Imgflip Logo Icon

No stars with those bars

No stars with those bars |  THEY'RE NOT EVEN TRYING TO HIDE IT ANYMORE, ARE THEY? | image tagged in captain obvious,joe biden,kamala harris,democratic party,socialism | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
share
2,167 views 83 upvotes Made by Memedave 1 month ago in politics
Add Meme
Add Image
Post Comment
Best first
49 Comments
reply
10 ups, 1m,
1 reply
WE’RE NOT 
REALLY 
SOCIALISTS NOT UNTIL WE 
INVOKE THE 25TH 
AMENDMENT | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
9 ups, 1m,
1 reply
I'M KAMELA HARRIS AND I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE | image tagged in kamela harris doing something right | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
*kamala
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Doh | DOH! | image tagged in doh | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Thanks, totally missed that...😆
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Now that you have seen me I would like to remind your 2 braincell ass that those red lines are meant to look like the red part of the american flag
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Gotta love that conspiracy theorist comeback just every time someone says something that makes more sense than your bullshit you just say that
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
$10 says you're also a holocaust denier
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Bad bet. But 911 was an inside job...
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
I honestly can't tell if you're joking
0 ups, 1m
Not on that last one. And I'm convinced JFK was shot by the limo driver.😉
reply
7 ups, 1m
Nope they are proud of being traitorous, communist useful idiots.
reply
7 ups, 1m
unbelievable
reply
5 ups, 1m,
1 reply
While there is no doubt that Biden's campaign is filled with Marxists, the "three red banners" doesn't refer to any specific design.

By this logic, the flag for the New York Fire Dept. is also communist.

While, yes, nothing is beyond these people, in this case, it's probably not more than they claim: a nod to the US flag.

If you're going to be a conservative, you need to be disciplined and not just take things you read at face value. Conservatives have to live by a far, FAR higher standard than the Leftists, who lie with every breath.
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
Thats very true. We as conservatives, and especially Christians, should live by a much higher standard. And this is mostly apparent at the rallies each side has, and the fact that you don't see conservatives burning down whole cities. But I was pointing out that symbolism has been a big thing behind their agenda. (Much like the illuminati). And when you see so much of it, its hard to write it off as just a coincidence.
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
I'm not a Christian, nor is virtually everyone who calls themselves a Christian, and, as your reaction to this meme demonstrates, neither are you.

You took something that some other conspiracy-minded person concluded and repeated it, without proof. A false accusation doesn't need to be proven false to be false. Making an accusation without evidence, in the face of denial from the accused, is just as false.

Biden and Harris and the rest don't need to be falsely accused. There is plenty that comes from their own mouths with which to judge them unfit to lead people. And false accusations are a very serious matter; so serious that it's one of the Ten Commandments.

But when it was pointed out to you that your accusation was false, instead of saying "oh, you're right" and deleting the meme, you doubled down and engaged in whataboutism, pointing to a different sign that did, in fact, show symbolism, and pointing out that conservatives "don't burn down cities", which, while true, is irrelevant to this situation. Symbolism IS a "big thing" behind many agendas...but in this case, your accusation comes without evidence, in the face of denial by the people involved, and is thus a false accusation.

Understand: I'm not condemning you. I'm simply pointing out your counterfeit status. If you're going to engage in conspiracy, innuendo, and rumor, you're acting in opposition to what you claim to believe, which reveals your counterfeit status...doubly so when your error was pointed out to you, and you refused to fix it. No one is suggesting you "write it off as coincidence." But until you have evidence, proof of wrong-doing...making the accusation you did is just as false, and just as conspiratorial, as those you are accusing of being.

After all...how many people have you now negatively influenced (and by that I mean "poisoned") by this "conspiracy" that, in all likelihood, isn't true...?

The answer is not "zero."
reply
2 ups, 1m,
1 reply
"Understand: I'm not condemning you..."
Bro, your first statement was condemning me as not being a Christian.

And I fail to see how you proved the meme to be false. When you look at the socialist policies the left is proposing, and how many profess to be Marxist, the meme makes sense.

