Posted on 09/17/2009 12:53:35 PM PDT by Admiral_Zeon
The liberals were crazy angry while George W. Bush was president. Part of it was that for a time after 9/11, they were made completely irrelevant — when people are dying, who is going to listen to a liberal?
But another part of it is that it’s much easier to hate a person than to hate a concept — like conservatism. So they were able to channel all their hate into President Bush. And they were jumping-around-pooh-flinging-biting-each-other angry. I think a number of conservatives were secretly looking forward to the Obama presidency in hopes that liberals might just calm down a little. Maybe they’d even consider supporting the troops in their war efforts for a change. At least, maybe they would be a bit less angry.
Big miscalculation.
Now conservatives have more reason to be angry these days, with liberals in charge and all the spending and government takeovers. But with Democrats having complete control of the government, you’d think liberals could be dismissive of conservatives and be calm themselves. But no, they’re still crazy angry. Maybe even angrier than before. Biting-fingers-off angry. They’re screeching about how all the people opposed to Obama are racists and neo-Nazis and stupid, and they’re using sexual slurs against protesters and boycotting everyone who disagrees with them. They’re still nuts, but why?
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Prov 13:6
Righteousness guards the person of integrity, but wickedness overthrows the sinner.
Because the GOT Their Man and now realize he is dumber than JIMMAH. . . . . .
The=they
Liberals are mentally deranged. They can’t ever be happy. So they strive to make EVERYONE unhappy.
They aren’t in TOTAL control, yet.
The oppoasition has to be beaten down before they’ll feel better, and not simply agreeing with them. Those who fight them must agree against their will, or the same stimulation isn’t derived.
Case inpoint: She Who Must Not Be Named - when William the Impeached steals the spotlight, watch her cold, souless eyes.
Because the "involved" ones aren't actually "Liberals" at all. Not in the classic sense. They are radicals, and the core tenet of the radical left is anger. It's how they bond.
The uninvolved ones, the unknowingly leftist, Democrat drone flock-members who reflexively pull the "D" lever, are usually just generally people who are unhappy in life anyway.
Their lives suck because they forgot to go to college, or to actually study when they got there, or they got stoned and turned forty before they remembered to get a job, or mommy didn't breastfeed them long enough, or any combination of a million other stupid reasons one can pick to be a pathetic loser and resent society.
As long as they can focus that angst outward, they don't have to face their own shortcomings.
They see in the success of others something they want, but they know they neither deserve or will ever attain, so their petulant envy manifests as anger at anyone but themselves.
They're all either in therapy, giving therapy, or want therapy.
Liberal are also "cool" because they grew up being cool hippies with mom and dad as uncool. They can't become uncool like mom and dad. No way. When mom and dad is feeding then you think about how cool you are -- if you are not fed for a couple of days coolness is not important. TV is important to liberals because they get their coolness from watch a cool media.
Marshal McLuhan did thing of TV as a cool media in not quite the same way. But cool it is for the generation raised on superfly junk.
Why are liberals angry?
Know God, Know Peace
No God, No Peace
Hayek refers to those who support individual liberty as “liberals”.
The “liberals” of today are nothing of the sort, they are group think collectivists.
OK...that's the liberals' excuse.
So what's the excuse from conservatives who hated (hate) Bush?
They thought electing Obama would be the end of their endless quest for a utopia that does not exist.
Excellent observation.
You just described my brother-in-law and his family.
The heart of liberalism is that people don’t have all they want or need, therefore someone must be purposefully preventing them from having it.
I think “hate” is used almost exclusively on the left in mainstream politics these days, and I also think it is used to control people (weak minded types) by those in leadership roles on the left. Bush was hated with such energy that it suggests the limits of sanity are breached.
Because they’re nasty, malcontented s.o.b.’s who always need something to bitch about.
It’s the nature of the beast.
Some people actually did expect the atmosphere to calm after a big “O” win - since the press would no longer be obligated to view every story as a pending disaster due to Bush. But that was indeed shortsighted as every story IS a pending disaster (ultimately due to Bush/Cheney/47% of the citizens not calling themselves Democrats, etc.) that needs a government takeover and reeducation camps or at least reeducation addresses to congress.
Wouldn’t it be great if instead of crying “YOU LIE!” the representative called out “Wolverines!”?
Bartmess’ Law: Liberals are never happy, and never grateful. If you believe anything else, you are only going to get hurt.
Because not everyone agrees with them.
And we certainly can't have that.
You might as well ask why is water wet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.