Roseanne fired but Sarah Jeong hired?

Wibbs

Brian? wrote: »

I'm am extremist. I'm quite capable of recognising moderates. I'm also quite capable of liking people I don't agree with, as long as the debate remains polite.

Painting all extremists with the same brush is just another lazy generalisation.

And yet you as a self identifying extremist fit pretty well into my lazy generalisations.

Brian? wrote: »

Omackeral isn't a far right radical. It undercuts any serious point you may have to start name calling this way.

Meh that poster is now at the you smell, no you smell level of the schoolyard. And completely oblivious to it, among a great many things. Never mind they're seeing nazis everywhere. Suggesting of all people someone like Omackeral is "radicalized right" is both hilarious and ridiculous. TBH O, I'd not worry about it. Name calling only hits home if there's any truth to it. The more ranting a reply the more likely a nerve has been hit a bit too close to home. Like you I was also a yes for SSM and the 9th and divorce and all such votes. We're practically damned commies to some. And nazis to others. A fairly good sign we're somewhere in the middle with an old style "liberal" bias.

Billy86

professore wrote: »

I agree, however Katie Hopkins writes for the Mail Online which doesn't pretend to be fair and impartial and a paper of record, unlike the NYT. If she stayed with the huff post or whatever then let her rant all she wants.

I would on one hand agree there that they have zero place on a paper of record, but on the other I'd rather not even see the likes of her, Hopkins or the pedo lover on DM, HuffPo, Breitbart, etc. They're what happens when you take a reality TV type approach to politics in a very heightened time of tension - a part of which their ilk is responsible for, which is hardly surprising given it's what that types feed off of with f*** all care that they're just making those matters worse. Actually 'f*** all care' is the wrong way of putting it as they actively encourage it due to their careers depending on these divisions.

Regardless of what side of the political spectrum someone is on, that's just pouring poison down the well and it's one of the most disheartening developments of the last 20 years just how quick major publications, outlets and even media in general are to pander to this in the name of clickbait (be it online, on TV or in print). I would even go so far as to say that as long as these types are around and given such prominence, the current divisions will never, ever be fixed while new ones will be 'developed' by these same cretins, and the same masses that 20 years on swallow reality TV en masse and continue to tell themselves it's not entirely scripted will continue to do so with this as well.

Call it politics as sports, call it politics as reality TV, call it what you want... it's one of the surest fire ways to damage society at an incredible rate.

Omackeral

Brian? wrote: »

I honestly think you're owed an apology. I may disagree with you on this subject, but that name calling isn't on.

Fair play to you. I won't wait around for one though nor will that poster take my offer to find any far-right postings I've made because there simply are none. He'll just ignore it as if it never happened would be my guess but ya never know, surprises happen!

I like a good debate myself and even though you might not be on the same side of an argument, an honest style of back and forth can be very eye opening at the very least and it's quite satisfying to find common ground on occasion. There are one or two posters on here who I butt heads with plenty but also find myself seeing things from their POV and seeing how they see it in the way that they do. It's interesting.

Omackeral

pickarooney wrote: »

This is the worst thing I have ever read and yet I have continued through 13 pages.

What the **** is wrong with me?

You're an alt-right leftist, the worst of them all.

Brian?

Omackeral wrote: »

Would you be as quick to critically analyse all people who claim that they were only being satirical? If yes, then fair play. I'd doubt it though.

I hope so. It's the standard I hold myself to. I may not always live up to it, but I try my best to.

Yes it is nonsense because I never said that. Read it back Mr Critical Analyst. I said,

Do you need the petty name calling? I'm happy to debate this to the death if we keep it polite.

What are you saying? To me the far right are the Nazis, Aryan nation etc. There is not equivalent philosophies the left IMO.

I also have said that the far right and far left are
as bad as each other. Two sides of the same coin was the term I used i.e they're both bad. Therefore, there's absolutely nothing wrong with condemning the far right as I'll happily do it myself. I agreed with you before you needed to bring up the KKK or Aryan Nation.

I disagree they are as bad as each other and don't fully understand why you think they are.

On the far right you do have the Aryan nation, the KKK, various neo Nazi groups. Horrific hate peddlers.Who are their left wing equivalents? I don't think they exist.

You slide in a little on the spectrum and you have the alt right. Still peddling hate in a slicker form. Who are their left wing equivalents? Possibly some Antifa elements who are stupidly violent.

