all 38 comments

[–]backfromthedead 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

Whenever I hear the weird leftist I know the person using it is a fucking idiot and likely an incel that will see ass other than his own his entire life

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's an Israeli term. They rarely use it in the US.

[–]jmichaelhudsondotnet 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Anyone writing a sentence like that has no standing whatsoever to look down on the intelligence of any other person, or primate, for that matter.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Who's looking down on whose intelligence? Where'd you even get that? It's pure psychological projection.

What do you call people on the political left, then? Not liberals, those believe in free speech. They might not believe in what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it. You can't win an argument by anathematizing terms. That's something leftists often do.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

" is a fucking idiot and likely an incel " seems pretty pejorative to me.

Progressives believe in free speech because that's how better ideas beat worse ones - even if they may come from the right.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Progressives believe in free speech

What!! Oh, come on. At least make your lies believable.

Per Critical Race Theory, any concept invented or propagated by white people is inherently "white" and inherently privileges white people. The free market? Racist! Free speech? Racist! Individual liberty? Racist!

All of these things are racist because they were invented by white people, became popular in societies that were largely white, and led to white people rising to the top of "inequality."

We've heard claims that speech that offends progressives is actually violence, and we've seen activists use actual violence to stop it - and to defend this as self-defense-when administrators fail to do so.

Lisa Feldman Barrett, a psychology professor who was given a platform by the New York Times to defend the idea of speech as violence.

free speech

is a code word

for hate speech

let us consider the reality of today's society where somehow, white supremacist and Nazi rhetoric is actually normalized enough that people will defend it for "free speech"

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I'm NOT a liar.

I've defined in this comment section what I believe progressives to be. There are no shortage of examples of Jimmy Dore saying free speech is necessary because you fight bad ideas with good ones.

I've also CLEARLY stated that SJWs are the problem and they LIE profusely. I am an admin (whatever that means) on InfoGalactic, an alt-right site founded by Vox Day who wrote SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police.


I said NOTHING about your Critical Race Theory and I don't care to delve into that can of worms nonsense.

You have a right to be offended, but you have no right to not be offended. That's also reflected by Dore.

He's never called offenses violence that I can recall and that is an utter absurdity - as are SJWs.

As long as you continue to conflate the Old-Left Progressives with the corrupt Corporate SJW Dems then you continue to be intentionally ignorant and a fucking fool. You've had it spelled out here for the last time. Hereafter you shall be called SHILL if you make this error again.

There is A FUCKING WAR ON IN THE LEFT and you have been too obtuse to realize it though it affects us all.

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

I've defined in this comment section what I believe progressives to be.

Better to ask them themselves to define what they are. It's pretty damning whenever they open their mouths.

I said NOTHING about your Critical Race Theory and I don't care to delve into that can of worms nonsense.

Yeah, no kidding you don't, it's at the heart of progressivism.


The left started the war on us. Now you can't stand that we're fighting back.

Maybe have a long, hard look at your ideas and understand why nobody wants them.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Also, any reference to the NY Times must be taken with a grain of source.

Violence is never acceptable. Even if SJWs or libertards on the right tell you otherwise.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Also in this confusion about definitions, I want to bring your attention to this left leader-organizer interview on this Marxist professor's YouTube channel:
"Economic Update: 2020 May Day Protests and Demands" ~ Democracy At Work with Prof. Richard D. Wolff

Show notes: "A special program: interview with Kali Akuno, leader of Cooperation Jackson in Mississippi. As a leader of national May Day actions, he discusses their size, diversity, motivations and goals (including planned monthly national actions). He analyzes organizational challenges and prospects. Finally, he explains why he believes this May Day was a major strengthening of the US left. "

Of note is the T-shirt Kali Akuno is wearing that says "COMBAT LIBERALISM", which I can only suspect as I didn't ask him, refers to NeoLiberalism around the world aka NeoConservatism in the USA. Of course, this is not to be confused with liberals or Liberals or the Canadian Liberal Party , libertarians or Libertarians or any Libertarian party, or anything else similar.

I suspect you may already know this stuff, but it's here for you and all the readers on the off chance it's new.

Bonus: It ties into our discussion the other day that touched on May Day :

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It doesn't mean neo-liberalism. It means liberalism.

"Liberals get the bullet too."

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children) :

" Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support free markets, free trade, limited government, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), capitalism, democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion. Yellow is the political colour most commonly associated with liberalism. "

Doesn't say anything about the left and sounds a fucking lot like NeoCons and NeoLibs to me. It also sounds a lot like libertarians and libertarianism - which is almost indistinguishable from AnCap / anarchist capitalism that still likes/tolerates corporations for some stupid reasons. (disambiguation) - take your fuckin pick as there is no page for Liberals. And yes, it may even apply to progressivism - so all four quadrants of the political spectrum are covered. It's an ambiguous bullshit term that I avoid.

FYI: I only looked this shit up now (not before), so not to brag, but I know my shit and there's a reason why I chose my words.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Low tier.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What would you like to be called, then? Liberal? You're not liberal. Liberals believe in free speech.

Progressive? Oh, come on, that's just a synonym for far left.

Do you have anything to say other than what's on the bottom of the pyramid of debate?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

"Progressive" is NOT a synonym for the far-left, whatever that means. (I think of the insane far-gone SJWs, but I may be wrong.)

Killary has claimed that she's progressive. Doesn't make it true.

The Corproate SJW Dems call themselves progressive just to confuse the matter. Doesn't make it true.

AOC claims to be a progressive yet her actions prove otherwise.

I call myself progressive, though because of their intentional confusion, I'd rather say old-left. Doesn't make it true because the definitions aren't clear.

