And right. Don’t forget that one
And wrong. Always wrong. Deeply and factually wrong.
If I were @DemonTree , I might have blocked me. It must be nice to be able to sit down on occasion without feeling that burning sting.
Wrong! The left here and in the media downplayed the violence that included arson, rape, murder, vast amounts of looting because it didn’t fit their social justice narrative. Billions of dollars of damage hand-waved away because the violent thugs doing the looting, burning, rampaging happened to be left wing radicals and anarchists. I really am not sure why those on the left actually want to legitimize political violence but the facts are what they are regardless of the disingenuous attempts at gaslighting.
You are correct that the world is likely to become less free. It’s sad but it seems to be human nature to want to use whatever tool is possible be it a gulag, a sickle and a hammer, or a sympathetic mod to eliminate and/or silence opposing views.
Hey, I’m still proud of SlackWit’s ACT:
I mean, wow! A 35 composite right in the gut…
ETA: Also, she’s not so big on poker.
You’re arguing that “the left” “media” were downplaying violence and looting in the summer 2020 protests?
Have you just forgotten what the media were actually reporting back then, or are you just hoping that it was long enough ago that we’ll have forgotten?
I really can’t even with right-wingers imagining that if they just let a few weeks or months pass between a given event and the time they start lying about it, nobody will even notice the discrepancy.
BBC, 29 April 2020: Man fined $12m for police station arson during George Floyd protests
MN Star-Tribune, 13 July 2020: Buildings damaged in Minneapolis, St. Paul after riots
And on and on and on and on: there was hardly anything else but protest-related violence and crime in the news last summer, except COVID. But somehow conservatives like octopus can tell themselves that it was all “hand-waved away” because that’s what they want to believe, and what difference do facts make compared to what they want to believe?
I genuinely wonder if there’s ever going to be a serious confrontation with reality on the American right wing ever again. Are significant numbers of them ever going to look in the mirror and say to themselves “Taking horse dewormer and inhaling hydrogen peroxide? Spreading a deadly virus in the name of ‘freedom’? Pretending that political events and media reports were whatever we chose to believe about them? Made-up scenarios about vast election-stealing conspiracies? Masturbatory fantasies about having to overthrow democracy and seize control of government by force to avoid the demographic realities of losing majority status? My God, what were we thinking??!?”
Gee, octopus, do you think you’ve got enough melodramatic victimhood blubbering going on there? Sure, sure, your not being allowed to use transphobic insults on one messageboard is exactly comparable to Soviet political prisoners being sent to Siberian gulags.
Denial of reality? Check!
Repetition of Preferred Narrative? Check!
Accusing others of what you’re literally doing? Check!
In other words, just like every other post you’ve made here. Anything to avoid your ongoing support for the party working to destroy democracy in America, I suppose.
They repeat it because they’re downplaying the protest-related violence and crime by their side, and projection is one of their big things. Which is why octopus just keeps repeating the same narrative (and the reason the same person who repeats right-wing talking points without question accuses us of being a hivemind). But when you’re already supporting outright treason, what’s a little lying and hypocrisy between friends?
Far better to just send law enforcement officers and vigilante groups to do it, like the right did last summer in those protests you keep mentioning. Or did your media sources downplay those?
And how’s that silencing of CRT going?
What you’re describing is a self-centered asshole willing to let millions of fellow human beings continue to suffer for the sake of ēs own comfortable privilege. It’s the type of person who would gladly go along with fascists in order to maintain the status quo only to the extent that things keep working fine for em. This is not a point of view that should be treated with respect or dignity. This kind of conservative has always been the right hand of tyranny.
As opposed to the peaceful crowd that descended upon the Capitol on January 6th. No violence or looting going on there. No sirrreee.
The difference is that the looting that took place during the George Floyd protests was largely the result of opportunistic, apolitical criminal activity, so the idea that you can pin this on the left is absurd. By contrast, the looting that took place on January 6th was 100% politically motivated and tied to the violent, murderous, thuggish right wing.
If it were “I’m fine and therefore other people can do what they want”, that’d be one thing. But it’s the “I’m irrationally afraid that changing the status quo will affect me negatively, so I will work to actively prevent anyone from helping those being materially harmed by the status quo” people that are the problem.
This is the only part of your post that I find an objection to. They usually start lying even while the events are happening, without bothering to wait.
They’re proactive now. They predict that any election won by a Democrat is rigged before it even begins.
You know why you need conservatives? To fight ignorance caused by being in a bubble.
For example, we were telling you the Hunter Biden Laptop story was a big deal, while Twitter and Facebook were censoring it. And it was real, and it’s still a big deal.
Without us, you might not know that the ‘Trump server connected to s Russian bank’ story was utter bullshit.
Without us you might not have heard that a lawyer representing Hillary Clinton has been indicted for lying to the FBI about it, and that he was part of a conspiracy that included a tech executive, two internet companies, a major law firm, a huge oppo-research firm and the Clinton campaign.
Just fighting ignorance here. It’s taking longer than I thought.
Fvck off
Nah. You guys need us.
No, we don’t. You are a dissembling scumbag, maliciously clinging to an ideology knowing that your arguments are absent of fact and fallacious.
And I stand by my accusation: You are Taliban Sam. You gleefully cheered as the Taliban attacked American, Canadian, NATO troops, and Afghans, because you thought it added credence to your perverse worldview.
I like your Lizard picture. It’s cute.
.
You can’t fight any ignorance by spreading lies. Or by credulously regurgitating a mix of facts and falsehoods and exaggerations so tangled up that it’s impossible to determine how much is which.
Moreover, the “bubble” nature of news and facts on the left is nowhere near as pervasive and distorting as it is on the right. In fact, all the stuff that rightwing media likes to trumpet as its own “exposes” of non-rightwing figures is generally much more fully and factually explained in non-rightwing media (which is usually where the rightwing media found out about it in the first place).
Sam, are you really under the impression that those of us in the reality-based community don’t hear about anything unless it’s on Twitter and Facebook? As this Washington Post article notes, there was plenty of coverage of this story at the time in the non-rightwing mainstream media, and there continues to be.
Yeah, 'cause nobody in non-rightwing media ever suggested any such thing. Oh wait, they did.
Because only conservatives have access to the Justice Department website where they announce what the Lawfare blog describes as “the special counsel’s weird prosecution of Michael Sussman”?
How mysterious that no non-rightwing media thought to cover this interesting story!
Honestly, Sam, you’re just being pathetic here. Believe it or not, liberals (unlike many conservatives) do not need to go far afield beyond their “bubble” into strange new worlds of journalism in order to access news and opinion reporting critical of people who align with their own political ideology.