TomSweeney

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Unbelievably, earlier today, as she was eating breakfast, Antifa showed up and chanted 'Fcuk White Supremacy' at her :P


https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1026458985967153153

Incredible, just incredible - the mental illness here is astounding, AntiFa are nothing but thugs - they are the new blackshirts.

Brian?

Wibbs wrote: »

And yet you as a self identifying extremist fit pretty well into my lazy generalisations.

How so? You don't get the throw that out and walk away.

Omackeral

keffiyeh wrote: »

Try again?

You said I was on the extreme far, or alt right. Post one thing I've ever said that will lend legitimacy to that claim. Go on, still waiting.

keffiyeh

Wibbs wrote: »

Meh that poster is now at the you smell, no you smell level of the schoolyard.

And completely oblivious to it, among a great many things.

Oh here's that irony again. If only you'd been able to control yourself and omit that last sentence. I'm not sure you really fully understand the word 'irony' right now. It's like you heard someone else use it and have a faint idea, but aren't all the way there.

Franz Von Peppercorn

keffiyeh wrote: »

"Both sides"

You're fooling no one, especially with saying cringey ****e like 'leftists'. Seriously anyone I hear saying 'liberals' or 'leftists' just seem like the biggest spas. Yiz aren't American. And aside from being reductive and dismissive, it's incorrect. It's not a case of 'right' or 'left'. It's a case of 'extremists' and 'moderates'.

Sal you're a little triggered snowflake by the looks of things. You can't refute a single thing I say. You're so triggered all you can choke out is 'troll' and 'lol'. Poor snowflake.

It’s a bit odd someone using American vocabulary like “white privilege”, “alt right” etc to claim that we are “Americanised”.

I’m of the Irish centre left. Pro moderate immigration (married to one), pro porogessive tax, pro increase in inheritance tax, opppsed to neo liberalism, and in particular the US imperialism. I rarely see the supposed socialists on this site opposing that bythe way. What’s Brian?’s view on Syria? Who knows?

However if an American imperialist starts ranting about the “whites” and normalising anti european rhetoric via the channels of its indoctrinated ideologically controlled vassals like you, that’s a worry. It’s something to resist.

Conversely if Sarah Jeong is so pro POC she may want to oppose the wars in Yemen, the wars in the Middle East, the attempted overthrow of the Venezuelan President, the actions of US supported Israel etc. She doesn’t probably even know about them.

This would be ok if she meant “American whites” and maybe she does, but as you have just demonstrated in your previous posts - indoctrinated American controlled minds like yours will blame all people with white skin for the actions of some of them. #resist

Brian?

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

It’s a bit odd someone using American vocabulary like “white privilege”, “alt right” etc to claim that we are “Americanised”.

I’m of the Irish centre left. Pro moderate immigration (married to one), pro porogessive tax, pro increase in inheritance tax, opppsed to neo liberalism, and in particular the US imperialism. I rarely see the supposed socialists on this site opposing that bythe way. What’s Brian?’s view on Syria? Who knows?

However if an American imperialist starts ranting about the “whites” and normalising anti european rhetoric via the channels of its indoctrinated ideologically controlled vassals like you, that’s a worry. It’s something to resist.

Conversely if Sarah Jeong is so pro POC she may want to oppose the wars in Yemen, the wars in the Middle East, the attempted overthrow of the Venezuelan President, the actions of US supported Israel etc. She doesn’t probably even know about them.

This would be ok if she meant “American whites” and maybe she does, but as you have just demonstrated in your previous posts - indoctrinated American controlled minds like yours will blame all people with white skin for the actions of some of them. #resist

You've the start of a great point here.

Why the feck are the left spending so much energy on identity politics these days when there are far larger issues to deal with.

My opinion on Syria? It's a whole pile of complicated mess.

Omackeral

Wibbs wrote: »

Suggesting of all people someone like Omackeral is "radicalized right" is both hilarious and ridiculous. TBH O, I'd not worry about it. Name calling only hits home if there's any truth to it. The more ranting a reply the more likely a nerve has been hit a bit too close to home. Like you I was also a yes for SSM and the 9th and divorce and all such votes. We're practically damned commies to some. And nazis to others. A fairly good sign we're somewhere in the middle with an old style "liberal" bias.

Do you know what sickens my hole Wibbs? These people would genuinely have you sometimes embarrassed to say you lean to the left. I've said here before that I feel they're pushing me closer to the right and I actually regret saying it because it gives off the impression that I care enough about them to redefine my thoughts and outlooks. There are always shades of grey to be had and those on either extreme end would have you feel guilty for thinking that if they could.

