Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > 2016 guess.      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 calguy14
Joined: 8/17/2014
Msg: 150
2016 guess.Page 7 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
@Yule
I am certain Jeb has learned a few things observing daddy and big brother in office.He released all his email correspondence to reassure supporters and backers.His wife will be an asset.

A few years have gone by since billy boy left office,more records are available to be scrutinized.... Wonder what kind of dirt will surface about Hillary and billy....should be good. :)


Edit
This time around maybe a woman will surface again....:)
 Double Cabin
Joined: 11/29/2004
Msg: 151
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 1/31/2015 7:29:43 AM
Having seen Romney compromise so many positions and principles in 2012 to appease the lunatic Teabilly Fringe the idea a far right candidate can take up residence on PA Ave. is in reality of course ludicrous. Given the lack of respect John Huntsman got in the last election I of course do not expect much moderation, and if Christie tries to pull his own Romney the informed fiscally responsible will of course again default to the lesser of two evils any rational, critical thinker can thank for the last 6 years when after inheriting the worst financial crisis of our lifetime this President has presided over the doubling of the stock market and the lowering of the unemployment rate to where it was before the Bush 43 debacle BY ANY MEASURE.

Could it be Kasich? Who knows what imbeciles like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are going to do to deceitfully misinform the ignorant right? Any Democrat's dream would be for Republicans to nominate someone without a prayer in Hades again. My dream Republican ticket would be Jindahl and Palin, he could perform an exorcism of Christie on Sarah's porch while she glared across the Bering Straits at Putin.

On the Democratic side of course Hillary has the inside track, her association with the greatest period of economic expansion in this country's history during Bill's tenure after ramming through one of the largest tax increases in American History in '93 is hard for any sane person truly interested in the further improvement of our economy after the last 3 Republican Presidents signed off on the far and away greatest accumulation of national debt. In my understanding her biggest challenge right now would likely come from Jim Webb since his military credentials will appeal significantly to the ignorant and paranoid isolationists.

Eric think's Jihadists are the greatest threat to us now. With all due respect Eric beyond the smoke and mirrors of deceitful Republican rhetoric back in reality we have FAR greater national security concerns like: 1) Critical Thinking Skills: Within this thread we see the bigoted, biased, and outright prejudiced ignorance that comes from far too many of us letting others propagate their deceitful agendas by doing our "thinking" for us. 2) Climate Change: Even if you refuse to accept the logical reasoning of the Theory of AGW there is no refuting the climatic record. 3) Obesity and other health concerns: We need to stop indulging healthcare profiteers and embrace the sanity of single payer that has served the rest of the developed world so well. 4) A runaway Military Industrial Complex Eisenhower, one of our nation's greatest soldiers, warned us about more than half a century ago. Just imagine if we didn't have the trillions in debt Bush 43 kept off the books and now ignoramuses on the right blame this President for because he has the decency to not hide our past transgressions? Imagine if we didn't have deceitfully motivated Benghazzi vendettas and people held the previous President accountable for the more the 200 documented false statements [lies] of his Administration's nearly 1,000 documented false statements leading up to the 2003 invasion of a Sovreign Nation that never attacked us and never used WMDs without the tacit approval of sitting [Republican] US President's?

I'm sure the inane chorus of "when are you going to stop blaming Bush for Obama's failures" will be here shortly. The fundamental error in logic so many of you make in blaming the President and not obstructionist Republicans for our slower than should of been recovery is less than smart to put it as kindly as possible. To not have been completely disgusted by Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Kevin McCarthy, and other prominent "Republicans" meeting on Inauguration Day 2009 to plot how to make this President fail without concern number one for the American people IMO and with all due respect makes you as unAmerican as any of those deceitful schmucks.

The greatest threat to our Republic right now is the over abundance of unAmerican posterior orifices on the "right" with the audacity to call themselves "Republicans." If there is an afterlife Lincoln is in Hades because of the imbeciles that have taken over the party he created. Teddy Roosevelt would be right there with him. What do you think Barry Goldwater would think of today's "Republicans" with an alacrity to deny equality to consenting adult homosexuals that is unequivocally guaranteed to them by the Declaration and Constitution? With a far more "liberal" fiscal record than this President do you think Ronald Reagen could be elected in today's environment of deceitfully cultivated lunacy? Where are the patriotic Republicans that were crucial in passing our landmark civil rights legislation over the objections of racist Southern Democrats? They're certainly not the ones that have welcomed the migration of those schmucks to the Republican PArty.

