Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evan Sayet: Liberals are ‘morally and intellectually retarded’
The Daily Caller ^ | 5:08 AM 03/31/2013 | Grae Stafford

Posted on 04/01/2013 12:24:42 AM PDT by plsjr

Comedian Evan Sayet described his progression from a “brain-dead liberal” to a “9/13 Republican” in a forthcoming interview with The Daily Caller’s Ginni Thomas.

“There is only one religion now [for the left],” he said. “The religion is that anything that is considered good, right or has become successful has some how been the beneficiary of some sort of injustice.”

Sayet went on to pointedly criticize liberals’ “morally and intellectually retarded” philosophy.

“The liberal believes if we just regurgitate the apple, give up all knowledge of right and wrong, we can return to paradise”

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS: intellect; liberal; moral; retard
"Liberalism is a mental disorder" - Michael Savage

Veteran psychiatrist calls liberals mentally ill ... and it's metastasized in the west.

1 posted on 04/01/2013 12:24:42 AM PDT by plsjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: plsjr

A large part of liberalism is based on denial and slander, as their way of avoiding arguments. They won’t admit to history in its true form, for example. Hitler wasn’t a socialist, and Stalin wasn’t a communist. But you’re a racist, because Democrats freed the slaves.


2 posted on 04/01/2013 12:59:10 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

Yup.


3 posted on 04/01/2013 1:01:48 AM PDT by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

Huh?


4 posted on 04/01/2013 1:10:52 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

In other words, it’s Alice in Wonderland mentality.


5 posted on 04/01/2013 1:16:35 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

Denial of history, slander by calling you a racist. Haven’t you noticed that’s all they do? Take the average libera’s views on gun control, for example. Will they admit that Hitler used it against his population, or Stalin against his? The rebellions against Stalin’s forced collectivism might in fact have succeeded if they weren’t arleady disarmed down to their pitch forks. Stalin’s forces were armed to the teeth instead. They will deny it most of the time, but it’s in the history books.


6 posted on 04/01/2013 1:20:27 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

I find that Liberals cannot think deeply, in terms of root causes. I had an argument with one today, in regards to taxing the poor. He couldn’t see the necessity of taxing those on low incomes, because they have so little. I explained to him that, when somebody doesn’t have to pay a price for their entitlements, there is no reason to not vote for more entitlements. Taxing the poor, even if its a relatively small amount, is a necessity to help protect the economy, which ultimately helps protect the poor. But he just could not see past that taxing low incomes, because they,have so little, was unjust.


7 posted on 04/01/2013 1:25:23 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
Guy Debord, French Marxist literary theorist, published his first book with a sandpaper cover so that books placed next to it would be destroyed.
8 posted on 04/01/2013 1:27:26 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (Justifiable homicide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

What you are referring to is their inability to see cause and effect. Action and consequence, because they just blame whatever consequences they don’t like on someone else. If communism hasn’t worked in the past, for infinite example, it’s because of capitalists. However, I take partial disagreement with you. I don’t think those receiving entitlements should be taxed on what they’re getting through taxes anyway. Either they don’t get them, or they don’t get to vote while they are. But as you know, once people find out they can vote themselves the forced welfare of others, democracy ends.


9 posted on 04/01/2013 1:37:14 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

Unfortunately, the Constitution guarantees a vote to all citizens, so you can’t deny them the vote. But I do think that they shouldn’t be protected from their own unwise acts.


10 posted on 04/01/2013 1:42:05 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

Meant scarcasm, by “Huh?”. Good solid response, Telepathic Intruder. Thanks.


11 posted on 04/01/2013 1:55:21 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Your sublte reference to taxes, then. And you’ll admit to mine that someone going to the government for benefits in the first place will most likely vote for whatever party will grant those benefits? So there’s the hidden vote, based on incentive. And what party is now creating a greater lower class by attacking the upper class? There is the motive. What am I suggesting as a solution? Only if that we don’t find one we’re screwed.


12 posted on 04/01/2013 1:58:03 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Now, was Alice looking for br’ar rabbit or the white rabbit? Just kidd’n. Thanks.


13 posted on 04/01/2013 1:58:54 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

Ah, the fine art of sarcasm. It’s often lost on me, even when it’s my own.


14 posted on 04/01/2013 2:00:40 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

People respond to incentives. If the entitlement-minded saw their cheques become smaller, due to increased taxes, they wouldn’t be so quick to demand more entitlements. The solution, ultimately, is to get the feds to mind its own business in areas that are state responsibility.


15 posted on 04/01/2013 2:02:43 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Touche. We need to go back to the constitution. But as long as no one in particular is enforcing it (i.e. the Supreme Court), the fed itself will only recognize incentive (what gets the most votes).


16 posted on 04/01/2013 2:15:21 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Jonty30. Wow. So, in your reasoning- entitlement recievers, would lessen a demand on producers of tax wealth, by increased demand of gov’t tax, followed a lessening of benefits to the recievers. Been reading the little red book, have ya? Your disconnect is obvious. Try again.


