Liberal Forum

Remember that arrogant assumption prior to the Bush invasion of Iraq?

It was a very common assumption held by many us citizens. 

And the fact we were proven wrong, SHOULD have inspired us to re examine our assumptions about human nature and the nature of governmental power. 

But it didn't. We are dumb. 

It is predictable that we would have such incorrect predictions...because in the west we are sold absolutely absurd lies in our education which we never examine. 

"The peasants under Christian monarchies were miserable and oppressed. They hated being peasants and the lord or king had no respect for them and just expoited them"

remember being trained to think this? But there is a massive body of literature that proves this is a lie. 

You can simply read Shakespeare in fact. We writes about kings quite often..often amazingly he makes them very human. they were not evil...they also were not somehow innately superior. 

How can your education explain this? It can't. You would at the very least assume that Shakespeare...who himself lived under the yoke of oppressive absolute monarchy...would view them in one extreme or the other. 

And yet all the us citizens who read Shakespeare just never think about the inherent contradiction here. 

Shakespeare simply respected kings. He liked the institution...yet he did not view them as actual gods (as your Hollywood education on the divine right of kings might suggest). No, kings were the fallible tool for the collective will of the people...so in fact loving the people was akin to loving the king. The king may not always do the best job, but it was assumed that he tried to do a good job. 

And what did you learn about the French revolution? 

Well it might be surprising that the people overall loved the king...and indeed the peasants seemed very happy with their lives. 

And this love was mutual. Indeed the reason the revolution succeeded is precisely because the king ordered his army toarever shoot at the mob. You can easily confirm that this is true on Google or something...it is not controversial. 

Only the very first riot was put down (because the king did not expect it)..and the revolution was later nearly defeated simply by Swiss mercenaries (because of language issues...they did not seem to understand the kings will)

the French king conceded to every demand of the mob, and did not resist being imprisoned by them. 

Now obviously that begs the question...what really motivated the revolution and who were the real actors involved? That is a deep and complex question...and I don't want to delve into it here. It is enough for me to mention that it was almost the same as the bolshevik revolution in russia, with almost identical outcomes. 

the truth is...our liberal education is simply wrong about human nature. What people want far more than material comfort is a purpose for their life. 

and that is why the taliban defeated us. Because Islam is quite simply more inspiring than empowered hip hop American ***. 

I often hear leftists say "white people don't have a culture"...that is a VERY revealing belief. 

The truth is, we used to have a culture. It was stolen from us. Our indoctrination into nihilism is the only thing that maintains the current power structure, and allows our elite to exploit us far more than any king ever did.

The baathists...who were a secular pan Arabic political movement...exactly like like Arab version of the whitr nationalists in early america...wanted no part of this. 

---

1 Nomination

Annoyed Liberall Aug 17, 2021

Go to original post on Aug 17, 2021 12:52pm
Go to nomination on Aug 18, 2021 11:17am

@Cannonpointer  
@GeorgeWashington  

By the way, if you want to see a pro-Covid vaxxer actually make good arguments, (WHICH I'VE BEEN SEARCHING FOR ALL THIS TIME) here it is:

https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/are-the-op ... crackpots/

My responses after each argument: (It's a long read, just to warn you)

========================================================================================

Unz Argument #1: Lockdowns didn't work here because they were done half-assedly, while they were done "well" in China and other Asian countries (with the proof being lower death rates).

The counter to this argument is whether "saving lives" is the only goal...I can already think of 5 instances where people value convenience/time over lower risk of death yet nobody objects to this trade-off

Well...not until "Covid-19" arrived...lol...then everybody claimed "saving every life is sacred"... one could ALMOST be forgiven for thinking these people had anything but altruistic motives and were totally not just virtue signaling retards  

The second counterargument is...in order for there to be a proper "lockdown," which Mr. Unz believes is the "right choice," you need either

1) A strong-armed government that enforces rules with strict penalties for disobedience
OR
2) A "high level" of social trust (people willing to sacrifice for the greater good).

The USA is not the former (at least not relatively speaking)...so let's get to that "trust" pact that was broken early on...I won't even get into the multiculturalism that makes "social trust" less likely:

I would say that half the reason people, justifiably so, did not believe in the "lockdown saves lives" narrative is that while all of this was happening, BLM protests were allowed to continue unchecked.

Apparently the (((media))) told everyone that racism was a far worse scourge than Covid-19, so BLM protests (which we were supposed to equate with "anti-racism") should be allowed to continue and that everyone else needs to be holed up at home and not be able to go to church or buy stuff at struggling local small businesses, etc.

(Churches + small businesses tended to vote for Trump...gosh, there COULDN'T HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN A POLITICAL MOTIVE TO ALL OF THIS CHICANERY?)

Of course, anyone with a brain called them out for this BS. 

If there were ANY consistency in the oligarchs' propaganda, people would probably be more inclined to accept some sacrifice for the "greater good."

Unfortunately as we have seen, liberal lockdown proponents did not do their part and thus they have only their own little selves to blame for destroying what, according to them, could have been a solution.

(And don't even get me started on hypocritical politicians, the list of violations by the same politicians promoting lockdowns is arduous.)

I will accept the POSSIBILITY that Mr. Unz is right, that lockdowns do work, but unfortunately the sheer mendacity of the corrupt/self serving bureaucrats/politicians and the hypocrisy of liberal retards PRECLUDED any proper implementation.

So those 2 groups can go **** themselves.

==========================================================================================

Unz Arg #2: (On the "China" case study of lockdowns supposedly eradicating the virus)

As Mike Whitney already said, there's a lot of controversy on whether the Chinese numbers are accurate...I am quite biased against any "government numbers" just because I know they tend to spin the stats quite easily to fool the sheeple (with the USA CDC/BLS/etc. being no exception to that rule...anyone familiar with my rants against fake CPI numbers knows...)

As Carl Sagan's "BS detection" kit explains, you MUST ALWAYS SEEK INDEPENDENT, THIRD PARTY CONFIRMATION.

A government agency is not "third party" and is certainly not "independent."

(Funny how the same people who claim China is imprisoning Uyghers but lying about it to global press orgs, lying about their GDP growth rate, lying about [X] suddenly take their "Covid deaths" # at face value...CONFIRMATION BIAS?

To be fair Mr. Unz doesn't believe in the "China imprisoning Uyghers" narrative so I can't fault him for inconsistency, but the same cannot be said for 0-1 SD IQ progressive retards...LOL...Mr. Unz is 3+ SD so he is unlikely to make that foolish mistake)

But let's say China only suffered < 5000 deaths.

And?

The difference is China can lock people up in their apartments/homes and stop all travel without any backlash because anyone who disobeys will be punished severely, i.e. thrown in jail.

Try doing that in the USA.

Oh wait, we have something called state constitutions. And people with guns.

Not every state governor was willing to shut down the churches, small retail stores, etc. while still allowing Walmart, Target, and Costco to be crowded with people (cuz you know, crowding more people in a smaller # of stores is great @ preventing the spread of Covid).   

======================================================

(Bonus counterargument):

Mr. Unz needs to evaluate why lockdowns in certain countries "worked," while the "half-assed" lockdown states in the US fared poorly compared to no-lockdown states. 

If we just go by the "evidence," then what we essentially see is a huge mess:

1) Lockdown countries (China, Australia, etc.) fared well.
2) Half-assed lockdown countries (USA, UK, France, etc.) fared poorly
3) Half-assed lockdown American states did worse than no lockdown/light lockdown American states.

So what is going on here? Is it just proper lockdown > no lockdown > half-assed lockdown? (But DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE?)

Here's another important question:

What countries/American states LIED about their numbers? Are they all trustworthy?

Just for the record, I don't think every country lied about their cases/deaths, or at least MADE AN HONEST ATTEMPT AT REPORTING, EVEN IF THEY WERE SLIGHTLY "OFF."

However, I do believe a HANDFUL of countries indeed lied about their numbers profusely, including the (((GLOBALIST OWNED))) USA.

Or are there some other variables that aren't being accounted for (e.g. the use of non-patented therapeutics that reduce the death rate?)

This is a subject that is not clear-cut and warrants some investigation.

==========================================================================================

Unz Arg #3: Since critics don’t like the lockdowns, masking, or social distancing, they make legal/constitutional arguments against them. But most people would find those legalistic issues ridiculous if the alternative was so many millions of American deaths.

I want Mr. Unz to substantiate the claim that "the alternative was so many millions of American deaths." 

So far we already know the CFR is < 1%. This <1% CFR is already NOT IN DISPUTE.

Even if everyone did all the **** they wanted to with no restrictions (or "voluntary" restrictions), "many millions of American deaths" is a highly suspect claim. When you say "many millions of deaths" I think 5 million deaths at the BARE minimum. Mr. Unz is probably thinking something like 2 million, which I estimate is still far too high.

There was another moderate alternative proposed early on, which was ignored. If Covid-19 is more likely to kill the elderly and frail, then you can simply do a "hard lockdown" for those groups while allowing others to go about their lives normally.

I need Mr. Unz to also explain why we need to apply lockdowns to people under 20 since

1) Those are crucial development years, and locking them at home almost certainly increases the risk of depression/social disorders (not an issue to take lightly)

2) The seasonal flu is more dangerous to children under the age of 10, yet nobody calls for lockdowns/school closures due to seasonal flus...yes, not even progressive retards think 5 year olds should sit in front of an iPad for all of 1st grade just so maybe 20 out of 4 million (or however many) 5 yr old kids don't die   

Unfortunately Mike Whitney was unable to (or forgot to) make these points, which would have DRAMATICALLY improved his case.

