[Thanos]

Given how often in each show the Kids were in dresses I'd say they were plenty pro tranny. The SJW's though are convincingly anti comedy. When someone are tame as Jerry Seinfeld says he can't play colleges anymore because he's too "offensive" to certain students then there's a big problem going on out there.

[Public_Domain]

[BeaverFever]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

The Left has their corporate media and it is pushing a lot of Trump scare and desperate attempts at gotcha. That's not conspiracy. That we can see with our own eyes.

But the alternate new media of the Right might be entering conspiracy territory with the leftist media corporates when they offer explanations as to why and what might be pushing it.

Corporations are part of the left now? I guess that explains Martins shitpost about WLl Street Journal being left wing

[ShepherdsDog]

Fiddle thinks anyone that disagrees with him is a left winger....Tea Party Syndrome.

[N_Fiddledog]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Fiddle thinks anyone that disagrees with him is a left winger....Tea Party Syndrome.

Not really, sometimes it's easier to deal that way when you're attacked on multiple fronts. Just give it a single name and knock them down as they come at you.

But no, there's fiscal conservatives with liberal social values, and the reverse. Apparently Neo-Cons were originally liberals. There are regressive progressives of course and one even hears tales of a Progressive that is actually progressive. I haven't seen one yet, but I'm anxious to meet him or her if he or him or zim or zir should ever present themselves.

Left and right are just convenient pidgeon holes. I'm a rightie. If you attack me you're a leftie. Don't like it. Don't attack me.

[N_Fiddledog]

Tricks Tricks:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

And really, it was Joe Rogan? 2 years ago? Shows you what you get for believing the Daily Beast. I only got as far as them and they were saying it was the Drunken Peasants. They're a group of Liberal YouTubers.

No, it happened again. It originally happened two years ago. THat's why him denying it is laughable, because he said it quite plainly 2 years ago, and because he wasn't famous he didn't receive backlash.

OK I'm back. Just did a quick scan for info on Milo.

So, what it looks like is the basics of Milo's views on pedos have been known for a while. Milo was talking on Joe Rogan about how he was molested by a gay priest as a teenager and he didn't seem to think there was much wrong with it. But I don't think they could have taken Milo down with what's there.

See for yourself. The video they gave me was linked Apr 6, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJhHwspZGcg

Here's some right wing blog gossip you'll like. They say there's this guy who calls himself Rebel Pundit and there's a claim he has video of Milo getting teens drunk and moving on them, or something. I can't find it, and if you start googling for it you get hacker warnings. I have to think if that existed we'd know about it from the corporates by now (and yes Beave the legacy, MSM outlets are run by corporations or they have corporate money behind them).

But from what I can find the destruction of Milo is a result of the CPAC firing. That's what put the scarlet letter on his forehead, and that was sparked by the Drunken Peasants YouTube videocast. In that one they suck Milo into talking the morality of pedo on teen. It's nuanced and Milo has evolved his explanation since then, but it doesn't matter. You can point and say Milo's cool with the pedophilia from that videocast.

I heard it's about a month old. See the Milo bit here:

https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/sta ... 73/video/1

So was he set up by the peasants, somebody behind them, or by CPAC? Or was it just a natural evolution of things? The timing is suspect. He had reached a level of notoriety one would expect attacks.

Does it matter? I don't think so. Best guess is he's done. He's finished and everybody seems to know it (with the possible exception of Milo). That's all that matters.

But even that doesn't really matter that much, because as they say in the movie Serenity - "Can't stop the signal." The message of free speech and counter regressive will still get out.

[Thanos]

Roman Polanski's victim said basically the same thing;

http://www.tmz.com/2017/02/17/roman-pol ... ch_Results

She forgives him, she wants all the fuss over with, and she wants him to be able to visit Sharon Tate's grave again for the first time in forty years. More important she said even though what happened to her was wrong it didn't break her and it didn't turn her into a lifelong wreck. Polanski's in his eighties and harmless and not long for the world. Are you going to bend on him the same way Milo got over the priest that attacked him? Or is your forgiveness all wonderful and clean while the same sentiment from us awful "progs" (assuming we even support forgiveness for Polanski to begin with) is all perverted and horrid?

Tell us what you think, even though we're all fairly certain how your reply will go.

[Public_Domain]

[N_Fiddledog]

Thanos Thanos:

Tell us what you think, even though we're all fairly certain how your reply will go.

You've never been right before. Why do you think you will be this time?

So basically there's a problem A, which is what we're discussing, but you would like to discuss a problem B.

So let's discuss problem C. (Did you see that coming? )

Ever heard about this:



Read about it here if you like:

http://culturalmarxism.net/liberal-medi ... edophilia/

Or if you're still on the kick where you can't listen to the fringe unless it's Prog try one of these.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/arch ... le/278921/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/virtuous- ... -1.2710160

They'll avoid the point, but there should be enough about what they want to call "virtuous pedophillia" for you to get it. There's a movement and it seems to centered in what we may think of as the regressive left that suggests we "PROGRESS" towards normalizing pedophilia.

So what do you think of that?

What does it have to do with Milo? Nothing more than the problem B you would like to divert me onto, but it does show you that how much effort we put into destroying those who dare put forward such notions seems to depend on circumstances and political affiliation.

Take you for instance...what's with the virtue signalling? You want to get Milo, because he's so bad and you're so good? Why not Salon?

[N_Fiddledog]

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Don't attack me.

Bud, you ask for it.

Best start respecting the fuck out of pronouns now, since that'll probably be your next token.

What a slimy little dung beetle you are for the humorless way you lie to take things out of context. Who are you trying to impress?

[Thanos]

You accused the rest of us multiple times in this thread of being supporters of Polanski and other molesters. They I bring up something that blows your Polanski argument apart like a bundle of dynamite into the depths of an outhouse and you run away from it as fast as you can. Nice dodge, Bundy. Your factory that churns out custom-built strawmen must be running on three-shifts and making you money hand over fist ever since the inauguration.

[Public_Domain]

[N_Fiddledog]

Thanos Thanos:

You accused the rest of us multiple times in this thread of being supporters of Polanski and other molesters.

In this thread? Should be easy for you to copy and paste a quote then.

Except you can't, because it didn't happen.

What's with all the lying bullshit all of a sudden. Are you guys getting desperate again or something?

One thing I remember about this thread, PD desperately wanted to talk about Milo rather than the subject.

Very well here you are. Why don't you actually talk about it then.

No? You'd rather tell lies, launch personal attacks and talk about something else now? Why is that, I wonder.

[Public_Domain]

[Public_Domain]