Politics & News

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

This is for all of you liberals

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be very liberal, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.
She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.
One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?" She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."
Her father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"
The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the conservative side of the fence."
If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him..
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church. A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and Jesus silenced.
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.. A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll post it. A liberal will delete it because he's "offended."

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

LeopoldBloom · M

If a conservative doesn't like abortions, he demands a law against it. If a liberal doesn't like abortions, she doesn't have one.

If a conservative doesn't like gay marriage, he demands that it be outlawed. If a liberal doesn't like gay marriage, he doesn't get gay married.

If a conservative doesn't like that a NFL player is kneeling to protest something, he cheers when the player is cancelled. If a liberal doesn't like that a NFL player is kneeling to protest something, he still thinks the player should be allowed to play football.

A conservative thinks only his own religion should be given consideration in the public square. A liberal thinks all religions should be given equal consideration.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he demands that the government take care of him because he "deserves" it. He just doesn't think anyone else should get help.

If a conservative politician is caught violating the Constitution, conservatives ignore it. If a liberal politician is caught violating the Constitution, liberals hold them accountable.

1-25 of 29

TrashCat · M

@LeopoldBloom Thany you for saying what I was to lazy to write myself. This is a perfect response. 💜 🍻

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

If a conservative doesn't like smash-and-grab shoplifting, he demands laws against it to be enforced.
If a liberal doesn't like smash-and-grab shoplifting, he doesn't indulge in smash-and-grab shoplifting. 🙄

TrashCat · M

@LeopoldBloom @Thinkerbell When a conservative hears that Trump was caught going to Epstein Island 7 times and is seen chumming it up with Jeffrey, they ignore it and point at Bill Clinton.
When Liberals hear Bill Clinton went to Epstein Island and may have engaged in wrongdoing, they say investigate, arrest and throw him in jail along with Trump

trollslayer · 46-50, M

@LeopoldBloom zing!!!

Torsten · 36-40, M

@LeopoldBloom what absolute horse shit haha

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell Conservatives think smash and grab shoplifting is causing stores all over America to close. Liberals recognize that it's inconsequential.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

And the illegals crossing the southern border are inconsequential; just ask Mayorkas.

And the homeless people living on the streets of San Francisco are inconsequential; just ask Newsom.

And the antisemitism at Harvard is inconsequential; just ask — wait, where did she go...? 🤔

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell Ask the Republicans in Congress why they refuse to give Mayorkas the funding he needs to stop the people crossing the border.

I agree with you about the homeless. It's shameful that the richest country on earth doesn't provide free housing for those people. I wonder which party is opposed to that?

The Harvard thing mystifies me. The main qualification of a university president is being a consummate politician. All she had to say was "we have a zero tolerance policy toward antisemitism as we do toward every form of expressed bigotry." If she couldn't do that, she wasn't qualified, regardless of the plagiarism.

Did you hear about the wife of the guy who was behind Gay's ouster, who was found to have plagiarized some of her own work? More proof that every accusation by a conservative is a confession.

[c=003BB2]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/neri-oxman-billionaire-investor-bill-ackmans-wife-accused-plagiarism-m-rcna132436[/c]

Also, TIL that Claudine Gay is the cousin of writer Roxane Gay, known for [i]Bad Feminist[/i], [i]Hunger[/i], and other books.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

[quote]"Ask the Republicans in Congress why they refuse to give Mayorkas the funding he needs to stop the people crossing the border."[/quote]

🤣 🤣 🤣 I must admit, Leo, you have a remarkable sense of humor to suggest that Mayorkas, or any of Biden's handlers for that matter, have the slightest intention of stopping the border crossings, if only the Republicans in Congress would give them the money to do so. 🤣 🤣 🤣

[quote]"I agree with you about the homeless. It's shameful that the richest country on earth doesn't provide free housing for those people. I wonder which party is opposed to that?"[/quote]

