Guide To The Liberal Mind

[francoHFW]

Actually, the dot com boom gave Clinton a surplus, and then people realized it should bust, dingbat. Reaganism's ruin of the nonrich and the country continued...

 

[Rikurzhen]

1. Seems only yesterday you, McCain and Romney were saying the illegals were only here doing "jobs Americans won't do". It was 2007.

2. Do the Westborough Baptists & KKK Christian churches down south represent Christianity? How about the Christian Cult in China who killed the woman just because she wouldn't give them her telephone number and convert? Do Christians take credit for them?

3. Clinton handed Bush a surplus, what'd he do with it? Exactly. What did Bush hand Obama? And considering the opposition, I'd say Obama has done all he can and a pretty darn good job too if you ask me.

The Republican congress gave Clinton a surplus. Liberals always take credit for conservative successes. Clinton caused the dot com collapse by having the DOJ split up Microsoft. That was the first domino.

There was no Clinton Surplus, not from Congress not from anywhere. It was an accounting trick. The Total Debt of the United States increased every single year of Clinton's term.
Then shut the fuck up on that one.

 

[francoHFW]

Pubs only fight against illegals during Pub recession/depressions. They have refused the only solution, a good SS/ID card, forever.

 

[Boss]

Wow... I am disappointed. I logged on to see my little ol' thread had 163 replies, and I got really excite about that. I thought for sure I'd find a robust intellectual debate on the topic of the OP. Instead, I found the usual predictable responses from the board's bevy of liberal airheads. A flurry of insults directed at me, followed by vigorous defense of liberal socialism of the past century, followed by mounds of liberal statistical propaganda and distortion of fact. Then... attacks on Christians and Jews and defense of Muslim terrorists, just to be rebellious. There was the typical liberal denial of reality and revision of history with regard to the economy, following very true to form with what I stated in the OP.

Virtually everything I said in the OP regarding how the liberal mind works, has been demonstrated beautifully here for all to see. As you will notice, the liberal never admits anything liberals have ever done is wrong. They take credit for things that were bipartisan in nature, where mostly conservatives and moderates forged the way while completely ignoring any failure of liberal policy by remarkably denying it was ever their policy to begin with. We discover that the War on Poverty was never to be won, of course things were "going swell" until Ronald Reagan, according to some liberals. So we've spent about $20 trillion fighting a war they admit we can't win because it's unwinnable. BUT... if we just jack up taxes on the rich some more, MAYBE it will help! This is typical of how liberals think. There is always a bigger and better liberal solution to whatever massive cluster-fuck of a problem their policies have created, no worries!

 

[Friends]

More concepts coming out of the Liberal Mind..
1. The 40-hour work week.
2. Weekends
3. Vacations
4. Women’s Voting Rights
5. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
6. The right of people of all colors to use schools and facilities.
7. Public schools.
8. Child-labor laws.
9. The right to unionize
10. Health care benefits
11. National Parks
12. National Forests
13. Interstate Highway System
14. GI Bill
15. Labor Laws/Worker’s Rights
16. Marshall Plan
17. FDA
18. Direct election of Senators by the people.
19. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Workplace safety laws
20. Social Security




8211 150 Achievements Of Liberalism That Conservatives Seek To Destroy

Oh please......Modern liberals could not even begin to conceptualize ANY of these things.
Your side gets ZERO credit for any item on this list....And do not insist. Because you'd be wrong

Huh?

 

[Friends]

Wow... I am disappointed. I logged on to see my little ol' thread had 163 replies, and I got really excite about that. I thought for sure I'd find a robust intellectual debate on the topic of the OP. Instead, I found the usual predictable responses from the board's bevy of liberal airheads.

You say you are disappointed by the absence of "a robust intellectual debate." Then you engage in name calling.

Have you read my comments #66, #68, and #106? Those are serious comments, without the usual sarcasm and over simplifications. Please read them, and comment on them.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Liberals founded this nation

What were they thinking?

Oh yeah, then why didn't they make provisions for homosexuals to marry, for special programs to advantage blacks, for welfare for single mothers, for "liberals" to dig up dead people and allow them to vote, etc, all key liberal beliefs?

Puerile!

 

[Derideo_Te]

1. Seems only yesterday you, McCain and Romney were saying the illegals were only here doing "jobs Americans won't do". It was 2007.

2. Do the Westborough Baptists & KKK Christian churches down south represent Christianity? How about the Christian Cult in China who killed the woman just because she wouldn't give them her telephone number and convert? Do Christians take credit for them?

Then shut the fuck up on that one.

