An interesting question was brought up today: To what degree do we go to influence events around ourselves? The question was brought up in a political context, and that's how I'm going to address it.
It's no secret that our government has become more and more authoritarian. The Overton Window is moving to the right at a ridiculous speed, and people that would have been laughed out of town in 1975 are now serious contenders to the highest offices. They have the backing of the mob, the hapless mullet heads who still wonder why they can't beat the hell out of homosexuals, like in the good old days.
So, what, are we gonna hand them pope cards? Is that going to do any fucking good?
I'd argue instead that they need to be painted with their own brush...Their own tactics, their own standards, their own propaganda. While I don't condone any any means to shove them into their political graves, I DO believe that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The obvious argument against this sort of asshattery is "how are you any different than them, then?" My response to this is "because I don't want to stone them to death because they offend my sensibilities." That being said, the idea that we should sit and do nothing is to my mind odious. To say that we must keep our hands spotlessly clean is – to my mind – a form of vanity, a conceit that says "no matter how bad things are, at least I never did anything questionable. Better that a certain class of people should be outlawed, than for me to get any muck on my shoes."
A spag named Edmund Burke once said "All that requires for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing." I'm a firm believer in that. I cannot see sitting idly by, or feebly trusting to the levers of power which have been utterly disconnected from the average man, while monsters gain office and restart the nightmares of the last century.
Alarmism? Perhaps. I doubt Rick Perry will open the camps on February 1st, 2013...but the underlying message he carries is no different than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot...Some people aren't actually people, and can be dismissed from the protection of the rule of law. We've all seen the result of that, on scales ranging from casual Saturday night lynchings, through the more organized, state-controlled pogroms.
Against all this, the only weapons we have are ridicule and information (or, to be perfectly frank, disinformation). I'm not above using those, in the right cause. This is the right cause. Nuff said.
Okay for now,
Dok
WOW!!
Damn, give me a few and I will get back to you on this!!
:mittens:
Excellent piece!
I take your point, Dok. And I am becoming more convinced as I consider your position.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 07:49:34 PM
An interesting question was brought up today: To what degree do we go to influence events around ourselves? The question was brought up in a political context, and that's how I'm going to address it.
It's no secret that our government has become more and more authoritarian. The Overton Window is moving to the right at a ridiculous speed, and people that would have been laughed out of town in 1975 are now serious contenders to the highest offices. They have the backing of the mob, the hapless mullet heads who still wonder why they can't beat the hell out of homosexuals, like in the good old days.
So, what, are we gonna hand them pope cards? Is that going to do any fucking good?
I'd argue instead that they need to be painted with their own brush...Their own tactics, their own standards, their own propaganda. While I don't condone any any means to shove them into their political graves, I DO believe that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The obvious argument against this sort of asshattery is "how are you any different than them, then?" My response to this is "because I don't want to stone them to death because they offend my sensibilities." That being said, the idea that we should sit and do nothing is to my mind odious. To say that we must keep our hands spotlessly clean is – to my mind – a form of vanity, a conceit that says "no matter how bad things are, at least I never did anything questionable. Better that a certain class of people should be outlawed, than for me to get any muck on my shoes."
A spag named Edmund Burke once said "All that requires for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing." I'm a firm believer in that. I cannot see sitting idly by, or feebly trusting to the levers of power which have been utterly disconnected from the average man, while monsters gain office and restart the nightmares of the last century.
Alarmism? Perhaps. I doubt Rick Perry will open the camps on February 1st, 2013...but the underlying message he carries is no different than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot...Some people aren't actually people, and can be dismissed from the protection of the rule of law. We've all seen the result of that, on scales ranging from casual Saturday night lynchings, through the more organized, state-controlled pogroms.
Against all this, the only weapons we have are ridicule and information (or, to be perfectly frank, disinformation). I'm not above using those, in the right cause. This is the right cause. Nuff said.
