Why do people hate Liberals?

[American_Jihad]

Liberals haven't changed a bit, it's your brainwashed little RW brains that have....change the channel.

What do you know, you're a dupe the only thing you know is salunsky's rule # 5, go smoke another

load...

 

[American_Jihad]

The Progressive Lynch Mob Claims Another Victim​

June 26, 2013
By David Horowitz and John Perazzo


Celebrity chef Paula Deen is a Georgia-based restaurateur, a self-made woman and national celebrity who has published fourteen cookbooks and hosted popular TV cooking shows on the Food Network for more than a decade. Known for her gregarious personality and folksy southern charm, Deen has performed charity work on behalf of poor people and minorities across the United States. She has donated massive quantities of food, money, and time to Second Harvest, an organization that distributes grocery products to the poor. She has given large donations to, and held fundraisers for, Blessings in a Backpack—a program that feeds elementary-school children from low-income families. This year she created the Bag Lady Foundation to help women and children in financial need. In each of these cases, a substantial percentage of the beneficiaries of Deen’s generosity have been African Americans. But thanks to a malicious law-suit, Deen’s irrepressible candor, and a nation-wide vilification campaign conducted by a civil rights lynch mob, she has been tarred and feathered as a “racist.” As a result, she is out of a job and out of pocket many millions of dollars in business revenues lost.

The campaign against Deen was triggered by a couple of answers she inadvisedly volunteered during a private deposition last month. The deposition was part of a $1.2 million discrimination/sexual-harassment lawsuit filed against her by a disgruntled former employee named Lisa Jackson. Jackson, a white woman, had managed a Savannah seafood restaurant owned by Deen and her brother. According to Jackson, the working environment at the restaurant was permeated by sexual innuendos and racial slurs. During her deposition, Paula Deen was asked by Jackson’s attorney if she herself had “ever used the N-word.” A person sensitive to the toxic environment civil rights vigilantes have created for white Americans—and particularly southerners—would have said “No,” particularly since Deen had never used the word in the course of her business. But Paula Deen is a transparently decent person, dangerously innocent of the racial mine fields into which the suit had transported her.

Instead of “No,” or “I don’t recall ever having used that word,” she replied, “Yes, of course.” She then explained that it happened a “very long time” ago. When asked for details, she said she had used the word in 1986 while recounting to her husband how she had been held up earlier that day by a black gunman at the bank where she was employed. In other words, she used the word in a private conversation with her husband twenty-seven years ago. She also admitted to telling or tolerating “off-colored jokes” of the kind that “we have all told.” (Indeed, TV comedians like Lisa Lampanelli have made racial humor their stock-in-trade, as have black comedians since Richard Pryor – but the butts of their jokes are white.) “But,” Deen added, that’s just not a word that we use as time has gone on. Things have changed since the ’60s in the South. And my children and my brother object to that word being used in any cruel or mean behavior. As well as I do.” If Paula Deen is a racist, every white, black, brown and yellow person in America is a racist too.

...

Ultimately, it wasn’t an Al Sharpton or a Jesse Jackson who destroyed the public career of Paula Deen. It was the lynch mob that the civil rights movement has become and that has turned its values upside down. These are manifest in the orgies of venomous self-righteousness that rise to the surface every time an opportunity presents itself to dramatize a problem that was effectively put to rest a generation ago. Yes, there are racists among us and no doubt always will be. But they are not simply white, and they do not limit their poisonous words to private conversations with their husbands in closeted circumstances twenty-seven years in the past.

The Progressive Lynch Mob Claims Another Victim | FrontPage Magazine

 

[Avatar4321]

That's a really bad picture of Paula. She will be able to recoup.

 

[American_Jihad]

That's a really bad picture of Paula. She will be able to recoup.

Fixed...

 

[Cowman]

A couple sticks of butter will make it better.

 

[rdean]

Right wingers hate so many. It's really hard to keep track.

 

[American_Jihad]

Right wingers hate so many. It's really hard to keep track.

I can see why nobody loves you, 33,500 posts and no reputation, hell cowshit has more rep than you, must be the chibongo way ah...



