The End of Liberalism....

[sangha]

Oh, I thought Social Security was unconstitutional because the power to create it isn't enumerated in the Constitution.

Are you now conceding that Social Security is Constitutional?

It needs to be phased out, once those who were promised it and depend on it are gone.

You didn't answer my question. Is Social Security Constitutional or not?

Revere is too scared to answer your question

 

[Revere]

It's not Constitutional. It needs to be shoved off a cliff as soon as people who were promised it are no longer in need of it.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I think it's cute how certain people act like "liberalism" is a relatively new and fleeting concept that can be killed off by "conservatism".

However? Liberalism as known today bears NO resemblence of it's creator here in America...Jefferson, but Modern Day Liberalism reflects that of Marx, Alinsky, and other Leftist Boobs.

Jefferson was no boob, but would be a Conservative in today's parlence.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...... ​

"Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor." - Thomas Jefferson

 

[sangha]

It's not Constitutional. It needs to be shoved off a cliff as soon as people who were promised it are no longer in need of it.

Thanks for helping us prove PC doesn't know what she's talking about

 

[geauxtohell]

But I figured that we'd keep a few liberals in a zoo, you know, so we could throw peanuts at 'em...


When we are dust and bones "... if we are lucky..."?????

That would be luck to you?

Hey, don't take the OP so seriously!

I suppose you missed my point.

Let me spell it out for you:

We have the luxury of sitting on our asses and arguing politics through an electronic medium in this country, because things aren't, relatively speaking, really that bad.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead.

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Speaking of cerebrums, I always love it when you whip out your big brain and act like the rest of us are moronic imbeciles.

It's a hell of a lot more interesting than your usual trick: which is to simply post someone else's OPED.

 

[Revere]

It's not Constitutional. It needs to be shoved off a cliff as soon as people who were promised it are no longer in need of it.

Thanks for helping us prove PC doesn't know what she's talking about

Whatever.

 

[geauxtohell]

Today's Liberals are not Socialists/Progressives and today's Socialists/Progressives are not Liberals. Most people still think they're the same thing but they're not. Socialists/Progressives do not care about individual Freedom & Liberty. It's all about the State for them. A true Liberal would not subscribe to that philosophy. Liberalism is alive,and that's not a bad thing. Libertarians and real Conservatives are who will save the Republican Party in the end. There is no hope for the Democratic Party though. Their Socialists/Progressives have plunged them into Goose Stepping madness.

Libocalypse is skipping again.

Someone put down their beer, walk over to the corner, and smack him in the head.

Hopefully that will fix it.

 

[sangha]

I suppose you missed my point.

Let me spell it out for you:

We have the luxury of sitting on our asses and arguing politics through an electronic medium in this country, because things aren't, relatively speaking, really that bad.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead.

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Speaking of cerebrums, I always love it when you whip out your big brain and act like the rest of us are moronic imbeciles.

It's a hell of a lot more interesting than your usual trick: which is to simply post someone else's OPED.

Want to hear something even funnier

PC thinks that the "we" in "we, as a nation" means "You and I" as in "You and I, as a nation"

 

[geauxtohell]

I suppose you missed my point.

Let me spell it out for you:

We have the luxury of sitting on our asses and arguing politics through an electronic medium in this country, because things aren't, relatively speaking, really that bad.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead.

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Umm, "we" does not mean "you and I" in that sentence.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead

In wingnut nation "we, as a nation" means "you and I"

She over-thunk herself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I suppose you missed my point.

Let me spell it out for you:

We have the luxury of sitting on our asses and arguing politics through an electronic medium in this country, because things aren't, relatively speaking, really that bad.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead.

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Speaking of cerebrums, I always love it when you whip out your big brain and act like the rest of us are moronic imbeciles.

It's a hell of a lot more interesting than your usual trick: which is to simply post someone else's OPED.

"...act like the rest of us are moronic imbeciles. "

See, now it's your comprehension problem: it's not 'the rest of us," it's just you.

