Do you get your facts from Alex Jones and the likes?

And this is their central motivation, mostly. Like Jones and Carlson, they play characters, and profit off those characters, then head home to the quasi-mansion and become completely different people, laughing at their victims as they check amazon book sales.

They’ve either just been smart enough, or fortunate enough to avoid a court in which they had to admit to playing characters they argue nobody reasonable would take seriously.

1 Like

Sinclair Media?

Sure add them to your list if you like.

… Noam Chomsky, Claire Lehman, Dave Rubin, Christina Hoff Sommers…

1 Like

See here’s where I prefer to simplify. My radar tells me Chomsky is not intellectually dishonest.

I think most people do have radar attuned to who is legitimately espousing/honestly debating their political opinions/ideology, and who is full of it.

That’s what ‘the likes’ means to me, intellectually dishonest people. I’m sure media on the left exists like that, but obviously they don’t have the same volume of dedicated fans.

I’m sure the stats in terms of viewership back that up as well, that the right is the dominant landscape in terms of fans of this type of person, Carlson, Jones, Limbaugh, etc.

Chomsky on that list is laughable. :rofl:


Smart guy, Chomsky. His views on postmodernism and free speech are well documented. Good thing his ideas weren’t judged based on his hair, but what kind of vapid moron would do that anyways?

Yeah wasn’t Noam Chomsky a real Koch Brothers friendly corporatist scholar who really wanted to crack down on discussions of the civil rights movement and defund colleges?

The noive, I swear.

I’ll bet @flatlandr is a Chomsky fan. Chomsky said he disliked Clintons neoliberalism but voting for Trump was a grave mistake that would lead to a potentially fatal unraveling of democracy in the U.S. He predicted the eventual US collapse, foresaw the social upheaval, the media conspiracies, all that. Do you agree with him now that all is said and done?

I’ll bet @flatlander can’t separate the sarcasm and snark in there from the point (if there is one); because I have a degree in applied linguistics (#chomsky) and I sure can’t!

A. You’ve reminded us about 10 times a day of your academic resume for quite a while now. I don’t know why you feel the need to do that. Still indifferent. Imagine me smoking a Gauloises and not giving a F. Some Django reinhardt in the background.
B. That was for @flatlandr . I do appreciate the press secretary volunteer gig but I’m sure he can answer his own questions. Thanks!

been to any marches or protests lately?

1 Like

I’ll wait for a reply from the person I asked the question to, thanks. You enjoy your day now :slight_smile:

If you find that post to be stupid and confusing, don’t waste a moment thinking about it, it is. :kissing_heart:

19th Century Q Anon: :grin:

Conspiracy Theories Abounded in 19th-Century American Politics

Rumors of secret alliances, bank deals, and double-crossings were rampant in early American elections

From claims that NASA faked the moon landing to suspicions about the U.S. government’s complicity in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Americans love conspiracy theories. Conspiratorial rhetoric in presidential campaigns and its distracting impact on the body politic have been a fixture in American elections from the beginning, but conspiracies flourished in the 1820s and 1830s, when modern-day American political parties developed, and the expansion of white male suffrage increased the nation’s voting base. These new parties, which included the Democrats, the National Republicans, the Anti-Masons, and the Whigs, frequently used conspiracy accusations as a political tool to capture new voters—ultimately bringing about a recession and a collapse of public trust in the democratic process.

Conspiracy Theories Abounded in 19th-Century American Politics | History | Smithsonian Magazine

Not really. I was an adult when first introduced to him. His thoughts on language were interesting.

Clinton was/is anything but neoliberal unless neoliberal has changed meaning to be a war mongering psychopath.

Only because his detractors screamed/whined/gaslit at every individual not agreeing with them and threatened to leave social media platforms, or else!

Unlike you, I spent a lifetime in the real, adult world before spending time in the fantasy world of books and theory. I don’t lean on someone else’s thoughts to make a point for myself. So, no, I don’t “agree with him…”.

1 Like

This one sounds like a Jones classic!


You do know that when you need to resort to insults, you only delegitimize your own opinions, right?

Maybe you don’t follow Alex Jones, but the way you’re talking reminds me of that kind of personality. It comes off a tad extreme.

1 Like

Same here! My first job was at a Perkins Family Restaurant off the side of a freeway. I put myself through college at a state school working there. Still found time to read a little Nietzsche on the side though. Chicks dug it.

That’s on you.

And still you don’t get it.

Your words are actually on you, not me. But back on topic.


  • The reason there are so many gay people now is because it’s a chemical warfare operation. I have the government documents where they said they’re going to encourage homosexuality with chemicals so people don’t have children.

I’m not saying that the lawyers for the Sandy Hook families set this up or did this.

– Alex Jones