Follow woodsmoke | TRP Network

Now tell them how many of those are just me star fucking your comments.

It was a slow rehearsal tonight; I had to find some way to keep entertained.

1 1

woodsmoke

4 hours ago The Public Square

@Vermillion-Rx

Nah. I was raised Mormon. They wouldn't want him.

woodsmoke

9 hours ago The Public Square

@MentORPHEUS

That must have had a different connotation when I was a kid. We used it to describe someone who looked like they could demolish a building with their bare hands.

What we'd have said about this rejected bridge troll is "she fell out o' the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down!"

Right. Pursuant to @lurkerhasarisen's reply, there's a reason I specified editorial fact checking. Propaganda and narrative spin were alive and well in the postwar era, just as they were during the war preceding it. And the interregnum between wars before that. And in the war before that. And on back through history, doubtless all the way back to the birth of language itself.

Typo-MAGAshiv @Butthead

about a day ago The Public Square

@Lone_Ranger

And now, the punchline:

I am 46 now and still searching for The One

Womp, womp.

I could have sworn we'd featured this at WAATGM before, but I can't find it. It seems really familiar.

Anyway, if you generate an archived link via archive.is, would you post that to the WAATGM forum this weekend? Flaired "pushing muh agenda!"

CC: @moorekom, @Kevin32, @lurkerhasarisen, @woodsmoke, @DeeplyDisturbed

Typo-MAGAshiv @Butthead

about a day ago The Public Square

@woodsmoke

fhqwhgads

Everybody to the limit!

CC: @redpillschool

lurkerhasarisen

2 days ago The Public Square

@woodsmoke

I'm not sure how far into their 70s your parents are, but I'm a decade of mor younger. Not quite a boomer myself, but I grew up in their shadow.

What you say about the news is true, but that's more because they were more subtle about it. They tended to be more more scrupulous about getting the "facts" right, but they certainly weren't any more interested in getting the truth out.

The way they did it was by telling only those carefully selected facts that advanced the narrative. If anyone called them out for bias, they could indignantly demand that the critic show where they got the facts wrong. In other words, they lied by omission then defended themselves by saying that they didn't lie by commission. Neat trick.

They don't bother with that any more. They just brazenly lie about obvious facts... knowing that nobody in their audience will believe the critics, who are obviously "deplorables" or "conspiracy theorists" or "Ultra-MAGA" or "racist / sexist / homophobes" or purveyors of "Russian Disinformation."

woodsmoke

2 days ago The Public Square

@Lone_Ranger

That attitude is precisely why I can't have any meaningful discussions of current events or cultural shifts with my parents.

'Course, my parents are aging boomers in their 70s. When they were coming of age there was at least some truth to the idea of news stations actually having editorial fact checking.

How people who were born after me have any such notion in their heads is mystifying to me.

3 3