832
833

Men's RightsHillary’s Top Donor Just Bought The Onion — Started Publishing Propaganda Immediately (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by Endorsed Contributorredpillbanana

Summary: Hillary supporter's media conglomorate buys The Onion and publishes fake humor articles to support her. The mainstream media is untrustworthy. RIP The Onion.


Article here: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/hillarys-top-donor-buys-onion-starts-publishing-propaganda-immediately/

Most of you are familiar with The Onion. I've always loved how The Onion wrapped hard truths in humor, especially RP truths. Here are many examples:

They've also taken many searing jabs at Hillary in the past:

Unfortunately, the following has happened:

When it was revealed in January that satirical news outlet, The Onion, had been purchased by Univision Communications (which is co-owned by one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest fans, top campaign donor, and pro-Israel fanatic, Haim Saban), it was if the world suddenly held its breath to see if the move would be the outlet’s downfall.

Now, it appears we have our answer. On Tuesday, an apparent attempt at satirical understatement in actuality proved to be nothing less than a blatant propagandistic fluff piece touting Clinton’s ostensibly stellar career.

It didn’t work.

“Female Presidential Candidate Who Was United States Senator, Secretary Of State Told To Be More Inspiring,” read The Onion’s not-at-all-opaque headline. And the nauseating attempt at tongue-in-cheek praise didn’t stop there.

According to the short ‘article,’ Hillary’s media advisor, Jim Margolis, urged “the woman — who overcame entrenched societal biases to build a successful legal career, became the first female senator elected in the state of New York, oversaw the Department of State during a period of widespread international tumult, and, if elected, would be the first female president in American history — to be more uplifting to voters.”

We've already seen extreme media bias towards Clinton. Now it seems that even satire sites are not immune from political bias.

How is this related to TRP? I've submitted a warning in the past about how all men should be concerned about a Hillary Clinton presidency and there have been plenty of other good submissions since (example 1, example 2). With the media behind her, there's a good chance that she'll clinch the presidency (unless she self-implodes like last time). If she's elected, get ready for some serious anti-male policies and more entitlements for women.


Lessons learned:

  • The MSM is becoming increasingly centralized, biased, and untrustworthy.
  • Even satire/humor sites are not immune from political bias.
  • The once-great The Onion, which used to be full of hard truths wrapped in humor, has become a propaganda vehicle for Hillary 2016.
  • For American men, it is time to start thinking about what it might be like to live in an increasingly feminist environment.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRed_August 123 points124 points  (65 children)

It's not just a leftist thing, each american media outlet always picks a pony in the race. Same with right-wing cuck-outlets. The owners go to the races then to see which pony wins. The problem is that every pony ultimately runs in the same direction, in the same 'race' and for the same stakes or paradigm. They run for the owners but with different populist flavours.

There will albeit be favouritism for their direct owner-supporters but the corollary is that even if one pony owner loses, the winning pony owner's interests do not generally fall very far away from the other pony owner's interests. They do however usually fall significantly away from the people's. Let the little people argue endlessly about ultimately not very consequential emotional debates such as abortion whilst the pony owners remove all vestiges of nation-state and shape the corporate republic to come.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 24 points25 points  (17 children)

The truth is always interpreted. I actually wrote a post about this issue earlier this week.

The truth is never directly observable … it is always interpreted. As such, the true danger lies not in the “other side” of the debate, but in extremism in any form. Extreme interpretations of the truth serve as vehicles to limit the freedom of individuals.

[–]1Paid_Internet_Troll 12 points13 points  (15 children)

The truth is never directly observable … it is always interpreted.

Yes. This is something that great thinkers/philosophers have been talking about for thousands of years. Everyone from Plato to Confucius to Buddha.

As such, the true danger lies not in the “other side” of the debate, but in extremism in any form. Extreme interpretations of the truth serve as vehicles to limit the freedom of individuals.

"Extreme" by whose interpretation? If you're submitting your inner thoughts to some sort of "majority rules/don't get to far from what the majority thinks" test, then you're fucked.

In 1850, the notion that black people were 100% capable of interacting on an equal level with whites was an "extremist" notion. Even the Abolitionists at the time believed in racial segregation, and that blacks were some sort of "inferior species."

Don't let the crowd define what is "extreme" and what is "acceptable," because a majority of idiots aren't going to stumble across the truth just because they had a vote on it.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 11 points12 points  (2 children)

It's not about majority opinion. "Extreme" can be defined as any interpretation (which fits the evidence) that doesn't pass the Occam's Razor test. There are exceptions, but that is the general rule.

For instance, the fact that women tend to be more attracted to strong, powerful, high-status men, and thus men tend to be more focused on accumulating status and money, and thus men tend to be richer and more powerful, could be the result of a centuries-long patriarchal oppression by a secret worldwide cabal of men ... or it could simply be biology.

In that case, biology is the most parsimonious explanation, the other explanation being "extreme".

