They say Trump has mental illness , LMAO this takes the cake

[Pogo]

There is no "classic" Liberalism. Liberalism is Liberalism, period. The fact that you or some other wag doesn't have a clue what it means, ain't the word's fault.

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite. Once you do that your words have no meaning.

Ah, yes I see what you did there.

Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of Gay Marriage and Bestiality, not to mention welfare and the popular vote.

Ummmmm nnno Sparkles. Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of power derived from the consent of the governed, rather than from the aristocracy and clergy. Because they figured out that free expression is crucial to an open democratic society and that We the People trumps They the Government. Which is in a nutshell what Liberalism is.

Very weak, arsehole, because you want to limit Liberalism in any given Thread to a specific topic.
But Liberalism doesn't work that way.
It creeps into every fiber of a society and demands that if it feels good, it is good.
And that what destroys nations.

Liberalism has nothing to do with "feelings". Perhaps you're confusing Liberalism with a really bad 1970s pop song.

Again, any given wag's inability to use the term properly, is not the term's fault. It's the user's.

I am talking about the assholes of today, not the bullshit of 200 years ago you're vainly trying to apply to today's America.
But nice try anyway.

That's just it --- you're talking about "assholes of today". Liberalism is not a person. It's a philosophy. And whether you think that philosophy is 'bullshit' or not, it did write the Constitution and found this nation, so it by definition "applies" to today's (US of) America. And yesterday's.

I understand what y'all are doing --- y'all pick up a term y'all don't understand and want to play with it like a toy. Well, Mommy says no.

 

[Indeependent]

Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of Gay Marriage and Bestiality, not to mention welfare and the popular vote.

Ummmmm nnno Sparkles. Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of power derived from the consent of the governed, rather than from the aristocracy and clergy. Because they figured out that free expression is crucial to an open democratic society and that We the People trumps They the Government. Which is in a nutshell what Liberalism is.

Very weak, arsehole, because you want to limit Liberalism in any given Thread to a specific topic.
But Liberalism doesn't work that way.
It creeps into every fiber of a society and demands that if it feels good, it is good.
And that what destroys nations.

Liberalism has nothing to do with "feelings". Perhaps you're confusing Liberalism with a really bad 1970s pop song.

Again, any given wag's inability to use the term properly, is not the term's fault. It's the user's.

I am talking about the assholes of today, not the bullshit of 200 years ago you're vainly trying to apply to today's America.
But nice try anyway.

That's just it --- you're talking about "assholes of today". Liberalism is not a person. It's a philosophy. And whether you think that philosophy is 'bullshit' or not, it did write the Constitution and found this nation, so it by definition "applies" to today's (US of) America. And yesterday's.

I understand what ý'all are doing --- y'all pick up a term y'all don't understand and want to play with it like a toy. Well, Mommy says no.

So what do you call yourself?
In today's vernacular, you're a Liberal.

 

[Pogo]

Ummmmm nnno Sparkles. Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of power derived from the consent of the governed, rather than from the aristocracy and clergy. Because they figured out that free expression is crucial to an open democratic society and that We the People trumps They the Government. Which is in a nutshell what Liberalism is.

Very weak, arsehole, because you want to limit Liberalism in any given Thread to a specific topic.
But Liberalism doesn't work that way.
It creeps into every fiber of a society and demands that if it feels good, it is good.
And that what destroys nations.

Liberalism has nothing to do with "feelings". Perhaps you're confusing Liberalism with a really bad 1970s pop song.

Again, any given wag's inability to use the term properly, is not the term's fault. It's the user's.

I am talking about the assholes of today, not the bullshit of 200 years ago you're vainly trying to apply to today's America.
But nice try anyway.

That's just it --- you're talking about "assholes of today". Liberalism is not a person. It's a philosophy. And whether you think that philosophy is 'bullshit' or not, it did write the Constitution and found this nation, so it by definition "applies" to today's (US of) America. And yesterday's.

I understand what ý'all are doing --- y'all pick up a term y'all don't understand and want to play with it like a toy. Well, Mommy says no.

So what do you call yourself?
In today's vernacular, you're a Liberal.

"Pogo". And yes, today's, yesterday's and tomorrow's.

 

[MindWars]

We need to find a cure for the mental retardation that is liberalism.

That "retardation" is what gave you this country and its Constitution, so that's informative.

No, it's not. There is no relation of modern "social justice" liberalism to classical liberalism. They are diametrically opposed.

There is no "classic" Liberalism. Liberalism is Liberalism, period. The fact that you or some other wag doesn't have a clue what it means, ain't the word's fault.

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite. Once you do that your words have no meaning.

Ah, yes I see what you did there.

Oh come on now Pogo... turn off the political and just look at how stupid he is lol, even if it was an Obama hater I'd still say the same thing .

