To an EXTRAORDINARY degree.

Jon Stewart

Sure this time “awareness” campaigns will result in different outcomes.

Sure. I think you make a point. Israel should be destroyed (as a legal structure). No government which places one ethnic or religious group above others should be allowed to persist.

Should ask Turkey or Egypt. Maybe Iran.

Surprised resident shit bird Ed Case isn’t on that list.

I just can not, in the name of the great spaghetti monster, noodle be thy name, figure out why the fuck @[email protected] insists on being the water carrier for Democrats. As in, in the traditional sense, being the apologist.

They’ll acknowledge the issues. They’ll be open and understanding the critiques. But they’ll die on the hill of protecting Ken Martin, whom, I think everyone on the left had some hope for, but who has been about as disapointing as cat shit. Just like we would have expected any corporate Dem to be. Its like they don’t want to acknowledge that actually, a party of feckless electors happy to rig primaries, lick any corporate boot, and only willing to pivot to the right, thats pretty much who makes up the Democratic party as far as leadership. They’ arent’ redeemable.

But they just won’t fucking hear it. They’re like, on a personal mission to save the sole of the DNC as it currently exists. Its like Ken Martin has his own personal Apostle Paul.

Why it’s different this time, is the DNC is going to keep supporting progressives instead of sabatoging them

Sure. It could be. Heck even three things could be true at much. Maybe even three ignorami all easily manipulated by their propaganda de jour. And its not like I’m new to this little panty-bundle pet issue you choose to editorially moderate around. We all see you. We all see what you are doing and have been doing around this issue for years. Just like we see Jordan Lund for what they do. Or Ruud. Or squid.

The issue to me isn’t the disagreement: its your refusal to have it and to use your moderator powers to suppress conversations which you can’t actually engage in, in a public manner, and expect to convince people to come to your side. And what it does, the way its almost exclusive to one particular pet issue: it dramatically weakens your stance.

Any point you could possibly be making which might actually be convincing becomes basically meaningless because you can’t do it rhetorically. You choose to not allow for it. Just like Squid coudlnt defend zionism rhetorically, and so they abused the power of moderation; just like Jordan Lund and their defense of establishment poltiics. These are your peers. These are who you share a bench with when you choose to engage in this manner.

If your arguments were really good and convincing, you wouldn’t need to editorialize via moderation. When you do what you do, it says more about the weakness of your perspective than it does show any kind of strength.

Two things can be true at the same time. They can be a vibed up shitlib. You can be a moderator trying to use your power to cultivate a narrow and specific interpretation of world events.

Removed by mod

And the same hogs who eat up the anti-Hasan rhetoric eat this up too.

Not really relevant, polling anyways. Not like he’s up for election and pretending he gave a shit about anyone other than himself, well youre probably part of the problem if youve have given that narrative any wind.

What does he care? He’s got what he needed.

Schumer and Jefferies are going to sell the left out for massive right-wing funding in this campaign cycle and the next. Mark it.

Your enemy is Democrats.

Came here to say… Fuckin duh.

Ahh… “nuance”…

Gj Wisconsin. Ya fekken blew it.

Yeah I saw the potato/ tomato comment. If you just getting going and need quick-reward for time invested, you really can’t beat kale and mustard greens. You’ll get food you can eat fast, and it will be steady and continuous. You don’t need any special equipment like cages and you don’t need to wait a whole season for results.

Mustard greens and kale.

I believe it was Martin O’mally who tried to get “Carnival Barker” to stick as an insult to Trump. It didn’t work. It made him look weak, foolish. Someone maladroit at using insults. Someone not actually willing to draw blood or do damage in a fight. This kind of petty, high browed insulation of an insult. Its for New York Magazine readers. Its for Third Way neoliberals who still want you to value their Ivy League education, even though its cost you any chance at a middle class life.

If Ossof wants to land a body blow, call Trump a child rapist; say into a microphone that Donald J. Trump rapes children and that his supporters support a pedophile. You can’t soft roll a fight. If you are going to go this way in tactics, you go fully. You can’t halfway do it. And it has to be in a way that shocks and embarrasses Trumps supporters. Not your own.