3. Clinton handed Bush a surplus, what'd he do with it? Exactly. What did Bush hand Obama? And considering the opposition, I'd say Obama has done all he can and a pretty darn good job too if you ask me.

Why are you defending Muslims? Weren't you pretending to be an Atheist in another thread?

There was no Clinton Surplus. You've bought the Democratic Kool-Aid propaganda.

Oh, the irony!

 

[Derideo_Te]

To write a book on the mind, don't you have to have one first?

Not only do you need a mind but the ability to write coherently would be an essential requirement too.

But this does raise an interesting question. Why do those least qualified to write on a topic believe that they should tackle the subject matter? Isn't one of the basic premises that books are written by those who actually have a grasp of the subject matter concerned? Instead we have clueless buffoons who believe that they are "experts" spouting utter gibberish to their equally uninformed audiences.

The OP should start with something more within his own range of "expertise". The 'Dummy's Guide to Pretentious Obliviousness' would be an appropriate topic for the OP since that covers all of his threads to date.

I think he can write a chapter or two on how liberals think they're smarter than everyone else. Make sure to use lots of big words so they''ll be impressed.

The extreme right derides education because it cannot compete. Their low self esteem is their problem. Ignorance can be cured through education but stupidity is a life sentence.

Only a liberal could write a position which is self-refuting. Liberals complain that the Right can't compete while at the same time complaining that the Right has won the economic competition and has too much money.

Your failure to comprehend the difference between education and economics exposes why you are a home schooled extreme right wing theist.

 

[francoHFW]

Rich people and giant corps are bloated and hoarding, while the nonrich and the country are hurting, hater dupes. Liberals are not against wealth, just greed and stupidity, screwing workers and pollution. Reaganism suqs, fools. see sig pp1.

 

[mudwhistle]

To write a book on the mind, don't you have to have one first?

Not only do you need a mind but the ability to write coherently would be an essential requirement too.

But this does raise an interesting question. Why do those least qualified to write on a topic believe that they should tackle the subject matter? Isn't one of the basic premises that books are written by those who actually have a grasp of the subject matter concerned? Instead we have clueless buffoons who believe that they are "experts" spouting utter gibberish to their equally uninformed audiences.

The OP should start with something more within his own range of "expertise". The 'Dummy's Guide to Pretentious Obliviousness' would be an appropriate topic for the OP since that covers all of his threads to date.

I think he can write a chapter or two on how liberals think they're smarter than everyone else. Make sure to use lots of big words so they''ll be impressed.

The extreme right derides education because it cannot compete. Their low self esteem is their problem. Ignorance can be cured through education but stupidity is a life sentence.

Only a liberal could write a position which is self-refuting. Liberals complain that the Right can't compete while at the same time complaining that the Right has won the economic competition and has too much money.

Your failure to comprehend the difference between education and economics exposes why you are a home schooled extreme right wing theist.

More name-calling, as if that answers everything.

 

[mudwhistle]

Rich people and giant corps are bloated and hoarding, while the nonrich and the country are hurting, hater dupes. Liberals are not against wealth, just greed and stupidity, screwing workers and pollution. Reaganism suqs, fools. see sig pp1.

Hey, how's that hope & change working for you?

 

[Mindful]

Difference Between Socialism and Liberalism


Difference Between Socialism and Liberalism Difference Between Socialism vs Liberalism

 

[Derideo_Te]

Not only do you need a mind but the ability to write coherently would be an essential requirement too.

But this does raise an interesting question. Why do those least qualified to write on a topic believe that they should tackle the subject matter? Isn't one of the basic premises that books are written by those who actually have a grasp of the subject matter concerned? Instead we have clueless buffoons who believe that they are "experts" spouting utter gibberish to their equally uninformed audiences.

The OP should start with something more within his own range of "expertise". The 'Dummy's Guide to Pretentious Obliviousness' would be an appropriate topic for the OP since that covers all of his threads to date.

I think he can write a chapter or two on how liberals think they're smarter than everyone else. Make sure to use lots of big words so they''ll be impressed.

The extreme right derides education because it cannot compete. Their low self esteem is their problem. Ignorance can be cured through education but stupidity is a life sentence.

Only a liberal could write a position which is self-refuting. Liberals complain that the Right can't compete while at the same time complaining that the Right has won the economic competition and has too much money.

Your failure to comprehend the difference between education and economics exposes why you are a home schooled extreme right wing theist.

More name-calling, as if that answers everything.

So you can't define the difference between education and economics either?

That says volumes.

 

[mudwhistle]

I think he can write a chapter or two on how liberals think they're smarter than everyone else. Make sure to use lots of big words so they''ll be impressed.