17 posted on 04/01/2013 2:29:36 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

People on welfare should not be allowed to vote.


18 posted on 04/01/2013 2:47:39 AM PDT by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
the Constitution guarantees a vote to all citizens

Where is that located in the Constitution?

19 posted on 04/01/2013 2:51:04 AM PDT by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

As I said, ultimately, getting the feds out if state business is the solution, but putting a bite on their entitlements will help.


20 posted on 04/01/2013 2:54:15 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Okay.


21 posted on 04/01/2013 2:55:47 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

There is no depravity you cannot trust the left to commit.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2980615/posts?page=175#175


22 posted on 04/01/2013 3:00:45 AM PDT by Hardraade (http://junipersec.wordpress.com (Vendetta))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abclily

My sentiment exactly. I would codify that in the constitution if I could, with the proper ratification of course.


23 posted on 04/01/2013 3:00:50 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

I would say it’s not just a mental disease, but a spiritual one as well. Read the 10 Commmandments and compare it to the left’s behavior. I realize we all fall short, however, they celebrate their “falling short” and want others to follow them as well. If you don’t, they won’t hesitate to ruin you. They hate freedom because it’s a gift from God. They want to run the show.


24 posted on 04/01/2013 3:06:48 AM PDT by grimalkin (Once abolish the God and the government becomes the God. -G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

“There is only one religion now [for the left],” he said. “The religion is that anything that is considered good, right or has become successful has some how been the beneficiary of some sort of injustice.”

Sounds satanic to me.


25 posted on 04/01/2013 3:28:27 AM PDT by ryan71 (The republican party is dead to me. Dead. Don't bother trying to revive it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Evan Sayet bump


26 posted on 04/01/2013 3:32:42 AM PDT by newfreep (Breitbart sent me...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Geez. The book is still available, at $3000 to $6000 with the sanpaper cover.

Will have to be boxed or brodart-covered, if you’re a collector :).


27 posted on 04/01/2013 3:57:48 AM PDT by Hardraade (http://junipersec.wordpress.com (Vendetta))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

You’re right about liberals not thinking too deeply. Most don’t. They never get past how they feel and what they wish things could be like. Those that do rapidly see how the liberal world view falls apart when it comes crashing into reality. Then the liberal does one of three things. One, they get angry and scared, stick their head in the sand, deny the reality, and blame us (non liberals). Two, they accept the reality and change their world view - becoming something other than a liberal (a great awakening). Three, they decide that power and control are more important than honesty, and use their new-found knowledge to manipulate other liberals. (the fascist option)


28 posted on 04/01/2013 4:27:45 AM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

When I went to the link, all I got was audio. The video and accompanying article are at:

http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/31/evan-sayet-from-liberal-to-913-republican-video/


29 posted on 04/01/2013 4:36:38 AM PDT by Rocky (Obama is pure evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

They can’t see anything, one of my favorite illustrations is the old saw that conservatives are “inconsistent” if they simultaneously favor the death penalty for murder but condemn abortion. The liberals are the reverse, they condemn the death penalty for murder but approve of abortion.

If a woman is ugly her image in the mirror is ugly, if she is beautiful her image in the mirror is beautiful, if the conservative position is “inconsistent” then the liberal position which is the mirror image is “inconsistent” so calling the conservatives inconsistent merely illustrates the absurdity of the left.

In reality the conservative position is consistent AS IS THE LIBERAL POSITION but the conservative is consistently sane while the liberal is consistently insane.


30 posted on 04/01/2013 4:44:24 AM PDT by RipSawyer (I was born on Earth, what planet is this?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

When you consider the basis of most of their political opinions rely on their ability to redefine things such as “up” into “down”, it’s not surprising any debate of substance with them resembles more of a psychotic episode rather than a discussion.


31 posted on 04/01/2013 5:04:15 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Pretty much all of Liberal psychology can be seen in the mind of an average 4-to-6 year-old. The inability to see consequences, over-generalization, self-absorbtion. A 6-year-old asks, “Why doesn’t everyone have a house to live in?” A Liberal tries to enact law to make this reality.

It is a natural state of mind, but one that you are supposed to grow out of. The description, “Retarded”, is completely appropriate.


32 posted on 04/01/2013 5:42:03 AM PDT by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

“Unfortunately, the Constitution guarantees a vote to all citizens,”

Could you kindly point that out for me please. I don’t recall reading that....ever.


33 posted on 04/01/2013 6:53:45 AM PDT by READINABLUESTATE ("We must hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most assuredly hang separately." - Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Empire_of_Liberty

I experience them as rebellious, hateful adolescents who are against things just because the “grown ups”, which is to say traditions are for them. For example, marriage is a meaningless piece of paper which they flaunt as ignorant and old fashioned when they want to define”living together” as the new cool norm, but that very same institution is the ultimate important thing for gays. The theme seems to be this: where society sanctions something, oppose it, simply for the sake of being contrary to the adults. They are like two year olds and teens.