"Think! ?It's very patriotic!" Especially when done with critical honesty.
 HFX_RGB
Joined: 7/26/2014
Msg: 152
2016 guess.
Posted: 1/31/2015 7:32:59 AM

Eric think's Jihadists are the greatest threat to us now. With all due respect Eric beyond the smoke and mirrors of deceitful Republican rhetoric back in reality we have FAR greater national security concerns like:...



FYI: Eric is part of the smoke and mirror show.
 professora
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 153
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 1/31/2015 10:27:40 AM
What about names like Scott Walker? Ted Cruz? Marco Rubio?

I vote for the person...not the party. I probably wont vote for Hilary (though I would Bill) b/c she has too many negatives.

Happy USA :)
 Yule_liquor
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 154
2016 guess.
Posted: 1/31/2015 9:15:18 PM
@POST 169


Well she received the best medical care in the best hospitals, flew all over the world on private jets,


^ this was mainly done at the behest of those who felt it was in their best interests to hob-nob with her in whatever way they could. I didn't read anything that indicated that she demanded the Papacy to fly her around in "private jets" or that she get treatment at the world's best Medical facilities.


but as a catholic she profited by getting the biggest prize a female can get from the club, she was made a saint.


^ you are joking of course :)
I'm sure you realize that she was made a "saint" well after she died
So unless she got to enjoy this "big prize" in the hereafter,
I highly doubt that this is something that she personally 'profited' from.


Becoming a saint for some catholics is worth more than anything else.


^ Is this something you read from some blogger as well?
Having been in the Catholic faith in my early days
I've never recalled ever hearing even from the most pious of followers,
that they were vying for sainthood "more than anything else" in their lives
especially considering that this is a title that gets bestowed post-humously
------------------------------------------
@poster 170


Thought maybe its karma... the floundering,


You better hope and pray that the US never flounders
because if it truly does than most of the world is gonna have it way worse than we will,
and what you will get is a re-play of the "dark-ages" but this time it will be on steroids.
Remember that the "green-back" is the de-facto currency of the world
and if you knew any better, you would hope it stays that way for a good long time to come.


for all you've done around the world.
Truly America... when people knew their place.


We "knew our place" up to 1942, when we tried hard minding our own business
until some ass-hole dictators declared war on us
which forced us to make the whole world "our business".
--------------------------------------

post 171


I am certain Jeb has learned a few things observing daddy and big brother in office.


Yeah, from his Pop; I'm sure he's learn how not to have the public 'read his lips' too much.
From his Bro; all he has to do is ask for his suggestions and then just do the direct opposite of what Gwb says.
Its a no-brainer.


He released all his email correspondence to reassure supporters and backers.His wife will be an asset.


wow, what a milestone from a GOP candidate, well that settles it; he's got my vote!


A few years have gone by since billy boy left office,more records are available to be scrutinized.... Wonder what kind of dirt will surface about Hillary and billy....should be good. :)


Don't hold your breath
considering that they've been exonerated of all they've been charged with.
 HFX_RGB
Joined: 7/26/2014
Msg: 155
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/1/2015 6:50:53 AM


So unless she got to enjoy this "big prize" in the hereafter,
I highly doubt that this is something that she personally 'profited' from.


Great point, because we all know that religious people really do not care what happens after they die.




Having been in the Catholic faith in my early days
I've never recalled ever hearing even from the most pious of followers,
that they were vying for sainthood "more than anything else" in their lives
especially considering that this is a title that gets bestowed post-humously


Well that clears everything up, you never heard a catholics care about being a saint, so it much be true.

And obviouly these where people with close ties to the guy in the funny hat and red shoes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



We "knew our place" up to 1942, when we tried hard minding our own business until some ass-hole dictators declared war on us which forced us to make the whole world "our business".


Actually it had more to do with the fact that people like Henry Ford and Prescot Bush were involved with the fascist regimes of Europe.
 Yule_liquor
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 156
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/1/2015 8:23:31 AM
^

Actually it had more to do with the fact that people like Henry Ford and Prescot Bush were involved with the fascist regimes of Europe.


