- cross-posted to:
- conservative@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- conservative@lemm.ee
The Georgia Republican is fast falling out of favor for her opposition to the Ukraine aid bill.
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greeneās failed fight to end aid to Ukraine, and herĀ sort-of-serious crusadeĀ against House Speaker Mike Johnson, has cost her the support of right-wing media.
The Sunday front page of the New York Post, owned by the conservative Murdoch family, was the latest outlet toĀ attackĀ Greene, invoking the āMoscow Marjorieā nicknameĀ coinedĀ by former representative Ken Buck.
Fox News, another arm of the Murdoch media empire, had alreadyĀ taken aimĀ at the Georgia Republican last week, with columnist Liz PeekĀ callingĀ her an āidiotā and saying she needs to āturn all that bombastic self-serving showmanship and drama queen energy on Democrats.ā This follows an editorial last month from The Wall Street Journal, also in the Murdoch portfolio, that called Greene āRep. Mayhem Taylor Greeneā and accused her and her allies of being āmost interested in TV hits and internet donors.ā
Even a non-Murdoch outlet is on the attack, as conservative Las Vegas Review-Journal columnist Debra SaundersĀ demandedĀ to know āwho put Marjorie Taylor Greene in charge?ā
I got banned for commenting āguillotineā. Nothing else. If that word is all around banned they should say so
I mean, context does matter. If youāre replying to a post or comment about a person or group of people, āguillotineā comes with a pretty clear implication: āthey should be sent to theā¦ā
If you were responding to a question like, āWhat tool did Mel Brooksā character use to provide circumcisions in Robin Hood Men in Tights?ā āGuillotineā may be an acceptable response. Again, context matters.
Saying they canāt ban a word is the same excuse white supremacists use when they coopt shit like the āOKā gesture to symbolize white power.
A very thin veneer of plausible deniability doesnāt somehow make a call for violent executions align with policies against violent rhetoric.
Even if I say āwe should guillotine the billionairesā why is that wrong? I fully believe we should, and literally eat one as a message. Why would some low wage mod care that Iām calling for the death of billionaires? Billionaires arenāt people.
Look, billionaires are bad for society, but normalizing this kind of dehumanizing violent rhetoric is how we get violent extremists.
When someone finally decides to act in this language and mails a bomb or goes to Tesla HQ with a gun, guess who is probably not going to be there
The mailroom worker or the receptionist are going to be in the line of fire while Elon probably isnāt even in the same state.
3.5 million people died during the French Revolution, only a tiny fraction of them were actually part of the ruling class. Acting like this is some ideal to strive for is childish. The ājokeā stopped being funny the 27-millionth time it came up in the comments of a āBillionaire Badā article.
At best, youāre distracting from people discussing real solutions to wealth inequity, at worst youāre promoting violent extremism. If I were moderating a community Iād probably boot you as well to make room for more productive conversations.
Letās cry liberal tears for the poor billionaires while they continue to fuck us. Nobody has balls, thatās why we keep getting fucked