|
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/ http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/guns-democracy-and-freedom/insurrection-timeline This is absolutely my favorite topic. These people are an electoral backstop to the GOP, tens of millions strong, a bloc which seriously limits the extent to which the Republicans can ever be made to pay for all the poo poo they break. Anyone whose picture of real America doesn't acknowledge the masses of casual, weekend-warrior fascists-in-training nurtured by talk radio has only the loosest of grasps on our politics. The most important in American politics is this: when WHATE 105.3 and QFAG 790 go off the air, will their listeners forget these terrible ideas and allow some safer ones to make their way in? Or are they ring-wing converts for life. Do they believe this poo poo enough to aggress in the name of it?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 12:24 |
|
Hollis posted:It's just frightening. Eh, I wouldn't worry so much. They're generally cowards, and people who respect power over truth tend to also respond quite positively to getting their asses beat. America is a hell of a prize, and the decent people are not going to let it fall to these shitheads for free. The right also operates under a number of disadvantages that usually prove disastrous in a tactical engagement: they are defined by greed, anti-intellectualism, arrogance/lack of respect for one's enemy. Lastly, everything they say sets people's bullshit detectors blaring because none of it fits together quite right, no matter how much bullshit they've shoveled on top of them to drown out the noise. Their greed is our most valuable asset, because it assures that even if they are lucky enough to stumble onto a homeostatic state of oppression, it won't be enough for them and they will keep pushing and pushing no matter what. Stop with the loving defeatism, it's grating. You're assuming that the truth prevails every single time, which is why you're stunned into submission that it has not done so this one time. Your side has the ability to think long-term and to sacrifice, so use it. People care, and they are not going to let this poo poo run unopposed forever. What's worth fighting for will inevitably be fought for. The right wing is a bloc that can be worked around. Like practically everyone else in America, throw some money at them and watch their bullshit ideology melt away.
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 02:30
|
|
Dr. Quigley posted:So what are some good ways to approach people you know of who are sucked into this poo poo. There's a guy I work with that I'm just getting to know, who seems like a really decent guy. He doesn't think pharmaceutical companies should be allowed to advertise on television, thinks fair trade agreements are bad, believes that wages are too low, and sees Wall Street as too powerful and corrupt. Debate & Discussion > Let's pool our knowledge: D&D helps D&D Debate and Discuss http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3443984 Generally, trap them by being nice, respectful, and sympathetic while you deliver your arguments. If they fall on deaf ears, be nice, respectful, and condescendingly pitying the next time. No one is lied to more than a right winger, so try to be nice. They've been forcibly removed to an alternate universe, and they can't understand why it's costing them friends.
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 02:55
|
|
Urban Space Cowboy posted:Nirvana? Rage Against the Machine? Big deal -- Reagan tarted the hell out of Bruce Springsteen too. Conservatives love to pretend to align themselves with yesterday's revolutions. Only moral revolution is some other country's revolution. Or some other decade's revolution. I've just taken to referring to libertarians as anarchists, why not let them run with it, see where it goes. Hey, maybe they're the future, and we're the crotchety old reactionaries.
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 05:26
|
|
|
I don't think the relationship between Rush and his listeners involves one taking the other "seriously". He sings hate and people pay to hear it because they are afforded few other opportunities to realize their hate against modernity, dark people, women, students, the ocean/rain-forest/atmosphere, computers, etc. The commodity in trade is not information, it is something on a different plane entirely. He's practically a cardinal in the church of the GOP, so think of his show as a sermon and his audience as a flock, and it makes a lot more sense sense. People who do not take the show seriously take the man seriously because of the size of his audience. You think he has no place in American discourse, but he has a place commensurate with the size of his audience, which is enormous. Discussions about the GOP, the religious right, and what's to be done about them aren't going to go anywhere until people start acknowledging that the Republican Party is not a political party in the same way that the Democratic Party is. Traditional political attacks are going to become more and more ineffective as religious behaviors keep seeping out of the religious-right and polluting the rest of the party.
