Dear Liberals: I Want a Divorce!

[Immanuel]

Agreement with logic and reason doesn't make going up one's ass. This is a terrible, unfunny joke, this post. How about instead of bringing up a ridiculous, impossible solution to gridlock, why don't you suggest to your party that they stop being so immovable on tax hikes for the rich?

Oh, because Rich people are Gods. My bad.

I am just curious. Would you feel the same way if the joke were aimed at conservatives? You state, "This is a terrible, unfunny joke", and you and Occupied seem to be offended by the OP, yet looking at your avatar, I have to believe that if it were aimed at conservatives, you would think it was hilarious.

And for the record, I'm with you on raising taxes on the rich. Ain't gonna happen because both parties are bought and paid for by those very people, but I think raising taxes on the rich and cutting spending across to board is the fastest way out of the predictament we have found ourselves in.

Immie

I for one explained in no uncertain terms early on that I find nothing funny about the subject of secession. On the subject of whiners packing up and going to some other country that more closely matches their ideology I am neutral.

Actually, secession doesn't really play into the scenario at all. It is simply a proposal to divide the country up. Personally, as I said early on, I think it is a terrible idea. But, it was supposed to be a joke. It failed and you didn't find it funny, but I believe most liberals would have found it extremely funny if someone like rdean had written it.

Generally, you are pretty reasonable. I don't know how you would have acted. But looking at CD's avatar, I would say it is a pretty good bet he/she would have thought it very funny.

Immie

 

[occupied]

I am just curious. Would you feel the same way if the joke were aimed at conservatives? You state, "This is a terrible, unfunny joke", and you and Occupied seem to be offended by the OP, yet looking at your avatar, I have to believe that if it were aimed at conservatives, you would think it was hilarious.

And for the record, I'm with you on raising taxes on the rich. Ain't gonna happen because both parties are bought and paid for by those very people, but I think raising taxes on the rich and cutting spending across to board is the fastest way out of the predictament we have found ourselves in.

Immie

I for one explained in no uncertain terms early on that I find nothing funny about the subject of secession. On the subject of whiners packing up and going to some other country that more closely matches their ideology I am neutral.

Actually, secession doesn't really play into the scenario at all. It is simply a proposal to divide the country up. Personally, as I said early on, I think it is a terrible idea. But, it was supposed to be a joke. It failed and you didn't find it funny, but I believe most liberals would have found it extremely funny if someone like rdean had written it.

Generally, you are pretty reasonable. I don't know how you would have acted. But looking at CD's avatar, I would say it is a pretty good bet he/she would have thought it very funny.

Immie

I don't see the distinction, especially since the OP demands conservative America still go by the same name and have the same constitution and flag as we all have now (minus the respect for civil rights, due process and diversity of course). It would amount to liberals seceding with a ridiculously unrepresentative piece of US territory.

 

[Immanuel]

I for one explained in no uncertain terms early on that I find nothing funny about the subject of secession. On the subject of whiners packing up and going to some other country that more closely matches their ideology I am neutral.

Actually, secession doesn't really play into the scenario at all. It is simply a proposal to divide the country up. Personally, as I said early on, I think it is a terrible idea. But, it was supposed to be a joke. It failed and you didn't find it funny, but I believe most liberals would have found it extremely funny if someone like rdean had written it.

Generally, you are pretty reasonable. I don't know how you would have acted. But looking at CD's avatar, I would say it is a pretty good bet he/she would have thought it very funny.

Immie

I don't see the distinction, especially since the OP demands conservative America still go by the same name and have the same constitution and flag as we all have now (minus the respect for civil rights, due process and diversity of course). It would amount to liberals seceding with a ridiculously unrepresentative piece of US territory.

I see secession as a forceful breaking of the union. Whereas this would be more of an amiable separation. Granted the OP was no where near being fair in regards to the division of the land, but if the idea were reasonable, I'm sure that part could be worked out.

However, I think it is a stupid idea. For one reason, we are better off together. I believe we need each other... if we could just send the politicians packing... ooops, I must be dreaming again.

Immie

 

[ConservaDerrps]

The answer is no, I wouldn't find it funny. Well, no, maybe I would if it was written in a clever way. But it's really just a lame "Liberals are amoral, goddless douchebags and we should get them out of OUR country." I'm not offended by the joke. I'm offended by the idea that Conservatives have that somehow this is THEIR country, not ours too. Like we're not entitled to our ideals, but they are. That's what I'm offended by.

Conservatives can have all the dumb fucking theories about life and how to make people stronger by starving them and shit, and that's fine by me. I just reserve the right to think they're a bunch of unevolved, money worshiping shit faces. But I'd never suggest kicking them out of the country is the way to go.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I for one explained in no uncertain terms early on that I find nothing funny about the subject of secession. On the subject of whiners packing up and going to some other country that more closely matches their ideology I am neutral.

Actually, secession doesn't really play into the scenario at all. It is simply a proposal to divide the country up. Personally, as I said early on, I think it is a terrible idea. But, it was supposed to be a joke. It failed and you didn't find it funny, but I believe most liberals would have found it extremely funny if someone like rdean had written it.

Generally, you are pretty reasonable. I don't know how you would have acted. But looking at CD's avatar, I would say it is a pretty good bet he/she would have thought it very funny.

Immie

I don't see the distinction, especially since the OP demands conservative America still go by the same name and have the same constitution and flag as we all have now (minus the respect for civil rights, due process and diversity of course). It would amount to liberals seceding with a ridiculously unrepresentative piece of US territory.

The irony of this, of course, being that conservative dogma is the most offensive to the Constitution and the original intent of the Framers, the idiotic notion that the Nation be somehow segregated along ideological lines.

 

[occupied]

Actually, secession doesn't really play into the scenario at all. It is simply a proposal to divide the country up. Personally, as I said early on, I think it is a terrible idea. But, it was supposed to be a joke. It failed and you didn't find it funny, but I believe most liberals would have found it extremely funny if someone like rdean had written it.

Generally, you are pretty reasonable. I don't know how you would have acted. But looking at CD's avatar, I would say it is a pretty good bet he/she would have thought it very funny.

Immie

I don't see the distinction, especially since the OP demands conservative America still go by the same name and have the same constitution and flag as we all have now (minus the respect for civil rights, due process and diversity of course). It would amount to liberals seceding with a ridiculously unrepresentative piece of US territory.

I see secession as a forceful breaking of the union. Whereas this would be more of an amiable separation. Granted the OP was no where near being fair in regards to the division of the land, but if the idea were reasonable, I'm sure that part could be worked out.

However, I think it is a stupid idea. For one reason, we are better off together. I believe we need each other... if we could just send the politicians packing... ooops, I must be dreaming again.

Immie

You are wrong for several reasons that vastly overestimate our capacity to be reasonable. The south mistakenly assumed the Union would be reasonable and allow them to just walk off with half the country, not going to happen in any form as long as the possibility exists that the other will be a threat or even a competitor in future. A surrounded and vastly outgunned liberal America on the west coast would be under attack before they could even get anything sorted out.

 

[Immanuel]

The answer is no, I wouldn't find it funny. Well, no, maybe I would if it was written in a clever way. But it's really just a lame "Liberals are amoral, goddless douchebags and we should get them out of OUR country." I'm not offended by the joke. I'm offended by the idea that Conservatives have that somehow this is THEIR country, not ours too. Like we're not entitled to our ideals, but they are. That's what I'm offended by.

Conservatives can have all the dumb fucking theories about life and how to make people stronger by starving them and shit, and that's fine by me. I just reserve the right to think they're a bunch of unevolved, money worshiping shit faces. But I'd never suggest kicking them out of the country is the way to go.

I'll take your word for that... and be watching you in the future. Just kidding.

And thanks for the answer.

And for the record, this conservative doesn't believe that this country is only for conservatives nor that you are not entitled to your views. In fact, if we could somehow get liberals out of the country (if that were even possible) this place would be a pretty boring land if I do say so myself.

Immie

 

[ConservaDerrps]

The answer is no, I wouldn't find it funny. Well, no, maybe I would if it was written in a clever way. But it's really just a lame "Liberals are amoral, goddless douchebags and we should get them out of OUR country." I'm not offended by the joke. I'm offended by the idea that Conservatives have that somehow this is THEIR country, not ours too. Like we're not entitled to our ideals, but they are. That's what I'm offended by.

Conservatives can have all the dumb fucking theories about life and how to make people stronger by starving them and shit, and that's fine by me. I just reserve the right to think they're a bunch of unevolved, money worshiping shit faces. But I'd never suggest kicking them out of the country is the way to go.

I'll take your word for that... and be watching you in the future. Just kidding.

And thanks for the answer.

And for the record, this conservative doesn't believe that this country is only for conservatives nor that you are not entitled to your views. In fact, if we could somehow get liberals out of the country (if that were even possible) this place would be a pretty boring land if I do say so myself.

Immie

Hey, I actually think compromise is the way out of this mess, but not all spending cuts are equal, and I'd rather not gut assistance programs and give more money to Defense spending. But other than that, I'm all for cuts if they don't fuck over the middle class even further.

Trust me, I'm a fan of funny shit. And this is just shit.

 

[Immanuel]

I don't see the distinction, especially since the OP demands conservative America still go by the same name and have the same constitution and flag as we all have now (minus the respect for civil rights, due process and diversity of course). It would amount to liberals seceding with a ridiculously unrepresentative piece of US territory.

I see secession as a forceful breaking of the union. Whereas this would be more of an amiable separation. Granted the OP was no where near being fair in regards to the division of the land, but if the idea were reasonable, I'm sure that part could be worked out.

However, I think it is a stupid idea. For one reason, we are better off together. I believe we need each other... if we could just send the politicians packing... ooops, I must be dreaming again.

Immie

You are wrong for several reasons that vastly overestimate our capacity to be reasonable. The south mistakenly assumed the Union would be reasonable and allow them to just walk off with half the country, not going to happen in any form as long as the possibility exists that the other will be a threat or even a competitor in future. A surrounded and vastly outgunned liberal America on the west coast would be under attack before they could even get anything sorted out.

How does that apply to anything I said in my post?

No where did I say it could happen nor should it. No where did I say that this was a good idea. I didn't even say we were reasonable.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

The answer is no, I wouldn't find it funny. Well, no, maybe I would if it was written in a clever way. But it's really just a lame "Liberals are amoral, goddless douchebags and we should get them out of OUR country." I'm not offended by the joke. I'm offended by the idea that Conservatives have that somehow this is THEIR country, not ours too. Like we're not entitled to our ideals, but they are. That's what I'm offended by.

Conservatives can have all the dumb fucking theories about life and how to make people stronger by starving them and shit, and that's fine by me. I just reserve the right to think they're a bunch of unevolved, money worshiping shit faces. But I'd never suggest kicking them out of the country is the way to go.

I'll take your word for that... and be watching you in the future. Just kidding.

And thanks for the answer.

And for the record, this conservative doesn't believe that this country is only for conservatives nor that you are not entitled to your views. In fact, if we could somehow get liberals out of the country (if that were even possible) this place would be a pretty boring land if I do say so myself.

Immie

Hey, I actually think compromise is the way out of this mess, but not all spending cuts are equal, and I'd rather not gut assistance programs and give more money to Defense spending. But other than that, I'm all for cuts if they don't fuck over the middle class even further.

Trust me, I'm a fan of funny shit. And this is just shit.

Trust me, I don't want to gut assistance programs either. I just escaped most of the last two and a half years on the unemployment line.

I would, however, like to see them cleaned up and improved. How that is done, I don't have the answers, but I am sure it can be done if we would just work together.

Immie

 

[ConservaDerrps]

What failed liberal policies are you referring to? Abolition of slavery? Women's sufferage? End of Jim Crow laws? Social Security? Medicare? Unemployment insurance? 40 hour work week? Child labor laws?

You actually bring up a really salient point. And I'd like any of the resident Right Wing Zealots here to answer a question in a similar vein.

What Liberal policies that have been enacted have failed, and why do you think they failed? Follow up, what Liberal policy has damaged the country, and why?

 

[occupied]

I see secession as a forceful breaking of the union. Whereas this would be more of an amiable separation. Granted the OP was no where near being fair in regards to the division of the land, but if the idea were reasonable, I'm sure that part could be worked out.

