Nom Nom Nom...

top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 212 points 1 year ago (15 children)
  • [–] 73 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Nah, that would be when Ted Cruz made similar comments the other day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Only because they are worried the next government will turn on them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well, not just that. They derive a great deal of success from ranting against the 'liberal agenda'. If all the vaguely left leaning voices are obviously silenced, then their own engagement goes down because there's no opposition voice to rant against. As ridiculous they look on a normal day, they look just utterly beyond crazy in a scenario where everyone but them are essentially gagged.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Their entire use to the party only has value until they do Crush opposition voices.

    After they consolidate power they will not need any of these guys, they will be a liability, especially ones like Joe that try to think for themselves and disagree with the party line on some issues even while pretending to believe things like the president's lawsuits against the media being in good faith which, ha, he knows better, he's a cynical motherfucker.

    That goes for almost everybody on the right however, they need a lot of people to take over, after they do they will not have any use for these same people. They should be careful what they wish for.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    With all the bizarre shit that has happened since Charlie Kirk's shooting, and it's a new level of Bizarro World out there, the most bizarre may be that Rafael Edward Cruz was a voice of reason.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    the bizarre shit that has happened since Charlie Kirk’s shooting

    Now you have right wing gun folk saying the shot was impossible because they know the 30-06 would penetrate way more and do more massive damage than it did according to the report.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I've been wondering about that. They might have a point? Not saying that the shot was faked , but maybe something was off about the ammo. Idk, the 30.06 is a fairly good size round used to hunt moose and elk, seems like it could easily pass right through a person

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    30-06 is pretty much the same size round as 7.62 which is used in AK-47s. They will generally pass right through a person (Especially in soft tissue like the neck) but it’s a normal size round for shooting humans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Thats not wrong, but not entirely accurate, the bullet diameter is similar, but the casing size on the 30-06 is much larger and able to hold much more powered, thus giving a much higher muzzle energy. So it should do even more damage. But it also depends on the type of bullet used. FMJ vs jacked hole point vs plain soft lead.

    https://www.foundryoutdoors.com/blogs/caliber-ballistics-comparison/30-06-springfield-vs-7-62x39mm-ammo-comparison-ballistics-info-chart

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    There is no physical way, even broken completely down, to fully put the murder weapon in the bag the alleged shooter was using to transport it.

    It is literally physically impossible.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Is that legit criticism? What if the bullet hit the spine? It did seem to do quite a bit of damage, I only saw a 3 second video clip but the lesson I took from all of this is looking for a single well placed shot, do it with the hunting rifle and leave the fancy assault rifle at home.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I am used to that part by now, I have found myself agreeing with Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor green on several subjects. Both of which made better points than the Democratic politicians or influencers on some of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 69 points 1 year ago

    You think so, Joe? You think the fascists might be crazy?

  • source
  • [–] 66 points 1 year ago (9 children)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    That is the face eating leopard after eating such a rich diet of fat disgusting overweight people that aren't hard to catch. Poor guy needs insulin shots now too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    should worry about picking up all kinds of diseases eating that filth raw.

    and talk about macroplastics

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    it's weird how so many conservative women end up looking like bad drag queens, some other examples include loomer, guilfoyle and bezo's wife..... it's like they turn themselves into a hyper-caricature of femininity, with bad filler and too much pancake make-up slathered across their faces.

    i guess the performative femininity plays well with it's performative masculinity/rural cosplay counterparts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It has to do with money. It doesn't matter that it's good. It matters that it's expensive. Kinda like an ugly gold chain.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    The average person pays like $90k for Mar-a-lago face now, it's definitely the new conspicuous consumerism. But with old fashion trends, you didn't permanently make yourself look like you needed an epi-pen

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Definitely want to get him tested for textoplasmosis now. The parasite may aid in its life cycle though because it makes the prey not afraid of cats that eat them.

    Makes rats not afraid of the smell of cats that is but all mammals can get it not just rats and cats.

