Society is screwed

[tlynn78]

bob claims society is changing. I can see that. But I think it's changing because people with his worldview have gradually taken control of the major communications apparati and the major institutions of higher education. If you're not blind, you can see that every day.

That is the subject of this whole thread.

bob has the opinion that I and people who have a different perspective than the 'prevailing' societal perspective will eventually become pariahs. Well, look at recent history and see what becomes of 'pariahs' in totalitarian states. Dissent cannot be tolerated in the quest to implement what is good for society as a whole.

What people like bob are proposing is the 'central authority' decide and implement what is 'for the good of the society'. All totalitarian states begin with that concept.
Many people who are wiser than me (which includes a whole lot of people) see us going down this path.

THAT is what I'm scared of.

You're right to be scared. We've been too complacent for too long.

[Bob78164]

LOL - key difference, I'm not claiming to.

The people who got elected to New Jersey school boards are. The issue is that you don’t like the decisions New Jersey parents are making through their elected representatives. Because, like most Republicans, you really do think that anyone who disagrees with your world view is illegitimate or (in BiT’s words) delusional. —Bob

You really have zero ability for self-awareness, don't you? Astounding, really. Almost fascinating, like a train wreck.

I think people who don't see things the way I do either, a) have a different world view; b) have a different perspective; c) have different real-life experiences; d) have different priorities than I; e) a dozen or more other reasons for seeing things differently, or f) are fecking morons (or a combination of those reasons). BTW, Republicans (who according to you think anyone who disagrees with them is 'illegitimate') are not the ones calling for the abolition of an entire political party. That would be you. Try a little introspection, if you're even remotely capable, which I sincerely doubt.

I haven't called for the abolition of a political party. I've called for it to become as politically irrelevant in the rest of the country as it has already become in California. Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in. --Bob

[tlynn78]

The people who got elected to New Jersey school boards are. The issue is that you don’t like the decisions New Jersey parents are making through their elected representatives. Because, like most Republicans, you really do think that anyone who disagrees with your world view is illegitimate or (in BiT’s words) delusional. —Bob

You really have zero ability for self-awareness, don't you? Astounding, really. Almost fascinating, like a train wreck.

I think people who don't see things the way I do either, a) have a different world view; b) have a different perspective; c) have different real-life experiences; d) have different priorities than I; e) a dozen or more other reasons for seeing things differently, or f) are fecking morons (or a combination of those reasons). BTW, Republicans (who according to you think anyone who disagrees with them is 'illegitimate') are not the ones calling for the abolition of an entire political party. That would be you. Try a little introspection, if you're even remotely capable, which I sincerely doubt.

I haven't called for the abolition of a political party. I've called for it to become as politically irrelevant in the rest of the country as it has already become in California. Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in. --Bob

Like spectators at a zoo. I wonder what a Republican party you'd approve of would look like. No, don't bother, that's rhetorical - I truly don't give a single feck what your dream Republican party would consist of.

[Beebs52]

The people who got elected to New Jersey school boards are. The issue is that you don’t like the decisions New Jersey parents are making through their elected representatives. Because, like most Republicans, you really do think that anyone who disagrees with your world view is illegitimate or (in BiT’s words) delusional. —Bob

You really have zero ability for self-awareness, don't you? Astounding, really. Almost fascinating, like a train wreck.

I think people who don't see things the way I do either, a) have a different world view; b) have a different perspective; c) have different real-life experiences; d) have different priorities than I; e) a dozen or more other reasons for seeing things differently, or f) are fecking morons (or a combination of those reasons). BTW, Republicans (who according to you think anyone who disagrees with them is 'illegitimate') are not the ones calling for the abolition of an entire political party. That would be you. Try a little introspection, if you're even remotely capable, which I sincerely doubt.

I haven't called for the abolition of a political party. I've called for it to become as politically irrelevant in the rest of the country as it has already become in California. Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in. --Bob

Actually, yes you have. Several times

then there's nothing left to discuss and all I can do to implement my value judgments is my level best to politically bulldoze you.
Bulldoze is a pretty active verb.

