Random Politics & Religion #28: The Last One
Random Politics & Religion #28: The Last One
Looks like Trump is done. Should be having impeachment hearings about his lack of sensitiveness any day now. The blue dress worn by the congresswomen at the time of the indecent apparently is going to be used as evidence in some way.
[+]
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Fallen soldier’s mother: ‘Trump did disrespect my son’
But its the WaPo so the trumpettes can put their fingers in their ears and shout la la la facts I don't like.
Right, just like when he said he had proof of Obama's Kenyan birth certificate.
I notice we haven't seen Trump's birth certificate either.
But its the WaPo so the trumpettes can put their fingers in their ears and shout la la la facts I don't like.
Quote:
The mother of a soldier killed in an ambush in Africa said Wednesday that President Trump “did disrespect my son” with remarks in a condolence telephone call.
Sgt. La David T. Johnson's mother, Cowanda Jones-Johnson, told The Washington Post that she was present during the call from the White House on Tuesday to Johnson's widow, Myeshia Johnson. Johnson's mother also stood by an account of the call from Rep. Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.) that Trump told Johnson's widow that her husband “must have known what he signed up for.”
“President Trump did disrespect my son and my daughter and also me and my husband,” Jones-Johnson said.
Trump lashed back. He denied Wilson's account in a Twitter message Wednesday. He said he had “proof” that the exchange did not go as Wilson had described. Trump did not elaborate, but White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the president had not taped the conversation....
Sgt. La David T. Johnson's mother, Cowanda Jones-Johnson, told The Washington Post that she was present during the call from the White House on Tuesday to Johnson's widow, Myeshia Johnson. Johnson's mother also stood by an account of the call from Rep. Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.) that Trump told Johnson's widow that her husband “must have known what he signed up for.”
“President Trump did disrespect my son and my daughter and also me and my husband,” Jones-Johnson said.
Trump lashed back. He denied Wilson's account in a Twitter message Wednesday. He said he had “proof” that the exchange did not go as Wilson had described. Trump did not elaborate, but White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the president had not taped the conversation....
I notice we haven't seen Trump's birth certificate either.
Secondly not sure why this is a story, no one sane would believe Trump called her up to be disrespectful to her.
[+]
Whoops, false alarm! Now the congresswoman is saying she didn't hear the whole phone call and it turns out what she claimed to have heard was just an interpretation. Save the impeachment proceedings til next weeks hastily rushed together; Trump is the devil because we say so, scandal.
Now we return you to our regularly scheduled program.
(CNN printing stories to make the President look bad before the facts are in.) Also know as "facts I don't like".
Now we return you to our regularly scheduled program.
(CNN printing stories to make the President look bad before the facts are in.) Also know as "facts I don't like".
[+]
Found a picture of Vic
[+]
Again, that's not why we hired him.
Given the choices between a retard and a monkey, we took our chances and went with the monkey.
Given the choices between a retard and a monkey, we took our chances and went with the monkey.
In "liberals still don't get it" news.
Leonard Pitts Jr.: Democrats need to move left
Sources are very bad, unless they are made up of "anonymous sources" which, in reality, are sources only found in the mind of the journalists who write such garbage.
And, yes, before anyone get their panties in a twist, it is an opinion piece. It's just more evidence of *shock* liberals not getting it.
Leonard Pitts Jr.: Democrats need to move left
Sources are very bad, unless they are made up of "anonymous sources" which, in reality, are sources only found in the mind of the journalists who write such garbage.
Quote:
I’ve been struggling with this question for a month.
It’s been that long since a Democratic state legislator rose during the Q&A after a speech and asked me a deceptively simple thing: What should Democrats do now? What should their message be?
I had no idea how to answer that, nor even any confidence that I was the one to do it. It seemed to me it was a question not for a professional kvetcher uninterested in the nuts and bolts of political machinery, but, rather, for some high-powered operative like Donna Brazile or James Carville.