    There could be rampant human infections of this that could be affecting the fear centers of our brains, long held theory of many of ours. I think the new South Park episode actually referenced it. The FCC douchebag got textoplasmosis after falling into a mountain of cat shit when he fell for the tricks the president was using to trick Satan into having an abortion of their demon hellspawn.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago

    Really kept his head down for a few days first huh?

  • source
  • [–] 138 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Obligatory fuck the unfunny Joe Rogan who ushered this fascist back in.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 1 year ago

    "Oh no! The fascists I supported are being fascists!"

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well, no he didn't. Not really. I haven't heard it (and don't intend to) but according to the quotes in this article he didn't do that at all.

    “The problem is the companies, if they are being pressured by the government – so if that’s real – and if people on the right are like ‘yeah, go get ’em,’ oh my God, you’re crazy. You’re crazy for supporting this because this will be used on you,” he said.

    If, if, if. Wouldn't want to risk upsetting anyone would you?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I wonder if Rogan realizes that he's part of the reason we've ended up here?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Like most rich ass conservatives, he only cared about advancing his bank account. He knew his audience and double downed. He know he won't lose those listeners. He could fuck Hilary Clinton tomorrow and they would still celebrate it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    An important reminder is that Kimmel's monologue did not say anything slightly negative about Charlie Kirk's demonic zionazi and replacement theorgy genocidal supremacism. He only made fun of Trump for interviews in which he was asked about any sympathy he had for his dead dear friend, getting deflect-weaved into "we're building the bestest ballroom in the white house now".

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    He got in trouble for saying that Kirk was killed by his own side.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    He didn't even say that though, this is driving me insane, he said that Trump and them were doing everything they could to pin the blame on the left and score political points from it, which is undeniable. He didn't say anything about who he actually thought the shooter was.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    He literally said that the right is "desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Which is not saying that the killer was one of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I see, you could actually interpret it either way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    How do you interpret it anyway other than what it says? You are making an assumption if you interpret it differently than what he clearly stated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I read it as him saying that the shooter was unquestionably right wing, which is different than saying that the right wing is desperate to prove that it's anyone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    The right also desperate to prove its somebody else because they want targets for political repression and kirk's death is simply not useful otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    Yes, just as there are those on the left who view the killing as deserved or somehow an acceptable outcome.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Idk how true that is. I think its more that if we're just going to have random people shooting folks at events it seems less bad if the people shot are the ones with a giant megaphone saying that the shootings should be seen as inevitable.

    Its like, at least the guy that got shot had lived as millionaire for a decade and its not some kid this time

    I can't point to anyone notable that couldn't be an AI or right winger sockpuppet account that actually cheered it on in the same sort of way that like republican politicians gleefully celebrated nancy pelosi's husband being attacked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Kirk's killing is inherently more political. School shootings are a slightly different matter. I don't think Robinson was capable of killing random people. He chose his target. It was an assassination.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I would argue all school shootings are political because they're a result of a policy and distinguishing Kirk as a political figure is just some bullshit. Kirk also is not a politician. He's just well connected to republican party donors, many of whom also own large portions of the US media.

    Kirk was a rich guy and a friend of donors. This makes him "Important" in US media. Avg people probably are largely unaware of who he was before he died, so I disagree that this is a "political" assassination and more like a "celebrity" assassination similar to John Lennon

    Still bad and stupid but the shooter's motives were probably more about his loved ones being harrassed by kirk fans than anything truly ideological.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    He implied it but he straight up was factually saying they're trying real hard to show it wasn't one of their guys. It definitely wasn't any of the people MAGA wanted to pin it on.

    Turns out it was some kind of apolitical zoomer whose friends were personally affected by Kirk's rhetoric likely because the problem with living in the most conservative US state is that a lot of people around you are probably repeating the vitriol.

    There's still a decent good case to be made that MAGA bullied this kid into killing Kirk by threatening people he loves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    The 2 candidates are Bill Ackman or Nick Fuentes "influence". That Carr, Trump, Sinclair need to protect one of those 2 shows how corrupt democracy is.

