Liberals have become so radicalized they have now become what they use to hate

[AvgGuyIA]

exactly.....liberals (or whatevertheyarecallingthemselvesatthemoment) used to promote tolerance.....now that they've gained power they are as intolerant as hell...

Liberals are the dorky hall monitors we all remember from grade school. If we dont walk on the right side of the hallway, they report us. They're killjoys.

amazing how much fantasy thinking rightwingnuts engage in.

. You people are control freaks. Just admit it.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

exactly.....liberals (or whatevertheyarecallingthemselvesatthemoment) used to promote tolerance.....now that they've gained power they are as intolerant as hell...

Liberals are the dorky hall monitors we all remember from grade school. If we dont walk on the right side of the hallway, they report us. They're killjoys.

amazing how much fantasy thinking rightwingnuts engage in.

The transference around here just never seems to end.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Jim Norton (who is left-leaning by the way), knocks it out of the park...

“You have become exactly [like] the conservative, religious book burners of the 40s and the 50s and the 60s. You are it,” Norton said. “You are the speech repressors, you are the hypersensitive ones, you are the ones who want people fired immediately, you are the ones calling for people’s jobs. You have become what you hated.”

"Opie and Anthony" and Jim Norton go off on "trigger words" and college culture - YouTube

I started a thread on this but there are those who are so far left on here( not saying who), put the kibosh on on it.
The comedian is spot on. Modern liberalism has become the 'establishment' that left wing protesters of the 60's railed against.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Maybe Liberals are just tired of stupid, ignorant racist fucks STILL trying to force their small-minded religious bullshit on our society, because we were supposed to have evolved beyond all of that by this time in history. If Conservatives would stop trying to outlaw abortion, encode Christianity into our laws, ban gay rights, and start wars over lies, our society might be able to focus on important issues like white collar banking crimes that ruined the world economy for everyone except the already unbelievably rich.

No. Today's liberal is exclusionary and narrow of thought and reasoning.
Liberalism seeks to quash and silence all opposing points of view as well as dissenting speech.
The country has had it with this nonsense.
Part of the reason the democrats are in danger of losing the majority it has in the US Senate.
Also part of the reason why over half the US states have a GOP governor and at least one legislative chamber in the hands of the GOP.
BTW, nice liberal talking points there.....More political pap.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You, Rot Whiner, are insane. There can be no other explanation.

Sure beats trying to deny the obvious, huh?

At least KNB admits to it and tries to defend it.

.

Obvious? "All liberals are ?" isn't even hyperbole; it's simply ridiculous. How does one beat the ridiculous? Laughter.

Liberal leadership. And of course their adoring minions.
If you have a mirror in your home, use it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Obvious? "All liberals are ?" isn't even hyperbole; it's simply ridiculous. How does one beat the ridiculous? Laughter.

Okay, well, whatever avoidance technique works, I reckon.

.

How would you respond to these superlatives:

All conservatives are homophobic;

All conservatives are racist;

All conservatives are X, Y & X?

Ridiculous statements, aren't they?

Sure.
The response to your side's consistent circling of the wagons in defense all things politically left offers the rest of us no choice but to believe you libs all think in lockstep.
I've not in all of your contributions here on USMB seen you ever break ranks with your fellow lib posters.

 

[thereisnospoon]

.

It wasn't so long ago that the Left crowed about "diversity", "inclusion" and "tolerance".

Now those words are only meant for certain people.

Which is just deliciously ironic.

.

It wasn't so long ago that the Right crowed about "individualism", "free markets" and "democracy".

Now those words are only meant for certain people.

Which is just deliciously ironic.

PS: You can leave both camps, but it makes you unpopular, as people don't like to be told that their camp has done wrong.

"but it makes you unpopular"
Now see, that is YOUR problem. Popularity is your first priority.
With you people is it all about being right. As opposed to doing right

 

[Wildman]

Maybe Liberals are just tired of stupid, ignorant racist fucks STILL trying to force their small-minded religious bullshit on our society, because we were supposed to have evolved beyond all of that by this time in history. If Conservatives would stop trying to outlaw abortion, encode Christianity into our laws, ban gay rights, and start wars over lies, our society might be able to focus on important issues like white collar banking crimes that ruined the world economy for everyone except the already unbelievably rich.

just one little word added and one dropped, changes every thing and is more to the point, "being" !

Maybe Liberals are just tired of being stupid, ignorant racist fucks STILL trying to force their small-minded bullshit on our society,

 

[NYcarbineer]

The fact that you believe the Constitution is "living, breathing" and able to be edited on the fly, while a fuck'n 25mph speed limit is set in stone shows that you are the only Kool-Aid drinker in the argument, junior....