[tlynn78]

You really have zero ability for self-awareness, don't you? Astounding, really. Almost fascinating, like a train wreck.

I think people who don't see things the way I do either, a) have a different world view; b) have a different perspective; c) have different real-life experiences; d) have different priorities than I; e) a dozen or more other reasons for seeing things differently, or f) are fecking morons (or a combination of those reasons). BTW, Republicans (who according to you think anyone who disagrees with them is 'illegitimate') are not the ones calling for the abolition of an entire political party. That would be you. Try a little introspection, if you're even remotely capable, which I sincerely doubt.

I haven't called for the abolition of a political party. I've called for it to become as politically irrelevant in the rest of the country as it has already become in California. Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in. --Bob

Actually, yes you have. Several times

then there's nothing left to discuss and all I can do to implement my value judgments is my level best to politically bulldoze you.
Bulldoze is a pretty active verb.

Oh, Beebs, you're surely misinterpreting any direct quote from bobbo the wordsmith. C'mon, man. Let him have his mindless fantasies, the poor dude.

[BackInTex]

Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in. --Bob

The Mitt Romney's and Liz Cheney's of the Republican party are being pushed out, not promoted. Funny how you think the Democratic party should define who their opposition is. Worse, many in the Republican party seem to agree.

[flockofseagulls104]

Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in.

That is what many of us are invested in. It's called 'America First'. I was at a rally with 4999 like-minded people a few weeks ago that are very interested in removing and preventing psychopaths like you from accumulating and wielding power over us. I truly can't think of any democrat representative that in any way fits the 'country over party' description. Except maybe Joe Manchin, (bless his heart) one time. And he was duly chastised by the party PTB for that.
I can think of many who, literally, hate this country and want to tear it down and rebuild it in their own image of what it should be. I think, based on what I've seen from you, that is where you are.

[Bob Juch]

Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in.

That is what many of us are invested in. It's called 'America First'. I was at a rally with 4999 like-minded people a few weeks ago that are very interested in removing and preventing psychopaths like you from accumulating and wielding power over us. I truly can't think of any democrat representative that in any way fits the 'country over party' description. Except maybe Joe Manchin, (bless his heart) one time. And he was duly chastised by the party PTB for that.
I can think of many who, literally, hate this country and want to tear it down and rebuild it in their own image of what it should be. I think, based on what I've seen from you, that is where you are.

You're in the wrong party. You need to join the America First Party:

[flockofseagulls104]

Eventually the current version of the Republican Party will be replaced by a sane conservative party that hasn't been captured by a psychopath and that truly believes in country over party. And when that happens, people like you will be on the outside looking in.

That is what many of us are invested in. It's called 'America First'. I was at a rally with 4999 like-minded people a few weeks ago that are very interested in removing and preventing psychopaths like you from accumulating and wielding power over us. I truly can't think of any democrat representative that in any way fits the 'country over party' description. Except maybe Joe Manchin, (bless his heart) one time. And he was duly chastised by the party PTB for that.
I can think of many who, literally, hate this country and want to tear it down and rebuild it in their own image of what it should be. I think, based on what I've seen from you, that is where you are.

You're in the wrong party. You need to join the America First Party:

Ya got me, BJ. I am so impressed with your insightful contributions to this discussion. And really, any discussion. You are probably a renowned scholar in the e-bigot cartoon world you live in.
Now why don't you go breathe some poisoned air, drink some foul water, eat some tainted meat and go run along.

[BackInTex]

Ya got me, BJ. I am so impressed with your insightful contributions to this discussion. And really, any discussion. You are probably a renowned scholar in the e-bigot cartoon world you live in.
Now why don't you go breathe some poisoned air, drink some foul water, eat some tainted meat and go run along.

Always jealous of the access he has to family photos. We lost most of ours when my mom abandoned her apartment, leaving much stuff there.

[Beebs52]

Ya got me, BJ. I am so impressed with your insightful contributions to this discussion. And really, any discussion. You are probably a renowned scholar in the e-bigot cartoon world you live in.
Now why don't you go breathe some poisoned air, drink some foul water, eat some tainted meat and go run along.

