What Is Wrong With Liberals??

[NYcarbineer]

1. "Referenda are not always constitutional."
The people,not judges,are the correct arbiters.

2. "Let's have one banning black people from marrying,..."
Could you provide same?

Otherwise you appear quite the moron.

Do you understand rights and the constitution? They are there, not by popular demand, but they protect rights assumed to exist already. The founding fathers didn't not set up the constitution to have it destroyed by muppets voting in referenda to take away protections of rights.

Could I provide same? What does that mean?

And then you have to insult, as if you simply can't get through a post without doing so. What do you think YOU look like?

The Constitution is the only document that the American people agreed to be governed by.

In it, is the instruction on how to alter it.

It is not done by Liberal judges.

I don't insult....I correctly identify.

But the Constitution has given judges the authority to interpret the law. Just because you don't like some of the decisions doesn't mean the Constitution is being criminally abused.

Help me here.....are you lying again...or simply ignorant?


If it is simply ignorance.....see if you can find the word "interpret."


In effect, the Liberal definition of "interpret" is simply to lie out of hand.
Sort of what you make a habit of doing.

If you want to make an argument that the Supreme Court has no constitutional right to interpret the law,

by all means, do so. Otherwise, go paint your toenails or something. Something in your league.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

You mean LIBERAL Republicans?

 

[PoliticalChic]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Conservative obstruction

Translation: having the right view, but one that runs counter to the Liberal/socialist one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Referenda are not always constitutional."
The people,not judges,are the correct arbiters.

2. "Let's have one banning black people from marrying,..."
Could you provide same?

Otherwise you appear quite the moron.

Do you understand rights and the constitution? They are there, not by popular demand, but they protect rights assumed to exist already. The founding fathers didn't not set up the constitution to have it destroyed by muppets voting in referenda to take away protections of rights.

Could I provide same? What does that mean?

And then you have to insult, as if you simply can't get through a post without doing so. What do you think YOU look like?

The Constitution is the only document that the American people agreed to be governed by.

In it, is the instruction on how to alter it.

It is not done by Liberal judges.

I don't insult....I correctly identify.

But the Constitution has given judges the authority to interpret the law. Just because you don't like some of the decisions doesn't mean the Constitution is being criminally abused.

Help me here.....are you lying again...or simply ignorant?


If it is simply ignorance.....see if you can find the word "interpret."


In effect, the Liberal definition of "interpret" is simply to lie out of hand.
Sort of what you make a habit of doing.

If you want to make an argument that the Supreme Court has no constitutional right to interpret the law,

by all means, do so. Otherwise, go paint your toenails or something. Something in your league.

As you neither answered the question, nor tried to find the word 'interpret' in Article III, and based on experience,.....I just chalk it up to you lying again.....and trying to slip one by.

You should realize that most folks are smarter than you are.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

You mean LIBERAL Republicans?

Well....at least you didn't try to deny that it was Republicans who were responsible for women getting the right to vote.

Instead, you try to take credit where none is due.
A slight variation on your lying.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

National Review s John Derbyshire Women Should Not Have The Right To Vote ThinkProgress

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you understand rights and the constitution? They are there, not by popular demand, but they protect rights assumed to exist already. The founding fathers didn't not set up the constitution to have it destroyed by muppets voting in referenda to take away protections of rights.

Could I provide same? What does that mean?

And then you have to insult, as if you simply can't get through a post without doing so. What do you think YOU look like?

The Constitution is the only document that the American people agreed to be governed by.

In it, is the instruction on how to alter it.

It is not done by Liberal judges.

I don't insult....I correctly identify.

But the Constitution has given judges the authority to interpret the law. Just because you don't like some of the decisions doesn't mean the Constitution is being criminally abused.

Help me here.....are you lying again...or simply ignorant?


If it is simply ignorance.....see if you can find the word "interpret."


In effect, the Liberal definition of "interpret" is simply to lie out of hand.
Sort of what you make a habit of doing.

If you want to make an argument that the Supreme Court has no constitutional right to interpret the law,

by all means, do so. Otherwise, go paint your toenails or something. Something in your league.

As you neither answered the question, nor tried to find the word 'interpret' in Article III, and based on experience,.....I just chalk it up to you lying again.....and trying to slip one by.

You should realize that most folks are smarter than you are.

So all of the Supreme Court's decisions interpreting the law and ruling on their constitutionality have been unconstitutional?

lol, you should write someone a letter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

National Review s John Derbyshire Women Should Not Have The Right To Vote ThinkProgress

And this has what to do with the fact that Republicans are responsible for blacks having freedom and the right to vote, and women having said right?

This is the other one of your two methods: changing the subject.

You've failed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

You mean LIBERAL Republicans?

Well....at least you didn't try to deny that it was Republicans who were responsible for women getting the right to vote.