But then, it is high-powered operatives who’ve led the party into its present cul de sac.
Indeed, as internecine fighting loudly fractures the GOP, Democrats quietly struggle with a civil war of their own.
Largely shut out of power at the state and federal levels, the party is torn between pragmatists who want to chase Donald Trump’s voters with a centrist economic agenda and insurrectionists a la Bernie Sanders who want to move hard to the left. What should Democrats do?
As I said, I’ve been wrestling with that. And I finally have an answer.
The Democrats need to move left.
That conclusion does not come easily to me.
I am, by nature, a centrist deeply suspicious of political extremes, which I consider Kryptonite to thoughtfulness.
I remain convinced no ideology has a monopoly on good ideas. Moreover, I’m skeptical the agenda proffered by the likes of Sen. Sanders — free college? — is politically or economically do-able.
But here’s the thing: The center is all but gone. That was, in fact, one of the points I made in the speech that inspired the lawmaker’s question: We have, I said, become a country dominated by its extremes.
A 2014 Pew Research Center study found that the percentage of Democrats and Republicans holding extremely negative views of the opposite party has more than doubled since 1994; Pew also found that, while 64 percent of Republicans in ‘94 held opinions that were to the right of the average Democrat, these days 92 percent do. And 94 percent of Democrats are now to the left of the GOP median.
So the right is moving further right, the left, further left and the center, as the poet Yeats observed, “cannot hold.”
And it is a fantasy for a party heavily populated by African Americans, Muslims, the LGBTQ, immigrants and other marginalized peoples yearning to breathe free in an increasingly oppressive environment, to think it can attract angry, older white voters who believe that what America really needs is to be made “great again.”
No one manufactures tents that big.
What other option, then, do Democrats have but to move left, exploiting the anger, energy and enthusiasm to be found there?
It’s an imperfect solution for all the reasons noted above, but it has one advantage: It clarifies the choices, makes them stark. That would be a good thing just now.
Say what you will about Trump: He was definitive, and did not lack for boldness in his appeal to white resentments and rage.
What if Democrats were as bold and definitive as he, but for universal health care, sane immigration reform, a living wage, fixing the broken justice system, jobs training and day care for families on public assistance, addressing climate change, and not blowing up the world in manhood-measuring contests with Asian dictators?
What if they were pugnacious and uncompromising in the service of simple decency? Of inclusion and compassion? Of just treating people right?
If these days you must be an extremist, well … there are worse things to be an extremist for.
It’s been that long since a Democratic state legislator rose during the Q&A after a speech and asked me a deceptively simple thing: What should Democrats do now? What should their message be?
I had no idea how to answer that, nor even any confidence that I was the one to do it. It seemed to me it was a question not for a professional kvetcher uninterested in the nuts and bolts of political machinery, but, rather, for some high-powered operative like Donna Brazile or James Carville.
But then, it is high-powered operatives who’ve led the party into its present cul de sac.
Indeed, as internecine fighting loudly fractures the GOP, Democrats quietly struggle with a civil war of their own.
Largely shut out of power at the state and federal levels, the party is torn between pragmatists who want to chase Donald Trump’s voters with a centrist economic agenda and insurrectionists a la Bernie Sanders who want to move hard to the left. What should Democrats do?
As I said, I’ve been wrestling with that. And I finally have an answer.
The Democrats need to move left.
That conclusion does not come easily to me.
I am, by nature, a centrist deeply suspicious of political extremes, which I consider Kryptonite to thoughtfulness.
I remain convinced no ideology has a monopoly on good ideas. Moreover, I’m skeptical the agenda proffered by the likes of Sen. Sanders — free college? — is politically or economically do-able.
But here’s the thing: The center is all but gone. That was, in fact, one of the points I made in the speech that inspired the lawmaker’s question: We have, I said, become a country dominated by its extremes.
