Just thought I’d point out that kicking me off your platform for expressing unapproved opinions does NOT make me less prone to have opinions of which you feckless little retards do not approve.
In fact, all it does is increase my propensity to express them.
I am not a pet to be trained in Pavlovian fashion. If you punish me for expressing views that you do not like, all it does is remind me that you and your all-seeing intrusive algorithms are exactly the problem George Orwell tried to warn us about when he wrote “1984”.
You cannot change reality by deleting posts you do not like or banning those who post them. You may THINK you can… but it’s like a dog who hides his head behind a tree and thinks nobody can see him because he can’t see anybody.
Your ass is still sticking out in plain view.
You may see yourself as heroes, but the rest of us see you for what you are; the draconian “Thought Police”. You’re nothing but pimple-faced little monkeys desperately pushing buttons to try and eliminate all thoughts that challenge your childish views.
Yeah, we know, you feel a high moral obligation to censor all content that hurts your feelings, because you’re too immature to handle opposing views. Here’s a dose of reality. Screw your “feelings”. Nobody but your mommy cares.
All you will accomplish with this behavior is to make enemies of about half those using your platform. Trust me when I tell you that is NOT a winning strategy.
Don’t take my word for it. Just keep it up and watch Facebook turn into the next MySpace.
WE’VE SEEN THIS MOVIE Remember 8 years ago, right before the election, when Harry Reid claimed reliable sources told him Romney didn’t pay taxes?
It later proved wholly untrue, but Reid wouldn’t apologize even when proved a liar. The lie served its purpose, it made big news. He was proud of it.
Now we have NY Times accusing Trump of tax AVOIDANCE… which is, read this closely, LEGAL. Heck, it’s standard operating procedure for every corporation. It’s why they hire CPA’s. It’s tax EVASION that is illegal.
And all they have to do to prove their case is publish illegally obtained tax returns. That, by the way IS illegal. It is in fact a FEDERAL FELONY.
But they’ve accomplished their goal. The claim made the news. I don’t recall a lot of airtime being devoted to the fact Harry Reid clearly lied for political gain.
Harry’s explanation when asked if he was sorry he lied?
There are 29.9 million people in Texas. Reports say approximately 1000 are dead of Covid-19. That’s 1 in 29,900.
Odds I’ll be hit by LIGHTNING in my lifetime?
1 in 3000. Roughly 10 times higher. So when IS government going to do something to mitigate this Lightning Pandemic?
No, I’m NOT belittling the value of the lives lost. I’m putting it in perspective, because, let’s face it, people die of something every day. Does getting in your car mean you don’t care about the 3000+ people who die on Texas highways every year?
What? You still drive? You selfish bastard. It isn’t just about YOUR safety. By driving you could kill my grandmother. Or is that your plan? Hmmm?
No matter how hard the news spins this thing, we are not seeing people with oxcarts collecting bodies from house to house. Instead, we are seeing the equivalent of a bad flu season.
Even then most of it is centered in the Northeast states, so expecting Texans to hide out because the death roll in far away high-rises is bad is statistically heretical.
Take what precautions you think necessary, but no matter what you do, the only people safe from death are those who already died.
Imagine going to the circus. The clown car enters the ring… and a clown hops out, grabs a microphone, and launches into a breathlessly sanctimonious lecture about the need for gun control.
Is THIS what you came for? NO.
But every day now we get effectively the same thing from movie stars, TV celebrities, late night hosts, rappers, and now even football players.
THEY HAVE A RIGHT YA KNOW
Now I KNOW they have a platform that enables them to share their opinions, and they certainly have a first amendment to right to say what they want without regard to whether I find it noteworthy or even offensive.
The only possible exception is the football players using their employers’ gametime to make a political statement… which is imminently questionable if their employer objects to them doing so, just as the greeter at Wal-Mart might get fired for standing at the front door in his company smock insulting people as they enter… but that’s another subject.
They ALL have the right to voice an opinion.
Why the hell should we listen?