Instead, you try to take credit where none is due.
A slight variation on your lying.

You are abysmally ignorant on the subject of political parties vs. the subject of political philosophies.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

National Review s John Derbyshire Women Should Not Have The Right To Vote ThinkProgress

And this has what to do with the fact that Republicans are responsible for blacks having freedom and the right to vote, and women having said right?

This is the other one of your two methods: changing the subject.

You've failed.

Those Republicans are dead. That Republican party doesn't exist anymore. If it did,

blacks and women would vote for it.

 

[Bush92]

A.) Libertarians founded our nation....not liberals.
B.) Midwestern populist Republicans fought against racism, while Democratic liberals like FDR and Adlai Stevenson accepted the electoral votes of the segregated South.
C.) Conservatives tried to win the Vietnam War when liberals betrayed our troops on the ground.
D.) Liberals allowed communist to infiltrate the Manhattan Project and allow Soviet Union to have nuclear weapons, placing the United States in the greatest peril it has ever, and still does, face.
E.) Liberals during 1990's allowed China to steal defense secrets such as stealth technology.
F.) Liberals pushed for a two paycheck economy that destroyed the family and increased the divorce rate paving the way for...
G.) Homosexual marriage and abortions.
H.) Liberals have betrayed Blacks by producing a system of inner city Democratic machine politics that produce poor representation by common criminals.
I.) Liberals have given us a welfare state and a budget deficit that we cannot balance as long as we have...
J.) A generation of crybaby victims. Americans used to be tough...now we are weak. We could never win a world war with the lazy, slovenly, society we have today. Weak!

 

[Bush92]

As long as we are a nation of weak liberals liked Jakey Snarky, Right Winger, and N Tea Party Pleez...we are on a path to doom.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Iraq wasn't about oil, now Libya was about oil SOS Clinton admitted it.

How on earth was Iraq not about oil?

Then again you're clearly backing up my point, that people will lie, and then people like you are willing to believe all the lies.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why do they hate this great nation?
Why do they strive, not just to "fundamentally transform" it, but to end it??


Seems the very center of Liberalism is to find every wound and apply salt......how often must we hear of the evils of slavery, with hardly a word about the cathartic Civil War, and the monumental efforts Americans have made to amend same?



American history.....to be proud of:

September 13th, 1814 British begin 25 hour bombardment of Fort McHenry, Baltimore, but fail to take fort. A giant 15-stripe flag stitched together by Mary Young Pickersgill waved over the fort. By 1818 the third version of the flag, with 13 stripes, was created. Frances Scott Key wrote Star Spangled Banner honoring the 15-stripe version.(See 3/3) The British Navy had used “mortar vessels,” the mortar placed on the forecastle of an anchored boat, capable of blasting a 196-pound explosive shell four thousand yards in a thirty-second, high-arcing flight. Thus “bombs bursting in air.”



Why would Liberals attack these symbols of America.....such as this from a Liberal historian at a major Ivy League university:



1 "Is It Time to Ditch the Star-Spangled Banner?

2. The Star-Spangled Banner, so often a prelude to our ceremonies for others, finds itself on center stage this weekend as Baltimore, the city of its birth, celebrates the national anthem’s bicentennial.

3. Two hundred years ago, a Maryland-born lawyer, Francis Scott Key, poured out his anxious feelings for the fate of his country. Having witnessed the shelling of Fort McHenry by British forces throughout the night of Sept. 13-14, 1814, Key was elated to see the American flag still flying the next morning.He wrote out four stanzas of a poem titled “Defence of Fort M’Henry,”....

4. ... 18th-century London, where the music was actually composed. Indeed, the invading army that shelled Baltimore that night has nearly as much claim to authorship as the composer, for the tune was likely brought to America by British soldiers at the time of the American Revolution. It has been testing our vocal chords and our eardrums ever since.

5. Indeed, from its murky origins, the song has become so ubiquitous that it’s difficult not to hear it... Its martial strains launch every sporting contest, adding a kind of athletic drama of its own, ....Each performance forces us to relive Key’s emotional trauma ... a kind of musical bombardment that endlessly perpetuates Key’s agony of waiting and watching.




6.... the third stanza is troubling. One line taunts the British for their failure, and specifically calls out “the hireling and slave” who joined the British forces.

7. A deeper study of Key only compounds the problem. .... his position on slavery is impossible to avoid. Key was not only a slave-owner, but he zealously defended the peculiar institution in his legal work, persecuting local journalists who questioned slavery, and even those who possessed anti-slavery writings in their homes.

a. His brother-in-law was Roger Taney, who became chief justice of the Supreme Court and authored the infamous Dred Scott decision, which argued that African-Americans could never be citizens of the United States. Indeed, much of what we know about how Key wrote out “The Star-Spangled Banner” comes from an account Taney published in 1857, the year of Dred Scott.