Your ignorance is amazing. First, the speed limit isn't set in stone. It is evaluated annually and can be adjusted up or down depending on the data collected.

And, we have over 200 years of courts deciding what is Constitutional and what is not, and rarely do all justices agree. Stupid people like you have no business arguing Constitutional Law or Constitutional issues.

So as you are driving down the road, you can arbitrarily "interpret" for yourself what the 25mph really means and then exceed it because it is "living, breathing" law?

Dumb ass....

And what you are stating - reviewing and altering it - is the process. And the process for altering the Constitution junior is the amendment process. And short of the amendment process, the Constitution is set in stone, says what it says, is not "living, breathing" (such an ignorant libtard term), and is the highest law in the land which is not open to debate.

Then how is it that the Supreme Court can decide major constitutional issues by 5 - 4 votes?

 

[jillian]

So as you are driving down the road, you can arbitrarily "interpret" for yourself what the 25mph really means and then exceed it because it is "living, breathing" law?

Dumb ass....

And what you are stating - reviewing and altering it - is the process. And the process for altering the Constitution junior is the amendment process. And short of the amendment process, the Constitution is set in stone, says what it says, is not "living, breathing" (such an ignorant libtard term), and is the highest law in the land which is not open to debate.

you really shouldn't call him names because he's correct about our constyitional law. there is a difference in law between "code" nations (e.g., france) and "common law" countries. we ar a common law country. our body of law is based on both statute and case law. that is what we were designed for. this rightwing push to ignore centuries of case law and process are inconceivable to most people who understand what is going on.

without the interpretation you disdain there is no meaning to the words "DUE process" or "UNREASONABLE search and seizure. Those terms are only defined by ouor case law.

and if you want to talk about radical alteration of our Constitution, here are a few for you. For over 200 years scholars laughed at idiots who said there was a private right of gun ownership. the idea that corporations are people would have been felt to be pathetically stupid and normal people understood that money is not speech.

however, the entirety of the constitution DOES demand that theocrats keep their religion out of government and does demand that government stay out of people's private business and that marriage is a fundamental right. (see loving v virginia, griswold v connecticut).

i hope that helps. but really, stop pretending that the people who don't actual get their idea of constitutional scholarship from rightwing blogs are the ignorant ones.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The fact that you believe the Constitution is "living, breathing" and able to be edited on the fly, while a fuck'n 25mph speed limit is set in stone shows that you are the only Kool-Aid drinker in the argument, junior....

Your ignorance is amazing. First, the speed limit isn't set in stone. It is evaluated annually and can be adjusted up or down depending on the data collected.

And, we have over 200 years of courts deciding what is Constitutional and what is not, and rarely do all justices agree. Stupid people like you have no business arguing Constitutional Law or Constitutional issues.

So as you are driving down the road, you can arbitrarily "interpret" for yourself what the 25mph really means and then exceed it because it is "living, breathing" law?

Dumb ass....

And what you are stating - reviewing and altering it - is the process. And the process for altering the Constitution junior is the amendment process. And short of the amendment process, the Constitution is set in stone, says what it says, is not "living, breathing" (such an ignorant libtard term), and is the highest law in the land which is not open to debate.

I'll ask the same question to you that stumps every other nut like you.

If you object to judicial review, how would you propose to overturn a state or local law banning ownership of firearms in that state or locality, or banning some sort of firearm?

 

[jillian]

Your ignorance is amazing. First, the speed limit isn't set in stone. It is evaluated annually and can be adjusted up or down depending on the data collected.

And, we have over 200 years of courts deciding what is Constitutional and what is not, and rarely do all justices agree. Stupid people like you have no business arguing Constitutional Law or Constitutional issues.

So as you are driving down the road, you can arbitrarily "interpret" for yourself what the 25mph really means and then exceed it because it is "living, breathing" law?

Dumb ass....

And what you are stating - reviewing and altering it - is the process. And the process for altering the Constitution junior is the amendment process. And short of the amendment process, the Constitution is set in stone, says what it says, is not "living, breathing" (such an ignorant libtard term), and is the highest law in the land which is not open to debate.

I'll ask the same question to you that stumps every other nut like you.

If you object to judicial review, how would you propose to overturn a state or local law banning ownership of firearms in that state or locality, or banning some sort of firearm?

they don't believe in judicial review. they want rightwingnut dogma replacing more than 200 years of judicial scholarship.

and someone needs to explain stare decisis to them. i know the right never likes that concept. but seems they're getting noisier and more damaging as they pervert the court with rightwingnut "judges".