However, I think it is a stupid idea. For one reason, we are better off together. I believe we need each other... if we could just send the politicians packing... ooops, I must be dreaming again.

Immie

You are wrong for several reasons that vastly overestimate our capacity to be reasonable. The south mistakenly assumed the Union would be reasonable and allow them to just walk off with half the country, not going to happen in any form as long as the possibility exists that the other will be a threat or even a competitor in future. A surrounded and vastly outgunned liberal America on the west coast would be under attack before they could even get anything sorted out.

How does that apply to anything I said in my post?

No where did I say it could happen nor should it. No where did I say that this was a good idea. I didn't even say we were reasonable.

Immie

Yes, sorry. rereading it I can see that I misunderstood, just accustomed to conservative apologists on this thread telling me that it is not anything to get alarmed or upset over.

 

[Immanuel]

You are wrong for several reasons that vastly overestimate our capacity to be reasonable. The south mistakenly assumed the Union would be reasonable and allow them to just walk off with half the country, not going to happen in any form as long as the possibility exists that the other will be a threat or even a competitor in future. A surrounded and vastly outgunned liberal America on the west coast would be under attack before they could even get anything sorted out.

How does that apply to anything I said in my post?

No where did I say it could happen nor should it. No where did I say that this was a good idea. I didn't even say we were reasonable.

Immie

Yes, sorry. rereading it I can see that I misunderstood, just accustomed to conservative apologists on this thread telling me that it is not anything to get alarmed or upset over.

It's not anything to get alarmed about because the idea is so ridicules, it is not even worth discussing really.

Immie

 

[Cecilie1200]

For me, this exercise has been a very depressing experience so far. I have always felt that one of this country's strengths has been the diversity of people and ideas. the country's motto "E Pluribus Unum" out of many - one. Sadly, it seems that conservatives don't want any diversity. They seem to want some kind of homogenous society where everyone just marches in lockstep. Sounds more like Nazi Germany than America to me.

Just once I wish you liberals would read the thread and the arguments already made before you get all depressed or whatever. We have discussed ad nauseum the difference in Conservative concepts--that it took the Founders themselves eight years of heated arguments, debates, negotiations, and compromises before they were able to arrive at a Constitution that all could agree to and accept.

Isn't that enough diversity for you? Why should they have included the failed concepts of feudal kingdoms and monarchies or authoritarian theocracies into the mix when they founded the United States? It was the vision of freedom that drove them to form their own country where they could be free of such failed and oppressive concepts. But they sure as hell didn't agree on everything. There was plenty to work out and deal with and that continued for more than a century and a half before modern day liberalism gained a foothold here.

So now why should Conservativeland include the failed polices of modern day American liberalism? We will have enough stuff to work out without including the very failed and oppressive concepts that we wish to escape.

And why would you want to continue any conservative policies that you have been railing against and condemning for decades now? There is zero evidence that liberalism is tolerant of or embraces or wishes to include conservative concepts.

It is the irreconcilable differences in our philosophies that makes the divorce necessary.

What failed liberal policies are you referring to? Abolition of slavery? Women's sufferage? End of Jim Crow laws? Social Security? Medicare? Unemployment insurance? 40 hour work week? Child labor laws?

What conservative policies have we been "railing" against? The War on (some) drugs? Prostitution? Warrantless wiretapes and searches? Torture? Corporate welfare? Money = speech? Corporations = people?

I think we have valid reason to be against many of these conservative things. I think we have valid reason to be for all of those liberal things. But perhaps you're right. I don't think liberals will tolerate conservative intolerance. Conservatives certainly don't want or tolerate liberal ideas. So perhaps this "divorce" is inevitable. The analogy to me seems closer to siblings arguing over their dead parent's estate though. I just hope that this "thought exercise" never becomes a reality.

Does anyone else continue to be amused by the endless leftist capacity to claim something as "liberal" simply because people like it?

Think slavery was bad? Ending it was liberal! Never mind the fact that it was Christians and other religious people who spearheaded worldwide abolition efforts.

Like women's suffrage? That was ours! Never mind that the leaders of the suffrage movement were pretty vocal in their disdain for what liberals think of as "feminism" and "women's rights".

Epic fail.

