Dear Liberals: I Want a Divorce!

[ConservaDerrps]

Looks like a budding romance! Congrats on finding one another guys!

Why don't you give Foxfire some hate lessons, he/she seems to think conservatism can be nice and civilized, set them straight will you?

It isn't hate. I just realize that while you can educate a semi-intelligent person, you just can't fix stoopid. You have blinders on and won't listen to facts, reason or logic. Therefore, I have given up on wasting time on you other than to make fun of you and your new found friend. You're a troll incapable of understanding the simple concept of this thread. In short, you took something fun seriously and got offended. Tough shitsky for you.

Oh, I get it. You have nothing to counter with, so you decide to just assume we're all stupid. Gotcha, right on. Okay, well, see you later I guess.

LOL @ Someone who's part of a movement that doesn't value education calling anyone else stupid. LOLZIKIN SKYWALKER

 

[kwc57]

HA HA HA!! LoneLaughter seriously made me crack the **** up. Which is better than Cecille "I think I'm Betty Page" and kw57's avatars have ever done. And K-dub, just as an Fizzle-Yizzle-Izzle, I'm straight as an arrow, but you don't have to be gay, straight or bi to know a SHITTTTTYYYY avatar when you see one.

True. For instance, I bet you thought this was clever.......when it wasn't.

View attachment 19488

 

[kwc57]

No room for gays in conservative land either, not live ones anyway.

There will be room for anybody who wishes to live in a country with Conservative laws, policy, and values. Such things as race, sexual orientation,and other issues liberals use to divide people will be of no more influence or importance than eye color or freckles.

That’s strange because it was conservatives who fought to keep segregation in place, it was conservatives who fought to keep discrimination in place, and it was conservatives who fought to keep miscegenation laws in place. That conservative tradition of hate is alive and well today as conservatives fight to deny same-sex couples equal access to the law.

I bet you learned that in a government school with union teachers didn't you?

 

[kwc57]

Yikes! No need to be so crude, dude, we are supposed to be the adults in this room full of toddler brains.

You stay in your saddle, I'll stay in mine, cowboy.

No skin off my nose if you want to play the stereotype, enjoy your stay.

Pot, kettle, black.

 

[MuadDib]

Looks like a budding romance! Congrats on finding one another guys!

Why don't you give Foxfire some hate lessons, he/she seems to think conservatism can be nice and civilized, set them straight will you?

It isn't hate. I just realize that while you can educate a semi-intelligent person, you just can't fix stoopid. You have blinders on and won't listen to facts, reason or logic. Therefore, I have given up on wasting time on you other than to make fun of you and your new found friend. You're a troll incapable of understanding the simple concept of this thread. In short, you took something fun seriously and got offended. Tough shitsky for you.

You can't expect much from occupiers who think this way:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxWOy6wpRLw]Sean Hannity Takes On Occupy Wall Street Leader - YouTube[/ame]

 

[MuadDib]

If you want to take credit for the early American visionaries then you need to abandon the word conservative, conservative is the opposite of what they were.

In some ways they were model conservatives. No rights for anyone except white men. But in most ways; you're right; religious freedom was a very liberal idea back then. Again; anyone who claims to speak for the founders on the topics of today is full of shit and they should really know better. Just point at these shit-for-brains losers; chuckle, and be on your way.

The very impulse to risk their lives and possessions to change their world is alien to the conservative mind. They may like some of the things the founders accomplished but they continue to spit on the same liberal impulse to change the world for the better.

This new definition for the word "conservative" kind of irritates me, I am compulsive for clarity, they should say "right wing authoritarian" or "white nationalist" or "christian dominionist" or "plutocratic loyalist".

The very concept of getting off of your ass, working hard for a living, not being a leech off of society, and what you have, you worked hard for instead of having free stuff given to you, and being responsible for yourself and your actions is foreign to Liberals and Progressives.

