Friday, April 11, 2014

Friday Spotlight: Finny



Finny is a woman who loves old movies, is really angry about how liberals cheated George HW Bush, and doesn't like feminism.

She also seems to think most of America is conservative, but for all the voter fraud. She's pretty into righteousness, but not in the usual Freeper hivemind way. Instead, she spends most of her time these days arguing with other Freepers that their vote for Romney made them liberals. With lots of italics, some CAPS, and using their screenname a lot. So yeah, she's a pretty special kind of asshole. Just read her profile.


Another Freeper women that thinks men are better.
I hate to say it, but we've become a country of timid, traumatized men, and who's damned fault is that? Grrrrrrrrr. The government (of course), the Left, and women. No Fault Divorce, where women overwhelmingly have gotten the spoils of parental authority for the past two generations, has done more to rape boys and men in America than anything, and it was powered and enabled by the left and government. The boy sees his father an emasculated slave, and wonders what he has to look forward to as a dad himself.

I'd rather vote for men. I'm almost a misogynist, though I'm a woman. I love Thatcher, I love Palin. I'd vote for both. But on balance, I prefer men. It saddens me to see that in America today, THE WOMEN are the ones carrying the Limited Government Conservative banner so high -- where the hell are the guys? But I know they're there, I'm just bitching.

Hey, I'm female.
Liberals are just a cheating minority.
Liberals have to cheat to win because the majority of legitimate American voters REJECT THEM.

WE are the majority; the fact that liberals have to cheat to win tells us so. The MSM and popular entertainment culture only make it appear that there are more liberals than there actually are, and WAY TOO MANY of us (including me) have bought it so thorougly that we've been conditioned to accept fraudulent liberal election "victories" as genuine.

It finally started to dawn on me just how MUCH most of Regular Joe and Jane Americans reject liberalism when I started to read the reader comments on non-conservative news sites like Yahoo News and the L.A. Times. It's a real eye-opener, in a good way.
NO need for evidence - Veganism is child abuse
Parents who encourage or force their kids to go vegan: that is CHILD ABUSE. Vegegarian is one thing. Kids can thrive. Vegan is a whole 'nother ballgame. Those poor little things have gray circles under their eyes. They're wan. Often listless. I want to slap those parents.

I want to send them to an island where everybody gets a pony. And leave them there. That's what they want in how they eat -- to not have to be "mean" to animals by eating meat and dairy -- and they will throw temper tantrums to have their pony, at the expense of their own children. Stupid, silly, self-absorbed morons. Nutrituion is like gravity. You don't get to choose.
Obama is assassinating novelists who disagree with him
Vince Flynn...now Tom Clancy...

and Breitbart etc, etc.

not necessarily a conspiracy theorist but.....


Don’t forget Michal Crichton. His book “State of Fear” was RIGHT ON THE MONEY. Having re-read it, I am seriously thinking that the man was assassinated.
But weirdly sane about illegal immigration?
you live in Virginia. I live in California and always have, with lots and lots of lovely Mexicans, for almost 57 years. I've worked side-by-side with many illegals; I have even helped hide one from the INS. WHY? Because he was a better co-worker, more honest, and a hell of a lot more industrious, than the lop-headed entitlement-minded "legal" teenager who would have taken his place.

Your use of the word Gestapo is particularly offensive. WRONG. It is particularly accurate. Like I say, I live and work here in the middle of it. You in Virginia can pretend that Gestapo-type tactics wouldn't result and cry about "emotion laden pejoratives"; from Ivory Towers, it looks just that way, but here on the front lines, we know that firebrand is right.

No one is advocating rounding up the illegals and putting them on rail cars ... It sure sounds that way to me, and in that, I'll admit I may be misjudging you. I sure as hell HOPE that no one is advocating "rounding up the illegals." If they are, I invite THEM to come do it themselves and leave me out of it.


Excerpts from her purism manifesto
It's very simple. That you think it's smug or arrogant is beyond me. It's simple. It's like putting a foot on a gas pedal, or taking it off the gas pedal. It is a FUNCTION. When you vote FOR politicians who work to advance government instrusion, and Romney did that DRASTICALLY in every aspect of life, from using government to force people to accept open homosexuality and promote it to their grade school kids via Gay Youth Pride, to funding abortion to writing the original Obamacare, to stating publicly that he thinks the "carbon" problem needs a world-wide solution, not an American one --

Gas pedal. Push, function, go. Vote for Romney or Schwarzenegger or Meg Whitman or Mitch McConnell or McCain or way too many "Republicans", and you get all the things you just FUNCTIONALLY voted for.

Voting FOR liberalism on the pretense of voting "against" it, is guaranteed to fail. Voting "against" is as imaginary as "purists." In asking me to accept Romney on the LIE that I only had to compromise 20 percent, the entire rationale that you uphold and promote, in your informed and thoughtful posts, indeed -- the SIMPLE truth is that it's getting to the point where there is very little or no compromise at all. Nobody asked or expected me to compromise with Romney. They asked me to abandon my principles so entirely as to vote for an agent with a lifelong political career of acting AGAINST them! SIMPLE TRUTH, if one is honestly informed as to Romney's real record.

And people like you have the gall to call me a "purist" and attribute my motives to want to be noble. Smug? Arrogant? *rolls eyes* Do you even know the meaning of the word "purist"?????

I don't know how old you are or how long you've been voting. I've been voting straight Republican for more than 35 years. Romney was the bridge too far, the eye opener, the wake up call as to the futility. Your "puristst" are unicorns, truly, they are Bigfoot.