=============================================================================

Unz Arg #4: (On Covid-19 Vaccines)

There are probably tens of thousands of scientific vaccine experts all around the world, and as far as I can tell maybe three or four of them seem to have very serious doubts about whether to vaccinate people against Covid, which suggests that 99.9+% of them support the vaccination effort. According to the AMA, almost all the doctors in America have had themselves vaccinated. Since I don’t know anything about vaccines, that seems good enough for me.

And here is arguably his best point (which some might say is an "appeal to authority" fallacy but I see it as a legitimate argument; that is, if the medical "experts" trust the vaccine, so should you):

With all due respect, Mr. Unz, I would not take the word of the (((AMA))) on anything...it is a LOBBYING ARM of Rockefeller "medicine" and mainstream hogwash, which basically amounts to -

"1 symptom, 1 [SOMETIMES MORE] pill."

For example, if you have some eczema or skin rash, you might be tempted to go to a dermatologist, who will then prescribe some "cream" or "ointment" to suppress your immune system...EXCEPT YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM IS TELLING YOU SOMETHING INSIDE YOUR BODY (LIKELY IN THE LARGE OR SMALL INTESTINE) IS SUFFERING.

Also, the (((AMA))) lobbies against all sorts of "alternative" medicine, claiming they are "quackery" or whatever. They hate the idea of competition and are trying to establish a pseudo-monopoly on "medicine." 

While I DO NOT DOUBT that there is indeed a lot of "quackery" one must sort through in the various fields of "alternative" medicine, the fundamental basis of ROCKEFELLER MEDICINE is filled with deception.

I would also add that my PERSONAL EXPERIENCES with ROCKEFELLER "MEDICINE" have been anything but great...mostly ranging from a waste of time/money to slightly dangerous for my long-term, overall health.

Now I know some people will try to COUNTER me with the argument, "Well your experiences don't invalidate [blah blah blah]. You need to show me some numbers/evidence." 

Then go look at the statistics on American overall health, and get back to me. Do you think those numbers are great?

LOL. They are **** GARBAGE.

And please don't COME BACK TO ME AND say "If ONLY we had Universal Health Care."

Giving everyone access to taxpayer funded "ROCKEFELLER MEDICINE" is not going to change the outcomes. It just means you deliver **** "Rockefeller medicine" to even more people so they get prescribed a bunch of pills/meds.   

Mr. Unz is saying to trust these "medical organizations."

I do not trust them, and don't see how we can reconcile these views. 

=======================================================================================

Unz Arg #5:

The evidence quoted in the newspapers seems to show that although vaccination doesn’t completely prevent the disease, it reduces the risk of a serious or fatal case by something like 90%, and therefore is obviously beneficial. On the other hand, vaccinated people can still apparently spread the disease to others, greatly reducing the public benefit in getting vaccination rates to very high levels. 

I agree with most of this actually, with one caveat - Mr. Unz didn't distinguish between relative risk reduction and absolute risk reduction. 

For retards who don't understand basic math/fractions...I can illustrate below (and why I will not be taking the "vaccine"):

If you're some obese 65 year old with 6 comobordities (whether because you were just an unlucky draw from the gene pool or a retard for not taking care of your health) then yes...there is a good amount of evidence showing that the vaccine would reduce your risk of death....maybe even by 90% compared to if you were unvaccinated.

Your risk profile might look like this:

Unvaccinated risk of death: 1%
Vaccinated risk of death: 0.1%

Your RRR is 90%. Your ARR is 0.9%

In that case, IF I WERE THIS PERSON, I would deem the pros of the vaccines to outweigh the possible cons

(Alternatively I would change my crappy lifestyle/"diet"...oh wait, can't do that...that's too much "work" ~ progressive retards)

Someone like myself does not fit this obese, 6 comorbidity profile. 

My profile is probably something like:

Unvaccinated risk of death: 0.001%
Vaccinated risk of death: (?) 0.0005%

My RRR is 50%. My ARR is 0.0005%.

In other words, NOTHING. THAT 50% IS MEANINGLESS. I ONLY CARE ABOUT THE ARR. THAT 0.0005% IS A ROUNDING ERROR. PROGRESSIVE RETARDS ARE MATHEMATICAL ILLITERATES.

(I put the (?) for reasons anyone with 115+ IQ can deduce)

Mr. Unz has acknowledged the shortcomings of these C-19 vaccines, and I do not object to his assessment (other than the one above). Of course it bears mentioning the vaccine is not some "risk free" choice, which is doubly true when you consider the (LACK OF) length of time these vaccines have been circulating in the general public.

Being skeptical about Covid-19 vaccines is not being an "anti-vaxxer." Please don't propagate this narrative. We already know how the "pros" and "cons" of the Covid-19 vaccine and decided the cons outweigh the pros.

It's a simple weighing of benefits/costs, and maybe if progressive retards understood something called "natural immunity" (which I already stated has been KNOWN SINCE ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS, BUT SOMEHOW ELUDES PROGRESSIVE RETARDS IN 2021 AD) then maybe we could reach some agreement, but they are retarded asswipes so that seems unlikely.
 
 

---

1 Nomination

Cannonpointer Aug 20, 2021

Go to original post on Aug 21, 2021 2:24am
Go to nomination on Aug 21, 2021 1:34pm

Cannonpointer » 23 Aug 2021, 9:00 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2021, 9:00 pm

RNA affects DNA, though - is that not the case?

So manipulating the one may have beneficial or deleterious effects on the other - yes?

No. DNA affects RNA. Not vice versa. 

DNA encodes RNA which enables the body to make proteins which drive all biochemical activity. 

 In the vaccine case. A pre made RNA is injected which codes for the S protein. 

After it is made the RNA degrades. RNA is always temporary. DNA is permanent. DNA doesn’t change your whole life.

Except for new technologies investigating gene editing for replacing defective genes. But this isn’t that. 
 
 

---

1 Nomination

Annoyed Liberall Aug 23, 2021

Go to original post on Aug 24, 2021 6:42am
Go to nomination on Aug 24, 2021 7:08am

AnnoyedLiberall » 01 Sep 2021, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2021, 12:59 pm

That's what I am wondering too.
The war went on too long, and we shouldn't have even been there.
But, the agreement was not kept.
Why did neither Trump nor Biden push back?

Consider my alternative take.

Assume for one moment that the president is not in charge of the joints chiefs, but that they respond and answer to someone above the president 

As evidence for this, I present Trump's repeated and growingly desperate attempts to leave Syria. How many times in our history have we seen a president issue orders to withdraw from the podium of a SOTU address? Only once, to my knowledge - and this hail mary still did not accomplish Trump's stated goal to pull out of Syria. It looked to me like the generals just told the POTUS to **** himself - and to cover his embarrassment, the POTUS simply claimed that it was HIS idea to "occupy the oil fields." But this flies in the face of the orders he gave publicly at the previous SOTU address. 

In my scenario, neither Trump nor Biden is in command. They are gelded figure heads, and we are being run by a shadow government. And not fer nuthin? That shadow government now want to stick us with poisons. 

That's my story, and I'm stickin to it. 
 

---

1 Nomination

SJConspirator Sep 01, 2021

Go to original post on Sep 01, 2021 9:50pm
Go to nomination on Sep 01, 2021 11:56pm

Pengwin » 06 Sep 2021, 10:40 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2021, 10:40 am

Taipan » 06 Sep 2021, 9:49 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2021, 9:49 am

The Taliban are hunting the Americans who are in hiding this morning in Kabul.

They should have left when it was obvious they needed to go - months ago.

 There's only so much we can do to protect the stupid from themselves...

One would have thought we might have learned our **** lesson about this **** in Vietnam.  How soon they forget...and that means the **** up American people who supported these **** "wars against terror" all along.  Believing this "fighting for our freedom" ****.  This was a **** political war for 20 years.  The only reason it wasn't over in 10 years like Vietnam, or even less, is because the ignorant **** American electorate didn't rise up in anger like we did in the late 1960's and force an end to it.  Want to blame somebody for this?  Put it where it belongs...where it always belongs...put it on the American people.  Nah..."support our troops" is what we heard for 20 **** years. What we heard in 1970 at Kent State was "support our troops...bring 'em home."  And they shot us up for it.

The only mistake Joe made was buying the US intelligence services information that the Afghan Army could hold off the Taliban long enough for us to get all our people out safely.  As graft laden and corrupt as the government and military of the Republic of  Vietnam was...the ARVN managed to hold off the NVA for two **** years.  And the Afghans couldn't manage two weeks?  Anybody who wants to blame Joe for any of this is just spewing political loose ****.

What the **** was Joe supposed to do?  Sit back and say..."OK, let's give 'em another 10 years to straighten this out.  Y'know 20 years, 30 years, what's the big ****' deal?  It's just another couple thousand of our people with their legs blown off by IED's."

**** that...and once again, thanks Joe for having the stones to do this.  What happened in Vietnam after the fall of Saigon in 1975, makes the **** going down in Afghanistan right now look like a stroll down the beach.  UN estimates suggest 400,000 Vietnamese boat people died at sea between 1975 and 1985.  Plus how many in the communist purges?  One can only guess.

 
 

---

1 Nomination

nuckin futz Sep 06, 2021

Go to original post on Sep 07, 2021 12:12pm
Go to nomination on Sep 07, 2021 5:52pm

I dare someone to name a time when the US military defended the homeland from a foriegn threat.

There has been stupid accusations against certain presidents saying they "gutted the military"  I say the military has never been gutted ENOUGH

Taxpayers pay $billions every WEEK so we can have "national defense" but when has the defense industry ever DEFENDED anything?

The greatest engagements of the US armed forces have been WWII, Korean war and Vietnam war.  Were those conflicts about "defense"?  How so?

My challenge : tell me when and how the military ever justified the massive expense to the taxpayer.  I say this as a veteran of the US Army who has become highly critical of American foriegn policy

---

1 Nomination

Cannonpointer Sep 21, 2021

Go to original post on Sep 22, 2021 12:37pm
Go to nomination on Sep 22, 2021 2:49pm

Polar1ty » 26 Sep 2021, 2:59 pm » wrote: ↑

26 Sep 2021, 2:59 pm

Has anyone else noticed some distinct patterns among progressive retards?

1) Go to a middling, no-name college

2) Brag about some "achievement" that isn't commendable (If you sold 2 million copies of a book you wrote that would be commendable, nothing progressive retards brag about is anything similar in scope)

3) "I thought about this for 30 s, and here's my pre-canned response that is completely predictable!" - majority of posts

4) Claim "victory" because you made a "gotcha" comment that doesn't actually refute the main point (only a minor detail)

Avg normies are the worst, because dumb people usually don't pretend they are intelligent.

LOL

I believe that right vs left just refers to ppl that inhabit distinct echo chambers. 

They are deliberate echo chambers and both are controlled by the same people.

There is no consistent political prior that defines people in either category...only a different collection of memes and information..

And ppl inbox camps are basically manipulated in in mkultra sort of way. They are taught which people to hate and which to love...what they are supposed to interpret their reality to be...etc..

Various similarities in their personality and behavior are a result of being a biased sample. Progressives are urbanite while conservatives are rural and Christian. Elites do not wish for there to be much communication between these two populations. 
 

---

1 Nomination

Cannonpointer Sep 26, 2021

Go to original post on Sep 26, 2021 5:25pm
Go to nomination on Sep 27, 2021 1:13pm

RollingRock » 07 Oct 2021, 11:12 am » wrote: ↑

07 Oct 2021, 11:12 am

My big question is how, exactly, does this affect my life (or yours) any any substantive way?  

It doesn't.  Why not just respect other people's choices and decisions if they're not harming others?  I don't care how they identify.  Their gender is irrelevant to me.  Either they're a decent person or they're not......that's all I care about.

Ohm and Cannonpointer have answered. It's being used as a club against those who refuse to entertain as reality the delusions of others. Who or what someone is sexually attracted to really should only matter to the individual and perhaps to the who or what they want to ****. If Bob asks to be called Barbra I will comply out of courtesy. If he demands I accept him as a woman, with full rights that come with that gender, I will politely decline. One should not suffer ill consequences for accidentally, unknowingly, or even deliberately identifying someone by their biological gender. 
 

---

2 Nominations

Annoyed Liberall Oct 06, 2021, Huey Oct 06, 2021

Go to original post on Oct 07, 2021 12:20pm
Go to nomination on Oct 07, 2021 11:34am

It seems typical that people pick and choose their ethics based on some instinct or whatever feels good to them. 

This causes ethics To become a bizarre creation which is simultaneously arbitrary and deeply important...and the majority of modern discussions on politics seems to be centered around questions.of ethics...upon which no logic can be employed because it is merely an aesthetic feeling...and so there is no negotiation. Or is their any discussion about issues that are actually.political...such as the analysis of power or indeed even the likelihood of survival.

I think I could at least establish that the highest ethical priority must be survical...and this is for purely logical reasons. 

Quite simply...it doesn't matter how 'good' you are if you don't exist. If you are a being that actually cares about having positive effects on the world...you must exist (survive) in order to accomplish this. Non existing people are no use to anyone.

Therefore if you follow some sort of eadical.pacificism where you refuse to fight even in self defense...and you are attacked by some external enemy that is not as nice as you...then they will destroy and replace you...and so your ethics managed to do nothing more than make the world a worse place.

Likewise if you are in the process of extreme dyslexic decline...where only the least capable people are reproducing and passing harmful genetics to the next generation...you must halt that and turn it around...or again you will fail to survive and just like the radical pacifists your ethics do more harm than good to the world. 

Indeed I believe that all human ethics has its source in survival and biologically evolved instincts that assist survival. The anglo race tends to adopt a very individualistic and open code of ethics...and this is because their strategy for survival involved rapid development of technology...and the traits associated with himan genius are such that the anglo people must foster such an environment in order to nurture such genius. You may not realize that survival and biology is what is really dictating what you think is right or wrong...but if you examine the cause and effect of it I believe you will see that it must be so. That is how evolution works. 

Meanwhile if you notice some ethical standard that is recently adopted and stifles or literally precludes survival...I suggest you investigate where it came from. I believe you will always see it comes from an external source...a competing tribe.

---

1 Nomination

Cannonpointer Oct 11, 2021

Go to original post on Oct 11, 2021 4:27pm
Go to nomination on Oct 12, 2021 12:42am

Officers:

There are those who will defend almost anything you do, on the argument that you are "only human." If you believe this - if you are committed to being "only human," then I invite you to get up, walk out, and get a different job. This is not the job for you.

You have asked for a job which puts you in AUTHORITY over ordinary humans - and by even REQUESTING such a post, you have agreed to be extraordinary. You've promised that you can maintain yourself, [i]while on official duty, [/i]as more than ordinary, more than "only."

We are ALL "only human" - but from among us have risen men and women of great renown and accomplishment - women and men whose names are etched in the history books and spoken of with reverence. All of these were "only human;" yet each rose above and became immortal, became more than human - [i]made a difference.[/i]

You have applied for this very special work because you want to make a difference in your community, want to rise above the pettiness which "only human" allows you to wallow in, want to aspire to the greatness and humility of service. Your mere application is a promise to be more than "only human" - to never hide behind such a weak excuse. Your application is a promise to keep your head when others lose theirs, to keep your calm when all around you are emotional, to REPRESENT THE STATE to a free people. And if this is not true of you, I invite you to withdraw your application, because this is the standard to which you will be held and by which your actions will be judged.

You are no longer only human. You are now among the less than 1% of human beings who have stepped forward proudly and promised to serve and protect - not bully - their fellows. I have only two words for those of you who are "only human:" GET OUT.


[hr]
[size=200][b][color=#aaaaaa]1[/color] Nomination[/b][/size]

[url=https://liberalforum.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1483]Bumper[/url] [size=85]Oct 14, 2021[/size]

[url=https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=713627#p713627]Go to original post on Apr 12, 2016 1:20pm[/url]
[url=https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=1821172#p1821172]Go to nomination on Oct 15, 2021 2:39pm[/url]

Earlier there were 1,660,871 posts & 54,196 topics and now there are 223,460 posts & 4,870 topics.

Why? Why @Misty  ?

We'll be notifying @Chuck  as soon as we get the ClemSignal working. It looks a lot like the BatSignal except it's douche shaped ... it's also ribbed, for Chuck's pleasure ...
 

---

1 Nomination

Cannonpointer Oct 14, 2021

Go to original post on Oct 15, 2021 4:25pm
Go to nomination on Oct 15, 2021 6:29pm

Jantje_Smit » 27 Oct 2021, 9:10 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2021, 9:10 am

So they're finally admitting that it was a real gun... enormous amounts of bullets... and criminal charges... that sounds promising...

A story was out yesterday they were using that gun to shoot beer cans earlier in the day.  Don't know if the armorer was involved.  

Greg Gutfeld brought up a good point the other night.  Baldwin, like most of Hollywood types, is anti NRA.  Ok, I am not a member and haven't always supported all of their positions on laws and lobbying.

What the NRA does have is some of the top Firearm Safety Instructors in the country.  If Hollywood could look beyond their hate and realize that there is some good in the NFA, particularly in the safety area, these type of thing may not happen.  Hire an expert NRA Safety Instructor as armorer and safety officer on these sets.  Swallow their pride and use them.  Guarantee this would not have happened, as well as the other alleged mishaps on that set. 

The other point is these Hollywood types hate guns.  Many are scared of them.  But here they are making movies that glorify gunfights and violence.  Profiting  from what they despise. 
 
 
 

---

1 Nomination

Annoyed Liberall Oct 26, 2021

Go to original post on Oct 27, 2021 10:08am
Go to nomination on Oct 27, 2021 10:25am

There was a time when certain activities were deemed necessary for the benefit of the state and its citizens, and those things were paid for with tax money, creating an unfortunate layer of beaurocracy, but suppressing some degree of corruption that always comes with profit motive.

For example, criminal justice and incarceration. The state governments, and federal penitentiaries were responsible for housing, punishing and rehabilitating prisoners, at the taxpayers expense. Now, the criminal justice system is privatized, with companies like Vanguard (NYSE VTI) making bank off crime, literally. With profit motive clearly driving criminal justice, the United States prison population has ballooned to the highest in The world… we now incarcerate more people than China or Russia, by far.

Providing clean water used to be a function of city government, that was turned over to Nestle who now charges you by the bottle to drink Evian (naive spelled backwards, a subtle mockery of the great unwashed masses).

phone service was once a public utility, now it is handled by private cellular companies like Verizon.