 

[sugardaddy]

1 u can never have my bible. ( i will loan it to ya ya if u will read it )
2 u cant have my guns n i have many
but maybe u can tell me whis trying to take them nra nothing but a whack
o machine for the repuckes
and if u would stop looking at fox rush and the like for ur dailey LIES look at the stock market (history ) always higher under dems u guys always wont to privatise profit n socialize losses

 

[Borillar]

You know, none of my real life friends are on USMB, but I think I'll show this thread to a couple of my friends who happen to be gay AND, while not flaming liberals, aren't exactly hard core conservative either. Both are intelligent, creative, and will catch on to the concept of the exercise quickly.

I wonder which country they will choose? Conservativeland where folks with some screwy ideas about gays will be in a small minority but they will exist. . . .

. . .or. . .

A country wite LoneLaugher, Conservaderrps, and Occupied in it?

No room for gays in conservative land either, not live ones anyway.

This will make your tiny head explode.

Home - - Log Cabin Republicans -

Yeah, that does blow my mind. It's like Jews for Hitler or something. I can see how people can have a conservative world view, but why associate yourself with people that think you are a disgusting pervert and compare your relationships with bestiality, pedophilia, or worse.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

In some ways they were model conservatives. No rights for anyone except white men. But in most ways; you're right; religious freedom was a very liberal idea back then. Again; anyone who claims to speak for the founders on the topics of today is full of shit and they should really know better. Just point at these shit-for-brains losers; chuckle, and be on your way.

The very impulse to risk their lives and possessions to change their world is alien to the conservative mind. They may like some of the things the founders accomplished but they continue to spit on the same liberal impulse to change the world for the better.

This new definition for the word "conservative" kind of irritates me, I am compulsive for clarity, they should say "right wing authoritarian" or "white nationalist" or "christian dominionist" or "plutocratic loyalist".

The very concept of getting off of your ass, working hard for a living, not being a leech off of society, and what you have, you worked hard for instead of having free stuff given to you, and being responsible for yourself and your actions is foreign to Liberals and Progressives.

Tell that to:

Steve Jobs
Richard Branson
Warren Buffet

 

[Borillar]

In some ways they were model conservatives. No rights for anyone except white men. But in most ways; you're right; religious freedom was a very liberal idea back then. Again; anyone who claims to speak for the founders on the topics of today is full of shit and they should really know better. Just point at these shit-for-brains losers; chuckle, and be on your way.

The very impulse to risk their lives and possessions to change their world is alien to the conservative mind. They may like some of the things the founders accomplished but they continue to spit on the same liberal impulse to change the world for the better.

This new definition for the word "conservative" kind of irritates me, I am compulsive for clarity, they should say "right wing authoritarian" or "white nationalist" or "christian dominionist" or "plutocratic loyalist".

The very concept of getting off of your ass, working hard for a living, not being a leech off of society, and what you have, you worked hard for instead of having free stuff given to you, and being responsible for yourself and your actions is foreign to Liberals and Progressives.

Yes, because everybody who has a job, goes to Church, serves in the military, supports a family, pays taxes, and works hard has to be a rightwinger. Puh-leeze!

 

[Foxfyre]

MaudDib didn't say that though did he.

One of the reasons we need the divorce is the huge disconnect in concepts, ideas, principles, and an inability to communicate.

The fact that Conservativeland won't be in the business of making people dependent on government is critical. Making people dependent on government, or allowing people to become dependent on government, or policies that however well intended lead to dependence on government is the stock in trade of liberalism.

Liberals think that is the way it should be.
Conservatives do not.

It is as simple as that.

Conservatives understand the concept.

And now we'll likely have another string of insults, straw men, red herring,and whiny complaints from the liberals.

And still the liberals won't admit that there are irreconcilable differences and the divorce is necessary in order for either of us to have the country we want.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

MaudDib didn't say that though did he.

One of the reasons we need the divorce is the huge disconnect in concepts, ideas, principles, and an inability to communicate.

The fact that Conservativeland won't be in the business of making people dependent on government is critical. Making people dependent on government, or allowing people to become dependent on government, or policies that however well intended lead to dependence on government is the stock in trade of liberalism.

