An Essay to Liberals

[mamooth]

The rant author couldn't address what liberals actual say, so he rants about what the voices told him the dirty liberals really believe.

Butthurt conservatives are a dime a dozen. If he wants to deny reality with all his heart and soul, and thus keep losing elections for his side, we're happy to let him keep it up. So please, make all the Grandpa Simpson rants you want.

 

[Darkwind]

Perhaps Conservatives have conveniently skipped over the reports which state that 95% of the money made in the economic recovery has gone to the richest 1%.

Would Conservatives please explain how 95% of all of our money being hoarded by 1% of the population is good for a free society? 95% of our money is being kept by 1% of the population.

Please explain how this promotes freedom for the remaining 99% of the American people.

Come back when you get a clue about money and wealth.

Here is a hint. It is not finite and you are not entitled to the wealth of others.

Have a nice day.

 

[Darkwind]

Is there any point in your trolling? Or do liberals not possess the ability to read for extended periods of time?

It was a rambling, self absorbed, mess. I started to read and then got tired of wondering what his point actually was. It isn't that people can't read for extended periods, it's the interest factor and whether or not it's there.

You are not interested in hearing any voice but those that reside in your head, so you lost interest and stopped reading. It is not because its a self absorbed mess. It is because it interferes with your own self-absorption.

 

[Darkwind]

Well, if you people don't want my input, how do you expect to get better?

Whew, you can lead a horse to water ...

Yeah, and you're the horse. Frankly, if we had your input on anything life or death, you'd lead us all off a cliff. So keep your idiotic statements to yourself, Sarah.

I'm here to post, if you don't like it just go get some sleep or something. You have to know by now that nobody ever listens to your dopey demands.

You are free to post. We just wish you'd put some intelligence behind the effort.

 

[Sarah G]

Yeah, and you're the horse. Frankly, if we had your input on anything life or death, you'd lead us all off a cliff. So keep your idiotic statements to yourself, Sarah.

I'm here to post, if you don't like it just go get some sleep or something. You have to know by now that nobody ever listens to your dopey demands.

You are free to post. We just wish you'd put some intelligence behind the effort.

Who's we? You and those voices in your head?

 

[Wolfsister77]

The OP is BS. In the third paragraph he immediately started with the labeling and blanket statements telling us what Liberals are and what they believe.

Pretty much dooming the rest of his essay from the start.

 

[jknowgood]

Well, if you people don't want my input, how do you expect to get better?

Whew, you can lead a horse to water ...

This isn't the mrs obama thread. Troll on.

 

[Sarah G]

The OP is BS. In the third paragraph he immediately started with the labeling and blanket statements telling us what Liberals are and what they believe.

Pretty much dooming the rest of his essay from the start.

I tried but it really seemed like a lecture from someone who had been drinking, angry or someone who is exhausted. I couldn't find any reason to continue reading. I give people a chance but some of these guys just don't have any hesitation calling things as they see them. Why do we have to hesitate?

 

[Wolfsister77]

Yep, I agree. I think it was not meant to talk to Liberals about anything. Just to preach at them and I'm like............no thanks. Let me know when you want to have a conversation.

 

[FA_Q2]

It is of worthy note that we are four pages in and not a single liberal has addressed a single point or managed to post anything other than ad homonyms.

The ass-hattery in this thread is rather pathetic.

 

[Darkwind]

I'm here to post, if you don't like it just go get some sleep or something. You have to know by now that nobody ever listens to your dopey demands.

You are free to post. We just wish you'd put some intelligence behind the effort.

Who's we? You and those voices in your head?

Are you incapable of following a discussion line?

 

[Rebelitarian]

This essay is a bit of departure from my usually reasonable and logical approach to important issues. That’s not to say that the essay isn’t well-reasoned and is bereft of logical argumentation, but I freely admit that it’s polemical, in nature. Sometimes you’re just pissed, and you need to vent. Here’s my vent…

Lately, I must admit that my hostility towards your political ilk has ramped up, pretty dramatically. No, it’s not because we, at this point in my life, have a half-black president in the White House, and I’m some closet racist who is becoming increasingly frustrated at the prospects of the White Man’s power slipping through my fingers. I know that you’ve accused our side of such nonsense, and the thought keeps you warm at night, but I can assure you that it is a comfortable fiction of which you should probably divest yourself.

