Liberals thinking memes are the same as newspaper headlines

3k4jf8.gif (click to show) A shiny green up vote

Yeah and they have no sense of humor.

Or sense of reality 😄

Except the OP is admiring their memes have jo sense of reality because they have no source so..,

Source?

You wanna hear something funny I got comment deleted and timered one time for saying ^that ONCE in a thread.

No.. Despite popular belief I rarely even downvote let alone flag or complain to mods.

I might complain ABOUT mods though. Or their actions anyway. I don't even know who they are here. 🤔

🤔

Does the lie that all your opposition is one person with multiple alts make you feel better?

If your political meme makes a claim saying something specific happened like "Kamala Harris is buying votes", or "Kamala's crowd was ai generated", or "Tim Walz was hospitalized for swallowing horse semen"........ya, I might ask for a source depending on if I think the subject is interesting or possibly more than just a joke. If not I might just post maga conspiracy guy as a stock response.

But ya I think the line between what rightwingers think is fact, feelings, or a joke seems to get blurry sometimes. Or something might initially be considered "just a joke", but evolves into something closer to, as you put it, "newspaper headlines". "A lie told often enough becomes truth" if you will.

The other thing is I mean people will act like haha these are just memes and light hearted jokes haha..... Then the titles be like.. dark humor satire level sh*t like " the left are satanic devil worshipping pedophiles who want to cut off your d*ck and eat your children!!!"

So its like... bro are we still joking here or what is this ? 🤔

Also as far as allegedly not having a sense of humor, I'm actually a big fan of comedy.... Chris Rock, Dave Chappelle, Shane Gillis, Tony Hinchcliffe, to name drop a few... And I dont care what anyone says Tough Crowd was the sh*t back in the day. RIP Greg Giraldo and Patrice!!

He's not.. but people actually tried to post fake sources to prove that he was... indicating to me that they either believed it was true, or they're just spreading lies/propaganda on purpose....

Do you have a source?

To be very clear, I'm asking if you have a source refuting the allegations, NOT a source for horse sperm.

I’d be more interested in sources that confirm rather than refute. It’s typically easier to prove something actually happened than to refute something didn’t happen.

That’s kind of how evidence works.

That’s why sources matter, by the way.

I understand. Thank you for clarifying.

One should seek out bias confirming sources while ignoring and discounting sources contrary to one's opinions and views.

"I don't like that evidence because it does not support my position so it's obviously invalid"?

That's how evidence works?

"This source is popular with the cabal from which I seek acceptance and accolade so I will only deem accurate those sources that confirm my chosen faction's predilection"?

Is that why sources matter, by the way?

There is an obverse and reverse side to every coin.

Whether it be philosophy, science, law, politics, etc., there are two sides to every story.

When that simple fact is ignored by zealotry, irreparable schisms are created.

"One should seek out bias confirming sources while ignoring and discounting sources contrary to one's opinions and views.

"That's how evidence works?"

No.

"There is an obverse and reverse side to every coin."

Binary-thinking is a very basic level of comprehension. But if we observed the world purely through binary thinking, and considered the morality of every action and there consequences; there would be no such thing as good.

In a way, philosophically speaking, the Christian religion is true. We’re all sinners.

But again, binary thinking is basic. As we grow up, we tend to learn the world isn’t perfect, and yet somehow we continue to endure. We try to be better. It’s just not adequate to place everyone, or everything, into one of two boxes.

The whole point of the Schrödinger's cat is to prove the limitations of binary thinking. Is the cat dead? Is it alive? Can it be both or neither? Until it is observed, it cannot be known.

That isn’t to say that binary thinking is useless. It’s the basis for basic programming, a stepping stone for very young children, or games. But when it comes to objective truth, until it is observed… only then can it be a fact.

Many words saying nothing.

You say much less.

Ooooh burn!

The "source" that was provided to me was basically a meme... idk if you looked into it but the news organization that allegedly reported it does not seem to exist anywhere.

Bigger picture, and I have said this many times but I guess I'll say it again.... I try not to play the "prove it DIDN'T happen" game.

Example: I heard donald trump r*ped his own mom in the 1970s. Provide a source refuting the allegation.

Things either have evidence & sources or they don't.

I thought I had been clear, I have not looked into horse sperm.

I asked you for the source that stated Tim Walz did not consume horse sperm/semen.

If none exists simply state none exists in the same manner you state the source that reported Tim Walz slurping semen does not exist.

In response to your example: even with evidence and sources many things that reportedly happened actually did not happen.

And despite evidence and sources, things that are said not to have happened have happened.

This is where our individual beliefs, reasoning, experiences, and biases determine our individual conclusions. It would be naive to think that people with shared conclusions would not coalesce.