A 2014 Pew Research Center study found that the percentage of Democrats and Republicans holding extremely negative views of the opposite party has more than doubled since 1994; Pew also found that, while 64 percent of Republicans in ‘94 held opinions that were to the right of the average Democrat, these days 92 percent do. And 94 percent of Democrats are now to the left of the GOP median.
So the right is moving further right, the left, further left and the center, as the poet Yeats observed, “cannot hold.”
And it is a fantasy for a party heavily populated by African Americans, Muslims, the LGBTQ, immigrants and other marginalized peoples yearning to breathe free in an increasingly oppressive environment, to think it can attract angry, older white voters who believe that what America really needs is to be made “great again.”
No one manufactures tents that big.
What other option, then, do Democrats have but to move left, exploiting the anger, energy and enthusiasm to be found there?
It’s an imperfect solution for all the reasons noted above, but it has one advantage: It clarifies the choices, makes them stark. That would be a good thing just now.
Say what you will about Trump: He was definitive, and did not lack for boldness in his appeal to white resentments and rage.
What if Democrats were as bold and definitive as he, but for universal health care, sane immigration reform, a living wage, fixing the broken justice system, jobs training and day care for families on public assistance, addressing climate change, and not blowing up the world in manhood-measuring contests with Asian dictators?
What if they were pugnacious and uncompromising in the service of simple decency? Of inclusion and compassion? Of just treating people right?
If these days you must be an extremist, well … there are worse things to be an extremist for.
And, yes, before anyone get their panties in a twist, it is an opinion piece. It's just more evidence of *shock* liberals not getting it.
No one age 30 and younger is "getting it," it seems.
Further left, further right. Ideals only. Not living in reality.
A lot of the problem with what Saev says on this topic is that he acts like it's only the snowflakes on the left that "don't get it."
People's complete and utter inability to look at something from someone else's perspective for a single *** second is grating as hell and it just seems to be snowballing.
Further left, further right. Ideals only. Not living in reality.
A lot of the problem with what Saev says on this topic is that he acts like it's only the snowflakes on the left that "don't get it."
People's complete and utter inability to look at something from someone else's perspective for a single *** second is grating as hell and it just seems to be snowballing.
Ramyrez said: »
No one age 30 and younger is "getting it," it seems.
Then again, since Trump's been elected, the tea party/ultra-conservative movement practically went away.
Ramyrez said: »
People's complete and utter inability to look at something from someone else's perspective for a single *** second is grating as hell and it just seems to be snowballing.
It's hard to show people what they are doing when the people who are brainwashing them (aka the media) are so out of it it seems like they are being brainwashed themselves.
Ramyrez said: »
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
he's still a better person than Hillary Clinton
Drinking gasoline is better than injecting it into your bloodstream but neither comes highly recommend for adding enjoyable years to your lifespan.
that doesn't even make a little bit of sense... we had a choice between two very obviously flawed people... this whole...trying to inject some sort of buyer's remorse after the fact is as pointless as it is tedious.
for those of you with seriously diminished attention spans.
hillary blamed monica lewinski who she called a "narcissistic loony toon" for the affair and if she hadn't kept the blue dress they would have crucified her in public...which they did anyways.
personally I find her "*** shaming" of all the women that came forward against bill clinton even more deplorable than his behavior...and apparently I am not alone.
try to imagine her saying the same thing about the woman coming forward against harvey weinstein....which she is doing by keeping his money...
when they need her the most, arguably the most powerful voice in the democratic party, is silent. and not only silent but complicit.
[+]
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
In Trump's defense (but not really), he probably doesn't know how to comfort another human being.
I think Mudd is giving Trump way too much credit.
I'm just saying they're both shitty and deciding which one is worse is a difficult proposition.
My worst run-in with anyone pre- or post-election was with a Hillary fanatic who was at most 5 when Slick Willy was diddling interns. Keeping in mind that neither of us likes Trump even a little bit, she was livid that I would dare suggest Hillary was not the right candidate for the Democrats. Just the amount of venom was...disturbing, really.
So while I have seen Trump supporters being very vile to others, my own worst experiences have come from...well, not "my own," but people who are more closely aligned with me.
Putting ideals ahead of pragmatism is not good.
And this is coming from someone who likes Bernie Sanders, ffs.
My worst run-in with anyone pre- or post-election was with a Hillary fanatic who was at most 5 when Slick Willy was diddling interns. Keeping in mind that neither of us likes Trump even a little bit, she was livid that I would dare suggest Hillary was not the right candidate for the Democrats. Just the amount of venom was...disturbing, really.
So while I have seen Trump supporters being very vile to others, my own worst experiences have come from...well, not "my own," but people who are more closely aligned with me.
Putting ideals ahead of pragmatism is not good.
And this is coming from someone who likes Bernie Sanders, ffs.
Ramyrez said: »
And this is coming from someone who likes Bernie Sanders
You...you animal you!
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You...you animal you!
I mean. Yeah. I didn't think this was something I was playing close to the vest.
[+]
In "This is obviously satire, but could be as close to the truth as it is" news:
Liberals Try To Connect With Normal Americans And It Goes Poorly
Yes, it's satire. There's even a warning for those who take things literally (like liberals do).
Liberals Try To Connect With Normal Americans And It Goes Poorly
Yes, it's satire. There's even a warning for those who take things literally (like liberals do).
Quote:
Editor's note: This column is satire.
Key Democrats met secretly to confer about the party’s future as America approached the one-year anniversary of their stunning and hilarious humiliation by Donald Trump. The key question they sought to answer: “How can we Democrats appeal to those Jesus-loving, racist idiots who hate science and don’t live on the coast like everyone we know?”
After opening the seminar by refusing to say the Pledge of Allegiance, Chuck Schumer gaveled the meeting to order, sparking widespread protests. “Hammers are violent tools of oppression that cause oppressed people to literally shake. We need a national conversation about assault gavels that use automatic high-capacity clips,” sputtered the 112 year-old Senator Dianne Feinstein. “Sure, we should be able to have them, but not those, those … little people out there. They don’t need gavels.”
The assembly quickly agreed that in 2018 Democrats must prioritize sensible hammer control, including gavel background checks and ending the tool show loophole, and to enlist Lawrence O’Donnell in their campaign to stop the hammering.
This vital issue settled, Schumer continued: “Remember, we’re here to freely exchange ideas in an atmosphere of openness and unlimited inquiry. With that in mind, your program has a list of the things you can’t say, like ‘illegal alien’ and ‘Christmas.’ It also has a handy cheat sheet of everyone’s preferred pronouns. Mine are ‘he’ and ‘him,’ while Senator Menendez’s are ‘convict’ and ‘Number 675973.’ Also, be sure to observe the rule about not mansplaining, which should not be a problem with this group.”
He then turned it over to 105 year-old Nancy Pelosi, who asked, “Where am I?”
After Schumer whispered in her ear, she began: “With the economy booming, the stock market setting records, and America defeating ISIS, things have never been worse. That’s why we need to keep The Resistance going, because it’s been a huge success so far in my district in San Francisco and, I’m sure, in your districts in Manhattan, Chicago, and Havana. And we need to expand our party, which means we need to convince dirty, stupid, transphobic normal Americans to come to grips with their own failings and join us.”
“We could tell them they’re stupid even more often,” suggested Al Franken.
“And racist,” suggested Maxine Waters.
“Also, Islamophobic,” said Keith Ellison.
“In my state, I can go potty with girls!” said California’s Gavin Newsom.
“Clearly, there’s something wrong with these people, so we need to consult with someone with a genuine connection with normal Americans,” Pelosi said. “Sadly, Hillary Clinton isn’t here to help us. If anyone connects with Middle America, it’s her. Unfortunately, she’s fallen and she can’t get up.” Pelosi made the “drinky drinky” gesture, and the crowd nodded.