Now before I waste too much of your time, let’s establish who I’m talking to. If you believe that we live in an evil, imperialist nation from its founding, and you believe that it should be “fundamentally transformed”, lend me your ears. If you believe that the free market is the source of the vast majority of society’s ills and wish to have more government intervention into it, I’m talking to you. If you believe that health care is a basic human right and that government should provide it to everyone, you’re the guy I’m screaming at. If you think minorities cannot possibly survive in this inherently racist country without handouts and government mandated diversity quotas, you’re my guy. If you believe that rich people are that way because they’ve exploited their workers and acquired wealth on the backs of the poor, keep reading. Pretty much, if you trust government more than your fellow American, this post is for you.

First of all, let me say that we probably agree on more things than you think. Even between Tea Party Patriots and Occupy Wall-Streeters, I’ve observed a common hatred of the insidious alliance between big business and big government. As Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) so correctly noted, government should never be in the business of picking winners and losers in corporate America, and no person, organization, union, or corporation should have their own key to the back door of our government.

Second, contrary to popular belief, conservatives really are concerned with the plight of the poor in this nation. You accuse us of being uncompassionate, hateful, racist, and greedy, but studies have shown that when it comes to charitable giving, conservatives are at least (if not more, depending on the study you read) as generous as liberals in caring for the poor. The difference between us is not in our attitude towards the problem — it’s our attitude towards the solution. We believe that the government does practically nothing well (since without competition or a profit motive there is no incentive to do well) and has made the plight of the poor far worse than it would have ever been had government never gotten involved. For a stark example of this, look no farther than the condition of the black family in America since the “War on Poverty” began. You believe that more government is the answer, and that if we only throw more money at the problem, the problem will go away. We believe, as Reagan so aptly stated,

Government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.

If government didn't pawn off the creation of money to the Federal-Reserve and actually ran the banking system itself and not let a private entity do it, then many of our welfare problems would be as bad as they are.

Third, as people who might actually have to avail ourselves of a doctor’s services at some point in our lives, we are just as concerned with the condition of America’s healthcare system as you are. While we believe that America has the world’s most capable physicians, has the world’s most innovative pharmaceutical industry, and is on the cutting edge of medical technology, we also understand that the delivery system is far from perfect. However, unlike you, we see a grave danger in turning the administration of that delivery system over to the same entity that is responsible for giving us the United States Postal Service. There are private sector solutions that should certainly be explored before we kill the system, altogether, by giving it to the government to run.

Now that we’ve touched on a couple of points of common ground, allow me to explain my aggressiveness towards your efforts to implement your progressive agenda. First, let’s talk about the word “progressive”, since you now seem to prefer that word to “liberal”. In order to label something as progressive or regressive, one must have some idea as to what constitutes progress. What is the ideal towards which you are striving? An idea is considered progressive if it moves us closer to the ideal and regressive if it moves us further away. So, what is your ideal society?

Debt free money like Guernsey and a space-based economy a la Star Trek.

Though I can’t begin to discern the thoughts of every liberal who may read this, nor can I assume that every liberal has the same notion of an ideal society, in my arguments with liberals over the years, I couldn’t help but notice the influence that FDR’s Second Bill of Rights has had in shaping the beliefs of the modern liberal with regards to domestic policy. The rights that FDR cited are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
At this point, you’re probably screaming, “Right on!!”, and who can blame you? What sane person in the world doesn’t want everyone to be gainfully employed, adequately fed, smartly clothed, appropriately sheltered, and properly educated? These are the goals of every moral society on the planet, however we cannot ignore the fundamental question of, “At what cost?”

The Nordic countries handle this quite well and don't nearly have as full prisons and high unemployment like America does. Iceland went after its bankers and is in economic recovery. The other Nordic issue debt free money for education and their economies are thriving cuz of it. Of course listening to Con-tarded media this all reeks of socialism and needs to be avoided like Communism.