 

[theliq]

We need to find a cure for the mental retardation that is liberalism.

That "retardation" is what gave you this country and its Constitution, so that's informative.

No, it's not. There is no relation of modern "social justice" liberalism to classical liberalism. They are diametrically opposed.

There is no "classic" Liberalism. Liberalism is Liberalism, period. The fact that you or some other wag doesn't have a clue what it means, ain't the word's fault.

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite. Once you do that your words have no meaning.

Ah, yes I see what you did there.

Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of Gay Marriage and Bestiality, not to mention welfare and the popular vote.
Do you have any other stupid comments coming down the pike?

r u TALKING ABOUT ISRAEL NOW? because you would be right,

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite.

You people do it all the time.

Once you do that your words have no meaning.

That is the standard MO employed by you people.

 

[jillian]

There is no "classic" Liberalism. Liberalism is Liberalism, period. The fact that you or some other wag doesn't have a clue what it means, ain't the word's fault.

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite. Once you do that your words have no meaning.

Ah, yes I see what you did there.

Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of Gay Marriage and Bestiality, not to mention welfare and the popular vote.
Do you have any other stupid comments coming down the pike?

who is in favor of beatiality?

do you have any other stupid comments to make?

Do you find Conservatives loving their pets to the point of wanting to marry them?
Perhaps I better start Bookmarking the insanity of Liberals.
Just because it;s not in the news since trashing Trump is currently taking up all the space doesn't mean I haven't seen tons of stories about inanimate objects being allowed to get married.
Conservatives may be cruel but Liberals are insane.

nice delusional rant. again, who supports beastiality?

I promise you I will document any and all stories I come across from now on.
Just like I did to Reasonable.

so if david Vitter likes wearing diapers and paying hookers, is that a republican thing? or is it david vitter's derangement?

well, maybe it is a GOP thing since he was voted in again after he was caught.

 

[Indeependent]

Because the Founding Fathers were in favor of Gay Marriage and Bestiality, not to mention welfare and the popular vote.
Do you have any other stupid comments coming down the pike?

who is in favor of beatiality?

do you have any other stupid comments to make?

Do you find Conservatives loving their pets to the point of wanting to marry them?
Perhaps I better start Bookmarking the insanity of Liberals.
Just because it;s not in the news since trashing Trump is currently taking up all the space doesn't mean I haven't seen tons of stories about inanimate objects being allowed to get married.
Conservatives may be cruel but Liberals are insane.

nice delusional rant. again, who supports beastiality?

I promise you I will document any and all stories I come across from now on.
Just like I did to Reasonable.

so if david Vitter likes wearing diapers and paying hookers, is that a republican thing? or is it david vitter's derangement?

well, maybe it is a GOP thing since he was voted in again after he was caught.

Both Parties are comprised of sickos.
Politics does not attract anyone on the normal spectrum.
Not Trump, not Obama, not anyone.

 

[Pogo]

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite.

You people do it all the time.

Once you do that your words have no meaning.

That is the standard MO employed by you people.

Not sure when your school is going to get around to "numbers" but when they do, plug this in --- I am a singular. One. Unique. I am sui generis, an enigma wrapped in a mystery surrounded by a thin thin sixteen millimeter shell of unknowableness. There is no "me people". You can't do that. Once again, 'singular' and "plural" are two different things.

Again -- your inability to handle simple words is not the word's problem.

Maybe there oughta be like a driver's license for this.

 

[Pogo]

We need to find a cure for the mental retardation that is liberalism.

That "retardation" is what gave you this country and its Constitution, so that's informative.

No, it's not. There is no relation of modern "social justice" liberalism to classical liberalism. They are diametrically opposed.

There is no "classic" Liberalism. Liberalism is Liberalism, period. The fact that you or some other wag doesn't have a clue what it means, ain't the word's fault.

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite. Once you do that your words have no meaning.

Ah, yes I see what you did there.

Oh come on now Pogo... turn off the political and just look at how stupid he is lol, even if it was an Obama hater I'd still say the same thing .

Oh hell I didn't actually watch the video. Didn't need to -- I jumped on post two.

And Composition Fallacies aren't valid anyway so I don't waste my time.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You cannot use the same term to mean its own opposite.

You people do it all the time.

Once you do that your words have no meaning.

That is the standard MO employed by you people.

There is no "me people".

That's what you people think.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

- I am a singular. One. Unique. .

So, when do you plan on embarking on this new phase of your life?

You do realize that the hive mind is going to be pissed, don't you?

 

[Pogo]

- I am a singular. One. Unique. .

So, when do you plan on embarking on this new phase of your life?

You do realize that the hive mind is going to be pissed, don't you?

I've been anti-hive as long as I've been alive.