are the people who made America great.

--Lee

--
If it doesn't get all over the place, it doesn't belong in your face.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

On 11/05/2020 05:18, 2203/2 wrote:

Up until Abraham Lincoln, almost all our presidents owned black
people as property.

I was under the impression that he had owned (black) slaves as well.

--
Regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68
* Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)

The presidency (in the US) is a very weak office. Had you bothered
to read the US Constitution, you would have known that.

It usually surprised the friends I encountered in the US when I was working there, that I, an ignorant Swede, actually *had* not only read it, but even understood it.

I usually started with asking them if they them selves knew what the first ten amendments are called. You'd be surprised to know how few knew the correct answer.

And, of course, after all those TV-shows from the WH we all know that the POTUS hasn't even read your constitution. There's even audio recordings where he admits that it's written in a language that he doesn't understand.

Don't you have any tests at all that a POTUS candidate has to pass? At least in par with the test you have to take to become a US citizen.

But I must admit I miss the daily WH press "conferences" now that Joe Orange obviously has been grounded(?) when not even the most fanatical and corrupt GOP:ers can defend his latest stupidities and blatant lies.

Or has he finally understood that the virus can invade even the WH unless you carefully follow the recommendations from the experts. Not a good idea to fire all of the experts who questioned your genius, in order to create a corps of yeah-sayers was it...?


..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

I was under the impression that he had owned (black) slaves as well.

Where did you get that impression? I was under the impression that even his parents were strongly against slavery.


..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello David,

Up until Abraham Lincoln, almost all our presidents owned black
people as property.

I was under the impression that he had owned (black) slaves as well.

Honest "Babe" Lincoln was not the kind of person everybody thinks.
Even though she was, by all accounts, the finest wrestler in all the
land, having lost only one match in her entire career.

Lincoln was an abolitionist for twenty years before becoming
president. Her twin brother died in childbirth, and she paid him
homage by duping the entire world into believing she was a man.
As well as managing to legally marry another woman, and live as
a couple in the White House. Even got folks to falsely believe
she ended slavery in the US. Anyway, all that is beside the point,
as only men could own slaves. Which is why she was so jealous of
John Wilkes Booth, who owned an entire stable, and when she got
a look at them at Ford's theater we all know what happened next.

--Lee

--
More Doctors Smoke Camels than Any Other Cigarette

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

On 12/05/2020 02:11, 2203/2 wrote:
 DD>> I was under the impression that he had owned (black) slaves as well.

   Where did you get that impression?

I don't know. That is the thing with impressions, the buggers sneak up on you.

I was under the impression that even his parents were strongly against slavery.

I do not closely follow all of the socio-political opinions of my parents. Would Abe?

https://www.history.com/news/how-many-u-s-presidents-owned-slaves

Perhaps it is Washington that I was thinking of...

--
Regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68
* Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)

Honest "Babe" Lincoln was not the kind of person everybody thinks.

The rest of this conspiracy shit of yours may very well be believed by a Trumpster group, but out here we are a wee bit more educated.




..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Perhaps it is Washington that I was thinking of...

That may very well be it. By then (almost a century earlier) it was mostly European misfits that managed to create the not so nice society of that time.


..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello David,

Up until Abraham Lincoln, almost all our presidents owned black
people as property.

I was under the impression that he had owned (black) slaves as well.

Abraham Lincoln (not the fictional character) was an abolitionist
for twenty years prior to becoming president. Contrary to popular
opinion, he did not free the slaves during his tenure. It was only
after his death, with passage and ratification of the 13th Amendment
that slavery and involuntary servitude came to an end. Even then,
slavery did continue to exist in other forms, such as in prisons (as
allowed in the 13th Amendment), and indentured servants (until the
time of FDR, who banned the practice).

I never looked into what Lincoln's parents views were, except to
note that his twin brother died in childbirth. What influenced his
views on slavery may have been due to his parents beliefs, perhaps
not. What was most important to him during his tenure as president
was not the issue of slavery, but rather of keeping the country
together.

--Lee

--
Probably the best beer in the world

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Bj”rn,

Perhaps it is Washington that I was thinking of...

That may very well be it.

George Washington had the teeth of his slaves for dentures.
Probably also some other teeth from other sources. But being
a wealthy man, he could afford a natural set ...

By then (almost a century earlier) it was mostly European misfits that managed to create the not so nice society of that time.

Imposing our own standards of today on those of the past is not fair.
Imagine what others a hundred years from now will think of us.

--Lee

--
NO MASKS REQUIRED. THIS IS A NO-FEAR ZONE.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Bj”rn,

I was under the impression that he had owned (black) slaves DD>as well.

Where did you get that impression? I was under the impression that even his
parents were strongly against slavery.

Fake news! Fake news!

The entity known as Abraham Lincoln was *not* born in a log cabin!

And also never ended slavery!

In fact, the USA still practices slavery today.
In our prisons, having prisoners work for less than peanuts.
One governor of Louisiana had the brilliant idea to get prisoners
to make the gurneys used for executing other prisoners. But that
started a riot, and he had to shelve that idea. Then the state
ran out of drugs to use to execute the prisoners. So now we have
no beds or drugs to kill our prisoners with.

Been well over ten years since the last time a prisoner was
executed. And that one had volunteered to die, by rejecting all
his appeals.

Time to bring Gertrude (the state's electric chair) out of retirement
and put her to use.

--Lee

--
Travel should take you places

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Bj”rn,

Honest "Babe" Lincoln was not the kind of person everybody thinks.

The rest of this conspiracy shit of yours may very well be believed by a Trumpster group, but out here we are a wee bit more educated.

I first read about it in a supermarket tabloid.
In the days before the internet.
So it must be true.

--Lee

--
Work sets you free.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)