The extreme right derides education because it cannot compete. Their low self esteem is their problem. Ignorance can be cured through education but stupidity is a life sentence.

Only a liberal could write a position which is self-refuting. Liberals complain that the Right can't compete while at the same time complaining that the Right has won the economic competition and has too much money.

Your failure to comprehend the difference between education and economics exposes why you are a home schooled extreme right wing theist.

More name-calling, as if that answers everything.

So you can't define the difference between education and economics either?

That says volumes.

You didn't ask me specifically to give you a definition. The difference should be obvious.

Just for argument sake, what do you think is the difference? I know any answer I give you would be automatically wrong. Let's hear your's first.

 

[AmericanFirst]

The new bs GOP started by Raygun has wrecked the nonrich and the country. See graph above. Not to mention their dumbass chickenhawk/covert foreign policy. Tax the rich and giant corps their fair share and invest it in America.

When you go to school and learn to talk come back and join the adults.

 

[Boss]

Wow... I am disappointed. I logged on to see my little ol' thread had 163 replies, and I got really excite about that. I thought for sure I'd find a robust intellectual debate on the topic of the OP. Instead, I found the usual predictable responses from the board's bevy of liberal airheads.

You say you are disappointed by the absence of "a robust intellectual debate." Then you engage in name calling.

Have you read my comments #66, #68, and #106? Those are serious comments, without the usual sarcasm and over simplifications. Please read them, and comment on them.

I have read your comments. In #66 you accuse the OP of being a straw man and logical fallacy. In #68 you explain the various and sundry varieties of liberal then explain your own nuanced variety. In #106 you toss out a cherry-picked statistic about the Dow and presidents, then defend Keynesian economics. As the OP correctly points out, in your mind you are right and liberalism is the only legitimate approach to anything. Those who oppose you are constructing straw men and logical fallacies and your trumped up statistics prove it all.

But in the spirit of debate fairness, let me deal with your statistical gem regarding the Dow and presidents, just so people can understand why this is such an important liberal tactic. The "Dow" is the Dow Jones Industrial Average. It is a measure of industrial stocks traded on the stock exchange daily. Generally speaking, it gives us an idea of overall stock valuation. Now, the value of how much a given stock is worth is determined by a myriad of factors including, but not limited to, growth in the overall economy. It is a fallacy to assume Dow growth automatically equates to economic prosperity. Value is more often determined by supply and demand.

Now I want you to put on your thinking caps for a moment and consider this. If ANY president had the power and ability to control actual economic prosperity, would we ever see bad economic conditions happen? If they controlled the little green and red arrows, we'd likely always see a green arrow. It wouldn't matter if they were Republicans or Democrats, they'd all do the same magical thing to make that green Dow arrow happen because that would please the masses, right? But the fact is, presidents have very little to do with what the market does on a daily basis. Their policies can sometimes have an effect on the market, but there are so many factors involved, it is difficult to determine what degree is related to policy and what degree is simply natural market forces at play. Not to mention, bad economic policy like raising income tax, may have the effect of increasing demand on stocks to protect against the taxation, thus increasing the value of stocks.

Finally, it is important to point out, Liberal doesn't mean Democrat. The vast and overwhelming majority of Democrat presidents from the past century were Conservatives.

 

[Redfish]

Liberals founded this nation

What were they thinking?

the founders were not liberals. they were libertarian constitutionalists.

 

[Redfish]

Liberals founded this nation

What were they thinking?

If you had ANY of the Founding Fathers in government today, you would run shrieking in horror to the nearest fainting couch. They would probably be fomenting revolution from prison.

Yes things change. It was the Republicans that freed the slaves. That doesn't make the GOP today the party for black people today. There is a long history after the Civil war where the GOP lost the black vote. Republicans want to forget that history when they say Lincoln freed the slaves.

And Reagan would be run out of the GOP today for being a flaming liberal. That's how far to the right the GOP has gone. A moderate Republican today is still too extreme.

"I'll have them ni66ers voting democrat for the next 200 years" Lyndon Baines Johnson

 

[Boss]

Rich people and giant corps are bloated and hoarding, while the nonrich and the country are hurting, hater dupes. Liberals are not against wealth, just greed and stupidity, screwing workers and pollution. Reaganism suqs, fools. see sig pp1.

Whether you are aware of it or not, what you are doing is engaging in Maoist philosophy. It is virtually the same emotive rhetoric which sparked the People's Revolution which brought Mao into power in China. His policies led to the deaths of over 70 million people and plunged China into economic darkness for 40 years.

There are some very important things to remember here. You can never legislate "greed" out of existence. You can never "screw" workers who have the freedom and liberty to become CEOs.