[–]1Paid_Internet_Troll 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ah, I see what you're saying now.

[–]FreeRadical5 2 points3 points  (0 children)

While I agree with everything you're saying, it would make more sense if you replace the word "extreme" with "illogical".

Average RedPiller's view of gender would be considered extreme by the vast majority of the population. What makes them extreme is the extreme deviation from the norm. That is the commonly accepted meaning of the word.

[–]waynebradysworld 2 points3 points  (11 children)

170 years later and they still can't function as a whole. No country under black leadership is worth a damn. They plague every country they inhabit with crime.

Maybe those ideas in the 1850s weren't as far out as you'd like to believe.

[–]1Paid_Internet_Troll 1 point2 points  (3 children)

170 years later and they still can't function as a whole. No country under black leadership is worth a damn. They plague every country they inhabit with crime.

There are a whole raft of reasons for that, but I've never, ever, seen any sort of credible evidence that "black skin = crime." It just doesn't make sense.

For example, there are people in Southern India who are "blacker" than a lot of people from Africa, and there are people from New Guinea whose bloodlines have been separated from Africa for two or three times longer than Caucasians have even existed... and yet, there's supposed to be some sort of magical secret gene connected to the darkness of skin... despite completely different genetic bloodlines leading to that dark skin... that makes people automatically bad?

I don't buy it. It doesn't make any sense.

It's just racism wrapped up in pseudo-scientific language.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]waynebradysworld -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

    All the way to their rotten, black souls

    [–]waynebradysworld -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

    You are operating in theory, I am simply observing what is. I don't claim to know WHY (though I can speculate, like you)

    [–]Endorsed ContributorRed_August 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Happy to discover your blog. Happy reading ahead - cheers.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorMentORPHEUS 16 points17 points  (7 children)

    It's not just a leftist thing, each american media outlet always picks a pony in the race. Same with right-wing cuck-outlets. ... The problem is that every pony ultimately runs in the same direction, in the same 'race' and for the same stakes or paradigm. They run for the owners but with different populist flavours.

    An important point, and why I hate seeing posts about Left/Right politics on this sub. Just because extreme far-left positions like Feminism and SJWs are the natural enemies of the Red Pill Man, does NOT mean that the right is our friend either. Wear it on your sleeve that you are 100% against marriage, sleep with multiple women half your age, don't go to their church, then come back here and tell us that the American Right Wing in its present incarnation is the natural home of Red Pill Men.

    [–]faded_jester 24 points25 points  (2 children)

    A point many of our brethren seem to either ignore or deny.

    A simpler explanation may be: Hating cold weather doesn't mean you love hot weather....it means you hate cold weather.

    I'm what many would consider here a dirty "liberal".

    That doesn't mean I love welfare, will vote for Hillary, and think my white privilege is problematic.

    Point of fact is I love guns, can't stand feminists, and think religion is silly.

    I'm simply here because this is one of the last few places where men can talk like men without fear or consequence. We can be brutally honest here, discuss ideas, and never have to placate women because "feelings".

    I'm a man first, everything else second. The Red Pill (to me at least) is about being the best man you can be, everything else can be debated on a different sub or in a private message.

    [–]wanderer779 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    Hear, hear. Honestly probably 70% of what I read here isn't worth shit. The fact that I'm still here probably speaks more to how anti-male everything else is than anything else.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This. I come to TRP looking for an informed discussion about male sexual strategy. Politics does not have to be a part of that. Some people's political opinons in here downright scare me.

    [–]McLarenX 8 points9 points  (3 children)

    Glad someone finally went into this on here. Being redpilled on matters such as these international globalists is just as important as being redpilled on the nature of women. National identities are being taken, and Western nations are being slowly bled dry.

    There is a strong group of people that controls international finance, who are also incredibly involved in every facet of political life. Most "national" banks are under private ownership, including the Federal Reserve of the united states. These people have weaseled their way into controlling the currency of every country, under the guise of "preventing panic" and "stabilising the market". When, in fact, an astute observer will note their manipulation of currency interest rates and world commodities actually triggers these "financial crisis" and "recession".

    Not sure how redpilled the mods themselves are here, (and i don't want us gaining undeserved labels by those enchanted by the agenda) , but there is a manifesto that has been repeatedly purged and prevented publication by a respected and revered man that can be had online for free. He predicted a hundred years ago the dire situation the populous is waking up to.

    PM me, only if you are truly open minded about learning who our true money masters are.

    Mandatory reading as well, a media magnate / international banking effective states their agenda and why "native populists must not win "

    [–]marlybarrow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    He's referring to 'The International Jew' by Henry Ford.

    [–]curious97 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    what is fascinating to me is that this paragraph could be referring to The Communist Manifesto or the actual thing you're talking about just as well

    [–]McLarenX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Yeah, I didn't go into the their agenda of forced racial dissemination and destruction of traditional religious morals because that turns people off to finding the truth.