Liberals think that is the way it should be.
Conservatives do not.

It is as simple as that.

Conservatives understand the concept.

And nowq we'll likely have another string of insults, straw men, red herring,and whiny complaints from the liberals.

And still the liberals won't admit that there are irreconcilable differences and the divorce is necessary in order for either of us to have the country we want.

So you get to post essentially a big "**** you" to Liberals by intimating that all we do is make people dependent on the government, and insulting OUR work ethic, and then say that we're the ones insulting you?

Jesus ******* Christ, your not just on your high horse, you're just ******* high to begin with. So delusional. So very, very delusional.

 

[Foxfyre]

MaudDib didn't say that though did he.

One of the reasons we need the divorce is the huge disconnect in concepts, ideas, principles, and an inability to communicate.

The fact that Conservativeland won't be in the business of making people dependent on government is critical. Making people dependent on government, or allowing people to become dependent on government, or policies that however well intended lead to dependence on government is the stock in trade of liberalism.

Liberals think that is the way it should be.
Conservatives do not.

It is as simple as that.

Conservatives understand the concept.

And nowq we'll likely have another string of insults, straw men, red herring,and whiny complaints from the liberals.

And still the liberals won't admit that there are irreconcilable differences and the divorce is necessary in order for either of us to have the country we want.

So you get to post essentially a big "**** you" to Liberals by intimating that all we do is make people dependent on the government, and insulting OUR work ethic, and then say that we're the ones insulting you?

Jesus ******* Christ, your not just on your high horse, you're just ******* high to begin with. So delusional. So very, very delusional.

Just stating facts as I see it. Roughly 50% of Americans are now dependent in some way on free government money. Liberals are pushing to increase that.
You, being liberal, will of course not see it the same way.

That is why we need the divorce.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Where are you getting that number from? It sounds highly trumped-up. And even if it's not, what do you think the underlying ROOT cause of that statistic is, you dope? It's called upward wealth redistribution. You as a Conservative will deny, deny, deny, but that's exactly what Reaganomics is.

Do you have access to what those numbers were in the 1950s and 60s, when probably the most "Liberal" or "Progressive" economic policies were in place? I don't, but I would guess that it's probably much, much lower. Why? Because the Middle Class didn't have to take help; and there was more than enough to go around.

That's the ******* fallacy of what you're preaching. Show me one point in our country's history when Reaganomics or Bushonomics were in place that the middle class was thriving. But I know, as a Conservative you really, truly don't give a **** about the Middle Class because you've all been programmed to believe you'll be rich one day.

 

[MuadDib]

The very impulse to risk their lives and possessions to change their world is alien to the conservative mind. They may like some of the things the founders accomplished but they continue to spit on the same liberal impulse to change the world for the better.

This new definition for the word "conservative" kind of irritates me, I am compulsive for clarity, they should say "right wing authoritarian" or "white nationalist" or "christian dominionist" or "plutocratic loyalist".

The very concept of getting off of your ass, working hard for a living, not being a leech off of society, and what you have, you worked hard for instead of having free stuff given to you, and being responsible for yourself and your actions is foreign to Liberals and Progressives.

Tell that to:

Steve Jobs
Richard Branson
Warren Buffet

Jobs, Branson, and Buffet got off of their asses, worked, took risks, and made themselves successful through innoation, hard work, and sheer determination.

 

[Swagger]

The very concept of getting off of your ass, working hard for a living, not being a leech off of society, and what you have, you worked hard for instead of having free stuff given to you, and being responsible for yourself and your actions is foreign to Liberals and Progressives.

Tell that to:

Steve Jobs
Richard Branson
Warren Buffet

Jobs, Branson, and Buffet got off of their asses, worked, took risks, and made themselves successful through innoation, hard work, and sheer determination.

Hey now, don't go shattering the illusion by stating the obvious!! I mean, there must be an inheritance in there somewhere...