“But we have someone almost as good, someone who knows how Americans feel, especially the women. Harvey, are you here?"
“Look, I know about how to reach regular Americans through the power of film, even though I may be having some problems caused by the vast right wing conspiracy, the NRA, and chicks who think they’re too good to play ball anymore," Weinstein said.
"I say we do a movie that really address some of the issues normal Americans care about, like global warming, or how much it costs to hire a team of top notch defense lawyers. Maybe we get Matt or Ben to star, and Woody or Roman to direct. And hire some actresses who know how the game is played,” he added, winking.
Schumer moved up and took the mic. “Thanks Harvey. We’re looking forward to having you back on top, so to speak, and writing checks. Okay, let’s hear from our next guest, a true hero whose courage and strength has been an inspiration to everyone, Mr. Colin Kaepernick.”
“Look, I’ll stand, I’ll totally stand. Just hire me, okay? Principles, schmiciples, I need money. I got a lifestyle to support. My girlfriend talked me into this kneeling thing and she just went out and bought a herd of yaks. Why did she buy yaks? You know how much a herd of yaks costs?” he said, eyes wide. Then he stepped down off the dais and ran over to Claire McCaskill’s table and began stuffing rolls into his pockets for later.
“Well, we have some other very special guests tonight who have done so much for us,” said Schumer. “These Republican friends have been a huge help. I especially want to thank John McCain for all he’s done on behalf of preserving Obamacare, and also for not taking things personally and joining up with those of us who spit on him after he returned from Vietnam while turning against the normal Americans who supported him. John, you’re a maverick we can always rely on!”
“And there’s Ana Navarro, our favorite conservative Republican since she opposes everything conservative and Republican."
“Now look,” Schumer said, frustrated. “We have to defend 22 Senate seats next year, many in red states. How the hell are we going to do that?”
“Move left,” said Bernie Sanders.
“Move left,” said Kamala Harris.
“Which one is left?” said Gavin Newsom, staring baffled at his raised hands.
“I know!” came a shrill, grating voice from the back of the room. Hillary Clinton entered with a bandage around her head and limping from the broken toe she got when she “slipped” while wearing her trademark high heels. She took the mic and the room fell still.
“We can start treating normal Americans with respect. We can honor them for their hard work, patriotism, and devotion to family. We can stop insulting their religious beliefs and trying to shove our urban blue state values down their throats. When criminals murder fellow citizens, we can choose not to blame law-abiding gun owners, and instead of calling them ‘racists’ for voting for Trump, talk to them and learn why they felt he was offering them more than the Democratic Party.”
The room was silent, and the crowd sat staring with jaws slack.
“And…and…,” she said, then steadied herself on the podium, looking around confused.
“Are you all right, Madame Should-Be-President?” asked Schumer, handing her a goblet of Chardonnay. She drank it in one gulp.
“I don’t understand…what happened?” she asked.
“You were just mumbling random words, crazy talk,” Schumer said. “It didn’t make any sense at all.”
Key Democrats met secretly to confer about the party’s future as America approached the one-year anniversary of their stunning and hilarious humiliation by Donald Trump. The key question they sought to answer: “How can we Democrats appeal to those Jesus-loving, racist idiots who hate science and don’t live on the coast like everyone we know?”
After opening the seminar by refusing to say the Pledge of Allegiance, Chuck Schumer gaveled the meeting to order, sparking widespread protests. “Hammers are violent tools of oppression that cause oppressed people to literally shake. We need a national conversation about assault gavels that use automatic high-capacity clips,” sputtered the 112 year-old Senator Dianne Feinstein. “Sure, we should be able to have them, but not those, those … little people out there. They don’t need gavels.”
The assembly quickly agreed that in 2018 Democrats must prioritize sensible hammer control, including gavel background checks and ending the tool show loophole, and to enlist Lawrence O’Donnell in their campaign to stop the hammering.