Do Hollywood characters have some special insight about political matters I don’t? A ton of them are at best high school grads, and their only claim to fame is reading lines someone else wrote and pretending to be someone they are not. Did becoming a famous TV doctor or movie action star make their opinion of what I should think valid?
Do rappers who became famous uttering lyrics about murdering cops or abusing women really deserve to lecture me about social justice or misogyny? Not sure they are the right guy for the job.
[To be fair, they aren’t the right guy to sing, either. “Untalented” does that begin to describe that noise.]
BOTTOM LINE: IT ISNT ENTERTAINING
If you are in the entertainment business, then entertain. HALF the country may agree with you, but the other half doesn’t, and unless you just enjoy driving your brand into the dirt, stick to what you know.
It isn’t politics.
It apparently isn’t business, either.
You need not believe me… a glimpse of box office proceeds and NFL revenues should tell you straying into 1-sided political discourse when it isn’t your real job is a poor business model.
There is pretty much nothing less enlightening than a self-aggrandizing lecture from some overpaid under-educated Hollywood twit. So thanks for thinking of us… but shut up and act. You aren’t paid because you’re smart, you’re paid because you play someone who is.
PC KILLS MORE US CITIZENS THAN EBOLA
A Kuwaiti born young Muslim male named Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez, who blogged jihad flavored rhetoric, whose father was subject of a terrorism investigation… traveled to 2 military facilities 7 miles apart to murder 4 US Marines he’d never met.
The Media and FBI are just stumped trying to find a motive.
If a fat guy steals your ice cream… would you spend much time wondering about his motive?
Personally, I’m betting he was radicalized by the NRA.
Today marks the 70th anniversary of the end of the Okinawa race riots.
Witnesses report hostilities began when a predominantly white mob armed with military style assault weapons initiated an unprovoked attack, targeting Asian men at a scenic beachfront resort. Violence escalated for days, during which many men of Japanese descent were murdered in an orgy of gunfire and terrorist bombings.
Afterward a group of largely white Americans celebrated the atrocity by raising their racist flag over land they’d stolen. FBI informants verify this flag has been used as a symbol of hate in many other military style attacks, including violent hate crimes perpetuated against Asians by white skinheads at Tarawa and Guadalcanal.
The gang believed to be responsible for these and other attacks is known to relish their history of racial violence, even singing songs celebrating displays of anger in places ranging from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli.
Though conspiracy buffs contend the attack was planned & coordinated in military fashion, sources in DC indicate it was likely just a spontaneous response to a vicious and racist John Wayne movie.
President Roosevelt went on radio to assure all that Bushido is a creed of peace… and warned racist white Americans that “the future must not belong to those who slander the emperor of Japan”.
KEEPING SENSATIONAL NEWS IN PERSPECTIVE
A lot of internet exposure about the guy that shot at police HQ in Dallas. Yes, he was white. He also killed NOBODY white or black before dying, but somehow ignited the race-baiters on the left to harumph a lot on the net.
Either way, kudos to the DPD for a job well done.
Meanwhile in the inner cities, life is so cheap nobody mentions the deaths unless a white cop kills a black guy. Then it is “news“.
Speaking of news, let’s talk for a minute on how they handle sensational murder stories.
INCREASINGLY USELESS NEWS CLICHES “Hate Crime” – in general use this has devolved to simply mean either a white guy killed a black guy or a straight guy killed a gay guy. We realize some violence is motivated by hate of another’s race (or nationality, etc), but if a black crowd beating a Serbian guy with hammers is not a hate crime, don’t bother using the phrase just because the perp is white. I’m almost sure most murders, regardless of whether the participants are the same color/sex/etc, are not “love crimes“. At least try for some measure of consistency.
“Racist / Racism” – The simple act of disagreeing with someone of another race is not “racism“. Even violent conflicts between people of opposite colors is not automatically “racism“. If two guys start shooting at each other because their drug deal went bad or one cut the other off on the road, their respective colors are probably a superfluous factor. If the term is to have meaning, it should be applied only when a conflict is actually motivated by race. Throwing it out when it is not applicable ends the possibility of rational discussion.
“The suspect” – I gave a newsman grief on twitter for calling a guy that was killed inside a van from which gunfire was directed at a police station “a suspected gunman“. He was the only person in the van. The news guy replied he has not been convicted. Seriously? After he’s been shot with a .50 cal and baked in his van… It’s a tad late to worry about his civil rights. Just call him “the shooter“. Common sense, ya know?
“Disturbed individual”– When there is a mass shooting, news outlets helpfully point out that the shooter is a “disturbed individual“. Thanks a lot for differentiating this from all the mass shootings performed by happy and well adjusted individuals. It means a lot to us.
“Time for a national discussion…” – Don’t bother finishing. We KNOW what follows. Just say what you mean: “Hi kids, we’d like to use this tragic event to renew our objection to anyone but the politically connected having the opportunity to keep and bear arms.” If you have a problem with the 2nd amendment, see the methods noted in the constitution for removing that. Until you can accomplish changing it… Remember the words “shall not be infringed” are pretty unambiguous.
WHY MENTION THIS TODAY?
There was a shooting in SC yesterday. It very likely IS a true “hate crime“. The fact he shot 9 people tells you he’s definitely disturbed. And given that a white guy went to a black church he does not normally attend to shoot everyone present, he very likely IS a racist.
Hopefully he’s caught quickly. A good public hanging would probably discourage this type of behavior… But that’s not as politically acceptable to point out as is the “time for a national discussion” stuff.
But for the record… He does not reflect poorly on all white people any more than the plethora of black on black murders in Chicago every weekend reflect poorly on all blacks. He needs to be caught and hung, but so does every single gang-banger that killed someone of any color this weekend.
Nor does he reflect poorly on the NRA or all gun owners. We don’t have a “national discussion on car ownership” every time a drunk plows into a pedestrian.
Quit falling for the politicians and media’s use of every tragedy to promote their unrelated agendas.
The NY Times first published a shocking expose’ showing Marco Rubio had 4 traffic tickets in 18 years, and his wife had a bunch more. Not unpaid tickets mind you… they just had some traffic tickets.
You know, like normal people that have not been chauffeur driven everywhere they go since the day in the early 90s their husband was elected president.
This amazing revelation brought guffaws from social media, with the NY Times editorial board bearing the brunt of the laughter. The Twitter hashtag #RubioCrimeSpree was active for days as people imagined his other possible sins… ranging from things like returning tapes to Blockbuster without rewinding to failing to pay library fines in a timely manner.
Someone has GOT to keep an eye on him.
And so the NY Times did… following up the story a few days later with the news that when he received an $800k book advance, Rubio “splurged” and bought “an $80k luxury speedboat”!
And of course the liberal Twittersphere began furiously breaking out all their puppet IDs to publicly denounce Rubio for his vile crime of boat ownership.
Funny part: Just as soon as the left started handing out the pitchforks to villagers, some spoilsport published a picture of the offending vehicle.
It’D be nice as small (24 ft) seagoing FISHING boats go, but you probably don’t want to enter it in a race, or get too far offshore for that matter. It makes the SS Minnow look like the QE2.
As @JohnEkdahl points out in a scale overlay… Rubio’s luxury speedboat would float like a cork in a bathtub in Hillary’s pool.
And then people pointed out such fun facts as what this boat looks like next to John Kerry’s boat, which is several times longer than and which he does NOT dock in his home state in order to avoid about half a mil in excise taxes. [Wait, I thought Dems LIKED to see the rich pay taxes?]
And naturally there were references to Ted Kennedy’s choice of luxury watercraft.
Next the discussion turned to tongue-in-cheek mention what an evil one-percenter Rubio must be to own such a magnificent craft. One comparison showed his residence vs Hillary’s…
So basically twice in the span of a week the NY Times staff has provided mass hilarity to the social media world without trying. The reporter… Michael Barbaro… responded by calling those who laughed at his partisan hack job “haters” and blocking them on Twitter. And of course the more petulant he got, the more people laughed.
