Do you agree or disagree with Candice Owen's statement?

[freyasman]

Cry laughing at how ridiculous you are, maybe, lol.

Buddy, we know your are fragile...

I bet you were one of the guys who bitched about Star Wars.

I think the last one of those I saw was Empire Strikes Back, lol...... I liked the first season of the Mandalorian, though.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Irrelevant. The fact remains that nobody proved they were true either. Besides, O.J. at least had the benefit of a trial where evidence was presented and he was allowed a defense. Sandmann, for example, did not.

Naw, what Smirky McBitchslap got was a media tour arranged by his Media Consultants where they dressed him up in a nice suit, lost the MAGA hat, and emoted about how unfairly he was being treated by the press, and no one asked him a hard question like, "Why are you a misogynist little shit who is against a woman's right to choose?"

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

You still haven't proven that Tico was written off due to "toxic white fanboys". In fact, you've already said in other discussions that people complained that Tico's character arc was pointless to the story.

You're full of shit.

Not at all. I would have been fine with the character if she was given a point, or written with some good dialog and a character arc.

Instead, they took an attractive Asian-American actress.

View attachment 508648

And made her totally frumpy and unattractive and sent her off on a meaningless fetch-quest.

View attachment 508649

You just made my point.

and when the toxic fanboys hated on her, their response was to give her a whopping 110 seconds of screen time in the next movie. I'm halfway surprised they didn't just blow her up while French Kissing Jar-Jar.

Now, if I had been in charge, I'd have developed her character more and made her interesting. You know, instead of taking up half the movie with more half-ass fetch-quests. "Okay, so we have to go find Ochi's dagger, and then we have to get C3PO reprogrammed to read it, then we have to go to the wreckage of the Second Death Star to find the Wayfinder so we can find the planet that Palpatine is hiding on! But Rose, the fans don't like you, so you stay here and hang out next to this green screen we'll project cutting floor clips of Carrie Fisher on because she was too busy being dead to appear in this film."

I really don't care.

A question: If a white person says to you that they had no problem with a black stormtrooper/protagonist or an Asian protagonist or a black lead in a Star Trek series and in fact, found the change refreshing and enjoyed these shows or movies, would you say this person is woke?

Not really. If we are talking about Star Trek, it had minorities in prominent roles since the 1960's. It had a black lead character in 1993 with Deep Space Nine (IMHO, the best Trek Series) with Avery Brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko. It had a female character as the lead in Star Trek Voyager.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

The point about the objections to Fin by the White Toxic Fanboys is that they were upset with him from the fucking TRAILER. Before they even got to see the movie.

On the subject of Fin, he started out in the first movie with kind of an interesting concept. A reminder that there are human beings under that Stormtrooper armor, and they have feelings and might even have a pang of conscience. They pretty much ruined him in the next two movies.

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

 

[freyasman]

Irrelevant. The fact remains that nobody proved they were true either. Besides, O.J. at least had the benefit of a trial where evidence was presented and he was allowed a defense. Sandmann, for example, did not.

Naw, what Smirky McBitchslap got was a media tour arranged by his Media Consultants where they dressed him up in a nice suit, lost the MAGA hat, and emoted about how unfairly he was being treated by the press, and no one asked him a hard question like, "Why are you a misogynist little shit who is against a woman's right to choose?"

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

You still haven't proven that Tico was written off due to "toxic white fanboys". In fact, you've already said in other discussions that people complained that Tico's character arc was pointless to the story.

You're full of shit.

Not at all. I would have been fine with the character if she was given a point, or written with some good dialog and a character arc.

Instead, they took an attractive Asian-American actress.

View attachment 508648

And made her totally frumpy and unattractive and sent her off on a meaningless fetch-quest.

View attachment 508649

You just made my point.

and when the toxic fanboys hated on her, their response was to give her a whopping 110 seconds of screen time in the next movie. I'm halfway surprised they didn't just blow her up while French Kissing Jar-Jar.

Now, if I had been in charge, I'd have developed her character more and made her interesting. You know, instead of taking up half the movie with more half-ass fetch-quests. "Okay, so we have to go find Ochi's dagger, and then we have to get C3PO reprogrammed to read it, then we have to go to the wreckage of the Second Death Star to find the Wayfinder so we can find the planet that Palpatine is hiding on! But Rose, the fans don't like you, so you stay here and hang out next to this green screen we'll project cutting floor clips of Carrie Fisher on because she was too busy being dead to appear in this film."

I really don't care.

A question: If a white person says to you that they had no problem with a black stormtrooper/protagonist or an Asian protagonist or a black lead in a Star Trek series and in fact, found the change refreshing and enjoyed these shows or movies, would you say this person is woke?

Not really. If we are talking about Star Trek, it had minorities in prominent roles since the 1960's. It had a black lead character in 1993 with Deep Space Nine (IMHO, the best Trek Series) with Avery Brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko. It had a female character as the lead in Star Trek Voyager.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

The point about the objections to Fin by the White Toxic Fanboys is that they were upset with him from the fucking TRAILER. Before they even got to see the movie.

On the subject of Fin, he started out in the first movie with kind of an interesting concept. A reminder that there are human beings under that Stormtrooper armor, and they have feelings and might even have a pang of conscience. They pretty much ruined him in the next two movies.

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

Who is "Fin"?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Irrelevant. The fact remains that nobody proved they were true either. Besides, O.J. at least had the benefit of a trial where evidence was presented and he was allowed a defense. Sandmann, for example, did not.

Naw, what Smirky McBitchslap got was a media tour arranged by his Media Consultants where they dressed him up in a nice suit, lost the MAGA hat, and emoted about how unfairly he was being treated by the press, and no one asked him a hard question like, "Why are you a misogynist little shit who is against a woman's right to choose?"

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

You still haven't proven that Tico was written off due to "toxic white fanboys". In fact, you've already said in other discussions that people complained that Tico's character arc was pointless to the story.

You're full of shit.

Not at all. I would have been fine with the character if she was given a point, or written with some good dialog and a character arc.

Instead, they took an attractive Asian-American actress.

View attachment 508648

And made her totally frumpy and unattractive and sent her off on a meaningless fetch-quest.

View attachment 508649

You just made my point.

and when the toxic fanboys hated on her, their response was to give her a whopping 110 seconds of screen time in the next movie. I'm halfway surprised they didn't just blow her up while French Kissing Jar-Jar.

Now, if I had been in charge, I'd have developed her character more and made her interesting. You know, instead of taking up half the movie with more half-ass fetch-quests. "Okay, so we have to go find Ochi's dagger, and then we have to get C3PO reprogrammed to read it, then we have to go to the wreckage of the Second Death Star to find the Wayfinder so we can find the planet that Palpatine is hiding on! But Rose, the fans don't like you, so you stay here and hang out next to this green screen we'll project cutting floor clips of Carrie Fisher on because she was too busy being dead to appear in this film."

I really don't care.

A question: If a white person says to you that they had no problem with a black stormtrooper/protagonist or an Asian protagonist or a black lead in a Star Trek series and in fact, found the change refreshing and enjoyed these shows or movies, would you say this person is woke?

Not really. If we are talking about Star Trek, it had minorities in prominent roles since the 1960's. It had a black lead character in 1993 with Deep Space Nine (IMHO, the best Trek Series) with Avery Brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko. It had a female character as the lead in Star Trek Voyager.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

The point about the objections to Fin by the White Toxic Fanboys is that they were upset with him from the fucking TRAILER. Before they even got to see the movie.

On the subject of Fin, he started out in the first movie with kind of an interesting concept. A reminder that there are human beings under that Stormtrooper armor, and they have feelings and might even have a pang of conscience. They pretty much ruined him in the next two movies.

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

Who is "Fin"?

The black character in the Star Wars sequel movies. He runs across Rey in The Force Awakens and they become good friends.