Omackeral

Brian? wrote: »

Do you need the petty name calling? I'm happy to debate this to the death if we keep it polite.

I take it back. It was honestly tongue in cheek though with our talk of critical analysis and all that. Sorry if it came of sarky.

Brian?

Omackeral wrote: »

I take it back. It was honestly tongue in cheek though with our talk of critical analysis and all that. Sorry if it came of sarky.

No worries. I was probably being a bit sensitive.

keffiyeh

Omackeral wrote: »

You said I was on the extreme far, or alt right. Post one thing I've ever said that will lend legitimacy to that claim. Go on, still waiting.

Your entire dialogue is textbook radicalized right (albeit a closet case "I swear I'm not!"). 'Both sides', 'leftists' etc. Go onto any RR source and they all swear up and down that they 'lean left' because of some silly quiz/graph thing that they flaunt around... except it doesn't ask any questions about race/gender so it's just them being completely disingenuous. Dogwhistling is the radicalized right's M.O. and one of the only thing that separates them from old school far right skinheads. The other thing would be cowardice, a skinhead would have a go no problem, the RR, with the exception of the Incel who've been perpetrating mass shootings, just stay home and whine online and harass behind burner Twitter accounts.

Brian?

TomSweeney wrote: »

Incredible, just incredible - the mental illness here is astounding, AntiFa are nothing but thugs - they are the new blackshirts.

It’s controversial to say “**** white supremacy” now?

Omackeral

Brian? wrote: »

I disagree they (far right and far left) are as bad as each other and don't fully understand why you think they are.

I think they are because they're both unwilling to compromise, are stubborn and leave no room for debate. I've seen abhorrent violence flare up from both sides also. To me, the extreme left and extreme right are strange bedfellows. I've no time for either.

Grayson

Omackeral wrote: »

I think they are because they're both unwilling to compromise, are stubborn and leave no room for debate. I've seen abhorrent violence flare up from both sides also. To me, the extreme left and extreme right are strange bedfellows. I've no time for either.

It depends on how rational their views are. The far right holocaust deniers for example. If i refuse to compromise with them am I far left? the same goes for birthers, the people who believe sandyhook was staged and all the other loons.

Omackeral

keffiyeh wrote: »

Your entire dialogue is textbook radicalized right. 'Both sides', 'leftists' etc.

So that's a no then. Not one quote could you offer. Thought so. Anyway, there are two sides of the political spectrum broadly speaking. Nearly anyone will tell you that. It's hardly the language of ... hang on. How can you say I'm radicalised right without their being an opposing side?!!? Right of what?!!? Jesus you are posting some crap.

keffiyeh wrote: »

Yiz aren't American.

By the way, we tend to spell it as radicalised over here. Using the 'z' is very American.

keffiyeh

Anybody comparing AntiFa to Blackshirts is just hilariously transparent. They'd be much closer to French Resistance, quite literally. Although I do always enjoy the racist/sexist/fascistic (literally even adopting the look) radicalized right trying to pin the tail on the enemy donkey instead. It may be futile, but it's dogwhistling at its purest, which I do still find mildly entertaining.

keffiyeh

Omackeral wrote: »

So that's a no then.

It's also textbook radicalized right to hear what you want to hear. They do love their confirmation bias and being able to dismiss a moderate as quickly as possible.

Omackeral

keffiyeh wrote: »

It's also textbook radicalized right to hear what you want to hear.

Maybe you're right about me so because I definitely know what I don't want to hear ever again and that's any morsel of garbage being uttered by you. My word you are a poor debater. Twice you were asked to back up what you said said and twice you couldn't. You accuse other users of importing American jargon yet you're here using words such as 'incel'? Absolutely unreal.

keffiyeh

Omackeral wrote: »

The neck of you calling people yank-wannabes when you come out with the stuff like that. You honestly don't do irony or self-awareness do you?

How thick do you have to be to not understand that as this thing started online, that it's global? You do realize you can get the internet outside of America right?

keffiyeh

Omackeral wrote: »

You accuse other users of importing American jargon yet you're here using words such as 'incel'? Absolutely unreal.

It's literally a proper noun. Do you realize they still call apples apples in America? You're not the sharpest lad.

PlaneSpeeking

Omackeral wrote: »

Maybe you're right about me so because I definitely know what I don't want to hear ever again and that's any morsel of garbage being uttered by you. My word you are a poor debater. Twice you were asked to back up what you said said and twice you couldn't. You accuse other users of importing American jargon yet you're here using words such as 'incel'? Absolutely unreal.