I could go on, there are many examples. The point is, government has no raison det’re anymore, no purpose, no reason to be, except for one thing… to enforce the will of the oligarchs at the barrel of a gun.

If Nestle runs out of ground water to bottle and sell you, the military will secure them new territory to drain more ground water. If Apple runs out of lithium for to make cell phones and iPads, the military will occupy Afghanistan for 20 years so they can mine more. If Monsanto needs to enforce their IP (privately owned seeds and crops) rights by taking over your farm, the military will be there to evict you off your land.

The previous functions of government are totally taken over by multinationals in the U.S., except for deploying government muscle as a tool of the corporations, and keeping track of SS, Medicare, welfare, etc. (pacify the masses with just enough money to keep them from rioting).

This trend will only continue, government is not public anymore. The multinationals ARE the government for all intents and purposes, and they write the laws and enforce them.. Corporations now effectively govern us all, in the applications of operations that used to be public, are now private, and the biggest difference is, we at least got to vote for the public asshole politicians, but nobody elected the current rulers.

They are unelected rulers who can displace thousands or millions of workers by closing down Walmart’s in one town and opening in another. The power of a Fortune 500 CEO to effect the lives of average citizens is far greater than a Senator or governor. Hail to the NEW chief.. multinational corporations

[url=https://postimages.org/][img]https://i.postimg.cc/5yYjd8QL/A0016-B12-AFD6-4169-800-C-A6-C8-E396-D7-D1.jpg[/img][/url]
 
 


[hr]
[size=200][b][color=#aaaaaa]1[/color] Nomination[/b][/size]

[url=https://liberalforum.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1048]nuckin futz[/url] [size=85]Nov 06, 2021[/size]

[url=https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=1841615#p1841615]Go to original post on Nov 06, 2021 3:51pm[/url]
[url=https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=1841988#p1841988]Go to nomination on Nov 07, 2021 11:18am[/url]

Isabel » 18 Sep 2021, 3:04 pm » wrote: ↑

18 Sep 2021, 3:04 pm

You're not in Hicksville any more, assholes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

^ Racist post, attacking democrat nig nogs, from a boozy strumpet - a slack jawed slattern - a scarlet harlot - a loud mouthed shrew - a trailer park tramp - a harridan, a battle ax, a defiled hussy, an intersexed abomination, a peanut butter slut (she'll spread in a Jif), a lipstick whore, a stinkweed of women, a street corner skank, a false-mooing bovine, a beached beluga, a salty-mouthed sea cow, a bellowing ***, a jizz-chinned jezebel, a one-woman suet farm, a greasy-legged street walker, a loud mouthing muslim magnet, a neck-flapped cellulite donor, a hollering horse faced harpy, a practice dummy for mexican rapists, an abortion-happy cum rag, a stark and frightening rebuttal of femininity, a paunchy, drunken guttersnipe, a vile experiment in bloat, an ignorant, misguided slut, a flat-backing floozy, a punch-drunk pudendum pandering pus-bucket, an over-mensing man hater, a yeasty member of the varsity whore squad, an over-sexed midget impersonator, a hairy legged fart dispenser - the original Mad Cow. 
 

---

1 Nomination

nuckin futz Nov 10, 2021

Go to original post on Nov 10, 2021 5:11pm
Go to nomination on Nov 10, 2021 10:22pm

Crazytrain » 18 Nov 2021, 1:21 am » wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021, 1:21 am

So it's all the black people's fault that this country doesn't do great things when republicans run the country. Ok.

Exactly. The rubes don't seem to mind it much when the Republican party whores itself out to farmers whose livelihoods tanked thanks to Trump's trade wars, or when it whores itself out to corporate America and billionaires by making it possible for them to pay zero in taxes, or by passing off a big GIVEAWAY to the filthy rich as some middle-class tax cut (NOT). Nor do they mind when the GOP whores itself out to the NRA, "proud" boys, neo-Nazis, supremacists, and similar vermin. Not to mention the fact that 11 OF THE LAST TEN RECESSIONS OCCURRED UNDER A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION. 

But Black people get a few crumbs? Heaven forbid!!
 
 

---

1 Nomination

Crazytrain Nov 17, 2021

Go to original post on Nov 18, 2021 1:32am
Go to nomination on Nov 18, 2021 1:35am

Africa is full of failed states so any data about it would need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Here are things that can alter rates of transmission: 1) genes. Are Africans asymptomatic less often? 2) vaccination rates..again are they asymptomatic less often? 3) percent of population in rural versus urban environment 4) amount of travel 5) reliability of diagnoses and records 6) how much contact occurs between people for cultural reasons 7) availability of medicine 8) death rates for conditions other than covid (if u die of malaria you can't also die of covid) 9) weather (flu more dangerous in colder climes)

Probably other things I did not take note of.

