If there’s one thing liberals pride themselves on it’s the myth that they’re “tolerant” of others. But what liberals mean by the word is not what the word means, nor is it what they practice.
The word “tolerate” means to put up with, to allow to exist. But liberals don’t mean it that way. They don’t preach tolerance, they preach conformity. Look up what these bastions of tolerance have said about the Tea Party. Look what they say about Allen West. Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas or anyone who dare creep outside the left-wing’s assigned box for them.
See, many liberals are, in reality, are the most intolerant human beings you’ll ever come across. They preach a “live and let live” philosophy, but relentlessly attack anyone with whom they disagree.
They can also be the most bigoted people you’ll ever meet. By bigoted I mean racist.
The most famous examples of this have been directed at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. In 1994, political commentator Julianne Malveaux said on PBS that she wished Justice Thomas’ wife “feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease,” continuing, “Well, that’s how I feel. He is an absolutely reprehensible person.” And in 1996, Emerge magazine ran a cover drawing of Justice Thomas dressed as a lawn jockey with the headline “Uncle Thomas: Lawn Jockey for The Far Right.”
What was the unforgivable sin Justice Thomas committed to warrant such a disgusting attacks? He thought differently than the accepted liberal orthodoxy. That orthodoxy is where the true bigotry lies in liberalism.
At its worst, liberalism sees skin color, gender or sexual orientation and assigns a belief system, their belief system, on those people.
http://allenwestrepublic.com/2012/10/08/the-myth-of-liberal-tolerance-will-this-make-the-nightly-news-i-doubt-it/
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
If there’s one thing liberals pride themselves on it’s the myth that they’re “tolerant” of others. But what liberals mean by the word is not what the word means, nor is it what they practice.
The word “tolerate” means to put up with, to allow to exist. But liberals don’t mean it that way. They don’t preach tolerance, they preach conformity. Look up what these bastions of tolerance have said about the Tea Party. Look what they say about Allen West. Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas or anyone who dare creep outside the left-wing’s assigned box for them.
See, many liberals are, in reality, are the most intolerant human beings you’ll ever come across. They preach a “live and let live” philosophy, but relentlessly attack anyone with whom they disagree.
They can also be the most bigoted people you’ll ever meet. By bigoted I mean racist.
The most famous examples of this have been directed at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. In 1994, political commentator Julianne Malveaux said on PBS that she wished Justice Thomas’ wife “feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease,” continuing, “Well, that’s how I feel. He is an absolutely reprehensible person.” And in 1996, Emerge magazine ran a cover drawing of Justice Thomas dressed as a lawn jockey with the headline “Uncle Thomas: Lawn Jockey for The Far Right.”
What was the unforgivable sin Justice Thomas committed to warrant such a disgusting attacks? He thought differently than the accepted liberal orthodoxy. That orthodoxy is where the true bigotry lies in liberalism.
At its worst, liberalism sees skin color, gender or sexual orientation and assigns a belief system, their belief system, on those people.
http://allenwestrepublic.com/2012/10/08/the-myth-of-liberal-tolerance-will-this-make-the-nightly-news-i-doubt-it/If there’s one thing liberals pride themselves on ... (
show quote)
To intolerant you should add judgmental, self-righteous & smug.
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
If there’s one thing liberals pride themselves on it’s the myth that they’re “tolerant” of others. But what liberals mean by the word is not what the word means, nor is it what they practice.
The word “tolerate” means to put up with, to allow to exist. But liberals don’t mean it that way. They don’t preach tolerance, they preach conformity. Look up what these bastions of tolerance have said about the Tea Party. Look what they say about Allen West. Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas or anyone who dare creep outside the left-wing’s assigned box for them.
See, many liberals are, in reality, are the most intolerant human beings you’ll ever come across. They preach a “live and let live” philosophy, but relentlessly attack anyone with whom they disagree.
They can also be the most bigoted people you’ll ever meet. By bigoted I mean racist.
The most famous examples of this have been directed at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. In 1994, political commentator Julianne Malveaux said on PBS that she wished Justice Thomas’ wife “feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease,” continuing, “Well, that’s how I feel. He is an absolutely reprehensible person.” And in 1996, Emerge magazine ran a cover drawing of Justice Thomas dressed as a lawn jockey with the headline “Uncle Thomas: Lawn Jockey for The Far Right.”
What was the unforgivable sin Justice Thomas committed to warrant such a disgusting attacks? He thought differently than the accepted liberal orthodoxy. That orthodoxy is where the true bigotry lies in liberalism.
At its worst, liberalism sees skin color, gender or sexual orientation and assigns a belief system, their belief system, on those people.
http://allenwestrepublic.com/2012/10/08/the-myth-of-liberal-tolerance-will-this-make-the-nightly-news-i-doubt-it/If there’s one thing liberals pride themselves on ... (
show quote)
The "unforgivable sin" was that Justice Thomas was "conservative". Liberal policies have always been based on "Do as I say, not as I do".
crazylibertarian wrote:
To intolerant you should add judgmental, self-righteous & smug.
Conceited and narcissistic should be added as well.
crazylibertarian wrote:
To intolerant you should add judgmental, self-righteous & smug.
My next thread will be about those crazy libertarians.
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
My next thread will be about those crazy libertarians.
I'm looking forward to it.
crazylibertarian wrote:
I'm looking forward to it.
Just kidding, actually. You're OK. Mostly.
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
Just kidding, actually. You're OK. Mostly.
I was joking also but look forward to being pilloried. You're OK too, mostly.
"What was the unforgivable sin Justice Thomas committed to warrant such a disgusting attacks? He thought differently than the accepted liberal orthodoxy. That orthodoxy is where the true bigotry lies in liberalism."
The 'unforgivable sin' was the sexual harassment case brought by Anita Hill. Which you chose to ignore. Your straw man about 'tolerance' is based on not understanding the issues.
working class stiff wrote:
"What was the unforgivable sin Justice Thomas committed to warrant such a disgusting attacks? He thought differently than the accepted liberal orthodoxy. That orthodoxy is where the true bigotry lies in liberalism."
The 'unforgivable sin' was the sexual harassment case brought by Anita Hill. Which you chose to ignore. Your straw man about 'tolerance' is based on not understanding the issues.
Who won that case? Enough said.
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
Who won that case? Enough said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anita-hill-matters-hbo-confirmation_us_570fb8f9e4b0ffa5937e5e72yeah....a bunch of men who clearly had no understanding of what constitutes sexual harassment cleared him.
But more to the point: for you to base your claim of liberal intolerance on the reaction to Clarence Thomas and his hearing just shows that you have no understanding of the issues involved. It wasn't about his views but about how he treated a female subordinate.
Like Roger Ailes, Thomas would be out on his can today and working for the sexual predator running for President.
working class stiff wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anita-hill-matters-hbo-confirmation_us_570fb8f9e4b0ffa5937e5e72
yeah....a bunch of men who clearly had no understanding of what constitutes sexual harassment cleared him.
But more to the point: for you to base your claim of liberal intolerance on the reaction to Clarence Thomas and his hearing just shows that you have no understanding of the issues involved. It wasn't about his views but about how he treated a female subordinate.
Like Roger Ailes, Thomas would be out on his can today and working for the sexual predator running for President.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anita-hill-mat... (
show quote)
He was not found guilty. You may not like it, but that's a fact. Besides, isn't it the left who keep saying that Hillary has never been indicted or convicted? Everyone knows she's guilty, but she will never be indicted because of politics as usual.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.