Liberals: Be Not Offended!

[David_42]

Funny how you claim I find Libs to be "evil" (I find them to be stupid) but post nothing of mine in which I make such a claim. I don't even believe you loony leftists are "evil" but you are definitely a menace to society.

I didn't say "you", I was refering to the compassionate conservative hive mind

But it's nice to know you don't think I'm evil allthough I'm not sure why I'm a menace to society.

Is it because I think corrupt banksters should be in jail? Everyone has a right to healthcare? Education should be free for all? Even a minimum wage job at wallmart should pay enough not to need government assistance? The rich should pay more taxes to pay for these kind of things?

Hello friend, looks like I have another ally.

 

[Seawytch]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So a person over 35 who doesn't believe that we should bring back slavery, take the vote away from women, legalize child labor, and re-criminalize homosexuality - for starters - is somehow brainless?

Silly loony leftist lies and straw man fallacies.

Every item I listed was a cause that the conservatives of those times fought against - ending slavery, giving women the vote, outlawing child labor, and extending equal rights to gays.

The implication of your 'proverb' is that the people of those times who were over 35 and did not stand with the conservatives of those times were idiots...

...so okay, who looks stupid now?

Of those times? Really? My post clearly refers to college kids circa 2015. Again you erect a lame Straw Man because ... well, because you are just too stupid to make a rational argument. Does that answer your silly question, Princess?

To answer yours, I know no one over or under 35 who believes we should "bring back slavery, take the vote away from women, legalize child labor, and re-criminalize homosexuality."
Does that answer your silly question, Princess?

No need to have a meltdown. It's just a stupid message board.

The quote we're talking about dates back at least a 100 years.

If you were a conservative about 50 years ago you were still fighting to preserve Jim Crow, IOW, according to you,

you were an idiot if you weren't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Gawd you're annoying

 

[NYcarbineer]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

Liberalism is the only religion that doesn't believe in something imaginary.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

Libertarianism is a religion because it doesn't work in reality.

The Constitution proves that Liberalism can and does work in real life.

 

[danielpalos]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

Yes, it is due to such lousy capital skills from the Right, that the left prefers to use socialism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

Libertarianism is a religion because it doesn't work in reality.

The Constitution proves that Liberalism can and does work in real life.

Actually, not.

Liberalism, and the desire to shut up opposing voices, contrary to the first amendment.

Liberalism is the American version of fascism.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberalism is the American version of fascism.

Liberalism is the founding ideology of America. It granted us Liberty, among other things...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberalism is the American version of fascism.

Liberalism is the founding ideology of America. It granted us Liberty, among other things...

Stop lying.

Not the modern version of Liberalism, which is simply a title stolen by the communist/socialist John Dewey, and applied to the Socialist Party.


How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
by Jim Peron

1. Pity the poor liberal. And I mean the real liberal. Not the modern watered-down socialist who calls himself a liberal but a real, honest, classical liberal. There is so much confusion over the term and real liberals have allowed fake liberals to get away with this subtle destruction of the language.
2. The classical liberals proposed laissez faire and this led to prosperity. The economics of 19th century liberalism brought about a major increase in the standard of living of all people. Thus real liberalism produced the effects which socialists dreamed their system would provide.
   1. Many socialists wanted prosperity and thought socialism would lead to such results faster than classical liberalism. But at the same time many socialists saw their ideology as a means of grabbing power for themselves and it was the power, not the promised prosperity, which attracted them.
3. [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
4. In the United States, where liberalism most clearly reversed its meaning, in common parlance, it was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label. Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism already existed in America.
   1. But he noted the collectivism of that day was a “collectivism of profit” and not a “collectivism of planning”. He said the only way liberalism could return to its true meaning was to adopt socialism as the means by which liberal goals would be achieved. As he put it central economic planning was “the sole method of social action by which liberalism can realize its professed aims.”
      1. http://orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/liberal_confusion.htm

Now don't let me catch you lying about this again.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberalism is the American version of fascism.

Liberalism is the founding ideology of America. It granted us Liberty, among other things...

Stop lying.

Not the modern version of Liberalism, which is simply a title stolen by the communist/socialist John Dewey, and applied to the Socialist Party.


How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
by Jim Peron

1. Pity the poor liberal. And I mean the real liberal. Not the modern watered-down socialist who calls himself a liberal but a real, honest, classical liberal. There is so much confusion over the term and real liberals have allowed fake liberals to get away with this subtle destruction of the language.
2. The classical liberals proposed laissez faire and this led to prosperity. The economics of 19th century liberalism brought about a major increase in the standard of living of all people. Thus real liberalism produced the effects which socialists dreamed their system would provide.
   1. Many socialists wanted prosperity and thought socialism would lead to such results faster than classical liberalism. But at the same time many socialists saw their ideology as a means of grabbing power for themselves and it was the power, not the promised prosperity, which attracted them.
3. [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
4. In the United States, where liberalism most clearly reversed its meaning, in common parlance, it was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label. Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism already existed in America.
   1. But he noted the collectivism of that day was a “collectivism of profit” and not a “collectivism of planning”. He said the only way liberalism could return to its true meaning was to adopt socialism as the means by which liberal goals would be achieved. As he put it central economic planning was “the sole method of social action by which liberalism can realize its professed aims.”
      1. http://orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/liberal_confusion.htm

Now don't let me catch you lying about this again.

