Roseanne tweets better than Trump

[henryp]

I have two things related to this:

1) One of the funnier things to watch, was people's opinion of George W. Bush.  He was a war criminal for 8 years.  That's not a small thing.  He definitely got plenty of "just like Hitler's" tossed his way. He was the worst president ever.  Just a nightmare of a human that will rot in hell.  Then the Bush's said they didn't care for Trump, and now he's a good guy.  61% view favorably, 33% unfavorably.

How does a war criminal who's just like Hitler in the eyes of so many people suddenly become loveable?  The answer, is that there's nobody up top in the group of people running the show that's invested in having people think George Bush is just like Hitler anymore.  And without that narrative controlling how people view him, now he's a  really nice guy who tried his best in some tough circumstances.

2) 

Too bad no one shut up about Obama.

But they will.  Once demonizing him no longer serves a purpose, nobody will remember why they hated him so much.  That's how it works.  The people don't decide what they think.  The people "running things" decide what people think.  I'm not even sure what that means, it's just clear that opinions are not grass roots ideas bubbling up from the populace.  It's all highly orchestrated.

[Shell B]

I'd agree with that, though I only think that applies more to the hardcore, clearly false things. Otherwise, it's just people looking at facts and forming opinions.

[Minimalist]

Bush is still a war criminal.  He just looks real good compared to the fucking piece of shit in there now.

Still, I sort of have to agree with the WLB on this one.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/05/interne...es-firing/

‘Me me me!’ Internet groans as ‘pathetic man-child’ Trump makes Roseanne’s firing about himself

He is a miserable racist cunt just like she is.  Two peas in a pod.

[henryp]

I'd agree with that, though I only think that applies more to the hardcore, clearly false things. Otherwise, it's just people looking at facts and forming opinions.

I think things resembling the facts are carefully shaped and presented to people with the goal of having them draw specific conclusions.  It's the same principles of deceptive advertising.

We just saw NY Times and Liberal Maggie Haberman try to take down Michelle Wolf at the correspondence dinner, by misrepresenting the nature of the smokey eyes joke.  She framed it as an attack on Huckabee Sanders appearance, when it was clearly not.  Dishonest or incompetent?  Did Michelle tearing news media a new asshole play into Maggie's (and other liberal media member's) portrayal of the SHS joke?  

The right wing news obviously did the same thing.  But we know they are being dishonest because they are dishonest.  But why did Maggie Haberman do it?  Everybody gets so caught up in how the other side is being tricked, nobody checks to make sure they themselves aren't also being tricked.

And what was crazy, is after people backed Michelle Wolf, mostly because they liked the idea of SHS being attacked based on her looks, it was framed as "Right wing complaining about the joke", even though the outcry started with several left-wing media members.

==

Something that came out when Roseanne first was coming back, was the picture of her dressed as Hitler baking cookies.  I've stumbled across her explanation of that.  I'd be surprised if anyone else has any idea what her intent was.  But that doesn't stop people from posting it as proof she's a Nazi.  It's all very nefarious.

And it's why I think people like Roseanne or Billy Corgan or Joe Rogan are probably more susceptible to conspiracy theories.  Because when you see that invisible hand shifting shit around, it's scary.  And then the next logical step is wondering what there is that you don't see that's happening.  In the end, I think conspiracy theorists may have a more realistic view of reality than people who think it's all on the level.

[brewer]

ABC has cancelled her show and her talent agency has dropped her.  

Good.  She's just as much of a racist pig as her hero turd muffin.

Didn't you hear. Racism was a side effect of her sleeping pills.

Maybe she should combine her Ambien with Black Beauties.

[Minimalist]

The maker of Ambien notes that racism is not a side effect of Ambien.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/05/ambien-...de-effect/

Ambien maker knocks Roseanne for blaming its drugs for her tirades: ‘Racism is not a known side effect’

[CapnAwesome]

Why are you putting *s in your curse words? Are you afraid your mom might read this forum or something?

Because the internet is polluted with people, who are triggered by the mere thought, that someone somewhere might be trying to be considerate of other people's feelings. And it doesn't cost me anything to annoy those c*nts, while using as colourful and offensive a language, as I wish. Sort of a "two birds, one stone" situation...

How is calling someone a c*nt any more considerate of someone's feelings than a cunt?

[Minimalist]

Who said I want to be considerate of that cunt's feelings?

Really, Capn.  Sometimes you make the strangest comments.

I regard all republicunts as cunts.  You should know that by now.

[The Valkyrie]

The maker of Ambien notes that racism is not a side effect of Ambien.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/05/ambien-...de-effect/

Ambien maker knocks Roseanne for blaming its drugs for her tirades: ‘Racism is not a known side effect’

I loved this when I heard it this morning.

Nice shoot down.

[AFTT47]

The maker of Ambien notes that racism is not a side effect of Ambien.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/05/ambien-...de-effect/

I loved this when I heard it this morning.

Nice shoot down.

Yeah, that was good! I'd love to see the double-blind studies showing that one of the potential side effects of Ambien is that the patient will become a racist asshole. Lol! I think she had that covered long before she took the drug.