The French & Brits were doing just as much business with them(they set the precedence)
which is probably why they didn't step in when Hitler marched into the saarland (without firing a shot)
because they didn't want to upset the apple-cart of income.
 calguy14
Joined: 8/17/2014
Msg: 157
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/1/2015 2:04:43 PM
Wages of War yule.
@HFX
Vying to be a saint would be like giving to charity for the recognition.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 158
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 3/23/2015 6:57:17 PM
If Mike Pence jumps on the GOP bandwagon...he may just wipe out the rest of the GOP candidates except Rand Paul as Rand has quite the following and just may get young people to vote.

I say Hilary is a shoe in, although I can't stand her or her policy's. (unless war is declared before the election. If it is, we may see Obama in for a might longer than thought). Hopefully not, but I wouldn't right off the idea. Wouldn't that cause an outrage?

I hope the people get wise before the election and demand that super pacs aren't allowed, and fair voting/representative voting is in first. Next time around get rid of the electoral college?

You guys are going to have a tough time voting for the lesser of evils. Is this why so many have shunned elections?

What would get you out to vote? Keep you home?
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 159
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 3/23/2015 7:07:55 PM
In Canada 2015, I think Harper (conservative) will get a minority even though he should be chucked out completely. Hopefully he'll quit because a minority won't be good enough for power tripping.

I think Trudeau (a liberal) is his biggest opponent even though I don't have any respect for him or his policies. The pot smokers like him. (and his dad was P.M.).

Thomas Mulcair (NDP) would be my 2nd choice. He seems to want to protect peoples rights.

I'm voting Green as always. (to keep whoever is in power, in check) and because it makes sense for ALL.
 NotGorshkovAgain
Joined: 4/29/2009
Msg: 160
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 3/24/2015 5:31:37 PM


We "knew our place" up to 1942, when we tried hard minding our own business until some ass-hole dictators declared war on us which forced us to make the whole world "our business".



Actually it had more to do with the fact that people like Henry Ford and Prescot Bush were involved with the fascist regimes of Europe.

Actually it had a lot more to do with the fact of Lend Lease & American goods being shipped to supply Britain so she could stay in the war, which for some strange reason the Germans took exception to.

So no, it had exactly zero to do with minding your own business - and neither Ford nor Bush did anything that wasn't also done by every other frikking industrialist/businessman in the world when given the opportunity to sell their goods to paying customers.
 HFX_RGB
Joined: 7/26/2014
Msg: 161
2016 guess.
Posted: 3/25/2015 5:23:35 AM

So no, it had exactly zero to do with minding your own business - and neither Ford nor Bush did anything that wasn't also done by every other frikking industrialist/businessman in the world when given the opportunity to sell their goods to paying customers.


Exactly, as sure there where laws against doing it, but hey, they where just businessmen trying to make a buck so let give them a pass.
 FullMoonGuy
Joined: 3/7/2014
Msg: 162
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/9/2017 7:02:48 PM

Hillary to win.


Wrong.


My guess is the Koch darling, Scott Walker, gets the Republican nod.


Wrong.


I still think Elizabeth Warren will eventually re-think things and step into the race.


Wronger.


Ummmm ... the "Donald"?


Bingo.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 163
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/10/2017 11:35:24 AM
well, December 7 1941 the Japanese decided we were in the way of their gas and it was time to do something about it (how ironic). As for Germany, most of the west figured they were the lesser-evil against Uncle Joe. Even the Catholic Church thought fascists were better than godless Communists trying to push atheism. and out of the 1930's Great Depression, Germany sure was a rising market. Money goes where its wanted. And of course, there was a tiny little matter of the 1934 coup that didn't happen, thank you General Smedley Butler

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/coup.html

the origins of WW2 are a tiny bit complicated, but Gorshie brings up a salient point of Lend/Lease. When Communist nations backed the Vietnamese against us, we weren't thrilled about it...but nukes, like fences, make for good neighbors.

Alas, if DameWright (shouldn't she be DameLeft?) had predicted the popular vote, she could have been closer...
 John252817
Joined: 8/24/2016
Msg: 164
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/10/2017 7:35:12 PM
Well, it was quite the surprise for all the liberals and many others but wow, Hillary got CRUSHED!! I see Chelsea is out and about on twitter and I am sure billy and hillary are hoping she is the next corrupt clinton. Not a chance and thank God for that!!
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 165
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/10/2017 7:56:06 PM
Whoop! Whoop! And he's back, Hillary hating addiction in full force. LOL
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 166
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 7:03:22 AM
Poor Johnny Flounder, can't talk about the great job his candidate is doing when two courts hand him his ass. Yikes! Maybe Flounder can blame Obama somehow for why Ivanna's clothing line got clotheslined.
 _babblefish
Joined: 9/23/2011
Msg: 167
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 7:57:22 AM

Well, it was quite the surprise for all the liberals and many others but wow, Hillary got CRUSHED!! I see Chelsea is out and about on twitter and I am sure billy and hillary are hoping she is the next corrupt clinton. Not a chance and thank God for that!!


chuck, you're one of those x'tain's that talks in tongues, amirite?
 John252817
Joined: 8/24/2016
Msg: 168
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 8:20:26 AM
I see dayna and others are hurt that Hillary's name is brought up again. dayna, you can talk about a President but you sure hate to hear someone else talk. That is pretty common among liberals, believe what I write or don't speak at all. Your bigotry is showing. babble, sorry you hate Christians like some others in here. Hatred and bigotry....YIKES!!!!
 _babblefish
Joined: 9/23/2011
Msg: 169
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 8:38:49 AM

“Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence.”


Hitchens

*chuck, you're a bigotry enabler, a social coward trying to "preserve a façade of mutual respect"
 2ufo2
Joined: 8/29/2016
Msg: 170
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 4:10:34 PM


I see dayna and others are hurt that Hillary's name is brought up again. dayna, you can talk about a President but you sure hate to hear someone else talk. That is pretty common among liberals, believe what I write or don't speak at all. Your bigotry is showing. babble, sorry you hate Christians like some others in here. Hatred and bigotry....YIKES!!!!


Hate? Hurt?
Dear, dear john... we're simply bored to tears with your obsession to Hillary.
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 171
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 5:35:07 PM
Come on John, this is getting pathetic, how am I hurt, we are wondering about your stability and if you need us to help you. This is not normal, it's losing it's humorous entertainment and run right off the cliff. Do you need help? Is there someone here who knows how to contact you, check in on you?
 John252817
Joined: 8/24/2016
Msg: 172
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 5:56:51 PM
dayna, i see you typed more then one sentence this time. Good job, sorry that when you don't like someone's opinion or post that you attack personally. Must have learned that from a few others in here. Or is that your normal approach to others that don't "tow" your opinion. If you don't like my posts, you can stop reading them. But nah, you are one of those liberals nowadays that will attack anyone who has a different opinion. Maybe Linda Sarsour can help you out in furthering your hate. You definitely are doing well all by yourself. YIKES!!!
____________________________________________________________________

dayna is just one in here that this story talks about. Learn dayna, learn.

BY CHRISTOPHER COOK

“CONSERVATIVES SEE LIBERALS AS MISGUIDED; LIBERALS SEE CONSERVATIVES AS EVIL.”
—ORIGINAL SOURCE UNKNOWN

Are you a conservative, a libertarian, or a Republican? Have you ever been verbally assaulted by someone on the political left with a ferocity you didn’t quite understand? Have you seen it happen to friends and colleagues, or watched in horror as the media establishment does it to a public figure?

Of course you have. At some point or other, nearly everyone on the political right has witnessed or been the victim of an attack designed not to elucidate facts, but rather to paint him or her as a villain.

My attention was recently drawn to a typical such calumny from a Facebook exchange:

Republicans hate anything that isn’t white, wealthy, and christian at least in appearance. They hate the poor, women, and minorities. They hate science and don’t believe that the global warming we clearly are experiencing is man made. They hate any government programs that help the poor and minorities, and the (sic) particularly despise immigrants, particularly the illegal kind. They love programs that line the pockets of oil companies, mining companies, and are willing to export jobs with wild abandon.

They hate public education, and they despise public schools and the public school teachers and public university professors. And since the (sic) do not respect the market place of ideas, they hate tenure (that gives teachers academic freedom) because it prevents them from firing teachers who are Democrats and who might infect some student with their liberal ideas. They want insurance companies to make a maximum of profit, and are perfectly willing for the health insurance companies to kill people by refusing service to anyone that might cost them a buck more than the median expense. They don’t care about clean food because it might cost the food corporation a little money, and they don’t care about clean water because cleaning up the waste will cost their precious corporate persons a little money.
This is not a recitation of facts; it is a series of smears. It is the construction of a giant cartoonish super-villain, made of straw and woven together with calumny. The giant straw villain is then publicly burned, in a narcissistic orgy of self-adulation. Of course, the torches of the “best” people burn the brightest.