Krystal Ball, Jimmy Dore, R.J. Eskow, Richard Wolff, are progressive - and are demonstrably VERY different than the Corporate Left.

There is a HUGE fight between "The Left" of power and "the left" of the people.

Maybe people on the right don't give a shit or care to know, but it will affect us ALL with profound ramifications.


[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Trump and Obama are both corrupt.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

One side has death threats, media lies, and threats against your livelihood and career. The other side has le epic memes.

"Bad apples on both sides - let's all be more rational here!"

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

One side or the other side? I can't tell which is which.

The left and right wings of the warhawk party have the same Machiavellian heart and mind that has waged class war since long before history.

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

r/libertarianmeme my bois.

[–]igorness 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

You need a hell of lot more proof than these 2 non journalists. No one knew who the person(s) in the transcripts were. That's why they call it "unmasking".

[–]jmichaelhudsondotnet 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Also odd that as soon as the virus response is determined to be a catastrophe, while Jared Kushner manages it, and they are pushing through bills to make it illegal to boycott israel, and vaccinations potentially manditory, even though there isnt one, I mean, odd time to find a scandal against the previous president, who had no such scandals.

The Hill is basically Israel, and they hate Obama and anyone who is not with their radical expansionism and racism.

Same reason we are seeing the gender wars and race wars pushed, and there is equal support in mass media pro and against lockdown, without any real consistent understanding of what the virus even is or its actual danger.

Everyone is begging for Obama back, and truth is he could run, and I hope he does.

He is an actual leader, and even if he did investigate the trump campaign, he had every reason to because the trump organization is a criminal organization. Anyone trying to brush that aside or the other things, well they are part of the other agenda that they are trying to hide from us.

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

I mean, odd time to find a scandal against the previous president, who had no such scandals.

Pizza gate happened, and all the MSM united to cover it up.

[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Within the next couple of months, many officials from the Obama administration will be charged with sedition for their part in trying to regime change the current administration. The Democrat mainstream media (CNN, Washington Post etc.) will frame these charges as an attempt to silence political opposition by a would-be dictator. The demographic that places its trust in media based on brand loyalty, i.e. morons, will be taken off guard by these events and may become violent. Many of these poor souls don't understand that the security state and mainstream media have been working together to conceal war crimes committed by the Obama administration and will suffer intense cognitive dissonance leading to psychotic episodes.

This scandal shows the systemic corruption of the Obama administration. Procedural abuses e.g. opening investigations to prevent FOI requests and fabricating evidence for FISA authorisations, became common practise. The systemic corruption that should’ve taken down Wall Street in the 2008 financial crisis simply moved into government.

Remember the Benghazi scandal, where the administration tried to blame an assassination of US embassy personnel on a viral video because they didn’t want to attract attention to the fact that their proxy forces were Al-Qaeda affiliates that had committed massacres in the city less then a year earlier?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

" I mean, odd time to find a scandal against the previous president, who had no such scandals. "

Obama: A Legacy of Ashes (1:00:08) ~ Corbett Report, 2017-01-20

2009 Obama continued to bail out the banks and fuck the people over - without prosecuting those who were responsible.

Obama continued the opiate crisis, the perpetual droning, and took the 2 Bush wars up to 7 to 9 in total, depending what you call a "war" - most of which people don't even fucking know about.

Making it legal in the USA to do propaganda and psyops on their own people:–Mundt_Modernization_Act_of_2012

Since then there's been nothing but manufactured cirsis events, from lone shooters to viruses and everything in between, with fake dead, real dead, and sometimes a combination of real and live victims.

And if you think the propaganda has ONLY been on the left you are sorely mistaken, a fool, and a victim their counter-propaganda.


Obama was/is a huge problem.

I also agree with the rest of your stuff and would add, that this is yet another dismal piece of terrible Washington theater making people believe that there is a justice system and a chance of fairness - distracting us from the crisis, all the shit they're doing behind the scenes, and how they've ramped up all their global wars while no one is watching.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'd point out how Obama is no leader but you've blocked me so you can remain ignorant to inconvenient truths.

[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Drip, drip, drip...

I can say this, you can't find anything even remotely close to the level of corruption that is weaponizing the FBI and DOJ like was done by Obama. His administration spied on the opposing party nominee and President elect. Framed people working for him. Blackmailed them into pleading guilty to crimes they didn't commit. This is Watergate on steroids. You can pretend it isn't if you want, your choice.

[–]igorness 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I see a lot of writing and talk but zero proof. Do you have actual proof that isn't a right wing blog or Fox News? Any at all,....just one bit?

[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

[–]igorness 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

AG Barr said today, no criminal charges will be filed, that's why. Get over yourself. You (and the GOP) got nothing. You also sent blog links. Those are NEVER news.

[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Sure they are. A blog broke the Monica Lewinsky scandal, when Bill Clinton raped an intern in the oval office. A blog took Tom Brokaw's scalp when he tried to throw an election with fake news.

The mainstream media is deliberately ignoring Obamagate. But you knew that already.

[–]igorness 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

AG Bill Barr says nothing there. That's not enough for you? Is he "on the take" too?

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Both "sides" are. The entire government is a quagmire of people on the take, often infighting for sure, but none bother to help the people.

[–]igorness 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That's a complete overreach and generalization.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

And yet ever so true, sadly.

[–]Captzapheart 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Obama looks pretty corporate to me. Can't think of one socialist policy implemented in favour of poor/working people....Goldman Sachs did very well. There a disturbing amount of confusion around corporate/neo-lib/leftists/socialist/Marxist???Imo, the really weird thing is....its not actually that complex.

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