Why aren't liberals happy?

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The first and foremost thing to understand when delving into the motives of liberals is to know they have an inherent totalitarian mindset.

They know best, and the rest of us require firm but loving guidance OR ELSE!

 

[unregistered]

 

[Boxlicker101]

The first and foremost thing to understand when delving into the motives of liberals is to know they have an inherent totalitarian mindset.

But a benevolent despotism, because they are so much more intelligent than the rest of the herd, if only everybody would recognize that self-evident fact.

 

[Sean]

The first and foremost thing to understand when delving into the motives of liberals is to know they have an inherent totalitarian mindset.

Tell us again about how peaceful protesters that you don't agree with should be shot.

 

[unregistered]

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Absofuckinglutely!

Its kindergarten with bigger kids.

And they never change.

 

[KingOrfeo]

America has been turned into a third world sh*thole overrun with impoverished masses of "diversity." Television, music, and movies has become entirely vulgar immoral filth. Almost half of all children are bastards. The majority of people live off the teat of government paid for by the ever shrinking productive class.

I'm not sure why they complain all the time. I'd think they would just be soaking up paradise and having fun.

As it happens, there are still plenty of things in American society for liberals to be unhappy about, such as the maldistribution of wealth.

Incipient anti-American Reign of Terror!

Then there are those who view Occupy Wall Street's message as anti-American and generally evil.[14] Rush Limbaugh called them "stupid idiots and tools,"[15] while Glenn Beck said "They will come for you and drag you into the streets and kill you...they're Marxist radicals...these guys are worse than Robespierre from the French Revolution...they'll kill everybody."[16]

Prepare your irony meters. The U.S.'s income distribution, as measured by the Gini coefficient, is nearing the level seen in ancien regime France around that time,[17] and even worse than those seen in the Roman Empire.[18]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/2008_Top1percentUSA.png

 

[unregistered]

 

[koalabear]

What third world shithole is like that?

Detroit.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

People like Obama feel deep down inside that Communism failed because they weren't running it.

Youre essentially right, tho I think they believe all Slavs are tards, and that's why it failed.

 

[KingOrfeo]

There should be no re-distribution of wealth.

You really can't see why that picture constitutes a problem?!

You needn't be any kind of Commie or socialist to want a more-equal distribution of wealth. Thomas Jefferson was big on it, as were the definitely anti-Communist Roman Catholic Distributists.

 

[Boxlicker101]

As it happens, there are still plenty of things in American society for liberals to be unhappy about, such as the maldistribution of wealth.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/2008_Top1percentUSA.png

There are several major differences between those earlier societies and the USA. For one, even the lowest of the low are not too bad off by the standards of Rome and France. I was one of the lowest of the low, but I always had a roof over my head and food in my belly.

For another thing, there is always a chance of upward mobility. One day I got my shit together and got out of the hole I had gotten myself into. I have never been rich, but I have had a comfortable life for the last 35 years, and never have to go back to where I was. I am one example, but there are some as extreme as Bill Gates, who has used his brain and worked hard to become one of the richest people in the world. Obama might be a better example, because he was raised in relative poverty and is now one of that envied 1% of the population.

ETA: In other words, wealth is being redistributed, but it is through the hard work and ambition of the have-nots who have joined the haves, rather than the heavy hand of government.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

You really can't see why that picture constitutes a problem?!

You needn't be any kind of Commie or socialist to want a more-equal distribution of wealth. Thomas Jefferson was big on it, as were the definitely anti-Communist Roman Catholic Distributists.

Hows about an equal distribution of the work? And military service?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Adre]

If only we had the kind of leadership JBJ and Vetteman could provide, but all they do is lob criticism from the peanut gallery. Step up to the plate, gentlemen.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Bullshit! No founder contemplated or supported the kind of big government we see today.

Jefferson envisioned a society of (white) small family farmers owning their own farms with no landlords. It was pursuant to that vision that the Big Government pursued a policy for decades of practically giving away land to (white) homesteaders (once the Indians were cleared off it). If you find that objectionable, you're the first non-Indian/non-Indian-sympathizer I ever heard of who does.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

If only we had the kind of leadership JBJ and Vetteman could provide, but all they do is lob criticism from the peanut gallery. Step up to the plate, gentlemen.

There'd be real prosperity, opportunity, security, and respect for all Americans.

 

[CandiCame]

They do not have netting in the turd world sh*ithole of Kentucky?

We do, but they aren't government sponsored.

...or terribly clean, honestly. Believe me, you don't wanna be picking the hay out up to three days later.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Adre]

There'd be real prosperity, opportunity, security, and respect for all Americans.

Even the colored ones?

 

[mercury14]

There should be no re-distribution of wealth.

Roads are paid for by taxing income earners and redistrubuting those resources to everyone in the form of infrastructure. Since you want this to stop happening who should pay for roads?

 

[KingOrfeo]

Please, get serious.

When are you gonna start?!

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

As opposed to Obama, we'd have clothes.

And clothes fit for an Emperor! (I.e., invisible and intangible.)

 

[MisterChillax]

elevision, music, and movies has become entirely vulgar immoral filth.

You forgot to mention the world wide web.

Where again do Cons support forums like literotica.com and the liberal view on sexuality?

I love it when liberals are attacked on a website that wouldn´t exist if it wasn´t for liberalism.

Liberals aren´t by definition unhappy or happy. They advocate a political view point. Turns out through history overall very successfully and convincingly.