Another way of looking at it is this: It is the modern-day version of a witch trial. The charges are utterly farcical and cartoonish. “I saw her dancing with demons in the pale moonlight.” “She looked at me and I sneezed, and the next day, I had a terrible cold.” “She turned me into a newt.” But they are stated with great conviction and repeated incessantly, and they establish the unassailable collective will of which the accused has run afoul. The witch is made into the auslander, and the good people of the community show how “good” they are by shouting their accusations the loudest.

Either way, whether the wicker man or the witch, the effigy goes up in flames and the community is purged—for the moment—of its evil. Moral annulment now achieved, the villagers walk away feeling good about themselves. Feeling superior.

Facts are also unimportant in this perverse passion play. Like the slavering, semi-psychotic Facebook rant above, most such assaults aren’t a series of accusations backed up by facts, they are a series of character assassinations, most of which are contradicted by the facts.

The most salient example today is the charge that people of the right (conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, tea partiers) oppose Obama out of pure racism—simply because he is black. Though this charge is easily refuted—by common sense, widespread evidence, and actual studies—it is repeated incessantly by the media, the left’s foot-soldiers . . . even the president himself.

When actual studies are done (as opposed to just restating what the leftist imagines to be so as if it were actual fact), we learn that real racism is distributed fairly evenly among the population without regard to political affiliation. In 2008, a survey was done that showed similar numbers of Republicans (5.7) and Democrats (6.8) would not vote for a black presidential candidate. Such a question gives us one of the clearest possible tests of raw racism. A loaded question like, “Do you feel blacks receive too much welfare?” might confuse attitudes about race with attitudes about government welfare programs. But this gives us apples to apples: All things being equal, would you refuse to vote for someone solely because of race?

In the 2008 survey, Democrats were slightly (1.1%) more likely to show racist thinking than Republicans, though this is well within the margin of error. A similar study on senatorial candidates was far more damning to Democrats. Bottom line: there is little evidence that Republicans oppose Obama or any candidate on the basis of race to any greater degree than Democrats.

But this should be obvious based on other facts and indicators as well. Take Mia Love. If you are on the political left, you may not have heard of her, but she is a rising star on the right. She quotes Bastiat, she believes in core principles such as subsidiarity—she is dynamic, successful, and hits all the right notes. She is a black woman, and I have not met or heard of a single conservative, Republican, or tea partier who wouldn’t be delighted to support her. (Deep down, many of the left know this, which is why they have been so vicious to her.) I have worked alongside or come in contact with hundreds of activists and partisans on the political right over the last 15 years, and I cannot think of a single one who would not exult at a Mia Love victory. If she were elected president, I myself would do the happy dance on top of the tallest mountain in my area every November!

The reason is obvious: we agree ideologically. Race is unimportant. Barack Obama is, it can be fairly argued, further to the political left than any previous president. And people on the right oppose him so virulently for that very reason—not because of his race, but because of the huge ideological gulf that lies between. Imagine that.

The other painfully incessant canard is the notion that people on the right “hate the poor.” In fact, the evidence shows the opposite. Conservatives are more charitable than liberals by fairly significant margins, even when you adjust for a variety of factors. Rich, middle-class, and poor conservatives are all more charitable than their liberal counterparts. It’s not that conservatives are wealthier overall, either—liberal households are 6% wealthier on average. (I bet you never heard that little fact on MSNBC.) It is also not that conservatives are more religious: new data indicate that secular conservatives give more than secular liberals. These conservatives are voluntarily helping the poor with their own money, in greater numbers than their liberal counterparts in every cohort. Conservatism is a greater predictor of charity.

Leftists (they hardly deserve the term “liberal”), by contrast, are more “charitable” with other people’s money. Leftist A votes for Politician B to take money (by force) from Taxpayer C to give it to Recipient D. A and D give more support and power to B, who continues to take more and more from C, in a perverse and ever-increasing form of economic bondage. Then, A, B, and D get together and say that C hates the poor. Lather, rinse, repeat.

But we are getting dragged into the weeds here. We could go on and on refuting fact after fact, but the facts are unimportant. The leftist is creating a narrative. As a marketing guru will tell you, Facts tell, but stories sell. It’s a lesson the leftist has learned well.

