Right-wing T-shirt site

[Mr. Snakey]

:lmao: What have you been smoking!



Chirac was always a world player and always an ally of the US, whether you guys believed it or not - Sarkozy is just more upfront about it.

My comments were not about Chirac. I was wishing France a bright new future. I only smoke Cigarettes. We all know who Chirac was smoking cigars with.

 

[rob_just_rob]

Heh. I'd love to try.

In the US, the conservative movement is a frankenstein partnership between big business interests (primarily oil, pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, banking), who have the money to buy off congresscritters and wield real influence on legislation, and the religious right, which sets the rhetoric.

As a result, you have politicians on the right who talk a good game about social conservatism, but pursue a pro-business (and by extension, anti-consumer) agenda instead. The list of significant legislation of the Republican-dominated 109th Congress shows a roughly 80-20 tilt in favor of business and economic legislation over social issues.

At the risk of stereotyping, let's say the majority of t-shirt consumers fall in the religious right group. (Jack Abramoff and Richard Mellon Sciafe don't strike me as big t-shirt wearers.) If I were voting for these politicians and getting only a 20% return on my vote, while my insurance was going up, my credit card rates were going up, my gas and utility bills were going up, and companies are laying off people like me by the hundreds -- yeah, I'd be pretty angry, too. I've been let down by politicians on my side as well.

On top of that, the religious right fuels the most extreme sort of us vs. them mentality possible: we're going to be saved and live forever, and they will burn in the lake of fire for all eternity. That mentality taints nearly all of their agenda: keep those brown people from taking our jobs, stop those sluts from having abortions, don't let those fags march in our St. Patrick's Day parade; and get a job, you bum!

So we've got a legitimate cause for anger, coupled with an indoctrination of insensitivity towards other people. Say, did you ever hear the one about the lesbian spic retard?

Good points.

I think you skirted the "false populism" aspect of conservatism in the second paragraph - the "We're against big government (but in favour of big business)" posturing. I think that a lot of conservative "humour" suffers from the same sort of problem as their "populism" does. It just looks like humour - but the punchline comes off as heavyhanded and/or meanspirited as opposed to funny.

(Analogy: In a way, conservative "humour" reminds me of when I was 13 or so and being prompted by various religious friends to try listening to "christian rock" (I was then into various hard rock/metal bands that, coincidentally, were being accused of satanism by various hysterical groups at the time). And I did give some "christian rock" a listen. I found that they looked like rock bands, and sounded like rock bands - but just superficially. They were almost entirely about the message, not the music, and that made them almost entirely uninteresting to me.)

 

[B_big dirigible]

As a result, you have politicians on the right who talk a good game about social conservatism, but pursue a pro-business (and by extension, anti-consumer) agenda instead.

This is a false dichotomy. In fact, it's just Marxism. The concept of economic struggle is one of Marx's central tenets. This has been oversimplified to the notion that in any economic or social situation in which two distinguishable groups exist, one must be exploiting the other. For a chronic moralist - a disease of both right and left - from there it's only a small jump to the conclusion that one of these groups - the assumed oppressor - must be evil, and the other - the assumed oppressed - must be good. Marx himself avoided that judgement by confining himself almost entirely to the realm of economics. He asserted it to be a "scientific fact" that (in the economic cases he himself studied) the "oppressed" would triumph, and that this would be a Good Thing and should be encouraged to happen sooner. The logical fallacy is obvious, but at least Marx didn't extend his principles to social interactions; that fault belongs to his followers, in a way reminiscent of the rise of the vile doctrine of Social Darwinism, which can't be blamed on Darwin himself.

There is of course another view, the antithesis of the Marxist one, and that is that pro-business does not automatically imply anti-consumer. It recognizes that businesses and customers are necessarily tied together, but not necessarily as two opposite ends of a see-saw. To a card-carrying leftie, this is a dangerous consideration - it means that conservatism might not be inherently evil.

The next question is obvious - how can one possibly be pro-consumer if he's also anti-business? Where are consumers to get their goods and services if not from business? From government, of course - bring on those Five-Year Plans! And voila, the modern Marxist rears his head.

None for me, thanks. That experiment has already failed too many times, and been responsible for far too much human misery.

I think you skirted the "false populism" aspect of conservatism in the second paragraph - the "We're against big government (but in favour of big business)" posturing.

It's hardly posturing. It's a perfectly legitimate view, and, what's worse, may be a correct one. To conservatives, I suspect that it's not only regarded as correct, but vital.

I think that a lot of conservative "humour" suffers from the same sort of problem as their "populism" does. It just looks like humour - but the punchline comes off as heavyhanded and/or meanspirited as opposed to funny.

That rather depends on who's the butt of the jokes. Some think that the left makes a better butt for jokes than the right. The left isn't obligated to like that, but that doesn't mean that the jokes aren't jokes.

I found that they looked like rock bands, and sounded like rock bands - but just superficially. They were almost entirely about the message, not the music, and that made them almost entirely uninteresting to me.)

Yes, Live Earth seems to have been a dud all around (though I suppose U2 has done all right with amateurish political claptrap masquerading as music). Message uber Music is a losing tactic - look at Charlie on the M.T.A. We remember the song, even if we don't remember five cent fares too well.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

My comments were not about Chirac. I was wishing France a bright new future. I only smoke Cigarettes. We all know who Chirac was smoking cigars with.

I got that - I wasn't having a go.

Chirac may have some 'dodgy' smoking buddies indeed - but at least he's a bona fide war veteran.

 

[Mr. Snakey]

I got that - I wasn't having a go.

Chirac may have some 'dodgy' smoking buddies indeed - but at least he's a bona fide war veteran.

Yes dear:kiss:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Yes dear:kiss:

*swoons*

 

[wingnut84]

I LOLed at the "celebrating diversity" shirt. Don't fuck with my guns.


:AR15firing:

 

[invisibleman]

I think it is called suppression . You know that conservatives lack creativity.

Creativity is both rare and overrated. The last guys with major-league political creativity were probably Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, and we know how well that worked out.

Yeah, creativity can be rare if one thinks it is overrated. I never feel that creativity is rare and overrated. I think that Conservatives lack divergent thinking and maybe this leads to skewedness. Prime example: Ann Coulter. She thinks for some reason that John Edwards is gay. He is happily married...with children. Everytime she gives a microphone a verbal blowjob..."John Edwards is a faggot."

You don't hear her calling Jesse Jackson a faggot. You don't hear her calling Barack Obama a faggot. You definately don't hear her calling Hillary Clinton a faggot.

She had a crush on John Edwards and he probably "shut her down" like this: "Ann. I have a wife and children. I love my wife and my family. If you FUCKIN' grab my cock again--I WILL PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE!!!!! You hear me? "

I never mentioned anything about Communist ideals. So, I feel that that is irrelevant.

 

[Mr. Snakey]

Yeah, creativity can be rare if one thinks it is overrated. I never feel that creativity is rare and overrated. I think that Conservatives lack divergent thinking and maybe this leads to skewedness. Prime example: Ann Coulter. She thinks for some reason that John Edwards is gay. He is happily married...with children. Everytime she gives a microphone a verbal blowjob..."John Edwards is a faggot."

You don't hear her calling Jesse Jackson a faggot. You don't hear her calling Barack Obama a faggot. You definately don't hear her calling Hillary Clinton a faggot.

She had a crush on John Edwards and he probably "shut her down" like this: "Ann. I have a wife and children. I love my wife and my family. If you FUCKIN' grab my cock again--I WILL PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE!!!!! You hear me? "

I never mentioned anything about Communist ideals. So, I feel that that is irrelevant.

Ann Coulter is a man trapped in a womans body. Also an asshole. Most people on the right cant stand her either.

 

[B_big dirigible]

I never mentioned anything about Communist ideals. So, I feel that that is irrelevant.

Hardly. You were talking about creativity, but haven't given any examples of recent creative activity in the liberal camp. You simply assert that conservatives don't have it. I pointed out that liberals aren't creative, and haven't been for a long time. The left is an intellectual and creative desert. Liberalism hasn't had an idea, even a feeble one, since about 1972. What would one normally call someone who's fixated on the ideas he had thirty years ago? "Conservative" is an appropriate word for that. The most annoying thing about modern liberalism is that it's so conservative in outlook and viewpoint, but won't admit it.

Creativity is overrated because we have very little of it in the political sphere, but manage to have politics anyway. Evidently, it's not politically essential. If we try to use creativity as a metric of the superiority of one wing over another, it's a flat bust. The score is zero to zero.

Coulter doesn't come into it one way or another.

 

[invisibleman]

Hardly. You were talking about creativity, but haven't given any examples of recent creative activity in the liberal camp. You simply assert that conservatives don't have it. I pointed out that liberals aren't creative, and haven't been for a long time. The left is an intellectual and creative desert. Liberalism hasn't had an idea, even a feeble one, since about 1972. What would one normally call someone who's fixated on the ideas he had thirty years ago? "Conservative" is an appropriate word for that. The most annoying thing about modern liberalism is that it's so conservative in outlook and viewpoint, but won't admit it.

Creativity is overrated because we have very little of it in the political sphere, but manage to have politics anyway. Evidently, it's not politically essential. If we try to use creativity as a metric of the superiority of one wing over another, it's a flat bust. The score is zero to zero.

Coulter doesn't come into it one way or another.

Ann Coulter is Conservative--she DEFINATELY isn't Liberal. I just used her as an example of her skewedness. Rush Limbaugh is the same way but he assumes a lot. That is a different kind of skewedness.

Creativity doesn't thrive in criticism and judgment. You will get that in political and public arenas.

I disagree with your use of Communistic idealists and equating it with Liberalism. That is the skewedness that causes distortion. It is actually something Rush would do. Or is that an M.O. for Conservatism...distortion?
Are Conservatism ideals effective in the Iraq conflicts? Is anything the Bush administration does benefitting America in the whole world scheme of things? When Clinton was in office for two terms, he counterbalanced the deficit into a surplus. Now, Bush, he has two terms and counterbalanced the surplus into an escalating deficit.

 

[invisibleman]

Hardly. You were talking about creativity, but haven't given any examples of recent creative activity in the liberal camp. You simply assert that conservatives don't have it. I pointed out that liberals aren't creative, and haven't been for a long time. The left is an intellectual and creative desert. Liberalism hasn't had an idea, even a feeble one, since about 1972. What would one normally call someone who's fixated on the ideas he had thirty years ago? "Conservative" is an appropriate word for that. The most annoying thing about modern liberalism is that it's so conservative in outlook and viewpoint, but won't admit it.

Creativity is overrated because we have very little of it in the political sphere, but manage to have politics anyway. Evidently, it's not politically essential. If we try to use creativity as a metric of the superiority of one wing over another, it's a flat bust. The score is zero to zero.

Coulter doesn't come into it one way or another.

Ann Coulter is Conservative--she DEFINATELY isn't Liberal. I just used her as an example of her skewedness. Rush Limbaugh is the same way but he assumes a lot. That is a different kind of skewedness.

Creativity doesn't thrive in criticism and judgment. You will get that in political and public arenas.

I disagree with your use of Communistic idealists and equating it with Liberalism. That is the skewedness that causes distortion. It is actually something Rush would do. Or is that an M.O. for Conservatism...distortion?
Are Conservatism ideals effective in the Iraq conflicts? Is anything the Bush administration does benefitting America in the whole world scheme of things? When Clinton was in office for two terms, he counterbalanced the deficit into a surplus. Now, Bush, he has two terms and counterbalanced the surplus into an escalating deficit.

 

[psidom]

i am not even gonna go here.
i am not a liberal...but i am SURE AS HELL not a conservative.

 

[bfm01]

creepy

 

[B_big dirigible]

I disagree with your use of Communistic idealists and equating it with Liberalism.

Don't blame me - I didn't make it up. The legislators belonging to communist and socialist parties are seated to the left in parliaments; hence the term, "left wing".

That is the skewedness that causes distortion. It is actually something Rush would do. Or is that an M.O. for Conservatism...distortion?

I have no idea. Ask a conservative.

Are Conservatism ideals effective in the Iraq conflicts? Is anything the Bush administration does benefitting America in the whole world scheme of things?

A liberal of the Kennedy era would have been solidly behind the Iraq experiment. See his 1961 Inaugural Address to get a sense of just how far liberalism has fallen. In those days, the conservatives were the isolationists - the type of people who thought that "redeploying" away from where the action was constituted solid foreign policy.

I took liberals of that era far more seriously than I take their feeble namesakes of today.

 

[invisibleman]

Don't blame me - I didn't make it up. The legislators belonging to communist and socialist parties are seated to the left in parliaments; hence the term, "left wing".

We were discussing American politics...now why did you detour to Europe? More Conservative geography..."Afghanistan is Iraq?" type rhetoric?
More distortion.

I guess when God created the "tree of knowledge"-- you would probably say it had its roots in Communism. The tree of knowledge is a metaphor for "divergent thinking".

"It is unacceptable to think." --George H.W. Bush, Jr.