The Klartext Landfill for Absurd, Ignorant, and Deplorable Posts VI

[publicunofficial]

Yeah, seeing your posts in this thread is literally the worst thing that could happen in your life IMO.

It's like Wulfric thinks if a certain amount of your posts are put in this thread, it's an auto-ban. It backs up my theory that Wulfric is either a very intelligent child or a very dumb adult.

[Maxwell]

Yeah, seeing your posts in this thread is literally the worst thing that could happen in your life IMO.

It's like Wulfric thinks if a certain amount of your posts are put in this thread, it's an auto-ban. It backs up my theory that Wulfric is either a very intelligent child or a very dumb adult.

I would be unimpressed even with the child theory.

[Lachi]

Today at 09:59:58
in Re: Now that Sanders has...
by realisticidealist

RIP, FF

Wrong thread, presumably.

Yes
Was wondering why the post wouldn't show up earlier..

[Santander]

So firstly this also proposes massive benefit cuts, people will be getting a lot less money while affluent people get tax cuts. The age criteria has no logical justification or calculation. 69 is downright steep. I also don't understand why they make the middle class suffer & give tax breaks to billionaires. Someone with 3M pays says a lot less as a % of income than say someone with 250K$

If you have read basic macroeconomics you will understand why a flat tax is disastrous - How a progressive tax shields the economy from over-heating, how it prevents from a collapse (in the US the consumption function of GDP has rarely fallen despite so many recessions, GDP = C + I + G + NX). This is not even a flat tax, you pay less as % of income the more you earn, a decreasing tax. This will be terrible for the economy in general. Lift the cap, make the billionaires pay same % of income as ordinary people - You could even expand Social Security...

How can people in good faith support these crooks? I understand you are concerned about solvency, but then why would you slash the revenue further - You don't cut taxes when you are not raising enough money & are cutting benefits.

This is just flat out violation of Trump's proposal to fully protect Social Security, he said he will not touch it when Rubio offered to raise the Retirement age - He was the only Republican to flat out say he will not touch Social Security!

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Literally proposing apartheid:

Currently, the Joint Arab List has 13 seats in the Knesset. When seeing these polls, the Israeli right wing panicked, Benjamin Netanyahu filmed a disgusting, cheap political trick stinking of racism ('The Arabs are flocking to the ballots. The liberal organizations are bringing them with buses'). If your feverish, religious dream of annexing everything comes true, how many more do you think we'll get? 20? 40? Maybe 61, and an Arabic Prime Minister to boot? Yeah.

Hold up. I'm not proposing the annexation of Judea and Samaria right now. We should just keep building there, and focus on draining the swamp and ending the power of the courts instead. And even in the event that we annex it they should obviously not get voting rights on Israeli affairs. That should make people like you much more comfortable

[Kingpoleon]

Jesus, easily. He wasn't some gun toting, capitalist, nationalist with an authoritarian personality like most of his American followers. Charles Darwin, while I undeniably concur with his theories (and no, he wasn't some radical social Darwinist), was more preoccupied with biology than any social or economic matters. His values probably most closely aligned with those of 19th century England - no thanks.

I mean I see the issue with the rest but whats wrong with "gun toting"?

Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who own a gun are bad (to me), only that those in that general gun loving culture are.

Identity culture is just as gay on the right as it is on the left. Probably more so. Maybe less cartoonishly ridiculous but at least as cartoonish.

A series of bad posts, but I bolded the worst.

(Isn't some Atlas gay mafia supposed to take care of people who say things like this?)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, I see the problem with the rest, but what's wrong with fried chicken-eating?[/quote]
Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who eat fried chicken are bad (to me), only that those in that general thuggish culture are.[/quote]

[bagelman]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, I see the problem with the rest, but what's wrong with fried chicken-eating?[/quote]
Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who eat fried chicken are bad (to me), only that those in that general thuggish culture are.[/quote]
[/quote]

I'm hungry for fried chicken now

[Kingpoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, I see the problem with the rest, but what's wrong with fried chicken-eating?

Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who eat fried chicken are bad (to me), only that those in that general thuggish culture are.[/quote]
[/quote]

I'm hungry for heart attack diet now
[/quote]

FTFY

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, I see the problem with the rest, but what's wrong with fried chicken-eating?

Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who eat fried chicken are bad (to me), only that those in that general thuggish culture are.

[/quote]

I'm hungry for heart attack diet now
[/quote]

FTFY
[/quote]

Hey buddy, you're the Arkansan.

[LLR]

Jesus, easily. He wasn't some gun toting, capitalist, nationalist with an authoritarian personality like most of his American followers. Charles Darwin, while I undeniably concur with his theories (and no, he wasn't some radical social Darwinist), was more preoccupied with biology than any social or economic matters. His values probably most closely aligned with those of 19th century England - no thanks.

I mean I see the issue with the rest but whats wrong with "gun toting"?

Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who own a gun are bad (to me), only that those in that general gun loving culture are.

Identity culture is just as gay on the right as it is on the left. Probably more so. Maybe less cartoonishly ridiculous but at least as cartoonish.

A series of bad posts, but I bolded the worst.

(Isn't some Atlas gay mafia supposed to take care of people who say things like this?)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, I see the problem with the rest, but what's wrong with fried chicken-eating?

