What God Thinks About Liberals In His Own Words

[Dr Grump]

But:
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.
Ecclesiastes 10:2

PC is a right-wing loon
Grump: 1:1

 

[PoliticalChic]

But:
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.
Ecclesiastes 10:2

PC is a right-wing loon
Grump: 1:1

"Think where man's glory most begins and ends, and say my glory was I had such friends."
- William Butler Yeats

Kinda thankful we're on different sides.


But...in the hopes that my opinion of you is incorrect....could you provide, oh...one or two of my views that you deem 'loony'?

Don't bother answering if there aren't any such, and we'll consider it a retraction of your post.
OK?

 

[Dr Grump]

PC is a right-wing loon
Grump: 1:1

"Think where man's glory most begins and ends, and say my glory was I had such friends."
- William Butler Yeats

Kinda thankful we're on different sides.


But...in the hopes that my opinion of you is incorrect....could you provide, oh...one or two of my views that you deem 'loony'?

Don't bother answering if there aren't any such, and we'll consider it a retraction of your post.
OK?
[/QUOTE]

If I had a spare day, I might be able to do it. Just....

 

[koshergrl]

PC is a right-wing loon
Grump: 1:1

"Think where man's glory most begins and ends, and say my glory was I had such friends."
- William Butler Yeats

Kinda thankful we're on different sides.


But...in the hopes that my opinion of you is incorrect....could you provide, oh...one or two of my views that you deem 'loony'?

Don't bother answering if there aren't any such, and we'll consider it a retraction of your post.
OK?

If I had a spare day, I might be able to do it. Just....[/QUOTE]
No, you wouldn't.

 

[Dr Grump]

If I had a spare day, I might be able to do it. Just....

No, you wouldn't.[/QUOTE]
You're right. It'd probably take two.

 

[koshergrl]

If I had a spare day, I might be able to do it. Just....

No, you wouldn't.

You're right. It'd probably take two.[/QUOTE]
I don't think you understand how stupid you sound, you pathetic old drunk. If you had anything it would take two seconds to come up with evidence. You are nothing but a miserable, drunken, misogynist. Go back to trying to get you pecker stiff, loser.

 

[Dr Grump]

I don't think you understand how stupid you sound, you pathetic old drunk. If you had anything it would take two seconds to come up with evidence. You are nothing but a miserable, drunken, misogynist. Go back to trying to get you pecker stiff, loser.

One day at a time Allie Baby, one day at a time. Call your sponsor now before it's too late.

 

[koshergrl]

I don't think you understand how stupid you sound, you pathetic old drunk. If you had anything it would take two seconds to come up with evidence. You are nothing but a miserable, drunken, misogynist. Go back to trying to get you pecker stiff, loser.

One day at a time Allie Baby, one day at a time. Call your sponsor now before it's too late.

No need for a sponsor, outside of Christ. You poor stooge...too weak to walk your own walk, dependent on celebrity wisdom and ex drunk keepers...and you still fail.You should just off yourself, don't you think? End your pain and ours.

 

[Dr Grump]

[
No need for a sponsor, outside of Christ. You poor stooge...too weak to walk your own walk, dependent on celebrity wisdom and ex drunk keepers...and you still fail.You should just off yourself, don't you think? End your pain and ours.

Says the person who leans on an mythical entity...the irony..

 

[MrFritz]

Jesus Was A Liberal: 20 Quotes GOP Christians Will Hate

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC is a right-wing loon
Grump: 1:1

"Think where man's glory most begins and ends, and say my glory was I had such friends."
- William Butler Yeats

Kinda thankful we're on different sides.


But...in the hopes that my opinion of you is incorrect....could you provide, oh...one or two of my views that you deem 'loony'?

Don't bother answering if there aren't any such, and we'll consider it a retraction of your post.
OK?

If I had a spare day, I might be able to do it. Just....[/QUOTE]




Gee....I asked for one or two....
could you provide, oh...one or two of my views that you deem 'loony'?

Don't bother answering if there aren't any such, and we'll consider it a retraction of your post.
OK?



So we can now stipulate that there aren't any, and you've retracted your erroneous post?

Excellent.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If I had a spare day, I might be able to do it. Just....

No, you wouldn't.

You're right. It'd probably take two.[/QUOTE]


Just asked for one or two....

So...once again, the defining characteristic of a Liberal is hot air.

QED

 

[PoliticalChic]

[
No need for a sponsor, outside of Christ. You poor stooge...too weak to walk your own walk, dependent on celebrity wisdom and ex drunk keepers...and you still fail.You should just off yourself, don't you think? End your pain and ours.

Says the person who leans on an mythical entity...the irony..

Are your referring to the same "mythical entity" on Whom the Founders built this nation?


'Cause then, choosing sides is eminently simple...



“52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh
Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”
Coulter

 

[Dragonlady]

Different meaning, different time, different translation.
Back in biblical times, being a liberal meant being generous, helpful.
Today a liberal means being an immoral, lazy degenerate.
See the difference?

No the meaning of "liberal" hasn't changed much, it's just that the party of "mine", is in denial of their selfishness and greed.

 

[TooTall]

Galatians 1:8 ESV

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

worth repeating.

Your off topic misuse of scripture puts you on the HELL train with a one way ticket. All aboard those of you who twist scripture!!

The FACT that God prefers liberal bears repeating to the alt-Right dishonorable FALSE Christians.

God makes liberal's souls fat.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. -- Proverbs 11:25


And since being fat is is sure sign of righteousness in the eyes of God, liberals are righteous people.

The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree ... they shall be fat and flourishing. -- Psalm 92:12-14


Liberals are not vile, villainous, hypocrites that steal from the poor and hungry.

The vile person shall be no more called liberal ... For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy ... to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail. -- Isaiah 32:5-6


Liberals distribute wealth from the rich to the poor.

For your liberal distribution ... unto all men ... Thanks be unto God. -- 2 Corinthians 9:13-15


And lastly, liberals devise and stand for liberal things.


The liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand. -- Isaiah 32:8

Jesus knows Trump is unredeemable.

How do you know what Jesus knows or doesn't know. I'm waiting.

 

[koshergrl]

Different meaning, different time, different translation.
Back in biblical times, being a liberal meant being generous, helpful.
Today a liberal means being an immoral, lazy degenerate.
See the difference?

No the meaning of "liberal" hasn't changed much, it's just that the party of "mine", is in denial of their selfishness and greed.

This is what happens when we turn education over to the feds. Communists historically teach children lies and call it education from the minute they can get their hands on them. In weak families with no culture of their own, this is the result...useful idiots like dl who toe the party line no matter what reality smacks them with.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Different meaning, different time, different translation.
Back in biblical times, being a liberal meant being generous, helpful.
Today a liberal means being an immoral, lazy degenerate.
See the difference?

No the meaning of "liberal" hasn't changed much, it's just that the party of "mine", is in denial of their selfishness and greed.

You could't be more wrong.
You could try to be, but you wouldn't be successful.


The name 'Liberal' as used today was co-opted by the communist John Dewey who convinced the Socialist Party to adopt that as its name.

So...you are proud Socialist.



"How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
by Jim Peron

1. Pity the poor liberal. And I mean the real liberal. Not the modern watered-down socialist who calls himself a liberal but a real, honest, classical liberal. There is so much confusion over the term and real liberals have allowed fake liberals to get away with this subtle destruction of the language.
2. The classical liberals proposed laissez faire and this led to prosperity. The economics of 19th century liberalism brought about a major increase in the standard of living of all people. Thus real liberalism produced the effects which socialists dreamed their system would provide.
   1. Many socialists wanted prosperity and thought socialism would lead to such results faster than classical liberalism. But at the same time many socialists saw their ideology as a means of grabbing power for themselves and it was the power, not the promised prosperity, which attracted them.
3. [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
4. In the United States, where liberalism most clearly reversed its meaning, in common parlance, it was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label. Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism already existed in America.
   1. But he noted the collectivism of that day was a “collectivism of profit” and not a “collectivism of planning”. He said the only way liberalism could return to its true meaning was to adopt socialism as the means by which liberal goals would be achieved. As he put it central economic planning was “the sole method of social action by which liberalism can realize its professed aims.”
5. Peter Witonski, in his essay The Historical Roots of American Planning said: “Dewey was the first to argue that the world ‘liberal’—which once stood for liberal, free-market capitalism—could better serve the needs of social democracy in America than the world ‘socialism’.
   1. The liberalism of Adam Smith was out-of-date Dewey argued.” In his book Liberalism and Social Action, Dewey suggested that the goals of a free society could best be obtained “only by a reversal of the means to which early liberalism was committed.” But the means of liberalism were fundamentally connected to the basic premises of liberalism. A reversal of means, while keeping similar goals in mind, also changed the premises of liberalism. The “new wisdom” of Keynes with the “reversal of means” of Dewey really meant stealing the name of liberalism and applying it to another very different species. The famed economist Joseph Schumpeter noted that “the enemies of private enterprise have thought it wise to appropriate its label.”
6. Today a great deal of confusion reigns because socialists decided to deceptively call their own ideology liberal. And, to a very large degree, the academics who wrote the recent texts on liberalism were socialists. Hence they were quite willing to pretend that socialism was a modern form of classical liberalism.
7. [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called “liberals” support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism. "
   

http://orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/liberal_confusion.htm

Democracy & free markets vs socialism

Right wing Hollywood - Rotten Tomatoes Forum

 

[MrFritz]

Galatians 1:8 ESV

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

worth repeating.

Your off topic misuse of scripture puts you on the HELL train with a one way ticket. All aboard those of you who twist scripture!!

The FACT that God prefers liberal bears repeating to the alt-Right dishonorable FALSE Christians.

God makes liberal's souls fat.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. -- Proverbs 11:25


And since being fat is is sure sign of righteousness in the eyes of God, liberals are righteous people.

The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree ... they shall be fat and flourishing. -- Psalm 92:12-14


Liberals are not vile, villainous, hypocrites that steal from the poor and hungry.

The vile person shall be no more called liberal ... For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy ... to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail. -- Isaiah 32:5-6


Liberals distribute wealth from the rich to the poor.

For your liberal distribution ... unto all men ... Thanks be unto God. -- 2 Corinthians 9:13-15


And lastly, liberals devise and stand for liberal things.


The liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand. -- Isaiah 32:8

Jesus knows Trump is unredeemable.

How do you know what Jesus knows or doesn't know. I'm waiting.

I guess you have never heard of the Holy Spirit.

 

[MrFritz]

Different meaning, different time, different translation.
Back in biblical times, being a liberal meant being generous, helpful.
Today a liberal means being an immoral, lazy degenerate.
See the difference?

No the meaning of "liberal" hasn't changed much, it's just that the party of "mine", is in denial of their selfishness and greed.

You could't be more wrong.
You could try to be, but you wouldn't be successful.


The name 'Liberal' as used today was co-opted by the communist John Dewey who convinced the Socialist Party to adopt that as its name.

So...you are proud Socialist.



"How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
by Jim Peron

1. Pity the poor liberal. And I mean the real liberal. Not the modern watered-down socialist who calls himself a liberal but a real, honest, classical liberal. There is so much confusion over the term and real liberals have allowed fake liberals to get away with this subtle destruction of the language.
2. The classical liberals proposed laissez faire and this led to prosperity. The economics of 19th century liberalism brought about a major increase in the standard of living of all people. Thus real liberalism produced the effects which socialists dreamed their system would provide.
   1. Many socialists wanted prosperity and thought socialism would lead to such results faster than classical liberalism. But at the same time many socialists saw their ideology as a means of grabbing power for themselves and it was the power, not the promised prosperity, which attracted them.
3. [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
4. In the United States, where liberalism most clearly reversed its meaning, in common parlance, it was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label. Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism already existed in America.
   1. But he noted the collectivism of that day was a “collectivism of profit” and not a “collectivism of planning”. He said the only way liberalism could return to its true meaning was to adopt socialism as the means by which liberal goals would be achieved. As he put it central economic planning was “the sole method of social action by which liberalism can realize its professed aims.”
5. Peter Witonski, in his essay The Historical Roots of American Planning said: “Dewey was the first to argue that the world ‘liberal’—which once stood for liberal, free-market capitalism—could better serve the needs of social democracy in America than the world ‘socialism’.
   1. The liberalism of Adam Smith was out-of-date Dewey argued.” In his book Liberalism and Social Action, Dewey suggested that the goals of a free society could best be obtained “only by a reversal of the means to which early liberalism was committed.” But the means of liberalism were fundamentally connected to the basic premises of liberalism. A reversal of means, while keeping similar goals in mind, also changed the premises of liberalism. The “new wisdom” of Keynes with the “reversal of means” of Dewey really meant stealing the name of liberalism and applying it to another very different species. The famed economist Joseph Schumpeter noted that “the enemies of private enterprise have thought it wise to appropriate its label.”
6. Today a great deal of confusion reigns because socialists decided to deceptively call their own ideology liberal. And, to a very large degree, the academics who wrote the recent texts on liberalism were socialists. Hence they were quite willing to pretend that socialism was a modern form of classical liberalism.
7. [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called “liberals” support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism. "

http://orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/liberal_confusion.htm

Democracy & free markets vs socialism

Right wing Hollywood - Rotten Tomatoes Forum

You know what they say about opinions?

BTW, Denmark is socialist and they have a higher standard of living than the US.

 

[koshergrl]

Different meaning, different time, different translation.
Back in biblical times, being a liberal meant being generous, helpful.
Today a liberal means being an immoral, lazy degenerate.
See the difference?

No the meaning of "liberal" hasn't changed much, it's just that the party of "mine", is in denial of their selfishness and greed.

You could't be more wrong.
You could try to be, but you wouldn't be successful.


The name 'Liberal' as used today was co-opted by the communist John Dewey who convinced the Socialist Party to adopt that as its name.

So...you are proud Socialist.



"How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
by Jim Peron

1. Pity the poor liberal. And I mean the real liberal. Not the modern watered-down socialist who calls himself a liberal but a real, honest, classical liberal. There is so much confusion over the term and real liberals have allowed fake liberals to get away with this subtle destruction of the language.
2. The classical liberals proposed laissez faire and this led to prosperity. The economics of 19th century liberalism brought about a major increase in the standard of living of all people. Thus real liberalism produced the effects which socialists dreamed their system would provide.
   1. Many socialists wanted prosperity and thought socialism would lead to such results faster than classical liberalism. But at the same time many socialists saw their ideology as a means of grabbing power for themselves and it was the power, not the promised prosperity, which attracted them.
3. [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
4. In the United States, where liberalism most clearly reversed its meaning, in common parlance, it was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label. Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism already existed in America.
   1. But he noted the collectivism of that day was a “collectivism of profit” and not a “collectivism of planning”. He said the only way liberalism could return to its true meaning was to adopt socialism as the means by which liberal goals would be achieved. As he put it central economic planning was “the sole method of social action by which liberalism can realize its professed aims.”
5. Peter Witonski, in his essay The Historical Roots of American Planning said: “Dewey was the first to argue that the world ‘liberal’—which once stood for liberal, free-market capitalism—could better serve the needs of social democracy in America than the world ‘socialism’.
   1. The liberalism of Adam Smith was out-of-date Dewey argued.” In his book Liberalism and Social Action, Dewey suggested that the goals of a free society could best be obtained “only by a reversal of the means to which early liberalism was committed.” But the means of liberalism were fundamentally connected to the basic premises of liberalism. A reversal of means, while keeping similar goals in mind, also changed the premises of liberalism. The “new wisdom” of Keynes with the “reversal of means” of Dewey really meant stealing the name of liberalism and applying it to another very different species. The famed economist Joseph Schumpeter noted that “the enemies of private enterprise have thought it wise to appropriate its label.”
6. Today a great deal of confusion reigns because socialists decided to deceptively call their own ideology liberal. And, to a very large degree, the academics who wrote the recent texts on liberalism were socialists. Hence they were quite willing to pretend that socialism was a modern form of classical liberalism.
7. [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called “liberals” support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism. "

http://orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/liberal_confusion.htm

Democracy & free markets vs socialism

Right wing Hollywood - Rotten Tomatoes Forum

You know what they say about opinions?

BTW, Denmark is socialist and they have a higher standard of living than the US.

Only by babykilling commie standards.

Another lie pushed by evil men who wish to normalize depravity and pervert the Word of God and misrepresent Christianity.