Okay for now,
Dok
I agree with everything you've said here.
However, it is a difficult thing to use ridicule and information in a way that doesn't get reduced down to mere entertainment. If you want to be the fool king of Saturnalia, and you have a narrow window of time to get your point across, how do you say/do something that will jar people awake, and not just make them think you are a crazy fool? What can you do in the typical attention span of 20 seconds that gets people to actually think?? How do you address the illness and not just the symptoms??
I think about this a lot. I've actually had relationships with close family severed/irreparably damaged over this shit. I just don't know what to do. I can pretty easily outline the influences that flipped me upside down and shook the lunch money out of my pockets, but is that sort of thing reproducible?
-TGB
Quote from: The Grandmaster Beta on September 13, 2011, 08:21:32 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 07:49:34 PM
An interesting question was brought up today: To what degree do we go to influence events around ourselves? The question was brought up in a political context, and that's how I'm going to address it.
It's no secret that our government has become more and more authoritarian. The Overton Window is moving to the right at a ridiculous speed, and people that would have been laughed out of town in 1975 are now serious contenders to the highest offices. They have the backing of the mob, the hapless mullet heads who still wonder why they can't beat the hell out of homosexuals, like in the good old days.
So, what, are we gonna hand them pope cards? Is that going to do any fucking good?
I'd argue instead that they need to be painted with their own brush...Their own tactics, their own standards, their own propaganda. While I don't condone any any means to shove them into their political graves, I DO believe that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The obvious argument against this sort of asshattery is "how are you any different than them, then?" My response to this is "because I don't want to stone them to death because they offend my sensibilities." That being said, the idea that we should sit and do nothing is to my mind odious. To say that we must keep our hands spotlessly clean is – to my mind – a form of vanity, a conceit that says "no matter how bad things are, at least I never did anything questionable. Better that a certain class of people should be outlawed, than for me to get any muck on my shoes."
A spag named Edmund Burke once said "All that requires for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing." I'm a firm believer in that. I cannot see sitting idly by, or feebly trusting to the levers of power which have been utterly disconnected from the average man, while monsters gain office and restart the nightmares of the last century.
Alarmism? Perhaps. I doubt Rick Perry will open the camps on February 1st, 2013...but the underlying message he carries is no different than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot...Some people aren't actually people, and can be dismissed from the protection of the rule of law. We've all seen the result of that, on scales ranging from casual Saturday night lynchings, through the more organized, state-controlled pogroms.
Against all this, the only weapons we have are ridicule and information (or, to be perfectly frank, disinformation). I'm not above using those, in the right cause. This is the right cause. Nuff said.
Okay for now,
Dok
I agree with everything you've said here.
However, it is a difficult thing to use ridicule and information in a way that doesn't get reduced down to mere entertainment. If you want to be the fool king of Saturnalia, and you have a narrow window of time to get your point across, how do you say/do something that will jar people awake, and not just make them think you are a crazy fool? What can you do in the typical attention span of 20 seconds that gets people to actually think?? How do you address the illness and not just the symptoms??
I think about this a lot. I've actually had relationships with close family severed/irreparably damaged over this shit. I just don't know what to do. I can pretty easily outline the influences that flipped me upside down and shook the lunch money out of my pockets, but is that sort of thing reproducible?
-TGB
Dunno about 20 seconds. I'm a firm believer in repetition. On the Perry thing, for example, I just circulate "Perry: Not Gay" images as often as I can, and bring up my "concerns" on teabagger boards, etc.
Dok I firmly believe the time to sit back and accept what is happening is long past. The time has come for the people of this country to take a stand and make it count.
America has lost, given away or sold anything resembling the even the concept of freedom. We need to take it back.
That means we need to take a position against people like Perry and anyone else like him who will take what social and moral strides this country has made in the last two decades and shove us back into prohibition.
