Support NeoGAF

[Earendil]

I don't know why, but I think there is a reason the person in this picture is a woman. And the reasoning is probably just as fucked up as the rest of these images.

I've actually run into people like this.

 

[captive]

Both extremes exist, both extremes are annoying, both extremes are equivalently prevalent, regardless of how irritating you find it.

The group that doesn't get what they want will kick up a fuss, and the group that got what it wanted will continue to kick over their figurative trash cans(legalization of marijuana, eat only local grown organic, etc.) because they can.

You don't see it though, and I respect that. I suggest that we agree to disagree.

You know, I might have used to agree with you. Now? No way.

I never see the hateful, ignorant, racist, sexist, bigoted, idiotic, and downright insane, things coming from the left side. And my Facebook feed is about 50/50 maybe 60/40 liberal to conservative. For instance, I've never seen anything nearly this insane come across my Facebook feed from a liberal..

“Take this Supreme Court decision and shove it.”

A new Rasmussen Poll indicates that a growing number of Americans want state governments to tell the Supreme Court to get out of the business of rewriting laws and telling American citizens how to live their lives.

In a new poll, Rasmussen reported the percentage of Americans who want states to tell the Supreme Court it does not have the power to rewrite the Affordable Care Act or force sovereign states to authorize gay marriages has increased from 24 percent to 33 percent after last week’s Constitution-defying decisions by the court.

A closer look at the poll results indicates that popular sentiment for state defiance of the federal government extends beyond just the Supreme Court’s latest decisions.

“Only 20% [of likely voters] now consider the federal government a protector of individual liberty,” the Rasmussen Poll finds. “Sixty percent (60 %) see the government as a threat to individual liberty instead,” it adds.

“Take this regulation and shove it,” and “take this grant and shove it,” are two additional battle cries which appear to resonate with a growing popular sentiment, especially in “flyover country,” those 38 states outside the dozen in which President Obama won more than 56.2 percent of the vote in 2012.

(In descending order of support for Obama, those twelve states are: Hawaii, Vermont, New York, Rhode Island, Maryland, Massachusetts, California, Delaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, and Maine. Arguably, three additional states where President Obama won between 54 percent and 56.2 percent of the vote in 2012 could be added to this list: Washington, Oregon, and Michigan.)

One hundred and fifty years after the end of the Civil War, it is becoming increasingly clear that there are two Americas—one where the principles of constitutionally limited government and individual liberty are still revered, the other where statism and the trampling of individual rights are on the rise.

The Tea Party movement arose in 2009 to restore those principles of constitutionally-limited government. But despite electoral victories that placed Republicans in control of the House of Representatives in 2010, and the Senate in 2014, it is undeniable that the Republican establishment those elections empowered is instead aligned with the forces of statism.

The majority of the members of the Supreme Court itself are also clearly part of the “elitist” camp of anti-constitutionalists. As Breitbart’s Thomas Williams noted, and Justice Scalia himself pointed out in his scathing dissent in the gay marriage decision, not a single member of the nine member court is of the Protestant faith. Not a single member has graduated from a law school other than Harvard, Yale, or Columbia. Nor has a single member done anything other than practice some version of corporate law with “big law” firms, sit on a federal court, work for the federal government, or work in left-wing academia.

With the entire apparatus of the federal government now aligned against constitutionally limited government, some traditionalists have given themselves over to despair and defeatism. That negative view, however, fails to understand the solution provided to usurpations of power by the central government found within the Constitution itself, with origins in the Declaration of Independence, whose signing on July 4, 1776 we celebrate today.

As Rasmussen Reports noted, “The Declaration of Independence, the foundational document that Americans honor on the Fourth of July, says that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, but just 25% believe that to be true of the federal government today.”

Even more significantly, however, the recent Supreme Court decisions are a complete rejection of the concepts of state sovereignty articulated in the 10th amendment, the last element of the Bill of Rights, the promise of whose passage by the First Congress was key to the ratification of the Constitution.

The 10th amendment, ratified along with the other nine amendments of the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791, reads as follows:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The concept of popular resistance to the unconstitutional encroachment of the federal government on the rights of individuals and states has been gaining momentum over the past several years.

Conservative radio host Mark Levin, for instance, has advocated on behalf of an Article V Convention of the States to propose new amendments to the Constitution for ratification by the states that would limit federal powers.

