evil politicians


Mitch McConnell, the most evil American politician of the past 100 years, is fast-tracking a Senate vote to repeal the ACA and pass the horrific Trumpcare which will eliminate most affordable healthcare for the poor and middle class, effectively end laws stopping insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing medical conditions, massively cut Medicaid and Medicare, and leave an estimated 30 million Americans without healthcare, condemning millions to death. McConnell is doing this without allowing debate or public knowledge of what is even in the bill - actually Senate Republicans themselves HAVE NO IDEA what is going to be in the bill, because they haven’t even had time to properly study and amend the monstrous, evil mess the House Republicans passed. 


The Republicans are once again trying to quickly bypass all usual methods of governing because they know how incredibly unpopular their agenda is. These people are pure evil, and we must do everything we can to stop them. CALL YOUR SENATOR TODAY!!!

  • Person A: So, why don’t you like Hillary Clinton?
  • Person B [a white woman]: She’s evil.
  • Person A: Really?
  • Person B: Well, my friend, who’s psychic, looked at her aura, and she’s definitely evil.
  • submitted by @judgmentalfairy

remember when that comically evil politician in florida said “solar sells”? environmentalism is a game of profit under capitalism.

people like al gore and leonardo dicaprio won’t save us.

There are more evil politicians in movies than there are lower back tattoos at a Saliva concert. And yet none of them ever seem to be the president. Seriously, every movie with a shady politician somehow manages to limit their offices to senators and congressmen, with the occasional CIA director thrown in to keep things spicy. Operation Treadstone is always created and run without the president’s knowledge or involvement.

Movies like Iron Man 3, X-Men, the Star Wars prequels, Bob Roberts, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, The American President, and others revolve primarily around conspiratorial senators, vice presidents, and the like abusing their power. But why? Wouldn’t it make more sense to have an evil president? After all, isn’t that a scarier proposition?

Bang Moms, But NOT Dads: 5 Weird Lessons From Movies

anonymous asked:

Okay since you're so pro net neutrality, how do you explain the fact 63 million Americans voted AGAINST net neutrality back in November? Why do you and others keep pushing the Evil politicians working for Internet Providers narrative upfront while ignoring this fact? You had construction workers, plumbers, teachers, students, average joes voting against NN. Could it be they live in areas with no broadband and or can't afford high speed internet? Perhaps jobs outweighed 21st century commerce?

Listen Comcast I’m gonna need you to get out of my inbox

Every child is born good. No child is born as Ronald Reagan, or Adolf Hitler, or Joseph Stalin—but what happens? These people have tried… Adolf Hitler first wanted to be a painter. No school of painting accepted him, because he was not a great painter. But my understanding is, if he wanted to be a painter… he may have been amateurish in the beginning. If the chance was given he may not have become a genius, a Picasso, but he would have become at least a good painter—and the Second World War would have been avoided, six million people would not have been killed. When rejected from the schools of painting he started thinking of becoming an architect, and was again refused.

It seems we accept only flowers, not seeds. Our insight is so shallow that we cannot see the flower in the seed—and every educational system is criminal in this sense. They want you to come as a flower, fully grown, fragrant; then you will be accepted. But why should a flower come to you? It is the seed who is tortured inside, wants to grow, have green foliage, wants to dance in the sun, wants to grow flowers—just give him the opportunity. And don’t ask that every flower has to be a roseflower. What about the marigold? There is no way for the marigold to be a rose, it can only be a marigold. A right educational system—an educational system which is wise—will not impose standards on people but rather find ways how a certain person can grow into his own potentiality.

If Adolf Hitler wanted to be an architect, what was wrong in it? At the most he may not have created great Taj Mahals, but I don’t think that he would have not have been able to make your apartments, high-rise buildings… they don’t need much intelligence. Absolutely idiotic constructors are making all kinds of things—they have made humanity live in boxes. What harm could Adolf Hitler have done? But rejected from there, this continuous rejection… And all Adolf Hitler’s efforts were for creativity. He wanted to be a painter or an architect; both are creative dimensions. He may not have gone very far, but what was wrong? Everybody does not want to create a Taj Mahal, and everybody cannot afford a Taj Mahal. There are people who need mediocre architects, because they can only afford mediocre architects and their mediocre designs. But continuous rejection from everywhere was like a wound—and it was these wounds that turned him into a politician.

The profession of the politician is the only profession where no qualification is needed. It is strange: they have all the power, power over millions of peoples’ life and death—but no qualification is needed. But if you want to be a painter, qualifications are needed; if you want to be an architect, talents are needed. But if you want to become an Adolf Hitler, no qualification is needed.

And he took… In my view, the Second World War was nothing but a revenge against the humanity that had rejected the man, humiliated the man, his creativity, his longing to make something beautiful. The Second World War was a revenge with vengeance.

If you don’t allow creativity, it is bound to become destructiveness. If you don’t love, you are bound to hate. If you don’t allow your good to grow, you are bound to fall into the darkness of evil.

—  Osho

anonymous asked:

Okay, but why is Northern Independence apparently a central plotline? I'd like it if it happened, but in the end, the common folk still toil away in service to a King, and armies still march to death for a King--just a Wolf instead of a Lion or Dragon. I'd say the central plotline of GOT is that none of that matters anymore, that Winter is Coming and Lords and Kings and titles and the whole damn feudal system have no importance beyond what men give them. I certainly think that's GRRM's point.

Hi friend! I don’t know where you live, but I’m a Canadian. We have an incredibly stable system of government which is called a constitutional monarchy. Technically we still have a queen. The best way to get rid of the feudal system is not through violent revolution but through gradual shifts in economic and political systems. Shifting income inequality, establishing a constitution, creating some sort of parliament, etc. are all parts of this progressive switch. Fuedalism —-> Democracy doesn’t work. Fuedalism —-> Primitive Democracy does. You know what a key part to establishing a democracy is? Independence and sovereignty. Getting rid of the system you have entirely leads to a power vacuum. The kind of power vacuum Littlefinger jerks off to as he tries to fall asleep at night.

And actually, the North is probably your best bet for that. Primitive democracies were basically a House of Lords to check power on a potentially absolutist King. Eventually a House of Commons is introduced. Given that Robb and Jon were proclaimed King by their bannermen, they are different from our other rulers. Jon Snow, who is reluctant to use his power except to save his people, is more likely to allow a diffusion of power than anyone else still living. If you want a democracy, I’d go with Northern independence.

Keep reading

S: Hmm.  Well at first I thought he was gonna be a typical ‘evil politician’ type character, but he didn’t react unreasonably to getting hosed, especially since he is wearing a suit.  So I’m guessing he’ll lean toward the ‘bumbling but goodhearted’ politician instead?  

L: Any other thoughts on Mayor Dewey?

S: He’s very pink. Likely because he’s not getting enough oxygen due to that disturbingly tight collar.

What I love about House of Cards is that it unabashedly shows how evil Frank is, how ruthless Claire is, and how self-serving and corrupt most of the politicians in the Capitol are. So many of these political shows portray their main characters as “heroic”, but this show doesn’t. Every politician is a fucking asshole on this show, Democrat or Republican. And that’s phenomenal. Depicting the true evil and selfishness within, stripped back to deconstruct each move and strategic play to reveal how truly corrupt all American politicians are, how rotten the office of the executive itself is. 

Frank is a Democrat, but he’s still written as incredibly evil. That’s why his political party doesn’t matter - because Democrat or Republican, he’d be self-serving and disingenuous either way. He hurt people with his education bill, he wants to gut entitlements with his America Works program, he thinks drone strikes are acceptable versions of “justice”. I just finished watching the episode in which the brown man who was severely injured by a US-sanctioned drone strike refuses to forgive Frank, and tells him that he hopes he has difficulty getting sleep at night. I loved that scene. It was so vindicating. Frank deserves to squirm and more importantly, the “victim forgives their oppressor” trope is so fucking hurtful and overrated. I loved that he told Frank “knowing some lines from the Qu’ran won’t change anything” and “you didn’t ask me to come so that you could apologize, but so that I’d forgive you”). 

This show is so brilliant and so raw and to the point. How politicians stifle freedom of press, how they collude with corporate interests, how they destroy average citizens, how they funnel dirty money through their campaigns, how every move is calculated for their gains and their gains only. Exposing the evil of the American empire! If I was going to a love a show of this nature, one with a white male protagonist and mostly white characters, it obviously has to be one that showcases these people in power as the selfish, corrupt, ruthless, and evil fucks that they are. And the writers don’t shy away from making the evil believable either - no heroism, no apologetic rhetoric, no euphemisms, no backtracking, no grandstanding. Frank is evil, Claire is cruel, and the rest of them are vapid or selfish or both. 

Essentially, while they try to portray the Hill and Oval Office as far sexier than they are, they strip the flesh back to reveal the bones beneath. They aren’t glorifying the Office at all. In fact, quite the opposite. I’m surprised that the show is so popular! People may think that it’s far-fetched for Frank and Claire to be this evil, but this is how politicians truly are. They’re either ignorantly selfish like Garret Walker and Donald Blythe, or they’re cruel and clever and dangerous like Frank, and Claire, and Remy, and Jackie, and Doug, and Seth. Only the bravest people even attempt to take them down (Zoe, Janine, Lucas, Rachel, Ayla, and even Heather Dunbar though Heather goes from being solicitor general to a Democratic presidential candidate so I guess she’s a politician too). 

This is why House of Cards beats West Wing and Veep out of the park. I don’t want to see a president that’s friendly and buddy-buddy and kind, because it detracts from the imperial evil and bloodshed inherent in their office. I want to see the president as a metaphor for evil because he IS evil, because all American politicians are evil, because the empire itself is evil.