Surely you read that and think 'What kind of asshole thinks this way?'
Surely you read that and think 'What kind of asshole thinks this way?'
Wut. Any proof? Cultural arguments don't count.Originally Posted by phonics
Yes no way he can win the presidency with those reliable poll numbers!
It's par for the course in the US. And anyways states can erect their own privacy protections, it's not the federal governments job to micromanage everything.
That's what I love about the US. Don't get me wrong, I come from one of the most corrupt countries in the world, but over here, corruption is legal.
Probably because USA doesn't have any newspapers or anything other than corporate journalism. We're slowly heading the same way.
Mexico of course cuts to the chase by having all the journalists murdered.
Alright, Tony Montana.
Yet we still probably have a bit more investigative journalism. It really is a shit situation we find ourselves in, sadly.
It's true. Privately funded campaings, donations all over the shop, public endorsments, lobbyists being a thing. It really is a big fucking mess.
Attachment 39
I'll just leave this without comment...
EDIT: Actually, that's very small but you can still read the main bit...
Yes, it is. And it is why the left so often loses. But that ignores the history. The concept comes from two Republican strategists in the late 60's, Lee Atwater and Kevin Phillips, who created the Southern Strategy. Both left and right have been playing identity since but we don't like talking about it because it is all so uncomfortable.
Phillips pretty much coined the entire current political lexicon we use today: Heartland, coastal enclaves, or Sunbelt. It is all his. In the 90's he did one of those deathbed repudiations and referred to it as "You tell me who hates who and I'll tell you how to win."
Atwater described activating identity like this in 1981:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”
I am guessing that you're not commenting because you too can't read it.
Tax cuts are racist. Got it.
Nigger, nigger, nigger.
Click on it.
Still small as fuck.
Okay, well take 5 warning points.
Will those be big enough to read?
What a fucking twat.
It's unlike Henry to be an unmitigated bellend.
You can't honestly have thought that posting that was going to be looked upon favourably.
Lol how is Henry a mod still? Go shag a prozzie, microphone-head.
No. A tax cut is just a tax cut. If you can code it as saying that program that helps that undeserving group that stops a tax cut you can sell it more easily. It doesn't have to be strictly race - that just makes more sense to Atwater as a man of his time.
Do the same with the left and massive corporations and you get the same place. The argument doesn't sell. The ability to activate a core identity does.
Be honest, you had a cheeky smile to yourself.
What Lee Atwater said is just his opinion and in my opinion, is no longer relevant; Trump won the election by flipping counties in the Midwest that voted for Obama twice. There are a lot of conservatives who are mobilized on the basis of race-blind issues that they feel strongly about and who would accept allies from across the racial boundaries. Just look at The_Donald on Reddit; they elevate literally any minority / woman who voices their support for the cause.
More importantly, based Bannon at it again:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...a=twitter_page
"Guys, I'm going to use an internet message board to validate a thing a guy said. Guys!"
Anyone want to explain why everyones up in arms about bombing Syria. Hasn't everyone been bombing Syria for about 5 years now?
"thedailybeast"
Because it was some sort of gas being used. I think, but I don't know for sure, that the Assad regime was using chemical warfare to some extent before, but since having been more prominently (lol) backed by Russia and whoever else (is it Iran?) they have stuck to normal bombs etc (very grand of them of course). So why it's potentially an extra big deal this time is that theres a possibility that the chemical weapon being used was Russian or even fired by Russians.
That's what I've gotten at least.
The difference is that we were previously bombing Islamic State, which everyone broadly supports / can reconcile themselves to.
They've now bombed Assad, who is a) fighting Islamic State, b) supported by the Russians, and c) technically still the head of state of a sovereign country.
It's significantly more serious than bombing a terrorist group, and it also raises far more questions in the medium term about maintaining regional stability, the role of the West therein (we don't have a great track record, after all), and exactly what you're going to do about Assad.
It should also be noted that the West have been dreadfully inconsistent in their policy in Syria. They recognised the rebels as the legitimate representatives of the Syrian people in 2012. Which was stupid, because many of them are jihadis, and it pushed Assad towards the Russians. Putin wanted a base in the Middle East, and the Russians have historically supported countries being able to do what they want (presumably so they can keep bombing Chechnya and thus maintain a consistent line). We could have bombed the Syrian government in 2013, the last time he used chemical weapons, but the House of Commons managed to block that (well done, Ed Miliband) and Obama bottled it going alone. So the West have little to no credibility. Trump's view that Assad staying in some role wasn't a deal breaker was at least new (Obama et al had previously DEMANDED as a precondition of a deal), but using chemical weapons again (if, indeed, he did) sort of makes that almost politically impossible now.
The whole thing is a complete mess, accompanied as it always is by demands for action without anybody thinking through what the end game is.
Yee haw.
70 million USD worth of fireworks.
Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is.
Shouldn't this be in the WW3 thread?
Have you tried using the search function on this place? It's somehow more broken than the last one.
If only we had someone who said they were going to fix things in January.
The mobile skin stuff is a nightmare and requires actual coding. I nearly destroyed the place last time I did that.
"We ask for God's wisdom". Of fuck off, you yellow fucking cunt.
Harold's on the phone, phonics: http://w11.zetaboards.com/The_Refuge...0207563/1/#new
'You can not view this board'
You logged in?
I don't even think I have an account. Can't be bothered. Just copy/paste it.
Title: Someone tell moronics
If he wants to know whether I'm a big, nasty racist, then come and ask me himself. Are blacks genetically pre-disposed to crime? Not sure I ever explicitly stated that but there's every reason to think there's genetic pre-disposition regarding intelligence and, of course, the more intelligent the less likely to be a criminal you are. It's a fact that certain blacks are better at sprinting. Now that's a positive trait so therefor it's not racist to point it out apparently. The only time something is racist is if evidence points to a negative trait. Because feelings are more important than facts to some people. Not many black chess masters, are there? By the way, Asians are way out in the lead on intelligence and 'privilege' so it can hardly be construed as an attempt at promoting some kind of white supremacy. Whites are only third, in fact.
And this coming from a man who admitted banning me for no other reason than being unable to control his emotions (a typical trait of the modern left). He'll probably be seeing if some of his twitter mates want to organise a protest about my comments if he sees them.
lol. Good to know he's still alive I guess.
Isn't he posting dozens of threads to himself on Teh Refuge? Other than apparently spending his time reading a board that he's been banned from for some time...
Bernie Sanders has got himself a podcast
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...223800705?mt=2
Bernie Sanders pays a lower effective tax than the average blue-collar union worker in America. He's a fraud (with 3 houses).
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...veal-hypocrisy
So he's a success?
Yep. Capitalism works apparently.
Bruh, Trump Train ran off the tracks, we're on the Bernard Monorail now.
P.S. Love how those on the other side always try to make it out that the left hate anyone that makes more than 70k. They did it with Corbyn as well. "HAVE YOU SEEN HOW MUCH THIS MAN MAKES" "The same as everyone else in his position and he takes no payments outside of that salary and some after dinner speeches" "FUCKING CAPITALIST" "?"
The mans nearly 70. He got to live through the greatest economic rigging of all time while being a public servant, I'd be a little worried if as a Baby Boomer, he hadn't managed to save any money.
They'll all still vote for him because the Republicans will play the Roe v Wade card, so it's not as if this momentary spat with the nutter fringe will matter.
I hate getting in an argument with my fridge, always so cold hearted.
Meanwhile
Reply With Quote