I’m not sure whether FDR was a shallow thinker or simply a shrewd, Machiavellian politician, but the fact that he framed each of these ideals as a human right should be troubling to every freedom-loving person in America. After all, what does it mean for something to be a human right? Doesn’t it mean that it’s something to which you are entitled simply by virtue of your being human? Let’s think about some of the basic rights that the real Bill of Rights delineates: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to petition the government, freedom to bear arms, freedom from illegal search and seizure, etc.

If you’re moderately intelligent and intellectually honest, you’ll quickly see what separates the rights laid out in the real Bill of Rights from those laid out in FDR’s misguided list — none of the rights listed above require the time, treasure, or talents of another human being. Your right to speak requires nothing from anyone else. Your right to practice your religion requires nothing from any of your fellow citizens. Your right to bear arms means that you are allowed to possess weapons to defend yourself and your family, but it makes no demand that a weapon be provided to you by anyone. A true human right is one that you possess, even if you’re the only person on the entire planet — and it is unconditional.

FDR’s list is no “Bill of Rights”. It’s a list of demands. If I have a right to a job, doesn’t that mean that one must be provided to me? If I have a right to adequate food, clothing, and recreation, doesn’t that mean that I am entitled to those things, and someone should provide them to me? If I have an inherent right to a decent home, once again, doesn’t that mean it should be provided to me, regardless of my ability to afford one or build one for myself?

You might protest that FDR only meant that we have the right to pursue those things, but that’s not what he said, and why would he? If we live in a free society, our right to pursue those things is self-evident, is it not? Besides, if he only believed in our right to pursue those things, he would not have felt the need to implement the New Deal.

You may be getting anxious, now, wondering what FDR’s Second Bill of Rights has to do with my antipathy towards your political philosophy. It’s quite simple — your political beliefs are a threat to liberty — not just for me, but for my three boys and their children as well. I care much less about the America that I’m living in at this very moment than I do about the one that I’m leaving Nathaniel, Charlie, and Jackson.

How does your political bent threaten my and my sons personal liberty, you ask? In your irrational attempt to classify things such as clothing, shelter, health care, employment, and income as basic human rights, you are placing a demand upon my time, my treasure, and my talents. If you believe that you have a right to health care, and you are successful in persuading enough shallow thinkers to think as you do, then it will place a demand upon me to provide it to you. If you believe that you have a right to a job, and more than half of America agrees with you, as a business owner, I am obligated to provide one to you, even if it means making my business less profitable.

The fact is, you can rail against my conservatism all you wish. You can make fun of my Tea Party gatherings, and you can ridicule patriots in tri-corner hats until you wet yourself from mirth, but one thing is for certain: my political philosophy will NEVER be a threat to your freedom. If you feel a burning responsibility to the poor, conservatism will never prevent you from working 80 hours per week and donating all of your income to charity. If you feel a strong sense of pity for a family who cannot afford health insurance, my political philosophy will never prevent you from purchasing health insurance for this family or raising money to do so, if you cannot afford it, personally. If you are moved with compassion for a family who is homeless, a conservative will never use the police power of government to prevent you from taking that family in to your own home or mobilizing your community to build one for them.

However, you cannot say the same for liberalism. If I choose not to give to the poor for whatever reason, you won’t simply try to persuade me on the merits of the idea — you will seek to use the government as an instrument of plunder to force me to give to the poor. If we are walking down the street together and we spot a homeless person, using this logic, you would not simply be content with giving him $20 from your own pocket — you would hold a gun to my head and force me to give him $20, as well.

I wouldn't force you to give him/her anything but I would remind you that you voting for 1 or both of the Bilderberg parties that allowed jobs to be outsourced and companies offshored put him/her in that situation. Had Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution party been elected America would be recovering just like Iceland is now and the homeless person would be able to find a job in a Constitution Party recovery. Since you mindlessly voted for one of the 2 Bilderberg clowns you in fact are indirectly responsible for his homelessness.

Everything that modern liberalism accomplishes is accomplished at the barrel of a government rifle. You do not trust in the generosity of the American people to provide, through private charity, things such as clothing, food, shelter, and health care, so you empower the government to take from them and spend the money on wasteful, inefficient, and inadequate government entitlement programs. You do not trust in the personal responsibility of the average American to wield firearms in defense of themselves and their families, so you seek to empower the government to criminalize the use and possession of firearms by private citizens. Everytime you empower the government, you lose more of your personal liberty — it’s an axiomatic truth.

