How To
See other How To Articles
Title: How to Talk to a Liberal
Source:
E-mail
URL Source: http://N/A
Published: Dec 26, 2011
Author: Ann Coulter
Post Date: 2011-12-26 09:21:41 by CZ82
Keywords: None
Views: 45008
Comments: 75
How to Talk to a Liberal Historically, the best way to convert liberals is to have them move out of their parents' home, get a job, and start paying taxes. But if this doesn't work, you might have to actually argue with a liberal. This is not for the faint of heart. It is important to remember that when arguing with liberals, you are always within inches of the "Arab street." Liberals traffic in shouting and demagogy. In a public setting, they will work themselves into a dervish-like trance and start incanting inanities: "Bush lied, kids died!" "racist!" "fascist!" "fire Rumsfeld!" "Halliburton!" Fortunately, the street performers usually punch themselves out eventually and are taken back to their parents' house. Also resembling the Arab street, liberals are chock-full of conspiracy theories. They invoke weird personal obsessions like a conversational deus ex machina to trump all facts. You think you're talking about the war in Iraq and suddenly you start getting a disquisition on Nixon, oil, the neoconservatives, Vietnam (Tom Hayden discusses gang violence in Los Angeles as it relates to Vietnam), or whether Bill O'Reilly's former show, Inside Edition, won the Peabody or the Peanuckle Award. This is because liberals, as opposed to sentient creatures, have a finite number of memorized talking points, which they periodically try to shoehorn into unrelated events, such as when Nancy Pelosi opposed the first Gulf war in 1991 on the grounds that it would cause environmental damage in Kuwait. Oddly enough, about half of liberal conspiracy theories involve the Jews. So be prepared for that. A major impediment to arguing with liberals is: They refuse to argue. Liberals' idea of a battle of wits is to say "Bush lied!" in front of adoring college audiences and be wildly applauded for their courage. They're like hack road comics who coax a cheap round of applause out of audiences by declaring, "I just quit smoking!" or "My wife just had a baby!" Without a Roman Coliseum-style audience to give them standing ovations for every idiotic utterance, you get the liberal disappearing act. At a loss whenever anyone argues back, liberals have a number of stratagems to prevent conservatives from talking. They shout conservatives down; unplug reporters' microphones; edit conservatives' answers in pretaped TV shows (Hardball) to make the conservative look like a monkey; burn student newspapers; and heckle conservative speakers. When John Stossel went to Brown University for a report on "date rape," he was mobbed by angry protesters chanting, "Rape is not TV hype!"--and then his microphone cord was unplugged by an angry student. College dropout Michael Moore put a microphone in Republican Congressman Mark Kennedy's face and asked for his help in getting more members of Congress to send their own family members to fight the war on terror. Kennedy replied that he would love to and that he already had two nephews in the military, one on his way to Afghanistan. Moore's documentary shows Kennedy's image--but cuts his answer from the film. There is probably no conservative student newspaper in the country that has not been trashed or burned by liberals. Meanwhile, there is no known instance of College Republicans burning or trashing liberal student newspapers. To the contrary, conservatives get a kick out of watching liberals try to thrash their way to a coherent argument ("bush lied, kids died!"). In fact, if it weren't for conservatives with a taste for schadenfreude, literally no one would be listening to Air America--assuming it's still on the air by the time this book hits the stores. Life was much better for liberals when there were only three TV stations airing precious little news. Back in the pre-cable news days, public political debate consisted exclusively of liberal Democrats debating radical Democrats. Now that conservatives are physically present on cable news, liberals are terrified they might have to respond to a conservative point, so liberals filibuster and interrupt, hoping to never hear it. Turn on your TV right now and you'll see a liberal--probably Julian Epstein--trying to Filibuster his way out of having to respond to a conservative. If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you said--unless you were, in fact, talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It's like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder. Inasmuch as liberals can only win arguments when no one is allowed to argue back, they enjoy creating fictional worlds in movies and on TV where liberals finally get to win. Remember the Andy Hardy movies? Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland would be headed for disaster--until Andy shouted out, "I tell you what! Let's put on a play!" With liberals, it's "We're losing on the facts! Let's make a movie!" In movies, liberals are invariably morally and intellectually superior. They are also good-looking, witty, compassionate, and always right--basically Bob Byrd, Jerry Nadler, Al Franken, and Hillary Clinton rolled into one adorable bunch. Only in Hollywood is Robert Redford considered a dead ringer for Bob Woodward, Emma Thompson for Hillary Clinton, Dustin Hoffman for Carl Bernstein, and Andy Garcia for Al Franken. Typically, Republicans are played by hard-boiled B-list types whose only other roles are as cruel high school football coaches or rogue army drill instructors. Reflect on the fact that Anthony Hopkins played both Nixon and Hannibal Lecter. The only policemen in the universe who are not aware that "cop-killer bullets" have never killed a cop are the ones on Law & Order. Only in liberal fantasy movies like Coming Home is a patriotic hawk the impotent klutz who shoots himself in the foot, and the liberal dove the sexually potent one. Only in Hollywood could a sitcom that parodies a U.S. president and is titled There's My Bush be about George Bush rather than Bill Clinton. (The show was unceremoniously and quietly canceled because of low ratings.) In movies, we always learn that there is no reason, ever, to Fight a war. Unless the Earth is invaded by aliens from outer space with huge scary spaceships and death rays and men of all races and nationalities can unite against a common enemy--like in Independence Day. So if the Earth is ever invaded by hostile aliens from outer space, you won't have to ask liberals twice to take up arms in defense of Planet Earth. It was inevitable, given what liberals value, that on the popular sitcom Friends beautiful actresses would be depicted hyperventilating over George Stephanopoulos's Fictional manhood when he drops his Fictional towel. Only in the bizarro world of Hollywood can such a harmless little chap as George exude massive sexual potency. On HGTV, the female host of What Not to Wear leeringly jokes about seeing Bill Clinton in a Speedo. In real life, Monica Lewinsky can be heard on tape describing Clinton's executive branch thus: "Think of a thumb." No wonder liberals prefer the world of make-believe. In addition to all Oliver Stone movies and all Michael Moore documentaries (Oliver Stone Without the Talent!), an extremely abbreviated list of liberal fantasy movies includes: The Day After Tomorrow (not to be confused with Next Friday, starring Ice Cube)--message: liberals are right about global warming! The hyper-silly disaster epic is based on a book coauthored by UFO/black-helicopter/the-CIA-is-beaming-microwaves-into-my-teeth-fillings guru and late-night AM radio maven Art Bell. The Cider House Rules--message: liberals are right about abortion! Kindly small-town abortionist (Michael Caine) just wants to help unwed pregnant girls. Disaster strikes when it turns out the young lad taking over Caine's practice (Tobey Maguire) is opposed to abortion because it's "wrong." The lad soon learns the error of his ways after a black teenaged girl from a family of apple pickers is raped and impregnated by her own father and needs an abortion. (You can't remind people too often that most women having abortions were raped by their own fathers.) This Film was a veritable ode to moral relativism and the hideous notion that there are no rules save the ones we make up ourselves as we go along. Shockingly, it only won a single Oscar. The American President--message: democrats will vote their consciences even if it hurts them politically and all republicans ever do is call people names. In this movie, Michael Douglas plays Bill Clinton as Clinton would like to be--handsome, thin, courageous, liberal, and widowed. The president's top Republican adversary goes on national TV and calls the president's girlfriend a "whore." So it's a plausible story. Dave--message: liberals are right about federal spending on the homeless! Only the president can put an end to homelessness, and he's got to cut $500 million in pork from the discretionary budget to do so. He finds the money by poring over the entire federal budget (during an "all-nighter") with the help of his tax guy, played by Charles Grodin. (Of course, to do that, the president would need a line-item veto. Now which party, do you suppose, supports a line-item veto and which opposes it?) Of the dozens and dozens of nonfiction books to come out about the Clinton presidency, only one was made into a movie: The Hunting of the President, by fanatical Clinton apologists Joe Conason and Gene Lyons. (Message: liberals were right about Clinton, even if there are only two liberals left defending him!) The intriguing plotline is this: A lot of mean people tried to bring down a great president. Leaving aside which account most closely resembles the truth, which one of these sounds like a better movie plot: Movie Plot A: Through the freak accident of a third-party candidacy, a lying, horndog Jimmy Swaggart type somehow ends up as president of the United States. As his Eva Peron-style wife tries to socialize all industry, the president gallivants with Hollywood starlets, has repeated affairs, accepts illegal campaign donations from