The Right is truly, truly terrified of Hillary Clinton

[Statistikhengst]

We don't need another divider that will harm this country. Hillitary will run on her hatred of males. How sad.

WTF are you talking about? Hatred of males?

How sad...All the left does is spray hatred all over the place. You know as well as I do that she hates men.

Got a link or a vid to back up that outlandish claim?

 

[emilynghiem]

That's incorrect. The better educated you are, the more liberal you are. The opposite is also true.

There are just as many well educated Conservatives as there are Liberals.

No, there aren't. Educated people, and smart people, tend towards Liberalism. It's been known for a very long time. Stupid people usually have God and their prejudices, that's all they need or want.

Hi PMH
I am trying to relate to what you are saying.

It could be that since science does not require people to believe in God in order to study "universal laws" then people who don't see the world through the lens of a "personified God" tend to "rely on science" to study the world and its laws.

It makes sense that many nontheists would rely on science as their language.
So of course, more such nontheists would develop their skills in this field.

That is not a judgment call about intelligence; it is like saying people who are "color blind" might rely on black and white photography and tend to flock there.

As for people less intelligent,
when I try to explain the spiritual process of forgiveness and compassion to others,
I have found some of the people who don't over-intellectualize
are more open to understanding without a bunch of "scientific explanation."

One of my neighbors who always thought she was "dumb" in school
asked me what made people behave so crazy: all she did was ask for her comic books
back from a man who stole them when he helped her move, and he threatened her with a gun to and told her to leave, when it was her property that he stole, not the other way. I showed her a chart from my mother about Buddhism and the realms of suffering; and how some souls were trapped in suffering, that no matter how much they got from others, they wanted more and could never be at peace. She immediately understood and felt sorry that the man was so sick. She did not grieve for her comic books but she felt for him, and how fortunate she was to have a healthy mind and not suffer like he did.

She got this concept immediately, this "dumb girl" that everyone made fun of.

And yet when I explain the mental liberation that comes with forgiveness to other
people, of above average intelligence and well versed in political and religious arguments,
they often fight and fight, try to justify why the problem is "with other people"
and insist that "other people need to change, not their perception" etc. They won't forgive,
let go, and stay stuck, because they are convinced they are right, they know better,
and it's the "other person/group" that is the cause of the problems and needs to change, not them!

They don't get it. But this "dumb girl" got it immediately and let go of her anger.
She "saw" there was something else going on, that wasn't within her ability to change,
and it put things in perspective for her where it didn't bother her as before.

So PMH if you want to say that intelligence has something to do with it.

I would say yes and no.

Yes it can be a plus but it can also be an equal minus.

So in the end, it looks like it comes out pretty even.

My "dumber" friends, who may not follow all this political argument, critical analysis and logical flaws in debate back and forth,
sometimes get the harder concepts to accept because they aren't trying to rationalize around things.

It goes both ways. We all have gifts, strengths and weaknesses.

Intelligence and education can work for us, and against us,
if our ego's, pride, fear or resistance to change gets in the way,
regardless of our beliefs or our intelligence/education levels.

 

[Pete7469]

Hi Emily,

It isn't that the nation is split that I am questioning. It is the allegation that those who are out of power want a "revolution". I have seen absolutely nothing whatsoever that supports the allegation about a "revolution" that would have "50% support".

No sane person "wants a revolution".

Maybe the %20 that exist in the hard core moonbat catagory do, but the rest of us are aware of just what a nightmare that would be. Since those of us on the right tend to be law abiding and God-fearing, I think that speaks for itself to back up my assertion. The fact that everytime the bed wetters "demonstrate", there are riots, fires, destruction of property and mass arrests might just be another indication of which side has a revolutionary agenda.

Tea Party rallies? Not so much.

 

[whitehall]

About 20 years ago some women who were molested by Hillary's husband were terrified of Hillary and her "bimbo eruption squad". The capacity of the left to fool themselves is amazing.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Hi Emily,

It isn't that the nation is split that I am questioning. It is the allegation that those who are out of power want a "revolution". I have seen absolutely nothing whatsoever that supports the allegation about a "revolution" that would have "50% support".

No sane person "wants a revolution".

Maybe the %20 that exist in the hard core moonbat catagory do, but the rest of us are aware of just what a nightmare that would be. Since those of us on the right tend to be law abiding and God-fearing, I think that speaks for itself to back up my assertion. The fact that everytime the bed wetters "demonstrate", there are riots, fires, destruction of property and mass arrests might just be another indication of which side has a revolutionary agenda.

Tea Party rallies? Not so much.

The extreme right armed aggression against the federal government in the form of the BLA notwithstanding?

 

[buckeye45_73]

No, there aren't. Educated people, and smart people, tend towards Liberalism. It's been known for a very long time. Stupid people usually have God and their prejudices, that's all they need or want.

And you're normally blind and foolish. You people judge people based on race and make protected groups.

Who is clean? Asshole???

I judge people based on the truth. In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative. Rich people tend to be as well, and both groups fear change.

complete bullshit.....most liberals dont knowmshit, even the dupes in college. They cant name basic information let alone have complex thought. It explains why liberals make stupid arguements.

I mean liberals tnink a video caused the ben ghazi incident.
They are for killing children, but not criminals,
they said republicans back putin but are now sending aid to ukraine, huh?

yeah real genius on the libtard side

 

[Derideo_Te]

And you're normally blind and foolish. You people judge people based on race and make protected groups.

Who is clean? Asshole???

I judge people based on the truth. In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative. Rich people tend to be as well, and both groups fear change.

complete bullshit.....most liberals dont knowmshit, even the dupes in college. They cant name basic information let alone have complex thought. It explains why liberals make stupid arguements.

I mean liberals tnink a video caused the ben ghazi incident.
They are for killing children, but not criminals,
they said republicans back putin but are now sending aid to ukraine, huh?

yeah real genius on the libtard side

[MENTION=46168]Statistikhengst[/MENTION] Deceleration Alert!

 

[emilynghiem]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

I would say the moderates are people in the middle, who still lean toward people or parties that share their beliefs, but NOT SO FAR LEFT OR RIGHT that they cannot align with ideas or policies they agree with from the other party or parties.

So there are moderate conservatives/Republicans who can work with more liberal Democrats (as long as they stay within Constitutional bounds) and there are moderate Democrats and liberals who can work with more conservative Republicans (as long as they stay equally inclusive).

I believe most people would fall in the middle somewhere, were it not for the divisive hate-baiting and fear-based campaigning that pits one side against the other and forges mental and social barriers to change.

The extremes who are NOT moderate can get so caught up in their own biases and agenda they cannot work with other people or groups. Unfortunately if that side of people is trumpeted as what the parties believe in, in order to incite media frenzy and reaction by the public to take sides, then it alienates the people who are willing to work together. The media and social barriers can be so segregated, they cannot even find how to contact other sympathetic people to work together on common solutions.

 

[Pete7469]

Hi Emily,

It isn't that the nation is split that I am questioning. It is the allegation that those who are out of power want a "revolution". I have seen absolutely nothing whatsoever that supports the allegation about a "revolution" that would have "50% support".

No sane person "wants a revolution".

Maybe the %20 that exist in the hard core moonbat catagory do, but the rest of us are aware of just what a nightmare that would be. Since those of us on the right tend to be law abiding and God-fearing, I think that speaks for itself to back up my assertion. The fact that everytime the bed wetters "demonstrate", there are riots, fires, destruction of property and mass arrests might just be another indication of which side has a revolutionary agenda.

Tea Party rallies? Not so much.

The extreme right armed aggression against the federal government in the form of the BLA notwithstanding?

If a single shot was fired by anyone I might say you have a point.

Armed men standing in opposition to an out of control aggressive government agency that has no business being armed in the first place aren't "revolutionary". They're resistors. The BLM if that's what you were referring too, were the aggressors. They could have called in local law enforcement to handle anything that may have happened. Instead they sent paramilitary agents complete with M4's and body armor collect a debt.

It was an unnecessary aggressive show of force anyway the bed wetters want to cut it.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I judge people based on the truth. In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative. Rich people tend to be as well, and both groups fear change.

complete bullshit.....most liberals dont knowmshit, even the dupes in college. They cant name basic information let alone have complex thought. It explains why liberals make stupid arguements.

I mean liberals tnink a video caused the ben ghazi incident.
They are for killing children, but not criminals,
they said republicans back putin but are now sending aid to ukraine, huh?

yeah real genius on the libtard side

[MENTION=46168]Statistikhengst[/MENTION] Deceleration Alert!

OMG, call the 911 of spelling and grammar. That was one helluva deceleration.

Now, let's see if Buckeye's posting has anything at all to do with the OP....checking, checking....


So, the title of the OP is:

The Right is truly, truly terrified of Hillary Clinton

Ok, Buckeye doesn't mention Hillary Clinton at all. And doesn't mention Glenn Beck at all, in spite of the fact that the OP is virtually all about him (Glenn Beck) accusing Hillary Clinton of being a lesbian, yadayadayada....

So, that's strike 1! vis-a-vis relevance to the OP.

Now, to those wonderfully spelled words:

dont knowmshit - sorry, intergalactic translator came up totally blank.

arguements. - intergalactic translator says: "olde englische way of saying 'bar fight' after 12 pints of ale"

tnink - hmmmm...

I think we need [MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION] 's help with that one. "tnink", "tnink". That might be the sound of squid fighting underwater.

ben ghazi - ahhh, finally, an easy one. Ben Ghazi is the newest creme on the market for the alleviation of butthurt symptoms.

Now, let's call Crayola and get those TP posters rolling with this good stuff, folks!!

Oh, and Buckeye, just in case you lost your way, here is the OP:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...truly-truly-terrified-of-hillary-clinton.html

Hope that helps!

 

[HelenaHandbag]

No, there aren't. Educated people, and smart people, tend towards Liberalism. It's been known for a very long time. Stupid people usually have God and their prejudices, that's all they need or want.

And you're normally blind and foolish. You people judge people based on race and make protected groups.

Who is clean? Asshole???

I judge people based on the truth. In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative. Rich people tend to be as well, and both groups fear change.

You judge based upon misanthropy and bigotry.

It simply does not get any more stupid than that.

 

[emilynghiem]

I judge people based on the truth. In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative. Rich people tend to be as well, and both groups fear change.

complete bullshit.....most liberals dont knowmshit, even the dupes in college. They cant name basic information let alone have complex thought. It explains why liberals make stupid arguements.

I mean liberals tnink a video caused the ben ghazi incident.
They are for killing children, but not criminals,
they said republicans back putin but are now sending aid to ukraine, huh?

yeah real genius on the libtard side

[MENTION=46168]Statistikhengst[/MENTION] Deceleration Alert!

Hi Buckeye and PaintMyHouse:
Do you realize I don't fit either of your stereotypes?

I am a highly educated person of above average intelligence, and a critically analytical
liberal progressive Democrat, who believes in equal inclusion and ending
discrimination and poverty,

Yet I align with and equally defend the same Constitutional checks on limited govt
that the Conservatives and Republicans and Libertarians tend to champion,

I believe in God, and believe in the teachings in Christianity and all other religions that I believe are all necessary for universal salvation, peace and justice for all humanity,
I believe in the unique, central role of Jesus in unifying humanity in this process of ending
suffering by bringing divine forgiveness, healing grace, correction and agreement among men to break the vicious cycle of retribution and to establish unified understanding of truth.

I believe in using both science and religion to teach this process of "restorative justice"
that is represented in figurative language and symbolism in the Bible and in Christianity.

So whatever you say of either liberals who extol and excel in the virtues of science or of conservatives who believe in the Bible and the Constitution as given by God,
I believe in those people and those things, too. These things must apply to me, right?

So how am I different from whatever you are criticizing or generalizing?

How can I share the qualities of both groups, and yet you complain about one or the other as being more ignorant or closeminded? I find ALL PEOPLE to have problems, but focus on how those can be corrected regardless what approach we believe in or don't relate to.

 

[Derideo_Te]

No sane person "wants a revolution".

Maybe the %20 that exist in the hard core moonbat catagory do, but the rest of us are aware of just what a nightmare that would be. Since those of us on the right tend to be law abiding and God-fearing, I think that speaks for itself to back up my assertion. The fact that everytime the bed wetters "demonstrate", there are riots, fires, destruction of property and mass arrests might just be another indication of which side has a revolutionary agenda.

Tea Party rallies? Not so much.

The extreme right armed aggression against the federal government in the form of the BLA notwithstanding?

If a single shot was fired by anyone I might say you have a point.

Armed men standing in opposition to an out of control aggressive government agency that has no business being armed in the first place aren't "revolutionary". They're resistors. The BLM if that's what you were referring too, were the aggressors. They could have called in local law enforcement to handle anything that may have happened. Instead they sent paramilitary agents complete with M4's and body armor collect a debt.

It was an unnecessary aggressive show of force anyway the bed wetters want to cut it.

Thank you for confirming that you are incapable of making a rational evaluation of what is and isn't armed aggression.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I judge people based on the truth.

You judge people based on impact to party goals.

In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative.

You don't seem conservative, and if your thesis were accurate, you'd be VERY conservative.

Rich people tend to be as well,

That's what George Soros, Andrew Grove, Algore, and Warren Buffet said...

and both groups fear change.

Not as much as you fear soap...

 

[Uncensored2008]

I see people use the term "you people" all the time and it has absolutely nothing to do with race.

So, no, he didn't mention race, but YOU did.

In all fairness Statist, I usually address you using "You Communist Fuckers..."

I'm just sayin.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I judge people based on the truth.

You judge people based on impact to party goals.

In this case it's been proven, time and again. Stupid people are conservative.

You don't seem conservative, and if your thesis were accurate, you'd be VERY conservative.

Rich people tend to be as well,

That's what George Soros, Andrew Grove, Algore, and Warren Buffet said...

and both groups fear change.

Not as much as you fear soap...

So glad you're wrong, and added nothing. Please continue...

 

[kaz]

I see people use the term "you people" all the time and it has absolutely nothing to do with race.

So, no, he didn't mention race, but YOU did.

In all fairness Statist, I usually address you using "You Communist Fuckers..."

I'm just sayin.

Yes, they are authoritarian leftists, aka statists, there is nothing "liberal" about them at all.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I see people use the term "you people" all the time and it has absolutely nothing to do with race.

So, no, he didn't mention race, but YOU did.

In all fairness Statist, I usually address you using "You Communist Fuckers..."

I'm just sayin.

Well, I guess that's your idead of the uncensored version, what?

Now, back to the OP:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...truly-truly-terrified-of-hillary-clinton.html

Have something of value to add, or would you just prefer to grunt really loud?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Your intellectual response is just amazing!

Maybe next time you can write it as a Poem?

Okay..

There was once a leftist reunion;
Plotting to recreate the Soviet Union;
They elected Barack who was busy sucking cock;
And left the economy in ruins....

 

[kaz]

I see people use the term "you people" all the time and it has absolutely nothing to do with race.

So, no, he didn't mention race, but YOU did.

In all fairness Statist, I usually address you using "You Communist Fuckers..."

I'm just sayin.

Well, I guess that's your idead of the uncensored version, what?

Now, back to the OP:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...truly-truly-terrified-of-hillary-clinton.html

Have something of value to add, or would you just prefer to grunt really loud?

Most Republicans I know would love to have her as the Democratic party candidate. The woman is unpleasant and tightly controlled ever since the first year of the Clinton administration. Even the liberal media almost always quote her rather than putting her speeches on the air, and even when they do they are carefully selected snippets to protect her. If she runs for President, she can't hide. It would be a disaster for Democrats to pick her. I hope you do.