Always jealous of the access he has to family photos. We lost most of ours when my mom abandoned her apartment, leaving much stuff there.

Now that's funny I don't care who yar.

[flockofseagulls104]

I am tempted to make BJ's new photo my new avatar, replacing my old badge of honor, also given to me by BJ in a previous, extremely clever personal jab at me. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are solicited.

TROLLER REVIEWS:

I have to acknowledge that although BJ doesn't come close in the quantity of personal insult trolls aimed at me, (My own loyal stalker has that locked up forever) his contributions are far more innane, stupid and childish than even the stalker's. Not an easy task for anyone. It is obvious he puts a lot of thought into it, (or quite possibly none at all, which is even more difficult) which is probably why they are more infrequent. BJ also tends to include more pictures in his trolls than any of the others, which sometimes makes them easier to digest. His prose offerings oftentimes don't make much sense, even in a careful read-through. It's much more evident what insipid message he's trying to convey when he is using his graphics.

However, my favorite troller has to be our above-average lawyer. Though the others occasionally lapse into vulgarity and self-righteous rages aimed at me, the counselor does it frequently and with apparent passion behind it. No feeble attempts at being the least bit clever, he lets me have it. You gotta give him credit for that. Plus he uses many big words that someone like BJ has never even heard of.

My Loyal Stalker has a definite disadvantage, however, as he has earned the coveted 'ignore' status. So I don't get to see most of his compositions in honor of me. Still, because of his past voluminous output, I can usually surmise the content of the trolls I skip over, and the ones that get re-quoted mostly confirm my intuition. I have detected no change in tone, content, or maturity in the recent trolls I do get to see.

Trolling me has proven to be a useful tool. Recently, I have been posing specific questions, directed mostly to the trollers and e-bigots. Personal attacks on me allow them to avoid having to even give an attempt to answer them.

There are several other trollers, but they are the also-rans (sorry travis: try harder).

[tlynn78]

I am tempted to make BJ's new photo my new avatar, replacing my old badge of honor, also given to me by BJ in a previous, extremely clever personal jab at me. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are solicited.

TROLLER REVIEWS:

I have to acknowledge that although BJ doesn't come close in the quantity of personal insult trolls aimed at me, (My own loyal stalker has that locked up forever) his contributions are far more innane, stupid and childish than even the stalker's. Not an easy task for anyone. It is obvious he puts a lot of thought into it, (or quite possibly none at all, which is even more difficult) which is probably why they are more infrequent. BJ also tends to include more pictures in his trolls than any of the others, which sometimes makes them easier to digest. His prose offerings oftentimes don't make much sense, even in a careful read-through. It's much more evident what insipid message he's trying to convey when he is using his graphics.

However, my favorite troller has to be our above-average lawyer. Though the others occasionally lapse into vulgarity and self-righteous rages aimed at me, the counselor does it frequently and with apparent passion behind it. No feeble attempts at being the least bit clever, he lets me have it. You gotta give him credit for that. Plus he uses many big words that someone like BJ has never even heard of.

My Loyal Stalker has a definite disadvantage, however, as he has earned the coveted 'ignore' status. So I don't get to see most of his compositions in honor of me. Still, because of his past voluminous output, I can usually surmise the content of the trolls I skip over, and the ones that get re-quoted mostly confirm my intuition. I have detected no change in tone, content, or maturity in the recent trolls I do get to see.

Trolling me has proven to be a useful tool. Recently, I have been posing specific questions, directed mostly to the trollers and e-bigots. Personal attacks on me allow them to avoid having to even give an attempt to answer them.

There are several other trollers, but they are the also-rans (sorry travis: try harder).

Maybe you could set up weekly rankings, give them something to aim for?

[Beebs52]

I want to be the sweeper after the fact. Sometimes I'm prickly but usually in agreement. Does that get a rank?