Conservative author and intellectual leader Charles Murray has also advocated for a type of civil disobedience to resist unlawful federal regulations through the use of well funded legal challenges to the most egregious of those regulations.

Both concepts have merit, but ultimately lack the power and effective counter-attack available through the simple mechanism offered by the 10th amendment—widespread resistance to federal overreaches by the state governments themselves.

Bolder, constitutionally based resistance at the state level, is a practical and viable remedy, one that already has broad popular support among conservatives.

As Rasmussen Reports noted:

[T]he voters who feel strongest about overriding the federal courts – Republicans and conservatives – are those who traditionally have been the most supportive of the Constitution and separation of powers. During the Obama years, however, these voters have become increasingly suspicious and even hostile toward the federal government.

Fifty percent (50%) of GOP voters now believe states should have the right to ignore federal court rulings, compared to just 22% of Democrats and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Interestingly, this represents a noticeable rise in support among all three groups.

Fifty percent (50%) of conservative voters share this view, but just 27% of moderates and 15% of liberals agree.

Widespread resistance at the state level, however, will require two elements: strong governors and strong state legislatures willing to vigorously assert their 10th amendment rights.

At the local level, we’ve already seen the first indications that a movement may be afoot. In Tennessee, for example, the entire Decatur County Clerk’s Office resigned rather than enforce the recent gay marriage decision announced by the Supreme Court.

Isolated pockets of resistance are springing up around the country.

And yet, even among “The Great 38 States”—flyover country where President Obama either lost or won less than 56.2 percent of the vote in the 2012 election—leadership at the executive level is lacking.

The next electoral battle for the preservation of the constitutional republic will be fought not only for the highest office of the executive branch in 2016—it will also be fought in the gubernatorial races of those “Great 38 States” where the vast majority of voters still believe in America, and still believe in constitutionally limited government.

Freedom of the individual states from the usurpations of the federal government does not mean secession from the constitutional republic. It is, instead, the surest realistic mechanism that remains to preserve the constitutional republic.

By limiting the role of the federal government to the exercise of that very narrow set of specifically “enumerated powers” ascribed to it in the Constitution, state governments can guarantee that our constitutional republic will continue to flourish for generations to come.

The alternative is a constitutional republic in name only, a dystopian oligarchy where words have no meaning, right is wrong, good is bad, truth is deception, and the rule of law is invented anew each day by the ruling class of federal royalty.

As for that dirty dozen of liberal blue states, like California, New York, and Massachusetts? Let them continue on their path of reckless spending and experience the fate of modern Greece.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can continue to choose liberty.

From breitbart.com

The cognitive dissidence these people have is insane. They quote "love" the constitution, yet they want to ignore the part about checks and balances, ignore the part about having a federal government. Ignore the 1st amendment which specifically states we shall make no law supporting a religion. All so they can discriminate based on their religious beliefs. While simultaneously denouncing countries like, Iran, Saudi Arabia et al, that by the way rule by religion.

 

[Rex Griswold]

You know, I might have used to agree with you. Now? No way.

I never see the hateful, ignorant, racist, idiotic, things coming from the left side. And my Facebook feed is about 50/50 maybe 60/40 liberal to conservative. For instance, I've never seen anything nearly this insane come across my Facebook feed from a liberal..



From breitbart.com

The cognitive dissidence these people have is insane. They quote "love" the constitution, yet they want to ignore the part about checks and balances, ignore the part about having a federal government. Ignore the 1st amendment which specifically states we shall make no law supporting a religion. All so they can discriminate based on their religious beliefs. While simultaneously denouncing countries like, Iran, Saudi Arabia et al, that by the way rule by religion.

Wooooah, your approval might not mean a whole lot to me, but please do refrain from calling me a crazy person.

I think it's pretty much unanimous in this thread that the stuff coming out of the right is insane. My point has always been that there is a ton of trash coming out of both sides, and there always has been. Is one group more than happy to hide hatred behind 'freedom' and 'religion'? Well, there's a thread on it..

 

[captive]

Wooooah, your approval might not mean a whole lot to me, but please do refrain from calling me a crazy person.

I think it's pretty much unanimous in this thread that the stuff coming out of the right is insane. My point has always been that there is a ton of trash coming out of both sides, and there always has been. Is one group more than happy to hide hatred behind 'freedom' and 'religion'? Well, there's a thread on it..