Forgive the ignorance but what in the name of God is an "incel" - sounds like Dennis O'Brien's new wifi firm!

keffiyeh

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Forgive the ignorance but what in the name of God is an "incel" - sounds like Dennis O'Brien's new wifi firm!

Involuntary Celibate. People who hate women because they can't get laid. A number of mass shootings on the north American continent have been attributed to them.

PlaneSpeeking

keffiyeh wrote: »

Involuntary Celibate. People who hate women because they can't get laid. A number of mass shootings on the north American continent have been attributed to them.

So, morons then ? Right.

Call Me Jimmy

Brian? wrote: »

I do.

I’ve made the case that you can’t have hate speech laws in a society that espouses freedom of expression a good few times lately.

This wasn’t always my view, I’ve evolved my position on it.

I’m sure someone can travel through my posting history to find examples of me taking both positions, to save you all time, I used to believe in hate speech laws but changed my mind.

Yea was genuinely curious, fair play

Wibbs

keffiyeh wrote: »

I'm not sure you really fully understand the word 'irony' right now. It's like you heard someone else use it and have a faint idea, but aren't all the way there.

With nigh on every post of yours you provide a pretty good definition of it for anyone unsure of the meaning. Good Christ, you're the gift that keeps on giving.

Will I Am Not

Keffiyeh having an absolute mare here :pac:

DickSwiveller Returns

Omackeral wrote: »

If you're not with us, you're against us. Very fascist sounding.

How are you gonna label me a far-right radical when all I've done here is label a racist a racist. Feel free to point out any far-right (or alt-right or whatever it is this week) posts or points I've ever made on this website. I hate racists. Absolutely detest them. This far right nut job can be seen advocating a YES vote for Same Sex Marriage on this website. Ditto for Repeal the 8th. So extreme amn't I? So go on, quote my far right posts. I'll wait. Here's a spoiler, you won't be able to because I never have. You're a liar.

I think i would describe you as a liberal. i don't think Repeal the 8th and gay marriage are necessarily causes of the 'left'. What I consider left would be the trade union movement; local community groups trying to engineer change; opposition to high levels of inequality etc. My father is a lifelong Union member and always voted Labour but is very socially conservative.

Yer Da sells Avon

Omackeral wrote: »

There you go again. It's that type of sh*te that does you no favours. Why are you bringing gender in to it? Do you know the sex of each and every poster?

The posters to whom I was referring are, as far as I'm aware, all men. Very serious ones too.

keffiyeh

Wibbs wrote: »

keffiyeh wrote: »

I'm not sure you really fully understand the word 'irony' right now. It's like you heard someone else use it and have a faint idea, but aren't all the way there.

With nigh on every post of yours you provide a pretty good definition of it for anyone unsure of the meaning. Good Christ, you're the gift that keeps on giving.

God love ye, it's like you need the 'no u' or you'd shrivel up and cry. The radicalized right are the biggest snowflakes.

Lash Into The Pints

Why can't the left just admit non white people can be lousy hate filled people too?

Lads, drop the white saviour complex.

keffiyeh

" i don't think Repeal the 8th and gay marriage are necessarily causes of the 'left'. "

Exactly right, thought the exact same thing. Being for rights like abortion wouldn't mean you're not radicalized right.

keffiyeh

Lash Into The Pints wrote: »

Why can't the left just admit non white people can be lousy hate filled people too?

Lads, drop the white saviour complex.

Why can't Irish people stop talking like Sean The Gob****e Hannity?

Wibbs

keffiyeh wrote: »

God love ye, it's like you need the 'no u' or you'd shrivel up and cry.

...And giving...

The radicalized right are the biggest snowflakes.

Woohoo! I'm a nazi too!

keffiyeh wrote: »

Exactly right, thought the exact same thing. Being for rights like abortion wouldn't mean you're not radicalized right.

So you reckon being supportive of Gay rights and marriage and abortion would sit well with the most of the highly conservative "radicalized(sic) right"? Do you even know what these extreme right wingers you see everywhere are and what they tend to support?

Omackeral

keffiyeh wrote: »

You do realize you can get the internet outside of America right?

You do realise it's ''realise'' outside of America, right?

Malayalam

keffiyeh wrote: »

Anybody comparing AntiFa to Blackshirts is just hilariously transparent. They'd be much closer to French Resistance, quite literally. Although I do always enjoy the racist/sexist/fascistic (literally even adopting the look) radicalized right trying to pin the tail on the enemy donkey instead. It may be futile, but it's dogwhistling at its purest, which I do still find mildly entertaining.

French Resistance? Hahahahahahah! Sorry, but that is just laugh out loudable. then again, it is an interesting insight into the heads of one such person. You honestly consider these spoilt upper middle class thugs with too much time on their hands and too much idiotic science denying ideology in their heads are like the French Resistence?

PlaneSpeeking

Malayalam wrote: »

French Resistance? Hahahahahahah! Sorry, but that is just laugh out loudable. then again, it is an interesting insight into the heads of one such person. You honestly consider these spoilt upper middle class thugs with too much time on their hands and too much idiotic science denying ideology in their heads are like the French Resistence?

He's got a point - if you mean the Resistance as portrayed in Allo Allo, inept idiots that couldn't wipe their own arses without a You Tube video.

Violette Szabo and her like? Million miles away from these brave guys.

pickarooney

Omackeral wrote: »

You're an alt-right leftist, the worst of them all.

I tried to Control my Alt+Right leanings but I ended up with a crick in my neck.

Malayalam

By the way Keffiyeh, do you have a patent pending on the phrase ''radicaliz/sed right''?

RasTa

Sal Butamol wrote: »

He'd have probably shot himself again more likely.

That wasnt my point though, Hunter was a journalist who spent much of his career attacking the lazy idiotic press in the US.

He'd have been disgusted with the media in America today.

I don't think you know anything about Hunter. What aspects of the media would he be disgusted with?

I know Fox he would want burnt to the ground and all that rubbish in the media with a load of twitter screengrabs but mostly one type of media doing that ****e.

He was a man who "could shake your hand and stab you in the back at the same time" and said "his casket [should] have been launched into one of those open-sewage canals that empty into the ocean just south of Los Angeles. He was a swine of a man and a jabbering dupe of a president. [He] was an evil man—evil in a way that only those who believe in the physical reality of the Devil can understand it.”

That was on Nixon so no doubt he would have blown Trump's brains out then turned it on himself again.

Taytoland

Brian? wrote: »

givyjoe wrote: »

Then read the post/blog linked earlier in the thread. There are hundreds of tweets of this stuff. It's just isn't credible to suggest that it's simply satire over that long a period.

I was aware of her excuse and I've read the blog of her own posts. It's just not a credible explanation.

I read the blog. It was a collection of tweets. I don’t know if it was all her tweets of just a few selected racist tweets. Hence my request for something more solid. I can’t find anything.

A few? Pages full of them. I saw a Twitter thread earlier with them. Staggering actually.

Venom

Wibbs wrote: »

...And giving... Woohoo! I'm a nazi too!



So you reckon being supportive of Gay rights and marriage and abortion would sit well with the most of the highly conservative "radicalized(sic) right"? Do you even know what these extreme right wingers you see everywhere are and what they tend to support?

When you get your politics from




of course you see everyone as extreme right wingers!

Brian?

Taytoland wrote: »

A few? Pages full of them. I saw a Twitter thread earlier with them. Staggering actually.

It doesn’t change the fact that it’s tweets and only tweets. That’s my point.

PlaneSpeeking

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t change the fact that it’s tweets and only tweets. That’s my point.

So was Roseanne's - yet many people called for her sacking, and got it.

The method of communication does not negate the content, nor should it.

"Just a tweet" is such a cop out.

Malayalam

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t change the fact that it’s tweets and only tweets. That’s my point.

I am keeping some small part of my mind open for the possibility that this was a prolonged work of satire. Doubtful, but not absolutely impossible. If you ever find or create a reasoned analysis that demonstrates the satire thesis I would be interested in reading it.

P_1

Omackeral wrote: »

Do you know what sickens my hole Wibbs? These people would genuinely have you sometimes embarrassed to say you lean to the left. I've said here before that I feel they're pushing me closer to the right and I actually regret saying it because it gives off the impression that I care enough about them to redefine my thoughts and outlooks. There are always shades of grey to be had and those on either extreme end would have you feel guilty for thinking that if they could.

This times a million. You would argue they're actually doing more harm than good at this stage

keffiyeh

Wibbs wrote: »

...And giving... Woohoo! I'm a nazi too!

Jayzis you're impressively slow if you're only copping on now. Although I don't really call RR 'Nazis'; would rather that term referred just to your 30's/40's equivalent. You're radicalized right.