Why am I a liberal?

I laughed when I read the Title line. I thought to myself something else a liberal doesn't know. :badgrin::lol:
 
I laughed when I read the Title line. I thought to myself something else a liberal doesn't know. :badgrin::lol:

By the end I'm sure you understood, unless of course somebody has to turn your computer on for you cause you're special.
 
Sounds like someone got cut out of the will.

If you must know as a child I was blessed to play with children who lived on dirt floors with no indoor pluming and also with those that had wine cellars and pictures of Presidents on their desks. It gave me a certain perspective on life that I don’t feel many have had the opportunity to develop.

the liberal way of saying "aaahhhhh i am better than you" lovely that you have to point out how you have a better perspective but i am reading you sling around insults and showing your tolerant side. Another reason people are done with liberals.

as far as reason goes yours is shit, about right for a con, you guys been running away from me all over the site what a bunch of wimps
 
Well at least we know where the OP is coming from.

As a citizen I say "Get your filthy paws out of my wallet!"

Translation: "I've got mine - SCREW YOU!"

Tranlsation; "gimmee, gimmee, gimmee." Where did liberals get the idea they are entitled to what other people have earned? Oh yeah . . . now I remember . . . they got it from Karl Marx.


I got from the CEO's office, ever been in one?
 
He thinks that people who don't study and get a D on a test should be given an A simply because another more diligent student earned an A


You think if you played for the Bills your son should play for the Bills.

I think every body even the ones born rich should have to earn their way, I know as parents the folk won't have the heart or ego to do that but it's still the right thing to do, right now the problem is too many people with great power that didn't earn it.

Class Matters - Social Class in the United States of America - The New York Times
Typical idiot confusing football with real life.

Tell me are you planning to leave any property to your kids?


typical con pussy running and hiding
 
You think if you played for the Bills your son should play for the Bills.

I think every body even the ones born rich should have to earn their way, I know as parents the folk won't have the heart or ego to do that but it's still the right thing to do, right now the problem is too many people with great power that didn't earn it.

Class Matters - Social Class in the United States of America - The New York Times
Typical idiot confusing football with real life.

Tell me are you planning to leave any property to your kids?


typical con pussy running and hiding

You're the pussy who won't answer my question.

You say that no one should get an inheritance and that everyone should have to earn their own way. And you won't even state that you plan on leaving you kids nothing.

You are a fucking hypocrite of the worst sort.
 
Typical idiot confusing football with real life.

Tell me are you planning to leave any property to your kids?


typical con pussy running and hiding

You're the pussy who won't answer my question.

You say that no one should get an inheritance and that everyone should have to earn their own way. And you won't even state that you plan on leaving you kids nothing.

You are a fucking hypocrite of the worst sort.


Listen here pussy shit I don't have to tell you shit about my personal life, I'm here to talk policy, you have addressed nothing cause you got nothing you can say. you think oh it's silly to say you kid should run the football team, that's got to be competitive, but running the business of course who else would I give it to? But you refuse to acknowledge that inherence makes us weaker and we should stop this passing of huge assets based on birth right, because when money rules all and money comes at birth, well that’s a Monarchy and you just refuse to even address the issue because you know you will just get your pussy ass kicked. . read the essay again the whole point is that we must write rules to keep me or anybody bring back the King
 
Last edited:
Liberal ICON, John F. Kennedy, was pleased to report that he was NOT a "liberal."

JFK himself . . . in an interview with the Sarurday Evening Post in 1953 . . . declared, "I'd bevery happy to tell them I'm not a liberal. I never joined the Americans for Democratic Action or the American Veterans Committee. I'm not comfortable with those people."
-- JFK and Nixon

JFK had some faults, but he was (by an large) a good public servant. The Democrat Parody doesn't offer his likes any more.
 
Last edited:
typical con pussy running and hiding

You're the pussy who won't answer my question.

You say that no one should get an inheritance and that everyone should have to earn their own way. And you won't even state that you plan on leaving you kids nothing.

You are a fucking hypocrite of the worst sort.


Listen here pussy shit I don't have to tell you shit about my personal life, I'm here to talk policy, you have addressed nothing cause you got nothing you can say. you think oh it's silly to say you kid should run the football team, that's got to be competitive, but running the business of course who else would I give it to? But you refuse to acknowledge that inherence makes us weaker and we should stop this passing of huge assets based on birth right, because when money rules all and money comes at birth, well that’s a Monarchy and you just refuse to even address the issue because you know you will just get your pussy ass kicked. . read the essay again the whole point is that we must write rules to keep me or anybody bring back the King

yeah because a father leaving his business and money to his kids is going to replace democracy with monarchy.

You're a fucking hypocrite, and idiot and a sheep. A real fucking triple threat.
 
Last edited:
You're the pussy who won't answer my question.

You say that no one should get an inheritance and that everyone should have to earn their own way. And you won't even state that you plan on leaving you kids nothing.

You are a fucking hypocrite of the worst sort.


Listen here pussy shit I don't have to tell you shit about my personal life, I'm here to talk policy, you have addressed nothing cause you got nothing you can say. you think oh it's silly to say you kid should run the football team, that's got to be competitive, but running the business of course who else would I give it to? But you refuse to acknowledge that inherence makes us weaker and we should stop this passing of huge assets based on birth right, because when money rules all and money comes at birth, well that’s a Monarchy and you just refuse to even address the issue because you know you will just get your pussy ass kicked. . read the essay again the whole point is that we must write rules to keep me or anybody bring back the King

yeah because a father leaving his business and money to his kids is going to replace democracy with monarchy.

You're a fucking hypocrite, and idiot and a sheep. A real fucking triple threat.

How much does it take to make it a Kingdom? 20 billion? 50 billion a 100 trillion? tell me how much? is there any limit to how much you love the King?

You are a sheep and a fool and you sell your children's future down the drain for the sake of your stupidity.
 
You're the pussy who won't answer my question.

You say that no one should get an inheritance and that everyone should have to earn their own way. And you won't even state that you plan on leaving you kids nothing.

You are a fucking hypocrite of the worst sort.


Listen here pussy shit I don't have to tell you shit about my personal life, I'm here to talk policy, you have addressed nothing cause you got nothing you can say. you think oh it's silly to say you kid should run the football team, that's got to be competitive, but running the business of course who else would I give it to? But you refuse to acknowledge that inherence makes us weaker and we should stop this passing of huge assets based on birth right, because when money rules all and money comes at birth, well that’s a Monarchy and you just refuse to even address the issue because you know you will just get your pussy ass kicked. . read the essay again the whole point is that we must write rules to keep me or anybody bring back the King

yeah because a father leaving his business and money to his kids is going to replace democracy with monarchy.

You're a fucking hypocrite, and idiot and a sheep. A real fucking triple threat.

Why don't you take your naive shit out there and talk to some of the mom and pop 5 and dime store owners oh that's right there aren't any cause the Wall Mart Kingdom killed them all, you are such a stupid shit.
 
Liberal ICON, John F. Kennedy, was pleased to report that he was NOT a "liberal."

JFK himself . . . in an interview with the Sarurday Evening Post in 1953 . . . declared, "I'd bevery happy to tell them I'm not a liberal. I never joined the Americans for Democratic Action or the American Veterans Committee. I'm not comfortable with those people."
-- JFK and Nixon

JFK had some faults, but he was (by an large) a good public servant. The Democrat Parody doesn't offer his likes any more.

JFK had a top rate of 70%, not too bad.
 
Listen here pussy shit I don't have to tell you shit about my personal life, I'm here to talk policy, you have addressed nothing cause you got nothing you can say. you think oh it's silly to say you kid should run the football team, that's got to be competitive, but running the business of course who else would I give it to? But you refuse to acknowledge that inherence makes us weaker and we should stop this passing of huge assets based on birth right, because when money rules all and money comes at birth, well that’s a Monarchy and you just refuse to even address the issue because you know you will just get your pussy ass kicked. . read the essay again the whole point is that we must write rules to keep me or anybody bring back the King

yeah because a father leaving his business and money to his kids is going to replace democracy with monarchy.

You're a fucking hypocrite, and idiot and a sheep. A real fucking triple threat.

Why don't you take your naive shit out there and talk to some of the mom and pop 5 and dime store owners oh that's right there aren't any cause the Wall Mart Kingdom killed them all, you are such a stupid shit.

Do we all see now how incredibly backward, ignorant dishonest and generally stupid these modern American libs are?

Because a highly successful and very competitive LARGE scale business does put smaller and less efficient entities out of business, therefore (in the simplistic somewhat retarded view of the modern American liberal) the LARGE scale entity is "bad."

Fucking stupid drone shitheads.
 
yeah because a father leaving his business and money to his kids is going to replace democracy with monarchy.

You're a fucking hypocrite, and idiot and a sheep. A real fucking triple threat.

Why don't you take your naive shit out there and talk to some of the mom and pop 5 and dime store owners oh that's right there aren't any cause the Wall Mart Kingdom killed them all, you are such a stupid shit.

Do we all see now how incredibly backward, ignorant dishonest and generally stupid these modern American libs are?

Because a highly successful and very competitive LARGE scale business does put smaller and less efficient entities out of business, therefore (in the simplistic somewhat retarded view of the modern American liberal) the LARGE scale entity is "bad."

Fucking stupid drone shitheads.

Yo stupid shithead, I got no problem with big, just stupid rich brats running the world, you got a problem with that? You toad.
 