Liberals haven't changed, much, just the times we live in. I still believe in what the Founders did, rights and responsibilities, and that's no lie...

 

[CowboyTed]

1. Yet, the dominant political party/worldview promises to do just that. 'Your widdle feeling hurt? Or might be hurt? Well....we'll put in place rules, regulations, speech codes, 'trigger warnings,' ....and, don't forget the mantra that the Democrats provided during the Clarence Thomas nomination, that the accusation of criminal wrongdoing , namely the unproved sexual harassment claims of one Anita Hill....even though Ms. Hill couldn't prove her accusation, that didn't matter.

.

Oh dear, were Clarence Thomas's feelings hurt?

So....there were no restrictive policies set in motion by Clarence Thomas?

You simply provided a bogus post in your failed attempt to provide cover for Leftist fascists?

Shut up woman and go back to the kitchen where you belong...

 

[danielpalos]

feminine women should always look cute barefoot and bottomless.

It doesn't matter what anyone says. Here is the what our Founding Fathers told us to do with socialism:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[SAYIT]

Funny how you claim I find Libs to be "evil" (I find them to be stupid) but post nothing of mine in which I make such a claim. I don't even believe you loony leftists are "evil" but you are definitely a menace to society.

I didn't say "you", I was refering to the compassionate conservative hive mind

But it's nice to know you don't think I'm evil allthough I'm not sure why I'm a menace to society.

Is it because I think corrupt banksters should be in jail? Everyone has a right to healthcare? Education should be free for all? Even a minimum wage job at wallmart should pay enough not to need government assistance? The rich should pay more taxes to pay for these kind of things?

Forgive me. I thought "all you compassionate conservatives" meant "all." My bad.
I have no prob with the kind of goodies we choose to give the less fortunate as long as we can afford to pay for them. As things now stand we are and have for years been running a deficit budget with no relief in sight. Adding the goodies you listed will simply expand the gap and while you - like a good little socialist - insist that we soak-the-rich to pay for more, I would remind you that personal income tax accounts for 80% of all federal tax revenue collected and the top 10% of all American earners already carry 70% (the top 25% carry 86%) of the load.

I would also remind you that the bottom 49% of American earners pay nothing. Zippo. Zilch. Nada. They get all the same goodies - US military, gov't, courts, interstate highways, etc. - for free, as well as any entitlements to which their economic condition qualifies.

So how much of the load should the super-rich be made to carry? What would satisfy you? 80%? 100%? 120%?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

feminine women should always look cute barefoot and bottomless.

It doesn't matter what anyone says. Here is the what our Founding Fathers told us to do with socialism:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Those damn liberals...

 

[SAYIT]

feminine women should always look cute barefoot and bottomless...

Typical loony leftist. It's all about you and your adolescent fantasy world. Grow da **** up, Princess.

 

[SAYIT]

So a person over 35 who doesn't believe that we should bring back slavery, take the vote away from women, legalize child labor, and re-criminalize homosexuality - for starters - is somehow brainless?

Silly loony leftist lies and straw man fallacies.

Every item I listed was a cause that the conservatives of those times fought against - ending slavery, giving women the vote, outlawing child labor, and extending equal rights to gays.

The implication of your 'proverb' is that the people of those times who were over 35 and did not stand with the conservatives of those times were idiots...

...so okay, who looks stupid now?

Of those times? Really? My post clearly refers to college kids circa 2015. Again you erect a lame Straw Man because ... well, because you are just too stupid to make a rational argument. Does that answer your silly question, Princess?

To answer yours, I know no one over or under 35 who believes we should "bring back slavery, take the vote away from women, legalize child labor, and re-criminalize homosexuality."
Does that answer your silly question, Princess?

No need to have a meltdown. It's just a stupid message board.

The quote we're talking about dates back at least a 100 years.

If you were a conservative about 50 years ago you were still fighting to preserve Jim Crow, IOW, according to you,

you were an idiot if you weren't.

No meltdown here, Princess, and your response ("It's just a stupid message board") reveals that even you know just how lame your loony left POV is.
My post clearly referred to the current stock of college lefties and the bullhorn that is today's social media - which didn't even exist 15 years ago - makes them seem more significant than they are.

BTW, 50 years ago I was a teenager and, as I recall, a loony lefty. I was just as clueless then as you are now.

"If you are not liberal at 25 you have no heart. If you are still liberal at 35 you have no brain."

 

[SAYIT]

Liberals actually set policies to restrict religious and conservative dissidents.

Yup!

Those liberals were the Founding Fathers and that policy is called the 1st Amendment.

You should ask one of your teachers to explain it to you one day.

Especially the part about freedom FROM religion.

There is no "freedom FROM religion", it's "freedom OF religion". You look really, really stupid right now, more so than you usually do

Of course there is. This is one of the silliest of the right wing talking points...and that's saying something 'cause there are some really ridiculous ones. If I’m a Jew, I have the freedom not to be a Baptist. If I’m Catholic, I have the right not to to be Buddhist. There are hundreds of different faiths all living in the United States and I have the freedom NOT to be any of them if I so desire.

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

Retrograde. Leftism, like Churchill's Mohammedism (The River War - 1899) is one of the world's most retrograde religions.

 

[SAYIT]

Are you aware of the fact that Leftism is the most dynamic of religions?

Liberalism is the only religion that doesn't believe in something imaginary.

Leftism - as PC noted - is a retrograde religion which is totally immersed in that greatest of all fantasies ... the free lunch.