🤣 🤣 🤣 Last I heard, Newsom is a Democrat, and both houses of the CA legislature are Democrat, and still they can only manage to clean up San Francisco for a few days for XI's visit? 🤣 🤣 🤣

[quote]"The main qualification of a university president is being a consummate politician. All she [Gay] had to say was "we have a zero tolerance policy toward antisemitism as we do toward every form of expressed bigotry." If she couldn't do that, she wasn't qualified, regardless of the plagiarism."[/quote]

OF COURSE she wasn't qualified, but as naturally as night follows day, it was her race and gender that mattered to the Harvard Corporation when they appointed her.

[quote] "Did you hear about the wife of the guy who was behind Gay's ouster, who was found to have plagiarized some of her own work? More proof that every accusation by a conservative is a confession."[/quote]

🤣 🤣 🤣 Let me know when the Harvard Corporation makes the wife of the guy behind Gay's ouster president of Harvard. Or maybe he has a plagiarizing cousin that they might consider. 🤣 🤣 🤣

"Veritas" Hah[i]![/i]

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell The people who want an open border are the Republicans. Illegal immigrants are a convenient scapegoat for them to rally their base, and their Chamber of Commerce backers prefer to have a frightened, docile workforce that won't complain about wage or safety violations. It's hilarious that you think Democrats want an open border when apprehensions are higher during Democratic administrations - at least, when they're funded.

I agree with you about the homeless situation in California. However, it's also bad in Republican strongholds like Casper, Wyoming. Of course, we can make believe that's not happening and blame everything on the Democrats.

Like most bigots, you assume if a Black person gets a plum job, it was because of their race. In fact, there are probably hundreds of equally qualified people for those positions. Given a choice between two equally qualified candidates, if the Black one gets the job, you'll say it was because of their race, and if the white one is hired, I'll say the same thing.

It's just ironic that the guy who got his panties in a bunch over Gay's plagiarism is married to a plagiarist. it reminds me of those pastors who scream about deh gayz every Sunday from the pulpit, then sneak out to diddle their gay lover. Remember what they say about people in glass houses?

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

[quote]"The people who want an open border are the Republicans."[/quote]

What utter nonsense. If that were so, Biden wouldn't have repealed Trump's executive orders that made illegal crossings more difficult, and Democrats would not have allowed the "remain in Mexico" for 'refugee' processing law to expire. Nor would Biden's handlers have torn down the parts of Trump's wall that had already been built. Nor would Garland's DOJ be suing Abbott for calling up the Texas National Guard to keep out illegals.
The only germ of truth in what you say is that there are indeed commercial interests that want the cheap labor. That, in tandem with the Democrats looking forward to millions of new voters is why nothing effective will be done in the foreseeable future.

[quote]"it [homelessness, tent cities] is also bad in Republican strongholds like Casper, Wyoming."[/quote]

There are about 8000 urban homeless in San Francisco (2024 urban pop, 670,000) or about 1.2%.
In Caspar, the homeless number about 200 out of 54,000, or about 0.4%.

It looks like the 'Republican stronghold' is doing about 3x better than the woke Democrat stronghold. 🙄

Another point: SF's urban population has declined precipitously since 2020, dropping from 870,000 in 2020 to 670,000 in 2024, a 23% loss.
I'll leave it to you to figure out why that may have happened. [HINT: quality of urban life in SF, perhaps...? 🤔]

[quote]"Like most bigots, you assume if a Black person gets a plum job, it was because of their race."[/quote]

Since Gay proved to be an unqualified politician (by your own admission a couple of comments back), and later was also proved to be a third-rate scholar, are you saying that she was equal in credentials to anyone else that might have been considered for the job of Harvard president? Don't make me laugh again. 😂 😂 😂

[quote]"
It's just ironic that the guy who got his panties in a bunch over Gay's plagiarism is married to a plagiarist."[/quote]

Well, you know the old saying: "set the husband of a plagiarist to catch a plagiarist."
And as I said before, let me know when Harvard makes his wife president of Harvard. 😂 😂 😂

Please DO try a little harder next time, Leo. 🤭

Torsten · 36-40, M

@Thinkerbell dont bother with facts, he will just ignore them and keep rambling stupidity instead

LeopoldBloom · M

@Torsten @Thinkerbell The fact remains that the Republicans in Congress have failed to adequately fund border security. But why worry about that when impeaching Mayorkas is such great political theater? They'd love to impeach Biden, but he has to actually do something impeachable first. So Mayorkas is a good proxy.