    [–][deleted]  (33 children)

    [removed]

      [–]Modredpillschool[M] 20 points21 points  (30 children)

      I want you to know, your comment was removed, not because of the Jew comment, but because of concern trolling.

      [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (17 children)

      would love to see the Jew comment though. I love em. because you know, they rule the world.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      -Moshe, why do you read the right wing newspaper instead of the Jewish one?

      -Well, because when I read our newspaper, we're victims of abuse and bombings and terrorism, and when I read the right wing newspaper, we're the rulers of the world!

      [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

      I read both LOL and thanks

      and I guess since I am jewish, I just believe what I experience

      [–]NaClAgNO3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      The Jews that you are referring to are the fake Jews. This video here shows the real and true Jews that are enlightening the fake Jew about the truth!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBlbLgl5WDs

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        John F. Kennedy

        If only you knew how bad things are going to get.

        [–]1thiasus 51 points52 points  (0 children)

        American Women Studying In Europe Are Unbelievably Easy

        As a European man, this article is hilariously spot-on. Every single thing the fictional guy lists is 100% true, and given the precise and correct details he sprinkled in about locations and food I doubt this isn't based on actual personal experience.

        [–]Themooseconnection 140 points141 points  (13 children)

        "Journalism" and "the news" have been dead for a long time. People are too stupid to realise "the news" isn't the facts, it's actually someone else's opinion on the facts.

        [–][deleted] 36 points37 points  (1 child)

        people now are stupid enough that they don't care. they want to be told what to think, the toughest decision they have all day is who to vote for in american idol

        [–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

        Oh god, I just had a horrid realization... there are people who are too lazy to even vote in American Idol.

        [–]tits_out_forTheBoys 14 points15 points  (0 children)

        Agreed, but the rabbit hole goes deeper than that.

        "The News" promotes an endless stream of conflicting opinions on the most vital matters of life. It's a big divide and conquer tactic: Destroy the natural rallying points of human thought, and divert our thoughts and interests over to luxury.

        No one gives a fuck about anyone but themselves these days. That's the extent of the mainstream media's power over people.

        [–]machimus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        I like South Park anyway, but this season they did an unusually good indictment of ads taking over where the news used to be.

        [–]thechariot83 1 point2 points  (6 children)

        I don't hold a lot of hope for people 40 years of age and over. News Corporations have already drilled their heads with garbage. The newer generations though, through the power of the internet, are waking up to the bullshit. I think that's why Bernie Sanders has so much support from the youth demographic. Young people are tired of bullshit politicians and Bernie stands out to them.

        [–]Themooseconnection 4 points5 points  (5 children)

        You think your vote actually matters..... HAHAHAHA bread and circuses friend. You're brainwashed just like the boomers that get told what think by the media everyday.

        [–]thechariot83 0 points1 point  (4 children)

        Very, very ignorant comment my dude.

        [–]Themooseconnection 5 points6 points  (2 children)

        I'm gona vote for Bernie guys he promised me free shit herp derp

        [–]thechariot83 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        I didn't even mention my political affiliation. Smarten the fuck up.

        [–]Mildly_Sociopathic 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        Actually, I think about 50% (not certain on exact numbers) of Americans no longer trust the 'news'.

        [–]1Paid_Internet_Troll 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        That would be the top 50%. There's still the other 50%.

        [–]Vietnom 41 points42 points  (12 children)

        Great post. It's happening everywhere.

        I'm a writer who was working freelance for LA Weekly. My articles were consistently some of their most trafficked and most shared articles, largely because they took an angle that was counter to the mainstream perspective (which is what alt weeklies used to be best at). Then a new SJW editor came in, and these were four of the first front page articles under her regime: http://imgur.com/6PAjEk0

        And then this one this week: http://imgur.com/XhFWAH3.

        Needless to say, I don't write for them anymore.

        [–]waynebradysworld 18 points19 points  (0 children)

        WOW thats a piss publication

        [–]yiab127 12 points13 points  (8 children)

        Even The Economist has taken a huge turn for the worse. When I first started reading it over ten years ago, it was a dense and somewhat dry weekly commentary on business, political, and economic trends. Over the past few years, and this year in particular, it has become filled with all sorts of cultural lecturing and social justice crap. Not to mention that the core material has declined in both in depth and quality. As far as I know it's one of the few news sources that has seen revenue increase in recent years so that's not even an excuse. If this keeps up it'll end up as a pop-culture zombie like TIME or National Geographic.

        [–]wanderer779 6 points7 points  (3 children)

        For some reason your comment reminded me of something. These fuckers, whoever they are, also got ahold of popular mechanics. My dad and I both noticed it, we were on the phone and he was like, "did you get the new popular mechanics?", and I was like, "well it says PM but it's not it" an he was just like, "yep." I don't know if anyone here subscribes to it but if you do you know what I'm talking about.

