You must log in or register to comment.
schrodinger: jeez cmon guys all i did was kill a cat (maybe)
Schrodinger’s racism: All non-whites must be deported, but South-African white people must be brought over, granted asylum and protection from “genocide”.
I am white, so there’s no confusion. And no, I’m not saying they don’t deserve help, as the situation in South Africa is pretty bad for them - it’s really just the double standard.
Schrodinger’s tariffs: they’re great, except when they hurt my small business.
That’s just basic cruelty. “Hurting other people is great”
Schrödinger’s Democracy: We The People, unless I disagree with those people.
It’s “We, the people”, not “Them there people”! /s
Schrödingers free speech: You can tweet everything unless it’s against Muskrats opinion.
Classic fascist doublethink. Straight out of the book. The enemy is both strong/dangerous enough to be a serious threat, but the fascist is still somehow very superior to them. 🤷
Schrödinger’s Election: it’s rigged unless we win.
It was rigged but ALSO we won.
Schrodinger’s immigrant: they’re both lazy moochers and taking all our jobs.
Schrodinger’s immigrant for the Trump era: they’re all criminals and have no criminal records… clearly because they’re such good criminals.
This is actually how Russians do their propaganda. NATO is weak but also the greatest threat to our nation. Sending Abrams to Ukraine is pointless as they are useless tanks and Ukraine has already lost, but also sending Abrams is crossing a line and a declaration of war.
Gee, wonder where Trump learned it from?
Zelenskyy is simultaneously a puppet of The West™ and a wizard mind controlling EU and US
And how NATO does propaganda against both Russia and China.
Oh? Can you give an example? Because I’ve mostly seen official channels take Russia very seriously
Taken very seriously while it’s economy is in shambles and it’s military is depleted to the point of relying on Soviet era relics?
Why can’t both of those be true? Should Europe ignore Russia until they CAN march into Amsterdam? There are far too many corpses in Ukraine not to take them seriously, regardless of economics.
Is your face okay after walking into the point that hard and not seeing it?
To stealman it, I’d say it’s in how China has a large navy that’s also incapable, or has extensive R&D that copies the west’s homework and only makes cheap parts. Russia is both incapable of taking on Ukraine and justifies the need for much greater EU military expenditure.
There’s some nuance to this. China’s navy is large, but it’s mostly built as a green water navy (close to their shores), and not a blue water navy. Russia can’t take Ukraine, but it’s because both the EU and US have been feeding them, and US support is drying up.
China’s R&D, however, is something I think we should take more seriously. They’ve done most of the practical applications of new battery tech and have spun up an EV industry from scratch.
To stealman it
Is that when you steal your talking points from someone else?
I mean, these arguments really only work if you disregard that NAFO isn’t NATO.
LOL like Russia isn’t depicted the same way by our propaganda? GTFOH…
Sorry, no Orcs allowed, you’ll have to leave.
Gee, wonder where Trump learned it from?
It’s Fascism 101.
The greatest threat to a nation being weak technically isnt a contradiction. If all your enemies are weak, even the most powerful is weak
the followers [of fascism] must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.
– Umberto Eco, Ur-Fascism https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/umberto-eco-ur-fascismThe loser’s flag, the confederate’s is flown today in my neighborhood, and they are determined to make us all losers.
You don’t need to learn it from anywhere. Look at the stereotype of cats who love affection when they want it even if you’re busy but who get mad when you initiate when all they’re doing is lying there. All these people have really “done” is not grow out of being whiny, bitch-ass toddlers. They’re just deeply insecure, immature assholes with zero compassion or self-awareness.
While simultaneously having compassion and empathy for billionaire fascist. lol.
You just described my ex. I’ve never known a cat to be that shitty to me though.
If you’re a trans American upset that you can’t be part of the US military in 2025, what the fuck are you even doing?
I just commented to get rid of the 88 count. Smash the fash.
This is a mixed metaphor. Women are kept out of frontline combat much like they’re sidelined to the WNBA: segregated under the guise of inclusion.