Trump's "wall" was worthless against the cutting-edge technology developed in Mexico: ladders.

SF's urban population is falling as housing costs there are among the highest in the country. Could that have something to do with homelessness? Nah, of course not.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

[quote]"The fact remains that the Republicans in Congress have failed to adequately fund border security."[/quote]

The fact remains that the Republicans couldn't fund border security because with their slim majority, there are too any RINOS who would vote with Democrats to oppose it.

And if the Democrats in Congress are so in favor of border security,
why didn't they fund it when the had a majority two years ago? 🤔

[quote]"
Trump's "wall" was worthless against the cutting-edge technology developed in Mexico: ladders."[/quote]

News Flash: It's much easier to catch illegals when they have to climb up and down ladders one by one, as compared with a truck stuffed with 50 or 100 illegals, speeding over open terrain with no let or hindrance.

[quote]"SF's urban population is falling as housing costs there are among the highest in the country. Could that have something to do with homelessness? Nah, of course not."[/quote]

Let's take a look at SF's housing market:

As anyone with an ounce of sense can see, it is down from a peak of about $1.6 million in early 2022 to about $1.2 million now, a drop of 25%.

And that's in current dollars. If you fold in Biden's cumulative 10-15% inflation over that period, home values are down about 35-40% in constant dollars.

Don't you EVER get tired of being wrong, Leo?
Nah, that's not in a liberal's DNA. 🙄

missyann · 56-60

@LeopoldBloom Boo Hoo!!!!!

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell Of course, "RINOs." More like the Freedumb Caca throwing a tantrum because they can't get their fascist agenda passed.

If San Francisco is such a horrible place, why are more people moving there now? I had to look it up because I assumed it was still falling. In fact, that trend has recently reversed.

[c=003BB2]https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/s-f-exodus-population-recovery-data-18564064.php[/c]

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

Leo, Leo... you're clutching at straws again. 🙄

The SF Chronicle publishes a story of how a "revised" estimate of SF's population finds a few thousand more residents in a city of about 800,000, and that's supposed to be significant?

It probably was caused by an undercount of the illegals that had moved in. Perhaps the lefty city fathers figured if they were going to give the illegals driver's licenses and register them to vote, maybe they had better count them as residents. 😂

Meanwhile, the SF housing market value trendline continues its downward course, the population "increases" notwithstanding.

Oh, wait... The illegals don't live in the ritzy areas where the Pelosis and corrupt DAs who don't enforce laws live, so it's no wonder that the influx of illegals didn't raise the property values.

Massageman · 70-79, M

@Thinkerbell Thank you, Tink!

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell Can you cite statistics from a reputable source of how many "illegals" are "moving in" and "registering to vote?"

Housing in the Bay Area is still absurdly overpriced, mainly due to the effect from Silicon Valley.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

As you should well know, Leo, there are NO reliable statistics as to how many illegals there are in the country, or in any particular city, especially the self-proclaimed, virtue-signalling "sanctuary" cities, where few or no questions are asked.

