3rdnlng Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I've noticed the propensity of liberals to run and hide from direct questions and also subjects that they know they can't discuss, and stay true to their Utopian beliefs while still making a sensible case. Because very few of them don't have the facts to argue with, or the balls to do so, they are constantly running and hiding or trying to confuse the issue with platitudes or misdirection. Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discussion with a liberal about race without them eventually calling you a racist? Why can I despise Obama and love Herman Cain but still be called a racist? Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discusion with a liberal about fiscal conservatism without them eventually calling you a religious zealot, or a right-wing nut wanting to make grandma eat dog food? Why won't they discuss facts? If I object to a new mosque near ground zero I'm islamophobic but if I also object to a synagogue in Riyadh I'm sensible? What other things do you fellow conservatives see that liberals run and hide from? What makes them so intellectually dishonest? I don't know about the rest of you but I feel really fortunate to have been born without the warped liberal gene that makes the liberals of this world so unfullfilled, mean and unhappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I've noticed the propensity of liberals to run and hide from direct questions and also subjects that they know they can't discuss, and stay true to their Utopian beliefs while still making a sensible case. Because very few of them don't have the facts to argue with, or the balls to do so, they are constantly running and hiding or trying to confuse the issue with platitudes or misdirection. Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discussion with a liberal about race without them eventually calling you a racist? Why can I despise Obama and love Herman Cain but still be called a racist? Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discusion with a liberal about fiscal conservatism without them eventually calling you a religious zealot, or a right-wing nut wanting to make grandma eat dog food? Why won't they discuss facts? If I object to a new mosque near ground zero I'm islamophobic but if I also object to a synagogue in Riyadh I'm sensible? What other things do you fellow conservatives see that liberals run and hide from? What makes them so intellectually dishonest? I don't know about the rest of you but I feel really fortunate to have been born without the warped liberal gene that makes the liberals of this world so unfullfilled, mean and unhappy. What a dip-****... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I've noticed the propensity of liberals to run and hide from direct questions and also subjects that they know they can't discuss, and stay true to their Utopian beliefs while still making a sensible case. Because very few of them don't have the facts to argue with, or the balls to do so, they are constantly running and hiding or trying to confuse the issue with platitudes or misdirection. Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discussion with a liberal about race without them eventually calling you a racist? Why can I despise Obama and love Herman Cain but still be called a racist? Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discusion with a liberal about fiscal conservatism without them eventually calling you a religious zealot, or a right-wing nut wanting to make grandma eat dog food? Why won't they discuss facts? If I object to a new mosque near ground zero I'm islamophobic but if I also object to a synagogue in Riyadh I'm sensible? What other things do you fellow conservatives see that liberals run and hide from? What makes them so intellectually dishonest? I don't know about the rest of you but I feel really fortunate to have been born without the warped liberal gene that makes the liberals of this world so unfullfilled, mean and unhappy. I like liberals. Many have an incomplete approach at social issues and the economy, but I believe their heart is in the right (or left ) place. I think that our country is a better place for the mixture of the left and right, the mixture of idealism and pragmatism. As a society, it lends us the ability to run forward, while keeping our feet on the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I've noticed the propensity of liberals to run and hide from direct questions and also subjects that they know they can't discuss, and stay true to their Utopian beliefs while still making a sensible case. Because very few of them don't have the facts to argue with, or the balls to do so, they are constantly running and hiding or trying to confuse the issue with platitudes or misdirection. Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discussion with a liberal about race without them eventually calling you a racist? Why can I despise Obama and love Herman Cain but still be called a racist? Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discusion with a liberal about fiscal conservatism without them eventually calling you a religious zealot, or a right-wing nut wanting to make grandma eat dog food? Why won't they discuss facts? If I object to a new mosque near ground zero I'm islamophobic but if I also object to a synagogue in Riyadh I'm sensible? What other things do you fellow conservatives see that liberals run and hide from? What makes them so intellectually dishonest? I don't know about the rest of you but I feel really fortunate to have been born without the warped liberal gene that makes the liberals of this world so unfullfilled, mean and unhappy. Enlightened thinkers like yourself are destined to be misunderstood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I've noticed the propensity of liberals to run and hide from direct questions and also subjects that they know they can't discuss, and stay true to their Utopian beliefs while still making a sensible case. Because very few of them don't have the facts to argue with, or the balls to do so, they are constantly running and hiding or trying to confuse the issue with platitudes or misdirection. Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discussion with a liberal about race without them eventually calling you a racist? Why can I despise Obama and love Herman Cain but still be called a racist? Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discusion with a liberal about fiscal conservatism without them eventually calling you a religious zealot, or a right-wing nut wanting to make grandma eat dog food? Why won't they discuss facts? If I object to a new mosque near ground zero I'm islamophobic but if I also object to a synagogue in Riyadh I'm sensible? What other things do you fellow conservatives see that liberals run and hide from? What makes them so intellectually dishonest? I don't know about the rest of you but I feel really fortunate to have been born without the warped liberal gene that makes the liberals of this world so unfullfilled, mean and unhappy. Thank you for that scintillating analysis of your own assmudgeonry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Thank you for that scintillating analysis of your own assmudgeonry. Don't be such a drive-by poster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Don't be such a drive-by poster! I've been calling what I do "drive-by insults" for years already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) I've been calling what I do "drive-by insults" for years already. Yeah, but you can't hold a candle to the likes of Simon. edit: honorable mentions go to Pasta Joe Edited August 17, 2011 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Yeah, but you can't hold a candle to the likes of Simon. Oooooh, now you're gonna get banned... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Oooooh, now you're gonna get banned... It's sort of an art....Some do it with brilliance others are Maybinesque Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share Posted August 17, 2011 Thank you for that scintillating analysis of your own assmudgeonry. The term Assmudgeonry (in fact the abc's of mudgeonry) belong to me and you do not have my permission to use it or them. Cease and desist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Yeah, but you can't hold a candle to the likes of Simon. edit: honorable mentions go to Pasta Joe I feel that it's outrageous egregious preposterous that my name doesn't come up first in a discussion of drive-by posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I feel that it's outrageous egregious preposterous that my name doesn't come up first in a discussion of drive-by posters. You, like DC, do in many cases at least dip deep down into the depths of the PPP toilet to offer some sort of explanation or justification of your views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 The term Assmudgeonry (in fact the abc's of mudgeonry) belong to me and you do not have my permission to use it or them. Cease and desist. Fortunately, since I used your trademark to describe you, that probably falls under fair use. So stop you assmudgeonry, you assmudgeoning assmudgeon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share Posted August 17, 2011 Fortunately, since I used your trademark to describe you, that probably falls under fair use. So stop you assmudgeonry, you assmudgeoning assmudgeon. Watch it or I'll bring out the B or even the C of mudgeonry for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) I've noticed the propensity of liberals to run and hide from direct questions and also subjects that they know they can't discuss, and stay true to their Utopian beliefs while still making a sensible case. Because very few of them don't have the facts to argue with, or the balls to do so, they are constantly running and hiding or trying to confuse the issue with platitudes or misdirection. Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discussion with a liberal about race without them eventually calling you a racist? Why can I despise Obama and love Herman Cain but still be called a racist? Does anyone know why you can't have an honest, open discusion with a liberal about fiscal conservatism without them eventually calling you a religious zealot, or a right-wing nut wanting to make grandma eat dog food? Why won't they discuss facts? If I object to a new mosque near ground zero I'm islamophobic but if I also object to a synagogue in Riyadh I'm sensible? What other things do you fellow conservatives see that liberals run and hide from? What makes them so intellectually dishonest? I don't know about the rest of you but I feel really fortunate to have been born without the warped liberal gene that makes the liberals of this world so unfullfilled, mean and unhappy. Nice bait and I would love to if right wingers could actually have a discussion about fiscal responsibility. Most of my conservative friends have the hearts in the right place, but their answers to getting to where they want to go is fraught with religiosity or big corporate agendas that don't do the job. Cutting taxes is fine if done correctly, but just cutting taxes for the sake of it doesn't equate to fiscal conservatism and leads to more inflated deficits. Nor as so many right wingers claim does it stimulate the economy, but rather shifts spending habits around based on their agenda and makes the situation worse. I don't believe many liberals understand this either, the Federal and State governments are pinching the heck out of the middle class and despite the Corporate Tax rate being high, its effective rate with all the loopholes is actually low compared to the rest of the world. Simplifying the tax code but not flattening the rate it would work well and limit distortions as long as overall revenue stayed the same. If it increase the rates should drop accordingly and that would be stimulative. Doing so, however is fraught with political danger. Various constituents that have their claws in both sides create many problems and despite the talk to the contrary, no one really has found the political will to do much about it. Streamlining bureaucracies would be great. Clinton did a lot of that, and Bush II did just the opposite... Only recently have Obama begun doing so, but not at the rates the Clinton, Delay and Gingrich did. Clinton made sure it was done in a responsible way with targeted early retirement buyouts. The other major issue with all of this is the cost of Medicare and the military. On the military, you can't just deactivate all these troops and expect them to find jobs, so the GI Bill is critical, but it costs and Medicare is important too especially now that the Wall Street Mavens have stolen a high percentage of the 401K money while claiming that pensions cost too much at the same time when CEO/CFO has skyrocketed. Investing in the stock market as so many Republicans claimed as the answer to reducing pensions has proved little consolation to lower and middle class retirement security needs. In fact Social Security, I believe will become more important as Baby Boomers retire, towards maintaining the well being of our population. Raising the age limit may be one way to reducing the overall cost, but in this down economy when age discrimination is everywhere the political will to do so is suspect. But go ahead with you non-sequitor accusations of racism as part of the fiscal conservative argument. That sounds more ideologically conservative and has nothing to do with fiscal discipline. Edited August 17, 2011 by North Buffalo1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I feel that it's outrageous egregious preposterous that my name doesn't come up first in a discussion of drive-by posters. Who the !@#$ are you? Most of my conservative friends have the hearts in the right place, but their answers to getting to where they want to go is fraught with religiosity or big corporate agendas that don't do the job. Cutting taxes is fine if done correctly, but just cutting taxes for the sake of it doesn't equate to fiscal conservatism and leads to more inflated deficits. With one paragraph, you basically just told everyone you don't know a !@#$ing thing about economics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Who the !@#$ are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Who the !@#$ are you? Where the !@#$ have you been? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 I've been calling what I do "drive-by insults" for years already. Drive-by? Your car doesn't have an engine... With one paragraph, you basically just told everyone you don't know a !@#$ing thing about economics. And the Bush tax cuts did what exactly? Oh crap! I think I just fell for his drive by... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts