This is no different from when Obama gave his statement about sandy hook and then took a big swig of ObamaCola, holding the can so the logo was clearly visible to the cameras. He then proceeded to say "ahhh, it's tragically refreshing!" so don't judge, libtards.

Gah - that should have been +1 Funny. Ah well.

make america pay again

"I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is swindling, to treat everything as if it were a sale."
- A. Maslow (kinda)

FLOTUS

Cancer, and my name is Larry.

(I'm neither a Cancer nor am I named Larry, but for some reason, this always makes me chuckle.)

Trump approval rating at lowest point: 36.8% and dropping

Thems starting-a-war numbers.

It's gonna be the greatest war. The best. Everyone is gonna die. Just everyone.

Foxnews' current state of wardrumming, second only to floodporn:

"KIM'S TORTURE CAMPS Starving prisoners look like 'walking skeletons': US
Trump says talking to North Korea 'not the answer,' rips US 'extortion' payments
US downs ballistic missile in test amid North Korea threats

I'm expecting a story about Kim taking babies off resuscitators, any day now.

CALM DOWN PEOPLE!

He needs to cash to help build his Trump Tower in Moscow.

That lefty NewsMax! The issue is him promoting his merchandise in official photo ops, not how long he has been selling his merchandise. But thanks for playing!

"The other side"? Why do you need to divide us?

The quickest retort is: "It's a cap that just says USA." It makes the indignation come across as petty, anti-American, and vapid and no one really changes their opinion.

Then people buy the $40 hat because it was brought to their attention.

Point Trump.

Keep it up; this is how he won.

So you are saying Trump is profiting off his position? Thanks for agreeing!

Pretty sure it goes to fund his re-election. He thanks you for the free advertising.

There's nothing to be snarky about bud. You really fell for it here.

As did every Trump voter.

MAGA

When though?

Every day. Michael Moore was spot on.

America is great again everyday? Is that like being at war with Eastasia always?

You're clearly not interested in a dialogue because you didn't engage with my point. I even provided a Latter Day Saint to draw upon. You don't get a cookie though for cursory knowledge of 1984 memes because if you had actually understood it you'd have greater concerns than a red hat.

The dialogue of this post was clearly about a president using his office to promote personal business ventures, pointing to one glaring example. You didn't want to engage with that dialogue, so you distracted with some random person saying something offensive. Then gloated about how much the president is using his office to promote personal business ventures.

I am not a Mooremon, so I don't know why you thought that would be impressive.

His hat saying "USA 45 TRUMP" is indeed self-promotional advertising during a national tragedy, to be celebrated by all fans of political profiteering.

The guy said the hurricane was karma for voting Trump. He was so divided in his thinking as to dehumanize whom he saw as ideological opponents.

Trying to exploit tragedy for personal gain -- whether in the form of hat revenue or liberal attention points -- is a dick move. If we draw a line and call one side of it "decent human beings", these two bozos are both squarely on the other side.

You must be really thankful that some random, powerless person you never heard of before said something you could virtue signal about. Take that, other side!

He also got fired for that tweet so you can't exactly say no one noticed or cared that he said a terrible thing because he was a liberal.

No, I'm not thankful people are suffering and someone is so entrenched in their toxic politics that they thought it was acceptable to utter something so vile.

So when are fish, numbers, and you going to start crying out about the 'freedom of speech' violation that happened to this professor? Remember that in the KKK and google writer posts you defended that anyone should be able to say anything free from consequences and be provided a protest-free platform, even if you don't necessarily agree with their opinion?

Also I assume you thought it 'vile' when homosexuality/abortion was blamed for hurricane Katrina and earthquakes?

From Your Side

I have an opinion about his opinion. My opinion is that he is an asshole. People should be free to be assholes and let their arguments fall on deaf or discerning ears.

Yes, both are stupid anachronisms.

And by using 'other' I explicitly avoided labeling anyone's side personally. So don't assume mine. OP clearly advertised for Trump's merchandise so there was no way to assume theirs.

You have already argued that private businesses have the right to fire assholes for any reason they see fit. In fact, that 'asshole' (your words) specifically signed a document authorizing Google to fire him for any reason they deem fit. You're not against contract law, are you?

Freedom of speech has not been denied, as the government wasn't involved, which is the only organization the first amendment applies to.

Listen, you don't have to play games about what side you are on or what 'side' you were referring to. You implied a professor, who suffered consequences for his speech, represented the 'indifference' of lefty click-bait (your words). I have yet to see you cry tears for this 'injustice', from what I can tell, because it is from the wrong 'side'.

