grumpyduck
grumpyduck's JournalDid anybody believe the Ted vs Fucker show?
Just curious. We know Ted is a spineless POS, but that whole exchange looked like something out of a TV cop show interrogation. Scripted. Cliched. Overwrought with emotion. Or a bit of Spanish Inquisition. Ol' Fucker bringing wayward Teddy "back into the fold."
I guess I'm just getting more cynical about these assholes by the day. So much of what they do seems to be theatre for their lemmings, and it's more obvious by the day that they think their lemmings are morons.
I don't believe the repuqs in Congress "believe the big lie."
I don't believe it for a second. I think they know it's a lie but they're playing along with it for their asshole followers.
Plus, of course, they'd rather die slowly and painfully than ever admit they were wrong.
Is it possible tfg or vlad are blackmailing some of these repuqs?
I'm sure this has come up before, but it just seems like the question needs to be asked. In public.
I can't wait until the repuqs start accusing Biden
of bad-mouthing tfg. "Not presidential." "He shouldn't do that." "Disgusting." Blah blah blah.
One more bit of hypocrisy from the repuqs.
Just struck me... all this ranting and raving about Twitter suspending that asshole's account... the repuqs would be the first to take a page from the Russian playbook and put a clamp on the press.
Now, you try and say that to tfg's lemmings, and see how far you get. Arrogant ignorance knows no bounds.
Pet peeves?
Okay, it's getting close to the end of the year, so maybe it's time for a little fun venting.
What are some of your pet peeves? They don't have to be political.
Mine include:
People who talk way too much, and often just for the sake of talking.
Busybodies.
The "It's ok for me to do it, but it's not okay for you to do it" crowd.
Useless "customer service" reps.
Those multiple-choice, multiple-level phone menus.
People who don't listen to what you're saying because they can' t wait to jump in and say something. Or they cut you off.
I have more, but you get the idea.
From SFGate: Nancy Pelosi, London Breed and Gavin Newsom escalate rhetoric..."
"...on San Francisco retail theft"
https://www.sfgate.com/bay-area-politics/article/Pelosi-Breed-Newsom-on-crime-16704428.php?IPID=SFGate-HP-CP-Spotlight
Yup, that's exactly what it sounds like after a while: rhetoric. Talk. Blah blah.
And then Nancy says, “There is an attitude of lawlessness in our country that springs from I don’t know where ... and we cannot have that lawlessness become the norm.” Ummm, Nancy, have you considered thinking about tfg?
So, did Faux set their own tree on fire?
I haven't this posted here yet (sorry if it's a duplicate), so here goes:
Did Faux set their own tree on fire? Or, okay, do we think they did? I know the cops arrested someone, but we don't know the details yet. Personally, I wouldn't put it past Faux to do this, especially considering the coverage they've given to it.
If Congresional Democrats were an NFL team...
I hate sports analogies, mostly because iI'm not that much of a sports fan, but it struck me a couple of mornings ago that, if Democrats were an NFL team, they would have the worst record of all time.
They want to run the ball right down the middle of the field right into the end zone. Never mind the tackles: they don't matter. They're totally focused on the end zone.
Defense? Who cares about defense? They don' t need defense.
Meanwhile the fucking requbs are playing the game and eating the Democrats alive.
Sorry, but that's my opinion based on the last few years of following the news.
Feedback on an idea, please.
First, a bit of background.
I've detested politics since I was a kid and listened to my Dad talk politics every chance he got. He didn't do it all the time by any means (he had other interests too), and wasn't obnoxious about it, but he really cared and expressed his opinions without pushing them. But, for me as a little kid with other interests, it was overexposure. If someone had told me ten years ago that I would hang out in a political forum, I would have told them something along the lines of "you're nuts."
What got me to come here? That thing that infested our country via the Oval Office a few years ago. But I've learned a lot here, among them being how left and right wing media outlets report the name bit of news. The Douchey-Psaki saga is an example: many posters here have suggested that Faux Noise edits their exchanges to make it seem like Douchey "gets" Psaki when it's the other way around.
So I'm curious whether a YouTube show, focusing on how specific bits of news are reported by both sides, would be interesting to the masses. For instance, the RW scandal over Kamala's cooking pot vs how it was reported elsewhere, or how Jen Psaki answered Peter's question vs how Faux edited it. Basically a Brian Tyler Cohen type of show, but long on the actual news clips and short on extraneous commentary.
Hope that's clear. If not, I'll elaborate.
Whaddaya think?
Profile Information
Member since: Sat Dec 16, 2017, 01:51 PMNumber of posts: 6,235