[flockofseagulls104]

I want to be the sweeper after the fact. Sometimes I'm prickly but usually in agreement. Does that get a rank?

Well, I hope I don't get you as a troller. You are actually clever and witty, a talent my current entourage doesn't have. A troll by you would sting.
And you make up words. They don't do that.

[flockofseagulls104]

I am tempted to make BJ's new photo my new avatar, replacing my old badge of honor, also given to me by BJ in a previous, extremely clever personal jab at me. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are solicited.

TROLLER REVIEWS:

I have to acknowledge that although BJ doesn't come close in the quantity of personal insult trolls aimed at me, (My own loyal stalker has that locked up forever) his contributions are far more innane, stupid and childish than even the stalker's. Not an easy task for anyone. It is obvious he puts a lot of thought into it, (or quite possibly none at all, which is even more difficult) which is probably why they are more infrequent. BJ also tends to include more pictures in his trolls than any of the others, which sometimes makes them easier to digest. His prose offerings oftentimes don't make much sense, even in a careful read-through. It's much more evident what insipid message he's trying to convey when he is using his graphics.

However, my favorite troller has to be our above-average lawyer. Though the others occasionally lapse into vulgarity and self-righteous rages aimed at me, the counselor does it frequently and with apparent passion behind it. No feeble attempts at being the least bit clever, he lets me have it. You gotta give him credit for that. Plus he uses many big words that someone like BJ has never even heard of.

My Loyal Stalker has a definite disadvantage, however, as he has earned the coveted 'ignore' status. So I don't get to see most of his compositions in honor of me. Still, because of his past voluminous output, I can usually surmise the content of the trolls I skip over, and the ones that get re-quoted mostly confirm my intuition. I have detected no change in tone, content, or maturity in the recent trolls I do get to see.

Trolling me has proven to be a useful tool. Recently, I have been posing specific questions, directed mostly to the trollers and e-bigots. Personal attacks on me allow them to avoid having to even give an attempt to answer them.

There are several other trollers, but they are the also-rans (sorry travis: try harder).

Maybe you could set up weekly rankings, give them something to aim for?

I try to be fair. But it wouldn't be right, given that My Loyal Stalker has been canceled. Perhaps he can create a MM and compete under a false identity.

[Beebs52]

I want to be the sweeper after the fact. Sometimes I'm prickly but usually in agreement. Does that get a rank?

Well, I hope I don't get you as a troller. You are actually clever and witty, a talent my current entourage doesn't have. A troll by you would sting.
And you make up words. They don't do that.

No! Not a troller. Jeez. I am a bullshitter, with truthiness infused. Therefore, scattershot towards those who are weak and annoying.

Like that.

[Bob Juch]

I want to be the sweeper after the fact. Sometimes I'm prickly but usually in agreement. Does that get a rank?

I hope you have a good supply of SMELLEZE.

[Beebs52]

I want to be the sweeper after the fact. Sometimes I'm prickly but usually in agreement. Does that get a rank?

I hope you have a good supply of SMELLEZE.

Sorry. That is weak.

[flockofseagulls104]

I want to be the sweeper after the fact. Sometimes I'm prickly but usually in agreement. Does that get a rank?

I hope you have a good supply of SMELLEZE.

Sorry. That is weak.

He's better when he has pictures. But not much.

[silverscreenselect]

I am tempted to make BJ's new photo my new avatar, replacing my old badge of honor, also given to me by BJ in a previous, extremely clever personal jab at me. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are solicited.

TROLLER REVIEWS:

Having run out of serious topics to look foolish discussing, Flock has fallen back on his favorite pastimes, patting himself on the back for his non-existent humor and taking a victory lap over the bored liberals.

[wbtravis007]

I am tempted to make BJ's new photo my new avatar, replacing my old badge of honor, also given to me by BJ in a previous, extremely clever personal jab at me. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are solicited.

