The establishment left seems to have suddenly come to the conclusion that the tranny hill is the one they'll die on if they try to hold it.
I really thought they'd never abandon it. The trans thing always seemed crucial to their war on individualism, families and identity, but it seems they've realized that the resistance to it is so strong it threatens to undermine the rest of their social engineering project.
The halfway intelligent ones have realized it's a losing battle and they need to back off.
The radicalized zealots still want all gas no brakes. So far, the zealots have been the dominant faction politically, with the remainder cowering in fear.
It's going to be fun to watch them eat each other. The radicalized zealots aren't just going to let this go. Libtards are indoctrinated as children to see the civil rights movement as the most virtuous thing a human can do, so each new generation of libtards needs to invent their own version of it to LARP out, and they're at the bottom of the barrel now with trannies.
"The radicalized zealots still want all gas no brakes. So far, the zealots have been the dominant faction politically, with the remainder cowering in fear." It is really insane. The only people I see regularly making death threats online are trans people. Just straight up saying they will murder someone for joking they are "super straight" or will play harry potter game, or suggesting a man is indeed a man. I see presumably teens on instagram freaking out that making fun of some insane person is "transphobic." It's hilarious that people are so fervent about one of the biggest psyops in history. I would feel bad for them if they weren't so virulent. They all seem to be deeply disturbed, sad people.
They won't abandon it. They'll just scale back its public visibility like it used to be. It was festering in the US since WWII era, and hardly anyone was paying attention.
They won the gay equality fight by appealing to (old definition) liberal values and arguments. I don’t even mind that they won it, I care not what adults do to each other. But then they thought the next step was to convince people to abandon liberalism and replace it with their non-evidence-based Marxist ways of thinking, all this progressive stack, lived experience, sit quietly and listen white boy bullshit. You can do that if the “substrate” by which you try to push that stuff through is something most people already agree about: racism bad, women equal, let gay people be gay, maybe we weren’t very nice to the Indians, etc. That’s why it feels like they’re trying to rehash old battles, because they aren’t really so much trying to convince us that we’re racist (etc.) but using a divisive issue like race relations as a “substrate” to change HOW we think (or don’t think, I’d say is more accurate).
But they didn’t count on having to fight for trans acceptance or that trans/non-binary bullshit would suddenly become trendy. The problem with trans activism done through an illiberal lens or framework is that they never laid the foundation for trans acceptance through a liberal argument that most people could come to an agreement by. Unlike the other identity groups, there was no trans liberation before, argued for on lines of “don’t we deserve these rights you have” or “hey we’re just people too.” Instead, it’s all been illiberal arguments: do what we say or you’re LITERALLY KILLING US, gender is only ASSIGNED AT BIRTH, you don’t know until you get older… total bullshit claims they can’t prove with evidence (liberal method) so the have to just demand we accept them or else we need to be re-educated (illiberal method).
By demanding trans acceptance using an illiberal framework, they’re asking people to do two new things at once, not just one like CRT does, for example. Even people who think of themselves as being quite progressive in a slightly older sense (so pre-Trump announcing his run perhaps) don’t really buy all the trans, non-binary, faegender, they/them bullshit. So I suspect the establishment is pumping the brakes on that stuff just a bit, because if ordinary people start going “no, hang on, that’s a man in a skirt,” it’s easy for them to then ask, “and hey, why do you get to tell me what to think and yell at me if I have questions,” and then “and what do you mean, showing up on time is white supremacy,” etc etc and the whole damn thing comes unraveled.
This is all just one man’s hypothesis, but I think this is close to what they’re thinking. They need to pull back the reins on the trans thing and get illiberal systems of (non-) thought planted firmly in the Western conscious first, and then maybe after that’s done they can bring the trans along to acceptance, since a illiberal society will accept whatever you tell them to accept. They probably now wish they’d held off on the illiberalism for a decade so they could do the trans fight under the old rules, but entitled students at Evergreen and Yale opened the Marxist jar earlier than the Marxists might have liked (in retrospect), and so they have to make strategic decisions.
Does this op-ed mention the British teenager who was brutally murdered for being trans this week? No.
Oh, you mean the case where they found no evidence that the faggot's degenerate "identity" played any role in his death? That one? Lying little fuckers.
As if that matters. There was no evidence of Matthew Shepard nor the Florida gay bar shooting, but these people were programmed to repeat lies, so they will.
The same way that the majority of the "trans deaths" they whine about happen during prostitution gone wrong, a profession wherein actual women also day in absurd numbers.
Strong disagree. The defense boils down to "she rly is on your side".
And truth be told, she is. The problem is that they are so extreme that they have pushed the Overton Window way out into orbit, so someone who is supportive of troonery becomes a conservative.
That said, I still do respect Rowling because she has courage.
Well the defense is that she is not "transphobic", which is still knifing the trannies in the back since they need to destroy JK in order to flex their political and social power, and the NYT is directly opposing them in that effort.
The whole game the trannies play is to exaggerate to manipulate, calling everything violence and targeting everything that they dislike as no different than calling for trans genocide. It turns out a decent number of libs (who end up as the trannies primary targets) are sick of their bullshit.
Well the defense is that she is not "transphobic", which is still knifing the trannies in the back since they need to destroy JK in order to flex their political and social power, and the NYT is directly opposing them in that effort.
Disagree. Suppose I said that Ron DeSantis is a communist infiltrator who loves trannies. And the New York Times wrote an article saying "no, no, Ron DeSantis is actually a great guy, he opposes communism and is anti-tranny". That may be a defeat for my delusion, but it's definitely a victory for the right.
The maximalist, orbit-position enables the 'moderate' position to be far more skewed in favor of the bad side than otherwise.
The whole game the trannies play is to exaggerate to manipulate, calling everything violence and targeting everything that they dislike as no different than calling for trans genocide. It turns out a decent number of libs (who end up as the trannies primary targets) are sick of their bullshit.
They're still surrendering 95%. So while I'm glad to see infighting, and I support "libs" who are courageous enough to stand up to this vicious lobby, and it's good to show the true nature of the troon lobby, the war is not going to be won with the JK Rowlings of the world.
It's Zelensky syndrome. When you've got a guy in a t-shirt demanding nuclear war, or close to it, and always being unhappy, even the most escalatory steps become the moderate, compromise position. Quite crafty really. The right should learn from this. Maybe Stormfags can be deployed to that end. "OK, no segregation, but blacks will get only the rights others have, no more".
You seem to be confused about something. I'm not suggesting that the NYT are somehow heroes of the Right, they're still libtards.
I never said the NYT aren't being good libtards. I'm pointing out libtard infighting. Of COURSE it's better for the Left that the trannies get shut down. Of course the NYT wants to do what's best for the Left.
Up until now, the NYT and other bastions of libtard elites have refused to fight the trannies out of fear of being the 1st one into the breach and getting torn apart. The fact that the NYT published a feminist Op ed in direct conflict with the trannies is a watershed moment in the Left's tranny civil war between the trannies/intersectionals and the TERFs.
None of this is good for the Right except as entertainment. I never suggested that the people at the NYT are becoming right wing or would vote republican. Those things are impossible.
I never said the NYT aren't being good libtards. I'm pointing out libtard infighting. Of COURSE it's better for the Left that the trannies get shut down. Of course the NYT wants to do what's best for the Left.
So we want liberals to be less unreasonable so that when they do gain power, as inevitably they will (assuming I were to accept your ideas about 'democracy' and all that), so they'll do less damage, right?
The fact that the NYT published a feminist Op ed in direct conflict with the trannies is a watershed moment in the Left's tranny civil war between the trannies/intersectionals and the TERFs.
I also want the GC to win, because they are less crazy.
None of this is good for the Right except as entertainment. I never suggested that the people at the NYT are becoming right wing or would vote republican. Those things are impossible.
Sure, but I'm just saying that this may not be the defeat for the lobby. Make extreme demands, settle on a 'compromise' that is grossly skewed in your position, that is actually brilliant "strategery".
So we want liberals to be less unreasonable so that when they do gain power, as inevitably they will (assuming I were to accept your ideas about 'democracy' and all that), so they'll do less damage, right?
Yes, if liberals realize their ideas are unpopular so they back off, that is how democracy works to maintain balance and stability. Trump & BLM/Covid caused the libtards to get so worked up that they began to act against democracy by pushing too aggressively. They SHOULD have been dealt a punishing defeat in the 2022 election, but Trump saved them from that by promoting retard candidates who lost what should have been easy pickups.
Sure, but I'm just saying that this may not be the defeat for the lobby. Make extreme demands, settle on a 'compromise' that is grossly skewed in your position, that is actually brilliant "strategery".
Not in this case. This is about internal power struggles within the Left, and the radicals were indoctrinated to be uncompromising. The more radical the Democrats are, the more elections they will lose.
Yes, if liberals realize their ideas are unpopular so they back off, that is how democracy works to maintain balance and stability.
The only thing that matters is popularity among the elites. The troons had been good at intimidating the elites into silence, but now that more and more see their own children going down the drain of this idiocy, they become more critical. So yeah, that is how oligarchy works.
They SHOULD have been dealt a punishing defeat in the 2022 election, but Trump saved them from that by promoting retard candidates who lost what should have been easy pickups.
They weren't the only ones who lost though.
Not in this case. This is about internal power struggles within the Left, and the radicals were indoctrinated to be uncompromising. The more radical the Democrats are, the more elections they will lose.
As the Trump presidency showed, they continue pushing their agenda even when a nominal opponent is in power. That is because they control the bureaucracy.
The only thing that matters is popularity among the elites.
If elites push things too far out of step with the people, you get a backlash like you saw with Trump.
The troons had been good at intimidating the elites into silence, but now that more and more see their own children going down the drain of this idiocy, they become more critical. So yeah, that is how oligarchy works.
I see the troons as a weapon forged by the elites, especially the atheistic jew elites who often are the thought leaders of the Left. These leftist elites made their troon weapon and unleashed it, thinking it would aid in their destruction of American culture and society. However, the troons are now getting in the way of their mainstream control by shifting swing voters to the right, and are also engaging in a lot of friendly fire, so SOME of these elites have decided it's time to rein in their weapon.
They weren't the only ones who lost though.
I can't think of a single good candidate who lost. DeSantis absolutely crushed it in Florida. All the high profile losses were Trump-endorsed candidates who had a lot of flaws. These bad candidates dragged the whole side down, too, because the media could run nonstop headlines about how "ULTRA MAGA" the republican slate was.
they continue pushing their agenda even when a nominal opponent is in power. That is because they control the bureaucracy.
Yes and I've told you that fighting back against the long march through the institutions is a generational struggle. We currently have no easy answer to it. The eventual answer will be that we need to strip as much power away from the bureaucracy as possible so they lack opportunities to abuse it.
It's an American Conservative web site. Idk what about it would be "neocon" since the articles I've seen there have plenty of Ukraine skepticism in them.
Also, "neocons" were all basically democrats, and they switched back to Democrat party identity when Trump showed up. All of them endorsed Biden. So no, Republicans can't be associated with "neocons" anymore.
Never mind, I must have misremembered, because there is nothing in my history indicating that. I think it's because Allahpundit is a neocon of the highest order, but that's on Twitter, and not on the website.
EDIT: Wow, he actually quit Twitter because Musk restored free speech. What a moron.
I think it's because Allahpundit is a neocon of the highest order, but that's on Twitter, and not on the website.
Hotair fired Allahpundit because he became too liberal and provoked too many complaints, despite being a founding member of the site.
I have a history with Allahpundit. I started to follow him back in the early 2000s when I was in law school and he had a blog "Allah is in the House" where all his posts were in the voice of Allah, talking about various topics making fun of jihadis and liberals. Allahpundit was a major player in the right wing blogosphere for Rathergate in the 2004 election, and I had a front row seat.
Allahpundit was consistently right wing until Trump showed up. Trump broke him. Then in 2020 with BLM and Covid, he went full Democrat. I realized that Allahpundit only became right wing in response to 9/11 out of fear, then, when Covid showed up, he switched sides again out of fear. His impulse was that he wanted authoritarian "strong government" to save him from what he feared. Very sad to see a man so controlled by fear and so delusional to think that the government could actually save him.
Hotair fired Allahpundit because he became too liberal and provoked too many complaints, despite being a founding member of the site.
Hm... firing a founder is a bit troubling, but I do think it is justified in this case.
I have a history with Allahpundit. I started to follow him back in the early 2000s when I was in law school and he had a blog "Allah is in the House" where all his posts were in the voice of Allah, talking about various topics making fun of jihadis and liberals. Allahpundit was a major player in the right wing blogosphere for Rathergate in the 2004 election, and I had a front row seat.
To be clear, much of that was "LOLZ LIBS ARE TRAITORS FOR NOT SUPPORTING OUR WARS", not? (And yes, I know most of their politicians did.)
I realized that Allahpundit only became right wing in response to 9/11 out of fear, then, when Covid showed up, he switched sides again out of fear. His impulse was that he wanted authoritarian "strong government" to save him from what he feared. Very sad to see a man so controlled by fear and so delusional to think that the government could actually save him.
Actually, I'm unfortunately similar to that. I supported all the anti-terror measures after 9/11, which governments gleefully imposed here as well, same for lockdowns during Covid. I like to think that I now learned my lesson, but only time will tell.
I guess a George W. Bush Republican will definitely switch now that the Democrats are more warmongering than the Republicans.
Or maybe he was always a grifter. Who the hell knows? If you can't tell if I'm an FSB contractor despite interacting with me quite a lot, I can't tell based on someone's carefully curated posts.
To be clear, much of that was "LOLZ LIBS ARE TRAITORS FOR NOT SUPPORTING OUR WARS", not? (And yes, I know most of their politicians did.)
No, it was speaking as "Allah" to make fun of jihadis. Example:
Allah finds it hilarious that the Jew Rumsfeld's account of his exchange with a South Korean journalist appeared in newspapers on the same day as this story. You have some interesting "friends" there, Satan. Now you know how the peaceful Palestinian people feel vis-a-vis the rest of the Arab world. Speaking of which, did you know that the Jew is the "cancer" of the region and that he is disseminating his "venom" in the Middle East in hopes of conquering Saudi Arabia? It must be true; Allah heard it on Palestinian television. The imam also said that "[m]ixing with the Arabs gave the Jews an Arab trait – courage," and that makes sense since, hey, no wonder the IDF keeps winning wars.
The establishment left seems to have suddenly come to the conclusion that the tranny hill is the one they'll die on if they try to hold it.
I really thought they'd never abandon it. The trans thing always seemed crucial to their war on individualism, families and identity, but it seems they've realized that the resistance to it is so strong it threatens to undermine the rest of their social engineering project.
The halfway intelligent ones have realized it's a losing battle and they need to back off.
The radicalized zealots still want all gas no brakes. So far, the zealots have been the dominant faction politically, with the remainder cowering in fear.
It's going to be fun to watch them eat each other. The radicalized zealots aren't just going to let this go. Libtards are indoctrinated as children to see the civil rights movement as the most virtuous thing a human can do, so each new generation of libtards needs to invent their own version of it to LARP out, and they're at the bottom of the barrel now with trannies.
"The radicalized zealots still want all gas no brakes. So far, the zealots have been the dominant faction politically, with the remainder cowering in fear." It is really insane. The only people I see regularly making death threats online are trans people. Just straight up saying they will murder someone for joking they are "super straight" or will play harry potter game, or suggesting a man is indeed a man. I see presumably teens on instagram freaking out that making fun of some insane person is "transphobic." It's hilarious that people are so fervent about one of the biggest psyops in history. I would feel bad for them if they weren't so virulent. They all seem to be deeply disturbed, sad people.
well, it's true that all those people you're seeing are mentally ill.
They won't abandon it. They'll just scale back its public visibility like it used to be. It was festering in the US since WWII era, and hardly anyone was paying attention.
I think its really a case of seeing that pushed too hard too early and are pulling back to not shoot their "credibility" out the window just yet.
The same way the gay thing had to take a backseat in the for a while before the late Bush/Obama era it blew up again and succeeded better than before.
They won the gay equality fight by appealing to (old definition) liberal values and arguments. I don’t even mind that they won it, I care not what adults do to each other. But then they thought the next step was to convince people to abandon liberalism and replace it with their non-evidence-based Marxist ways of thinking, all this progressive stack, lived experience, sit quietly and listen white boy bullshit. You can do that if the “substrate” by which you try to push that stuff through is something most people already agree about: racism bad, women equal, let gay people be gay, maybe we weren’t very nice to the Indians, etc. That’s why it feels like they’re trying to rehash old battles, because they aren’t really so much trying to convince us that we’re racist (etc.) but using a divisive issue like race relations as a “substrate” to change HOW we think (or don’t think, I’d say is more accurate).
But they didn’t count on having to fight for trans acceptance or that trans/non-binary bullshit would suddenly become trendy. The problem with trans activism done through an illiberal lens or framework is that they never laid the foundation for trans acceptance through a liberal argument that most people could come to an agreement by. Unlike the other identity groups, there was no trans liberation before, argued for on lines of “don’t we deserve these rights you have” or “hey we’re just people too.” Instead, it’s all been illiberal arguments: do what we say or you’re LITERALLY KILLING US, gender is only ASSIGNED AT BIRTH, you don’t know until you get older… total bullshit claims they can’t prove with evidence (liberal method) so the have to just demand we accept them or else we need to be re-educated (illiberal method).
By demanding trans acceptance using an illiberal framework, they’re asking people to do two new things at once, not just one like CRT does, for example. Even people who think of themselves as being quite progressive in a slightly older sense (so pre-Trump announcing his run perhaps) don’t really buy all the trans, non-binary, faegender, they/them bullshit. So I suspect the establishment is pumping the brakes on that stuff just a bit, because if ordinary people start going “no, hang on, that’s a man in a skirt,” it’s easy for them to then ask, “and hey, why do you get to tell me what to think and yell at me if I have questions,” and then “and what do you mean, showing up on time is white supremacy,” etc etc and the whole damn thing comes unraveled.
This is all just one man’s hypothesis, but I think this is close to what they’re thinking. They need to pull back the reins on the trans thing and get illiberal systems of (non-) thought planted firmly in the Western conscious first, and then maybe after that’s done they can bring the trans along to acceptance, since a illiberal society will accept whatever you tell them to accept. They probably now wish they’d held off on the illiberalism for a decade so they could do the trans fight under the old rules, but entitled students at Evergreen and Yale opened the Marxist jar earlier than the Marxists might have liked (in retrospect), and so they have to make strategic decisions.
The early Bush years were peak liberalism before the economic crash caused people to shout for regulation again.
It is such an absurdly imppossible concept, that they have to retreat.
Oh, you mean the case where they found no evidence that the faggot's degenerate "identity" played any role in his death? That one? Lying little fuckers.
As if that matters. There was no evidence of Matthew Shepard nor the Florida gay bar shooting, but these people were programmed to repeat lies, so they will.
The context never matters.
The same way that the majority of the "trans deaths" they whine about happen during prostitution gone wrong, a profession wherein actual women also day in absurd numbers.
Strong disagree. The defense boils down to "she rly is on your side".
And truth be told, she is. The problem is that they are so extreme that they have pushed the Overton Window way out into orbit, so someone who is supportive of troonery becomes a conservative.
That said, I still do respect Rowling because she has courage.
Well the defense is that she is not "transphobic", which is still knifing the trannies in the back since they need to destroy JK in order to flex their political and social power, and the NYT is directly opposing them in that effort.
The whole game the trannies play is to exaggerate to manipulate, calling everything violence and targeting everything that they dislike as no different than calling for trans genocide. It turns out a decent number of libs (who end up as the trannies primary targets) are sick of their bullshit.
Disagree. Suppose I said that Ron DeSantis is a communist infiltrator who loves trannies. And the New York Times wrote an article saying "no, no, Ron DeSantis is actually a great guy, he opposes communism and is anti-tranny". That may be a defeat for my delusion, but it's definitely a victory for the right.
The maximalist, orbit-position enables the 'moderate' position to be far more skewed in favor of the bad side than otherwise.
They're still surrendering 95%. So while I'm glad to see infighting, and I support "libs" who are courageous enough to stand up to this vicious lobby, and it's good to show the true nature of the troon lobby, the war is not going to be won with the JK Rowlings of the world.
It's Zelensky syndrome. When you've got a guy in a t-shirt demanding nuclear war, or close to it, and always being unhappy, even the most escalatory steps become the moderate, compromise position. Quite crafty really. The right should learn from this. Maybe Stormfags can be deployed to that end. "OK, no segregation, but blacks will get only the rights others have, no more".
You seem to be confused about something. I'm not suggesting that the NYT are somehow heroes of the Right, they're still libtards.
I never said the NYT aren't being good libtards. I'm pointing out libtard infighting. Of COURSE it's better for the Left that the trannies get shut down. Of course the NYT wants to do what's best for the Left.
Up until now, the NYT and other bastions of libtard elites have refused to fight the trannies out of fear of being the 1st one into the breach and getting torn apart. The fact that the NYT published a feminist Op ed in direct conflict with the trannies is a watershed moment in the Left's tranny civil war between the trannies/intersectionals and the TERFs.
None of this is good for the Right except as entertainment. I never suggested that the people at the NYT are becoming right wing or would vote republican. Those things are impossible.
So we want liberals to be less unreasonable so that when they do gain power, as inevitably they will (assuming I were to accept your ideas about 'democracy' and all that), so they'll do less damage, right?
I also want the GC to win, because they are less crazy.
Sure, but I'm just saying that this may not be the defeat for the lobby. Make extreme demands, settle on a 'compromise' that is grossly skewed in your position, that is actually brilliant "strategery".
Yes, if liberals realize their ideas are unpopular so they back off, that is how democracy works to maintain balance and stability. Trump & BLM/Covid caused the libtards to get so worked up that they began to act against democracy by pushing too aggressively. They SHOULD have been dealt a punishing defeat in the 2022 election, but Trump saved them from that by promoting retard candidates who lost what should have been easy pickups.
Not in this case. This is about internal power struggles within the Left, and the radicals were indoctrinated to be uncompromising. The more radical the Democrats are, the more elections they will lose.
The only thing that matters is popularity among the elites. The troons had been good at intimidating the elites into silence, but now that more and more see their own children going down the drain of this idiocy, they become more critical. So yeah, that is how oligarchy works.
They weren't the only ones who lost though.
As the Trump presidency showed, they continue pushing their agenda even when a nominal opponent is in power. That is because they control the bureaucracy.
If elites push things too far out of step with the people, you get a backlash like you saw with Trump.
I see the troons as a weapon forged by the elites, especially the atheistic jew elites who often are the thought leaders of the Left. These leftist elites made their troon weapon and unleashed it, thinking it would aid in their destruction of American culture and society. However, the troons are now getting in the way of their mainstream control by shifting swing voters to the right, and are also engaging in a lot of friendly fire, so SOME of these elites have decided it's time to rein in their weapon.
I can't think of a single good candidate who lost. DeSantis absolutely crushed it in Florida. All the high profile losses were Trump-endorsed candidates who had a lot of flaws. These bad candidates dragged the whole side down, too, because the media could run nonstop headlines about how "ULTRA MAGA" the republican slate was.
Yes and I've told you that fighting back against the long march through the institutions is a generational struggle. We currently have no easy answer to it. The eventual answer will be that we need to strip as much power away from the bureaucracy as possible so they lack opportunities to abuse it.
So they’ve been knifed in at least two places, then.
I love to see infighting in the intersectional coalition. This is what you get for making mentally ill people the tip of your spear, libtards.
Opened link, and it immediately asked me to install something.
Archive your shit.
Archive.
You mean "click here to enable DRM" which you just ignore. Hotair is a conservative site and they deserve the views.
I clicked on a link somewhere today, and it came up with reminder that Flash support has been discontinued.
I did not end up viewing that "website"
Eh... I guess they don't hurt overall, but it is a neocon type website.
It's an American Conservative web site. Idk what about it would be "neocon" since the articles I've seen there have plenty of Ukraine skepticism in them.
Also, "neocons" were all basically democrats, and they switched back to Democrat party identity when Trump showed up. All of them endorsed Biden. So no, Republicans can't be associated with "neocons" anymore.
Never mind, I must have misremembered, because there is nothing in my history indicating that. I think it's because Allahpundit is a neocon of the highest order, but that's on Twitter, and not on the website.
EDIT: Wow, he actually quit Twitter because Musk restored free speech. What a moron.
Hotair fired Allahpundit because he became too liberal and provoked too many complaints, despite being a founding member of the site.
I have a history with Allahpundit. I started to follow him back in the early 2000s when I was in law school and he had a blog "Allah is in the House" where all his posts were in the voice of Allah, talking about various topics making fun of jihadis and liberals. Allahpundit was a major player in the right wing blogosphere for Rathergate in the 2004 election, and I had a front row seat.
Allahpundit was consistently right wing until Trump showed up. Trump broke him. Then in 2020 with BLM and Covid, he went full Democrat. I realized that Allahpundit only became right wing in response to 9/11 out of fear, then, when Covid showed up, he switched sides again out of fear. His impulse was that he wanted authoritarian "strong government" to save him from what he feared. Very sad to see a man so controlled by fear and so delusional to think that the government could actually save him.
Hm... firing a founder is a bit troubling, but I do think it is justified in this case.
To be clear, much of that was "LOLZ LIBS ARE TRAITORS FOR NOT SUPPORTING OUR WARS", not? (And yes, I know most of their politicians did.)
Actually, I'm unfortunately similar to that. I supported all the anti-terror measures after 9/11, which governments gleefully imposed here as well, same for lockdowns during Covid. I like to think that I now learned my lesson, but only time will tell.
I guess a George W. Bush Republican will definitely switch now that the Democrats are more warmongering than the Republicans.
Or maybe he was always a grifter. Who the hell knows? If you can't tell if I'm an FSB contractor despite interacting with me quite a lot, I can't tell based on someone's carefully curated posts.
No, it was speaking as "Allah" to make fun of jihadis. Example:
Pay close attention to this, because this is the first time we will be able to see who is really pulling the woke cult's strings.