foreign enemies, and uses the vast powers of the federal government to frighten and intimidate the people who get in his way. Some end up dead, some have their secret FBI files pored over by a former bar bouncer, some are audited by the IRS. He is Finally brought down when he ejaculates on an intern's dress and lies about it under oath--and it turns out the intern has kept the dress! Movie Plot B: For no reason whatsoever, a few oddball private citizens develop a deep personal antipathy for a "Third Way," moderate Democratic president. Amazingly, Hollywood actually made a movie, Bob Roberts, in which the slick, cosmetic tricks of the sophisticated right-wing political machine hoodwink the American people. (So that's why liberals are losing all the arguments in real life!) Since cable news has begun forcing liberals to confront opposing points of view in real life rather than movie scripts where the Republicans' only argument is to call the president's girlfriend a "whore," liberals have been trying to drop emotionalism as their main argument. Their new posture is mock hardheaded realism. Now they begin sentences with phrases like, "The fact of the matter is," or "Experts say"--followed by comically false assertions. Liberals flex their spindly little muscles and announce that everything that used to make them cry--gun ownership, racial profiling, missile defense, school vouchers, torturing terror suspects--simply "doesn't work." The fact is, it doesn't work, this is according to several studies, and no, you can't see them, why would you ask? After nineteen nearly identical-looking Muslim men hijacked four airplanes and murdered 3,000 Americans, people weren't in much of a mood for liberal preachiness about racial profiling. So instead of crying and trying to make Americans feel guilty, liberals pretended to be hardheaded realists. Asked if there was anything wrong with ethnic profiling at airports after 9/11, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz said, "Yes, it doesn't work." Other, better ideas, he said, were face-recognition technology and national ID cards. These would work great--if only we knew who the terrorists were. But if we knew who the terrorists were, the only plane they'd be boarding would be headed to Guantanamo and we wouldn't need to search anyone at all.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-11) not displayed.
.
.
.
#12. To: harrowup (#9)
STILL trying to spin your way out of being proven as a lying hypocrite, eh? At the end of the day, all you idiot leftists have is "spin," aka "lies." (((smirk)))
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
(((smirk))) Kind of looks like all you've got is your smirk.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Nothing funnier than a jirk with a smirk.
Two fools who are so behind the curve they actually think they're in the lead. Your lives must really suck.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
whorin'Up: Ahh, it's so cute the way you make up nicknames. (between the smirk and the nickname one might think you're George, the lessor)
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
The names have been changed to more accurately reflect your attitudes.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
Calling a lady a bitch is very low class. We've observed your hatred of women. Not a good thing. As for me? I'd rather be a whore than a pimp. At least there is an honest exchange. Mind you, I did not call you a pimp.
On another thread he asserts that people who work in a family business are not legitimate employees.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
On another thread he asserts that people who work in a family business are not legitimate employees. Well as an anarcho-libertarian that makes sense. Sharing is not a well- understood function of civil associations.
"super size my fries Please"
Class is a moot point, in using this word. It is technically accurate. From here,: 3. Slang . a. a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person, especially a woman. Your powers of observation- unsurprisingly- are flawed. What is the quid pro quo for your whoring the socialist agenda? You hoping to be one of the elites? Getting paid to spew your propaganda? Or are you just another useful idiot? Which is it?
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
LMAO!!!!!!!! Damn, that was GOOD...
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
That is due to Eric's preference for the corporate model inspite of his bad mouthing of it. Or maybe it's due to his Asperger's and his inability to comprehend certain concepts. He's probably in favor of the corporate financed movement that's currently behind legislation to have family businesses outlawed or severely restricted.
"ROTFLMAO... Perfect! She longs... for someone to Teabag her. a man that squats on top of a women's face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex, known as "teabagging" She aches for it"... ~~~JWpegler. Head Tea Bagger and Tea Party supporter extraordinaire, explicitly expressing his fantasies in public about other posters.
Damn, that was GOOD... You really do hate those who put in an honest day's work don't you?
"ROTFLMAO... Perfect! She longs... for someone to Teabag her. a man that squats on top of a women's face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex, known as "teabagging" She aches for it"... ~~~JWpegler. Head Tea Bagger and Tea Party supporter extraordinaire, explicitly expressing his fantasies in public about other posters.
I agree. Most of us can be assholes at times. I've seen just about everyone here be an asshole at one time or another. Myself included. I see some who are assholes always. My criteria is this... most posters, at one time or another, actually discuss issues with other posters. Even with other posters with whom they disagree politically. We can argue percentages at another time, hopefully. ;o) There are some posters who spend the majority of their time only discussing other posters. Those posters are bitches and they certainly aren't ladies. Like yukon. Well, kinda like yukon. He's kinda like a lady. Dang it, I'm not being nice! I'll work on that.
Speaking of assholes, I wonder where Biff is these days. He's Grade A.
LOL! Can't argue with that.
Actually when I was very young and living off my parents I was a dyed in the wool communist. Once I became an adult and began to see the world differently I just settled for being a Harry Truman Democrat. Strong defense, The Marshall Plan and preserving Social Security. Outside of that the states had a role to play. Although I had to associate with country club Republicans and Limousine Liberals I sure as hell didn't care for them. Once the McGovern crowd started to take over the Democrat Party I grew weary of their disrespect for the military and since I was in the military I spoke not. I don't think trickle down economics works any better than throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don't believe any level of government has any business telling me how to screw, breed or how to worship or not and if a local school or anyone wants to say the Lord's prayer let them and salute the flag without interference. I do not believe libertarians are conservative and I don't believe anarcho- libertarians are capable of existing in a civil society of more than one. I am not going to debate any of it with you because you have zero credibility with me. Not because you are a rude obnoxious plick; because you don't know better.
That's interesting, and I tend to agree, especially if we're talking about today's Libertarian Party and its platform.
LOL. Like rat-boy, loonymom and dingaling, you believe that because you can type on a keyboard, that your ideas automatically have merit. Yet, I've already proven you to be a lying hypocrite, and it took all of 30 seconds to knock you off your high horse. Oh, and BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed it. LOL. You're so far behind the curve, you actually think you're in the lead. So your assessments of who has (or hasn't cred) are just merely opinion, based on nothing but the vacuum in your empty little skull.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
Allow me the opportunity to edit my remarks:
Try to imagine how little I care about the rantings of you socialist bimbos...
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
Well put. A walk through the ocean of erica's soul would scarcely get one's feet wet.
If I were Ron Paul, I'd pay you not to post in my behalf.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Well put and cuts to the chase, thanks.
You can tell CE, but you can't tell him much.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
You're incapable of rational thought, so this is simply wishful thinking.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
You're welcome.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Says who? You?
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Ahh, isn't that sweet...? Rat-boy trying to play white-knight for the socialist bimbos of the forum... Awwwww.... Time for you to get back to work, ratty. Try to think of something clever to say, while you're cleaning toilets.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
One man's toilet is another man's sculpted rendition of your mug, pug.
Just think - if it weren't for women and janitors, you'd have to live in your own poop.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Okay, now that was funny. Happy New Year
If I were a caretaker in a nursing home where erica wound up at, he'd be living in the same depends undergarment until it welded to his wrinkled skin. He'll never change, and when he ages sufficiently to require the help of others, life will really suck for him.
Thanks Hawk, and a happy and prosperous New year to you too.
I'll never make it that far- I've always known that, so such comments really don't bother me. On a different note, I hope Warren does make it to the Senate. From what I've read, she's the real deal... But I fear the system is too far gone, too corrupted to be fixed from within... leading me right back to Claire Wolfe's analysis, Landmine Legislation in the 104th Congress, where she makes the same points.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
Do you ever take a break from being an asshole?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Ahh, I love irony. I thought A K A Stone flushed you, like the turd you are... No? Well, then, off to bozo-list you give, you worthless little fuck.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
I thought A K A Stone flushed you, like the turd you are... Lucky for you, CE, Stone believes in affirmative action for Libertarian potty mouths.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Lucky for you, Stone seems to have an "affirmative action" policy for socialist retards, else you, war, and the rest of your ilk would have gotten the bums-rush long ago. He gives you more than you deserve, in my opinion. Treason deserves no tolerance.