I can imagine all of these things being a factor more or less. I wouldn't focus on merely one cause

---

1 Nomination

SJConspirator Nov 22, 2021

Go to original post on Nov 22, 2021 8:06pm
Go to nomination on Nov 23, 2021 9:42am

I have been hearing this far too much: conservatives who consume mainstream right wing media/radio/etc keep saying that wokeness...the left...blm...etc are 'marxist'.

This is totally false. 

Marxism was actually fundamentally opposed ideologically to and sort of 'identity politics'. Marx suggested that the evil capitalists use identity to control people with divide and conquer tactics and distract people from the only issues that really matters: class warfare. 

Marx wanted people to 'emancipate' themselves from any racial/national/religious identities and unite as one common proletariat to overthrow the bourgoise. 

Communists also typically saw pet issues like homosexuality, environmentalism, etc. As bourgoise concerns that only the bourgeois have the luxury to virtue signal about. 

Marx also felt it was a complete waste of time to try to turn the sort of people who loot luxury stores into revolutionaries...their criminality still buys into bourgoise concepts of status.

Indeed Martin Luther king...which has somehow become the darling of modern conservatism...whose handler was the Communist jew Stanley levison...was giving a Communist take when he said he didn't want people judged by the color of their skin. 

Indeed modern conservatism is much closer to communism than leftist is. Especially...strange as it may sound...conservatives who celebrate capitalism as a way to lift everyone out of poverty. Because both you and communism place the focus of your values on economics and ending poverty. 

---

1 Nomination

SJConspirator Dec 12, 2021

Go to original post on Dec 13, 2021 4:32pm
Go to nomination on Dec 13, 2021 5:25pm

Well you gotta look at both sides. I think the right wing is all about enriching themselves and having the lower classes pick up the bill

While I see the left as enriching themselves and having the rich pick up the bill. If you confuse the issue you get lost.

---

1 Nomination

SJConspirator Dec 14, 2021

Go to original post on Dec 15, 2021 12:27am
Go to nomination on Dec 15, 2021 12:30am

of course the 'left' is just deciding to worship big pharma and the government as a way to 'own the rednecks'....which is of course the only important activity that exists in their pathetic life.

but there is also way too much trust among ordinary people and even on the right.

It is literally mRNA engineering. it is gene therapy. And clearly you are going to be forced to get boosters every 6 months.

Imagine what the government COULD do if it just wants access to all the DNA of its **** population? And WOULD the government do that sort of thing if they could get away with it? OF COURSE.

We are living in a kafka esque sort of dystopia right now.

The government spies on absolutely everything you do...collects all data on absolutely everyone...and uses AI to analyze that data.

corporations can literally patent a strand of DNA...which of course started out being used for GMO technology.

BUt what if human beings are about to be the new **** GMO? why not?

and we are allowing all of this access because we are afraid of a bad flu? that kills less than 1% of the people it infects?

I really am baffled at the modern man. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

---

1 Nomination

Cannonpointer Dec 17, 2021

Go to original post on Dec 18, 2021 10:12am
Go to nomination on Dec 18, 2021 1:16pm

FOS » 21 Dec 2021, 5:50 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Dec 2021, 5:50 pm

In my experience on the internet.. it is quite obvious that although I can construct very compelling arguments and have a deeply predictive and explanatory view of politics...the left is unable to even hear my arguments.

The people who are able sometimes to admit that I made a point happen to be conservatives and libertarians and sometimes anarchists.

There is an obvious psychological difference between the two. People who consider themselves leftists have somehow been so deeply brainwashed that they have lost all sentience. They just want to be good servants to their masters and could not care less about truth or consequences.

I certainly cannot disagree. But my own experience with the right, PRE TRUMP, is that their behavior was extremely similar. 

These days, it is less pronounced on the right - and it is bloody ubiquitous on the left. But snapshots are snapshots - and the moving picture we live in is a two party production. Back when the repukes became slavish goons for corporate power (for example, huey defended citizens united, as well as torture - neo defended torture - almost every conjob on the board defended torture, and ALL the mother **** defended globalism and so-called free trade), the democrats were still the party of labor. They fought AGAINST globalism. The democrat old guard was stridently nationalist and protectionist, beyond anything Trump manifested.

It was only after republicans turned our nation over to the globalists that democrats threw dignity to the winds and started sucking global corporate dick. 

And not fer nuthin? I can find you an *** load of leftists who oppose aipac and israeli influence. You find me ANY repuke, and I can swab that ***'s mouth for jew semen every time, never fails. 

The repukes are cheek by jowl with the demonrats on covid - if they were not, the game would not be afoot. They are presenting TOKEN resistance, while the demonrats' agenda continues to gain steam. 
 
 

---

1 Nomination

SJConspirator Dec 20, 2021

Go to original post on Dec 21, 2021 6:00pm
Go to nomination on Dec 21, 2021 6:09pm