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2012 21:57
|
|
the jizz taxi posted:I don't know why some people insist on making a distinction between whether they mean or don't mean what they say. The net effect is the same. In a way, I even think not meaning the hate you peddle is even worse because on top of saying horrible things that inspire so much hate in people, you're also being inauthentic. Spreading hate and knowing better is probably worse, yeah. But they can at least be paid to abandon their crusades, which is a trait we value. On the other hand, the credit that is inexplicably lavished on terrible, terrible people for speaking their mind and swimming against the current, I think is just a reflection of awful postmodern, contrarian, nihilistic attitudes towards everything. Media figures who do this do not resemble humans enough to be reporting on human events.
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 12:39
|
|
Gazpacho posted:In the 90s Rush used to say "Folks, people ask why I don't run for president. Well, I can't afford the pay cut." It's damned important to the rightwing battle plan that all government jobs be widely considered to be noncompetitive, unproductive, and unprestigious. The deliberate and public disregard is a staple tactic and it covers every position from postal worker up to the presidency. Demean government from every possible angle at every opportunity. Which is why you'll hear conservative industrialists, even activist ones, crassly dismiss the idea of themselves running for high office, citing their earnest love of money instead. They'd run if they weren't such contemptible and ugly human beings and thought they had a chance at election to anything. They want power, not money, and are apparently too dumb to see that buying people off and bullying them is an extraordinarily expensive way to acquire power and make people do what you want. Thus the piles and piles of money become necessary. As far as his audience goes, I'd say it's mainly stiffs. Actual rich guys have been forced to get some culture in their coerced dealings with civil society, and they tend to be a little embarrassed at the candidness and brazenness with which Rush wages his campaign against everything.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2012 07:03
|
|
|
If you're going to parody right-wingers, you need to toss in an obvious tip-off somewhere near the end. Because they really are building the new crazy atop the old crazy at a rate that's difficult for satirists to keep pace with.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 09:43
|
|
|
Can public radio be right-wing media too? The answer is yes, yes it can. This is how they conduct a debate on what the effects of all this fiscal cliff horseshit will be: Robert Frank, Prof. Economics and Management, Cornell University vs. Dan Holler, Communications Director, Heritage Foundation PAC Certainly, an economics professor and an honest-to-god propagandist carry the same intellectual weight in the chief disagreement in U.S. economic policy (the effect of tax cuts). Dear NPR, you don't have to ask this man if he intends to come on your program and lie to your audience. It's right there in his loving title. He is the communications director for a conservative fundamentalist organization's political action committee. God help us. God help us. The next time the house GOP makes a run at NPR's budget, I'm stepping right the gently caress out of the way. I can't support this. It doesn't seem possible that corporate influence could poison a media organization to the extent that NPR is influenced by fear of the congressional Republicans.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2012 15:04
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:NPR is not one monolithic entity. What program was this? Different programs have different biases and different models of what meets broadcast standards. Marketplace and Democracy Now! are clearly not even in the same league, yet share NPR radio space. This was Joy Cardin's call-in show on Wisconsin Public Radio, from 7:00-8:00 this morning. Local public broadcasting orgs like Wisconsin Public Media are, of course, responsible for their own guests and content. WPR's content is more likely than average to contain openly progressive viewpoints, and NPR goes batty over any opportunity to have the Heritage or Cato guys on to poo poo up debates they have no credentials in. I don't think WPR found this guy on their own. It's academy vs. think-tank each and every time with an economics debate where NPR is involved. I'm also kind of using NPR as a synonym for federally-funded public media. NPR is public media's connection to the federal government, and I am left wondering again and again if public media under the supervision of the Congressional Republicans can ever be free media. I know federally funded public media is important and I am probably wrong to be blaming NPR so quickly for the actions of a local station. But NPR is local public media's connection to the congressional Republicans. Is the federal funding worth it if that connection starts to poison the entire public media structure, national and local?