One weapon you didn't mention, and it is actually more of a side benefit of the ones you did, is fear. We need to put the fear back into the people. They need to know just what they will lose if they don't stop and pay attention. The three great motivators, love, lust and fear..... Surely we can make use of those in this.
Quote from: Khara on September 13, 2011, 08:27:58 PM
One weapon you didn't mention, and it is actually more of a side benefit of the ones you did, is fear. We need to put the fear back into the people. They need to know just what they will lose if they don't stop and pay attention. The three great motivators, love, lust and fear..... Surely we can make use of those in this.
Doesn't work. The filtering systems these people have in their heads will screen out any criticism of the candidate's positions. You have to use those filters against the candidate. If you can poison enough of their campaigns, their ideas get associated with losers, and that's that. America will tolerate anything but a loser.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 08:36:21 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 13, 2011, 08:27:58 PM
One weapon you didn't mention, and it is actually more of a side benefit of the ones you did, is fear. We need to put the fear back into the people. They need to know just what they will lose if they don't stop and pay attention. The three great motivators, love, lust and fear..... Surely we can make use of those in this.
Doesn't work. The filtering systems these people have in their heads will screen out any criticism of the candidate's positions. You have to use those filters against the candidate. If you can poison enough of their campaigns, their ideas get associated with losers, and that's that. America will tolerate anything but a loser.
Ah, I see what you mean. Damn. :sad:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 08:36:21 PM
Doesn't work. The filtering systems these people have in their heads will screen out any criticism of the candidate's positions. You have to use those filters against the candidate. If you can poison enough of their campaigns, their ideas get associated with losers, and that's that. America will tolerate anything but a loser.
Even if it works, all that has been accomplished is the creation of a new division of winners and losers. What I hate most is that we live in a culture that is increasingly less tolerant and sympathetic to "losers." Nevermind that the rules of the game aren't fair.
What is amazing about the way things are going is that the very people who are victims of the plutarchy love them! They elect and idolize their oppressors. Why? What makes Egyptians, once they've reached their fill of corruption and economic disparity, take to the streets while Americans in the same situation join the Tea Party?
Dok, all the stuff you mentioned is good. But I'm here in "god's country" where most people don't go to discussion boards for anything other than to get a new fuel pump or see if their kids have a secret myspace account. How do you change culture? How do you change the <gulp>
spirituality that feeds into creating people like Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman?
Ideas?
-TGB
Quote from: The Grandmaster Beta on September 13, 2011, 08:51:28 PM
Even if it works, all that has been accomplished is the creation of a new division of winners and losers.
And if it doesn't work, then everyone who isn't a straight Christian conservative becomes a second-class citizen, at best.
Decide.
Quote from: The Grandmaster Beta on September 13, 2011, 08:51:28 PM
Dok, all the stuff you mentioned is good. But I'm here in "god's country" where most people don't go to discussion boards for anything other than to get a new fuel pump or see if their kids have a secret myspace account. How do you change culture? How do you change the <gulp> spirituality that feeds into creating people like Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman?
You can't.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 08:53:01 PM
Decide.
Fuck. This is like the jr. high game where you have to choose between two ridiculously painful outcomes involving either a giant piece of sandpaper and a vat of rubbing alcohol or a, well, you get the idea.
Why not a third way? Why not a complete inversion of values? If Dostoevsky can write a novel where a hooker is an evangelist and an Orthodox seminarian is a libertine cruising for easy chicks, why not make the "losers" seem cool, instead?
(For the younger crowd, think Adam Sandler and making peeing your pants on a school field trip cool.)
I get what you are saying. I really do. It's just that I work for the machinery on the "other side" (a government-funded program in Supertan Boner's crosshairs), and it ain't so swell when the "libs" are in power, either. Both of them screw the masses in their own special way, and I really don't know which is worse.
And don't get me wrong, I spit my fair share of knowledge when the conservative talking points come up, but reason just doesn't work. Even when I have verbally lashed some fresh-faced teabagger into a gelatinous mess. They still remain where they are. I can assplode their minds, but what I said doesn't grab the soul.
