Broke Liberals

submitted by TheJamesRocket from (i.imgur.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]TheJamesRocket[S] 16 insightful - 9 fun16 insightful - 8 fun17 insightful - 9 fun -  (12 children)

You mad bro? LOL.

Looks like this meme hit a little too close to home for you.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Which part seems to indicate anger? I don't see any anger in the post. Perhaps: sniveling cuck? That's my usual 'term of endearment' for QBoogaloo MAGAtards. It's cutsie language to describe rapists, murders, frauds, pedos, fascists, American Taliban, gravy seals, traitors, and similar pussies. Nothing angry or mad about any of it. Merely descriptive. Regarding home, I mentioned that only half of one of the descriptions applies to me. LOL, I guess...

[–]TheJamesRocket[S] 12 insightful - 5 fun12 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 5 fun -  (9 children)

It's cutsie language to describe rapists, murders, frauds, pedos, fascists, American Taliban, gravy seals, traitors, and similar pussies.

The fact that you can unironically believe ANY of those things are an accurate description of the average conservative shows how mentally unhinged you are. (And yes, it also hints that you harbor a deep, supressed rage against them) People like you are what is wrong with the political discourse in the U.S. today.

Your political party would quite literally put Americans in FEMA camps for engaging in wrongthink. Fact: Conservatives are not guilty of 90% of the imaginary crimes you accuse them of.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Seems my comments hit a little too close to home.

If you want to discuss politics, rather than LULZ, how's this?:

There are no "Conservatives" in the sense of the original meaning of that term, which addressed Eisenhower conservatives, well into the late 1970s. That's why it made sense to vote for Reagan in 1979. Conservatives were the good guys. They were the response to corrupt yellow dog liberals. After 4 years of Reagan, the Radical Republican was in a position to steal from Social Security, borrow from China, give themselves tax cuts, create Iran/Contra deals, destabilize governments abroad, run up the debt, funnel trillions into the Military Industrial Complex, establish lobbying as a legitimate way of getting money into politics, and many other corrupt developments that continue causing problems today. At last count, the Republican-led government put the US $27 trillion in debt, while also reducing taxes for the 1%. Guess who will pay for it? Wealth has been funneled toward the 1%, from the 99% gradually for the past 30 years, if not longer. What does income inequality to for the 99%. (It causes great suffering.) Who can we thank for this extreme income inequality that puts the US at a similar level as a 3rd world country in economic, educational, retirement, healthcare, environment, and so many other sectors? Radical Republicans. If you're not in the 1%, you're fucked.

[–]TheJamesRocket[S] 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

Seems my comments hit a little too close to home.

Its okay, I know that your triggered. How do I know? Because you're copying my words. They hurt your feelings, so you repeat them back in an attempt to hurt mine.

Little do you know, I have no feelings.

If you want to discuss politics, rather than LULZ, how's this?

You're obviously very sensitive about your politics. I was just taking a quick jab at liberals for their consumerism, and then you went full NPC by ranting about conservatives being murders, rapists, terrorists, etc.

We're not on Reddit, dude. Take it easy with the histrionics. You aren't getting any internet points by spouting off with your PC diatribe.

[–]RightousBob 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

Socks is a weak pharma/division shill who has taken up residence here to spread divisive narratives. Their comments are almost always reactionary and dismissive. They pigeon hole anyone that opposes mainstream narratives as being "maga" related. My feeling is that Socks was a poor shill elsewhere who got canned, banned or shunned for not following the flow chart close enough, and has now slithered their way over to Saidit. That, or they are here because Saidit represents many things that Retardit and Twatter oppose and they are trying to undermine the momentum that this site has gathered since the last great Purge. Finally I believe that your post did truly strike the core of what kind of person Socks is IRL. The stench of butt-hurt coming off their reaction is overwhelming. Well done enraging the NPC's!

[–]madcow-5 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

There's a few here, and you really do have to wonder if they just got demoted from someplace bigger.

[–]RightousBob 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I like to think that Saidit is the wild west rather than the minor leagues. Either way shills can eat shit and choke.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

OK - back to LULZ, is it?

Nothing in my language is triggered or angry. You don't have to spend so much time trying to psychoanalyse me. Comment or don't comment. (Keep in mind that we don't actually know one another, which is perhaps for the best.)

No - not sensitive about politics. Why do you assume others are so emotional? Projecting?

What is NPC?

Again - no histrionics in anything I've written. (Just descriptions.)

Why would I want internet points? (Feel free to look at my comment history if you want to see how much I try to earn internet points.)

Where in my notes is there a "PC diatribe"?

It seems you only have insults here. I cannot locate in your response any real arguments or counterpoints against what I've written. You seem to be concerned only with me, rather than what's written.

(One of the reasons I am at Saidit is to see how intial debates will sometimes devolve into these obsessions with the other user, rather than continue the pyramid of debate. If you wish to return to the pyramid of debate, respond with an argument, rather than what you have here.)

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

What is NPC?

Non Player Character. Originally from Dungeons and Dragons, and commonly used in video games.

As in they're not a real person, ya know. And it's easy to fall into that kind of thinking. To just assume Bob the gas station attendant just exists to sell you gas and doesn't have a meaningful existence outside that role.

It's a mentally unbalanced worldview and although I struggle with it myself, at least I know it's nuts.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thanks. One would think that one of the Redditors' problems that Saiditors would like to escape is the incessant comparison over there with games and cartoons. After the Digg invasion years ago (2010?), the majority of engagement on Reddit seemed to be at the age of 13. Everything was - and often still is - filtered through cultural infantilism. Shortly after 2010, /r/Politics was removed from /r/all, and one could see that as a sign of things to come - that the news aggregation site where one could discuss politics and world news would become a LULZ site (eg. what's now on /r/all). As for NPC, it makes no sense in a debate. Perhaps it's only meant to be an insult, an ad hominem, albeit unfounded for real-world discussions.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's far more serious than appearances. That's the kind of thinking of people like Stephen Craig Paddock have. I mean, the question is, how can you end so many people's lives casually, and the answer is he considered them NPCs.

It dehumanizes people.

[–]Akali 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He doesn'T seem mad in his comment though.