I wasn't calling you a crazy person, just saying in my anecdotal experience its not nearly equivalent between both sides. Of course there are crazies on both sides, but the amount of crap coming across Facebook and email is overwhelmingly conservative.

 

[mr.beers]

Had a "friend" post this on Facebook...

 

[excelsiorlef]

Had a "friend" post this on Facebook...

Everyone should definitely look to North Korea, Iran, and Afghanistan for tips on how to do things

 

[*Splinter]

Had a "friend" post this on Facebook...

That's so confusing, how can you repost that without realising your suggestion boils down to: "be more like North Korea"

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

That's so confusing, how can you repost that without realising your suggestion boils down to: "be more like North Korea"

Because ignorance and stupidity?

 

[PdotMichael]

Had a "friend" post this on Facebook...

eh... I would be proud of my country if it true.

 

[*Splinter]

Because ignorance and stupidity?

I'm surprised anyone that stupid is able to read

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Stunned people are still butt hurt over this.

 

[diffusionx]

Yeah, I'm really tired of the partisan bullshit on Facebook. I'm old enough to remember what the liberal circles were posting during the first eight years of the last decade. I remember thinking that when Democrats regain political power in this country, that the ridiculous rhetoric would subside and that conservatives would not use the same tactics as liberals were using against Bush when at their worst. That fantasy took about two weeks to destroy. It might be worse now than it's ever been. I have no expectation that reasonable discourse will ever be gained at this point *on social media.

*edited for clarification.

Bush and Cheney lied to get us into a war that destroyed a nation, killed hundreds of thousands of people (at least), and cost the lives of thousands of soldiers. We are going to be living with the repercussions of those lies for the rest of our lives, as we have seen with ISIS.

Exactly what would it take for someone's rhetoric to not be "ridiculous" to you?

 

[Reversed]

Saw this elsewhere but not on my facebook timeline (I'm glad). I hope no one actually posts it, though.

The serious expression had me cracking.

 

[captive]

Stunned people are still butt hurt over this.

Someone posted Ted Cruz's nonsense about wanting to have elections for the supreme court, just today on my feed.

 

[mr.beers]

That's so confusing, how can you repost that without realising your suggestion boils down to: "be more like North Korea"

My response to his Facebook post: "Yes, we should be more like terrorist nations..."

His response to my post: "It would be racist to some of these pussy ass people that live in this country"

Needless to say I didn't continue this conversation. Him and I were roommates for 2 years and never displayed this behavior. In fact he had a huge crush on a Hispanic girl he worked with at the time.

 

[Dai101]

I'm surprised anyone that stupid is able to read

They can read, that doesn't mean they understand what they write.

 

[Fracas]

Saw this elsewhere but not on my facebook timeline (I'm glad). I hope no one actually posts it, though.



The serious expression had me cracking.

ahahahahahahaha

 

[LightofRohan]

Ugh, I just had an arguement about this specific post the other day and in general I never engage in it, but this was just increddibly ignorant and obnoxious I could not resist.

(Somewhat disturbing image):
http://i.imgur.com/3jKgPRv.jpg

Basically it is a picture of a starving african child and it is saying how pointless it is to be celebrating for gay rights when there are kids dying in Africa from hunger. So stop being so overly dramatic about it and changing your profile pic (because for some reason that is WAY too much celebration).

It's like a 12 year olds childish retort to a discussion. So fucking lame.

 

[Zeke]

More flag nonsense. This one is from a guy I went to high school with.

Sorry totally off topic. Where in port A is that? Only place I can see that being is over by light house park near the ferry crossing. Dude was fool driving his car on the beach like that with the waves coming in. Came back from south padre last week glad to say didn't see any confederate flag waving.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Both extremes exist, both extremes are annoying, both extremes are equivalently prevalent, regardless of how irritating you find it.

The group that doesn't get what they want will kick up a fuss, and the group that got what it wanted will continue to kick over their figurative trash cans(legalization of marijuana, eat only local grown organic, etc.) because they can.

You don't see it though, and I respect that. I suggest that we agree to disagree.

You're wrong, point blank. There's no agreeing to disagree. I'm not sure why you're trying to portray both sides as equivalent, but nobody with any sense buys it.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Someone posted Ted Cruz's nonsense about wanting to have elections for the supreme court, just today on my feed.