 

[freyasman]

Irrelevant. The fact remains that nobody proved they were true either. Besides, O.J. at least had the benefit of a trial where evidence was presented and he was allowed a defense. Sandmann, for example, did not.

Naw, what Smirky McBitchslap got was a media tour arranged by his Media Consultants where they dressed him up in a nice suit, lost the MAGA hat, and emoted about how unfairly he was being treated by the press, and no one asked him a hard question like, "Why are you a misogynist little shit who is against a woman's right to choose?"

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

You still haven't proven that Tico was written off due to "toxic white fanboys". In fact, you've already said in other discussions that people complained that Tico's character arc was pointless to the story.

You're full of shit.

Not at all. I would have been fine with the character if she was given a point, or written with some good dialog and a character arc.

Instead, they took an attractive Asian-American actress.

View attachment 508648

And made her totally frumpy and unattractive and sent her off on a meaningless fetch-quest.

View attachment 508649

You just made my point.

and when the toxic fanboys hated on her, their response was to give her a whopping 110 seconds of screen time in the next movie. I'm halfway surprised they didn't just blow her up while French Kissing Jar-Jar.

Now, if I had been in charge, I'd have developed her character more and made her interesting. You know, instead of taking up half the movie with more half-ass fetch-quests. "Okay, so we have to go find Ochi's dagger, and then we have to get C3PO reprogrammed to read it, then we have to go to the wreckage of the Second Death Star to find the Wayfinder so we can find the planet that Palpatine is hiding on! But Rose, the fans don't like you, so you stay here and hang out next to this green screen we'll project cutting floor clips of Carrie Fisher on because she was too busy being dead to appear in this film."

I really don't care.

A question: If a white person says to you that they had no problem with a black stormtrooper/protagonist or an Asian protagonist or a black lead in a Star Trek series and in fact, found the change refreshing and enjoyed these shows or movies, would you say this person is woke?

Not really. If we are talking about Star Trek, it had minorities in prominent roles since the 1960's. It had a black lead character in 1993 with Deep Space Nine (IMHO, the best Trek Series) with Avery Brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko. It had a female character as the lead in Star Trek Voyager.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

The point about the objections to Fin by the White Toxic Fanboys is that they were upset with him from the fucking TRAILER. Before they even got to see the movie.

On the subject of Fin, he started out in the first movie with kind of an interesting concept. A reminder that there are human beings under that Stormtrooper armor, and they have feelings and might even have a pang of conscience. They pretty much ruined him in the next two movies.

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

Who is "Fin"?

The black character in the Star Wars sequel movies. He runs across Rey in The Force Awakens and they become good friends.

Okay, thanks........... who is "Rey"?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Irrelevant. The fact remains that nobody proved they were true either. Besides, O.J. at least had the benefit of a trial where evidence was presented and he was allowed a defense. Sandmann, for example, did not.

Naw, what Smirky McBitchslap got was a media tour arranged by his Media Consultants where they dressed him up in a nice suit, lost the MAGA hat, and emoted about how unfairly he was being treated by the press, and no one asked him a hard question like, "Why are you a misogynist little shit who is against a woman's right to choose?"

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

You still haven't proven that Tico was written off due to "toxic white fanboys". In fact, you've already said in other discussions that people complained that Tico's character arc was pointless to the story.

You're full of shit.

Not at all. I would have been fine with the character if she was given a point, or written with some good dialog and a character arc.

Instead, they took an attractive Asian-American actress.

View attachment 508648

And made her totally frumpy and unattractive and sent her off on a meaningless fetch-quest.

View attachment 508649

You just made my point.

and when the toxic fanboys hated on her, their response was to give her a whopping 110 seconds of screen time in the next movie. I'm halfway surprised they didn't just blow her up while French Kissing Jar-Jar.

Now, if I had been in charge, I'd have developed her character more and made her interesting. You know, instead of taking up half the movie with more half-ass fetch-quests. "Okay, so we have to go find Ochi's dagger, and then we have to get C3PO reprogrammed to read it, then we have to go to the wreckage of the Second Death Star to find the Wayfinder so we can find the planet that Palpatine is hiding on! But Rose, the fans don't like you, so you stay here and hang out next to this green screen we'll project cutting floor clips of Carrie Fisher on because she was too busy being dead to appear in this film."

I really don't care.

A question: If a white person says to you that they had no problem with a black stormtrooper/protagonist or an Asian protagonist or a black lead in a Star Trek series and in fact, found the change refreshing and enjoyed these shows or movies, would you say this person is woke?

Not really. If we are talking about Star Trek, it had minorities in prominent roles since the 1960's. It had a black lead character in 1993 with Deep Space Nine (IMHO, the best Trek Series) with Avery Brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko. It had a female character as the lead in Star Trek Voyager.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

The point about the objections to Fin by the White Toxic Fanboys is that they were upset with him from the fucking TRAILER. Before they even got to see the movie.

On the subject of Fin, he started out in the first movie with kind of an interesting concept. A reminder that there are human beings under that Stormtrooper armor, and they have feelings and might even have a pang of conscience. They pretty much ruined him in the next two movies.

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

Who is "Fin"?

The black character in the Star Wars sequel movies. He runs across Rey in The Force Awakens and they become good friends.

Okay, thanks........... who is "Rey"?

Hah! I should have seen that one coming.

In the sequel movies, Rey (played by Daisy Ridley) is a scavenger who, it turns out, is strong in the Force and becomes the new Jedi hero.

 

[JoeB131]

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

He was wearing a MAGA hat. Only hard core racists wear those.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

Well, it's Star Trek. They haven't had a show without minority characters and racial equality was kind of the point. Not only for humans of all colors but Vulcans, Klingons, Androids, Ferengi, Bajorans, etc.

In fact, it's kind of why the Toxic Fanboys showing up now freaking out about the "Woke" Michael Burhman character is kind of weird. But Trump has enabled a whole lot of bad behavior. While I'm sure it's liberating for the bigots to be able to open their mouths now (at least on line hiding behind screen names), it's also kind of distressing.

(Then again, Star Trek Discovery has tweeked these people a bit more by being the first Trek show with openly gay characters.)

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

Naw, they are just decent human beings. "Woke" is what a bigot says when he wants to criticize someone for actually being for equality.

 

[frigidweirdo]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

 

[freyasman]

Irrelevant. The fact remains that nobody proved they were true either. Besides, O.J. at least had the benefit of a trial where evidence was presented and he was allowed a defense. Sandmann, for example, did not.

Naw, what Smirky McBitchslap got was a media tour arranged by his Media Consultants where they dressed him up in a nice suit, lost the MAGA hat, and emoted about how unfairly he was being treated by the press, and no one asked him a hard question like, "Why are you a misogynist little shit who is against a woman's right to choose?"

Irrelevant. No one ever proved Sandmann is racist.

You still haven't proven that Tico was written off due to "toxic white fanboys". In fact, you've already said in other discussions that people complained that Tico's character arc was pointless to the story.

You're full of shit.

Not at all. I would have been fine with the character if she was given a point, or written with some good dialog and a character arc.

Instead, they took an attractive Asian-American actress.

View attachment 508648

And made her totally frumpy and unattractive and sent her off on a meaningless fetch-quest.

View attachment 508649

You just made my point.

and when the toxic fanboys hated on her, their response was to give her a whopping 110 seconds of screen time in the next movie. I'm halfway surprised they didn't just blow her up while French Kissing Jar-Jar.

Now, if I had been in charge, I'd have developed her character more and made her interesting. You know, instead of taking up half the movie with more half-ass fetch-quests. "Okay, so we have to go find Ochi's dagger, and then we have to get C3PO reprogrammed to read it, then we have to go to the wreckage of the Second Death Star to find the Wayfinder so we can find the planet that Palpatine is hiding on! But Rose, the fans don't like you, so you stay here and hang out next to this green screen we'll project cutting floor clips of Carrie Fisher on because she was too busy being dead to appear in this film."

I really don't care.

A question: If a white person says to you that they had no problem with a black stormtrooper/protagonist or an Asian protagonist or a black lead in a Star Trek series and in fact, found the change refreshing and enjoyed these shows or movies, would you say this person is woke?

Not really. If we are talking about Star Trek, it had minorities in prominent roles since the 1960's. It had a black lead character in 1993 with Deep Space Nine (IMHO, the best Trek Series) with Avery Brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko. It had a female character as the lead in Star Trek Voyager.

So by your reasoning here, a person who has no issues with minorities in Star Trek is not necessarily woke because Star Trek has had minorities in their shows for a long time? Are you kidding me?

Man, I've seen accomplished weaseling before but you take it to an art form.

The point about the objections to Fin by the White Toxic Fanboys is that they were upset with him from the fucking TRAILER. Before they even got to see the movie.

On the subject of Fin, he started out in the first movie with kind of an interesting concept. A reminder that there are human beings under that Stormtrooper armor, and they have feelings and might even have a pang of conscience. They pretty much ruined him in the next two movies.

Irrelevant. What about those who had no problem with him being black and got into and cheered the character, are they woke?

Who is "Fin"?

The black character in the Star Wars sequel movies. He runs across Rey in The Force Awakens and they become good friends.

Okay, thanks........... who is "Rey"?

Hah! I should have seen that one coming.

In the sequel movies, Rey (played by Daisy Ridley) is a scavenger who, it turns out, is strong in the Force and becomes the new Jedi hero.

Okay.

My science fiction movie taste runs more to stuff like Altered Carbon and Edge of Tomorrow..... shit like that.

 

[freyasman]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

Disagree.

 

[justinacolmena]

If she really did say that, she's nuts.

That's right. There's a heavy mental health gun control agenda on the table with all that peace and love shit.

 

[frigidweirdo]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

Disagree.

Do you want a cake to go with that?

 

[freyasman]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

Disagree.

Do you want a cake to go with that?

No but you could go make me a sandwich.

 

[IM2]

Liberals ARE Black People and White people coming together and loving their country.!

Liberals love their country so much, they either loot it, burn it or tear it down. Liberal Black people HATE Conservative Black people. That's not love either.

Another white "expert" on blacks. Blacks don't hate conservative black people, it is the black right wingers we cannot stand.

 

[Dadoalex]

Liberals ARE Black People and White people coming together and loving their country.!

Liberals love their country so much, they either loot it, burn it or tear it down. Liberal Black people HATE Conservative Black people. That's not love either.

Another white "expert" on blacks. Blacks don't hate conservative black people, it is the black right wingers we cannot stand.

Isn't it amazing how many White people, sometimes myself included, know EXACTLY go Black people think.
In my defense, I try to speculate on possible explanations for behaviors as opposed to saying "Black people believe this."

 

[frigidweirdo]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

Disagree.

Do you want a cake to go with that?

No but you could go make me a sandwich.

I don't think you deserve a sandwich, seeing how you write more words to my second statement than the politics I wrote the post before that, do you?

 

[freyasman]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

Disagree.

Do you want a cake to go with that?

No but you could go make me a sandwich.

I don't think you deserve a sandwich, seeing how you write more words to my second statement than the politics I wrote the post before that, do you?

And parasites don't deserve to be in public office, what's your point?













Wheat bread and go easy on the mustard please.

 

[LuckyDuck]

Sounds accurate to me. What say you?

View attachment 507547

While I am a fan of Candace Owens, I have to some degree, disagree with her statement. What the left wants of the "inner-city" blacks is for them to keep wanting government handouts so that they will continue voting for leftist politicians.

 

[frigidweirdo]

100% spot-on.

Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).

I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.

It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.

Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.

A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....

“I mean...” what? What are you implying?

I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.

Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for fuck's sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.

Jesus.

I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.

The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?

Hilarious.

Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.

Anti-communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Take a look if you want to see.

Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.

The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.

Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?

Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.

By who?

There's a massive amount of money being spent on agendas. Manipulating people.

The Koch brothers realized when they lost (as Libertarians and as VP candidate) to Reagan that you can't win with a third party, all you can do is try and change a party to reflect what you want. And they've done that. They've changed the Republican Party. Trump is their product. Though they hate Trump.

They thought they could control it. But they can't. The Republican Party is becoming a monster.

How does the right benefit from friction?

Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".

If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.

People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.

Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.

But see..... McCarthy was right. That's the thing.

Welcome To The Unravelling

“All we can do, Scully, is pull the thread. See what it unravels.” – The X-Files I imagine the guy who decided to use Velcro™ on shoes said, “Why knot?” Well, that struck a nerve. I’m never sure wh…

wilderwealthywise.com

From the link;
"When Tail Gunner Joe pointed out, rightly, that the State Department and Hollywood® were filled with commies, people were upset.

Leftism was generally viewed as bad. It was so obvious that Stalin was a bad guy that even the New York Times® couldn’t hide it, as they had swept the human cost of the Holodomor (In The World Murder Olympics, Communists Take Gold And Silver Medals) under the rug two decades earlier.



The way the Left did that is they went to their normal playbook. How do you trump logic and facts? A plain appeal to emotion:

“Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last?” was how they went after Senator Joe McCarthy. They tried to make his dogged pursuit of Leftism appear to be an unhinged attack against ghosts.

But McCarthy was . . . right. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was shown that Joe was right about the scope and scale of Soviet infiltration. Where? Everywhere Joe had said. McCarthyism was just what you and I would call, “Telling the truth.”

Again, McCarthy was right. Leftism had infiltrated the Federal government. Stalin had better progress reports on the atomic bomb than those that were given to Truman. There’s a reason we celebrate Juneteenth around my house.

Why did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg cross the road? Because they were never on your side. (meme: not original)

Leftism has burrowed inside of our country. For decades. When Reagan was shot we couldn’t watch it on TV. There were no televisions in our classrooms. But some teachers had radios and instead of listening to a lecture on social studies, we sat and listened to the news on a tinny AM radio.

Would President Reagan live? No one knew. All we knew was that he was in the hospital.

One kid, whose parents were Leftist professors at the local college, said, simply, “I hope he dies. Maybe then the Senate will choose Ted Kennedy as Vice President.”

The split we see now isn’t new. It’s been festering in our country for decades.

I could come up with example after example. But if I were to try to create a scenario where people would be on each other like Karens on a manager, I couldn’t create a better scenario than what I see today:

• Multiple cultures forced together in small spaces.
• Actual propaganda presented as nightly news.
• Dogs and cats, living together.
• An Internet where people can check facts for themselves.
• A demonization of the Culture that created the place."

Doesn't matter whether you think he was right or not.

The reality is that McCarthy used anti-Communism to boost his career as a politician.

Yes it actually DOES matter.


And the fact that you want to ignore that, tells me pretty clearly who you are, and what side you're on.

And it sure as hell ain't America's.

Not to this conversation it doesn't.

And now you're trying to get all emotional. Great.

You're trying to move this conversation away from the conversation and onto things you're comfortable with. Typical.

I don't agree.

You're saying the "right" and using it to mean just the Republican political power structure rather than all of the conservatives in America; I'm referring to all the normal traditional Americans who value our core principles.


If you wish to discuss what a bunch of parasites in politics are up to, and have been doing for decades, then keep your terms limited to just them, rather than referring to all the people they claim to represent (most all of whom they don't, in actual fact.)

What is "the right"? Of course I'm generalizing, but I think you're wrong.

The Koch brothers have manipulated "the right" and they've changed it.

There are no "core principles", people's "principles" change on a whim.

Disagree.

Do you want a cake to go with that?

No but you could go make me a sandwich.

I don't think you deserve a sandwich, seeing how you write more words to my second statement than the politics I wrote the post before that, do you?

And parasites don't deserve to be in public office, what's your point?













Wheat bread and go easy on the mustard please.

My point is "disagree" as the totally of a comment is lazy and pointless.