Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
M4A1 ?Maybe time for me to spend a few quid on a good long range rifle, a close quarters weapon, and an M4.
If you need to add a sauce to your gun you are not doing it right.M4A1 ?
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.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Seems like a good sauce.If you need to add a sauce to your gun you are not doing it right.
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.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Alt-righters are actually pretty big on environmental protection.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.
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.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.
Well that completely blows my worldview to shreds.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.
Direct consequence of ending Reconstruction because they wanted the votes of southern whites.The lasting legacy of appeasing the beliefs and ideology. They still believe they are "different"
Idiots gonna idiot.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'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.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.
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.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.
I seem to recall that. Keep us posted on what you're considering!I've always pictured him as Burt Gummer.
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.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.
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.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.
It is, and it’s also how they differentiate themselves from what a right winger/conservative was then defined in mainstream discourse.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.
I think there's quite a big difference between online alt right communities and the "normal" white supremacists you'd meet out and about.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.
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!"Surely it doesn't matter how big a disclaimer they put on that. They've given his bonkers ranting their platform.
If they stop voting it will.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.
Some of those who stop voting will instead pursue anti-democratic (and violent) means of achieving their goals.If they stop voting it will.
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.Some of those who stop voting will instead pursue anti-democratic (and violent) means of achieving their goals.
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.Surely it doesn't matter how big a disclaimer they put on that. They've given his bonkers ranting their platform.
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.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.
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.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?
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.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?
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.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.
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.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.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
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.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.