34 posted on 04/01/2013 7:05:41 AM PDT by Anima Mundi (Envy is just passive, lazy greed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: READINABLUESTATE

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the_United_States

Good luck getting the Supremes to deny anybody the vote, Keep in mind that, if anybody can be denied the right to vote, that anybody can be you.


35 posted on 04/01/2013 7:18:11 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ThunderSleeps

“You’re right about liberals not thinking too deeply. Most don’t. They never get past how they feel and what they wish things could be like.”

I believe Thomas Sowell stated that liberals replace what works with what “sounds” good.


36 posted on 04/01/2013 7:49:38 AM PDT by Artie (We are surrounded by MORONS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

I just bought Sayet’s new book “Kindergarden of Eden.”

It’s the best thing I’ve read in 10 years and explains how liberals “think.”

You can get the book or download the eBook.


37 posted on 04/01/2013 11:19:39 AM PDT by LyinLibs (If victims of islam were more "islamophobic," maybe they'd still be alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder
someone going to the government for benefits in the first place will most likely vote for whatever party will grant those benefits . . . What am I suggesting as a solution? Only that if we don’t find one we’re screwed.
We can’t find the solution without clearly identifying the root cause of the problem. Having looked at the problem long and hard, my opinion is that the unified tendentiousness of journalism is that root cause. Journalism is protected, and rightly so, under the First Amendment - but nothing in 1A indicates that journalism is objective - or that it should be unified. A constitutional provision isolating the press from government interference is certainly no way to force journalism to be objective.The Constitution doesn’t contemplate forcing journalism to be objective, far from it - it only protects the right of anyone to express their own opinion to anyone who wants to listen to it. Leaving the judgement of “objectivity” or wisdom to the listener/reader who we wish were prudent enough to recognize that anyone who claims to be objective, or does so implicitly by criticizing others for not being objective, is the least objective of all.

But there is a caveat. Journalism may be independent of the government or any political party, but nothing requires a political party - or a government constituted by a political party - to be independent of journalism. What if journalism has interests distinct from, even contrary to, that of the people as a whole?

Adam Smith pointed out in Wealth of Nations that 

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. Book I, Ch 10
So in that sense Adam Smith predicted that if the newspaper printers got to be in too close a communication - say, for example, by forming an organization to share reports over the telegraph - that newspapers would become one associated press, and the interests of journalism would be put forth as "the interests of the people." And that is what we observe in reality. They call it “liberalism” or “progressivism, or moderation or centrism or motherhood and apple pie - but socialism is simply the interest not of the people but of journalism unified by the Associated Press (and by any and all other wire services you care to name).

Why is that so? Journalists are about talk, not doing things. They are the “critics” of “the man in the arena” - they never run risks to get things done, but they are sure, they want you to be sure, that they are smarter than those who do - and would do better than what is actually done if they were in charge of everything. The junior senator from Massachusetts will tell you that “you didn’t build that.” You and I know that it wouldn’t have been built if nobody had had the vision and the commitment to build and operate “that,” but it flatters everyone else to deny reality. And so we see the associated press vigorously promoting the politics of the money tree fantasy at the expense of anyone who has ever deferred spending in order to save and invest.

You also see “white man him bad” politics promoted the same way - whoever has the effrontery to even think of succeeding without being in bed with politicians associated with the associated press is given the “Joe the Plumber” treatment. Or the “Nifong” treatment just for being a convenient target for a Democrat politician’s ambition.

Well, so much for preaching to the choir - what can be done about it? The Associated Press should be sued into oblivion. Now that transmission bandwidth cost is de minimus, its mission - the transmission of significant news across the continent while conserving bandwidth - is obsolete. The sins of “the MSM” are manifold, and the AP and its membership should be called to account in a class-action, RICO civil suit for triple damages. Sue the whole bunch at once, to prevent them from passing responsibility for coining and propagating libelous falsehoods. And include the FCC while you are at it, for demanding “objective journalism” as a condition of broadcast licensing, thereby putting the imprimatur of the government on fraudulent claims of objectivity.

38 posted on 04/01/2013 1:40:46 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (“Liberalism” is a conspiracy against the public by wire-service journalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion

But as we saw in the Bush years, no one in the GOP will stand up to MSM slander. Kerry threatened to sue any station airing swift boat ads, and a movie documenting facts about it. What did Bush do when CBS actually aired fake documents suggesting he was AWOL in the National Guard, hoping to effect an election? Nothing. And so the MSM thrives in a niche of appeasement to one side only.


39 posted on 04/01/2013 6:13:32 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder; PGalt
no one in the GOP will stand up to MSM slander.
That’s why I suggest a civil action, not depending on a Karl Rove to give a President Bush a spine and get him to use the Justice Dept. And I don’t suggest that the Republican Party do it, either - they never will. The plaintiff needs to be the class of people who wish the Republicans were their defenders because we know that the Democrats and the journalists with whom the Democrats exist in symbiosis, are systematically abusing us.

So, say I, we go to court alleging that:

Journalism and Objectivity

40 posted on 04/02/2013 2:24:42 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (“Liberalism” is a conspiracy against the public by wire-service journalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson