particularly from younger people (35 and under would work)
One important thing that fundamentalist Christians have been great at is pushing their sheltered, homeschooled kids into politics. And those kids are really fantastic at campaigning and debating and fundraising and they’re going to be fucking up the senate and law courts in a generation or two and yeah, the rest of the country needs to get on that ASAP.
It's a genius idea because homeschooled kids generally don't wreck their future political careers on twitter
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
David Cameron fucked a dead pig in the mouth and I never even got the impression that people were terribly shocked by it, I got a real sense of "But of course he did" from the UK
Turns out when you have one side with absolutely no scruples versus a side with some scruples some of the time, the former group ends up winning.
They do have one scruple: be outwardly unfailingly polite.
There’s one guy I debate online a lot (he’s 18 and I engage because he’s usually the only person to pipe up) and all of his bigoted views are always wrapped up and presented in the most polite language. And he seems to believe (as do others) that this alone elevates him above the rest of us. In fact, he’s declared that the only thing that offends him is swearing and that his mother will beat him for swearing.
I’ve seen this amongst online parent friends, too. Their kids can be the meanest little shits and can believe all kinds of horrid things but if they swear or forget their ma’ams or sirs, that’s it. Worst child ever.
And I get the impression that in many social circles, that’s all that does matter. Be polite in your use of language and you can get away with almost anything. It also seems to unite people on the right - they may not agree with everything their politician stands for but the minutiae doesn’t matter, as long as their politician looks and sounds like a Nice person.
It's kinda dangerous, especially for people near the top, to assume they'll always have the moral high ground
+10
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
I feel like most Democrats are in a desperate panic as they watch the America they tried hard to build towards begin to slip quickly into an authoritarian nightmare the likes of which they never thought they would see. Any prominent member of their party coming under suspicion of wrongdoing/scandal only further exacerbates that panic.
David Cameron fucked a dead pig in the mouth and I never even got the impression that people were terribly shocked by it, I got a real sense of "But of course he did" from the UK
Of course he did. You ever hear of anyone fucking a live pig in the mouth?
That shit's dangerous.
Turns out when you have one side with absolutely no scruples versus a side with some scruples some of the time, the former group ends up winning.
They do have one scruple: be outwardly unfailingly polite.
There’s one guy I debate online a lot (he’s 18 and I engage because he’s usually the only person to pipe up) and all of his bigoted views are always wrapped up and presented in the most polite language. And he seems to believe (as do others) that this alone elevates him above the rest of us. In fact, he’s declared that the only thing that offends him is swearing and that his mother will beat him for swearing.
I’ve seen this amongst online parent friends, too. Their kids can be the meanest little shits and can believe all kinds of horrid things but if they swear or forget their ma’ams or sirs, that’s it. Worst child ever.
And I get the impression that in many social circles, that’s all that does matter. Be polite in your use of language and you can get away with almost anything. It also seems to unite people on the right - they may not agree with everything their politician stands for but the minutiae doesn’t matter, as long as their politician looks and sounds like a Nice person.
This is 100% intentional, when you enter a debate with the implication that the facts don't actually matter. When facts don't matter, the debate then becomes, to them, about remaining polite and civil, even if the ideas behind the words are completely abhorrent. So according to their own warped rules, whoever 'loss their temper' first, loses.
Pelosi has, in the past, worked to push out members involved in inappropriate behavior. But in public, on a popular Sunday show, she ran through a list of excuses for Conyers that are the very reasons women are afraid to come forward and report sexual harassment in the first place:
Conyers is the credible one. He is an “icon,” she told Todd. The woman? “I do not know who they are. Do you?” she asked the host. “They have not really come forward.” (The woman came forward three years ago, dogging her case through an opaque process in Congress that bars her from speaking about it. She spoke to BuzzFeed anonymously.)
Conyers is the real victim. Pelosi is withholding judgment until Conyers gets “due process,” she said. But Conyers got something better than due process. Congress wrote the rules for how sexual harassment claims are handled, exempting members from requirements that most other employers must follow. The woman, meanwhile, got less. She didn’t have a right to free lawyer. She couldn’t speak about her case. And it took months. Then she couldn’t find a job on the Hill. “I was basically blackballed,” she told BuzzFeed. “There was nowhere I could go.”
Conyers is a good man. “He understands what is at stake here and he’ll do the right thing,” Pelosi said, explaining how he’s going to think about what he’s done. He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon. “A good deal of that would be done by the Judiciary Committee. And I know that John would take that into consideration.” The woman, meanwhile, first raised her complaints three years ago. Will she get to explain what’s at stake for herself?
Conyers cares about women. “He’s done a great deal to protect women,” Pelosi said, pointing out he worked on the Violence Against Women Act. How, she implied, could he have hurt a woman who works for him?
Conyers’ behavior isn’t so bad. “Was it one accusation? Was it two?” Pelosi said when talking through how she is considering Conyers’s case. In an age of serial predators, maybe one woman’s story shouldn’t count.
Did they update this story? There's no note that they updated it, but it mentions that Conyers announced he's stepping down from the Judiciary Committee, which seems at odds with the point "He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon" which is still in the article.
David Cameron fucked a dead pig in the mouth and I never even got the impression that people were terribly shocked by it, I got a real sense of "But of course he did" from the UK
They even made a documentary about it, Black Mirror I think
I'm just kidding, the Prime Minister in Black Mirror was compelled against his will to fuck a pig, Dave Cameron did it for fun and pleasure and the acclaim of his peers
Did they update this story? There's no note that they updated it, but it mentions that Conyers announced he's stepping down from the Judiciary Committee, which seems at odds with the point "He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon" which is still in the article.
I'm not sure what that has to do with Nancy Pelosi, a party leader (if not the defacto leader herself) saying shitty things.
Turns out when you have one side with absolutely no scruples versus a side with some scruples some of the time, the former group ends up winning.
They do have one scruple: be outwardly unfailingly polite.
There’s one guy I debate online a lot (he’s 18 and I engage because he’s usually the only person to pipe up) and all of his bigoted views are always wrapped up and presented in the most polite language. And he seems to believe (as do others) that this alone elevates him above the rest of us. In fact, he’s declared that the only thing that offends him is swearing and that his mother will beat him for swearing.
I’ve seen this amongst online parent friends, too. Their kids can be the meanest little shits and can believe all kinds of horrid things but if they swear or forget their ma’ams or sirs, that’s it. Worst child ever.
And I get the impression that in many social circles, that’s all that does matter. Be polite in your use of language and you can get away with almost anything. It also seems to unite people on the right - they may not agree with everything their politician stands for but the minutiae doesn’t matter, as long as their politician looks and sounds like a Nice person.
This is 100% intentional, when you enter a debate with the implication that the facts don't actually matter. When facts don't matter, the debate then becomes, to them, about remaining polite and civil, even if the ideas behind the words are completely abhorrent. So according to their own warped rules, whoever 'loss their temper' first, loses.
Oh, I know it’s intentional... it’s just still disquieting that they really believe saying ‘shit’ makes you a worse person than someone who is abusive or racist or whatever.
I tried to argue once that my kids uttering a swear word didn’t matter to me so long as they were kind and principled people and this argument was literally not understood, for some people swearing is the ultimate indicator of an evil person.
I always do remain polite and civil in debate since I know that’s how they work, but still.
Turns out when you have one side with absolutely no scruples versus a side with some scruples some of the time, the former group ends up winning.
They do have one scruple: be outwardly unfailingly polite.
There’s one guy I debate online a lot (he’s 18 and I engage because he’s usually the only person to pipe up) and all of his bigoted views are always wrapped up and presented in the most polite language. And he seems to believe (as do others) that this alone elevates him above the rest of us. In fact, he’s declared that the only thing that offends him is swearing and that his mother will beat him for swearing.
I’ve seen this amongst online parent friends, too. Their kids can be the meanest little shits and can believe all kinds of horrid things but if they swear or forget their ma’ams or sirs, that’s it. Worst child ever.
And I get the impression that in many social circles, that’s all that does matter. Be polite in your use of language and you can get away with almost anything. It also seems to unite people on the right - they may not agree with everything their politician stands for but the minutiae doesn’t matter, as long as their politician looks and sounds like a Nice person.
The basics of authoritarianism: know who your Master is.
DisruptedCapitalist on
"Simple, real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time." -Mustrum Ridcully in Terry Pratchett's Hogfather p. 142 (HarperPrism 1996)
+2
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
There are a number of evangelical types (especially in the rural areas, where I ran into these people a lot growing up) who interpret the unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit as cussing, because their theology is very bad. It's the same type of people who believe that gay sex is worst than murder because murder only hurts a person while two guys banging hurts God somehow. When the beginning and end of all morality is "obey the top without question" any and all the rules are just arbitrary meaningless nonsense.
The thing that I remember from U.K. folk at the time of the Cameron pigfucking news came around was "Yes, of course he did. Of course he would do that."
Posts
it absolutely does''
edit: i see this has been covered, well I'm confirming con sarnit
https://vocaroo.com/i/s0YqK2EnGK8g
Switch Friend Code: SW-1406-1275-7906
One important thing that fundamentalist Christians have been great at is pushing their sheltered, homeschooled kids into politics. And those kids are really fantastic at campaigning and debating and fundraising and they’re going to be fucking up the senate and law courts in a generation or two and yeah, the rest of the country needs to get on that ASAP.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I think we're past the point where anything you've said in the past can hurt your chance of being elected.
If you join the GOP, yeah.
finally, an advantage
Only if you're a conservative.
Switch Friend Code: SW-1406-1275-7906
Ed Miliband ate a pork sandwich in a slightly akward way and got destroyed for it
David Cameron fucked a dead pig in the mouth and that somehow ended up endearing
They do have one scruple: be outwardly unfailingly polite.
There’s one guy I debate online a lot (he’s 18 and I engage because he’s usually the only person to pipe up) and all of his bigoted views are always wrapped up and presented in the most polite language. And he seems to believe (as do others) that this alone elevates him above the rest of us. In fact, he’s declared that the only thing that offends him is swearing and that his mother will beat him for swearing.
I’ve seen this amongst online parent friends, too. Their kids can be the meanest little shits and can believe all kinds of horrid things but if they swear or forget their ma’ams or sirs, that’s it. Worst child ever.
And I get the impression that in many social circles, that’s all that does matter. Be polite in your use of language and you can get away with almost anything. It also seems to unite people on the right - they may not agree with everything their politician stands for but the minutiae doesn’t matter, as long as their politician looks and sounds like a Nice person.
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Of course he did. You ever hear of anyone fucking a live pig in the mouth?
That shit's dangerous.
This is 100% intentional, when you enter a debate with the implication that the facts don't actually matter. When facts don't matter, the debate then becomes, to them, about remaining polite and civil, even if the ideas behind the words are completely abhorrent. So according to their own warped rules, whoever 'loss their temper' first, loses.
Did they update this story? There's no note that they updated it, but it mentions that Conyers announced he's stepping down from the Judiciary Committee, which seems at odds with the point "He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon" which is still in the article.
Wait what
I'm just kidding, the Prime Minister in Black Mirror was compelled against his will to fuck a pig, Dave Cameron did it for fun and pleasure and the acclaim of his peers
And then I went and watched it after the election.
Ed Balls.
Before the election it was the worst episode of the show. After the election it makes you think that Brooker might be an actual witch.
Oh, I know it’s intentional... it’s just still disquieting that they really believe saying ‘shit’ makes you a worse person than someone who is abusive or racist or whatever.
I tried to argue once that my kids uttering a swear word didn’t matter to me so long as they were kind and principled people and this argument was literally not understood, for some people swearing is the ultimate indicator of an evil person.
I always do remain polite and civil in debate since I know that’s how they work, but still.
I really ought to watch Black Mirror for my own health I guess
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
Also is it me or does cuckolding show up as a plot point more often than one might think, in that show?
The basics of authoritarianism: know who your Master is.