In Re ‘Clovers’


Defined and discussed.

Not to mention despised.

(H/t GVDL)

14 responses to “In Re ‘Clovers’

  1. Brilliant. Clovers must be allied with Fudds.

  2. Although clovers will deny being clovers, just as fudds will.

  3. Centurion_Cornelius

    CLOVER COMMANDMENT #1: “This for your own (the children’s’) good!”

  4. I prefer the moniker Anne Barnhardt coined and explained: diabolical narcissist.
    ‘Gay’ softens the description of sodomites. ‘Queer’ softens the description of same. Why soften the description of narcissists?
    Calling narcissists ‘clovers’ is ridiculous and is a great disservice to plants everywhere.

  5. There seem to be way more Clovers aka diabolical narcissists today than there were 25yrs ago.
    Read a report somewhere that 1 out of 5 CEOs was a sociopath.
    My experience is more like 6 out of 5.
    Both cream and scum rise to the top.

  6. “Clovers are generally only dangerous in herds.” The solution for that is long established.
    Also, agree with above on the terminology issue. TPTB have been refusing to publicly call an enemy by it’s name on several fronts, so I’ll stick with diabolical narcissist (as polite as I can get), one of those things I happen to actually agree with Ms. Barnhardt about. Calling it like you see it is one of the separations.

  7. “Clovers equate legal and illegal with moral right and wrong. If an action is legal than it it is morally right. And if an action is illegal then it is morally wrong and anyone who is “guilty” of committing the proscribed act deserves to be punished…For a Clover, right and wrong are constructs of law. They do not grok moral law.”

    A whole lot of people need to grok this. Too much of this ‘well as long as Congress declares blah, blah,blah according to Amendment yadda yadda it’s CONSTEEEETUSHONAL! Constitution =/= morality. When murdering infants is Constitutional the word has no meaning. Words on paper are not an adequate defense to robbery, murder and violation of God-given rights. Legality simply means you have no moral or intellectual ground to stand on and must resort to threats of violence.

  8. Alfred E. Neuman

    Reblogged this on ETC., ETC., & ETC..