The more "progress" do "Liberals" make the more America slides backwards relative to some other countries. The evidence is staggering, yet the "Liberals" dismiss it all.
What could be a better proof that the "Liberalism" doesn't work? In 1960, China was a Third World country and "Liberalism" was a fringe in the U.S. Now, the "Liberals" control at least half of our country and China will be leaving us in a dust before long.
One must have a defective "Liberal" mind to not see the obvious correlation here.
32 comments
The solution for the States' financial woes is surprisingly simple. Here's what everyone needs to do:
1) Get a wheelbarrow and a shovel, 2) Go to your bank and empty your savings account onto the wheelbarrow, 3) find the nearest rich person, 4) shovel your money at the rich person.
It's the American way.
Because correlation obviously equals causation... sigh.
Dumb bastard.
Perhaps if we became more conservative China's infrastructure would simply evaporate, it's ports and industrial centers dissolve and its billion people be forced into starvation. It'll just become a third world nation again, for no good reason.
China was a Third World country and "Liberalism" was a fringe in the U.S.
1) Even the Republican Party platform of 1960 looks pretty liberal by today's standards.
2) China is more wealthy because it stopped sacrificing its people to an unattainable ideal. Perhaps you should do think about doing the same.
Yes, you're right: we don't see it.
Because Liberalism must therefore be working , if we control at least half the world, and China is leaving you Teabaggers in the dust. [/The Cyberattacks via China in the news yesterday]
As per a certain Austrian who had ideas above his station, he thought he could eliminate a certain religious community.
Despite six million being murdered, not only have future generations flourished, they now have their own country - Israel - and his 'Thousand Year Reich' barely lasted twelve . So if that aforememntioned religious community haven't proved (to at least said Austrian's few Neo-bumchums around today) that they are the Ubermensch, and he was the Inferior Subhuman, I don't know what will.
Must be Backwards Decade in the Yang household, methinks.
So China goes Communist, which Fox and associates constantly say Liberals are a front for, and becomes an economic powerhouse while the democratic US that more often than not votes Republican and pines for the 50's has been in an undefined decline...
...
You really need to think your scathing comparisons through better dude.
The countries that are actually better than us in important criteria like health, education, financial security, etc. are more liberal or socialist than we are.
Liberalism was a "fringe" in the US in 1960? Guess that's why that staunch conservative John F. Kennedy got elected (*cough, cough*)
I love people that blame people they don't like when they're proven wrong. That China was bound to overtake the US economically, just like the US was bound to overtake Great Britain, has been known for at least 50 years and probably longer.
With the exception of Eisenhower and Nixon - who certainly weren't conservatives by today's Tea Party standards (e.g., the EPA and OSHA were formed under Nixon with his support), liberals were elected to the presidency every year since the early 1930's until Reagan. The Chinese economy began its rise during the Reagan years. So there is no "obvious correlation" except the one David invented.
I'm still waiting for him to define what he thinks "liberalism" actually is. Because I hear these nutbags throw this word around and I honestly have no idead what they mean or what they're talking about. I'm starting to get the sneaking suspicion that it just means, "anyone who ddoesn't agree with me".
Remind me again, who went to China and convinced their leaders that they were dictators, not communists? Who pointed out that they were sitting on a virtually untapped "slave" labor force? How did all our manufacturing jobs wind up overseas, beyond the reach of those pesky health and safety regulations? Which social class made a short-sighted killing moving it all off shore? Who was that again? Only "who" could go to China?
Dick Prickson? Prick Exxon? Something like that.
Fuck you revisionists. Steal our future and blame the liberals.
@myrese
Actually second world means those countries aligned with the USSR, by the 1960s the PRC had broken relations with the Soviets and left their sphere of influence, so technically the PRC is a 3rd world country...
... though still the term "3rd world country" does not mean economic status.
It's in no way remotely the Liberals that have given the Chenese the chance to pull ahead. The liberals have warned y'all about this massive overseas outsourceing for years and who kept demanding these market changes? Who kept lobbying Washington for overseas write-offs, tax freedoms, WARS?
Wasn't the libs. Full on conservative rich-worshipping policies. REPUBLICANS.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.