Evidence and sources can be wrong...just ask the "central park five", right? Or are you of the mind that they are indeed guilty?

The crime drama standard of the murderer saying, "you got nothing on me!" does not mean he did not commit tbe murder because evidence and sources do not exist.

That is why investigation is a thing.

K you still don't seem to get what I'm saying and idk where you are going with this but here's a source so at least we start at the same page.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/aug/09/viral-image/story-about-gov-tim-walz-getting-his-stomach-pumpe/

Does that source say Walzo does NOT gargle equine spoo?

Nope. And that is my point.

It merely disproved the source. Which means it's a claim without evidence.

Proving things like that did not happen is nearly impossible. You would not be able to prove you have never drank horse cum. But you could say there is no evidence of it. Well... assuming there is no evidence of it. 😜

Whoa, hold your horses!

No reason to not believe me, I am not the one that said it happened.

I simply find it humorous to believe it occurred.

Compare it to your belief in the veracity of that weird woman and her unsubstantiated 30+ year old claims.

She had no proof he did and, as you stated, he cannot prove a negative.

The jury split the baby, but I believe they got it wrong while you think they got it right.

I see black, you see white

I see day, you see night

I say Tim drinks from the hose, you say who knows

It is more interesting to disagree with one as contrary as contrary can be, wouldn't you agree?

"Compare it to your belief in the veracity of that weird woman and her unsubstantiated 30+ year old claims.
She had no proof he did and, as you stated, he cannot prove a negative."

Sorry I don't know what you're talking about... maybe be a little bit more specific.

Then you agree that no one can positively say that Tim Walz has NOT drunk horsey spunk?

Sure. But that's kind of a dumb game to play in reality because then people could say literally anything happened because there's never proof it didn't..... unless it's something incredibly specific.

Or example that "article" allegedly from "West Point Daily News" was very specific. Gave a time frame, a hospital, etc. And there is no evidence the newspaper itself exists outside of that one meme. And as far as I know it is the ONLY source regarding the claim.

You can say there's no proof it didn't happen a different time at a different hospital and I can say true. But without a source saying it did I have no reason to believe you. So as far as I'm concerned it didn't happen.

Well it’s obvious Harris and Biden are buying votes. That’s what their student loan forgiveness, money for starting a business, money for illegal immigrants, etc is.

But this meme is mocking the people who just plain old don’t get it. They don’t see the above and think everything is literal. For example, thinking Trump expected Mexico to literally hand over money to pay for the wall.

Then there’s the blatant lies from the left such as saying Trump told people to drink bleach to cure covid. The sad part is, some liberals actually believe he did.

Anyway, humor is subjective. Most of my political memes are funny to conservatives because they poke fun at the left. But I’ll always upvote a funny meme poking fun at conservatives if it’s actually funny. But most of them are just mean spirited or propaganda.

If any potential future financial benefits can be described as "buying votes" than both trump and kamala are "buying votes". No taxes on tips for example.

I'm not sure anyone actually believed trump would build the wall nor literally make mexico pay for it when he was saying it however many times. It's like he was lying right to our faces.

But if everything isn't to be taken literally and having any part of what ended up happening makes the whole thing "true" in a non literal sense...Changing NAFTA to shift trade deficit and building some fraction of the wall = built the wall and mexico paid for it) ... well I guess that's excellent news for Joe Biden and his record.

To name a few
Afghanistan withdrawal was successful. (We're out aren't we?)

Inflation reduction worked. (Inflation has been coming down.)

Student loan debt forgiven. (For some)

Etc.

As far as the bleach thing, if I recall correctly he suggested injecting disinfectant like as a possibility. Like floating the idea. Which seems like a dumb suggestion for a president to say on TV no matter how you interpret what he meant.

But to take that and go back to the previous concept, he didn't literally say drink bleach... but he did mention injecting disinfectant and Bleach is a disinfectant. So is it a "blatant lie" to say he said drink bleach? Where does that line of thinking end?

And while we're on this sliver of truth makes it true idea, are Haitian immigrants eating cats / dogs / pets in Springfield Ohio? Is that a blatant lie? Just a joke? Or is it true because someone somewhere ate a goose or a duck or something one time?

I do agree on humor being subjective.

"Mean spirited and propaganda" is exactly how I see 99% of right wing memes. And occasionally childish.

Lying is saying something that you know to be false. Now, you may not know that what you’re saying is false and that is spreading a lie, especially after you’ve been corrected.

In Trump’s case, he couldn’t have been lying about the wall because it hadn’t happened yet. It was his belief or intention but was he “lying?”

If a Democrat thought the election was stolen, the media would phrase it as he “believes the election was stolen.” But, because Trump believed it, the media says he “lied about the election being stolen.”

As for the bleach statement, Trump wasn’t telling anyone to do anything. He asked if they had looked into UV light as well as other disinfectants. And research into using UV light as an internal disinfectant had already started at the time. But, of course, the media had to sensationalize it by claiming he told people to inject themselves with “bleach” because using his own words wouldn’t get them the reaction they were looking for.

Do you see the pattern here. The media does most of the lying. People think Trump lies more than his Dem competitors simply because that’s how the media portrays them.

What I like about this politics stream is we get a variety of views. Even the propaganda and mean spirited spats are fun to comment on just, if just to mock the image and/or submitter.
But it seems liberals are much more prone to take offense than conservatives - thus the reason they are called “snowflakes”.

"Lying is saying something that you know to be false. "

If you want to make the distinction that trump is actually more of a "bullsh*tter" than a "liar"........ feel free. I have made that exact claim here.

It's just easier to call him a "liar" (and I believe it is more generous) than calling him a bullsh*tter.

To be a "liar" you have to have some regard for truth. (In order to intentionally say something false, to hide the truth, there has to be a truth existing in the equation).

A bullsh*tter has no regard for what the truth ever was, is, or will be. Truth basically does not exist. It is irrelevant. They just say whatever they feel like saying... regardless.

Doesn't matter what Kamala's policies are. She's a "Communist, Fascist, Marxist, Socialist". He could add Anarchist and it wouldnt make any difference. Doesn't matter if he doesn't know what those words mean. He feels like saying them, so he says em.

Doesn't matter that he said "lock her up" multiple times... on camera... tomorrow he can turn around and say "I never said lock her up".

Doesn't matter that there is no evidence of Haitians out there stealing/eating pets in Springfield, OH.

Doesn't matter if a record high stock market and record low unemployment 6 years ago meant that the economy was "booming". Now that exact same thing exists and the economy has been "destroyed". If trump was in office right now it would be labeled booming, the greatest economy in history, etc. And if he gets re-elected, I would not be surprised at all to see him say something along those lines.... "He MAGA'ed the economy" and such. The only question would be how soon the narrative would switch.

Bleach vs disinfectant = Potato / Potáto. Both will probably kill you. I know you have better examples of media sensationalism than that.

Anyway I hear your beef about the media but you should also understand that Fox news DOMINATES all other news stations. I mean it's not even close. Were they fair about the disinfectant statement? Did they even report on it? If the president mentions doing something which could kill you, is it newsworthy?

As far as libs being snowflakes I mean I hear you.. but I also see Repubs.. right now.. saying not only has the economy been destroyed but America itself has been destroyed. Completely destroyed. And they're still ranting about the election 4 years ago! I need to buy a 2nd swimming pool to store their tears. 😜

I will make this brief, my knuckles are dore from dragging the ground.

Are you saying that you think someone actually believes that brains can explode clearing one's sinuses?

If this is not your assertion, can you restate your position in just a few sentences?

Sorry to hear about your dore knuckles.

Source on where I asked for a source?
😜

There was no mention of you asking for a source in the comment to which you replied.

I asked if you think there exists a person that actually believes brains can explode clearing one's sinuses.

"I asked if you think there exists a person that actually believes brains can explode clearing one's sinuses."

K I'll play your game.

Yes I do.

Nonsense.

You do not believe that 😄

Even if one person did exist somewhere on earth, what is the harm of that allegedly simple minded individual thinking Kamala would be not be able to clear her nasal passages, allegedly long collapsed from cocaine use, if her allegedly small brain was to spontaneously explode due to a non existent biological process?

I believe an aneurysm is part of your brain basically ballooning and exploding. Now while I am not sure that clearing one's sinuses can cause an aneurysm, I'm pretty sure that clearing one's sinuses cannot prevent one. therefore one could occur while clearing one's sinuses. I am a person existing on earth. Therefore a person that actually believes brains can explode clearing one's sinuses exists on earth.

Hey if someone eating a duck or a goose somewhere in America counts as proof that Haitians are stealing and eating pets in Springfield, I think my example counts!
😜

Nonsense.

Is your true issue that the meme does seem to suggest the vp has a small brain and that does better explain why you complain of the jest?

Haitians in Springfield have eaten nearly all, if not all, of the ducks and geese that lived near the lakes and ponds.

Cats are a part of their normal diet in Haiti.

One does not erase one's cultural norms because they relocate.

I say to the Haitian people, there are plenty of feral cats - bon appetit!

But they should leave people's pets alone.

I believe the county animal shelter, which profited from a song lampooning the issue, might take advantage of the situation in order to low key scare people into getting a required pet license to further increase the counties revenue.

Try again.

Cats allegedly being "on the menu" does not prove they're stealing and eating them in Springfield, Ohio.

