Jump to content

Oprah 4 Prez


Recommended Posts

Trump would take that "eloquence" to the gutter so fast. If Trump still has a political heartbeat come 2020, Democrats would be wiser to find a knife fighter political animal that has no problem meeting Trump on his own ground and would enjoy getting inside Trump's head. Someone like a Biden or even a Cuban if you're looking for a celebrity candidate.

People have no idea how many exploitation-worthy skeletons Biden has in his closet, but I'll let others open that closet door sometime in 2019--in the event the Biden for president noise gets going.

 

Cuban. Oh, that's a good one. The last thing any Trump opposition group needs is a guy who buried a recording of his racist slurs flying all around, along with 20+ years of other questionable statements and behavior. You don't meet offensive fire with more offensive fire.

 

...and Oprah. Let her run. She's a time bomb waiting to happen. From her longtime relationship with Harvey Weinstein (and kissing ass to other Hollywood libs nearly as guilty of the same sexual harassment/assault), to her on-camera support of Scientology while making various anti-Christian comments on her show, to a general belief from the black community that she hates heterosexuals (specifically black males), hence her building up/support of the polar opposite of a hetero black man--Tyler Perry), which--as a Democrat--will set her up to lose a major Dem voting block.

 

Her history is such a massive target, that I actually hope she runs, just for the sake of what's sure to be the political hit piece extravaganza unlike anything seen before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oprah's too smart to be running for president. She probably has a new show coming out on OWN and could use the publicity. If I'm taking her running seriously, I'd say she wouldn't get shit accompilished and everyone would still love her. Basically, Obama.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Raise your hand if you've been posting long enough at nightly to remember when Justus was a liberal.

Raise your hand if you remember when liberals were actually liberal, instead of precisely the kinds of rank partisans that they so hated (and rightly so) the Tea Party types for being. Doubly so since democratic opposition to Trump seems to be all show and no substance. "OMG! He said mean things about Haiti! Whatever are we going to do?" What you are going to do is join in a vote to give Trump increased spying powers on US citizens! #resistance, eh?

 

If supporting Oprah Winfrey for president is what constitutes liberal now, count me out too. There's far better - not perfect but better ideas floating in the breeze anyway. Tulsi Gabbard might be one. Suggestions out of a recent AFL/CIO convention for the formation of a Labor Party is another, so long as they don't repeat the Justice Democrat's mistake and actually keep the identity politics and SJWs out. Longshots to be sure, but preferable to Oprah. Hell, Trump would be better. At least with Trump, the legacy media will be scrutinizing him to death, which is what they should do. But Oprah? Hell, she could carry out another holocaust, and not a word from a completely cowed press afraid to do its job for fear of accusations of racism and misogyny. If you think the media fell asleep for Obama, which they did, just you wait.

 

 

She probably has a new show coming out on OWN and could use the publicity.

Gee, this is getting to be a pattern, isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OUR

is black, a woman and much more touchy-feely than THEIR warmongering corporate billionaire, who's an old white male who says mean things. Yay! YAY! Much progressive. Such liberal.

Can't say I'd be happy about trump vs oprah. Neither should be running the country, I'd rather Tulsi Gabbard get the nomination.

Yup.

I'm a huge fan of jimmy dore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Raise your hand if you've been posting long enough at nightly to remember when Justus was a liberal.

Raise your hand if you remember when liberals were actually liberal, instead of precisely the kinds of rank partisans that they so hated (and rightly so) the Tea Party types for being. Doubly so since democratic opposition to Trump seems to be all show and no substance. "OMG! He said mean things about Haiti! Whatever are we going to do?" What you are going to do is join in a vote to give Trump increased spying powers on US citizens! #resistance, eh?