It saddens me he is one of my senators....sigh. He's a master at what he does, I give him that. Learned a lot about selling bullshit to idiots from his pastor dad.

 

[captive]

Sorry totally off topic. Where in port A is that? Only place I can see that being is over by light house park near the ferry crossing. Dude was fool driving his car on the beach like that with the waves coming in. Came back from south padre last week glad to say didn't see any confederate flag waving.

Went Sargent TX this weekend, saw at least 7 confederate flags. Personally I don't care if you fly it, you have every right to. Just as I have every right to automatically assume you are a ignorant racist until proven otherwise if you are flying it.

 

[Rex Griswold]

You're wrong, point blank. There's no agreeing to disagree. I'm not sure why you're trying to portray both sides as equivalent, but nobody with any sense buys it.

You know what, I do concede.

I was going to try to create an example about political climates, but most of what's being fought for that's being called 'liberal' is pretty much basic human rights.

 

[Yazan]

 

[Shuggananas]

Saw this elsewhere but not on my facebook timeline (I'm glad). I hope no one actually posts it, though.



The serious expression had me cracking.

oh man this is so bad lmao
anybody posting minion garbage gets unfollowed immediately but I'd be tempted to keep anybody posting this because it's just hilariously bad

 

[Kenstar]

Satire:

Real:

 

[uncredited male]

Well, I wouldn't want to take the rights away from a little white girl.

 

[Kenstar]

Well, I wouldn't want to take the rights away from a little white girl.

She NEEDS a mom and dad bro
Too bad they don't adopt enough to keep up with the amount of orphaned children

 

[IAmtheFMan]

I try to stay away from the political stuff and actually don't check facebook really all that often, but this one got me. This guy's a young psychiatrist, just out of training maybe a year or so.

The great perversion sweeping the nation is unsettling. One of my deepest concerns for the future is being legally liable for refusing to take homosexual patients into psychotherapy where relationship dynamics are a main focus of the treatment. It is completely reasonable to consider that one day Christian psychiatrists and therapists could face discrimination lawsuits. Already the American psychiatric association breathlessly supports each new perversion du jour (these days transgenderism and queer culture). Christians should assume they will receive zero support from the [American Psychiaric Association] should religious liberties begin to be trampled in psychiatry.

 

[The Elite]

I would have taken a second mom over a dad who thought $100 in alimony a month was enough to help raise me.

 

[captive]

I try to stay away from the political stuff and actually don't check facebook really all that often, but this one got me. This guy's a young psychiatrist, just out of training maybe a year or so.

Um, this guy should not be allowed to practice. My wife is a psychologist, and one of the biggest and most common issues is gays and lesbians coming in for treatment for various reasons related to they're sexual identity, whether they struggle with that identity, whether they've been bullied/abused, raped etc.

 

[Link]

I try to stay away from the political stuff and actually don't check facebook really all that often, but this one got me. This guy's a young psychiatrist, just out of training maybe a year or so.

I don't want to ruin anyone's life, but that's probably something that should be reported to a medical board. That's definitely a destructive attitude for a psychiatrist to have.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

Had a "friend" post this on Facebook...

Hmmmm, America sounds pretty civil and humanitarian there. Good job US.

That's what this guy was going for right? Not to look up to the horror show that is North Korea right? Right?!

 

[Yukiari]

Ha! My dad this with chicken drumsticks when he tried to explain why being gay was bad.

 

[PulseONE]

We were talking about Republicans.

Whoops, sorry

 

[Morrigan Stark]

I try to stay away from the political stuff and actually don't check facebook really all that often, but this one got me. This guy's a young psychiatrist, just out of training maybe a year or so.

I hope whatever medical board he'll have to join will kick him out. Holy shit, this guy is actively rejecting the basic science of his profession.

 

[Mr_Zombie]

There should be a fourth picture with a rubber on the plug. It seems people who keep posting that "gay sex doesn't produce children!" forget that most of the time you have sex just for fun - and thus you use condoms or other contraceptives - not to have kids. Otherwise one would either have sex just few times during their lifetime or have a really big family.

Ugh, I just had an arguement about this specific post the other day and in general I never engage in it, but this was just increddibly ignorant and obnoxious I could not resist.