BTW, it's just a meme on the politics page. No need to get so offended.
reply
2 ups, 1m,
1 reply
""Understand: I'm not condemning you..."
Bro, your first statement was condemning me as not being a Christian."

This is more evidence of your counterfeit status. No one condemned you as "not being a Christian." Pointing out that you are a counterfeit is not condemnation. It's pointing out that you are a counterfeit. What is the rest of that statement you quote?: "Understand: I'm not condemning you. I'm simply pointing out your counterfeit status."

"And I fail to see how you proved the meme to be false."

I said...very specifically...that your accusation was false, and explained...very specifically...why.

I will, for your sake, say it again: for an accusation to be false, it doesn't have to be proven false. A false accusation can be made by accusing someone of something for which you have no evidence or proof.

Memedave: "Biden's campaign logo is a direct reference to the Maoist "three red banners" communist philosophy!"

Biden's campaign logo designer, Aimee Brodbeck: "“The logo is approachable and strong, just like the Biden name. By incorporating nods to the American flag, the logo is a representation of Biden’s investment in America. The 3 stripes represent the branches of government and the strength of unity with Biden. The logo also nods to the familiarity of the Obama “O” logo where 3 stripes are seen."

Now...you can claim "she's lying! She's clearly trying to cover up her Maoist design!"

Fine.

But until and UNLESS you come up with evidence to support that claim, it's not a legitimate argument. It is, in fact...a false accusation.

And, as all counterfeits, when confronted with your error, you refuse to fix it. "He who judges a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him."

A Christian...of which, in this world, there are only a handful at any given time...would, when confronted, have recognized it and, at the very least, deleted it. But you refuse, protesting your innocence.

"When you look at the socialist policies the left is proposing, and how many profess to be Marxist, the meme makes sense."

That is not evidence of the accusation you have made. "Well...it SOUNDS right!" is not justification for a false accusation.

"BTW, it's just a meme on the politics page. No need to get so offended."

This is more proof of your counterfeit status. "What's the big deal? Who cares? Why are you making such a stink about it?"

"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." You're right. Probably not important.
reply
0 ups, 1m,
4 replies
"A Christian...of which, in this world, there are only a handful at any given time...would, when confronted, have recognized it and, at the very least, deleted it. But you refuse, protesting your innocence."

No True Scotsman fallacy. Simple and to the point. You don't get to decide who is and isn't a Christian based on whether or not they cede your ill-made point. You didn't prove anything, only cited the authors of the design and their post-facto explanation of the design....using Snopes most likely. Memedave may be wrong, but not believing your copy and paste argument doesn't change his status with God, information you're not privy to.

You seem to imply that a Christian who sins is not a Christian when Paul, a seasoned "Apostle" wrote 40 years into his ministry that he still does what he shouldn't do, and doesn't do what he should, a clear confession that sin was still alive and working in him despite his relationship with God (Romans 7:14-), so parading around with your "I know all men's hearts" flag is just blatant
self-righteousness on display, pointing ironically to someone, quite possibly, unfamiliar with the doctrine of Grace.
reply
0 ups, 1m
"so parading around with your "I know all men's hearts" flag"

Heh. You're super offended. This is resentment. "How DARE you call things out that are exposed?" You're so offended, you have, in your response, falsely accused me multiple times...and you not only don't care, you're *proud* of it.

I never claimed to "know men's hearts." Not even once. But when you expose yourself to the world, as you have done, as Memedave has done, and even the unbelievers see it...well...what can you say?

" is just blatant self-righteousness on display,"

Oh, did you think that somewhere in there I was proclaiming MY righteousness?

No, that is your offendedness speaking. "How DARE someone question someone else's faith?? How DARE they!!??"

I'm as "righteous" as you, which is to say, not at all.

The only difference between you and I? By God's grace, I am no longer a counterfeit, having been shown that I am not now, and never have been, a believer, as He defines it. An important step on the path of Truth.

" pointing ironically to someone, quite possibly, unfamiliar with the doctrine of Grace."

Indeed you are, quite unfamiliar with the doctrine of Grace.

I will inform you:

Grace is not the freedom TO sin.

Grace is freedom FROM sin.

And that's the difference between life and death.
reply
0 ups, 1m
"Memedave may be wrong,"

Lip service. You know that Memedave is wrong, but you, yourself, only weakly concede it because you resent me saying this...you were, as you have been in the past, deeply offended that I would dare question someone's status as a "Christian", because you have bought into the lie that all you have to do is say a magic formula (an incantation, actually) and you're automatically a "believer." But that's not how it works. That's not how it's ever worked.

" but not believing your copy and paste argument doesn't change his status with God, information you're not privy to."

Who said it *changed* his status...? No one. I only identified his extant counterfeit status.

Again: if you behave in a manner that is OPPOSED to what you claim to believe, and then, when it's pointed out to you, you proudly and stubbornly resist...are you really what you claim to be...?

And "copy and paste argument"...? Do you think I "copied and pasted" what I wrote from somewhere else...?

Are you, then, content to falsely accuse me without evidence...?

Counterfeits always...always...expose themselves if you examine them long enough.

"You seem to imply that a Christian who sins is not a Christian when Paul, a seasoned "Apostle" wrote 40 years into his ministry that he still does what he shouldn't do, and doesn't do what he should, a clear confession that sin was still alive and working in him despite his relationship with God (Romans 7:14-),"

Your interpretation of what Paul is actually saying here aside...and Paul makes a distinction between the sin *nature* and the acts of sin...what do you think was Peter's reaction to Paul's rebuke when Peter tried to make the gentiles live like Jews?

Did Peter get offended and resentful? Did he try to justify himself, or tell Paul it was "no big deal"...?

No. He accepted the rebuke and altered his behavior. He fixed it. See, it wasn't Peter's actions that determined who and what he really was...it was his attitude. He wasn't so proud that he refused to acknowledge his error.

"Do not rebuke a mocker, or he will hate you; rebuke a wise man, and he will love you. Instruct a wise man, and he will be wiser still; teach a righteous man, and he will increase his learning."

If you were a believer...and not a counterfeit...you wouldn't say "Memedave may be wrong" and then proceed to rebuke me, as you are doing. Yet I, an unbeliever (by God's definition) rebuke, and it is resented.

Interesting, no...?
reply
0 ups, 1m
"Simple and to the point. You don't get to decide who is and isn't a Christian based on whether or not they cede your ill-made point. "

"Ill-made"? You actually think my point is "ill-made"...? You don't think it's a problem that someone who claims to be a "Christian" is going around accusing people without evidence...?

No. You don't, do you?

But otherwise, you are quite correct. And I didn't decide that.

I demonstrated it.

And there's a difference.

Consider a counterfeit $100 bill. If I point out a "tell" that demonstrates that it is counterfeit, did I "decide" that it was counterfeit, or did I simply demonstrate that it was...?

"You didn't prove anything, only cited the authors of the design and their post-facto explanation of the design"

Sure, that's false. I proved that Memedave's accusation was without merit, having no evidence. What does Solomon say about such accusations? "Don't accuse anyone without cause, when he has done you no harm." Memedave accused without cause.

As for your claim that their explanation was "post-facto", I already linked the designer's website that explains how and what the design means.

http://www.aimeebrodbeck.com/biden

I don't know when that web page was posted, but then, neither do you. There's nothing on that page that indicates that it is a "post-facto ("after the fact") explanation." There is nothing that suggests that that explanation is a RESPONSE to anything, but rather, the official statement about what it is, and what it represents.

"using Snopes most likely."

Snopes isn't necessary: all the information can be found on Aimee Brodbeck's page I cited above.

That said, Snopes has a decidedly left-wing bias, but does that mean they are always wrong...?

What is your allegiance to, really? The Truth? Or a party?
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
"No True Scotsman fallacy. "

A lot of people are fond of misquoting that on imgflip.

Allow me to debunk: the "No True Scotsman" fallacy refers to applying characteristics or behaviors that have nothing to do with actually being a Scotsman as if they did. For example: "No Scotsman puts sugar in his coffee." "Um...sure they do." "No TRUE Scotsman puts sugar in his coffee!"

Putting coffee in your sugar has nothing whatsoever to do with the qualities, characteristics, or behaviors that identify someone as being a Scotsman.