 

If supporting Oprah Winfrey for president is what constitutes liberal now, count me out too. There's far better - not perfect but better ideas floating in the breeze anyway. Tulsi Gabbard might be one. Suggestions out of a recent AFL/CIO convention for the formation of a Labor Party is another, so long as they don't repeat the Justice Democrat's mistake and actually keep the identity politics and SJWs out. Longshots to be sure, but preferable to Oprah. Hell, Trump would be better. At least with Trump, the legacy media will be scrutinizing him to death, which is what they should do. But Oprah? Hell, she could carry out another holocaust, and not a word from a completely cowed press afraid to do its job for fear of accusations of racism and misogyny. If you think the media fell asleep for Obama, which they did, just you wait.

 

 

 

Well said.

 

The level-headed, pre-radicalized ( sometime around 1966/67) Left (aka the Kennedy/early LBJ-ers) were truly about fair treatment for all, not those who embraced the tables-have-turned /revenge fueled / "everyone who does bow to my worldview and/or desires is evil & must be ostracized/fired/demonized mindset since that time.

 

Oprah has certainly played her part in keeping this new Left campaign of intolerance alive, and answers to no one--especially the black community who criticized her agenda over the decades by pointing out that her brand of what would come to be known as identity politics "empowered" women by attacking black men, essentially writing them off as unnecessary, violent, and irresponsible. All of the self-serving productions in the world (e.g., Selma as a way of showing her traditional movement credentials) do not hide her true beliefs. That's the problem with extremist beliefs, as she has pushed an agenda that reads exactly like the far Right zealots such as Michael Savage or Tomi Lahren, yet somehow, Oprah is the Left's darling they want to push for president. That should tell anyone all they need to know about how much so many among the modern Left thinks about black people (when they're not being used for co-opted movements or votes).

 

 

Further, for such a fist-shaking advocate for women, that status did not provide cover from (earned) criticism for her longtime friendship with / support of Harvey Weinstein--the man she claims she knew nothing about. Spending endless hours around / part of a close culture where sexual manipulation and abuse was no secret, yet she claims she knew nothing. That excuse did not work for Tarantino, Affleck, Damon and others, and should not for Oprah. If anything, she should be grilled about that 24/7/365 long before she makes any announcement about a future in politics.

 

But I guess like the propaganda of any good cult you are condemned as not being a liberal if you reject the modern Left's single-minded, smothering tactics. Who knew?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post, Justus.

 

After that, the dems run Oprah in 2020 and get their asses handed to them. Especially if economic growth manages to creep over 3%/annum in the next year or so and stays there a while.

 

Then the "left" freaks out again: Antifa and/or Black Lives Matter burns a few progressive campus communities to the ground, the Salons and HuffPosts of the world run still more columns: everyone's racist, everyone's muhsogynist, everyone's homophobic and transphobic and a fat shamer and ableist. More garish protests. More pontificating blogs, Facebook pages and newspaper columns. Silicon Valley doubles down on censorship, both on its platforms and inside its corporate structures. Because that's what went wrong, after all. Too many people told the truth and not enough people thought about the feelings of "marginalized peoples" online. This is all because too many Pewdiepies, Count Dankulas or Jordan Petersons. Not because the "progressive" media lie through their teeth about damn near everything. They subject their workforces to McCarthyite witch hunts to purge wrongthinkers, then try to tell us how to be progressive. You want to be progressive? It's called worker's rights. It's called not firing people for what they believe, like they did in the red scares. Try it sometime.

 

More avalanches of stupid slogans: "privilege is when you don't have to care," "white males don't get to decide what's racist/sexist", "Treason against whiteness is loyalty towards humanity" "If your feminism isn't all about trans women, fat women and disabled women exclusively, then just who is it for!" That one douchebag SJW that we all know invites themselves onto everybody's twitter feed or facebook profile to scold them for their privilege and bigotry. Because that's what works, right. Beating people over the head with what a bunch of racist haters and inbred country bumpkins they are. They'd claim Oprah lost because of the f**king Russians. On and on.