TROLLER REVIEWS:

I have to acknowledge that although BJ doesn't come close in the quantity of personal insult trolls aimed at me, (My own loyal stalker has that locked up forever) his contributions are far more innane, stupid and childish than even the stalker's. Not an easy task for anyone. It is obvious he puts a lot of thought into it, (or quite possibly none at all, which is even more difficult) which is probably why they are more infrequent. BJ also tends to include more pictures in his trolls than any of the others, which sometimes makes them easier to digest. His prose offerings oftentimes don't make much sense, even in a careful read-through. It's much more evident what insipid message he's trying to convey when he is using his graphics.

However, my favorite troller has to be our above-average lawyer. Though the others occasionally lapse into vulgarity and self-righteous rages aimed at me, the counselor does it frequently and with apparent passion behind it. No feeble attempts at being the least bit clever, he lets me have it. You gotta give him credit for that. Plus he uses many big words that someone like BJ has never even heard of.

My Loyal Stalker has a definite disadvantage, however, as he has earned the coveted 'ignore' status. So I don't get to see most of his compositions in honor of me. Still, because of his past voluminous output, I can usually surmise the content of the trolls I skip over, and the ones that get re-quoted mostly confirm my intuition. I have detected no change in tone, content, or maturity in the recent trolls I do get to see.

Trolling me has proven to be a useful tool. Recently, I have been posing specific questions, directed mostly to the trollers and e-bigots. Personal attacks on me allow them to avoid having to even give an attempt to answer them.

There are several other trollers, but they are the also-rans (sorry travis: try harder).

Maybe you could set up weekly rankings, give them something to aim for?

Y’all weird. And, I hate to say it, but that goes for Flora, too.

[flockofseagulls104]

I am tempted to make BJ's new photo my new avatar, replacing my old badge of honor, also given to me by BJ in a previous, extremely clever personal jab at me. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are solicited.

TROLLER REVIEWS:

I have to acknowledge that although BJ doesn't come close in the quantity of personal insult trolls aimed at me, (My own loyal stalker has that locked up forever) his contributions are far more innane, stupid and childish than even the stalker's. Not an easy task for anyone. It is obvious he puts a lot of thought into it, (or quite possibly none at all, which is even more difficult) which is probably why they are more infrequent. BJ also tends to include more pictures in his trolls than any of the others, which sometimes makes them easier to digest. His prose offerings oftentimes don't make much sense, even in a careful read-through. It's much more evident what insipid message he's trying to convey when he is using his graphics.

However, my favorite troller has to be our above-average lawyer. Though the others occasionally lapse into vulgarity and self-righteous rages aimed at me, the counselor does it frequently and with apparent passion behind it. No feeble attempts at being the least bit clever, he lets me have it. You gotta give him credit for that. Plus he uses many big words that someone like BJ has never even heard of.

My Loyal Stalker has a definite disadvantage, however, as he has earned the coveted 'ignore' status. So I don't get to see most of his compositions in honor of me. Still, because of his past voluminous output, I can usually surmise the content of the trolls I skip over, and the ones that get re-quoted mostly confirm my intuition. I have detected no change in tone, content, or maturity in the recent trolls I do get to see.

Trolling me has proven to be a useful tool. Recently, I have been posing specific questions, directed mostly to the trollers and e-bigots. Personal attacks on me allow them to avoid having to even give an attempt to answer them.

There are several other trollers, but they are the also-rans (sorry travis: try harder).

Maybe you could set up weekly rankings, give them something to aim for?

Y’all weird. And, I hate to say it, but that goes for Flora, too.

Guess we're just like Austin, then.

[flockofseagulls104]

So, once again, getting back to the subject....

Is the major argument why we need to teach 1st and 2nd graders about 'gender' in public schools because we can't trust their parents to do it? Or do it the 'right' way?

Please enlighten me....

[Beebs52]

So, once again, getting back to the subject....

Is the major argument why we need to teach 1st and 2nd graders about 'gender' in public schools because we can't trust their parents to do it? Or do it the 'right' way?

Please enlighten me....

Funnily, the original post, that I made, was about the inanity of Hollywood, media, etc. I may start a new thread. Then they can blast me for my unwokeness in re the discussion at hand.