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
You are such a wiener, Erica.
Comments (53 - 75) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestPoor Erica, she loves to call check mate when her defeat is at hand...
#13. To: Capitalist Eric (#12)
At the end of the day, all you idiot leftists have is "spin," aka "lies."
#14. To: lucysmom, Capitalist Eric (#13)
Kind of looks like all you've got is your smirk
#15. To: harrowup, lucysmom (#14)
loonybitch: Kind of looks like all you've got is your smirk
whorin'Up: Nothing funnier than a jirk with a smirk.
#16. To: Capitalist Eric, harrowup (#15)
loonybitch:
#17. To: lucysmom (#16)
Ahh, it's so cute the way you make up nicknames.
#18. To: Capitalist Eric, lucysmom (#17)
The names have been changed to more accurately reflect your attitudes.
#19. To: harrowup (#18)
We've observed your hatred of women.
#20. To: lucysmom, Capitalist Eric (#19)
We've observed your hatred of women.
#21. To: CZ82 (#0)
How to Talk to a Liberal
#22. To: harrowup (#18)
Calling a lady a bitch is very low class.
We've observed your hatred of women. Not a good thing.
As for me? I'd rather be a whore than a pimp. At least there is an honest exchange.
#23. To: calcon (#21)
#24. To: lucysmom, Capitalist Eric (#19)
On another thread he asserts that people who work in a family business are not legitimate employees.
#25. To: Capitalist Eric, Calcon (#23)
LMAO!!!!!!!!
#26. To: harrowup, Capitalist Eric, lucysmom, yukon (#18)
Calling a lady a bitch is very low class.
#27. To: We The People, Biff Tannen (#26)
#28. To: Fred Mertz (#27)
Speaking of assholes, I wonder where Biff is these days. He's Grade A.
#29. To: Capitalist Eric, lucysmom (#22)
the socialist agenda
#30. To: harrowup (#29)
I do not believe libertarians are conservative
#31. To: harrowup (#29)
I am not going to debate any of it with you because you have zero credibility with me.
#32. To: Capitalist Eric, lucysmom (#31)
Oh, and BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed it. LOL.
I am not going to debate any of it with you because you have zero credibility with me.
Not because you are a rude obnoxious plick; because you don't know better, and probably never will, even after the onset of puberty.
#33. To: harrowup (#32)
#34. To: harrowup (#32)
#35. To: Capitalist Eric (#33)
Try to imagine how little I care about the rantings of you socialist bimbos...
#36. To: lucysmom (#35)
"If I were Ron Paul, I'd pay you not to post in my behalf."
#37. To: harrowup (#32)
Not because you are a rude obnoxious plick; because you don't know better, and probably never will, even after the onset of puberty.
#38. To: lucysmom (#35)
If I were Ron Paul,
#39. To: Ferret Mike (#36)
#40. To: Capitalist Eric (#38)
You're incapable of rational thought...
#41. To: Ferret Mike (#34)
Well put. A walk through the ocean of erica's soul would scarcely get one's feet wet.
#42. To: Capitalist Eric (#41)
#43. To: Capitalist Eric (#41)
...while you're cleaning toilets.
#44. To: Ferret Mike (#42)
One man's toilet is another man's sculpted rendition of your mug, pug.
#45. To: lucysmom (#43)
#46. To: harrowup (#44)
#47. To: Ferret Mike (#45)
If I were a caretaker in a nursing home where erica wound up at, he'd be living in the same depends undergarment until it welded to his wrinkled skin. He'll never change, and when he ages sufficiently to require the help of others, life will really suck for him.
#48. To: Capitalist Eric (#41)
#49. To: war (#48)
Do you ever take a break from being an asshole?
#50. To: Capitalist Eric, war, A K A Stone (#49)
Ahh, I love irony.
#51. To: lucysmom, A K A Stone (#50)
#52. To: Capitalist Eric (#49)
Well, then, off to bozo-list you give (sic)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]