Liberals, as well as liberal-libertarians realize the lessons of history and realize that much like a game needs referees, a nations needs governmental regulators. If capitalism isn't regulated America would turn itself into a kleptocratic nation like China who is polluting its people into sickness and/or like Mexico where the rich live well in compounds and the rest of the nation lives in squalor. FDR and progressives realize that a mixed-economy approach is the best and that 100% socialism or 100% capitalism will ultimately destroy a nation.

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the Government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs."
-Thomas Jefferson, (1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
-Thomas Jefferson

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."
-Mayer Amschel Rothschild

"In the United States today we have in effect two governments ... We have the duly constituted Government ... Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers which are reserved to Congress by the Constitution."
-Congressman Wright Patman

Of course you'll never hear con-tard radio address any of this cuz for all their rants against socialism they are too busy getting $200-$400 million payouts from the FED to maintain the phony left-right paradyme.

Con-tards automatically think liberal means anti-capitalism. Some liberals are socialist, and for that I apologize for the confusion. As a liberal-libertarian I want enough social safeguards in place so a family doesn't have to starve from lack of food-stamps cuz the bankers give themselves bonuses after getting bailed out by the public. Right now 81.5% of the QE money is just sitting in the banks while 110 million are unemployed.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/81-5-of...ring-dust-instead-of-helping-the-economy.html

Con-tards will blame the unemployed for being that way but what about calling out the irresponsibility of the bankers ?

There are 13 million patents sitting in the US Patent Office right now. With 110 million unemployed, if each inventor was to use part of the $22 Trillion still sitting in the banks. The inventor (boss) could hire 8-9 workers to produce each invention and pull America out of this banker induced Depression. In fact if all inventions were being produced America would be having labor shortages right now.

Instead....

U.S. is robbing tech innovation programs to pay off debt to foreign creditors: Quinlan
22 October 2013, by Wallace Witkowski (MarketWatch)
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetel...to-pay-off-debt-to-foreign-creditors-quinlan/



What angers me the most about you is the eagerness with which you allow the incremental enslavement to occur. You are the cliched and proverbial frog in the pot who has actually convinced himself that he’s discovered a big, silver jacuzzi. Somehow, you’re naive enough to believe that one more degree of heat won’t really matter that much.

I have the utmost respect for a slave who is continuously seeking a path to freedom. What I cannot stomach is a free man who is continuous seeking a path to servitude by willingly trading his freedom for the false sense of security that government will provide.

I am reminded of Samuel Adams’ impassioned speech where he stated:

“If ye love wealth (or security) better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”

Servitude can exist in a free society, but freedom cannot exist in a slave nation. In a free country, you have the liberty to join with others of your political ilk and realize whatever collectivist ideals you can dream up. You can start your own little commune where the sign at the front gate says, “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need”, and everyone can work for the mutual benefit of everyone else. In my society, you have the freedom to do that.

In your society, I don’t have the same freedom. If your collectivism offends me, I am not free to start my own free society within its borders. In order for collectivism to work, everyone must be on board, even those who oppose it — why do you think there was a Berlin Wall?

In conclusion, just know that the harder you push to enact your agenda, the more hostile I will become — the harder I will fight you. It’s nothing personal, necessarily. If you want to become a slave to an all-powerful central government, be my guest. But if you are planning to take me and my family down with you, as we say down here in the South, I will stomp a mud-hole in your chest and walk it dry.

Bring it.

Let's be clear the con-tard and lib-tard winged radio sides are both funded by the FED to keep the people divided so that America will not get tuned in to the big picture.

Thanks to the internet this is no longer the case.

26 Tenets of the New World Order:

1) Men are inclined to evil rather than good.

2) Preach Liberalism.

3) Use ideals of freedom to bring about class wars.

4) Any and all means necessary should be used to reach their goals as they are justified.

5) Believe their rights lie in force.

6) The power of their resources must remain invisible until the very moment that they have gained the strength so that no group or force can undermine it.

7) Advocates a mob psychology to obtain control of the masses

8 ) Promotes the use of alcohol, drugs, moral corruption, and all forms of vice to systematically corrupt the youth of the nation.

