Lurker > Sephiroth1288

How would a gun class or a background check have stopped Cruz
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

@Kineth posted...

This and the whole "well-regulated" qualifier in the amendment.

;)

@Zeeak4444 posted...

To clarify as well, the support has been on upholding the tradition of prohibiting the carrying of unusually or dangerous weapons, which an AR can and should fall under.

Be honest

You have no fucking clue what an AR-15 even is, do you?



@UnfairRepresent posted...

The Nazis promoted Animal Cruelty Laws, Drove Cars, Drank Milk, Went to school. You need more than "Well they did it therefore it's bad"

It wasn't just the Nazis. Literally every tyrant in the past 100 years has imposed strict gun bans.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

I think Trudeau is well aware that mankind means all of humankind. The entire point of that argument is that language plays a role in making "man" be the default and "women" something other than the default. So people make an effort to change the way they speak to not unconsciously perpetuate this idea that the norm is being male.
So if you're gonna make fun of him, make fun of that and not the notion that he doesn't know the etymology. He knows.

Which makes his statement even more stupid since he's aware it's an empty and pedantic sentiment.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

NinjaBreakfast posted...

Just japes itt, having a good ol time laughing at this and definitely not getting 'offended' no sir

Yeah, I'm so sure these people actually desire a war with Canada.

Chillax bro.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Aaaand more jobs sent overseas.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Balrog0 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Obviously the chart is just measuring tax brackets before any deductions.

so it's utterly useless 'in reality'

If you include deductions then you would save MORE money than what's shown on the chart

Which still flies completely in the face of the claim that the middle class didn't get a big tax cut.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

NinjaBreakfast posted...

While Trudeau is an awful centrist and this is a pretty meaningless, needlessly contrived gesture, it's always funny seeing the NeverOffended crew get so riled up by s*** like this.

Sephiroth1288 posted...

where I point out how ridiculous it is to say a person is offended when they're making fun of something

---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Balrog0 posted...

yes, they are, actually

at least if you are pretending that is the amount people at that income level will actually pay

Obviously the chart is just measuring tax brackets before any deductions. That doesn't mean the numbers are wrong.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

FrenchCrunch posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

FrenchCrunch posted...

it's just so hard to believe you're real. you're such a dramatic dude

Lol bro I just made a topic about a dumb politician. Chillax.

i'm referring to some of your responses in said topic tho

The ones where I point out how ridiculous it is to say a person is offended when they're making fun of something?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

CiIantro posted...

I like how you think a random excel document is somehow proof.

Are any of the numbers wrong? No? Well then.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

FrenchCrunch posted...

it's just so hard to believe you're real. you're such a dramatic dude

Lol bro I just made a topic about a dumb politician. Chillax.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

shockthemonkey posted...

Notice how this ends at 2018

And? The cuts last til 2025.

Or do you think the cuts should be permanent? Because if so I agree with you!
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

FrenchCrunch posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

You know, if you have nothing to defend this guy with, you don't have to respond to my topic. You can just ignore it.

You won't though, because you can't stand the idea that someone on your side is getting ridiculed.

man do you listen to yourself

You'd agree with me if every time you made a topic the same peanut gallery accused you of being "triggered" by the subject matter when it's obvious they're only saying that because they got nothing else.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

shockthemonkey posted...

GregShmedley posted...

Doom_Art posted...

Can't decide which is dumber

Trudeau saying this

Or the usual folks getting triggered over it

Probably the latter

Why is it that anyone on the opposite side of the political spectrum discussing things they think are outrageous is considered being "triggered" to you?

What else would you call it when someone is offended over nothing?

Implying you need to be offended by something in order to make fun of it

You know, if you have nothing to defend this guy with, you don't have to respond to my topic. You can just ignore it.

You won't though, because you can't stand the idea that someone on your side is getting ridiculed.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Meanwhile, in reality,


---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

shockthemonkey posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Kombucha posted...

0TiamaT0 posted...

This kind of shit is why so many people voted for that idiot, Trump. And really, who can blame them?

because this is so much worse than gutting net neutrality.

Yeah, gutting Net Neutrality so that the internet now works like it did in 2015.

The internet sure became a Capitalist hellscape since that happened, huh?

Its hilarious how youre still parroting crappy talking points that have been completely disproven because you have nothing going on in your life other than being a partisan troll on GameFAQs.

What has been disproven? That the policy that was repealed only existed since 2015? Or that the internet is clearly not a hellscape like all the doomsayers claimed it would be?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

bobtuse posted...

jpenny2 posted...

bobtuse posted...

Great, now we have to build two walls :/

You'd have to build a third one along the border in Alaska. :/

Yeah, I considered this but omitted it to keep the joke concise. Besides, maybe Alaska is a lost cause.

Alaska has a lot of guns, they can protect themselves.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Are we really supposed to buy that Trump "broke the seal" on claims of treason?

Democrats have been accusing him of that since before he was ever elected.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Kombucha posted...

0TiamaT0 posted...

This kind of shit is why so many people voted for that idiot, Trump. And really, who can blame them?

because this is so much worse than gutting net neutrality.

Yeah, gutting Net Neutrality so that the internet now works like it did in 2015.

The internet sure became a Capitalist hellscape since that happened, huh?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

CrimsonRage posted...

why do you care about this

Because it perfectly encapsulates the senseless appeal to histrionics that characterizes modern feminists. So I thought I'd share it.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Fam_Fam posted...

because maternal love is referring to the love of a mother specifically, but the use of mankind, presumably is not. this is not a contradiction.

But she wasn't referring to a woman
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

You can't make this shit up



Nevermind that the etymology of the word "man" is inclusive of all human beings. Also note how he has no problem with the phrase "maternal love".

What a tool
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Waluigi7 posted...

It doesn't even have anything to do with the topic.

Was in response to post 36 obviously.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

And I'm starting to sound like a broken clock here, because people still disagree about this.

I'm aware. It doesn't matter though, because they're mistaken.

scar the 1 posted...

And even when I explicitly mention that you always derail the discussion with whataboutism, you keep doing it, lmao

Sephiroth1288 posted...

I used your specific example to point out how you can apply the "fascism" label to progressives just as easily as you can to Trump, not to deflect, but to illustrate how worthless your definition is.

---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

A_Good_Boy posted...

Mal always picks up the worst liberal habits when it's convenient for him

Don't you think it's kind of a problem how racist and sexist the left is when it involves literally anyone who disagrees with them when they're supposedly the "anti-bigot" ones?


---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

Should the far left be criticized for bad behavior? Hell yeah. But what he's doing is a bit more refined than that. He's engaging in a quite reachy whataboutism exercise. Look, I'm suggesting to compare Trump's rhetoric with a definition of fascism. I'm adding the caveat that this is one of many definitions, so it's really problematic to try and determine if someone is indeed fascist.

No it isn't. You just need to judge them by what makes fascism unique the plain old authoritarianism. I used your specific example to point out how you can apply the "fascism" label to progressives just as easily as you can to Trump, not to deflect, but to illustrate how worthless your definition is.

scar the 1 posted...

Which, again, is classic whataboutism. I rarely see him discuss the actual merits of Trump being, or not being, fascist.

Well he isn't, compared to any actual fascists. His economic policies could not be more opposite and while his rhetoric is authoritarian, his actions aren't. For example, criticizing the media is significantly less like a fascist than imprisoning media whistleblowers under the espionage act, which Obama was really fond of doing. Suspiciously, the progressives calling Trump a fascist didn't seem to have a problem with fascism for the previous 8 years. Weird, huh?

foreveraIone posted...

Ben Shapiro isn't a fascist.

just a plain racist

https://mobile.twitter.com/benshapiro/status/25712847277?lang=en

Literally have to go back 8 years to find anything that can be interpreted as racist from him.

I think I've made my point.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

It's amazing how racist progressives get when the minority is a republican


---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

creativerealms posted...

Nomadic View posted...

r4X0r posted...

Alright, tell us what you think "fascism" means.

Fascism just means not a SJW apparently.

Nope.

Sephiroth1288 posted...

^ That's the guy the left insists is a fascist

---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

The quote was more in response to you trying to conflate fascism with contemporary left-wing politics.

I submit that it's a lot more applicable to them than it is to contemporary right-wing politics. Especially after Obama.

scar the 1 posted...

I gave you a link with various definitions of fascism made by scholars, if you take issue with their definitions take it up with them. I'm not going to defend them, I'm just saying that "unquestionably" is demonstrably false, since it's very much up for debate.

And I explained why all the scholars calling fascism "like capitalism" are wrong. It's not.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Um, I think he's referring to how Democrats wouldn't applaud for the anthem or the flag
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Well, they aren't known for being respectful of women.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

Yeah, that was why I quoted it. Thanks for repeating it back to me.

A word being meaningless in common parlance =/= the word has no real definition. Fascism does indeed have a definition.

scar the 1 posted...