 

No. Oprah would lose for the same reason Hillary lost. Preaching to the choir exclusively and forgetting that there's a lot of people outside your little cultural bubble that are still part of the country, whether you like them or not. This is precisely the kind of arrogance that the far right slid into between the time of the '94 Republican Revolution and the eventual petering out of the Tea Party in Obama's second term, and the price they paid for it was the fact Obama actually got a second term. Most people don't want evangelists of the right or left. They want the damned country to work again.

 

Just because they grew weary of the ceaseless stupidity of the Reagan dispensation's phony mix of traditional values moralism and "free" market economics, the people don't subsequently owe pampered urban "progressives" a God damned thing, no matter how "educated" they think they are, especially since we've now seen starting with Harvey Weinstein that they're actually not any better at adhering to their own moral codes and prescriptions for lifestyle purity than the religious right were. They didn't learn the right lessons from the disgracing of the televangelists and pedophile enabling churches. People didn't recoil against the religion or the conservatism. People recoiled against the hypocrisy and the moral arrogance. Against high browed elites who think their own rules didn't apply to them. This is what I've been saying almost as long as I've been on this site. No special immunity because you're an atheist or a feminist any more than because Jesus is your personal lord and savior.

 

Democracy, people. It means the politicians serve, not lord over the common plebs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A sizeable portion of progressives despise Hillary. It's why she's not POTUS now. Rather like how similar disillusionment with her husband helped Bush win in 2000. And the same kind of response then as now. Dems were blaming Nader and the Greens then just as they blame the "Bernie bros" now. The same kind of entitlement and arrogance from the DNC and its sundry mouth pieces. Why should progressives support the dems when they sell out and carry on the policies of their predacessors all the God damned time?

 

Frankly, I'd rather a good old fashioned rock ribbed Republican than some formless, spineless neolib who enacts roughly similar policy, but with less scrutiny and criticism from eatablishment media. Right wing reaction a-la the Tea Party or Trump is bad, but at least preserves the clear distinction between who the progressives and who the reactionaries are. Reaction via the SJWs and Obama/Hillary is actually worse, because with that, you see so called progressives behaving like reactionaries, but from behind a supossadly liberal veil. This causes the left to appear to be not righteous, but self righteous, and leaves no clear choice between left and right but rather between two flavors of reaction. That's what we have now as a result of decades of neoliberal dominance among the DNC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I could see myself voting GOP. If the right candidate came along.

I just know I'm voting good ole' Ted Cruz out this year.

 

Also Rubio fired a staffer for sexual harassment. HAHAHAHAHAA! It's not on topic but for a dude who was a former candidate I guess nothings safe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, Justus hating Hillary doesn't make him conservative. Hillary is not liberal or progressive. The biggest mistake people can make is thinking democrats=liberal. Many are, but many more a corperate bought. Hillary supports the tpp. If you read that deal youd hate anyone connected to it. Hillary bought her nomination and pissed off progressives for doing so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Chalupacabra

Wait, Justus hating Hillary doesn't make him conservative. Hillary is not liberal or progressive. The biggest mistake people can make is thinking democrats=liberal. Many are, but many more a corperate bought. Hillary supports the tpp. If you read that deal youd hate anyone connected to it. Hillary bought her nomination and pissed off progressives for doing so.

This is a fair point. I don't have much use for Hillary, either, and I don't consider myself conservative at all, and there were millions of Bernie voters because they felt Hillary wasn't progressive or liberal enough. Hillary can be considered socially liberal, but possibly fiscally conservative in some areas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wait, Justus hating Hillary doesn't make him conservative. Hillary is not liberal or progressive. The biggest mistake people can make is thinking democrats=liberal. Many are, but many more a corperate bought. Hillary supports the tpp. If you read that deal youd hate anyone connected to it. Hillary bought her nomination and pissed off progressives for doing so.

 

This is a fair point. I don't have much use for Hillary, either, and I don't consider myself conservative at all, and there were millions of Bernie voters because they felt Hillary wasn't progressive or liberal enough. Hillary can be considered socially liberal, but possibly fiscally conservative in some areas.

And even where she's liberal it's hard to believe she's sincere, the tpp for instances contradicts equal pay.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...