Even more disturbing, in recent years, this method of “argumentation” has increasingly become the first tool pulled out of the toolbox. No longer does the leftist feel as compelled to make real arguments. All he needs to do now is shout “Racist!” or “War on Women!” and his job is done. He walks away feeling smugly satisfied of his own politically correct superiority, and the untrained observer is left addled at best, and possibly even swayed by the narrative.

So why they are so vicious? Why do people who self-describe as “compassionate” direct such vitriolic hate and assaults at their ideological opponents? How they can justify painting you as such a monster?

Simple: To them, you are a monster. You must be.

REASON #1: UTOPIANISM
YOU’RE IN THEIR WAY

Strip everything away, and the fundamental trait of all leftists is this: They believe that through the state, they can build paradise on earth. They believe that with enough tinkering, coercion, and rule by “experts,” they can eliminate all hard choices and competing goods, perfect human nature, and bring all good things to all people.

To someone of the political right—defined by our belief in human freedom, private solutions, and individual sovereignty—this is just the modern re-telling of the age-old story: that some men should rule over other men. Ancient despotism, monarchy, fascism, totalitarianism, modern progressivism—they’re all just different flavors, and different degrees of application, of the same basic philosophy. But the person on the left does not see it that way. He wants perfection. He believes it is possible. And by gum, he’s going to get it.

This utopian thinking quickly leads to an unavoidable conclusion, echoed from the French Revolution to Lenin and Stalin to Mao to the Progressives of the modern era: “On ne fait pas d’omelet sans casser des oeufs.” (You can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs.) To the utopian statist, “process costs” are entirely acceptable. They are building paradise, after all.

That’s why you see so much more toleration by the left’s rank and file of corruption and bad behavior by their leaders. What’s a little lying here, a little corruption there? They are building paradise. What’s a little cheating in the face of all they intend to accomplish?

That is also why you see such a prevalence of cult-of-personality adulation for strong leaders. Strong leaders resolve contradictions and sweep away the opposition. Strong leaders have the will to get the job done. Strong leaders get the trains running on time. Next stop, paradise.

But most importantly . . . these utopians—both the leaders and the rank and file—are so convinced of the nobility of their intentions that they believe that anyone who stands in their way must, by definition, have evil intentions. After all, who but a monster would stand in the way of paradise? And what consideration do monsters deserve? Why none at all, of course—they’re monsters.

That is why they do not simply disagree with you. That is why they calumniate you and attribute the worst motives to you. That is why they hate you.

REASON #2: FANTASYLAND VS. REALITY
THE WORLD IS IN THEIR WAY

The world refuses to conform to their utopian vision. The world isn’t the neat and tidy place they want it to be. They still hold onto the childlike belief that there can be goods with no tradeoffs, and this world of endless tradeoffs proves them wrong every day, mocking their childishness in the process. That makes them very angry.

Someone once said, “Conservatives believe what they see; liberals see what they believe.” Leftists hate you for the fact that you see the world as it is, rather than as it should be. You accept the facts of reality as they truly are, and you try to make the best of it. They believe that they can make reality conform to their vision of it. (That this effort always requires massive application of force against other human beings doesn’t bother them. It’s just another process cost.)

Your acceptance of reality as it is is pedestrian and troglodytic. Their vision of how reality should be makes them noble and romantic. They hate you for not living in the same fantasy land that they do. They hate you for recognizing that life is filled with tradeoffs. They don’t see the tradeoffs, so when you point them out, it’s as if you are the one that is making the tradeoff exist. La-La-La . . . I can’t hear you! Stop making bad things happen.

Your acceptance of reality makes them so angry, in fact, that they have convinced themselves that you must be suffering from some sort of psychological malady. Over the last century, dozens of self-reinforcing junk-science books and studies have been published labeling “conservatism” (once called “classical liberalism”) as a mental disorder. Like the mental patient permanently lost in a psychotic world of his own creation . . . he’s normal, it’s the rest of you who are nuts.

REASON #3: PREENING NARCISSISM
THEY ARE BEAUTIFUL, SO YOU MUST BE UGLY

The ideas of the political left produce failure at best and misery, oppression, and democide at worst. In spite of this, I had long clung to the belief that at least people on the political left “mean well.”

But do they? Or do they simply want to feel as though they mean well?