        [–]yiab127 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I'd read it every now and then and always liked it, until I picked one up at the airport a year or two ago and tossed it before reading a quarter of it. I also saw PopSci go wholly off the deep end, but they have been a bit batty for a while.

        [–]insideman83 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        How does Popular Mechanics turn SJW?

        Reminds me of a book, The Conquest of Cool, about how advertisers in the '60s started to suck up to the emerging hippies in order to rejuvenate these lumbering corporations that had lost credibility with baby boomers:

        http://www.amazon.com/The-Conquest-Cool-Counterculture-Consumerism/dp/0226260127

        [–]wanderer779 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        It wasn't so much SJWey. They started putting hot girls in tank tops every few pages and the topics for their articles changed from interesting stuff about how technology worked to things I'm not interested in. I can't even remember what they were about to give an example. If I still had a copy here I'd refer back to it but I threw them all out.

        [–]spaceythrowaway 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        I'm Indian. When my dad was young, it was next to impossible to get international magazines without paying a shit load of money

        We would have to suffice with old magazines sold on the streetside for $1 a pop

        I remember in 1993, my dad went on a business trip to Mumbai. The economy was just opening up then. He came back with half a dozen National Geographic magazines from the 1970s

        I read them cover to cover, even thougj as a 11 year old I couldnt really understand them. But I knew it was powerful writing and even more powerful photography

        The NatGeo of today is a sham

        [–]Limekill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        TIME is a POS. Its not even a magazine anymore. I mean read the number of pages of content.

        Economist more technical articles are good, but they are let down by "more popular" BS new stories. Like how they are pro-immigration and then suddenly back tracked when the realised 1,000,000 people showing up is actually bad.

        [–]BigDaddyLightskin 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        What do you read now? I've noticed this trend myself.

        [–]yiab127 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I still read it, I still have most of this year left on my subscription and there still is some good content.

        I've started reading the Wall Street Journal recently, it's expensive but not for the content, and it is the one MSM source that offers hard-headed reporting and opinions, though you have to read it carefully. They let thier right wing bias taint thier reporting, but not as much as most.

        [–]Copenhagen23 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        Whites, camera, action? Wow. That's some shit. How about Jews, camera, more Jews?

        [–]MyLittleAtomBomb 23 points24 points  (6 children)

        It joins cracked and collegehumor in the great webserver in the sky.

        [–]cariboo_j 17 points18 points  (5 children)

        Cracked used to be awesome! Now it's just preachy SJW bullshit trying to make me feel guilty about everything.

        [–]darkrood 1 point2 points  (4 children)

        REALLY?!!! Damn, I haven't kept up with it except David Wong's stuff.

        Is there any evidence? Seriously, I barely notice.

        [–]gprime312 4 points5 points  (3 children)

        wat? Wong is the fucking leader in self-hating, white-bashing "journalism" You know he's white and changed his name to be more "ethnic" right?

        [–]Endorsed ContributorTheRedPilsner 10 points11 points  (0 children)

        The AMA with David Wong a few months back was hilarious. As soon as it started, people started asking him why he changed Cracked from a clever satire site to SJW clickbait. Wong threw a fit and asked his followers on Twitter and Facebook to downvote the people asking those questions, and got his own account banned because he violated Reddit's brigading rules.

        [–]darkrood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I thought everyone knows that he's white.

        I like his piece on "6 harsh truths that make you a better person"

        Based on that, It's pretty obvious this guys knows the reality of dating world, and someone did post that as a good red pill reading piece.

        [–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

        "But If We Started Dating..." is violently beautiful. Truth from sea to shining sea!

        [–]Klokinator 14 points15 points  (5 children)

        Hillary's agenda is the MSM and Banker agenda: Globalism and the extermination of all decent people. It's baffling too, why they would want to eliminate the greatest and most productive society of all time. I just don't get it.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeJ-iv3MOTo&feature=youtu.be

        [–]redzorp 14 points15 points  (4 children)

        The Republican agenda is the same (with the possible exception of Trump).

        Yes, the Elite want to destroy the west. Took me a long time to understand this but if you dig deep it makes sense in a very perverted way.

        They want to turn the entire planet into one giant serf plantation, with the Anglo and Zionist elite sitting at the very tippy-top of the one-eyed pyramid. It will literally be a scientific dictatorship, worse than anything Orwell described. Alex Jones and his merry band of conspiracy demagogues over at InfoWars are pretty much bang on for the most part.

        And the cruel irony is that the bulk of humanity will just quietly accept everything, like they did with feminism, the Patriot Act, NSA spying and on and on...

        [–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        Cut off a titty and place it on the table. The nipple is the elite, everyone else is a boob. That is the goal for globalism.

        [–]poop_lord_420 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I wouldn't really call Donald Trump or Ben Carson republicans. They are just running for the republican nomination.

        [–]wanderer779 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        What are they going to do about china though?

        [–]redzorp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        China and Russia are the endgame for the Elite. Both of those countries are slated for destruction and/or dismemberment.

        The Elite have been trying economic warfare and proxy wars against both countries but so far neither has cracked.

        The final option is World War III to finish the job. I am hoping that the Elite are not quite inbred and insane enough to actually go there. But given their behavior over the last 20 years, I would not put anything past them at this point.

        [–]1IamGale 10 points11 points  (0 children)

        This is a good and well-researched post dude. I had no idea of this, thanks!

        [–]theozoph 16 points17 points  (4 children)

        Haim Saban. Probably a Baptist.

        [–]redzorp 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Haha. Yeah.

        Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along.

        [–]vaelamin 15 points16 points  (0 children)

        even the satire sites get bought buy israel. America the cuck of israel.

        [–]_orion 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        Rip onion, may your lil Wayne solving mexicos drug problem video stream forever on

        [–]blacwidonsfw 8 points9 points  (1 child)

        My favorite onion article was "girl visits remote African poor village, inspires her to change her Facebook picture forever". So funny. RIP

        [–]StratCat86 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I always liked, "SCOTUS overturns car."

        [–]1KissTheBridesmaid 13 points14 points  (4 children)

        Great post, again exposing how every communication that comes to us has a specific hidden purpose. Often not even very well hidden.

        As for the presidency, a man will have to bend to the female imperative just as much as a woman, perhaps even more so, in an all-out white knighting effort to avoid being perceived as a misogynist.

        In order to get the entire female population on your side, simply provide some female privilege. This will get them ALL on your side, even if there are other issues that could benefit / damage them more.

        The male population is not so easily won over. They are more likely to consider issues impacting their personal life goals, social class etc, the sheep mentality does not work here.

        This is why women will continue to get random illogical privileges, and all of their ‘issues’ will be catered to and used to gain political support. Who happens to be in power is irrelevant. You have to please women to get there in the first place.

        [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

        simply provide some female privilege.

        Tell them there is a wage gap and you will fix it, and they wil come. Tell blacks they are oppressed and you'll fix it, and they will come.

        Create a good, tell them they need it, hold it above their heads, and only give it to them when they vote for you.

        Get them addicted to the drug of welfare - paid for by the value creators. They will come back for more, which keeps power in the party's hands.

        When does it all fall down?

        [–]darkrood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        paid for by the value creators.

        When value creators says fuck it, and vote with their feet.

        [–]1AmlanceJockey 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Only Nixon could go to China and only Hillary could tell the feminists to fuck off.

        [–]Limekill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Perhaps true. From what I've seen women (non college age) sometimes are more aligned to the political party than even men. Men will reason and disagree and possibly change their vote. Women will just hang on to what they know even harder.

        [–]ScottTheEngineer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

        The Onion has been sinking for some time now. Their clickbate "Clickhole" is horrendous.

        [–]faqur 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        The onion just got too big for its breeches. You can't have a counter-culture website going mainstream without losing its niche.

        [–]_fappycamper 30 points31 points  (11 children)

        Hillary will feel the "bern" on March 1

        [–]KidBuu55 18 points19 points  (10 children)

        Exactly, and if not him, Trump is next in line for me. I'm a liberal, not an idiot, I refuse to vote this train wreck.

        [–]nuesuh 9 points10 points  (9 children)

        I'm also split between Trump and Sanders. I like Trumps views on women and Muslims... Other than that, Sanders hits the nail on many subjects.

        [–]darkrood 7 points8 points  (2 children)

        What about when the BLM girls take over his event?

        That whole thing was pretty cringe worthy.

        Heck, even his supporter on the stage signal crowd to be silent for the girls (facepalm).

        It shows that he's surrounded by useless people, or he can't say no to SJW.

        Either is bad as a presidential trait.

        [–]nuesuh 5 points6 points  (1 child)

        I agree. Not a supporter of either candidate, just saying Trump has decent views on women and Muslims, and Sanders does hit the nail on a lot of topics, imo.

        There are no good presidential candidates. Can't remember ever seeing a good candidate for the US presidency.

        [–]darkrood -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        My voting strategy:

        Just don't vote for a sleazeball or a wimp.

        [–]StarDestinyGuy 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        Sanders believes the wage gap myth too, unfortunately

        [–]Darkone06 6 points7 points  (0 children)

        Honestly while he talks about it, he is for worker rights period, to alienate feminist esp when that is Hillarys only winning group would be suicide.

        [–]dxfifa 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        The dilemma of the classic liberal

        [–]nuesuh 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        I guess... 3 years ago i was, very very left wing.

        Now... I guess I'm a fucking liberal. I guess that is the result of rationality.

        [–]dxfifa 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Lots of people on TRP see black and white with left and right. You're either a good, manly, smart conservative or a bad, weak idiotic liberal. A lot of them would actually be traditional liberals.

        [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

        Hillary has proven to be one hell of a Machiavellian (like the vast majority of politicians), but she doesn't seem to get away with it as often as others do.

        [–]Endorsed ContributorTheRedPilsner 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        She's like Cersei Lannister; not nearly as clever or skilled at playing "the game" as she thinks she is.

        [–][deleted]  (14 children)

        [removed]

        [–]pisspoordecisions 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        My dad is a stout republican and is voting for Bernie in the primaries solely because of this, found it pretty amusing

        [–]KimJongUntzUntz 1 point2 points  (11 children)

        The only problem with Bernie is that he will take our second amendment right away...He seems like the only canidate that isnt status quo though...Im torn between having my country ruined, or my second amendment rights ruined...

        [–]americanmook 6 points7 points  (10 children)

        You should probably stop posting and read more. His weak gun rights issue was heavily attacked. Plus it doesn't even fucking matter, they have to amend the Constitution to take guns away.

        [–]T0000009 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        They already confiscate guns, they made it "illegal" to make ammunition, and ...

        Ah fuck it, you kids don't even understand

        [–]KimJongUntzUntz 1 point2 points  (3 children)

        I think posting and talking to people is the best way to learn, especially since reading articles from news sources (like the onion), you dont really know their intent. What do you mean by "his weak gun control stance was heavily attacked?"

        Also I didnt mean he would take all of our second amendment rights away...Just look at Clinton and the Assualt Weapons ban. The constitution was not ammended then, but our gun rights were severly crippled.

        [–]americanmook 0 points1 point  (2 children)

        I personally don't even care about guns. A person's gonna kill me with a handgun just the same as an assault rifle if he wants to.

        [–]KimJongUntzUntz -1 points0 points  (1 child)

        ...or a knife, or a spoon, or a sock filled with bottle caps. The issue is not really self defense or murder rates (to me). I just really like firearms and going shooting with my buddies. Having a president try and take away all my fun toys would really suck.

        [–]darkrood 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        You can always call the police when a burglar comes. (/s)

        [–]Sdom1 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        Amend. The Constitution was ratified hundreds of years ago.

        [–]Limekill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Thank Christ its literally impossible to amend.

        Tips hat a Scalia.

        (Only jurisprudence people would get that joke, because Scalia actually suggested that it should be infinitely easier to amend).

        [–]MrJugsMcBulge 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        ...they have to amend the Constitution to take guns away.

        Nope. All they need is a compliant Supreme Court.

        In 2008, the Supreme Court took up and considered the issue of whether the Second Amendment protected private, individual ownership of guns or whether it only protected ownership of guns by/for state militias. The Court's decision was 5-4 that the Second Amendment protected private, individual gun ownership. Now, that might sound encouraging and like the issue is settled, but keep in mind that the Supreme Court is not above reversing precedent on issues (Brown v. Board of Education being one of the higher-profile examples). And with Scalia's death, there is likely going to be another liberal justice appointed to the Supreme Court (either by Obama or Hillary if the process drags and she wins), so the 5-4 vote that upheld an individual right to bear arms will be a 5-4 vote against the individual right to bear arms next time a similar case comes to the Supreme Court. And if the Supreme Court rules that the Second Amendment does not protect individual ownership of guns, then there's nothing to stop the government from confiscating firearms, no amendment to the Constitution needed.

        [–]wanderer779 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        One might argue that the thing that stops confiscation of guns is the guns themselves. At that point, you have to go to war or it never meant anything anyway.

        [–]nutty_bi 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        What do you know, another Jew...

        [–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (25 children)

        Jews control Hollywood and the media. Not a big shock for those of us who have been societally redpilled.

        [–]Man-with-a-pitchfork 15 points16 points  (8 children)

        You realize that Hillary is not Jewish, while Bernie Sanders is?

        [–]SlowWing 23 points24 points  (2 children)

        Yes, but Hillary is with the Bankers and Bernie isn't.

        [–]mrsmeeseeks 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        She also gets funding from the Saudi family via her foundation, the same family that secretly funnels money to Malaysia, an issue that is causing enormous turmoil in Malaysia right now. Maybe people like /u/Rebirth1337 care to explain to us why he schizophrenically believes the Jews control Hollywood, meanwhile Saudi princes are raping women (and men) in Beverly Hills? I'm really tired of the unnecessary antisemitism, the Jews are some of the most diverse groups and spread out people in the world that is simply part of the nature of humanity right now. Perhaps there is some tribalism, sure, but my God are you not paying attention to current events and corruption among other powerful tribes?

        [–]nutty_bi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        The Jews and Saudis are close allies. It's obvious the Jews run Hebrewood. Just look at a list of owners and CEOs of all the big movie studios. Why do you think movies are so filled with propaganda nowadays? It's all anti-white, feminist bullshit. The Jews want to destroy our culture so we're too weak to fight them.

        [–]nuesuh 11 points12 points  (4 children)

        Jews doesn't care about Sanders. They care about money, which is generated through their buisnesses.

        Getting Shillary elected would be the best thing that could possibly happen to their companies and revenue stream. Sanders would be the worst thing that could happen.

        [–]waynebradysworld -5 points-4 points  (2 children)

        Sanders would be the worst thing for the entire world as we know it. Trump is America's Last Hope.

        [–]nuesuh 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        You sure think highly of Trump.

        Trump has some good views, but it's difficult to be wrong on everything. I'm impressed with his honesty, that's about it.

        [–]waynebradysworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Its not that I think so highly of Trump... Its that I think so little of everyone else. Its like a buffet of turds and trump is a refreshing glass of piss

        [–]sir_wankalot_here 7 points8 points  (10 children)

        Well researched article except for this comment.

        How is this related to TRP? I've submitted a warning in the past about how all men should be concerned about a Hillary Clinton presidency

        If you believe that the President can act on his own, you are naive. Obama vs Bush there isn't much difference in policy except Obama is black.

        It has pretty much been that way since the 1980s. Ronald Reagan for example legalized the most illegal immigrants. The exact number to this say is debated. Initally it was supposed to be only 100K to 200K but it possibly might be more then 2 million.

        [–]redzorp 10 points11 points  (1 child)

        This is true. However the Elite faction behind Hitlery will use her presidency as an excuse to ramp up the feminist agenda ten-fold. Their end goal is to turn all western democracies into societies even more feminist controlled than Sweden.

        As much as I don't trust Trump, his presidency might at least act as a temporary stop-gap against some of the Elite agenda.

        [–]sir_wankalot_here 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        Marx was right on a couple of things. The big one was change won't happen unless the "elites" are forced to change by the people. This does not mean an armed revolution, all that usually happens then is you replace one set of elites with another.

        Ghandhi under the British choose a method where basically he got Indians to opt out. The British would round up all of these Indians who opted out and this them in jail eventually the system started to fall apart.

        So for the last elections, Ron Paul was the only President Candidate who spoke about important things, everytime he tried to talked about them he was silenced.

        The important things are :

        • the massive debt USA has
        • massive amount spent on foreign wars and the US military overseas.
        • the amount of people (men) in jail for BS crimes
        • the amount spent spying in Americans

        [–]its-iceman 7 points8 points  (6 children)

        Look at the number of executive orders Obama used to circumvent the pesky congressional arm of the government.

        The president has an immense amount of power to impose their will.

        [–]HearTheRaven 14 points15 points  (5 children)

        Look at the number of executive orders Obama used to circumvent the pesky congressional arm of the government.

        On a per-year basis, Obama has used fewer executive orders than any president since Grover Cleveland.

        Source

        [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

        This is the problem of being the first Twitter president - people know every single thing you did and assume that to mean it's a lot.

        [–]MrJugsMcBulge 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        The issue is the content of those executive orders, not the quantity. Yes, Obama has used significantly fewer executive orders than many other President, but a number of the ones he has used have been significant over-reaches of executive power or flat-out unconstitutional.

        [–]its-iceman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I think I should have added more context: I'm not shitting on Obama, just using the current president for a frame of reference. Presidents have a shitload of power to do whatever they want without checks and balances.

        [–]sir_wankalot_here 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        You missed my point, how much does it cost to become president ? Where does the money come from ?

        [–]waynebradysworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Obama isn't dumb. He doesn't use executive orders, he uses memorandum. Same exact effect, reported differently. At a higher rate than anyone ever. Stop being fucking nieve

        [–]ktchong 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        October Surprise: The FBI indicts Hillary Clinton.

        [–]tekn0_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I am waiting for this to happen. Its already in the making from what fulford says

        [–]freddymerckx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Yeah, that's just terrible, you sound like you are up in arms. You should see the games and the propaganda brought to us by the Conservative/ Business community. Liars and thieves top to bottom

        [–]wanderer779 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        this has actually been going on forever. Look at what happened to the daily show for example. But I'd argue that things are actually better now because the internet increased the number of competing voices by about 10 million percent.

        [–]Luckyluke23 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        i guess Hillary needs all the help she can get right?

        what that saying, " if you can't join them, buy them"

        [–]insideman83 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        The Onion had been having money troubles for a while now. Its Onion News Network parody and content created under the Onion Digital Studios banner was legendary.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84phU8of02U

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtbSthgYh0U

        Once that stuff went away, it was all downhill.

        [–]wont_tell_i_refuse 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Look at Cracked.com. Going back before this, look at the Daily Show.

        It's all bullshit. Nothing's pure unless you go back to your George Carlins, and even they had a certain political slant. Comedy can be one of the most ideological forms of media.

        [–]GrammerNaziParadox 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Suddenly the recent change in tone of their political articles makes sense.

        [–]howard333 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        The corporate media in the West is highly coordinated. My first experience with that was seeing the push for gun prohibition in the 90's. This is the latest reminder that hits close to home for anyone posting here:

        http://www.returnofkings.com/79858/why-the-media-manufactured-outrage-against-our-meet-up

        [–][deleted]  (9 children)

        [removed]

        [–][deleted]  (6 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]redzorp 6 points7 points  (1 child)

          America is the greatest country to make money in.

