|
Angepain posted:somehow this additional context has just made me understand the image less Yeah, weird soundcloud does that. Triple Q makes remixes and such. He's a frequent contributor to the High Quality Rips of GiIvaSunner, if you're at all familiar with that channel. I don't *think* he's a Republican supporter.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 02:04 |
|
|
Lurdiak posted:No, really. Nixon wasn't even as bad as Reagan for the country, let alone Trump. You can draw a direct line from what Nixon did to the Republican party and where we are now, but I'd rather be at the top of that slide than the bottom. When Trump commits actual treason resulting in 22,000 American and untold tens of thousands of Vietnamese deaths, you can try to make the argument.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
I love the "Nixon wasn't actually that bad." arguments from I can only assume are folks whose parents weren't alive when he was president and/or don't pay much attention to history.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
Rugoberta Munchu posted:Bob Howie was amazing. drat college kids and their demands for social change and anti-war activism! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
lmao
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
Rugoberta Munchu posted:I love the "Nixon wasn't actually that bad." arguments from I can only assume are folks whose parents weren't alive when he was president and/or don't pay much attention to history. It wasn't that Nixon himself wasn't bad, it was that Republicans in general weren't as bad as they are today, they, at the very least, still believed in a functioning government. It's like comparing a man building a boat with wings to a man just loving wailing on the boat with the biggest hammer he can find.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
Sandpuppy posted:
Of course they're all overweight. I mean, he's American so it makes sense but that's not why he did it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:04
|
|
4
|
Duke Igthorn posted:It wasn't that Nixon himself wasn't bad, it was that Republicans in general weren't as bad as they are today, they, at the very least, still believed in a functioning government. Nixon didn't believe in a functioning government, he believed that death should come swiftly to his enemies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
Nixon had the same disregard for the rule of law that characterizes Trump and Trumpism, but the Republican party as a whole did not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
We need more jerkcity edits in this thread imo
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:25
|
|
|
I knew he reminded me of someone whomupclicklike posted:We need more jerkcity edits in this thread imo Last time we had any at all was DBD edits IIRC
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
whomupclicklike posted:We need more jerkcity edits in this thread imo yissssssss That one is particular good but jerkcity edits forever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
Remember "America when we don't speak about race / America when we do"? Here's a French version from 1898. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 01:25
|
|
|
Haha, the loving dog  Seems to be in relations to this which also created that badass J'Accuse...! newspaper article.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 01:30
|
|
|
A couple years old, but I stumbled across this and found it evocative:
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:No, really. Nixon wasn't even as bad as Reagan for the country, let alone Trump. You can draw a direct line from what Nixon did to the Republican party and where we are now, but I'd rather be at the top of that slide than the bottom. The issue is less the president and more the party as a whole. The Nixon era was overall more liberal than today, but that's as much down to Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and right-wing "news" as it is to the personality of the president. Imagining a paranoid genius like Nixon with today's GOP led Congress and a twenty-four hour propaganda machine at his disposal is the stuff of nightmares.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
Stevoblunt posted:I'm missing the transphobia, can you explain? A Pink News article here on the subject. Some unsavoury people deciding, as ever, that feminist conversation should focus on genitals. I can assure you that it's not just trans women who think that's immensely dreary. There is also the unrelated objection that wearing a hat to signal your support of a very nebulous cause isn't the last word in radicalism, and there are probably photographs of MPs and people like that wearing them. Also, whoever heard of a pink cat?  Edit: beaten hugely, which serves me right for not reading all the replies. But never mind. Jollity Farm fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Feb 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I think you are making poo poo up, because I don't remember Trump ever apologising for it. His "apology" is here. Trump posted:I said it, it was wrong, and I apologize. Roughly a year after that, the New York Times wrote an article about Trump's defense of Roy Moore and mentioned that Trump had told at least two different people the tape was a fake and he didn't actually say it. quote:But something deeper has been consuming Mr. Trump. He sees the calls for Mr. Moore to step aside as a version of the response to the now-famous “Access Hollywood” tape, in which he boasted about grabbing women’s genitalia, and the flood of groping accusations against him that followed soon after. He suggested to a senator earlier this year that it was not authentic, and repeated that claim to an adviser more recently.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
Jollity Farm posted:Also, whoever heard of a pink cat? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 04:16
|
|
cowboy
|
I thought he was supposed to be a diamond?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:A couple years old, but I stumbled across this and found it evocative: Accurate as of last week.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:I thought he was supposed to be a diamond? You’re thinking of Snagglepuss.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
Jollity Farm posted:Also, whoever heard of a pink cat?  Also Bagpuss. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 04:43
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:The issue is less the president and more the party as a whole. The Nixon era was overall more liberal than today, but that's as much down to Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and right-wing "news" as it is to the personality of the president. Imagining a paranoid genius like Nixon with today's GOP led Congress and a twenty-four hour propaganda machine at his disposal is the stuff of nightmares. Pretend I have a gif from Futurama where Nixon's head and his campaign manager are considering the idea of "Nixon...with charisma?" And how unstoppable that'd be. For semi-actual content: Didn't someone do an effort post in the last thread about how Bill Clinton winning the presidency is basically what broke the Republican party, or at least cracked them? Like, Bill coming out and beating Bush Sr. hosed them up so badly that as a whole, they've spent every day since committed to the idea that they will never let it happen again. And then Obama really threw them off the deep end by being President while Black.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:10