 

[Foxfyre]

Where are you getting that number from? It sounds highly trumped-up. And even if it's not, what do you think the underlying ROOT cause of that statistic is, you dope? It's called upward wealth redistribution. You as a Conservative will deny, deny, deny, but that's exactly what Reaganomics is.

Do you have access to what those numbers were in the 1950s and 60s, when probably the most "Liberal" or "Progressive" economic policies were in place? I don't, but I would guess that it's probably much, much lower. Why? Because the Middle Class didn't have to take help; and there was more than enough to go around.

That's the ******* fallacy of what you're preaching. Show me one point in our country's history when Reaganomics or Bushonomics were in place that the middle class was thriving. But I know, as a Conservative you really, truly don't give a **** about the Middle Class because you've all been programmed to believe you'll be rich one day.

The tax code is not the only symptom of what ails the country. Conservatives/Classical Liberals are mostly students of history and know that you can't pluck out a few short years of history and hold them up as defnitive any more than you can pluck one verse out of the Bible and hold it up as all that JudeoChristianity is.

We can define modern American conservatism aka Classical Liberalism and embrace the principles embodied within it. Most liberals won't even admit such a thing existed, can't define it, won't look it up. You have to look at history over at least three centuries to understand Classical Liberalism/Conservatism. And you have to look at the effect of policy over the long haul to understand how modern American liberalism bears no resemblance to Classical liberalism.

In the case of modern American liberalism, you have to go all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt, where the seeds of modern liberalism were planted, and come forward to see how the snowball started small when the seeds took root under FDR and has gradually gained momentum, size, and mass until it is now mowing down everything in its path to the detriment of everybody. The nation now teeters on the brink of bankruptcy, the result of roughly 80 years of modern American liberalism, and the liberals won't or can't see it.

We don't ask that you liberals understand, appreciate, or embrace modern day American conservatism/Classical Liberalism. We understand that you think we are delusional, evil, hateful, wrong, stupid or insert the uncomplimentary adjective of your choice. You are allowed to despise us. That actually makes the divorce easier.

We aren't asking you to read, study, learn, or understand anything that doesn't fit with your indoctrination as liberals. We are allowing you all the liberal concepts, ideas, notions, and policy that you want.

We just want you to have them away from us so that we can restore our great nation to the original concepts that the Founders gave us. We want a divorce.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

The very concept of getting off of your ass, working hard for a living, not being a leech off of society, and what you have, you worked hard for instead of having free stuff given to you, and being responsible for yourself and your actions is foreign to Liberals and Progressives.

Tell that to:

Steve Jobs
Richard Branson
Warren Buffet

Jobs, Branson, and Buffet got off of their asses, worked, took risks, and made themselves successful through innoation, hard work, and sheer determination.

And they're all (Jobs WAS I should say) flaming Liberals. Totally debunking the ******* stupid, hyperbolic rhetoric that Liberals don't work hard. Thanks for playing, Shitnose.

 

[Foxfyre]

CD won't like my source re the Dependency Index but the Heritage Foundation will no doubt go with us anyway. He is welcome to dispute their figures with any source of his choice. The Heritage Foundation just does a good job of pulling information together, but their numbers are verifiable from numerous other sources. (And no, I am not going to do anybody's homework to go get those either.)

 The (Dependence on Government index) increase from last year means that the Index has grown by 49 percent just since 2001;
 The Index begins in 1962 and has increased by more than 14 times over the intervening 47 years through 2009;
 This rapid growth of the Index has been accompanied by a rapid increase in the percentage of people who do not pay taxes. The percentage of people who do not pay federal income taxes themselves, and who are not claimed as dependents by someone who pays federal income taxes, jumped from 14.8 percent in 1984 to 43.6 percent in 2008. Counted this way, in 1984, 34.8 million tax filers paid no taxes; in 2008, 132.5 million paid nothing.[1] . . . .