To break it down for you:

Right-wing 'asshole' states vile things : Fired (Bad!!! Should be free to state anything, even the dehumanizing of an entire gender that works in his own field.)

Left-wing 'asshole' states vile things : Fired (See how terrible the left is? Deserved to be fired. "The guy said the hurricane was karma for voting Trump. He was so divided in his thinking as to dehumanize whom he saw as ideological opponents.")

My opponents make arguments without nuance; I do not. Businesses in certain states have rights to fire but in the case of Google I cited California law that presented grounds for him to file a civil suit for wrongful termination. Others in the thread made the point that he could be fired, and had no grounds to sue because of their feelings.

I separate individual ideas into their own paragraphs.

The two sentences were independent ideas.

The only thing I implied was that the guy was indifferent to suffering. It was tangential to the idea that profiting from the hat was a similar instance of indifference. It was a very short sentence. You're working very hard to expand upon what I say based on your own biases.

What you have here is a strawman or a really poor attempt at Deconstruction. I can't tell which but you're bad at both.

All I'm stating is that between three articles you have shown yourself to be inconsistent and that your bias clearly shows. That's fine, a lot of our biases show here. However, you are the only one trying to maintain a foot on the middle road (I assume in order to have some sort of moral high ground?) while clearly having residency in the conservative-camp.

When conservatives do something 'wrong' they are misunderstood, need to be protected, etc.

When liberals do something 'wrong' they are the clearest definition of hypocrites, vile beings, etc.

All we (I?) ask is that you remain consistent. Justice should be the same for all. If someone who said karma was the cause of suffering is vile and should be fired (your words), then anyone ELSE who says divine pay-back (karma) was the cause for suffering should be considered vile and fired.

You can jump in and agree anytime, we'll wait.

I don't admit you caught me in any inconsistencies. If anything I showed you were trying to pigeon hole me into a strawman which you persist in doing.

I agree everyone is biased. I also think I am quite liberal in mine but the spectrum has shifted so far Left I get called a 'conservative.'

someone who said karma was the cause of suffering is vile and should be fired (your words) Why do you keep doing this shit?

YOU posted the article of the professor that was fired for what he said. You specifically used it as an example to paint the left as indifferent and uncaring. Are you now saying what he said was vile but he shouldn't have been fired? By all means clarify if you think Baby is being put into a corner. :-P

Furthermore, you did NOT cry havoc when a right-wing writer ultimately implied women don't belong in tech and was subsequently fired for it. In fact, you researched what defenses he would/should use in court in his state. Now, I know it's a big leap, but I'm going to take a risk and ASSUME that means you think that individual shouldn't have been fired for what he said.

That's inconsistent. If you'd like to clarify where you stand, do so.

I don't think you will. You'll call it a strawman because apparently comparing ANY two similar situations is a 'strawman' argument.

"Remember that in the KKK and google writer posts you defended that anyone should be able to say anything free from consequences and be provided a protest-free platform"

I never said anything of the sort.

He's referring to 3333, obviously.

Actually 2345. :-)

It's so difficult to keep track of them all.

Or even just counting them.

Hey. We're not all mathologists over here.

They are still at it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ann-coulter-harvey-climate-change-god-punishment-more-credible-tweet-a7919301.html

That's OK, AC's face and personality are god's revenge on her.

I'm sure she'll be fired from her job as... what does she do again?

You were thankful enough to have it as a distraction for a post about the ethics of presidential merchandising.

My issue is that Trump and Ted Cruz are trying to cut hurricane assistance. I keep seeing things about how private companies are responding better/faster/quicker (and we don't need fed gov) but federal government money is going to be what gets Texas back on its feet afterwards.

And yes that one guy is a douche, but it's some asshole professor (who got fired). I'm more interested in not letting Americans die/restart their lives at a minus with no help.

Because as much as I disagree with Texas politic and culture, they're Americans and people and they deserve better and I think that's a worthy use of my tax money. (And it's all going to come-around-go-around)

Ted Cruz isn't trying to cut hurricane assistance now, for Texas. He voted against Hurricane Sandy assistance, for New Jersey. Totally different.

Well NY is a bunch of welfare queens. I mean they even have a place named (welfare) Queens.
I don't think we can blame Ted Cruz here.
Ammorite?
Guys?
Hello?

The reply to Cruz and Co. from the Northeast Congressional Delegations should be, "We are acting on hurricane recovery aid promptly and without conditions or debate, because we are not fucks, and there are Americans who need help."

we are not fucks, unlike the Texas legislators were, when we needed help."

Mod all you want, the rains fall on the just and unjust alike, and since weather is not sentient, it has no morality.

Much like Ted Cruz.

cheap image hosting