 

[Mac1958]

I started a thread on this but there are those who are so far left on here( not saying who), put the kibosh on on it.

The comedian is spot on. Modern liberalism has become the 'establishment' that left wing protesters of the 60's railed against.

Yep.

They have become what they used to hate.

They will not look in the mirror, though.

And ironically, that's a part of it.

.

 

[Mac1958]

Man, that took forfuckingEVER. What was that, four hours, just for an empty response?:

Wow, that was one long post just to continue avoiding the point.

You folks (and let me make this clear for you, the American Left) have become what you used to hate.

And my apologies, I wasn't sitting in front of the computer all day.

Were you?

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So as you are driving down the road, you can arbitrarily "interpret" for yourself what the 25mph really means and then exceed it because it is "living, breathing" law?

Dumb ass....

And what you are stating - reviewing and altering it - is the process. And the process for altering the Constitution junior is the amendment process. And short of the amendment process, the Constitution is set in stone, says what it says, is not "living, breathing" (such an ignorant libtard term), and is the highest law in the land which is not open to debate.

I'll ask the same question to you that stumps every other nut like you.

If you object to judicial review, how would you propose to overturn a state or local law banning ownership of firearms in that state or locality, or banning some sort of firearm?

they don't believe in judicial review. they want rightwingnut dogma replacing more than 200 years of judicial scholarship.

and someone needs to explain stare decisis to them. i know the right never likes that concept. but seems they're getting noisier and more damaging as they pervert the court with rightwingnut "judges".

They just pretend they don't like judicial review. They LOVE judicial review when they like the outcome.

None of them can explain how laws would be ruled unconstitutional without judicial review.

The argument against judicial review is an argument against even having a constitution.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I started a thread on this but there are those who are so far left on here( not saying who), put the kibosh on on it.

The comedian is spot on. Modern liberalism has become the 'establishment' that left wing protesters of the 60's railed against.

Yep.

They have become what they used to hate.

They will not look in the mirror, though.

And ironically, that's a part of it.

.

So the liberals of the 60's who were shutting down campuses to try to get their way were more tolerant than the modern day liberals on campuses who pass around petitions in order to try to get their way?

LOLOL

 

[Sallow]

Man, that took forfuckingEVER. What was that, four hours, just for an empty response?:

Wow, that was one long post just to continue avoiding the point.

You folks (and let me make this clear for you, the American Left) have become what you used to hate.

And my apologies, I wasn't sitting in front of the computer all day.

Were you?

.

Well no.

Not at all.

And, by the way, you folks (The "American" right) are still the same short sighted, bigoted, reactionary folks you've always been.

You folks (The "American" right) seem to be interested in making other folks worship your religion, have your prejudices and "tolerate" your hate, so much so, you want in codified.

It's the classic fight.

No one is "becoming" what they hate. They are fighting against bigotry and racism.

Don't like it?

Tough.

 

[Mac1958]

Don't like it?

Tough.

You do realize you're proving my point, right?

Never mind. I know you're ideologically prohibited from admitting this anyway.

.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Man, that took forfuckingEVER. What was that, four hours, just for an empty response?:

Wow, that was one long post just to continue avoiding the point.

You folks (and let me make this clear for you, the American Left) have become what you used to hate.

And my apologies, I wasn't sitting in front of the computer all day.

Were you?

.

Well no.

Not at all.

And, by the way, you folks (The "American" right) are still the same short sighted, bigoted, reactionary folks you've always been.

You folks (The "American" right) seem to be interested in making other folks worship your religion, have your prejudices and "tolerate" your hate, so much so, you want in codified.

It's the classic fight.

No one is "becoming" what they hate. They are fighting against bigotry and racism.

Don't like it?

Tough.

Classic transference.

Another one proving the OP correct.

 

[DriftingSand]

I started a thread on this but there are those who are so far left on here( not saying who), put the kibosh on on it.

The comedian is spot on. Modern liberalism has become the 'establishment' that left wing protesters of the 60's railed against.

Yep.

They have become what they used to hate.

They will not look in the mirror, though.

And ironically, that's a part of it.

.

So the liberals of the 60's who were shutting down campuses to try to get their way were more tolerant than the modern day liberals on campuses who pass around petitions in order to try to get their way?

LOLOL

At least you admit that liberals are CONSTANTLY trying to get their way (at the expense of everyone else).