 

[occupied]

How does that apply to anything I said in my post?

No where did I say it could happen nor should it. No where did I say that this was a good idea. I didn't even say we were reasonable.

Immie

Yes, sorry. rereading it I can see that I misunderstood, just accustomed to conservative apologists on this thread telling me that it is not anything to get alarmed or upset over.

It's not anything to get alarmed about because the idea is so ridicules, it is not even worth discussing really.

Immie

You are probably right there but what else am I going to talk about? Romney? Obama? At least this was a little bit of a break from an election season that is already boring me to tears.

 

[occupied]

Just once I wish you liberals would read the thread and the arguments already made before you get all depressed or whatever. We have discussed ad nauseum the difference in Conservative concepts--that it took the Founders themselves eight years of heated arguments, debates, negotiations, and compromises before they were able to arrive at a Constitution that all could agree to and accept.

Isn't that enough diversity for you? Why should they have included the failed concepts of feudal kingdoms and monarchies or authoritarian theocracies into the mix when they founded the United States? It was the vision of freedom that drove them to form their own country where they could be free of such failed and oppressive concepts. But they sure as hell didn't agree on everything. There was plenty to work out and deal with and that continued for more than a century and a half before modern day liberalism gained a foothold here.

So now why should Conservativeland include the failed polices of modern day American liberalism? We will have enough stuff to work out without including the very failed and oppressive concepts that we wish to escape.

And why would you want to continue any conservative policies that you have been railing against and condemning for decades now? There is zero evidence that liberalism is tolerant of or embraces or wishes to include conservative concepts.

It is the irreconcilable differences in our philosophies that makes the divorce necessary.

What failed liberal policies are you referring to? Abolition of slavery? Women's sufferage? End of Jim Crow laws? Social Security? Medicare? Unemployment insurance? 40 hour work week? Child labor laws?

What conservative policies have we been "railing" against? The War on (some) drugs? Prostitution? Warrantless wiretapes and searches? Torture? Corporate welfare? Money = speech? Corporations = people?

I think we have valid reason to be against many of these conservative things. I think we have valid reason to be for all of those liberal things. But perhaps you're right. I don't think liberals will tolerate conservative intolerance. Conservatives certainly don't want or tolerate liberal ideas. So perhaps this "divorce" is inevitable. The analogy to me seems closer to siblings arguing over their dead parent's estate though. I just hope that this "thought exercise" never becomes a reality.

Does anyone else continue to be amused by the endless leftist capacity to claim something as "liberal" simply because people like it?

Think slavery was bad? Ending it was liberal! Never mind the fact that it was Christians and other religious people who spearheaded worldwide abolition efforts.

Like women's suffrage? That was ours! Never mind that the leaders of the suffrage movement were pretty vocal in their disdain for what liberals think of as "feminism" and "women's rights".

Epic fail.

Any change in policy that resulted in greater freedoms for someone is by definition liberal. The resistance to the kind of willful change that upsets existing balances of power is by definition conservative. Pretty broad definitions, I admit, but they work for such a broad topic.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Ha ha. Wait. What the fuck? I had no idea the women who fought to get themselves a right that previously they had not had before were all totes conservative themselves! What't he story on that, exactly? That doesn't even add up, but if YOU'RE saying it's true, it fucking has to be!

 

[Borillar]

Just once I wish you liberals would read the thread and the arguments already made before you get all depressed or whatever. We have discussed ad nauseum the difference in Conservative concepts--that it took the Founders themselves eight years of heated arguments, debates, negotiations, and compromises before they were able to arrive at a Constitution that all could agree to and accept.

Isn't that enough diversity for you? Why should they have included the failed concepts of feudal kingdoms and monarchies or authoritarian theocracies into the mix when they founded the United States? It was the vision of freedom that drove them to form their own country where they could be free of such failed and oppressive concepts. But they sure as hell didn't agree on everything. There was plenty to work out and deal with and that continued for more than a century and a half before modern day liberalism gained a foothold here.

So now why should Conservativeland include the failed polices of modern day American liberalism? We will have enough stuff to work out without including the very failed and oppressive concepts that we wish to escape.

And why would you want to continue any conservative policies that you have been railing against and condemning for decades now? There is zero evidence that liberalism is tolerant of or embraces or wishes to include conservative concepts.