To put it another way, I read Hume's "Natural Religion" and the Ancient Skeptic "Sentences of Sextus Empiricus" and could intellectually acknowledge them as true. But outside of that, yawn. Sometime later, I read the Black Iron Prison, etc, and I thought, "Fuuuuuuuuuuck." Sure, I laughed. It's parody, but not mere parody. It says a lot of the same things as Mumon, Hume, Nietzsche, and others. But some things merely grab you as intellectual, others grab your soul. Or crotch, if you don't like the word "soul."
Is doing what I'm trying to describe even possible?
-TGB
Quote from: The Grandmaster Beta on September 13, 2011, 09:22:18 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 08:53:01 PM
Decide.
Fuck. This is like the jr. high game where you have to choose between two ridiculously painful outcomes involving either a giant piece of sandpaper and a vat of rubbing alcohol or a, well, you get the idea.
Why not a third way? Why not a complete inversion of values? If Dostoevsky can write a novel where a hooker is an evangelist and an Orthodox seminarian is a libertine cruising for easy chicks, why not make the "losers" seem cool, instead?
(For the younger crowd, think Adam Sandler and making peeing your pants on a school field trip cool.)
I get what you are saying. I really do. It's just that I work for the machinery on the "other side" (a government-funded program in Supertan Boner's crosshairs), and it ain't so swell when the "libs" are in power, either. Both of them screw the masses in their own special way, and I really don't know which is worse.
And don't get me wrong, I spit my fair share of knowledge when the conservative talking points come up, but reason just doesn't work. Even when I have verbally lashed some fresh-faced teabagger into a gelatinous mess. They still remain where they are. I can assplode their minds, but what I said doesn't grab the soul.
To put it another way, I read Hume's "Natural Religion" and the Ancient Skeptic "Sentences of Sextus Empiricus" and could intellectually acknowledge them as true. But outside of that, yawn. Sometime later, I read the Black Iron Prison, etc, and I thought, "Fuuuuuuuuuuck." Sure, I laughed. It's parody, but not mere parody. It says a lot of the same things as Mumon, Hume, Nietzsche, and others. But some things merely grab you as intellectual, others grab your soul. Or crotch, if you don't like the word "soul."
Is doing what I'm trying to describe even possible?
-TGB
Sure. If you were to gain control of television, madison avenue, the vast majority of churches, AM radio, and what's left of the print media.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 09:25:26 PM
Sure. If you were to gain control of television, madison avenue, the vast majority of churches, AM radio, and what's left of the print media.
Ok, I'll get right on that. ;)
I hate to sound like a rosy-cheeked utopian, but how did Gandhi shaft the Brits without the equivalent version all that stuff? How did Jeebus manage to start a radical fringe movement in Palestine without even visiting any of the centers of political power? (Ok, maybe JC is a bad example. Crucifixion is a sucky way to get publicity.) Civil Rights movement?
There has got to be some way to change things without access to conventional means of access to power.
Right?
...
-TGB
Quote from: The Grandmaster Beta on September 13, 2011, 09:33:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 09:25:26 PM
Sure. If you were to gain control of television, madison avenue, the vast majority of churches, AM radio, and what's left of the print media.
Ok, I'll get right on that. ;)
I hate to sound like a rosy-cheeked utopian, but how did Gandhi shaft the Brits without the equivalent version all that stuff? How did Jeebus manage to start a radical fringe movement in Palestine without even visiting any of the centers of political power? (Ok, maybe JC is a bad example. Crucifixion is a sucky way to get publicity.) Civil Rights movement?
There has got to be some way to change things without access to conventional means of access to power.
Right?
...
-TGB
If Gandhi had to contend with cable TV, his own people would have laughed him out of town for being a hippie.
And the civil rights movement succeeded because of television, not in spite of it. Again, wouldn't happen today. Today, Fox would have something like "Medgar Evers: Civil Rights Leader or Al Qaeda Stooge?", and "Black woman assaults police on city bus", and that would be the end of it.
The other thing Gandhi had going for him that reasonable Americans don't is numbers.
There were WAY more Indians than Brits in the Raj, so those demonstrations were enough to put the fear into the Brits of what might happen if they stopped being non-violent.
Here, we'd just get mowed down like dogs. Sometimes I'm surprised that MLK's strategy worked, and sometimes I think that it really DIDN'T work except in the most superficial of manners.
Without mass media, the civil rights movement never would have had a chance.
Unfortunately, the very tactics they mastered and used effectively don't mean much anymore. No one cares about police beat downs anymore, boycotts are yawned at, etc.
I don't have any suggestions for how to wake anyone up, mostly because I think it takes the kind of smack in the face we can't deliver ourselves.
1. Dok, there seems a disconnect between "They're getting exactly what they WANT, ho ho ho" and "We've got to at least try to do something."
2. ECH, I'm not so sure "we" are the minority ("we" meaning basically reasonable, sane people). It's been said before, but the stupidest people are just the loudest, generally speaking. Or is loudness exactly what you're saying will mow us down?
You mentioned the Overton window in the OP. I have been thinking about that concept a bit lately. Way back when Romney announced his candidacy, I considered him to be a right-wing nutjob. But after months of Bachmann and Perry running around on the loose, he seems downright reasonable by comparison. I recognize this and can correct for it in my head, but most of middle America can't or won't do that. I think Romney is gaining electability, all due to Bachmann and Perry shifting the Overton window for him to put him right in the middle of it. If he wins the primary, I think his chances of winning the presidency are improved because of Bachmann and Perry.
Maybe what needs to happen is that some real leftwingers need to become real political forces, maybe even some actual Socialists (rather than the center-right Democrats who pass for Socialists these days), and start pulling the Overton window back in the other direction. :?
Quote from: Epimetheus on September 13, 2011, 11:08:06 PM
1. Dok, there seems a disconnect between "They're getting exactly what they WANT, ho ho ho" and "We've got to at least try to do something."
2. ECH, I'm not so sure "we" are the minority ("we" meaning basically reasonable, sane people). It's been said before, but the stupidest people are just the loudest, generally speaking. Or is loudness exactly what you're saying will mow us down?
We may not be a minority, but we're sure as hell not an overwhelming majority either. At best, it's 50/50 and the majority of political/financial/military power (which is what really matters, innit?) is concentrated in the other 50%.
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 13, 2011, 11:16:00 PM
You mentioned the Overton window in the OP. I have been thinking about that concept a bit lately. Way back when Romney announced his candidacy, I considered him to be a right-wing nutjob. But after months of Bachmann and Perry running around on the loose, he seems downright reasonable by comparison. I recognize this and can correct for it in my head, but most of middle America can't or won't do that. I think Romney is gaining electability, all due to Bachmann and Perry shifting the Overton window for him to put him right in the middle of it. If he wins the primary, I think his chances of winning the presidency are improved because of Bachmann and Perry.
Maybe what needs to happen is that some real leftwingers need to become real political forces, maybe even some actual Socialists (rather than the center-right Democrats who pass for Socialists these days), and start pulling the Overton window back in the other direction. :?
Perry will most likely win the nomination. Romney is done.
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
How long did anyone expect the two party system to continue?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 14, 2011, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
How long did anyone expect the two party system to continue?
I don't understand what you mean.
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:44:47 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 14, 2011, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
How long did anyone expect the two party system to continue?
I don't understand what you mean.
Why should the corporations and interests support two parties, when it actually turns out that they only need to pay for one?
The democratic party is useless, ineffectual, and doomed. It eats its own.
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:44:47 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 14, 2011, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
How long did anyone expect the two party system to continue?
I don't understand what you mean.