Author Robert Bidinotto asks (and answers) the same question:

Have decades upon decades of liberal policy failures deterred liberals from being liberals? Have the trillions of dollars blown on welfare-state programs since the “New Deal” and the “War on Poverty” made a damned bit of difference in curing poverty? And has that failure convinced “progressives” that there is something fundamentally wrong in their worldview and approach? Have the horrendous historical consequences of appeasement policies stopped today’s politicians from appeasing international thugs and terrorists? No?

Then why does anyone assume that liberals gauge the value of their worldview by the standard of its PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES?

Practical consequences are ALWAYS trumped by the advancement and protection of one’s core Narrative: the fairy tale that gives one’s life meaning, coherence, and moral justification. [ . . . ]

Doing that makes them feel good about themselves. And they would far rather feel good about themselves than actually achieve any of their stated practical objectives. It’s not about the objectives at all. It’s about THEM.
John Hawkins is just as unequivocal:

3) Liberals emphasize feeling superior, not superior results. Liberalism is all about appearances, not outcomes. What matters to liberals is how a program makes them FEEL about themselves, not whether it works or not. Thus a program like Headstart, which sounds good because it’s designed to help children read, makes liberals feel good about themselves, even though the program doesn’t work and wastes billions. A ban on DDT makes liberals feel good about themselves because they’re “protecting the environment” even though millions of people have died as a result. For liberals, it’s not what a program does in the real world; it’s about whether they feel better about themselves for supporting it.
If this is true, then for many, utopianism isn’t about what they think they can achieve, it’s about their own self-image.

So is it true?

The persistence of this vision in the face of centuries of evidence would seem to indicate that it may be. We know that maximizing human freedom is more moral and produces better results—the last two centuries have made that clear. And on the flip side, we know that maximizing government at the expense of the individual produces a parade of horribles. And yet, again and again, we are told that it simply wasn’t done correctly before, or by the right people.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all?
Why you are, my dear—you are so compassionate and fair and noble in every way.

The leftist looks at herself in the mirror and sees that she is one of those “right people,” because that is how she wants to see herself.

And if she is so beautiful and noble and fair . . . then how ugly you must be for standing in her way.



The leftist—the utopian, the statist—sees himself as on noble quest. He is the embodiment of everything good, simply because that is how he sees himself. How he wants to see himself. In order to maintain this self-image, he must make you the embodiment of everything horrible. He must make you ugly.

To statists, you are just another process cost. Their willingness to accept process costs on the road to their utopia is limited only by national context. In the United States, an exceptional nation where we still have some rule of law, they will certainly calumniate you, and they may decide to harm your finances, career, or reputation. In less exceptional countries where there is less rule of law, the harm is often to people’s freedom or even their very lives, as more than 100 million poor souls discovered in the 20th century.

The typical leftist in America, ignorant of his own philosophical pedigree, will protest this characterization. Do not let their protestations sway you. The degree to which they will treat you—the monster standing in the way of their utopia—as a disposable process cost is limited only by the degree of power they have. For your own safety, do not let them get more.

You are in the way of the utopia they are trying to create. You are in the way of the power they need to do it.

You. Are. In. Their. Way.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 173
view profile
History
2016 guess.
Posted: 2/11/2017 7:16:07 PM
^^^I didn't bother to read that last post our "john" just posted ... too eager to get this one in!

Message 186 ...
john ...
Hillary got CRUSHED!!

LMFAO ... he's been drinking Kellyanne cool-aid again.

Oh wait, what's this? According to CNN that's not quite accurate!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-final-count/
It's official: Clinton SWAMPS Trump in popular vote

More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than any other losing presidential candidate in US history.
The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Now that's "CRUSHED"!!!



Actually it's Trump who appears to be "CRUSHED" ... his ego simply can't get over it!


LMAO ... got beat by a girl! He can't be happy winning the electoral votes ... he now wants to make everyone believe that the 2.9 million "official" votes were illegal ... because that's the only way anyone could ever beat him ... eh?

"john" ... seek help.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 174
Republican snowflakes are afraid of liberals. Trigger warning!
Posted: 2/11/2017 8:08:04 PM
yikes, that's the longest thing anyone's ever received from Flounder.

Still, its just funny as hell the snowflakes Republicans are so afraid of Liberal emails. I thought Faux News was teaching them to fear Muslims, but I guess now they fear words from liberals.

these are the people who are supposed to make America safe? They're afraid someone throws the truth at them. Quakin' in their jackboots.

oh, oops, excuse me. Now the snowflake Republicans will be asking for their safe zone.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > 2016 guess.