. . . .U.S. government spending and debt are now worrying the International Monetary Fund (IMF). On May 14, 2010, the IMF ranked the U.S. in second place among countries that must reduce their structural deficit (caused in part by spending on dependence-creating programs) or risk financial calamity. The IMF predicts that U.S. public-sector debt will equal 100 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) by 2015 unless immediate actions are taken to cut the deficits by an amount equal to 12 percent of GDP. Even woeful Greece need only cut its deficits by 9 percent of its national output., , , ,
The 2010 Index of Dependence on Government

 

[ConservaDerrps]

The tax code is not the only symptom of what ails the country. Conservatives/Classical Liberals are mostly students of history and know that you can't pluck out a few short years of history and hold them up as defnitive any more than you can pluck one verse out of the Bible and hold it up as all that JudeoChristianity is.

Take Jesus out of this. Last time I checked The Bible doesn't put forth Jesus Christ's 13 Steps To Fiscal Awesomeness.

As for "picking a few years" how about we go with about three decades, from the start of the New Deal/FDR's clean-up to about the mid 1970s when shit started going tits-up. Then in comes Reaganomics, and the middle class NEVER recovered. In fact, it's been on a slow and steady decline.

And if it's not just about the tax code, why the **** do you guys care so much about taxes? Why did every politician on your side sign Norquist's borderline unconstitutional pledge?

We can define modern American conservativm aka Classical Liberalism and embrace the principles embodied within it. Most liberals won't even admit such a thing existed, can't define it, won't look it up. You have to look at history over at least three centuries to understand Classical Liberalism/Conservatism. And you have to look at the effect of policy over the long haul to understand how modern American liberalism bears no resemblance to Classical liberalism.

PLEASE SHUT THE **** UP ABOUT CLASSICAL LIBERALISM. It's a dead ******* movement, replaced by Conservatism. You need to give it up. It's a pretty lame attempt to try and make Liberals look like the ones who haven't historically pushed for societal progress.

Yesterday you made some CRAZY claims that the founders were Conservatives, which other than not wanting black folks to be considered humans, they weren't; at all. You're positing bullshit as fact. And again: CLASSICAL LIBERALISM IS ******* DEAD. Your side killed it. You aren't going to resurrect it like Lazarus.

In the case of modern American liberalism, you have to go all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt and come forward to see how the snowball started small but has gradually gained momentum, size, and mass until it is now mowing down everything in its paths to the detriment of everybody. The nation now teeters on the brink of bankruptcy, the result of roughly 80 years of modern American liberalism, and the liberals won't or can't see it/.

Holy goddamned ****.

it's easy to be bankrupt when the source of your revenue/income has been forcibly reduced over 30+ years of failed economic policy. You're becoming BARELY worth debating with because of how ******* brainwashed you are. You sound like a robot. The snowball didn't start with Teddy you prat. Things were GREAT for a long time after FDR. You can't ******* spin that. Data shows it.

You know what another word for data is: Fact. Truth. Shit you can't spin.

We don't ask that you liberals understand, appreciate, or embrace modern day American conservatism/Dlassical Liberalism. We understand that you think we are delusional, evil, hateful, wrong, stupid or insert the uncomplimentary adjective of your choice.

Delusional? Yes.
Evil? Only some of you.
Hateful? Only if you're gay or not a Christian.
Wrong? Most definitely.
Stupid? I choose "deliberately ignorant" for most of you, though stupid definitely works for people trained to vote FOR killing the middle class

We aren't asking you to read, study, learn, or understand anything that doesn't fit with your indoctrination as liberals. We are allowing you all the liberal concepts, ideas, notions, and policy that you want.

We just want you to have it away from us so that we can restore our great nation to the original concepts that the Founders gave us.

Yeah, the guy below wanted to create two separate countries before. Didn't work out too well.

(I can just HEAR the Tea Baggers jerking off to that picture)

So again, this thread, your dumb joke behind it, it's all bullshit propaganda. "WE ARE MORALLY SUPERIOR SO LEAVE THE HEATHENS TO THEIR BROKEN LAND."

Who needs compromise when you have rhetoric, right?