          And once you make your money, the smart man gets the hell out. Thailand, Costa Rica, the Philippines, Eastern Europe...you can live like a king in these places if you have some good savings.

          In America over the next 20 years, it wouldn't surprise me at all if you will need to qualify for a license to have heteronormative sex. And even then, it can only be with someone over the new age of consent, which will be set at 30. If you have sex with a female under 30, the male goes to jail while the female gets cash and prizes from the state to compensate for her trauma.

          My plan is to get the hell outta here as soon as I can afford to.

          [–][deleted]  (3 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]its-iceman 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            So where are you going to go?

            [–]waynebradysworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Noone can answer that honestly. While America has its issues, its still better than anywhere else.

            [–]princepeanutbutter 5 points6 points  (1 child)

            Thailand is a military dictatorship

            [–]1Paid_Internet_Troll 7 points8 points  (0 children)

            Thailand is a military dictatorship

            Living in a military dictatorship where the dictator likes you personally, is much preferable to living in a democracy where the elected officials despise you personally.

            Examples: Edward Snowden is enjoying his time in Russia fucking models a lot more than that fucked-up Army private (Chelsea Manning) is enjoying rotting in solitary confinement.

            [–]TheMGhandi 3 points4 points  (1 child)

            Quit acting like voting matters. America has been in control by the elite since it's creation. The federal reserve act just allowed for a private company to independently print all the money to create more debt and charge interest to the american people.

            Every 20 years/generation a revolution would happen. The fact that women revolted in the 60s-70s is proof men have been emasculated for awhile.

            Edit: the masculine men all died off in WWI and WWII or were incapable of being in a relationship for various reasons (eg. Torn limbs).

            [–]AlphaAccountant 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            For American men, it is time to start thinking about what it might be like to live in an increasingly feminist environment.

            Or to think about moving. Things are only going to get worse before they get better.

            Maybe eventually we can make America great again. You can't stump the Trump.

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            With the media behind her, there's a good chance that she'll clinch the presidency

            I LOL'd so hard at this part.

            [–]Scizzler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            The world suddenly held its breath over the potential downfall? Of the onion? Lmfao, nah, not a single person did that.

            [–]smallkoopatroopa 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            should be illegal for jewish people to own media

            [–]Gbcue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            The onion has been long dead due to its anti gun agenda.

            [–]Lo-G 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            What the fuck does this have to do with TRP...

            [–]PaulMurrayCbr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            “Margolis added that Clinton was too much a part of the establishment she spent decades breaking down barriers to enter.”

            Would have been funnier if 'Margolis' had mentioned that she used to fuck the president. But that might be a little close to the bone, eh?

            [–]99919 -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

            Remember that the landmark Citizens United case was about whether a group of people had the right to make videos mocking Hillary Clinton. The Supreme Court ruled that they did, and Democrats are treating that decision like it is the undoing of our nation.

            [–]Limekill 1 point2 points  (4 children)

            No - Citizens United was was NOT about a "group of individuals". It was about electioneering campaigning via Non Individuals - i.e. Corporations, Trade Unions, etc. This had been banned, but was found to be unconstitutional. It was bought not because of the videos made (protected by 1st Amendment anyway) but they were funded within the 60 day prohibition window that previously applied to corporations.

            The real problem was that Citizens United green-lighted Speechnow.org case (9-0) which held that there was no restriction on contributions to Super-PACs from corporations.

            Of course you might not find anything wrong corporate influence in politics, and found it disgusting that there was rules against it in the first place, in which case I guess your claim "whether a group of people had the right to make videos mocking Hillary Clinton" is accurate and your not completing misreading the whole case.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

            [–]99919 0 points1 point  (3 children)

            It sounds like we disagree on first principles. I'm defining a corporation as a "group of individuals who have agreed to work together towards a common goal, and formed legal entity to do so." If you disagree with that description, we should talk about that first.

            Also, you can't prevent rich people and corporations from influencing politics as long as you have carved out an exception for "media corporations." Look at Comcast-NBCUniversal, which is controlled by the billionaire Roberts family, or The New York Times, which is controlled by the billionaire Sulzberger family, or 21st Century Fox, which is controlled by the billionaire Murdoch family, or the Washington Post, which is controlled by the billionaire Jeff Bezos, or even Viacom, which is controlled by billionaire Summer Redstone. These corporations are completely free to engage in electioneering at any point in the election cycle.

            When you see Rachel Maddow, or Thomas Friedman, or Sean Hannity, or George Will, or Jon Stewart (now Trevor Noah) providing explicitly political statements, satire, and opinions in the days before an election, remember that these billionaire-controlled corporations are exercising their First Amendment rights to endorse candidates and political positions, and trying to influence elections. Why shouldn't all corporations (groups of people) have the same right?

            load more comments (4 replies)