However...if someone were to say "a Scotsman is someone who was born in Sudan, to Ecuadoran and Indonesian parents, who have never been to Scotland, much less lived there", then you can properly say "no TRUE Scotsman is those things, because those things don't define what a Scotsman actually IS: someone who is from Scotland, or of Scottish heritage, or who lives there, etc."

It might be the most misused "fallacy" there is.

Memedave accused without evidence. That is a false accusation. The 9th Commandment says this: "You must not bear false witness against your neighbor." When it was pointed out to him (I assume Memedave is a "him"), he didn't say "oh, yeah, I probably shouldn't do that." He doubled down, argued that "well, it's something they WOULD do!", and then dismissed it all as "not a big deal."

And this isn't some irrelevant "sugar in your coffee" action. This is behavior that directly opposes what he (and you) claims to believe. Accusing people without evidence...? That's anti-Christian.

That's a counterfeit pretty much waving a giant sign that says "yo! Counterfeit here!!" Making a mistake is one thing...stubbornly digging in when it's pointed out is quite the tell.
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
You're pretty triggered dude. A response is not someone getting offended, however 4 lengthy comments, one after the other, is evidence of someone hyper triggered. lol.

Christians sin....doesn't mean they're not Christians. Pointing out a sin isn't evidence that they're not Christians either, so my comment stands. Pointing out someone lying, killing, or otherwise only describes an action they did, not a relationship that isn't bound by those actions. Screech it all you want. You're wrong. I don't know Memedave's status, and neither do you. And you sure as hell can't tell by a few words written on a meme site.

" Who said it *changed* his status...? No one. I only identified his extant counterfeit status."
What the f**k do you think counterfeit means? One is either Christian or not; there is no "counterfeit christian". Saying he is not real, is saying he is not Christian. Don't play like there's an inbetween. Was Paul a counterfeit as well...being that he deliberately sinned and deliberately chose not to do good? The answer is, "No."

"No true Christian would....(insert your list of faults here) is a bullshit statement, and fits perfectly within the No True Scotsman fallacy, so take your self-righteous BS and sell it elsewhere, cause I ain't buying it. Whatever...To each his own.
reply
0 ups, 1m,
2 replies
"You're pretty triggered dude. A response is not someone getting offended, however 4 lengthy comments, one after the other, is evidence of someone hyper triggered. lol."

Of course. I *almost* posted that you would respond in this exact way.

Lies are easy to disseminate. Just a few false accusations, short and sweet. "A lie goes halfway around the world before the truth gets its shoes on."

Justice, on the other hand, takes time to lay out. I mean, come on, man! The fact that you call someone "pretty triggered" is just another tell. "Do not repay insult for insult, but repay insult with blessing", as Peter said. You're a counterfeit. The sooner you own it, the better it is for you.

"A response is not someone getting offended." - true, which is why no one said it was. It's the substance of the response that demonstrates offendedness.

"Christians sin....doesn't mean they're not Christians. Pointing out a sin isn't evidence that they're not Christians either, so my comment stands. Pointing out someone lying, killing, or otherwise only describes an action they did, not a relationship that isn't bound by those actions. "

These words may be familiar to you:

"Everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin."

"If you love Me, keep My commandments."

"Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?"

"No one who remains in Him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has seen Him or known Him."

That last verse was written by John, who probably knew a thing or two about sin. Is he wrong? Oh, I know allllll the "evangelical" rationalizations: "that means living IN sin, not just sinning here and there!" - which, of course, is blasphemous nonsense.

And, of course, you completely ignored...as expected...the point I made: when it was pointed out, the attitude...that's the key, there...was dismissive, rationalizing, and justifying. "It's something they WOULD do!" No argument. It's exactly something they WOULD do.

But it's not something they actually DID.

"It's not a big deal." I think making false accusations, and accusing people without cause is a very big deal. And I'm not a Christian.

So why don't you?

"Screech it all you want. You're wrong. I don't know Memedave's status, and neither do you. And you sure as hell can't tell by a few words written on a meme site."

That's because you, yourself, are a counterfeit. "Screech"...? Come on, man! You're saying that in the hopes that it will annoy me...and you think you're a Christian...? ;)
reply
0 ups, 1m,
1 reply
0 ups, 1m
"Be of the same mind toward one another; do not be haughty in mind, but associate with the lowly. Do not be wise in your own estimation." - Paul the apostle

"Don't continue to talk proudly, and don't speak arrogantly, for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by Him actions are weighed." - Hannah

"But as it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil." - James the apostle.

"They pour forth words, they speak arrogantly; All who do wickedness vaunt themselves." - Psalm 94

Some counterfeits like to boldly proclaim their counterfeit status to the world.
reply
0 ups, 1m,
4 replies
First, I know what I am. You don't. That's your problem. You think you know more than you do, and it shows, especially to me. Your paperback cult theology is a tell as well, revealing what is, at best, a person who flunked out of some third rate 7th Day Adventist Bible college in South Carolina (no offense to SC folks). Your boastful arrogance about a Faith, you don't even aspire to is a sure sign of someone who was once in a dysfunctional church and left after "seeing the light" bursting out of said paperback cult novel. Quoting scripture is fine, but you still seem hesitant to even address that which has been put forth, instead cherry-picking your go-to verses, often used by culty little trolls such as yourself.

"Everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin."

"If you love Me, keep My commandments."

"Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?"

"No one who remains in Him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has seen Him or known Him."

For instance. The first quote doesn't call into question one's salvation or standing with God, only reveals their relationship to sin, and there's nothing untrue about the verse. What you don't understand is verb tense and how that affects the reading.
" poieô ", translated as "commits" speaks to an ongoing condition of causation or creation, a lifestyle of sin, which is literally "missing the mark". An alcoholic is a slave to alcohol, not because they have a drink, but because their life revolves around the ongoing practice of drinking, which eventually enslaves them. Likewise, one who sins occasionally, or "misses the mark" isn't the same as someone who is committed to that lifestyle and, hence; a slave to it.

The same tense is used in the second quote, only the time changes..it's future active indicative, which means it is a practice one will continue doing. It doesn't speak to occasionally missing the mark, only a lifestyle of striving to obey Jesus' commands, which were simple and few. It also doesn't speak to one's status if they mess up.
0 ups, 1m
Paul's line, in the third quote, taken right in the middle of a lengthy case he is making for grace that spans several chapters. He answers that question with an emphatic, "no," but he was referring to those who were trying to justify a lifestyle of continuance in the sins they were committing "so that grace may abound", not the one off that Paul states that he himself is guilty of in the following chapter...You know...the one that you have still no response to.

Your last quote speaks to the practice and continuation of a lifestyle of sin as well, verb tense the same as the others. No where will you find a verse that says one is a counterfeit is they commit a sin. You will only find vague references to those who make a continual lifestyle of it, and even then there will be no foregone conclusion that they are not Christians, only that they are suspect at best. And, since you use John's words, I'll close with them to make the point you avoid...

1 John 1:
5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; 7 but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us."

He reiterates the point here that both Paul, Jesus, and himself have already made...
One in Christ practices their walk of faith by striving live it, but if they sin and confess it, He is just and will forgive them. He also says that one who says he has no sin is a liar, which is indicative that Christians still sin and need to recognize that truth. No where, does the Bible say that a sin committed is indicative of a "counterfeit Christian" That's something cult leaders say as a means to control their followers.
0 ups, 1m
"For instance. The first quote doesn't call into question one's salvation or standing with God, only reveals their relationship to sin, and there's nothing untrue about the verse. What you don't understand is verb tense and how that affects the reading."

Heh. No contempt and scorn there. No sirree.

You don't think the first quote calls into question one's standing with God...?

Here, let's debunk that:

"Jesus replied, “Truly, truly, I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. A slave is not a permanent member of the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed."

That's the verse, in context. So what does He say about slaves and their standing with God...?

You make the same exact arguments that the heretics and justifiers made to Paul and the apostles in the 1st century. "It's a STATE, an ongoing CONDITION of sin, not just the occasional sin!"

Ok.

Let's say you're right.

What qualifies, then, as a "state" or "ongoing condition" or "lifestyle" of sin...? 2 sins? 3?

5?

10?

500?

That's Babylonish doublespeak, blasphemous nonsense, the justification for sin.

So, if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. Was Jesus just kidding there? Did He only mean an "ongoing condition" of sin...? Was He cool with occasional sins, so long as one didn't make a habit of it...?

That, of course, is blasphemous nonsense. When He says "you shall be free indeed", HE MEANT IT.

"You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God."

As for your "affects your salvation", again, you have a Babylon the Great pagan understanding of the concept of salvation. Here's what God has to say about salvation:

"This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, Who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. "

Do you see that?

Does God ever NOT achieve that which He wants? If so, He is not God.

All men will be saved. All men MUST be baptized with fire. Hell isn't a place that people "go." Hell is a state of existence, one in which both you and I are. Hell isn't to be avoided...it CANNOT be avoided...it must be gone THROUGH, burning up that which is opposed to God within us.

How do we get back to Eden?

We have to go THROUGH the flaming sword. And the flaming sword will do its job, for EVERYONE, each in his own time.
0 ups, 1m
Don't worry, I'll be back with more later! I know you're keen to hear it!
0 ups, 1m
I don't need to know who made a counterfeit $100 bill, their life story, what they do, what they've experienced, to be ale to tell that that $100 bill is counterfeit.

Likewise, I don't need to know you to know you are a counterfeit. You openly flaunt and disregard that which you claim to believe, which only provides more tells as to your counterfeit status. If you refuse to follow the commands of your "Faith" (interesting that you capitalize that), then why would anyone take your claims seriously?

If I call myself a toaster, but act in opposition to what a toaster does...am I a toaster?

Nope.

Some counterfeits are really good. They're really subtle, and very hard to detect, even by experts. Some counterfeits...like the picture above, which isn't even a counterfeit...are so obvious, only the most ignorant would mistake them for the real thing.

Guess which one you are...

Here's what Peter says:

"Finally, all of you, be like-minded and sympathetic, love as brothers, be tenderhearted and humble. Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. "

Is that "cherry-picked"?

Your posts aren't an example of humility. They're proud boasting, full of insults and false accusations.

Do you think Jesus would, in His earthly ministry, have told someone who confessed to not being a believer that they were "a person who flunked out of some third rate 7th Day Adventist Bible college in South Carolina"...?

Do you think Paul would have said that? That's pure contempt! Jesus' contempt was reserved for those RELIGIOUS hypocrites, those who claimed to be religious leaders, but refused to do what they claimed to believe...

...sound familiar?

And even then, Jesus didn't go after individuals.
reply
3 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Bingo! Without a doubt, China Joe Biden has become a communist. 👍🏻
reply
3 ups, 1m
reply
3 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Oh, and Wikipedia is a useless, corrupted cesspool of Leftists, and whatever information they may still contain is hopelessly corrupted by an army of Leftist thugs (aka "editors") who viciously control everything that the site contains.
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
Even the creator of wikipedia has condemned it and is trying to start a sight that will show all views on a subject.
reply
0 ups, 1m
Larry Sanger, who has written a great blog post about it:

https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/
reply
2 ups, 1m,
1 reply
2hsnp9.jpg (click to show) Upvoted!
reply
2 ups, 1m
reply
2 ups, 1m,
1 reply
Three Red Banners
reply
1 up, 1m
reply
2 ups, 1m
Stupid people admire China. They deserve to be bitch slapped into reality.
reply
2 ups, 1m
They will song change the national anthem to the one of the USSR
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
No.
In fact Biden is just an "electable " chump playing goofy so the house can put Harris in the oven office.
Pelosi has almost said as much several times and stopped just short.
reply
1 up, 1m,
1 reply
reply
1 up, 1m
Hes really trying but he shouldn't be allowed on Twitter or anywhere they have a live mic. 😁
Flip Settings
memes
gifs
other
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
EXTRA IMAGES ADDED: 2
  • 20201023_233127.jpg
  • 20201023_232833.jpg
  • Captain Obvious
  • IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
    THEY'RE NOT EVEN TRYING TO HIDE IT ANYMORE, ARE THEY?
    hotkeys: D = random, W = upvote, S = downvote, A = back
    Feedback