Venandi

As a PS, I probably should have mentioned that your go to brand of "dismissive arrogance" will only serve as fuel to accelerate the see-saws amplitude. I'm retired now, for me it comes down to the choice of scotch or popcorn while I watch the show... maybe both eh? I'll save you a seat. Cheers.

A final thought: You are going to find reverse messaging to be a technique that only works occasionally... It seems like you think that you just invented it. You may be able to sell the idea that the right invented cancel culture and that it all started with Bill and Kaepernick to ROBO-MONKEY, but after that initial success, your audience will dwindle precipitously. I don't think you're going to like the inevitable see-saw ride as much as you think. From what I've seen of the world it ends with people (usually innocent people BTW) being catapulted over the playground fence while those that built the damn see-saw blame park maintenance for the very fence they voted to erect. Here's what's going to happen... You will eventually settle for a compromise you could have had on day one and come to realize that the pain it took to get it wasn't worth the cost of admission to the park. Ask that old guy with the medals (at theLegion)... I bet he says the same thing.

Really? Bill was never cancelled... he's actually about the only reasonable libby on offer. I tend to think he's someone a thoughtful person could even negotiate with and achieve a compromise. His repeated warnings to progressive L/W lunatics should be amalgamated into a single video and they should all be forced to watch it until their eyes bleed.

Both widely known for being avid Trump supporters and raving MAGOTs... right? I stand in Awe. Do you proofread anything you write? Do you take a moment to think about it? Have you considered why this is blowing up in your face or that it may be the beginning of a long, bump and grind slow-dance? Or do you simply assume that your audience here is (collectively) as bat shi% crazy and easily lead as ROBO-MONKEY and Herb? I'm not trying to be confrontational here... I just think you're headed for Lemming Ridge on Crazy Island and think you should buck the trend and turn back before PNR... as opposed to leaping into "the void of darkness." Don't take my word for the potential pitfalls here...Remembrance Day is coming up. Go to the legion and find an old gray haired guy with lots of UN medals and ask him.

Please read the post directly above this one 10 times and then answer the following question: WTF did you think was going to happen?

DID he NEED to SAY it WHILE he WAS DOING it FOR it TO count, MONKEY Duh? The ROBO-MONKEY says: "YOUR ^FANTASIES" are RIDICULOUS. See Dunning-Kruger thread for WHY."

OK, I see you're doing it on purpose. Have you considered that you're going to see this same tactic applied in reverse? I'd submit that you're just starting to see it manifest itself now, that there's much more of it to come and that you're not going to like it. Narrative reversal techniques like "Kirk's shooter was a MAGOT motivated by the fact Kirk wasn't MAGA enough" and studiously avoiding direct evidence to the contrary whilst repeating the talking point in sound bites is something you'll be seeing again before you know it... Republicans will (I say) are adapting and will continue to adopt progressive information management techniques... if they're wise. Frankly, you've been lucky up to this point that someone (dare I say) like me wasn't running the war room... I'd have been gleefully pummelling you with your own BS long before now.

You're kidding right?

There, FIXED it FOR you. THE final WORD is YOURS and HERE it IS: ^YOUR OPINIONS don't make ME WRONG, lDIOT.

I'VE already SAID I don't LIKE this PARTICULAR EO but HEH, there WAS no HINT of LAWFARE under THE Biden ADMINISTRATION umbrella... right? The VILLAGE ide0t says: "Thanks for confirming you STILL GOT BUPKIS LMAO"

Actually, I was hopping you would absorb the ridiculousness of my statement (above) and relate it to some of your own rhetoric. I'm not going to waste time looking up the origin of this because facts don't seem to matter much here, but as I recall: The FCC (and a couple of other regulatory bodies) were placed under the supervision of the WH by EO in the first quarter of this year. Trump's position on this (at least insofar as it applies to the FCC) was that the MSM (and off shoots of it), did not reflect the opinion of the majority of voters and was (I'll call it) overly weaponized. Prior to that, WH influence was mostly limited to the selection of the heads of regulatory boards. That's my simplified version of it anyway and while I understood his thinking on the matter, I thought then (and still do) that it was a bad idea because of how easily it could be weaponized by any administration for political gain. Now, just imagine an EO like this in the hands of democrats... since they invented the very weaponization I most fear, I think it would be a bonafide disaster for free speech. Apart from general principle, that's my personal reason for opposing it but I'm now thinking that democrats are frothing at the mouth waiting until it's their turn to do the same thing. When that time comes they will deploy the same information management techniques they now decry and they'll do it with a vengeance... all whilst wishing that they had thought of it first.

You repeatedly fail to acknowledge that Kimmel was only pulled because he wasn't liberal and outspoken enough.

YOU keep ARGUING with YOURSELF... I'M willing TO bet YOU do IT AGAIN, and: "....you STILL write like a CHILD."

With the same kind words, polite and thoughtful consideration you offer here... right?

Someone here says: "You don't understand just how pathetic YOUR ^IGNROANCE IS, Dunning-Kruger." SO, do YOU have A trick TO get MY roosters TO lay EGGS? IT'S really: Too bad you're suffering from D&K effect by posting ONLY YOUR OPINION which means NOTHING.

