1 posted on
06/02/2003 12:00:24 PM PDT by
Stultis
To: Stultis
The trouble with liberals... is that they breathe too much. :)
2 posted on
06/02/2003 12:04:50 PM PDT by
KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
("This is how six-year-olds argue: they call everything 'stupid'." --Coulter, on liberals)
To: Stultis
bump
To: Stultis
"Almost every time a conservative politicians or other leaders talk about liberal agendas and policies, they say, "Well, liberals mean well even though when it comes to their views on (fill in the blank) national security, social welfare programs, high taxes, radical feminism/environmentalism even though their agenda has been shown to be a failure, liberals are good people, they want to do the right thing. . ." "
What talk-radio is she listening to? The words I hear being used to describe liberals are: "Clueless", "Socialists", "Anti-Individualists", "Idiots", "Anti-Americans", "Greedy" (for wanting to take more of my income and give to tax payers), etc. Most of which are accurate.
4 posted on
06/02/2003 12:06:31 PM PDT by
Blzbba
To: Stultis
It's about time that it's a good time to be a conservative. It's always been a good time to be a conservative, if you just consider the alternative.
7 posted on
06/02/2003 12:13:35 PM PDT by
Bullish
To: Stultis
Why do people insist on calling "leftists"
liberals.
The reason why the tide is turning is because rational people are coming to realize that there is nothing "freedom loving" about these people. The problem with liberals is they are NOT liberal.
This is one of my big pet peeves. Sorry.
Best Regards,
To: Stultis
But have you EVER heard a liberal activist, with or without any stature, say, "Well those conservatives want to do the right thing. . .I disagree with them on their views on social welfare, or taxes, but they are good people and they mean well. . .?"
Actually, I do know one guy like this. But just one. And to be honest, in my heart I question whether he really is a liberal of conviction or one of convenience.
Kent is not a conservative who argues that "liberals mean well. . ." Because, as he shows, often they don't.
The more they support homicidal dictators like Hussein, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Mihn, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, and Mad Bob Mugabe, the harder it is to convince oneself that they do mean well.
Owl_Eagle
Guns Before Butter.
To: Stultis
"Liberalism as we know it today is just plain ugly, divisive, selfish, and even downright mean."
Liberalism is a disease, probably genetic, and apparently incurable - Linda Bowles
13 posted on
06/02/2003 1:00:32 PM PDT by
SwinneySwitch
(Freedom is not Free - Support the Troops!!)
To: Stultis
For those of you who may not know Phil, he is the head of the Southeastern Legal Foundation the group that sued to have Clinton disbarred. I have heard from several people that the book is good and makes for fabulous talking points to quiet the liberals in your life.
To: Stultis
Liberalism as we know it today is just plain ugly, divisive, selfish, and even downright mean. ...liberal activists only paint conservatives as wanting to starve school kids, steal money from the poor to give to the rich, burn down black churches and push grandmothers down the on-ramp to the expressway.
Exactly! Even just reading the titles liberals like Al Franken and Michael Moore choose for their books, one can't help but think: Their mommas obviously didn't teach them anything about the Golden Rule.
Downright mean partially sums it up; ...and dishonest completes the description.
15 posted on
06/02/2003 1:34:36 PM PDT by
Fawnn
(I think therefore I'm halfway there....)
To: Stultis
Here's to hoping they don't figure it out any time soon. I like the fact that we've been averaging a gain of 1.4 Senate seats and 10.2 House seats for the past 5 election cycles (since 1994). In another 12 years, if that pace holds true, we'll be up to 60-39-1 in the Senate and 289-145-1 in the House (66.4%). Filibuster THAT!
To: Stultis
bump
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson