Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

Umm... the blacklist was created by the HOUSE on Unamerican Activities.
View attachment 1579022

Which would have been hard for SENATOR McCarthy to participate in.

The Tydings committee never investigated Hollywood.

You're basically mixing up 2 different events in American history and getting them kind of wrong.

If you don't want to read boring stuff, random youtubers can help.
This is wrong mcCarthy never targeted the entertainment industry. Roy brewer was the one who spoke up against the communists there.

McCarthy's story and legacy was heavily edited by the media and was twisted.
It still doesn't change the fact that Joseph McCarthy was an idiot when it came to optics then.

If he played his own cards right back then during the whole thing and if he also had far better optics before he could decide to then make his next move then he would have never started attacking the U.S. Armed Forces then. He made far more enemies than friends and that's what finally did him in.

So while I don't deny that there were obviously communists at the time, Joseph McCarthy should have picked his battles more carefully then.

This is why if you're going to start shit then you better not make a total jackass of yourself because it won't end well anyway.
This isn't how this works. This isn't how any of this works. Usually when a dictator rises to power the first thing that they do is to get rid of the elections and if they do keep elections then they're there for show only and then they abolish and purge anyone and anything that gets in their way anyway.

Now when a dictator gets elected, you usually either start a violent revolution to overthrow them or you wait for them to die then.

So as far as I'm concerned, I've never heard of a case where a dictator lets their people vote them out of office by the way.

This only shows me how dumb these people are then.
 
Last edited:
No, he's accusing Pentagon weenies and fucking Nobles and Sellouts of seeking to start wars to boost profits.

You know, like the Dems accused Bush, Halliburton, and the Military Industrial Complex as well as the US government since the 1940's?

Plus, it';s not an attack on the military.

It's coming right out and saying that the civvy scumbag contractors, the Nobles, and the Sellouts are shit-bags.

But can't expect a leftist or a neo-con to understand that.

You know, for all the sperging the left does about the military-industrial complex (when a Democrat isn't in the White House), none of them ever seem to have actually dealt with it. They just screech about how war is bad, and profit is evil, so put the two together and I just can't even.

If any of them had ever dealt with military contractors, on any side of the transaction (government, contractor, military user, supply chain, etc), they could understand just how banal it can be. They might understand how that banality is a specific kind of danger to the national character.

Yes, you can condemn it without condemning the country, or the military, or even some of the people who are putting in a good-faith effort at their jobs.
 
I remember 7 years ago when my old friend Ekdahl posted this to Buzzfeed of all places lol https://www.buzzfeed.com/johnekdahl/14-principled-anti-war-celebrities-we-fear-may-hav-a1x1

https://archive.md/BRHn4

It's amazing how the teams change when who is in the office and their policy positions. Remember the Russian Reset and how we need to normalize relations with Russia? Hell you have Leftists now defending free trade when they ran against it for year saying it cost American jobs. Back when Clinton signed NAFTA you had Perot saying there's going to be a massive sucking sound at the border as all the corporations shifted all their Manufacturing to Mexico.

Like Seinfeld said years ago, most people are literally rooting for laundry. They don't have actual principles, they just have negative partisanship.
 
You know, for all the sperging the left does about the military-industrial complex (when a Democrat isn't in the White House), none of them ever seem to have actually dealt with it. They just screech about how war is bad, and profit is evil, so put the two together and I just can't even.

If any of them had ever dealt with military contractors, on any side of the transaction (government, contractor, military user, supply chain, etc), they could understand just how banal it can be. They might understand how that banality is a specific kind of danger to the national character.

Yes, you can condemn it without condemning the country, or the military, or even some of the people who are putting in a good-faith effort at their jobs.

9-11 created a kafka trap where the Democrats can't fucking say no to the military or military action or be seen as soft on war, less another terror attack like the September 11th attack happens as the GOP will blame the Democrats for allowing it to happen and use it to decimate the Democrats ala how 9-11 castrated the DNC for an entire generation until Obama came along.

The Democrats held a rather apathetic view on the threat of Osama Bin Ladin, never making much of a serious attempt to catch him/kill him due to the fact that never thought he would do something that would fuck America's shit up on the scale of the 911 attacks. They paid dearly when Bin Ladin proved them wrong and it's one of the reasons why the DNC capitulated to the Iraq War as quickly as they did and why Obama renegged on all of his promises to end the wars and roll back the Patriot Act.


The House has rules about fucking your Staffers. She was Fucking one of her Staffers

I must've missed this, what happened?

To be more exact, Katie Hill was a bisexual turbo slut who was fucking men AND women and got caught in photos engaging in creepy ass S/M style play with a naked female intern that was her "slave" and IIRC accusations of her using campaign funds as bribes to get male staffers to fuck her, which was the real reason she resigned, as the Democrats wanted to nip THAT scandal in the bud before it busted wide open.
 
Last edited:
1599542981230.png


1599543063900.png


A very strange political spergout.
 
You know just because I have been working on putting my Theory about the Expansion of the Military Industrial Complex into other areas I have The Wiki article on it open.

.

Just...let me point out the following part

gained popularity after a warning on its detrimental effects in the farewell address of President Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 17, 1961.[8][9]

*gets a beer can*
Totally Unprecedented.
*Sips beer.*
YUP
 
It still doesn't change the fact that Joseph McCarthy was an idiot when it came to optics then.

If he played his own cards right back then during the whole thing and if he also had far better optics before he could decide to then make his next move then he would have never started attacking the U.S. Armed Forces then. He made far more enemies than friends and that's what finally did him in.

So while I don't deny that there were obviously communists at the time, Joseph McCarthy should have picked his battles more carefully then.

This is why if you're going to start shit then you better not make a total jackass of yourself because it won't end well anyway.
You should watch the video linked to you which you obviously didn't. McCarthy was wildly popular during his time as a senator and during his trials and after he resigned. The problem came from the media spin on it and that's a battle nobody could win pre-internet. It didn't matter what anyone did or said or how good their eyes for optics were if the media decided you were kaput. It tanked Orsen Welles career long term, it tanked Nixon's career and legacy. The saying "Don't pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel" is a saying for a reason. No amount of optic expertise could have saved McCarthy pre-internet. It's partly why they hate Trump. He is able to use the internet and the media themselves to get his message across and make them look like fools.
 

If you think everyone who doesn't agree with you is a fascist, irrelevant of any other context, maybe you aren't anti-fascist either? Considering the ramifications of "agree with me or get fucked" taken to the logical extreme will result in.... well.... fascists?
 
I always love the "In the US, white supremacists/far-right extremists have committed nearly three times as many terror attacks on US soil than Islamic terrorists have" line that people post. Considering the demographics of the US, isn't this a terrible point to bring up if you're trying to show just how non-violent Muslims (who are typically Arab) are?
 
I always love the "In the US, white supremacists/far-right extremists have committed nearly three times as many terror attacks on US soil than Islamic terrorists have" line that people post. Considering the demographics of the US, isn't this a terrible point to bring up if you're trying to show just how non-violent Muslims (who are typically Arab) are?
Nah that's not even the interesting thing since they use it as a comparison to say "why worry about a Muslim when a white guy is worse!"

They ignore 9/11 when they make these statistics up.
 
I always love the "In the US, white supremacists/far-right extremists have committed nearly three times as many terror attacks on US soil than Islamic terrorists have" line that people post. Considering the demographics of the US, isn't this a terrible point to bring up if you're trying to show just how non-violent Muslims (who are typically Arab) are?
Also, one of the deadliest mass shooters in the US was Muslim (Pulse shooting).
 
I always love the "In the US, white supremacists/far-right extremists have committed nearly three times as many terror attacks on US soil than Islamic terrorists have" line that people post. Considering the demographics of the US, isn't this a terrible point to bring up if you're trying to show just how non-violent Muslims (who are typically Arab) are?
These stats also use a very loose definition of terrorism when dealing with the “far right” while being ridiculously strict when dealing with Islamic terrorism. You’ll have non-political personal murders, such as a man killing his uncle to run away with his aunt, listed under “far-right terrorism” while Ahmed murdering people while screaming Allahu Akbar will be considered “workplace violence”.
 
Back