9) Seize citizens’ private property by any means necessary.

10) The use of slogans such as equity, liberty, and fraternity are used on the masses as psychological warfare.

11) War should be directed so that the nations on both sides are placed further in debt and peace conferences are designed so that neither combatant retain territory rights.

12) Members must use their wealth to have candidates chosen to public office who would be obedient to their demands, and would be used as pawns in the game by the men behind the scenes. The advisors will have been bred, reared, and trained from childhood to rule the affairs of the world.

13) Control the press, and hence most of the information the public receives.

14) Agents and provocateurs will come forward after creating traumatic situations, and appear to be the saviors of the masses, when they are actually interested in just the opposite, the reduction of the population.

15) Create industrial depression and financial panic, unemployment, hunger, shortage of food, use these events to control the masses and mobs, and use them to wipe out those who stand in the way.

16) Infiltrate Freemasonry which is to be used to conceal and further objectives.

17) Expound the value of systematic deception, use high sounding slogans and phrases, advocate lavish sounding promises to the masses even though they can’t be kept.

18) The art of street fighting is necessary to bring the population into subjection.

19) Use agents as provocateurs and advisers behind the scenes, and after wars use secret diplomacy talks to gain control.

20) Establish huge monopolies towards world government control.

21) Use high taxes and unfair competition to bring about economic ruin by controlling raw materials, organized agitation among the workers, and subsidizing competitors.

22) Build up armaments with police and soldiers who can protect and further the New World Order's interests.

23) Members and leaders of the one world government will be appointed by the director of the New World Order.

24) Infiltrate into all classes and levels of society and government for the purpose of teaching the youth in the schools theories and principles known to be false.

25) Create and use national and international laws to destroy civilization.

26) Use estrogens & femicals to drive males gay and the female population insane thereby insuring the destruction of the family, hence more governmental dependency.

 

[Rebelitarian]

Endgame

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho]EndGame HQ full length version - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Rebelitarian]

Prison Planet.com » 41 Facts About The History Of Central Banks In The United States That Our Children Are No Longer Taught In School

 

[Wolfsister77]

It is of worthy note that we are four pages in and not a single liberal has addressed a single point or managed to post anything other than ad homonyms.

The ass-hattery in this thread is rather pathetic.

I agree. Starting with the OP.

 

[Rebelitarian]

Perhaps Conservatives have conveniently skipped over the reports which state that 95% of the money made in the economic recovery has gone to the richest 1%.

Would Conservatives please explain how 95% of all of our money being hoarded by 1% of the population is good for a free society? 95% of our money is being kept by 1% of the population.

Please explain how this promotes freedom for the remaining 99% of the American people.

His corporate overlords have convinced him to preach that they have earned that money fair and square. Nevermind the fact that he's getting screwed over by these same people that he worships, he's actually so brainwashed that he gets up in the middle of the night to write out rambling, nonsensical rants that place the blame for the countries woes on the greedy poor people and dumb liberals.

True story.

Good one !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[RDD_1210]

It is of worthy note that we are four pages in and not a single liberal has addressed a single point or managed to post anything other than ad homonyms.

The ass-hattery in this thread is rather pathetic.

There isn't one substantial point in his entire post. What would you like people to respond to?

 

[TemplarKormac]

The OP is BS. In the third paragraph he immediately started with the labeling and blanket statements telling us what Liberals are and what they believe.

Pretty much dooming the rest of his essay from the start.

Perhaps you would like to represent your party by refuting these claims. It's quite dishonest to call the OP BS and not attempt to set the record straight.

 

[Mr Natural]

The OP is BS. In the third paragraph he immediately started with the labeling and blanket statements telling us what Liberals are and what they believe.

Pretty much dooming the rest of his essay from the start.

Perhaps you would like to represent your party by refuting these claims. It's quite dishonest to call the OP BS and not attempt to set the record straight.

Bullshit is bullshit and doesn't require any further explanation or clarification.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

It is of worthy note that we are four pages in and not a single liberal has addressed a single point or managed to post anything other than ad homonyms.

The ass-hattery in this thread is rather pathetic.

Typical though. So whose the bigger idiots? Them or the people who continue to engage these mindless weasels?