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

[Mac1958]

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.

Immediately providing evidence of what the OP was talking about.

Great job, champ.

This happens all the time. They don't deny it, they reinforce it, then they attack anyone who brings it up.

Madness.

.

 

[P@triot]

I'm not tolerant of stupid people. No such thing is required.

So says the resident poster boy for self-loathing.

Self-loathing? On occasion. Mostly I loath people like you.

More liberal tolerance!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So says the resident poster boy for self-loathing.

Self-loathing? On occasion. Mostly I loath people like you.

More liberal tolerance!

The tolerance you seek will not be granted. Start your own nation if you want that kind of crap supported and respected.

 

[eagle7_31]

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.

Another legend in their own mind spewing more lwing propaganda. It never ends.

 

[P@triot]

Self-loathing? On occasion. Mostly I loath people like you.

More liberal tolerance!

The tolerance you seek will not be granted. Start your own nation if you want that kind of crap supported and respected.

There are not "kinds" of tolerance chief. There is either tolerance or no tolerance. Liberals are not tolerant. But like everything else, they lie about it.

 

[Stephanie]

More liberal tolerance!

The tolerance you seek will not be granted. Start your own nation if you want that kind of crap supported and respected.

There are not "kinds" of tolerance chief. There is either tolerance or no tolerance. Liberals are not tolerant. But like everything else, they lie about it.

lol, thank goodness someone who tell's people to "start their own nation" is a liberal
I'd be embarrassed if they were conservative/Republican

 

[HelenaHandbag]

I'm not tolerant of stupid people. No such thing is required.

So says the resident poster boy for self-loathing.

Self-loathing? On occasion. Mostly I loath people like you.

Yours starts in the mirror, sport-o. I have read enough of your misanthropic posts to know that much.

And nobody gets away with loathing humanity, without selfl-loathing as the starting point.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

More liberal tolerance!

The tolerance you seek will not be granted. Start your own nation if you want that kind of crap supported and respected.

There are not "kinds" of tolerance chief. There is either tolerance or no tolerance. Liberals are not tolerant. But like everything else, they lie about it.

You are incorrect, and entirely childish, as usual.

People tolerate a certain about of nonsense and misbehavior from their children, but what crosses the line gets them spanked. That doesn't make them Intolerant, it means they have common sense and tolerance, like all things in life, has its limits.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And nobody gets away with loathing humanity, without selfl-loathing as the starting point.

You're incorrect, since it is based upon the actions of humanity as a species, towards its own, but mostly other, species.

 

[Stephanie]

here's an example

SNIP:

Conference Speaker Calls for White Race and MEN to be Abolished! (Video)


Posted on Monday, May 26th, 2014 at 8:01 am by Kyle Olson




The Multnomah County Library in Portland, Oregon played host to the latest round of batty progressives espousing wacky theories.

The library hosted the “Radfems Respond” conference, a collective of “radical feminists” that apparently resort to militant tactics to establish their utopia – which apparently means the end of the “White Race” and men.

Check out this video, courtesy of DaylightDisinfectant:

[ame=http://youtu.be/tkMOuVh0CP8]Sen.Cool's+and+the+Disruption+of+Feminazi's+7.wmv - YouTube[/ame]


The speaker is Lierre Keith, who supposedly penned “the most important ecological book of this generation,” titled, “The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice and Sustainability.” We have no idea who actually heaped upon her that kind of praise but we must admit it does make her sound important!

Keith said during her talk:

ALL of it here
Conference Speaker Calls for White Race and MEN to be Abolished! (Video) | Progressives Today

 

[HelenaHandbag]

And nobody gets away with loathing humanity, without selfl-loathing as the starting point.

You're incorrect, since it is based upon the actions of humanity as a species, towards its own, but mostly other, species.

Sorry, buck-o, there is no squirming out of the obvious conclusion, no matter how smart you have mistakenly convinced yourself to be.

 

[Pogo]

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

This has nothing to do with "Liberalism". Matter of fact it's got nothing to even do with politics. It's about contemporary social mores. But it does speak volumes that the OP doesn't know the difference.

Let alone -- using a shock jock show as political fodder -- just when we thought the bar couldn't be lowered any further...

 

[The T]

.

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.

Democracy? WE will be the first to tell YOU and your ilk that we are NOT a 'Democracy'. Why do you think the Founders opted NOT to be one, and gave us a REPUBLIC...you know? Law and order instead of MOB RULE you idiots clamour for?

 

[Mac1958]

This has nothing to do with "Liberalism". Matter of fact it's got nothing to even do with politics. It's about contemporary social mores. But it does speak volumes that the OP doesn't know the difference.

You do realize that's precisely what they were saying back then.

Right?

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And nobody gets away with loathing humanity, without selfl-loathing as the starting point.

You're incorrect, since it is based upon the actions of humanity as a species, towards its own, but mostly other, species.

Sorry, buck-o, there is no squirming out of the obvious conclusion, no matter how smart you have mistakenly convinced yourself to be.

I'm much smarter than you and always have been. Don't play amateur Internet shrink, you have no chance.

 

[Pogo]

This has nothing to do with "Liberalism". Matter of fact it's got nothing to even do with politics. It's about contemporary social mores. But it does speak volumes that the OP doesn't know the difference.

You do realize that's precisely what they were saying back then.

Right?

Uh...

Can you state that in something resembling a complete sentence? Something where, y'know, pronouns are attached to something?

 

[Meathead]

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

This has nothing to do with "Liberalism". Matter of fact it's got nothing to even do with politics. It's about contemporary social mores. But it does speak volumes that the OP doesn't know the difference.

Let alone -- using a shock jock show as political fodder -- just when we thought the bar couldn't be lowered any further...

I have no idea why you think social mores and politics are mutuually exclusive. At that level, one should not discuss the lowering of bars.

 

[Mac1958]

This has nothing to do with "Liberalism". Matter of fact it's got nothing to even do with politics. It's about contemporary social mores. But it does speak volumes that the OP doesn't know the difference.

You do realize that's precisely what they were saying back then.

Right?

Uh...

Can you state that in something resembling a complete sentence? Something where, y'know, pronouns are attached to something?

Just say "I don't have a good response to your question, Mac."

It's okay. I know.

.

 

[The T]

.

Funny how some lefties call the Constitution a document that was written by rich white slaveholders -- presumably a bad thing -- while others try to take credit for it.

Just admit you want to get rid of it and establish an authoritarian European-style Social Democracy.

That would give you folks yet another excuse to avoid the point of the thread, too!

Win-win!



.

And they ignore too that there was a compromise needed to get the Southern States [ mainly,Democrats] to sign on to the Constitution (3/5ths Compromise, as those states wanted to count their slaves into the population but didn't make sense to the abolitionists as how can you count them when they weren't free in the first place)?
Many of the Founders knew that slavery would be coming to the forefront again. They left that door open.

Fast forward....here the Democrats [Progressives] of today have created a new kind of slavery...government dependence.

 

[LoneLaugher]

First you admit you didn't listen to it - then you claim there was (and I quote) "no evidence".

Folks...you can't make this stuff up! Vintage liberal response here...

(Hint - it's FULL of evidence if you actually listen)

No asshole.. I listened to a couple of minutes. It was annoying. The dude was reading an article. I got tired of listening to his whining.

By the way. The term is "used to". Dumbass.

Finally, Norton is not a liberal.

So again, you admit you didn't listen to it (because it was "annoying" - how ironic since it was about liberals ), and then in your infinite liberal wisdom, you declare there was "no evidence".

By the way DUMB-ASS, the term is "what they USE to hate" you uneducated, high school drop-out. God Almighty are you dumber than a hammer. And less functional than one.

No. It is "used to". Ask anyone.