Due to the gradual slide into plutocracy, both parties have bowed to Almighty Dollar™ -- and in doing so, have made the parties redundant. It was only a matter of time before they collapsed into the same beast.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 14, 2011, 02:46:33 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:44:47 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 14, 2011, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
How long did anyone expect the two party system to continue?
I don't understand what you mean.
Due to the gradual slide into plutocracy, both parties have bowed to Almighty Dollar™ -- and in doing so, have made the parties redundant. It was only a matter of time before they collapsed into the same beast.
Sure. And the dems are helping things along. Weiner, for example, could have survived the whole pics thing, until Pelosi basically ordered him to resign. His seat was then taken by a republican in the special election.
The dems are a joke.
:cry:
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
It's been like that for awhile now. Massachusetts elected Bill Weld governor TWICE in the 90's.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 14, 2011, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: Khara on September 14, 2011, 02:13:32 PM
Considering they voted in Turner to replace Weiner I truly today feel a sense of hopelessness. If New York, one of the most liberal places in this country is going Republican.... :cry:
How long did anyone expect the two party system to continue?
I figured it would last as long as the plutocrats felt they needed to give us the illusion of choice. I guess those days are ending.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 08:23:30 PM
Dunno about 20 seconds. I'm a firm believer in repetition. On the Perry thing, for example, I just circulate "Perry: Not Gay" images as often as I can, and bring up my "concerns" on teabagger boards, etc.
That will work.
Another interesting thing, I forgot where I read it, but if some shameful or embarrassing thing gets out, and later rectified because it plainly wasn't true, it'll still "stick" in people's minds, even now they know it wasn't true, the seed has been planted.
An extra powerful variation is misattributed quotes:
[Face of politician] +
"Quoted badwrong yet believable text in a serious font" -- Name of Politician, 17 August 2010Even if it gets rectified (and it often doesn't) how many people are going to see the rectification? And
even for people that see the rectification, there's the powerful psychological effect that they have already heard the politician speak the quote in their minds and this
will affect their judgement, even though they knew he didn't actually say it.
Very filthy. Very low. Very effective.
BAM
(http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/766/rickperri.jpg)
That's AWESOME!
Trip is winning!
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 15, 2011, 04:50:39 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 08:23:30 PM
Dunno about 20 seconds. I'm a firm believer in repetition. On the Perry thing, for example, I just circulate "Perry: Not Gay" images as often as I can, and bring up my "concerns" on teabagger boards, etc.
That will work.
Another interesting thing, I forgot where I read it, but if some shameful or embarrassing thing gets out, and later rectified because it plainly wasn't true, it'll still "stick" in people's minds, even now they know it wasn't true, the seed has been planted.
An extra powerful variation is misattributed quotes:
[Face of politician] + "Quoted badwrong yet believable text in a serious font" -- Name of Politician, 17 August 2010
Even if it gets rectified (and it often doesn't) how many people are going to see the rectification? And even for people that see the rectification, there's the powerful psychological effect that they have already heard the politician speak the quote in their minds and this will affect their judgement, even though they knew he didn't actually say it.
Very filthy. Very low. Very effective.
BAM
(http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/766/rickperri.jpg)
Beauteous. :mittens: Rick Fairy. :lulz:
Just posted that at Capitol Grilling. :lulz:
Thanks :) You guys spam it on your teabaggers boards etc okay? (ah you already did, sweet)
If you got any suggestions on the text, let me know, I just made this up on the spot and wove a nice "Dicky doth protest too much" kind of semi contradictory word tangle. Hope the double negation isn't too complicated for the target audience?
I think they just see "RICK PERRY...BUNCHA WORDS...GAY." :lulz:
can I see the thread on CG btw? or do you need an account to view it?
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 15, 2011, 06:03:31 PM
can I see the thread on CG btw? or do you need an account to view it?
You can see it.
It's at capitolgrilling.com, and it's in the Rick Perry Gay thread.
Aw no replies yet :)
They're tonguetied. :lulz: