From the interviews at the end:
...why not give it [female president] a go once? It could end wars.
Reeeeetard detected.
Definitely Trump. He'll be more fun if he wins.
Hahaha.
Also, look at the discomfort from the lady on the right.
...could lead to widespread civil rights violations against women, immigrants, transgender individuals and political opponents.
If only Trump was the horror they thought he as.
Also, Oxford comma; use it, bitches.
How did a convicted felon, who sought to overturn a presidential election that he decisively lost just four years ago, win the votes of more than 72 million Americans?
"Decisively" my ass. And we all know what happened. Trump won three elections.
Yes, but also sadly no.
Technically, yes. In practice, and how people think about it...sadly no. We're so far beyond that "old school" type of thinking, and most people couldn't even tell you what "free speech" is. Perception is, sadly, important, and most people couldn't even grasp your argument. It's sad that this was a largely a talking point liberals agreed with, in even the 90's and 00's, and now most leftists/progressives are staunchly opposed to the concept.
For some reason, a communication carrier isn't a carrier, if it's digital, or does games, or TV, or anime, or VOIP, or what have you. All must be regulated, all must censor "hate speech."
Also, these fuckers would censor you for talking shit over AT&T if they could, and they'd love to get there eventually. Thankfully judges sort of knew what they were doing back then, some of the time, so it's much harder to go after established telecom carriers than new digital "platforms."
It's a shame our government went further to shit, as technology rapidly developed, so we're missing a lot of protections in the digital sphere. And no, I'm not talking regulations on the companies, but regulations on the government being able to censor people online.
TL;DR: Technically speaking, asking Steam to censor its customers is like telling AT&T to police what someone says over the phone, but in practice and perception (i.e. what people expect and ask for), digital platforms don't get that same protection or perceived benefit of the doubt, so vast swathes of people will not see it as the same, and will think it's totally Steam's job and responsibility to police the speech of their users. Woof, that was a sentence.
Just curious, and this isn't at you specifically, but why are people acting like Steam won't cave like everyone else? Heck, they already have a bunch of turbo-progressive faggots all over their community teams, and Steam community mods can give Reddit mods a run for their money.
I like and use Steam, and have for decades, but it's not like they're not already cucked. Why wouldn't they cuck harder? Go along to get along, and all that.
Or do you just mean, like some other comments said, that this nonsense will further radicalize the big bad Gamers? Because yeah, that would be funny.
Yup, and there was some stuff that people found suspicious about the emergency response, evacuation, and the like, as well as weird stuff like the parents all getting new houses or some weird stuff like that. I don't remember all the specifics, but there was some odd stuff. And, as per usual, it wasn't hard to find connections to the FBI.
I wouldn't swear by any of it, but people should certainly be allowed to theorize. "Conspiracy theories" are still protected speech. In fact, it should be the most protected speech, as it's usually against those in power, which is part of the whole point of the First Amendment, that the government doesn't get to shut down dissent.
"Politics is downstream from culture," and all that.
You can call them grifters - and many are, perhaps even all depending on definition - but to act like they're changing nothing is silly.
Political commentators are having an impact, because the things they talk about are things that need more normalization in the culture. It's shifting the Overton window, as well as pushing cultural events like our own GamerGate, Trump winning (three times), and the like. It's all connected.
Which is not to say everyone has to watch political commentators, and I certainly get tired of them myself. But they serve a very important role of initially helping people wake up some. They provide an important counterpoint to legacy media.
I honestly think we wouldn't have as much hope for our culture as we do, if not for many of these commentators. And, again, that's not even saying I personally like them. But they've been undeniably useful. So many people like to shit on them for 'not doing things,' but fact is them talking to a large audience is infinitely more than almost all of the whiners will ever do.
You say they're blackpilling people. I'd say the 'you're not doing anything' crowd is embracing the blackpill much more.
You don't have to like them, but they're not useless. Talking about the problems is a step toward solutions. People who already know the problems aren't the target audience.
Who can reply?
Accounts @ADL follows or mentioned can reply
It's extra pathetic when an official organization pulls this crap.
Also odd, since they seem to love to provoke antisemitism, to keep their grift going. You think they'd love to give "Nazis" the opportunity to harass them while they dox people.
Also, the article (archived, fuck the ADL) is worth a read, as it's hilariously lame.
Lastly...Cruz? Is this another Hispanic White Supreme? I couldn't find out much about "Cyan Cruz," but for humor alone I choose to believe it is this anime character, which was one of the search results. Not sure where the "Cruz" came from, as she seems to just be Cyan Hijirikawa on other pages, but it's still funny so I'm going with it.
White Supremacist Maid Catgirl Cyan Hijirikawa Cruz.
Truly a diverse coalition.
I have guns. I still need more guns. Lots of guns.
How does this hack still have a job? There needs to be a rule that, if you ever get utterly blown out in public, like this dude did on Rogan, or with what Kamala had done unto her by Tulsi, you just have to slink away and live out the rest of your days in a cave somewhere. You don't get to go back on TV to peddle the same old evil, and you don't get to be VP.
Ahhh, gotta love shifting language.
When, you mean back in the day where a lot less people were depressed? Back then? Before we started "treating" depression like we do now? That way? Just checking...
What single solution? The one that you yourself, at the start, admitted he was basically right about, and would likely cure, by your own numbers, seventy percent of people...and would still help the rest? That solution? Because that seems like, at the very least, maybe something we should try. You fucking prick.
Well, that one dude will be very relieved there's a solution now! (Yes, exaggeration, don't @ me, as they say.)
A real journalist would have asked the obvious follow-up: "What, roughly, would you say is that percentage?"
This is what pissed me off enough to go through this again. We say we hate journalists...but the real problem is we don't have any journalists left in legacy media. Most people on the "pro-journalist" side have never seen a journalist in their lives, and wouldn't recognize one if it bit them on the ass...which is more something these fake and gay propagandists would do, to be fair.
Seriously, though. What fucking percentage? And is it being prescribed above or below that percentage? And how many six year old kids qualify as being people for whom nothing else works? How many people should be taking Ozempic?
Look, I just did more journalism while ranting on the internet over my morning cup of coffee than most of these fucks will do in their sorry lives.