AND the FALLACY of THINKING THAT the INEVITABLE (UNINTENDED) consequences OF LONG history CAN be EASILY mitigated WITOUT a TIME machine. >> SOMETIMES you HAVE to PLAY the HAND you ARE dealt IN the HERE and NOW.>> Learn from mistakes of the past whilst looking to the future and living in the present. AS to DUNNING KRUGER.... The idea that men can become women (because they feel like it) isn't far removed from the idea that roosters will lay eggs and bulls produce milk if you put them in dresses. By comparison, it makes the lemon juice idea seem clever.

So you logically assumed that Fuentes shot Kirk then? If an abusive husband with multiple battery convictions is shot, do you assume that it was another abusive husband that did it because he wasn't abusive enough? I can't follow your logic here...

Other than common sense, and good headwork? Please tell me the logic behind immediately suspecting that a conservative shot a conservative for not being conservative enough.

Good Lord, why are you stuck on something that makes no bloody sense? When was the last time a leftist assassinated a leftist for not being leftist enough? Same question in reverse for the folks you call MAGATs. What kind of logic immediately assumes that a person who shoots a conservative figure mid sentence at a conservative gathering would most likely be be a conservative with a "you aren't conservative enough" motive?

Me too. I think it's the result of a series of bad choices for temporary political gain and those choices were made in a cynical and self serving manner. I also happen to think it gets worse from here on as the flame it ignited becomes self sustaining and hungry for more fuel. The only discussion actually worth having here is how to dampen the fire... watch, that isn't going to happen though. There's a curious (at least for me) element of joy in this battle; a passive aggressive thing maybe... I'm not sure. Scale and circumstances are always different but the outcome is generally similar, you can see it in small scale neighbourhood disputes too if you look at it objectively. Things slowly turn toxic and then result in various forms of violence from minor to extreme. It usually starts over a dog that craps at the end of someone's driveway (or something like that) and then it escalates. By the time violence actually erupts the dog has been dead for 2 years. Got to run... cheers

How about one topic at a time Michael I'm not going to follow you all around the forest... there's a ban in place. As a general response though, the leftist defenders of cancel culture were repeatedly warned about the see-saw effect they were setting in motion with this. Seems like you were expecting a different result. Fear not, the leftists will get their turn back soon enough, that's the problem with this stuff and it illustrates why Crazy Island isn't the vacation paradise progressives see it as. Take a look at what's going on in the UK now and imagine it to be stood entirely on its head... because it absolutely will be in the fullness of time IMO. Pretty sure the people cheering now won't be cheering when that happens. The side effect of all this serves to make people meaner, more polarized and more vengeful and it applies across the board simply because it's human nature. At a more primitive level, if you ever find yourself refereeing cattle stealing in Africa it's really an exercise in WHATABOUTISM too. That is until everybody sees that you can actually read sign... see that track here?? I bet it belongs to that cow right there in the corral, should we check? POOF, everyone suddenly becomes cooperative... it's a game played for temporary advantage and it serves no one in the long run. IMO of course.

Here's part of what Kimmel actually said... I'd note that you gave the MAGA vs MAGA spin a pretty good effort as well with the idea that it was actually a MAGA shooter targeting another MAGAT because he wasn't MAGATy enough: "We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it," Kimmel said." It seems to me that the cancel culture creatures are now lining up to cancel themselves in droves. This concept of cancelling people whose message you find offensive is/was the darling of the left... you (and I don't mean YOU specifically here) were repeatedly warned about the consequences of doing this, both in general and even right here on this forum. How many times did you hear that once you actually arrived on Crazy Island that you wouldn't like it there. As I perused the various "expressions of dismay" posted here, each one of them lead me to a single question: "WTF did you think was going to happen?"

You POSTED allegations THEN proceeded DIRECTLY to CONCLUSIONS. POLY want A cracker? "You better get checked for your Alzheimer's cause it's getting really bad. LMAO"

Maybe we don't. I don't like how Trump acts much of the time either but I try to be fair about it and consider what he's trying to do and why he's doing it without making it all about personalities, hair or complexions. I was actually defending Justin BTW... so ya, you missed the point. I'll try this again: It sounds like he was addressing stats that were thrown in his face to suggest a lack of efficacy in temporarily federalizing some police services and deploying the NG. If that's the case I agree with what he said even though I wouldn't have framed it the way he did.

Did you so utterly fail to see the point of doing that? The only thing I actually like about Trump is his wife. I'm guessing his remarks were due to posturing from across the aisle that may have (and I don't know this) suggested that his efforts to bring law and order failed and that his own stats were bogus because domestic violence calls hadn't decreased. That tends to disregard that the effort itself was never directed at household domestic violence in the first place and (again I'm guessing here) the stats used to discredit the effort sound like they included domestic dispute responses as opposed to felony arrests for such things as domestic battery etc. These situations are easily manipulated for political gain and the proof is that I can do it too. IMO it's just as unreasonable to hold Justin to account for domestic (indictable) assault charges in Canada as it is to hold Trump accountable for felony battery in the US. I could argue that police defunding and easy bail (as a function of government policy) in both countries played a role, but that's another thread entirely. Show me a quote were he said beating your wife isn't (or shouldn't) be considered a crime (or some such) and I'll agree with your assertions above. As I see it, that was neither what he said or what he meant... and I think you know it. Your TDS is palpable... if Trump saved 3 people from drowning by picking them up in a canoe you would accuse him of not being able to swim.