M4A1 ?
2021 American Civil War
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
M4A1 ?
If you need to add a sauce to your gun you are not doing it right.
Can you imagine the outrage on the right, if say a BLM protester had refused to eat and gotten the same treatment? They practically worshipped Joe Arpaio for treating his inmates like human feces, when he was still sheriff.
Seems like a good sauce.
I thought it was the libs that were all tree hugging hippie types? It's almost as if the whole thing was a stereotype or something.
I'd wager the overwhelming majority of Trumplicans probably find this clown's organic diet and complaining as stupid.
Alt-righters are actually pretty big on environmental protection.
Their biggest calling card is race segregation/white supremacy, but on a range of issues from the environment, taxation, healthcare etc... they are quite similar to the left, which makes sense really because they skewed younger on average than your boomer business/Reaganite conservatives.
In my experience the variance is huge here, the alt right is ironocally a very diverse bunch. The average alt righter absolutely cares more about the environment than the average right winger, I agree on that, but I wouldn't say it's anything like a defining trait of a "typical" alt righter if that makes any sense. You're probably just as likely to meet a Hoppean "libertarian" as an ecofascist, and the "normal right winger just extra racist/genocidal" camp is huge. The accelerationists tend to talk about the environment a lot, though, and then you have the "welfare state but for white people" gang where it's pretty mixed I think.
Well that completely blows my worldview to shreds.
Direct consequence of ending Reconstruction because they wanted the votes of southern whites.
Idiots gonna idiot.
I'm not sure where you've met your Ctl-Alt-Del peeps, but the ones I knew down south had absolutely nothing in common with the left on the issues of environment and healthcare. Each and every one was 100% anti regulation and were ecstatic as Trump demolished the EPA. Each and every one thought the idea of medicare for all was communist (but still bitched about not having their own healthcare). Maybe there was overlap on taxes, as in they thought they should not have to pay them, but that is about it.
Same here in SC. Which always confused me... these are folks who love to go hunting and fishing all the time, but simultaneously actively support destroying the environment that they hunt and fish in.
These aren’t your typical red neck mouth breathers, they would be the ones born in late 80s onwards who are fairly if not very online, worship Hitler, prefer a white ethno state with strong welfare and anti-intervention.
It’s implied in the name. Alt-right, not your states right Confederate traditional US conservatives.
There is no conclusion to be drawn from the name "Alt Right". It was nothing more than a rebranding of the white-supremacist/Neo Nazi movement.
It is, and it’s also how they differentiate themselves from what a right winger/conservative was then defined in mainstream discourse.
Also as has been said above, this group encompasses many different subgroups and some of them wouldn’t be out of touch fiscally or environmentally with the Reaganite conservatives, but by and large the group that gained most attention/notoriety in online space under that tag holds those belief about the ethno state, welfare state, environmental protection and isolationism.
I think there's quite a big difference between online alt right communities and the "normal" white supremacists you'd meet out and about.
Found the sequel. They are shitting themselves over potential lawsuits
Surely it doesn't matter how big a disclaimer they put on that. They've given his bonkers ranting their platform.
He needs to be locked in a room lined with MyPillows
Surely so. They took his cash for that time slot. They're just as responsible IMO, especially with that nonsense end line in their disclaimer, basically telling the tin foil hatters "we still support you!"
It's funny and deranged, but it's also a little bit scary. Millions of Americans probably believe he's right, and they are getting more and more sure that democracy is a sham and your vote doesn't matter. This isn't going to get better.
If they stop voting it will.
Some of those who stop voting will instead pursue anti-democratic (and violent) means of achieving their goals.
They might, however: the whole set that doesnt believe in elections any longer is the minority. The subset of those, who are able and willing to form sort of violent response is tiny. Some of these will probably indeed die on this hill, but most will see that there is no point in continuing.
At the end, there will be trouble , however not voting in q-nuts en masse will be the better outcome.
As disclaimers go, it was water tight until that bit at the end where they gave his lunacy a small semblance of credibility by declaring people were entitled to hear it so they could determine what may have happened.
Hopefully by including that they are royally fecked and sued out of business by Dominion.
But surely a disclaimer like that should offer no protection, right? By airing it they are allowing the slander/defamation to be aired on their channel.
If NBC puts up a disclaimer that says "the following commercial does not reflect what we think should be on the air" and the shows a 30 second clip from a porno I doubt that is going to protect them from the FCC. Right?
Usually this kind of disclaimer is enough...it separates the network's decision makers from the opinion and the courts usually agree. But the piece at the end was different and not something I've come across before. Like I said, hopefully it's enough for Dominion to threaten OAN out of existence.
In your example, the porno clip is against FCC rules, and the network would rightly be sanctioned. Opinion pieces usually have a bit more leeway and media companies can protect themselves by using disclaimers but this one, as I said above, gets a bit loose at the end. They really didn't need to attempt to justify why they were airing it. All they had to say was My Pillow Guy paid for this airtime and the opinion expressed does not reflect the opinion of OAN, just as they would for any two bit infomercial.
This was my point of view too. I don't see what a disclaimer can do when you're providing a daft point of view with direct access to your audience with no opposition. They can present anything under the sun as fact without counterargument.
So back to my example. If NBC aired an "opinion" piece from someone who wanted to prove that the source of all STD's was Ron Jeremey, (which is far more likely than any of Pillow Biters theories), and showed movie clips as proof, would they be protected? I know it is absurd, but I just don't see how claiming in the beginning that "this is lies" can protect you. What if someone starts watching in minute 2? They miss the disclaimer. I would get it if OAN had to flash "Bullshit" on the screen every 5 seconds, but a quick disclaimer at the beginning seems flimsy at best, even without the last 2 lines.
Found the sequel. They are shitting themselves over potential lawsuits
Crack, the effects last forever... Or is he back smoking it?
Q trying to assimilate back into society, yet needs to redpill the office team meeting.
Both of your examples break FCC rules around obscenity. These rules are rooted in US law that says obsecene material isn't protected speech so that's why the broadcaster would be penalized.
Mr. Pillow's opinion piece made on paid airtime doesn't violate those rules and therefore is protected speech under the first amendment. OANs disclaimer is an attempt to avoid legal liability for airing the content.
The bulk of the disclaimer ("hey it's not what we believe and he's paid for this airtime") along with the first amendment would probably offer them a good amount of liability protection but the parts that go on to claim "viewers need to know this because maybe it's true" take away from that for me.
What's even more strange is that they are preaching to the choir so there's no real need to go there. Their lawyers must've thought it was fine and would offer more protection under FCC rules.
Looks like our friend Roger Stone will somehow manage to go to jail after his pardon.
"His coat feel so good"
"Mr Roger"
"Mr Roger"
I'd say that they have strong commitments to the race/traditional values part of the program, and are diverse (rather than left-wing) on the rest. Lots of alt-righters have come from libertarianism (the @libertyhangout twitter account is a famous example) and they feel that a strong, non-democratic state is necessary to enforce property rights, for example.
"military is the only way"