...2 4 1

 

[TemplarKormac]

The OP wants an honest answer? Okay,

Liberals are narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy. They see prosperity as a means of inequality, but they themselves have never tried it. They have the notion that they always know best, and use specious reasoning to justify government involvement in every aspect of our lives. They are racist, intolerant and misogynistic, in spite of claiming otherwise. They are rank hypocrites. Instead of arguing a point with facts, they try to will their way to a point. If they fail to beat you in an argument, the standard pejorative "racist" is hurled in your direction.

Why do I hate liberals? They are childish. (Not all of them, mind you.) plain and simple.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's a really bad picture of Paula. She will be able to recoup.

Fixed...

I m not sure that's much better lol

 

[Avatar4321]

Right wingers hate so many. It's really hard to keep track.

Not really. Ill give you the list of people I hate:








Sums it up.

I don't even hate you. I pity you. But I don't hate you.

 

[Avatar4321]

The OP wants an honest answer? Okay,

Liberals are narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy. They see prosperity as a means of inequality, but they themselves have never tried it. They have the notion that they always know best, and use specious reasoning to justify government involvement in every aspect of our lives. They are racist, intolerant and misogynistic, in spite of claiming otherwise. They are rank hypocrites. Instead of arguing a point with facts, they try to will their way to a point. If they fail to beat you in an argument, the standard pejorative "racist" is hurled in your direction.

Why do I hate liberals? They are childish. (Not all of them, mind you.) plain and simple.

There are way too many conservatives who are just as narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Because in order for them to conceal their utter contempt for the Constitution and the Rule of Law, they say that the Constitution is a "Living and Breathing document," that the founding fathers "could not have envisioned xyz."

No, the founding fathers and the STATES that RATIFIED, could not have envisioned XYZ, that's why they wrote Article V, which prescribes how the Constitution is to be AMENDED, upon Consent of 3/4 of the STATES.

It doesn't say that Congress or the SCOTUS or the President have the power to change the Constitution.

If you feel the Constitution is "behind the times" then fucking amend it. There are plenty of good laws on the books that are not constitutional, but I would be perfectly willing to amend the constitution to allow for them.

Also notice that 99% of your Libtard agenda couldn't be enforced without a para-military police force in every town and city. IDEAS SO GOOD THEY'RE MANDATORY AT GUN POINT!

 

[zeke]

Right wingers hate so many. It's really hard to keep track.

I can see why nobody loves you, 33,500 posts and no reputation, hell cowshit has more rep than you, must be the chibongo way ah...



...2 4 1

And here you have the real difference between right and left posting on here.

The right wing whack jobs think that the pos rep MEANS something. The right wing whack job will post something truly stupid and the other right wingers flock to that post to give thanks and rep. (almost like an act of worshilp). Acting just like it means something. They even threaten to give neg reps. Like it means something. Hell they ain't even smart enough to turn the rep off.

The left side wack jobs are a little more subdued. Thank god for left wingers. They are the only ones you can have a conversation with.

The right wingers are good and happy only if they can shoot "it", pollute "it" or tell YOU what to do with "it". Whatever it is.

 

[editec]

Because in order for them to conceal their utter contempt for the Constitution and the Rule of Law, they say that the Constitution is a "Living and Breathing document," that the founding fathers "could not have envisioned xyz."

No, the founding fathers and the STATES that RATIFIED, could not have envisioned XYZ, that's why they wrote Article V, which prescribes how the Constitution is to be AMENDED, upon Consent of 3/4 of the STATES.

It doesn't say that Congress or the SCOTUS or the President have the power to change the Constitution.

If you feel the Constitution is "behind the times" then fucking amend it. There are plenty of good laws on the books that are not constitutional, but I would be perfectly willing to amend the constitution to allow for them.

Also notice that 99% of your Libtard agenda couldn't be enforced without a para-military police force in every town and city. IDEAS SO GOOD THEY'RE MANDATORY AT GUN POINT!

Are you familiar with this clause in the Consitution, Lad?

The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Its not called the ELASTIC CLAUSE for nothing

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Its not called the ELASTIC CLAUSE for nothing

What would be the point of enumerating federal powers, if that clause was elastic, granting the Federal Government any power it wishes?

What would be the point of the 9th and 10th Amendments (which were ratified AFTER that original Constitution), if the "elastic clause" trumped then whenever the federal government wanted to?

"Elastic Clause" is a term invented by libtards.

The Necessary and Proper clause gives Congress the power to make Laws to carry out their ENUMERATED (foregoing) powers, and any other power vested WITHIN the Constitution (not OUTSIDE the constitution) in either Article I, II, III, IV, V, VI or the amendments.

For instance, if the federal government wants to use its ENUMERATED power to build a fort, it has the right to pass a law purchasing lumber. Purchasing lumber is a necessary and proper task for completing a fort.

"Elastic Clause Card failed; must try Supremacy Clause Card."

As understood by the founders and the STATES that ratified the Constitution in their ratification documents (you can read any of them online), this was the accepted interpretation upon ratification:

The "necessary and proper" clause requires a right fit between means and ends. Besides being a proper end, the end must also be necessary (in the plainest sense of the word), in terms of the stated purpose of government ("to secure theBlessings of Liberty"). The ends must be necessary, and if they are, the means may be proper or improper. The means may violate the principles of federalism and the separation of powers, the enumerated powers or may violate natural rights. All laws enacted by congress must be necessary to secure liberty, aimed at goals consistent with the enumerated powers, preserving federalism and the separation of powers and protect natural rights.

The "end" must be both constitutional and necessary; not unconstitutional and feckless.

The "means" to accomplish this end, must not usurp any power of the states. Buying bundles of lumber wouldn't usurp anyone State's power.

You have now proven the title of the OP: Why does everyone hate liberals?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Right wingers hate so many. It's really hard to keep track.

Modern "liberals" hate liberty and are all about control.

 

[Wolfsister77]

The OP wants an honest answer? Okay,

Liberals are narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy. They see prosperity as a means of inequality, but they themselves have never tried it. They have the notion that they always know best, and use specious reasoning to justify government involvement in every aspect of our lives. They are racist, intolerant and misogynistic, in spite of claiming otherwise. They are rank hypocrites. Instead of arguing a point with facts, they try to will their way to a point. If they fail to beat you in an argument, the standard pejorative "racist" is hurled in your direction.

Why do I hate liberals? They are childish. (Not all of them, mind you.) plain and simple.

You just described many Conservatives as well.

 

[thanatos144]

So lets talk about hypocrisy of progressives shall we???? Paula Deen said ****** once 27 years ago and gets fired.....Robert Bryd Was in the KKK and wanted to hang black people but they made him a senator till he went to hell ...... Can you see it?

 

[TemplarKormac]

The OP wants an honest answer? Okay,

Liberals are narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy. They see prosperity as a means of inequality, but they themselves have never tried it. They have the notion that they always know best, and use specious reasoning to justify government involvement in every aspect of our lives. They are racist, intolerant and misogynistic, in spite of claiming otherwise. They are rank hypocrites. Instead of arguing a point with facts, they try to will their way to a point. If they fail to beat you in an argument, the standard pejorative "racist" is hurled in your direction.

Why do I hate liberals? They are childish. (Not all of them, mind you.) plain and simple.

There are way too many conservatives who are just as narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy.

He wanted my view in all honesty so I gave it to him. I could just as easily ask him why he hates conservatives, he could have phrased the question differently, too. This thread was easily designed to start a fight between the two sides. Frankly stirring the pot to me is overtly childish.

 

[thanatos144]

The OP wants an honest answer? Okay,

Liberals are narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy. They see prosperity as a means of inequality, but they themselves have never tried it. They have the notion that they always know best, and use specious reasoning to justify government involvement in every aspect of our lives. They are racist, intolerant and misogynistic, in spite of claiming otherwise. They are rank hypocrites. Instead of arguing a point with facts, they try to will their way to a point. If they fail to beat you in an argument, the standard pejorative "racist" is hurled in your direction.

Why do I hate liberals? They are childish. (Not all of them, mind you.) plain and simple.

There are way too many conservatives who are just as narcissistic, arrogant, and foolhardy.

He wanted my view in all honesty so I gave it to him. I could just as easily ask him why he hates conservatives, he could have phrased the question differently, too. This thread was easily designed to start a fight between the two sides. Frankly stirring the pot to me is overtly childish.

And ignoring the differences is mature?