And here is Michael Barbaro’s clever method of handling criticism of his media bias.
Seriously… who would NOT want to be a fly on the wall at a NY Times editorial board meeting? Imagine what it must look like.
SENIOR EDITOR: Alright, we need a serious piece on a presidential candidate. Ideas?
REPORTER 1: I hear there’s evidence Hillary used her position as Sec of State to work around US govt sanctions in return for “charitable donations” from foreign governments.
REPORTER 2: Let’s not forget she was caught straight faced lying to a grieving mother at a funeral, claiming her kid that was killed in a terrorist attack was actually murdered by angry film critics.
REPORTER 3: I heard Rubio owns a nice boat.
SENIOR EDITOR: Quick… GET ME THAT BOAT STORY NOW!
C’mon, New York Times. We KNOW you’re liberal political hacks, but for the sake of appearances you might at least PRETEND you’re journalists. Occasionally. Right?
Watching Matt Lauer interview Jim (Sheldon Cooper) Parsons about his role on Broadway playing God. Matt giggles that some might not like him playing God, and Parsons replies “What can I say… haters gonna hate”. They both chuckle and continue chatting.
Gee. No mention he might “incite violence” by Shiite Baptists? So if some Catholic objects, THEY are the “haters”, not the one that offended them? Watched the news lately?
Similarly, in a glowing review of Broadway hit “Book of Mormon”, the NYT says it’s “… blasphemous, scurrilous and more foul-mouthed than David Mamet on a blue streak. But trust me when I tell you that its heart is as pure as that of a Rodgers and Hammerstein show.”
Wait a sec. It’s “blasphemous“? Oh my. Aren’t you worried it’ll CAUSE violence?
The same New York Times is all over Pam Geller for her blatant and intentional “disrespect” of Islam… and the AP News crew is openly amazed she “has no regrets”.
Yeah, she’s just a troublemaker isn’t she? How DARE she think she can mock a religion? Right?
I’m NOT suggesting the self-crowned “elite” must temper their antics to avoid offending religions. The 1st amendment says they CAN. I don’t have to like it. I can change the channel, read a different paper, even boycott their sponsors… but I cannot MAKE them “respect” my religion, and I for sure cannot threaten violence.
Just trying to figure out how they can’t see the blatant hypocrisy of granting Islam a preferred status.
If the media didn’t have double-standards… they’d have none at all.
If I tell you MY religion prohibits profanity, therefore *I* won’t cuss, that’s legit.
If I tell you MY religion prohibits profanity, therefore YOU can’t cuss AND I can murder you if you do… your response might be a few choice 4 letter words and a call to the police.
That is the issue involved in the Garland attack, only instead of profanity, it was disrespect for the “prophet of Islam”. After years of protests in the US and other western countries by Islamists seeking to tell others to follow their own religious tenets or die… Pamela Geller’s group pushed back.
In response to Geller’s push back, to jihadi wannabes drove over 1000 miles with hi-capacity rifles and body armor to shoot up a meeting in Garland TX. They wounded 1 security guard, then both got killed by a Texas traffic cop with a pistol.
Oddly, the response of the US media is not to castigate the jihadi-boys, but to hound Geller… Why did you intentionally incite violence?
Newsflash: That is EXACTLY like telling a rape survivor she incited rape by wearing that dress.
We do NOT live under Sharia law. Islam does NOT dictate what we may say or do. If you want Sharia law… move to another country. We will push back.
Meanwhile, current score:
Texas – 2
Murdering Islamic Dirtbags – 0
Don’t even think about telling US citizens we must follow your rules.
Don’t mess with Texas. We WILL shoot back.
That last part isn’t a threat. It’s a proven fact.
Welcome to Texas. It’s a Sharia Free Zone. Please set your watches forward 1400 years. Worship whatever you want, but don’t tell us to do it too. Thank you.