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
Was a bit of an unsupported ragepost. I can't really prove that NPR had anything to do with the booking of this guy, a terrible choice for a crucial debate. I want to blame the national org because I can't believe people who live outside of Washington DC, running a fairly progressive outfit, would think that this was anything but an irresponsible way to present the issue. The guy just read off a list of Luntz-derived evangelistic talking points, without addressing a single word of the econ professor's pleas to reason, of which he made rather few (not shocking, given that he is a professor of Management). This is the norm for NPR-distributed content, not for my local stations.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2012 17:34
|
|
cheese posted:The free market at work ladies and gentlemen. Why would it be a bad thing if Clear Channel were to go away? They're already borderline right-wing media on their own, and the age of mass consolidation in radio that they oversaw could only have aided Rush, Savage, Hannity, and Levin in their quest to make the two-minutes hate a drivetime tradition for tens of millions of bitter flatlanders. Who puts these demons on 600 news radio stations for five hours a day and tells the listeners it's reputable editorializing? Clear Channel does.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2012 06:14
|
|
|
This is just a natural extension of having the dumbest, least critical audience around. He knows their bullshit detectors have been disabled in the BIOS, so why even bother being right about anything. He just loving talks, and sometimes those words add up into a killer hate riff, but usually he's just talking. Everything springs from the premise of LIBERALS!LIBERALS!!UAGGGHHLIBRALS!!?!. There's no such thing as a lie in the media anymore and so there's no punishment for telling them. So why even bother to wiki your African child-soldiering terrorist groups before pronouncing them friends of Jesus. Like why even loving bother if there's no rewards and no consequences involved.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2012 20:15
|
|
kik2dagroin posted:Yeah I heard this too. The whole "Clinton will run for President... but only if Obama decides to abdicate the Presidency" was really astounding. I hear this poo poo all the time on right-wing websites, but hearing it from one of the prominent mouthpieces of the right-wing media is just astounding. In addition to all this, he's been referring to Obama's inauguration as his "immacculation" ( They aren't going to stop saying absurd things and making hilarious accusations, ever, because it keeps their opposition off balance and on defense. And confuses the poo poo out of everyone. Stop laughing at it, because they get their way no matter how right you are. President Obama as a person doesn't even exist in their world, only their made-up version of him does. I don't think some of them would recognize the guy if they saw him on the street, such is the extent to which they believe their insane caricatures of him. They've found a way to short circuit public opinion, and the left has demonstrated over decades that it has no plans of finding the counter to this technique, and would prefer to be kicked some more.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 19:08
|
|
), and even placing the term abdicate next to the word Presidency, is a clever use of words to reinforce the narrative that Obama is now our God King. It's been said before, but Limbaugh is masterful at framing things to appeal to his listener's beliefs. 
|
Laying out the facts isn't going to put this thing to rest, she and Obama should have leaped down the throats of every ringleader on the right, called them unpatriotic, craven and opportunistic wretches. It happens to right-wing guys so rarely, when someone way up high does it, they just piss their pants and walk away muttering liberalsliberals...liberals!. Since Obama can't do that and Hillary can't do it alone, I kind of look forward to him going away so someone who knows how to handle these guys can step in and begin to stall their gains.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
It's not. They put a tell at the bottom, because parodying Republicans is not easy.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2013 01:06
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:Alternately, they really don't give a poo poo and are cynical bastards who will say whatever doublespeakin' drat thing that will allow them to stay in power. Um, yeah, they'll do basically whatever. They're pretty rock and roll about the whole affair, really. They start with, "We must win this election" and go from there. If they were supposed to feel ashamed about something, then why did they get so many votes. When they lose the presidency by twenty million votes, they'll start to wonder about who and what they are.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
There are more than enough wingers and Randroids in California to become dominant again in the legislature. The only problem as I see it is that they keep calling themselves Republicans and the GOP brand is irreparably destroyed in the dark blue states. California is a place where a bullshit party rebrand could really work, because it's mainly historical (and very recent) party baggage holding them back there. There are more than enough reactionaries and budding oligarchs there to elect Gov. Reagan three or four more times. There are states which are resisting the race to the bottom, but I don't know that there are any states that can call themselves progressive, certainly not one with the number of billionaires and prisoners that that one has.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2013 05:18
|
|
knife super power posted:In an interview reciently, John Boenher made the argument that taxation is theft. He said it loudly and casually. It's not the sort of thing a Republican like him is supposed to declare blithely at a major media event. They're going all-in.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2013 08:28
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:Today's conservative punditry is mostly reheated Bircher-ism. For example: "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order, managed by a 'one-world socialist government.'" is a quote from 1961 from the John Birch Society's Blue Book. I'd love to hear that Bircherism has ever had the chance to grow cold. If their enemies aren't visibly plotting, it's simply proof that their enemies are invisibly plotting. This crazy train's just got no brakes.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2013 04:02
|
|
Soviet Commubot posted:This article from Fox News last year gives a pretty good view of how warped the conservative point of view regarding environmentalism is. I bring it up and read it every couple of months are so and it still boggles my damned mind. The current conservative position on the environment is as follows: There is no such thing as the environment. Liberals made it up. So let them worry about it. They really can't help getting pushed and pulled into the most extreme position (outright denial), because they hate their enemies so much and their enemies tend to be decent, concerned people.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2013 20:26
|
|
Roxors posted:So a libertarian radio host named Adam Kokesh is organizing a march on washington with open carried weapons. Considering they are not going to bother getting a permit, and will be in violation of DC gun laws, I wonder how the local police will respond. Of course, Kokesh isn't actually willing to do this unless they get a critical mass of 10,000 people to RSVP, so who knows if it will actually happen. Open carry rallies are indistinguishable from public and aggressive shows of force. Especially because they have the same political views on basically everything else besides the one that the rally is ostensibly about. So if they were hippies instead of fascists in training (FiT!), they'd see about forty to four hundred of their own gunned down by police. I heard somewhere yesterday than National Guardsmen were no longer sent out to demonstrations with live ammunition following Kent State. I assume this is not the policy with other agencies doing crowd control. Killing students does not protect wealth (as much as some police enjoy it), and the myriad of terrifying but less-than-lethal options they have available does no less to dissuade energetic gathering.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
I feel like all the worst and best Congresspeople come out of Ohio. Why the hell is this.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
I know how the Republicans insisting with all their little boy's heart that this be a real thing can actually make it a real thing. But do they have polls confirming that more people are taking them seriously on Benghazi than on the day they first got to work on it? If a good poll says that their efforts to "make it stick" have ultimately been a failure, I wonder if we can just stop talking about it. It's just so oppressively stupid. I am apparently a proud man and it insults and demeans me to see my country unable to shake it. The dumb depths they'll have to sink to to get every last Republican on board is going to piss off and inflame Democrats to an extent not seen since the first Gingrich years.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2013 19:02
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:I know a lot of you guys love to watch/listen/experience right wing news for laughs but I just can't laugh when its so drat effective at getting people to believe it. Do you guys just look at it from a big picture perspective or something? I'm more optimistic, because what they do to their base constantly seems likely to produce unintended consequences, or diminishing returns at the very least. The GOP is not playing small ball, when they get into the business of keeping thirty million wingers at a never-ending fever pitch. And it's not made of nothing, it's made of raw seething hatred. But even that's not an unlimited resource, and they're eventually going to break these people if they try to play them like a fiddle forever to make up for their platform's basic unpopularity. Like many of you, I believe fervently that the Republicans are basically a bunch of fuckups who should be laughed at before they are feared. So I have to believe that the mass manipulation of so many angry people is going to backfire on them sooner or later.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 19:24
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Well, uhhhhh, hrm. I think I have some bad news for your friends about their favorite tv show. Admitting you're a right-winger who loves Star Trek is admitting you're the thickest-headed motherfucker around. Their paranoia of Hollywood liberal propaganda could not possibly coexist with TNG's bluntly progressive messaging, unless they had suffered some sort of brain injury.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 22:43
|
|
beatlegs posted:Watch conservative J.D. Hayworth explain how getting free government grants is simply getting your own money back! I was wondering how long it would be for them to discover that a presenter with a British accent conveys a scary amount of credibility to your scammy products. Which sucks for the actual English because the trick will be exhausted in ten years and a British accent will come to signal the exact opposite of aloof trustworthiness, and Brits will be the least trusted people in America. It's not surprising at all that conservative media has been importing its voices from everywhere but here for a while now.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2013 22:34
|
|
The Angry Bum posted:You mean 2009 to present. The whole 'Michelle Obama wants to ban cake and cookies' thing is still a thing. You read articles occasionally about some school districts getting rid of newer school lunch menus just because 'the kids are too hungry, Obama is starving our children!' They called Hillary fat too. It's conservative-colored glasses. They see poo poo that isn't there because one of their radio hosts told them to. Don't take it too seriously.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 20:07
|
|
My sister went off to school downstate (Illinois) and she comes back to my parents' place for the summer, and I guess her sorority and all the good ol boys at U of I turned her conservative, because I hear this poo poo come on her laptop. It's a typical country song, except almost every verse is gently caress YOU LIBERALS. I like how the refrain implies that liberals don't care about their families, don't register for the draft, and don't beat their children (eh I can live with that one). It starts off a nice little ditty about fishing, and gets nasty and indignant quick. Are there many of these songs? If so, definitely a subset of right-wing media.quote:Put me on a mountain, way back in the backwoods
|
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 20:59
|
|
HERE LIES TEBOW posted:You can also tell he is a terrible hunter because putting the deer on the hood of your car can cause the meat to spoil from engine heat. Shut up he makes his money the old-fashioned way and you leech off the benevolence of the economic powerhouses of Alabama and Mississippi.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 22:14
|
|
Rev. Bleech_ posted:Most of today's country "artists" are, in fact, suburban idiot shitlords who bought a 10-gallon hat, a belt buckle, and some boots from the nearest Stein Mart, picked up an F-250 from the Ford dealership, and decided that was enough to qualify as "country" even if they'd never been more than 5 miles from the nearest Wal-Mart in their entire wasted life. I thought being country ideally meant working with your hands, drinking lovely beer and listening to awful music, driving a truck and voting Republican. I doubt it still has anything to do with having a connection to the land. The guys I know who can handle themselves in the backcountry are the most left ones I know because they despise development. They are also utterly unfamiliar with the concept of taking a vehicle off-roading, because that's not real camping. I don't know how much backcountry remains in the south, but I do know that practically the entire northern half of Georgia is functionally a suburb of Atlanta. Suburbanized folk are probably more disconnected from the land than urbanized people, because city-dwellers can tell the difference between a human settlement and a mountain.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
"Coming around on Bill O'Reilly" is a common mistake made by people who watch his debates with Jon Stewart and decide he is arguing in good faith. When in truth, Jon just tends to accept his terms and framing, and they argue in Bill's wheelhouse all show which pleases Bill tremendously. When Jon asserts things that do not fit into any sort of conservative framework for understanding the world, Bill cleanly ignores them and coughs up an unrelated talking point. This is a service he does for his friend Jon, because if it were anyone else he would be screaming RED STALINIST SCUM! Billo is insufferably whiny, infuriated by on-air challenges, boldly mendacious and then indignant about his casual lying habit, and just a generally lazy, seemingly half-drunk useless motherfucker. You know it in your heart, because after all these years of partisan rancor and yielding to the GOP on almost every possible issue, he still insists on calling himself an independent (groan). Why wouldn't Bill hate Hannity (apart from 'hating Hannity' being a servicable Voight-Kampff test)? They're both prima donnas in the Xtreme-newschat segment, and work in the same building. Hannity does some stuff that Bill probably endorses in the long culture war, but doesn't personally engage in because that doesn't fit his painstakingly-cultivated public persona.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 19:15
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Yeah, she has some good moments (e.g. "Is this math that you as a Republican do to make yourself feel better?"), but most of the time I know not to listen to her. I'm pretty against heaping laud and relieved acclaim on conservatives who sometimes forget themselves and say a thing that is true. Those people are even worse because they clearly know better.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 19:27
|
|
ReidRansom posted:What? No, she was defending maternity leave. That's even more conservative than those who would ignore their own personal needs to keep being a team player. Tatum Girlparts posted:Oh shut up, you can say 'yea she's decent on a topic' without 'heaping laud' on them. Of the fleet of 'pretty blonde ladies who tell you everything is scary' Kelly is the best of that lovely crop. She's not a hero or even that decent, but sometimes she says things that go against FNC's narrative and that's good. Sure, you can. But why would you? They're all poo poo and awful and need to go away. Anyway, having a tiny amounts of dissent on-air at Fox is worse than none at all, because people like my dad who fancy themselves independents take a little back-and-forth as ironclad proof of its ultimate objectivity.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 20:20
|
|
Never.More posted:Maybe we have a different view of worked really, really well. You have a really simple understanding of debt and probably everything else, which is not surprising since being right-wing means you only ever assign agency to one party at a time, the lender in this case. The US public debt will be treated basically the same by its creditors whether it's tiny or massive. If you owe someone a million dollars, they own you. If you owe them a trillion dollars, you own them. The global dependence on US debt was basically proven when some typical Republican horseshit in Congress last summer caused fear in the markets which caused people to flee right the hell back to US treasury bonds. The actual holders of US debt likely know a bit more about our financial landscape and prospects than a bunch of fearmongering poor-hating reactionaries, and they continue to judge us a near-zero risk investment. So kindly stop shittalking America and trying to gum up the works so your party of children can cling bitterly to power they are less qualified to wield than my dogs.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
Hey, Nevermore. Since you picked this thread to courageously air your extremely unpopular views and you're not a total rear end in a top hat, why don't you talk about your media and (contemporary) intellectual influences or something. Like, who and what made you a conservative? That's way more in the spirit of the thread than doing the Supply-side Actually Good! / No, Supply-side Bad! endless back and forth. You have come to believe that the public debt is the paramount issue of the day through no fault of your own, and you sound like you could easily be convinced otherwise if you hang out here a while, so I'd prefer that you do that instead of hijacking our beloved rightwingwatch catch-all thread until you get bitter and leave or get pissed off and banned. I think you will find that the rare conservative is treated rather well at d&d even if some posters have no patience for addressing talking points over and over. You might even make an Ask a Conservative thread. This thread is more for those who believe that all your sincerely-held convictions are lies fostered by for-profit private-sector propagandists, and for us to track the goings-on of those people (who we all roundly despise). Since you're not a right-wing radio host and you don't work for the Family Research Council, you're just a guy who is probably nice enough, your personal political beliefs are not that important one way or another and you're wasting your time and ours trying to justify them here. People have posted good links, here's another one that covers what the baseline d&d poster believes and why. http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/LiberalFAQ.htm
|
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 08:21
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So now the Republican social mobility message has basically become The Secret? If people will pay real money for this brand of world-class bullshit, they probably won't object too strenuously to it being beaten over the head with it for free.
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2013 11:57
|
|
Beerdeer posted:Hi, I live in Lincoln, Nebraska, and hate that expression. Omaha and Lincoln aren't as liberal as they could be, but they're not backwater, BFE. The real damage is that when people with cultural power choose to disregard what happens in 80% of the country, what ends up happening there turns out to be pretty loving disagreeable to those people who were too cool to get involved in indigenous affairs. And the only retort you need when someone from California says it is, hey remember when your enlightened citizenry voted en masse about giving marriage rights to all citizens, and YOU. SAID. NO. You sadistic fucks. I don't remember Nebraska having that vote.
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2013 03:01
|
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:Or just start your own food company if they're really doing such a bad job. If you were important enough to be fed, you'd already have a thriving food company. Personally, I don't trust any man who isn't a limited liability corporation, bonded and insured. It's a sad commentary that there are 7 billion people and far fewer than seven billion companies. Around tax, never relax!
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
If there is a homosexual recruitment agenda, it is directed solely at bi people. Why can't a fellow like two things? S'not fair.
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2013 05:55
|
|