(Somewhat disturbing image):
http://i.imgur.com/3jKgPRv.jpg

Basically it is a picture of a starving african child and it is saying how pointless it is to be celebrating for gay rights when there are kids dying in Africa from hunger. So stop being so overly dramatic about it and changing your profile pic (because for some reason that is WAY too much celebration).

It's like a 12 year olds childish retort to a discussion. So fucking lame.

Eh, I saw a similar post. Guy was arguing that people applying the rainbow filter on their avatars are selfish ignorants - how can they celebrate "deviants being able to marry in America" and yet they were doing nothing when bad stuff was happening all over the world (he listed some events that happened recently). What's the connection between the two? None, but whatever.

He then went on on how leftists are always selfish; that they are pushing for in-vitro (Poland is finally working on a law to regulate in-vitro prodecure - it's legally in use for several years now but without any regulations it's basically anything goes) and by doing so they neglect all those orphans waiting to be adopted. Now those couples who couldn't have their own kids will use in-vitro instead of adopting a kid. Damn selfish people!

 

[Deified Data]

Saw this elsewhere but not on my facebook timeline (I'm glad). I hope no one actually posts it, though.

The serious expression had me cracking.

They look a lot like your average stars-and-bars supporter.

 

[Emerson]

There should be a fourth picture with a rubber on the plug. It seems people who keep posting that "gay sex doesn't produce children!" forget that most of the time you have sex just for fun - and thus you use condoms or other contraceptives - not to have kids. Otherwise one would either have sex just few times during their lifetime or have a really big family.

There are plenty of religious people who do believe sex is only for procreation (despite the Bible not really supporting that) and do have overly large families.

 

[Vicetrailia]

There are plenty of religious people who do believe sex is only for procreation (despite the Bible not really supporting that) and do have overly large families.

Um, for some reason I'm sure that people say this all of the time but don't actually practice this in reality. They may have a lot of kids, but that doesn't have to do with having sex for fun versus procreation.

 

[impirius]

The serious expression had me cracking.

The Realtree Minions look so disappointed in us

 

[Mr_Zombie]

There are plenty of religious people who do believe sex is only for procreation (despite the Bible not really supporting that) and do have overly large families.

I know, but usually those aren't the people that post this kind of images. I know guys - who already went through few girlfriends and talks about about "banging random chick on saturday evening" - who post those.

 

[Link]

There are plenty of religious people who do believe sex is only for procreation (despite the Bible not really supporting that) and do have overly large families.

There are also the ones who are against contraception for various reasons as well. Just look at the Hobby Lobby case.

 

[minor effort]

Pictures of crying children. For when you know you're losing an argument.

 

[T'Zariah]

Sarah Palin posted this non-ironically.

:lol :lol :lol

 

[Princess Viola]

Sarah Palin posted this non-ironically.

:lol :lol :lol

:lol

 

[nailbombxx]

Sarah Palin posted this non-ironically.

:lol :lol :lol

so this is a real tactic eh

pretending that nothing about the two parties has changed for almost 150 years

 

[Apt101]

Conservatives are absolutely fucking terrified of Hillary Clinton, and it is hilarious.

I once had a conservative coworker, a level-headed software engineer with a loving family, tell me Hilary reminded him of Adolf Hitler in mannerisms and ideals, and he intends on leaving the country if she ever comes to power. He's not even all that conservative, just started listening to banal AM talk radio. This is what happens when a person turns to manipulative pundits as news sources. Which, unfortunately, is the bulk of all right-leaning news.

 

[T'Zariah]

I once had a conservative coworker, a level-headed software engineer with a loving family, tell me Hilary reminded him of Adolf Hitler in mannerisms and ideals, and he intends on leaving the country if she ever comes to power. He's not even all that conservative, just started listening to banal AM talk radio. This is what happens when a person turns to manipulative pundits as news sources. Which, unfortunately, is the bulk of all right-leaning news.

His ass ain't leaving the country.

Very VERY few follow up on that shit.

 

[Philia]

I'm pretty blessed to have a lot of liberal democratic friends and family on my fb feed.

On occasion though I see my cousin's husband post several ignorant right wing images that doesn't source very well. In other words, he's quick to share his opinions but never to back it up with hard evidence, just to post them conveniently, not double checking the source.