|
|
Jurgan posted:The issue is less the president and more the party as a whole. The Nixon era was overall more liberal than today, but that's as much down to Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and right-wing "news" as it is to the personality of the president. Imagining a paranoid genius like Nixon with today's GOP led Congress and a twenty-four hour propaganda machine at his disposal is the stuff of nightmares. You're absolutely right on that point. Although Trump's incompetence is its own terrifying factor to consider. Nixon probably would not be daring a nuclear power to attack the US over twitter, for example. Honestly can't we just have Corbyn or something instead of trying to decide which republican is the lesser evil.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:11
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:You're absolutely right on that point. Although Trump's incompetence is its own terrifying factor to consider. Nixon probably would not be daring a nuclear power to attack the US over twitter, for example. It's going to take some time before the US would elect someone like Corbyn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
the_steve posted:For semi-actual content: Didn't someone do an effort post in the last thread about how Bill Clinton winning the presidency is basically what broke the Republican party, or at least cracked them? The republican party has been strongly reactionary since the New Deal and beginnings of the civil rights movement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Those Nixon defense cartoons, if you tweaked them a little, are pretty much verbatim the kind of schlock the right wing cartoonists have been cranking out for Trump when it comes to Russia and the other scandals so at least they stay the course?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Pretend I have a gif from Futurama where Nixon's head and his campaign manager are considering the idea of "Nixon...with charisma?" And how unstoppable that'd be. Personally, I think the rot started with Reagan, but yes, Clinton winning was a massive shock to the Republicans. After destroying Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis, they were convinced that the Democrats were too out of touch to contend meaningfully for the presidency, and they could ride the Reagan wave forever. And then Clinton stepped in and beat them, and worse, he did it by focusing on the economy, which Democrats weren't supposed to be able to do. Hence the conspiracy theorizing and the desperate need to somehow prove Clinton's presidency was illegitimate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:24
|
|
|
Poor timing from the Rat Man given Ryan's "$1.50" tweet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
Selachian posted:Personally, I think the rot started with Reagan, but yes, Clinton winning was a massive shock to the Republicans. After destroying Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis, they were convinced that the Democrats were too out of touch to contend meaningfully for the presidency, and they could ride the Reagan wave forever. And then Clinton stepped in and beat them, and worse, he did it by focusing on the economy, which Democrats weren't supposed to be able to do. Hence the conspiracy theorizing and the desperate need to somehow prove Clinton's presidency was illegitimate. I think one of the biggest mindfucks for me was seeing Newt during one of the recent Republican Nomination campaigns saying with a straight face that Barack Obama must be a bad President because back when Clinton was President he had a great working relationship with the Republicans and Newt in particular. The same Newt that caused two Government shutdowns while Clinton was President.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
I've seen a lot of work from that guy, pretty sure its satirizing the notion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a313r3MEZAw
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:40
|
|
|
54.4 crowns posted:I've seen a lot of work from that guy, pretty sure its satirizing the notion. Im the guy at the very end of the video.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Hihohe posted:Im the guy at the very end of the video. P...Putin?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Pretend I have a gif from Futurama where Nixon's head and his campaign manager are considering the idea of "Nixon...with charisma?" And how unstoppable that'd be. To an extent its coincidence. Without the Clinton Administration, there may not have as been much right-wing RAGE, but I think we still would have seen the rise of Fox News and the proliferation of right wing talk radio.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Yeah, the former was basically the sole intent of repealing the fairness doctrine, and the latter was because of Nixon cronies trying to destroy journalism as a concept in retaliation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
Yep. With the USSR defeated, those looking outward for the enemy could go back to looking inward for one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
i wish i got laid as much as zelda.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:To an extent its coincidence. Without the Clinton Administration, there may not have as been much right-wing RAGE, but I think we still would have seen the rise of Fox News and the proliferation of right wing talk radio. Absolutely, but for another reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996 quote:In the 1970s and 1980s, a combination of technological change, court decisions, and changes in U.S. policy permitted competitive entry into some telecommunications and broadcast markets. In this context, the 1996 Telecommunications Act was designed to allow fewer, but larger corporations, to operate more media enterprises within a sector (such as Clear Channel's dominance in radio), and to expand across media sectors (through relaxation of cross-ownership rules), thus enabling massive and historic consolidation of media in the United States. These changes amounted to a near-total rollback of New Deal market regulation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 02:04 |
|
|
Rugoberta Munchu posted:Yep. With the USSR defeated, those looking outward for the enemy could go back to looking inward for one. They spent the entire cold war fighting internal enemies what the hell are you talking about?? Literally anybody with a progressive agenda, economic or social, was smeared as a degenerate commie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:44
|
|