8. .... the “Star-Spangled Banner” gained currency as the Navy began to play it more officially in the 1890s, in the same decade that the Navy was spearheading the spread of American influence around the world. Its use accelerated in World War I, ...

9. .... is it time to rethink the Star-Spangled Banner?.... the story of Key’s nearness to slavery cannot easily be forgotten, especially in an era that demands more accountability, and offers to tools to find it. Critics over the years—I am hardly the first—have been brutal about the Star-Spangled Banner’s many shortcomings.

a. The New York Herald Tribune dismissed it as “words that nobody can remember [set] to a tune that nobody can sing.” In 1918, a woman named Kitty Cheatham denounced the words as “German propaganda” (because they undermined the Anglo-American alliance), and saw the music as a product of “darkness,” “degeneracy,” and “the carnal mind.” .... the columnist Michael Kinsley has ripped its “empty bravado” and “mindless nonsense about rockets and bombs.”

10. It would take a gigantic effort to remove the “Star-Spangled Banner” from its throne—a throne that becomes a little more entrenched this weekend. But to ask hard questions about entrenched power is an American tradition even older than our attempts to sing this enduringly difficult national song."
Is It Time to Ditch the Star-Spangled Banner - Ted Widmer - POLITICO Magazine



What's next.....the flag itself?

Liberals are more stable than the Republicans who obsess over them... another BOO HOO PC thread.

In honor of the unstable RW OP, BOO HOO !!!

Nanci Pelosi is a prime contradiction to that statement. She is what happens when you divide by zero.

 

[Redfish]

If liberalism is so good for the country then why is it liberal polices have not done anything to improve the things liberals have promised they'd improve?

Ask PC. Ask her if she'd be better off if she couldn't vote.

Republicans endorsed and fulfilled women's suffrage.

National Review s John Derbyshire Women Should Not Have The Right To Vote ThinkProgress

And this has what to do with the fact that Republicans are responsible for blacks having freedom and the right to vote, and women having said right?

This is the other one of your two methods: changing the subject.

You've failed.

Those Republicans are dead. That Republican party doesn't exist anymore. If it did,

blacks and women would vote for it.

They do and will. wait til november. obozo has destroyed the dem party for the next 30 years. But you got the black guy, and thats all you were seeing. Racist bastards.

 

[Redfish]

Why do they hate this great nation?
Why do they strive, not just to "fundamentally transform" it, but to end it??


Seems the very center of Liberalism is to find every wound and apply salt......how often must we hear of the evils of slavery, with hardly a word about the cathartic Civil War, and the monumental efforts Americans have made to amend same?



American history.....to be proud of:

September 13th, 1814 British begin 25 hour bombardment of Fort McHenry, Baltimore, but fail to take fort. A giant 15-stripe flag stitched together by Mary Young Pickersgill waved over the fort. By 1818 the third version of the flag, with 13 stripes, was created. Frances Scott Key wrote Star Spangled Banner honoring the 15-stripe version.(See 3/3) The British Navy had used “mortar vessels,” the mortar placed on the forecastle of an anchored boat, capable of blasting a 196-pound explosive shell four thousand yards in a thirty-second, high-arcing flight. Thus “bombs bursting in air.”



Why would Liberals attack these symbols of America.....such as this from a Liberal historian at a major Ivy League university:



1 "Is It Time to Ditch the Star-Spangled Banner?

2. The Star-Spangled Banner, so often a prelude to our ceremonies for others, finds itself on center stage this weekend as Baltimore, the city of its birth, celebrates the national anthem’s bicentennial.

3. Two hundred years ago, a Maryland-born lawyer, Francis Scott Key, poured out his anxious feelings for the fate of his country. Having witnessed the shelling of Fort McHenry by British forces throughout the night of Sept. 13-14, 1814, Key was elated to see the American flag still flying the next morning.He wrote out four stanzas of a poem titled “Defence of Fort M’Henry,”....

4. ... 18th-century London, where the music was actually composed. Indeed, the invading army that shelled Baltimore that night has nearly as much claim to authorship as the composer, for the tune was likely brought to America by British soldiers at the time of the American Revolution. It has been testing our vocal chords and our eardrums ever since.

5. Indeed, from its murky origins, the song has become so ubiquitous that it’s difficult not to hear it... Its martial strains launch every sporting contest, adding a kind of athletic drama of its own, ....Each performance forces us to relive Key’s emotional trauma ... a kind of musical bombardment that endlessly perpetuates Key’s agony of waiting and watching.




6.... the third stanza is troubling. One line taunts the British for their failure, and specifically calls out “the hireling and slave” who joined the British forces.