Identity politics. Having grown up and lived all of my life around such people, I don't deny possessing a bias against them in general. That doesn't mean all people who eat fried chicken are bad (to me), only that those in that general thuggish culture are.[/quote]
[/quote]

There's a big difference between eating fried chicken and owning a murder weapon?

[Kingpoleon]

One kills you, the other kills animals?

In all seriousness, guns are not necessarily a murder weapon, and 99.9999% of the time, when used by civilians, are not used for murder. On a similar note, fried chicken is necessarily unhealthy and hurts hearts's health.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Context not required

Bangable.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Classic Beet

DWS had one big job this year and that was to put together the convention. And she did a great job! Hillary got a huge bounce coming out of the DNC in Philadelphia. It was the campaign's fault, not that of DWS that they couldn't hold onto it. To bad DWS couldn't even enjoy the convention because of the barbaric Bernie fanatics.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Wow, freedom move! Better not trust Democrats with something like actual power.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

She didn't do anything wrong. Her 3 million vote win loss was just a weird geographic fluke.

The last thing the party needs to do is grossly overreact.

That doesn't belong here. Disagree =/= bad post.

[MT Treasurer]

^Pot, meet kettle:

The Democrats' near absolute worst case scenario is a 54-46 R Senate(Heitkamp and one of McCaskill or Donnelly loses). Their likely absolute worst is a pickup in NV being offset by a loss in ND.

2022 has at least ten potential D pickups.

No, not really...

Totally agree. And how the hell does New Freaking Hampshire flip before Michigan, Minnesota, Virginia, and even Oregon?

All in the stack except Kingpoleon.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

^Pot, meet kettle:

The Democrats' near absolute worst case scenario is a 54-46 R Senate(Heitkamp and one of McCaskill or Donnelly loses). Their likely absolute worst is a pickup in NV being offset by a loss in ND.

2022 has at least ten potential D pickups.

No, not really...

Totally agree. And how the hell does New Freaking Hampshire flip before Michigan, Minnesota, Virginia, and even Oregon?

All in the stack except Kingpoleon.

I clicked show only because I had a feeling you were being overly salty. I was right.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Bill did a ton. Hillary, however, doesn't deserve as much as she gets simply because of her association with her husband.

"BREAKING FEDERAL LAWS DOES. NOT. MATTER.

CLINTON DEFINITELY DID NOT SET UP AN ILLEGAL PRIVATE SERVER TO CONDUCT UNETHICAL BUSINESS AND HIDE 'PAY-TO-PLAY' FAVORS, AS EXPLICITLY OUTLINED IN EXPOSED EMAILS.

SHE DID NOT HAVE ALL OF HER EMAILS WIPED FROM THE SEVER AFTER SHE WAS SUBPOENAED FOR THEM, ANOTHER FEDERAL CRIME.

SHE IS INNOCENT, AND ALL THESE ATTACKS ARE JUST VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACIES AND ALT-RIGHT LIES.

IF THE ROLES WERE REVERSED, AND IT WAS A REPUBLICAN IN THAT POSITION, THEN I WOULD BE TOTALLY NON-BIASED AND DEFEND HIM/HER.

DERP DERPA DERPY DERP."
~Clinton defenders

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

No

I've realized that Red Republicans, Blue Democrats are a better color scheme then Blue Republicans, Red Democrats.

As a result, I've become a Democrat. Pretend that my avatar is R-TX, but red

[MT Treasurer]

Probably a sock/troll, but still...

Most people can spell Alabama

Except the natives. And West Virginians.

We will never be able to live this stereotype down huh?

Not until the ability of Alabamans and neighboring states (except Georgians) to calculate without using their fingers reaches double digits.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Probably a sock/troll, but still...

Most people can spell Alabama

Except the natives. And West Virginians.

We will never be able to live this stereotype down huh?

Not until the ability of Alabamans and neighboring states (except Georgians) to calculate without using their fingers reaches double digits.

Everything else aside, the schtick is simply getting very, very old.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Classism is an awful scourge on society.

[MT Treasurer]

I would persobally be very proud to share a party with those less intellectually gifted, and if Democrats think it would be shameful to have people of low intelligence voting for them, well, it's another reason your party is in the pits.

Well, some low intelligence people vote for dems. But it is a minority.

IQ under 80: Trump 70-20
IQ 80-140: Clinton 51-44
IQ over 140: Clinton 95-3

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I would persobally be very proud to share a party with those less intellectually gifted, and if Democrats think it would be shameful to have people of low intelligence voting for them, well, it's another reason your party is in the pits.

Well, some low intelligence people vote for dems. But it is a minority.

IQ under 80: Trump 70-20
IQ 80-140: Clinton 51-44
IQ over 140: Clinton 95-3

How is that a bad post? It's literally a statistic.

[MT Treasurer]

I would persobally be very proud to share a party with those less intellectually gifted, and if Democrats think it would be shameful to have people of low intelligence voting for them, well, it's another reason your party is in the pits.

Well, some low intelligence people vote for dems. But it is a minority.

IQ under 80: Trump 70-20
IQ 80-140: Clinton 51-44
IQ over 140: Clinton 95-3

How is that a bad post? It's literally a statistic.

Nah, those are just numbers Wulfric made up to imply that dumb people™ vote Republican and intelligent people™ vote Democratic. Classism at its best. Hilariously enough, his numbers don't even add up and they show that people with an IQ under 80 (what he really means: dumb people™) are more likely to vote for third-party candidates, even though he claims the opposite in his other post in that thread.