Oh, wait... Mayor Adams of NYC seems to have had too much of a good thing, judging from his recent complaints and actions. 😂
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/07/nyregion/adams-migrants-destroy-nyc.html

And here, FYI, is a list of places that DO register illegals to vote in local elections, and of course Oakland and San Francisco are high on the list of usual suspects.

https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_permitting_noncitizens_to_vote_in_the_United_States

And as for the still absurdly overpriced real estate in the Bay area: you of course dodged the point of WHY it has dropped about 25% since the total mess of SF's handling of homelessness and influx of illegals began in earnest over the last three years.. 🙄

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell Like most conservatives, you don't know what a sanctuary city is. It's not a place where illegal immigrants are allowed to remain indefinitely. It refers to the requirement that local law enforcement hold any arrested illegal immigrants for 72 hours, until a federal officer has time to show up and collect them. Sanctuary cities adhere to this requirement. Non-sanctuary cities will hold the immigrants beyond 72 hours if necessary. Keep in mind, these are people who were arrested but are not being charged for a crime other than entering the country illegally.

Housing prices depend on many factors. Something else that affected the Bay Area over the past 3 years was COVID, and the attendant increase in remote work. If I were hired by a Silicon Valley company and could stay here in Savannah, I would prefer to do that over moving to San Jose and having to buy a similar house at 5-10 times what my house here would sell for. If enough people are doing that, the law of supply and demand will have an effect. Bay Area real estate rose in value because for decades, you had high numbers of very highly-paid workers trying to move there.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

[quote]"Like most conservatives, you don't know what a sanctuary city is. It's not a place where illegal immigrants are allowed to remain indefinitely. It refers to the requirement that local law enforcement hold any arrested illegal immigrants for 72 hours, until a federal officer has time to show up and collect them."[/quote]

Tut, tut, Leo... you are engaging in misrepresentation. Sanctuary cities or counties won't arrest an illegal unless FIRST REQUESTED to do so by federal authorities; it is only THEN that the 72 hours begin. And there are many 'sanctuary' cities or counties that won't even do that; they don't comply AT ALL if the feds ask. That was mainly under Trump. The Biden feds under Mayorkas know better than to even ask. 🙄

Here, educate yourself:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/sanctuary-cities/

And as for the Bay area real estate, oh, I should have realized it was COVID[i]![/i]
And of course, quality of life issues in SF had NOTHING to do with it;
people just stayed in their modestly-priced homes in GA, or wherever, and worked remotely.

But wait a minute.... most jobs have gone back to at least partial in-person presence.
I guess Silicon Valley must be an exception. 😂

LeopoldBloom · M

@Thinkerbell Normally, cities don't enforce federal law. Conservatives wouldn't want them enforcing [i]all[/i] federal law, would they? Imagine if the cops could bust your business for OSHA violations. Don't you prefer that they only enforce federal law when asked, especially a law that only affects those hated "illegals?"

As for remote jobs, they were 5.7% in 2018, spiked to 41.7% in 2020, and are now at 25%. So hardly "most" jobs. Employers have figured out that they don't need to pay for office space when employees are perfectly happy to work from home.

The situation in Silicon Valley is reversed, with three-quarters of current job openings being remote.

No, this couldn't [i]possibly[/i] influence home prices in the Bay Area. It's purely "quality of life" where people don't want to live somewhere where they might see a homeless person. That's gotta be it!

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

Tut, tut, Leo... you got it wrong yet again.

[big]As of 2023, 12.7% of full-time employees work from home, while 28.2% work a hybrid model[/big]

https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/remote-work-statistics/

And Silicon Valley only pays about $45,000/year for remote jobs?
No wonder they're remote.
They could never dream of living in SF, unless they are illegals, of course.

And what do they do for this handsome average salary?
Proofread Excel spreadsheets for errors...? 😂

I thought you said Silicon Valley is what drove SF housing costs up. 🙄

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@LeopoldBloom

Oh, I forgot to comment on your claptrap about enforcing federal law.
The vast majority of local jurisdictions DO cooperate in enforcing federal immigration law; it's only the "sanctuary" cities and counties that in many cases (enumerated in the link I gave you above) will NOT.

But of course, that point completely got by you. 🙄

1-25 of 29