7. A deeper study of Key only compounds the problem. .... his position on slavery is impossible to avoid. Key was not only a slave-owner, but he zealously defended the peculiar institution in his legal work, persecuting local journalists who questioned slavery, and even those who possessed anti-slavery writings in their homes.

a. His brother-in-law was Roger Taney, who became chief justice of the Supreme Court and authored the infamous Dred Scott decision, which argued that African-Americans could never be citizens of the United States. Indeed, much of what we know about how Key wrote out “The Star-Spangled Banner” comes from an account Taney published in 1857, the year of Dred Scott.




8. .... the “Star-Spangled Banner” gained currency as the Navy began to play it more officially in the 1890s, in the same decade that the Navy was spearheading the spread of American influence around the world. Its use accelerated in World War I, ...

9. .... is it time to rethink the Star-Spangled Banner?.... the story of Key’s nearness to slavery cannot easily be forgotten, especially in an era that demands more accountability, and offers to tools to find it. Critics over the years—I am hardly the first—have been brutal about the Star-Spangled Banner’s many shortcomings.

a. The New York Herald Tribune dismissed it as “words that nobody can remember [set] to a tune that nobody can sing.” In 1918, a woman named Kitty Cheatham denounced the words as “German propaganda” (because they undermined the Anglo-American alliance), and saw the music as a product of “darkness,” “degeneracy,” and “the carnal mind.” .... the columnist Michael Kinsley has ripped its “empty bravado” and “mindless nonsense about rockets and bombs.”

10. It would take a gigantic effort to remove the “Star-Spangled Banner” from its throne—a throne that becomes a little more entrenched this weekend. But to ask hard questions about entrenched power is an American tradition even older than our attempts to sing this enduringly difficult national song."
Is It Time to Ditch the Star-Spangled Banner - Ted Widmer - POLITICO Magazine



What's next.....the flag itself?

Liberals are more stable than the Republicans who obsess over them... another BOO HOO PC thread.

In honor of the unstable RW OP, BOO HOO !!!

Nanci Pelosi is a prime contradiction to that statement. She is what happens when you divide by zero.

Pelosi is what you get when you combine the defective liberal gene with massive amounts of botox.

 

[Redfish]

Iraq wasn't about oil, now Libya was about oil SOS Clinton admitted it.

How on earth was Iraq not about oil?

Then again you're clearly backing up my point, that people will lie, and then people like you are willing to believe all the lies.

Iraq was about several things
1. oil
2. Saddam trying to kill Bush 41
3. bad intel
4. americas desire to get even for 9/11
5. the unfinished first gulf war

and remember, both parties authorized, funded, and supported that fiasco, just like they all supported the viet nam fiasco.

 

[initforme]

Part of the problem is that most people with half a brain aren't extremist but both parties are now being guided by their far (for lack of better term) "wacko" groups. I would bet most people are closer to the middle yet its the crazies who make the most noise and get the most attention. Time for moderates to make the noise to shut the extremists in the parties up.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Squirm all you like....you've been put in your place.

"The opposition came from Conservatives."

This is a laugh.


Every major Democrat was a segregationist.....up to and certainly including Bill 'the rapist' Clinton.

Who did bill Clinton Rape? News to me, I never even heard of him being charged with "rape."

Clinton Misogyny - SexJuanita Broaddrick (AR)- rape
Eileen Wellstone (Oxford) - rape
Elizabeth Ward Gracen - rape - quid pro quo, post incident intimidation
Regina Hopper Blakely - "forced himself on her, biting, bruising her"
Kathleen Willey (WH) - sexual assault, intimidations, threats
Sandra Allen James (DC) - sexual assault
22 Year Old 1972 (Yale) - sexual assault
Kathy Bradshaw (AK) - sexual assault
Cristy Zercher - unwelcomed sexual advance, intimidations
Paula Jones (AR) - unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
Carolyn Moffet -unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
1974 student at University of Arkansas - unwelcomed physical contact
1978-1980 - seven complaints per Arkansas state troopers
Monica Lewinsky - quid pro quo, post incident character assault
Gennifer Flowers - quid pro quo, post incident character assault
Dolly Kyle Browning - post incident character assault
Sally Perdue - post incident threats
Betty Dalton - rebuffed his advances, married to one of his supporters
Denise Reeder - apologetic note scanned
CLINTON S ROGUES GALLERY

Slick Willie raped all these women, yet the Ken Star mobile missed it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Iraq was about several things
1. oil
2. Saddam trying to kill Bush 41
3. bad intel
4. americas desire to get even for 9/11
5. the unfinished first gulf war

and remember, both parties authorized, funded, and supported that fiasco, just like they all supported the viet nam fiasco.

Bad intel because Bush told them to go find intel that proved what he needed. Perhaps revenge was there. But the big factor is that Bush wasn't the man pulling the strings, he was the puppet, and the puppet can only do so much.