And that's fine! I opposed you using the term "unquestionably" since that was literally false.

Unless you can explain to me how a collectivist system of government ostensibly controlled by the workers which controls the means of production is "right wing", fascism is virtually unquestionably leftist. That is to say, unquestionable to anyone who knows anything about fascism.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

It's quite literally questioned, since people still disagree on it. If it were "unquestionably", then there wouldn't have to be an entire wikipedia page summarizing different definitions of fascism. I think it's a little amusing that you're calling Orwell's description dishonest, considering you've been so prone to cite him in the past.

Orwell in that quote isn't saying that Fascism has no actual definition. It does. Fascism is a form of government that has numerous consistencies between different fascist political parties. He's saying that the term has become essentially meaningless because people in common parlance use it to just mean "bad".

And yes obviously there are people who question whether Fascism is right or left-wing. I submit though that, economically speaking, it is far to the left for many reasons that I've already given.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Omnislasher posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

he's never been involved in a case where a company moving out would destroy a community

ok prove it

"Prove something doesn't exist"

I don't think you know how proof works.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Omnislasher posted...

i don't know what you think it is that i have an onus to provide evidence of.

you made the charge that he is a slanderer. you've given no basis for this accusation. that seems to be the beginning and end of this.

My basis for the accusation is that he's never been involved in a case where a company moving out would destroy a community even though he declares that's what he threatens to tell people.

How many more times do you need me to repeat this
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

the president accused democrats who didn't clap for him to be traitors and unamerican

There is a difference in a fascist and someone just talking shit.

Also I think he was specifically referring to them not clapping for the anthem and the flag
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

I wouldn't say unquestionably. I think that page alone makes it clear that it is definitely questioned.

Well it's not, since every fascist regime has done things in that way. I don't know what kind of rhetorical voodoo one has to cast to make "the state seized the means of production" a right-wing economic policy, but they would be wrong.

Calling fascism a form of capitalism is extremely dishonest. While it's true that Nazi Germany privatized some industries (that is to say, allowed them to be run by private individuals), they also imposed heavy regulations on those "private" businesses down to telling them what they are to produce, at what price, how quickly they are to produce it, and how much to pay their workers. The businesses were nationalized in every meaningful sense. Ergo, way more socialist than capitalist. Certainly not free-market.

If you want a real example of a right-wing dictator, look up Augusto Pinochet. The differences between him and what the Nazis did economically will be immediately obvious.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Also



^ That's the guy the left insists is a fascist
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

At any rate, that wikipedia page serves as a pretty good introduction to trying to define fascism. For example it elaborates quite a bit on the similarities/differences between fascism and socialism according to different scholars.

Well I'd imagine they have to, since fascism is just an offshoot of Marxist socialism. In fascism, the state owns the means of production, the economy is centrally-planned, quasi-Keynesian jobs programs put in place solely to get people to work, etc.

Fascism is unquestionably a leftist form of government on an economic level, and everything I quoted from your source (and attributed to modern-day progressives) are actually just facets of any authoritarian regime, be it Fascist, Stalinist, Maoist, Pinochet-ist, etc. That's why singling those out is so easy to apply to anyone who has authoritarian leanings. That's why it's so easy to apply it to all sides as long as you're willing to cherrypick the examples.

I will point out though that Trump is significantly less authoritarian than Obama. And apparently that therefore means he is less fascist, according to that wiki article.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

scar the 1 posted...

There are many defining traits of fascism, and authoritarianism is far from enough. Furthermore, while gerrymandering is indeed terrible, it's a tactic that has been used by both parties over the years.
The recently deceased Umberto Eco has a quite popular list of traits that he thought defined fascism. Keep in mind that scholars think this is a good starting point, however it's still not enough to perfectly classify a party as fascist. That's because scholars still can't really agree on exactly what fascism is. Anyway, read this and see if you can find any similarities with Trump rhetoric:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#Umberto_Eco

I found this really interesting actually, but not for the reasons you might think

"The Cult of Tradition", characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction.

^ Like an obsession with "multiculturalism" even though many of the other cultures one seeks to merge with are the polar opposite of social justice

"The Rejection of modernism", which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity.

^ Like rejecting the precepts of freedom of expression for all, the Socratic method, and scientific realities that go against one's presupposed conclusions

"The Cult of Action for Action's Sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection.

^ Basically the definition of "progressivism" (change) as it relates to "conservatism" (no change)

"Disagreement Is Treason" Fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action

^ Like calling anyone who cirticizes you a "deplorable", staring a McCarthyist crackdown on anyone who doesn't identify as a feminist, deplatforming speakers who you don't like, calling people who disagree with you racists and Nazis even though they say nothing bigoted...

"Fear of Difference", which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate,

^ Kind of like those who are hostile to any diversity that doesn't relate to immutable characteristics like skin color and sex. (Just listen to how the left talks about people like Ben Carson)

"Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class", fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.

^ Let's be honest, all politicians try to do this.

"Obsession with a Plot" and the hyping-up of an enemy threat.

^ Like continually insisting there is an illegal Russian plot to bolster your political enemies even though no proof of such a thing has materialized

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak."

^ Let's be honest, all politicians try to do this.

"Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy" because "Life is Permanent Warfare"

^ Like the kind of treatment all leftists get when they dare to meet eye-to-eye with the right. See: Bill Nye, Sam Harris, Bret Weinstein, Dave Rubin, Laci Green...

I think you get the point
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Tyranthraxus posted...

0AbsoluteZero0 posted...

I certainly wouldnt argue that Dems havent done similar things before

they actually don't in this case. Like, for every 30 gerrymandered red districts you'll find 1 gerrymandered blue district and it's not even gerrymandered half as bad.

You actually believe Democrats dont engage in gerrymandering just like republicans do?

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

There are other aspects of the current Republican Party that reek of fascism too, such as discrediting any media that isn?t favorable towards their party

Wow, if discrediting journalists is fascist, then Obama was therefore a way bigger fascist than Trump ever was. How many whistleblowers who leaked info to the press do you think Obama imprisoned? 31.

And how many has Trump imprisoned? 0.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

QueenCarly posted...

http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

Most of these are pretty spot on.

Literally all of those are applicable to left-wing dictatorships like Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong Un..

I guess all those guys are fascists?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

epik_fail1 posted...

And considering that he is right about the fake news. For the f***ing THIRD TIME why exactly was he a propagandist of fake news during Obama's presidency?

He stopped with the birther crap when Obama released his birth certificate

CNN and the like however will run a story they know for a fact is fake and then quietly retract it later so that not as many people will know about it so they can damage their political enemies while still pretend to be a trustworthy news source.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Omnislasher posted...

honestly I'm on mobile and I can barely follow what you're saying anymore. doesn't seem to be making sense. I'll try to process when I'm on PC again although it doesn't seem worthwhile

What a weak-ass excuse. My question to you is the same one I asked yesterday in post 53. Can you or can you not verify that what he's saying is the truth?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Omnislasher posted...

I'm gonna keep sharing these every week and you special few can keep claiming he's a 'goon' or a 'nutcase'
reasonable will decide for themselves and most likely judge that he isn't

Yeah about that, how are you so sure he's not a liar even though you've admitted to not being able to verify his claims?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

foreveraIone posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

mustachedmystic posted...

A conservative calling out a liberal for lacking compassion is like Anchorage calling Chicago cold. Or an elephant calling a hippo fat.

If you only have compassion for people insofar as which specific identity group they belong to, you don't actually have compassion.

lol this applies to conservatives far more than anyone.

you people only care about white conservative Americans

Actually I care about people who obey the law.

But nowadays, insisting that people obey the law or face legal consequences makes you a racist somehow
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

metralo posted...

conservatives get absolutely giddy at the fact of human beings being stripped from their families

I don't know where you've been, but this happens to criminals regardless if you're illegal or not. Do you consider putting a thief in jail to be "stripping them from their families"?

metralo posted...

and trump calling an entire countries people s***holes

Which affects literally nobody except the hysterical media personalities trying to grab ratings.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

mustachedmystic posted...

A conservative calling out a liberal for lacking compassion is like Anchorage calling Chicago cold. Or an elephant calling a hippo fat.

If you only have compassion for people insofar as which specific identity group they belong to, you don't actually have compassion.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Omnislasher posted...

I'd be interested to know where you are finding instances of this type of work being done.

He has a fucking website which he regularly updates with the shit he does. He never misses an opportunity to boast about his successes.

So I reiterate: he is a liar and a goon. He threatens business owners who are unfortunate enough to have unionized workers with spreading lies about them. There is zero evidence that he has ever saved a community from being destroyed in this way. You claim that he is not lying, but you have no evidence that he has ever done such a thing. Hitchens' razor states that claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, so consider your claim that Wolff is not a liar summarily dismissed ;)
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Trump is right about the fake news.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248