    Next election needs to promise to nationalize with no compensation all zionazi media, zeroing out all directors and exectutives wealth, decitizenize any politician pledging allegiance to Israel, zeroing out all of their donors, and nationalize defense and oil industry.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 49 points 1 year ago

    Careful Joe. That's sounding dangerously unconservative, and you know what the crazy conservative gun people do to those conservative voices that aren't conservative enough for them.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Joe has always been good at knowing which side of the fence to temporarily come off of.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 101 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    You.. you made the crazy Joe.

    also if you haven't seen it, I highly recommend this: How Comedy Was Destroyed by an Anti-Reality Doomsday Cult

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I had a friend tell me years ago that he didn't think any comedian was actually funny. It helped open my eyes to the truth. They really aren't funny.

    Good comedy is still out there, though. Watch any of the shows from PFFR, the art collective that made Xavier Renegade Angel to see for yourself.

    Odds are if you're watching anything mainstream, it's probably watered-down shit for morons.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Hey, this walking talking cyst finally got something right.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 77 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    He said that if such interference were really happening and conservatives were supporting such behavior they were “crazy” because eventually they themselves would be the target of such censorship

    What's really wild is that his biggest concern is that the people doing the fascist thing could become the target of it later. There's no dawning of 'oh maybe the people doing this aren't so good' no, he's worried that the other people who have been warning that they are fascists might pursue them later with the fascist precedent they are putting in place.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago

    Not necessarily. It's called arguing a conclusion to your audience in terms of premises they'll accept & understand.

    The conclusion is "censorship is dangerous". The premise "fascists are pieces of shit" doesn't support that. That's a separate argument entirely.

    Moreover, fascists are unlikely to accept that premise. Arguing that is a great way to make fascists stop listening, which people who don't know how to argue excel at.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 83 points 1 year ago

    fuck this grift. this dude did more propoganda minutes for Maga than Charlie did, he doesn't give af about free speech beyond crying about how "censored" he is into the world's largest microphone

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    Joe Rogan you dumb fuck.....you helped get the orange turd elected!

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago (26 children)

    Joe Rogan is a drug-addled moron. Do not listen or engage with anything he says, even if you feel like you agree.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] [S] 26 points 1 year ago (24 children)

    You got it all wrong. He's not drug addicted. He's brain damaged from his mma days. Apparently brain damage leads to conservative thoughts. Look at Fetterman.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    There's a talk show video out there where the host is conservative (it's well known I just can't remember the name). Some guy is on the phone talking about how he's seen the light of the GOP and the host asks what changed, and he says he got kicked in the head by a horse.

    The host looks a little shocked and says something like, okay moving on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That's crazy man, have you ever tried DMT?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    No but I was once awake for a week straight, the shadow people and porn hallucinations weren't fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    That's the farthest from DMT one can go.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (10 children)

    He's a massive every-drug-under-the-sun addict

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

    I don't like Rogan just as much as the next guy, but that's simply not true. He's an advocate for psychedelics and psychedelic assisted therapy as it pertains to ptsd and expanding consciousness in general. Is he a piece of shit? Absolutely! Is he a junky? Not even close

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    He’s an advocate for psychedelics and psychedelic assisted therapy

    In the same way that an alcoholic is advocating for local breweries, sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    Quit playing word games. Now hes not a "junky". F off with this shit. He's very obviously an ADDICT.

    Just look at the guy, he's an absolutely bloated sack of shit that looks like he sleeps in a haunted house. He's obviously a heavy hormone abuser. All the guy talks about is drugs drugs drugs drugs drugs, and he's fucked up all the time in public and on his own show. Get a grip and stop apologizing for this drug addled lunatic

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    I think you might be extremely uninformed. If he was "every-drug-under-the-sun addict," he'd be strung out on opioids and meth. It's simply not true.

    Not defending Rogan, but the other commenter is correct. Dude just smokes weed and does psychedelics.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    You seem angry. Maybe think before speaking and you won't feel so stupid

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm not angry, I'm exhausted by your conspicuously uninformed stupidity and word-games, and more than happy to let you know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›