It is the irreconcilable differences in our philosophies that makes the divorce necessary.

What failed liberal policies are you referring to? Abolition of slavery? Women's sufferage? End of Jim Crow laws? Social Security? Medicare? Unemployment insurance? 40 hour work week? Child labor laws?

What conservative policies have we been "railing" against? The War on (some) drugs? Prostitution? Warrantless wiretapes and searches? Torture? Corporate welfare? Money = speech? Corporations = people?

I think we have valid reason to be against many of these conservative things. I think we have valid reason to be for all of those liberal things. But perhaps you're right. I don't think liberals will tolerate conservative intolerance. Conservatives certainly don't want or tolerate liberal ideas. So perhaps this "divorce" is inevitable. The analogy to me seems closer to siblings arguing over their dead parent's estate though. I just hope that this "thought exercise" never becomes a reality.

Does anyone else continue to be amused by the endless leftist capacity to claim something as "liberal" simply because people like it?

Think slavery was bad? Ending it was liberal! Never mind the fact that it was Christians and other religious people who spearheaded worldwide abolition efforts.

Like women's suffrage? That was ours! Never mind that the leaders of the suffrage movement were pretty vocal in their disdain for what liberals think of as "feminism" and "women's rights".

Epic fail.

I am continually amazed at people who think that in order to be a Christian you have to be a conservative right winger. And efforts to extend rights to people who have been denied them is historically liberal. Conservatives almost always try to diminish the rights of individuals. Look at gay rights today as an example.

So some Christian groups supported abolition of slavery - yeah liberal Christians. The conservative Christians used the Bible to justify slavery.

Conservatives wanted women to be able to vote? Thats a new one to me. Conservatives today want to make it harder for people to vote.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

(Disclaimer: This is an adaptation of a divorce agreement that has been circulating around the internet for awhile.)

To All My Dearest Beloved Liberal, Leftist, Social Progressive, Regressive, Marxist, and Liberation Theologist Friends:

Since we are not going to get gasoline back to $1.50 per gallon and coffee to $2.00 per pound, it is time to divide up our common property and split the sheets so to speak. To wit I propose the following:

DIVORCE AGREEMENT​

WHEREAS, we have stuck together since the late 1950s for the sake of the kids and for sake of future generations, but the whole of this latest election process has revealed that our relationship has clearly run its course, and

WHEREAS, our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all,

THEREFORE let's end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is the suggested model separation agreement:

1. Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass apportioned according to numerical representation. You can have California, Oregon, and Washington State. We'll take all the rest.

2. We don't like redistributive taxes, so you can keep them.

3. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.

4. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military.

5. We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with all the wind, solar, and bio-diesel.

6. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.

7. We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street.

8. You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless homeboys, hippies, druggies, illegal aliens, unions, peaceniks, war protesters, and the OSW groups.

9. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks.

10. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood

11. You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us or hit back when we are threatened or attacked.

14. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness, and Shirley McLain. You can also have the U.N., but we will no longer be paying the bill.

13. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.

14. We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Chevy Volt you can find.

15. You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any doctors to deliver it. We'll continue to believe that healthcare is more affordable and more excellent in a free market system.

16. We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic", "God Bless America", and "The National Anthem."

17. You get "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya," or "We Are the World".

18. We'll practice trickledown economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

19. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our constitution and our flag.

Please sign and pass it on if you will agree to this equitable distribution of property, values, and practices.

In the spirit of friendly parting, we will arrange for a community picnic in about 10 years to compare notes and see how each other are doing.

Sincerely,

Your Conservative Friends


P.S.: Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Barbara Streisand, Alec Baldwin, and Jane Fonda with you.

P.S.S..: And you won't have to "Press 1 for English" when you call our country.

I got a better idea.


You go vote what you want and I vote what I want. If the laws don't wind up the way you like them, you got two choices a) move the fuck out the country or b) fucking deal with it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Talk about an ass whipping! Liberal logic and reason has once again beaten nutter dishonesty and fantasy to a fucking pulp.

Well done Occupied, Borrilar and CD. Honorable mention to Immie for trying to keep it real.