Err does anyone on the right actually think we have secure borders?
Like wasn’t “securing the borders” part of Trump’s pitch? As in “there’s an invasion taking place and we need to secure the borders”?
The trans one is spot on though
Err does anyone on the right actually think we have secure borders?
Yes, Trump and his administration keep saying this.
“The Invasion of our Country is OVER.” https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114088564162922800
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/04/28/100-days-most-secure-border-american-history
the rest of the world thinks it’s terribly hilarious. and now they’re picking a fight with canada? lmao that’s a hell of a wall to build to keep out a teaspoon of fent.
and there’s no point in asking the “right” in the usa any questions any more, because they can’t be trusted to answer you in good faith. they’re lost, and it’s just a matter of time before america realizes they’re really just on the brink of a war with themselves.
It’s telling that Trump never brings up the Sackler family and Purdue Pharma. They’re the one’s directly responsible for over prescribing opioids and causing the fentanyl crisis in the first place. The court system has let them completely off the hook.
I’m not sure the trans one is contradictory in the conservative mindset. Trans women are too “manly”, trans men are too “effeminate” according to them.
Their military excuse is actually that a person who switches gender can’t be honest and committed, which is just as crazy, it still has that view that people “choose” to be trans and by choosing to be trans they should a lack of commitment to their birth gender i guess??
That’s why I’m appalled this is even a discussion, they aren’t even pretending to have a valid military or medical excuse, they just jumped straight to “Group is bad because I don’t like them.”
I lived through post 9/11 bullshit and how they wanted to ban Muslims from the military, all the open racism and rhetoric. Same shit different day and target, it’s a right wing pattern they always follow
You swore an oath when you signed that birth certificate! “I swear to uphold my assigned gender and to maintain my proper genital configuration until death!” It’s right there on the document, you can’t fool us with this whole “I was literally minutes old, I didn’t sign anything! That’s not even a thing!” That’s just what a Communist oath breaker would say!
True story. Back in 2008 there were two op-ed pieces on the smae page of the Murdoch owned New York Post.
One said that voting for Obama was a waste of time, because he was a centrist neoliberal who’d only serve up milder versions of GOP programs, so you’d be better off with an actual Republican.
The other screamed that he was a radical Socialist who would destroy America.
Same newspaper, same page, no irony
Brace yourself for all the “gotcha!” comments from enlightened centrists that don’t understand the core concept of controlled opposition or propaganda.
People nitpicking on the internet?
Un-possible!
Theres nitpicking, and theres just disingenuous horse shit from centrists telling you that ummm actually both sides are the same.
Isn’t this what the opinion page is for?
Not only is it what Op Eds are for, it’s also extremely common practice to have two contrasting views on the same page to give voice to a variety of different opinions.
Complaining about two Op Eds on the same page with different opinions is like complaining that a dictionary has two definitions of two different words on the same page.
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of an Op Ed?
So, you read what I wrote and concluded that in life I’d only seen one Op-Ed page?
You funny, in a sad way.
Apparently so. You seem surprised that there were two people who had different opinions on the same page in the Op Eds. That’s what Op Eds are.
Again, I ask, are you familiar with the concept of an Op Ed? Or are you just confused that people might have different opinions?
Both opinions agree that you should not vote for Obama, that is the editorial strategy, the different motivations are to capture the whole range of voters.
Nowadays it is even easier to do this, thank to personalized news. They can tell unemployed people that immigrants are stealing all the jobs, while they can tell taxpayers that immigrants are leaving off grants. They can even tell cat lovers that immigrants are eating all the cats.
The idea you are pushing that Op-Eds are a whiteboard for diverse opinions is either innocent or malicious.
Op Eds are obviously influenced by the bias of the newspaper that runs them. But, there’s no need to veer into conspiracy theories just because two of them happen to be anti-Obama for different reasons.
You get funnier and funnier.
Please keep telling me about how much smarter you are than I am.
I’m just letting you prove it yourself.
So, you got nothing?
Too bad, I could always use another laugh.
The rest of us are laughing at you, so you could try that?