 

[sangha]

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Umm, "we" does not mean "you and I" in that sentence.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead

In wingnut nation "we, as a nation" means "you and I"

She over-thunk herself.

It seems that you and I, as a nation are in agreement!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's not Constitutional. It needs to be shoved off a cliff as soon as people who were promised it are no longer in need of it.

Actually it was ruled constitutional in the 1930's, so what you know in the category of 'what I'm talking about' is a big fat zero.

lolol

 

[Revere]

It's not Constitutional. It needs to be shoved off a cliff as soon as people who were promised it are no longer in need of it.

Actually it was ruled constitutional in the 1930's, so what you know in the category of 'what I'm talking about' is a big fat zero.

lolol

After FDR stacked the court.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Little boy says to his dad one day, dad,

I want to grow up and be a rightwinger!

Dad replies,

Son, you can't do both.

 

[Revere]

Shame there is more money for all your nonsense.

 

[code1211]

1. )[/[/U]quote]


I think it would be more realistic to say that America is SOCIALLY liberal but FISCALLY and MILITARILY conservative...

liberalism is no more dead today than conservatism was 2 years ago when conservative republicans were swept out of office

If we had had Conservatives in the Congress when the Authorization of Force was voted upon, we would not be hip deep in two wars.

We would not have run up deficits beyond any recognition of rationality.

We would have balanced the budget and assured the future of the Republic.

Our economy would be the envy of the world.

Other countries would fear the threat of US Military attack.

We would have the option to make choices in almost all endeavors we faced.

But, because we have been governed by Liberals since about 1999, none of these things are true. Our country teeters on the brink of bankruptcy, our military is overstretched, our budget is wrecked, the economy is in the dumper and we have a Marxist in the White House. We're pretty much screwed.

The Liberal spending policies of Bush and Bush on steroids, the Big 0, have brought us to this dilemma.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Umm, "we" does not mean "you and I" in that sentence.

If we, as a nation, are lucky; we will continue to be in that position for many years to come. Long after you and I are dead

In wingnut nation "we, as a nation" means "you and I"

She over-thunk herself.

Now look who you're reduced to playing with: talk about the blind leading the blind!

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's not Constitutional. It needs to be shoved off a cliff as soon as people who were promised it are no longer in need of it.

Actually it was ruled constitutional in the 1930's, so what you know in the category of 'what I'm talking about' is a big fat zero.

lolol

After FDR stacked the court.

Oh, yes, rightwing victimology. waa waa.

It's constitutional and you can't find enough Americans to want to get rid of it. This is just one more rightwing extremist crackpot dream that they fantasize about when they're pretending they're in the mainstream.

 

[geauxtohell]

I didn't miss a point you made, you simply made a mistake in syntax...you do know what syntax is, don't you?

You see, when you arranged the post in this manner:

"...when you and I are dust and bones.

That is, if we are lucky."

then the "we" refers to the "you and I."

And the proof that you were in error, if I needed to provide further proof, is the agreement from Sans-Cerebrum.

Now, see, you've learned something today!

Speaking of cerebrums, I always love it when you whip out your big brain and act like the rest of us are moronic imbeciles.

It's a hell of a lot more interesting than your usual trick: which is to simply post someone else's OPED.

"...act like the rest of us are moronic imbeciles. "

See, now it's your comprehension problem: it's not 'the rest of us," it's just you.

And Sangha, right?

And then anyone else who happens to disagree with you.

Unless you want to pretend that I am the only person on here you like to play the "I am oh-so-smarter than you" game with.

 

[sangha]

Umm, "we" does not mean "you and I" in that sentence.



In wingnut nation "we, as a nation" means "you and I"

She over-thunk herself.

Now look who you're reduced to playing with: talk about the blind leading the blind!

She still believes that "we, as a nation" means "you and I, as a nation"

The low self-esteem of wingnuts prevents them from admitting they are wrong