I guess this is one "they" really don't want you to read.....

First all liberal presidents had high approval ratings because they pander. But pandering is not healthy for the individual and it is not healthy for the country. Every bit of the 16 trillion dollars in debt can be tied to policies started by Liberals. Sure conservatives were in office while the debt was growing but the debt was growing because of policies started by Liberals. This country has reached a point of no return. Liberal policies one way or another are about to bring down this country regardless of who is in office it will all come crashing down. Now if Republicans get in to all three branches the pain of the wall will be a little less as they will start cutting now. However, if Democrats maintain the presidency then we will hit a brick wall in about 4 years. Roughly around 2016 when Social Security truly runs out and all the down grades to our credits start to hit home. So cheer if you want but you guys are killing us all.
 
I guess this is one "they" really don't want you to read.....

First all liberal presidents had high approval ratings because they pander. But pandering is not healthy for the individual and it is not healthy for the country. Every bit of the 16 trillion dollars in debt can be tied to policies started by Liberals. Sure conservatives were in office while the debt was growing but the debt was growing because of policies started by Liberals. This country has reached a point of no return. Liberal policies one way or another are about to bring down this country regardless of who is in office it will all come crashing down. Now if Republicans get in to all three branches the pain of the wall will be a little less as they will start cutting now. However, if Democrats maintain the presidency then we will hit a brick wall in about 4 years. Roughly around 2016 when Social Security truly runs out and all the down grades to our credits start to hit home. So cheer if you want but you guys are killing us all.

What could possibly be more "pandering" than "I'll cut your taxes and balance the budget"?

I guess you slept through 2000-2001 when we had a balanced budget thanks only to the Ds of 1993?

Here let me remind you what life was like back when Washington was "taking in too much money":


“The most recent projections from OMB and CBO indicate that, if current policies remain in place, the total unified surplus will reach about $800 billion in fiscal year 2010, including an on-budget surplus of almost $500 billion. Moreover, the admittedly quite uncertain long-term budget exercises released by the CBO last October maintain an implicit on-budget surplus under baseline assumptions well past 2030 despite the budgetary pressures from the aging of the baby-boom generation, especially on the major health programs.

These most recent projections, granted their tentativeness, nonetheless make clear that the highly desirable goal of paying off the federal debt is in reach and, indeed, would occur well before the end of the decade under baseline assumptions. This is in marked contrast to the perception of a year ago, when the elimination of the debt did not appear likely until the next decade. But continuing to run surpluses beyond the point at which we reach zero or near-zero federal debt brings to center stage the critical longer-term fiscal policy issue of whether the federal government should accumulate large quantities of private (more technically, nonfederal) assets.

At zero debt, the continuing unified budget surpluses now projected under current law imply a major accumulation of private assets by the federal government. Such an accumulation would make the federal government a significant factor in our nation's capital markets and would risk significant distortion in the allocation of capital to its most productive uses. Such a distortion could be quite costly, as it is our extraordinarily effective allocation process that has enabled such impressive increases in productivity and standards of living despite a relatively low domestic saving rate.”


“Returning to the broader fiscal picture, I continue to believe, as I have testified previously, that all else being equal, a declining level of federal debt is desirable because it holds down long-term real interest rates, thereby lowering the cost of capital and elevating private investment. The rapid capital deepening that has occurred in the U.S. economy in recent years is a testament to these benefits. But the sequence of upward revisions to the budget surplus projections for several years now has reshaped the choices and opportunities before us.
Indeed, in almost any credible baseline scenario, short of a major and prolonged economic contraction, the full benefits of debt reduction are now achieved well before the end of this decade--a prospect that did not seem reasonable only a year or even six months ago. Thus, the emerging key fiscal policy need is now to address the implications of maintaining surpluses beyond the point at which publicly held debt is effectively eliminated.”


Testimony of Chairman Alan Greenspan
Current fiscal issues
Before the Committee on the Budget, U.S. House of Representatives
March 2, 2001
 
Great and wonderful only a few problems in that though. First we have never really been balanced since the 1969 under Richard Nixon. Since that time the debt has always grown. Under Clinton the budget was balanced simply because we do not count interest in the budget. Now Clinton did get closer than anyone else but that was using the boosted economy built up by Reagan and Bush and raising taxes on that economy. Of course tax policy has a future impact more than a current impact and Clinton created the disaster we are currently sitting in not only through taxes but the policies as well. Especially the housing for everyone crap. Last, the budget has truly not been balanced since prior to FDR since we have never budgeted future liabilities for the welfare programs started then. If we budget future liabilities like states and businesses do, we are so broke that 16 trillion looks like chump change. So keep on listening to the lies while the world and country around us slowly is collapsing but denial does not make things go away.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top