"Is your true issue that the meme does seem to suggest the vp has a small brain and that does better explain why you complain of the jest?"

? Did I complain of the jest..? I said almost nothing about the OP meme. It's clearly a joke making a hypothetical statement ... not exactly the same thing as saying Kamala is buying votes.

It's not alleged, it is researched fact.

It does prove that first generation Haitian immigrants, as indicated in the report, would have no reservations with having to dine on a feline.

And have you seen the price of beef lately?

Oy vey!

In all fairness, every politician tries to appeal to everybody.

Kamala knows the people aren't going to get what she's promising them.

So I agree, she is not buying votes.

She is scamming people out of their votes.

"...would have no reservations with having to dine on a feline."

Good effort but even if true, proves nothing as far as them actually doing it.

"...scamming people out of their votes."

That's the same thing the right said about President Joe Biden and Student loan debt....... at first. 🥱
OoOops.

"Trump gives you a choice between a watch, bible....."

Ya if this is the matrix, whoever wrote the code has quite a sense of humor.
Ex-president Trump, the "America First" guy who cheated on his wife with a porn star..... is now selling " God Bless the USA" bibles... which were made in China. I mean sure why not. 😂

At least Trump gives you a choice between a watch, bible, or gold sneakers. 😄

So, you’re admiring your memes are based on lies?

You just confirmed it’s based on fact by your comments 😂

That’s not how facts work.

Look you can laugh and make fun of me and the majority of Americans but at the end of the day…

Facts matter. Especially in political memes.

I’m glad you find some comfort in that but if you’re that distant from reality, maybe you’re not mature enough to discuss politics.

This meme is about people like you who don’t get the joke and demand facts.
So, your comments are rock solid proof that the meme is based on reality. 😂

Without truth, humor is meaningless.

Thanks for making this meme so funny 😂

So, you admit it wasn’t funny before.

Gotcha.

LOL

😄 there's one now!

Are you saying jokes based on stereotypes are meaningful due to their badis in truth?

Because that is what you seem to be saying.

I wouldn’t say stereotypes are meaningful but they would be more meaningful than attempting to make a joke based on lies.

You can joke about anything really, even things that didn’t happen, but political humor is a bit more nuanced than just the basic premise of.. "Democrats suck"

Arguably that’s the most consistent truthful thing that is parodied successfully in IMGFlip Politics. If only it weren’t the only thing.

First you said:

"Without truth, humor is meaningless".

Then you said:

"I wouldn’t say stereotypes are meaningful but they would be more meaningful than attempting to make a joke based on lies".

You said stereotypes ARE NOT meaningful and that stereotypes ARE meaningful in the same breath.

Is not one left to infer that you are indeed saying that jokes based on racist stereotypes are meaningful, because you believe them to be based on truth?

How is one not left to believe that you are indeed stating that racist stereotypes are humorous due to them NOT being "a joke based on lies" (which = based on truth)?

How is that not upholding racial stereotypes?

How is that not racist?

Because not all stereotypes are racist but almost all racist jokes are stereotypical.

I'll clarify what I mean since you didn't read what I wrote and only quoted me partially.

I said, "I wouldn’t say stereotypes are meaningful but they would be more meaningful than attempting to make a joke based on lies".

And THEN said..."You can joke about anything really"

What I'm saying is stereotypes are meaningless. Period. And while SOME stereotypes might be rooted in truth, or were once rooted in a truth, and can be a source of humor. They are ONLY superior to jokes made from lies.

That doesn't mean stereotypical jokes, or even racist jokes, are good. But they are, at least objectively, potentially funnier. Probably to racists.

Do I find jokes based on stereotypes funny? It depends. Usually on the context, how it's told, who is telling it, etc. But, in my experience, most are pretty cringe.

So, if you really want to make racist jokes... by all means... but they'll only be funny to racists. And, worse, make you look like a racist.

Your response seems to be equivocation.

Saying racism is funny is doing your best?

Please, explain what straw man was employed.

Is that just something one says when caught in the web of one's own words?

Well, I did my best against your strawman.

"Saying racism is funny is doing your best?"

"Please, explain what straw man was employed."

"Is that just something one says when caught in the web of one's own words?"

No.

You said racial stereotypes are based on truth and that makes them humorous.

Anybody can read your own self typed words.

Yes.

I also said SOME stereotypes are/were rooted in truth. Not all stereotypes are racist.

Your agenda is obvious.

No.

My agenda?

No, simply able to see the secret you coming out in the words you have typed.

What secret?

That I don't find racist jokes funny? Or that I am pretty sure racists would find racist jokes funny?

I'm being pretty clear on my position despite your seemingly inability to read or comprehend what I wrote.