what makes you think someone else relegated you (and everyone like you) to the fringe?
Observation of the public discussion. Counting heads on TV.
The well paid and ubiquitously encountered hired punditry is overwhelmingly rightwing and authoritarian, a full range of them including extremists and wingnuts and utter incompetents with major roles and solidly supported jobs, while the leftwing libertarian viewpoints are found almost entirely on the poorly paid fringes and in temporary appearances only, represented by a narrow range of centrist and supremely competent individuals hanging on to jobs that barely exist.
usually, that is something the individual does as a choice
Uh, no, that's quite stupid. Nobody hires themselves for millions to be David Brooks, first tier hack columnist for life at the NYT via the National Review; nobody chooses to not pay themselves 3/4 million a year to be second tier hack Chuck Todd holding down a prime time pundit job on major network TV; nobody rejects major influence and the big easy money available to the likes of crackpot Hugh Hewitt or plagiarist Ben Shapiro to be first tier and original thinker Charlie Pierce scrabbling for their payday on the subscription blog roll of Esquire magazine, where they have to write their own books and sell them one at a time to actual readers.
- - - - -
So you are the wingnut that you claim everyone else to be. You're one of those deplorables in flyover country. You don't work out of your basement do you? You work at Walmart.
Pee Wee Herman will never die.
Words - do they ever mean anything?
Btw: you do realize that by now, after a dozen or more idiotic misses like that, you can't dig out even by guessing right, right?
Because being
always wrong throughout your pages and pages of attempted personal insult and stereotypification - without exception, so far - isn't the problem with you guys. That's just a minor consequence of my own little setup for my own entertainment when dealing with the sewage aimed at me (and reassurance that I nailed the description and classification of your posting - by their folly shalt thou know them, a tree is known by its fruit, always reality check, etc).
The problem is the bandarlog approach in the first place, to all issues here
- misrepresent, assume the misrepresentation as an initial basis for personal attack, abandon all issues of content etc and focus on personal attacks in a chorus of stupid and preening and shitheap toupee@ modification; "We all say so, so it must be true", as Kipling put it. It's not a good fit for a discussion or science forum populated by grownups, and it won't become a good fit via improvements in the accuracy of the guesswork.
It's not that you're wrong - it's that you're doing the wrong thing. That simple, supported, and wholly accurate critique of the California joke didn't get three seconds of fairminded attention from any of you. Neither did the issue raised by the OP, in the middle of the Republican erosion of American science.
- - - -
did I say "The brown immigrant ones"? nope.
You just laughed at the wrong "joke", and realized too late what that revealed. Poe's Law, from my pov.
The ridiculous dishonesty of what you did say, your explanation of that joke, was dealt with above. Reread, if actually curious.
(Was that the fourth, or was it the fifth, lame-ass explanation of a joke from you guys? You know, what I was supposed to have posted but hadn't - - - )
I find it interesting that you would strike through the word "brown" as well. you're willing to post a racist joke but you can't own your own words? and all that after your own cries of racism and bigotry with a California joke?
My "cries" of "racism" over the
California joke - - - - hoo boy.
Maybe he thinks everybody has the same problems remembering and fact checking, or reading and comprehending, as the Republican propaganda parrots. Maybe he thinks I think striking through a word hides it. Maybe he thinks he can cover his ass for laughing at the Poe's Law "joke" by pulling a Pee Wee Herman routine. Maybe it's a Freudian Slip triggered by the mental shadow of his laughter at the Poe's Law "joke".
Or maybe he's just lying, deliberately misrepresenting the post in preparation for another round of personal attack, the standard tactic described months and years ago - the only way (besides the one line innuendo) these clowns know how to reply to anything I post. That's my bet.
How about it, Xelasnave - you must remember the California joke discussion, a brief but genuine - even OP relevant - discussion posted here:
you still taking these guys seriously?