This vital issue settled, Schumer continued: “Remember, we’re here to freely exchange ideas in an atmosphere of openness and unlimited inquiry. With that in mind, your program has a list of the things you can’t say, like ‘illegal alien’ and ‘Christmas.’ It also has a handy cheat sheet of everyone’s preferred pronouns. Mine are ‘he’ and ‘him,’ while Senator Menendez’s are ‘convict’ and ‘Number 675973.’ Also, be sure to observe the rule about not mansplaining, which should not be a problem with this group.”
He then turned it over to 105 year-old Nancy Pelosi, who asked, “Where am I?”
After Schumer whispered in her ear, she began: “With the economy booming, the stock market setting records, and America defeating ISIS, things have never been worse. That’s why we need to keep The Resistance going, because it’s been a huge success so far in my district in San Francisco and, I’m sure, in your districts in Manhattan, Chicago, and Havana. And we need to expand our party, which means we need to convince dirty, stupid, transphobic normal Americans to come to grips with their own failings and join us.”
“We could tell them they’re stupid even more often,” suggested Al Franken.
“And racist,” suggested Maxine Waters.
“Also, Islamophobic,” said Keith Ellison.
“In my state, I can go potty with girls!” said California’s Gavin Newsom.
“Clearly, there’s something wrong with these people, so we need to consult with someone with a genuine connection with normal Americans,” Pelosi said. “Sadly, Hillary Clinton isn’t here to help us. If anyone connects with Middle America, it’s her. Unfortunately, she’s fallen and she can’t get up.” Pelosi made the “drinky drinky” gesture, and the crowd nodded.
“But we have someone almost as good, someone who knows how Americans feel, especially the women. Harvey, are you here?"
“Look, I know about how to reach regular Americans through the power of film, even though I may be having some problems caused by the vast right wing conspiracy, the NRA, and chicks who think they’re too good to play ball anymore," Weinstein said.
"I say we do a movie that really address some of the issues normal Americans care about, like global warming, or how much it costs to hire a team of top notch defense lawyers. Maybe we get Matt or Ben to star, and Woody or Roman to direct. And hire some actresses who know how the game is played,” he added, winking.
Schumer moved up and took the mic. “Thanks Harvey. We’re looking forward to having you back on top, so to speak, and writing checks. Okay, let’s hear from our next guest, a true hero whose courage and strength has been an inspiration to everyone, Mr. Colin Kaepernick.”
“Look, I’ll stand, I’ll totally stand. Just hire me, okay? Principles, schmiciples, I need money. I got a lifestyle to support. My girlfriend talked me into this kneeling thing and she just went out and bought a herd of yaks. Why did she buy yaks? You know how much a herd of yaks costs?” he said, eyes wide. Then he stepped down off the dais and ran over to Claire McCaskill’s table and began stuffing rolls into his pockets for later.
“Well, we have some other very special guests tonight who have done so much for us,” said Schumer. “These Republican friends have been a huge help. I especially want to thank John McCain for all he’s done on behalf of preserving Obamacare, and also for not taking things personally and joining up with those of us who spit on him after he returned from Vietnam while turning against the normal Americans who supported him. John, you’re a maverick we can always rely on!”
“And there’s Ana Navarro, our favorite conservative Republican since she opposes everything conservative and Republican."
“Now look,” Schumer said, frustrated. “We have to defend 22 Senate seats next year, many in red states. How the hell are we going to do that?”
“Move left,” said Bernie Sanders.
“Move left,” said Kamala Harris.
“Which one is left?” said Gavin Newsom, staring baffled at his raised hands.
“I know!” came a shrill, grating voice from the back of the room. Hillary Clinton entered with a bandage around her head and limping from the broken toe she got when she “slipped” while wearing her trademark high heels. She took the mic and the room fell still.
“We can start treating normal Americans with respect. We can honor them for their hard work, patriotism, and devotion to family. We can stop insulting their religious beliefs and trying to shove our urban blue state values down their throats. When criminals murder fellow citizens, we can choose not to blame law-abiding gun owners, and instead of calling them ‘racists’ for voting for Trump, talk to them and learn why they felt he was offering them more than the Democratic Party.”
The room was silent, and the crowd sat staring with jaws slack.
“And…and…,” she said, then steadied herself on the podium, looking around confused.
“Are you all right, Madame Should-Be-President?” asked Schumer, handing her a goblet of Chardonnay. She drank it in one gulp.
“I don’t understand…what happened?” she asked.
“You were just mumbling random words, crazy talk,” Schumer said. “It didn’t make any sense at all.”
[+]
Ramyrez said: »
No one age 30 and younger is "getting it," it seems.
Further left, further right. Ideals only. Not living in reality.
A lot of the problem with what Saev says on this topic is that he acts like it's only the snowflakes on the left that "don't get it."
People's complete and utter inability to look at something from someone else's perspective for a single *** second is grating as hell and it just seems to be snowballing.
Further left, further right. Ideals only. Not living in reality.
A lot of the problem with what Saev says on this topic is that he acts like it's only the snowflakes on the left that "don't get it."
People's complete and utter inability to look at something from someone else's perspective for a single *** second is grating as hell and it just seems to be snowballing.
Then irony of losing your ***over people taking a knee during the anthem while calling them liberal snowflake social justice warriors is tasty. Yet completely lost on so many people.
Though the etymology for the pejorative “snowflake” is rather interesting. The term was used in the 1860’s to describe anti-abolitionists, with the implication of the name being that such people valued white people over black people.
Snowflakes, Claybanks and Charcoals were popular descriptors of the era.
[+]
Garuda.Chanti said: »
I think Mudd is giving Trump way too much credit.
because cockroaches are social insects and trump doesn't even like shaking other people's hands...
I'm sure if look hard enough at the constitution we can find some sort of minimum level of empathy requirement to be president and also some sort of ancient phrenological device for measuring it....
[+]
Like I said. I'm just seeing so much *** on both extremes these days.
It's like the Nazi thing. People devalued the word so much using it for every slightly backward world view that when people came along waving the Nazi flag it's not taken as seriously as it should be.
I'm so seriously sick of internet outrage from the left. And I'm part of the left ffs. Christ. It triggers me everyone I hear the worlds "Don't ____-shame me/her!"
It's the equivalent of the "War on Christmas." There is no War on Christmas, Christmas is just the latest in a long, long, long line of midwinter festivals that's just happened to stick around for quite some time.
People seem to feel the need to be outraged about something.
Meanwhile I'm more interested in going home, ignoring the news, doing some productive hobby and having a few beers to forget the *** out there trying to bring us down.
It's like the Nazi thing. People devalued the word so much using it for every slightly backward world view that when people came along waving the Nazi flag it's not taken as seriously as it should be.
I'm so seriously sick of internet outrage from the left. And I'm part of the left ffs. Christ. It triggers me everyone I hear the worlds "Don't ____-shame me/her!"
It's the equivalent of the "War on Christmas." There is no War on Christmas, Christmas is just the latest in a long, long, long line of midwinter festivals that's just happened to stick around for quite some time.
People seem to feel the need to be outraged about something.
Meanwhile I'm more interested in going home, ignoring the news, doing some productive hobby and having a few beers to forget the *** out there trying to bring us down.
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
Ramyrez said: »
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
he's still a better person than Hillary Clinton
Drinking gasoline is better than injecting it into your bloodstream but neither comes highly recommend for adding enjoyable years to your lifespan.
that doesn't even make a little bit of sense... we had a choice between two very obviously flawed people... this whole...trying to inject some sort of buyer's remorse after the fact is as pointless as it is tedious.
for those of you with seriously diminished attention spans.
hillary blamed monica lewinski who she called a "narcissistic loony toon" for the affair and if she hadn't kept the blue dress they would have crucified her in public...which they did anyways.
personally I find her "*** shaming" of all the women that came forward against bill clinton even more deplorable than his behavior...and apparently I am not alone.
try to imagine her saying the same thing about the woman coming forward against harvey weinstein....which she is doing by keeping his money...
when they need her the most, arguably the most powerful voice in the democratic party, is silent. and not only silent but complicit.
You could simplify this with: “Look both Trump and the Clinton’s are good friends of Jeffery Epstein. Do we need to elaborate further?”
[+]
Ramyrez said: »
It triggers me everyone I hear the worlds
Zerowone said: »
You could simplify this with: “Look both Trump and the Clinton’s are good friends of Jeffery Epstein. Do we need to elaborate further?”
And were at one time good friends with each other!
Zerowone said: »
Then irony of losing your ***over people taking a knee during the anthem while calling them liberal snowflake social justice warriors is tasty. Yet completely lost on so many people.
Though the etymology for the pejorative “snowflake” is rather interesting. The term was used in the 1860’s to describe anti-abolitionists, with the implication of the name being that such people valued white people over black people.
Snowflakes, Claybanks and Charcoals were popular descriptors of the era.
Though the etymology for the pejorative “snowflake” is rather interesting. The term was used in the 1860’s to describe anti-abolitionists, with the implication of the name being that such people valued white people over black people.
Snowflakes, Claybanks and Charcoals were popular descriptors of the era.
Yes, but calling back to that and using those in such a fashion is somewhat problematic, lest we forget the nature of Democrats at the time.
[+]
Ramyrez said: »
It's the equivalent of the "War on Christmas." There is no War on Christmas, Christmas is just the latest in a long, long, long line of midwinter festivals that's just happened to stick around for quite some time.
Ah the “War on Christmas”, another great irony of our era.
You know how you constantly hear from right wing media; “Really wish these athletes would express their political views, it’s only going to hurt the leagues profits”,?
Well this perception that there ever was a “War on Christmas” stems from a corporate desire to maximize profits. Poppy-*** you say? Just remember “Happy Holidays” is a general all “inclusive” salutation whereas “Merry Christmas” is very specific (this is like global progressive new world order boogeyman Star Trek borg assimilation type stuff if you’re one of those paranoid types).
Can’t scare away those burgeoning consumer demographics during the holiday quarter. Ironically making people believe there is a “War on Christmas” also boosts sales in niche markets. Similar to how making people believe the government is coming for their guns boost gun sales.
Ramyrez said: »
People seem to feel the need to be outraged about something.
as long as some of the time the focus of their outrage is canada... then I'm ok with it...
it's disheartening to me that you can tell which news channel/website people watch after talking to them for five minutes. it's boring and annoying to the point that I want to end the human race by improving the zika virus.
you're all a bunch of smelly meat puppets and canada sucks
[+]
Ramyrez said: »
Zerowone said: »
Then irony of losing your ***over people taking a knee during the anthem while calling them liberal snowflake social justice warriors is tasty. Yet completely lost on so many people.
Though the etymology for the pejorative “snowflake” is rather interesting. The term was used in the 1860’s to describe anti-abolitionists, with the implication of the name being that such people valued white people over black people.
Snowflakes, Claybanks and Charcoals were popular descriptors of the era.
Though the etymology for the pejorative “snowflake” is rather interesting. The term was used in the 1860’s to describe anti-abolitionists, with the implication of the name being that such people valued white people over black people.
Snowflakes, Claybanks and Charcoals were popular descriptors of the era.
Yes, but calling back to that and using those in such a fashion is somewhat problematic, lest we forget the nature of Democrats at the time.
But it’s rather moot given the party demographic shift after the Civil Rights movements of the 20th Century. It’s no different than pretending that the GOP couldn’t possibly pander to racists or use veiled racism because it was the party of Lincoln.
I do find it interesting how people conveniently pretend that party platforms are incapable of changing, morphing or evolving into something completely different over time. Especially when it suits their needs in an argument.
[+]
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.