Not stereotyping lol. The education system in small towns is awful and does them a huge disservice. That's more of an indictment on the school system than anything. It churns out undereducated and hateful people. And that's a feature, not a bug.
The New Lounge
- Thread starter hpnole
- Start date
Do you realize what has happened in your town, and why? Your local government wants its citizens uneducated, angry and poor. No better combination to keep them under their thumb so long as they keep the anger pointed away from them.
Your energy would be way better spent trying to fix the problems directly around you instead of defending a billionaire who wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.
Instead of addressing my points, which were all true, you divert.
Like I said earlier, you’ve been trained well. You are a good lil sheep.
What points did you make? That governments in cities make it easier for their populace to get federal assistance? You just made it sound like that's a bad thing lol.
Sorry if I don't directly address every non issue that you spout off lol.
Typical mindless lib. Assumes that there are no minorities in small towns and there are no white privileged poor people in inner cities. Of course it is racism. You are a sorry piece of shit. And you accused me of being the hateful one.
I didn't assume anything, I heard a dog-whistle and pointed it out. And you don't like being accused of being a hateful asshole, maybe try being less of a hateful asshole pumpkin.
If you heard a dogwhistle, that means you are a white supremacist. Dumbass. There was absolutely nothing racist about what I said. There were no undertones. This is the problem with the left. When they can't objectively defend their views, they claim racism. How about this. Small town black people are better people than inner city black people. The issue with that is that we would be generalizing based on race, which wasn't the topic, instead of based on geography. Which was the topic.
I made a broad, and true point about major cities. All you did was say yeah they get assistance. You either refuse to admit it, or can’t comprehend, a big driving force behind the assistance.
Have any of these cities gotten better in the last 50 years? And which party dominates the leadership in these cities? Instead of addressing the points I made, you throw a tantrum and blame it on billionaires.
You’re worse than a sheep, you’re a delusional clown.
Ooookay um, I'd love to see you explain how hearing a dog-whistle makes me a white supremacist. Just because I was raised around it doesn't mean I agree with it.
I've objectively defended all my views. You have not. Why? Because you cannot. Your views are rooted in disdain for anyone who is slightly different from you and your need to choke off any advancement in rights for those people. You are what is commonly referred to as a bigot, and with your recent admission to wanting to further restrict voting rights, a deeply unpatriotic one at that.
My pointing out major issues in small towns and indirectly telling you to hop off TRumps dick is a tantrum? Also, you're right Mac. Governments in cities keep their people full up with federal assistance to keep themselves in power. Care to guess why it works? They like the assistance.
Yup. You've given up. Not that I didn't already know that you were a lazy bum. But you have officially resorted to the laziest of all the accusations the whacky left throws at their opposition, racism and bigotry. You likely have never had any meaningful relationships with minorities, yet think that calling people on the internet, racists and bigots gives you some kind of clout. Probably drive a Subaru or a ford escape covered in bumper stickers.
You literally just acknowledged that the government is keeping the poor dependent on the government. Which keeps them poor. You can't be this dumb.
I’ll put the testing scores of the small towns in my area of northwest nc against the big cities in nc any day of the week.
No, they get them hooked on federal assistance Big difference
On another note, when has the notion of free speech also meant freedom from consequences? It is not cancel culture, it is consequence culture...
And i am in a small town. A lot of sucking at the government teet and the good old boy system in the government. Alot of lawyers who do not know there ass from their hole in the ground and very "the night the lights went out in Georgia" here. Just saying...
These same people talk about how the government pumped crack into the projects to get them addicted to drugs and to make them kill each other over territories. And then they defend the same government for keeping them dependent on government. It has been this way for a long time. Since before Johnson said he would have those (you know what he called them) voting democrat for the next 200 years.
Who decides what the consequences are? I fully agree that just because you have the right to say or express something, that doesn't mean that there aren't consequences for saying or expressing it.
Thirty years ago scientists predicted that climate change was going to end the world by this time
For instance, speaking of the people who say something controversial on tv, get fired, then whine they are being cancelled. You did something and a private business made a decision to remove you and/or fire you. That is how business works! They decided your PR headache is bigger than your worth to the company. It is not a "wokeness". Very strange the party of that supposedly wants small government and hands off private business are so quick to want to interfere and enfore things like restricting a private company pushing for diversity and inclusion.
On the flipside, Kapernick was not.cancelled and I don't believe there was collusion to keep him out of the league. He was a backup and nelt down during the anthem. Put aside your feelings on the issue, teams had to weigh him as a QB vs the PR headache Kapernick would cause. No team deemed him worth it.
On a sidenote, I am a big fan of a singing competition in Europe. At the finals in May, a singer made an obscene gesture and now some venues are cancelling her concert dates. Instead of whining how she is being cancelled, she apologized and is moving on. That is how it is supposed to work.
No offense. But this is just a bunch of words that don't form a meaningful point. It just seems like a half assed attempt to throw shade at conservatives without openly saying what's on your mind.
But to your point. Simply saying something controversial does not warrant being canceled or terminated from your job. What is controversial is subjective and not everything that is controversial is a fireable offense.
For the most part, the people who are being cancelled are those that don't toe the liberal line. Recently there has been a push back against corporations that push the lgtbvqrx agenda on the children, but overwhelmingly it is the left attacking anyone who says or does something that they find controversial. Which is why I asked you who decided the consequences.
Is it really a PR headache? Or is it just a virtue signal/ appeasement to a few loud cry babies on Twitter? In many cases, there’s no real outrage, no marching in the streets. It’s a company curling up in the fetal position, begging to be loved by the Establishment Left. It’d be funny if it weren’t so pathetic
The way it’s supposed to work is if you don’t want to go see a concert, don’t. The venue should carry on as planned and the customers can decide.
Define “uneducated”.To help illustrate my point about a literacy test killing the Republican party, let's looks at the top ten least educated states in the Union and how they voted in 2020
West Virginia 68.6% Trump
Mississippi 57.5% Trump
Louisiana 58.5% Trump
Arkansas 62.4% Trump
Alabama 62% Trump
Oklahoma 65.4% Trump
Nevada 50.1% Biden
Kentucky 62.1% Trump
New Mexico 54.3% Biden
Texas 52.1% Trump
Least Educated States 2024
worldpopulationreview.com
The uneducated hard carry Republicans. It's completely and totally undeniable.
And I guarantee your “educated” ass is in debt to your teeth.
And yet you get irate and call anyone who disagrees with grooming “hateful” and a “homophobe”. Oh the irony.
I love how you guys just assume I am a liberal when in fact I am straight down the middle libertarian. I agree with whomever has what I feel are the best ideas (and realize there can be a difference in how I personally feel and how I politically feel).
I am viewed as leftist by some as a large segment of this country has gone far right so it makes me look extreme.
If you truly feel in private business autonomy and the conservative ideals (I.e. a baker can refuse to make a cake for a same sex couple), then you must also accept that a company can fire you because they perceive you to be racist, sexist, or do not get a vaccine (they are not forcing you, you have a choice).
For instance, my job states I cannot put political signs in my yard. Personally, I disagree with this. Politically, I am fine with this because I know a business can make me dance the tarantella before I come into work if it wants. Kinda funny how a group of people cheered citizens united (treat corporations as people) but then get mad when corporations act as people.
And I am not saying I agree or disagree, but I find it ironic when states get all outraged when the federal government tells them what to do. However, those same state governments turn around and tell local governments what to do.
You labeled me leftist? For what, supporting the notion that a business can choose to hire or fire a person for things they say? That a venue canceled a comedian for things they say? While I personally may disagree with a decision, I politically am ecstatic that a business has the right to make a decision such as this. I thought the pro-business right would support this, didn’t know what it made me leftist.
There are so many false statements im this post. Like what do you mean when you say that states get outraged when the federal government tells them what to do?
Of all that you have said, the funniest thing is that a large segment of the country has gone far right. This has the markings of a leftist's POV. Notice how it is democrats who are losing representatives because they feel the country has gone too far left. You're not seeing republicans going left.
Your comparison between a business using its right to refuse service and a company terminating employees is bogus. The EEOC protects employees from being fired for discriminatory reasons. Firing people for not being vaccinated was and is unconstitutional. Your comment about them not being forced to is one of the most ridiculous stances this country took. Sure, technically you're right. But when you destroy someone's livelihood for making their own decisions about what to put in their body, you're not giving good choices. You're choosing sides.
When it comes to venues canceling or entertainers being canceled. No one is say they don't have a right to cancel them. We're just pointing out the ridiculousness of it and how there are only certain standards for who gets canceled. You still haven't answered who decides what the consequences of actions are.
How is it unconstitutional? Missed that paragraph in the constitution. You are upset about a private business says you have to get a vaccine, but there is a large overlap with people who have no problem telling a woman what they can’t do with their bodies. It sucks, but if you feel that strongly, quit. There are plenty of jobs out there.
And again, whether you perceive it to be ridiculous to be canceled, I celebrate the fact a venue has the freedom to make that call. Because true freedom is recognizing sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.
And with owners, it is all about money and PR, bottom line. An owner or venue decided the money and good PR they could get from canceling a show is better than having the show. They may be right, they may be wrong, but my god they made a choice.
When it comes down to it, it is about $$$. Thinking otherwise is as delusional as people who think Duke basketball is on ESPN all the time because ESPN has a favoritism to Duke…
And again, whether you perceive it to be ridiculous to be canceled, I celebrate the fact a venue has the freedom to make that call. Because true freedom is recognizing sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.
And with owners, it is all about money and PR, bottom line. An owner or venue decided the money and good PR they could get from canceling a show is better than having the show. They may be right, they may be wrong, but my god they made a choice.
When it comes down to it, it is about $$$. Thinking otherwise is as delusional as people who think Duke basketball is on ESPN all the time because ESPN has a favoritism to Duke…
Why wouldn't I give up? The entertainment factor is running low and its not as if you or @Fourteen44 and @Mac9192 actually provide any interesting or stimulating debates, you all just regurgitate the most basic of right wings talking points ad nauseum.
Professor claims children should be exposed to adult genitalia
Journalism professor Dr. Katja Thieme had made the comment in a Twitter post she shared criticizing swimmer and women's rights advocate Riley Gaines.
Unreal
In a basement somewhere, @eldritchorifice is smiling.Professor claims children should be exposed to adult genitalia
Journalism professor Dr. Katja Thieme had made the comment in a Twitter post she shared criticizing swimmer and women's rights advocate Riley Gaines.www.dailymail.co.uk
Unreal
Am I the only one here that thinks eldritch posts like Datt would if he were on the back nine of an 18 pack of Bud Light?
Yet they fly off the handle when the term "grooming" is used. Grooming is when you prepare and how else can you describe this sick thinking than preparing young children for sex.
These are sick people.Professor claims children should be exposed to adult genitalia
Journalism professor Dr. Katja Thieme had made the comment in a Twitter post she shared criticizing swimmer and women's rights advocate Riley Gaines.
Unreal
