dirtyhairy

Things the media won't tell you.

3,105 posts in this topic

Just now, silentbob1272 said:

It always comes back to being somehow on him? Nothing about the piece's of crap making these statements\threats, Not just Madonna, Snoop dog, or BW, but the many, many examples on a daily basis on social media, they just get ignored or brushed aside as you do here.

Threats to kill you or rape and make your wife a sexual slave. Meh, doesn't he have more important things to worry about?

GTFO

Yeah, just don't expect too many people to make much outrage about a sexist, racist and misogynist president that got into office for being sexist, racist and misogynistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how that article identified Milo the pedophile enabler as a conservative figure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, silentbob1272 said:

More than anything else this is the type crap that I find most annoying

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/324233-violent-threats-against-the-president-is-ok-now

Violent threats against the president are OK now?

Turn on TV or browse your newsfeeds on social media, and you will be bombarded with polemics about the sky falling and credible threats of violence against conservative figures.

The FBI investigated a threat to kill Milo Yiannoupolis for the audacity to want to speak on a college campus. Threats against former Labor Secretary nominee Andy Puzder’s wife caused him to withdraw himself from consideration. Multiple intimidatory remarks haunted members of the Trump-voting Electoral College. President Trump has been the target of declarations of violence on a near daily basis.

And yet, when it comes to this constant flow of threats, there seems to be little outrage from the nation’s leading journalists and pundits.

 

Social media shines almost every day with a new dimwitted threat against Trump and his presidency. “Comedienne” Sarah Silverman called for a military coup. Madonna told protesters she “thought” about blowing up the White House. Violence seems to break out every time a conservative comes to speak at a college campus. Rosie O’Donnell talks about “stopping” Trump on Twitter.

  

Snoop Dogg has done his best to get back on people’s radars since 1998 with his new music video in which he assassinates a clown dressed as Trump. Even if it was just a stunt by the 45-year-old rapper to stay relevant, it was still completely crass and unacceptable.

The media has largely glossed over these serious threats with a shrug. A simple Google search on Snoop Dogg’s assassination video, for example, yields virtually no mainstream editorials expressing disgust. It’s almost as if there’s an overarching belief among the media that Trump brought this upon himself.

All of these actions underlines what’s been obvious for a while now: The calls by President Obama for “civility” after the 2011 shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords were never genuine. The left only uses such efforts as a cudgel to silence their political foes, then turns around to call them Hitler when needed.

The selective outrage is deafening. Obama was certainly the target of vicious remarks, but the calls for outright violence from the left have received nowhere near the same attention in the press as conservatives received during the Obama years.

Every time a threatening, disrespectful, or unflattering comment was made about the former president, a national shaming storm sprung up. A staffer for an obscure congressman was forced to resign after stating that Obama’s daughters don’t show enough "class." Ex-congressman Joe Walsh was slammed in nearly every major outlet after he tweeted, “This is now war. Watch out Obama,” after five cops were fatally shot in Dallas. Even Tea Partiers were regularly called neo-Confederates.

 

Selective outrage gets tiring, even in the Trump years.

Both sides of the political spectrum seem to understand the concept of “outrage fatigue.” An Huffington Post op-ed asked its readers if they suffered from protest fatigue — the author wrote, "Daily I am poised to do something to ride the emotional tsunami." Fortunately for those of us constantly seeing crises on Facebook, we already have a term for such an ailment: The boy who cried wolf. Heck, the Onion was on this over a decade ago.

Political tensions are reaching a boiling point and the mainstream media, pundits, and “analysts” do nothing but fan the flames. The American people are quick to pick up on coverage patterns. Many are still making up their own minds about President Trump but understand that he is doing his best. They know (and maybe support) that the Democrats are the opposition party. They don’t want the media to be another.

These are serious times requiring serious attention – not just adoring coverage of ***** Hat protesters. At the end of the day it’s going to be the members of the traditional press gaggle left pointing fingers.

 

Yesterday's example. Where are the p***y hats decrying this misogyny? 

cjimvl0.png

These punks, these hollywood losers are part and parcel to why the left has lost so much, so quickly. They aren't learning from defeat. They are doubling down on their idealogical bent. They are hysterical to the point of dooming themselves, individually. Oh well, let them cry and moan, as we see so many here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dirtyhairy said:

These punks, these hollywood losers are part and parcel to why the left has lost so much, so quickly. They aren't learning from defeat. They are doubling down on their idealogical bent. They are hysterical to the point of dooming themselves, individually. Oh well, let them cry and moan, as we see so many here. 

I can take the crying, pissing, and moaning. That's what has come to define the left, but the daily barrage of death and now rape threats? Not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, silentbob1272 said:

I can take the crying, pissing, and moaning. That's what has come to define the left, but the daily barrage of death and now rape threats? Not so much.

These folks are out of their minds. There going to cause mayhem and chaos and people are going to get hurt and some killed.

silentbob1272 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dirtyhairy said:

These folks are out of their minds. There going to cause mayhem and chaos and people are going to get hurt and some killed.

And I can see the First Lady's tatas on a Google search.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dirtyhairy said:

Good for you but maybe you should stick to your wife's. 

I like yours, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, silentbob1272 said:

I can take the crying, pissing, and moaning. That's what has come to define the left, but the daily barrage of death and now rape threats? Not so much.

That is what defined the right in the previous eight years. Maybe it's just something that defines the opposition.

Leon Troutsky and Statick like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost as though irresponsible rhetoric can create a dangerous political environment.  I think the last time that I raised this exact point I was called a partisan hack.

Also, we're talking about some entertainers making these comments.  Stupid and dangerous, yes.  But how much more so is the rhetoric coming from actual elected officials like the President of the United States?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

That is what defined the right in the previous eight years. Maybe it's just something that defines the opposition.

When it comes to things political, no one gets irony anymore, even when they're imbibed in it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

That is what defined the right in the previous eight years. Maybe it's just something that defines the opposition.

Nah, it's the left. Look to your party's leadership as an example, or to your party's propaganda arm, or to your party's violent thugs posing as protesters for months on end now, or to your party's actual protesters for months on end now, or... you get the idea.

The left has won the battle for the biggest crybaby b*tches by a sizable degree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, silentbob1272 said:

Nah, it's the left. Look to your party's leadership as an example, or to your party's propaganda arm, or to your party's violent thugs posing as protesters for months on end now, or to your party's actual protesters for months on end now, or... you get the idea.

The left has won the battle for the biggest crybaby b*tches by a sizable degree. 

"Nuh uh! You're the bigger crybaby!"

Statick likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

It's almost as though irresponsible rhetoric can create a dangerous political environment.  I think the last time that I raised this exact point I was called a partisan hack.

Also, we're talking about some entertainers making these comments.  Stupid and dangerous, yes.  But how much more so is the rhetoric coming from actual elected officials like the President of the United States?

You gloss over the literally thousands of such examples on social media, but it's no big deal to threaten and wish death on the president. Ask Statick, Trump has other **** he should be worrying about.

WhenFalconsWin likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, silentbob1272 said:

Nah, it's the left. Look to your party's leadership as an example, or to your party's propaganda arm, or to your party's violent thugs posing as protesters for months on end now, or to your party's actual protesters for months on end now, or... you get the idea.

The left has won the battle for the biggest crybaby b*tches by a sizable degree. 

You do not see the right RIOT and destroy property and assault people. This is all too the left as activism is part of their movement. The left tried to portray the tea party as violent, which was a lie, and when you compare the  wallstreet protesters and anarchist's on the left, there is NO comparison. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, silentbob1272 said:

You gloss over the literally thousands of such examples on social media, but it's no big deal to threaten and wish death on the president. Ask Statick, Trump has other **** he should be worrying about.

So did you only start checking social media over the past few months? This stuff is nothing new. The only thing that has changed has been the sides doing it and decrying it.

Leon Troutsky likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt you two were crying when people were talking about lynching Obama and saying his wife should go procreate with gorillas in Africa. 

Statick likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dirtyhairy said:

You do not see the right RIOT and destroy property and assault people. This is all too the left as activism is part of their movement. The left tried to portray the tea party as violent, which was a lie, and when you compare the  wallstreet protesters and anarchist's on the left, there is NO comparison. 

Instead you see them threatening to kill federal workers, shooting cops, occupying state parks, etc. You know, peaceful stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, silentbob1272 said:

You gloss over the literally thousands of such examples on social media, but it's no big deal to threaten and wish death on the president. Ask Statick, Trump has other **** he should be worrying about.

It is a big deal and it's dangerous.  My point is that it was dangerous when Trump and others were doing it to Obama and Democrats.  The rhetoric about "death panels" in Obamacare led to one member's family having their gas lines cut.  The pizzagate nonsense put out by the likes of Michael Flynn led to a guy going to that pizza joint with a loaded rifle.  You don't think there was stuff just as bad on social media back then?

And when I pointed out how dangerous irresponsible rhetoric could be, I got called a partisan hack and people argued endlessly about how the rhetoric in no way leads to violent outcomes.  Now some of those same people are accepting my earlier point, but only because it's their side being targeted.

Maybe we should care more about dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric when it comes from our side?  Maybe we should have a serious discussion about it without people defaulting to partisanship and defending anything their side says, however stupid and irresponsible it might be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Psychic Gibbon said:

Instead you see them threatening to kill federal workers, shooting cops, occupying state parks, etc. You know, peaceful stuff.

Shooting cops, hmmm, I would suggest you leftist have that by about 10,000 to 1. As for occupying state parks, I'd suggest you tree hugging lefty's actually chain yourselves to tree's, ram boats, destroy the environment as you riot and protest. You leftist can't demonstrate without leaving trash and human feces. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Spectre said:

I doubt you two were crying when people were talking about lynching Obama and saying his wife should go procreate with gorillas in Africa. 

I don't care about insults. I do care about death threats to the president and rape threats to the First Lady. I never saw one threat to lynch Obama, if I had, my reaction would be exactly the same. That so many others are different now should cause those people to pause and examine how far we've sunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Spectre said:

I doubt you two were crying when people were talking about lynching Obama and saying his wife should go procreate with gorillas in Africa. 

I did not see any of that and if I had, I'd have called that out as liable. 

silentbob1272 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

It is a big deal and it's dangerous.  My point is that it was dangerous when Trump and others were doing it to Obama and Democrats.  The rhetoric about "death panels" in Obamacare led to one member's family having their gas lines cut.  The pizzagate nonsense put out by the likes of Michael Flynn led to a guy going to that pizza joint with a loaded rifle.  You don't think there was stuff just as bad on social media back then?

And when I pointed out how dangerous irresponsible rhetoric could be, I got called a partisan hack and people argued endlessly about how the rhetoric in no way leads to violent outcomes.  Now some of those same people are accepting my earlier point, but only because it's their side being targeted.

Maybe we should care more about dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric when it comes from our side?  Maybe we should have a serious discussion about it without people defaulting to partisanship and defending anything their side says, however stupid and irresponsible it might be?

That's going to be tough sell when its been going on for decades. You have people that can only see Left vs Right or Dem vs Repub when it comes to politics.

It's a tougher sell now being that the current president is a (former?) reality TV star that can't keep off social media to expose his views and feelings, a lot of which is shared by a lot of Americans.

So, who goes first? Who stops first? No one believes they're wrong and both sides believe they're right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.