And when voters hold their nose in the voting booth -- as all did in this past election -- be assured that America is going to get exceedingly stinky leadership.

Your vote is FUNCTIONAL. I understand now what I didn't understand eight, 10, 20 years ago and which you don't fundamentally grasp now, either. When I voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger, I was a functional liberal. When I voted for Meg Whitman, I was a functional liberal. When you voted for Mitt Romney, you were a functional liberal.

Voting for functional liberals when you're a Republican is STUPID. Always.
Liberals all over Freep!
You are a functional liberal, pal. PERIOD. You may be registered as a Republican, you may agree with conservative values, but you ARE a functional LIBERAL.

Period.
So pissed off about car pool lanes:
Can you imagine the Westward Expansion today?

Dead in its tracks. Government screws things up six ways to Sunday, invariably, from education to daily commutes!

It ain't rocket science. So Cons should see that about 95 percent of social issues that bug conservatives today, were and are enabled solely by government, not to mention all other manifestations of stupid crap like *%^#!!! car pool lanes in So Cal that are just plain lunacy, reducing functional ability by 10 to 30 percent. The ONLY reason they're there is because of government. PERIOD. The state takes federal money to keep the infrastructure, but a condition of getting it is to build *^&%*@#!!! car pool lanes and all the special off-ramps and bridges and special exists and gazillion dollar *^&#!! horsesh*t it entails ...

In every way -- The government needs to shut up and butt out.

Where can I vote for that?
Angry Freeper bert? Another liberal.
Okay, Bert, let's see if you "cop out" on answering this simple question. When you voted "against" Obama, what were you voting FOR? You will cop out and tell me what you were voting against. You will refuse to admit that you voted FOR an overt agent of everything morality and political conservatism stands against.

On the contrary, bert, voting for a pro-abortion-for-minors (you can look it up if you don't believe me), pro-homosexual, pro-global warming, pro-gun control, pro government micro-managed and controlled health care, pro activist judges "Republican" was the real cop out.

Hey, BERT??? And everybody else here who voted for Romney and would do so again in 2016 -- had the bastard won and was now implementing all the amoral tyranny he has advocated and advanced for his ENTIRE political career, who among you would be ACCOUNTABLE for what you voted FOR?

Voting "against" is like voting for the tooth fairy. WAKE UP. Stop letting emotions (namely pure blind fear) dictate your political choices and START THINKING ABOUT THE MATH.

In any election, any where, any time, a thousand years ago or a thousand years from now, in ANY ELECTION, you only get to vote FOR. Those who think they can vote "against" are like those who think they can have ice cream hot.
But lets not get emotional now:
I absolutely would have voted for Hillary I do not believe SHE IS HELL BENT on destroying our country! .... There is a HUGE difference in a liberal and a MARXIST!!!

Pure hysteria, pure panic, pure emotion, zero thinking. So here we have it -- a REPUBLICAN who'd have voted FOR Hillary Clinton because it would have been voting "against" a Marxist Muslim.

22 comments:

  1. ...Just read her profile.
    Wow, Finny. Singing "loudly and nasally" in contempt of your teacher's ideals. You sure burned him. I would hate see your extremism in a crowded movie theater showing a movie that conflicted with your "uncool" Republican ideals. Perhaps you would talk loudly while talking on your cell phone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Freepers seem to have reached the high point of their lives in elementary school. Check out the April Fools threads for tons of totally awesome and completely true stories from caveman days when Freepers were little kids.

      Delete
  2. One of the anons here and I came up with the word "FReepyPasta." Finny seems like one that would write a lot of FReepyPasta

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, definitely.
      Like most freepers, her "conservative activism" ends as soon as she gets up from her computer screen.
      All the rest is just make-pretend and fantasy.

      Delete
  3. From the other day I said this: "Which party is it that wants to regulate the fatty foods you can or cannot eat?"..referring to democrats

    and lib anonymousBApril 9, 2014 at 9:53 PM said this:

    "Suggesting alternatives and providing labeling information is not the same thing as "regulating." Please look up "regulating" in the dictionary, and feel free to stuff your fat face - nobody cares."



    Well look here lol.. USDA bans junk for from schools effective July 1st..

    http://fox59.com/2014/04/10/hello-fruits-and-vegetables-junk-food-banned-from-schools-july-1/#axzz2ybT39UVS

    I swear you libs are brain dead idiots or just want to play devils advocate..I could also destroy anonb's other arguments but seriously what is the point?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Smoking is banned in elementary schools too !!!!!!!!!!!
      What tyranny !!!!!!!!!!!!

      But of course, "junk food" would also include cake, which we all know is one of your bug-a-boos.

      Delete
    2. Is that the best you have? Weak.

      Delete
    3. More than good enough to bitch slap you down, cake boy! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

      Delete
    4. Even a weaker response..gonna be in Chink land pretty soon.

      Delete
    5. anon1, you act like they're banning it for adults. We regulate every aspect of children's lives, for their own good. You are supposed to know better. It's really strange that someone would make serving up junk food to school-age children instead of nutritious food their cause, but hey, if you want to die on that hill, it wouldn't surprise me.

      Delete
    6. Oh, and by the way, the guys who attacked and beat the driver in Detroit HAVE been apprehended, denounced, and charged with hate crimes. So suck it.

      Delete
    7. "It's really strange that someone would make serving up junk food to school-age children instead of nutritious food their cause, but hey, if you want to die on that hill, it wouldn't surprise me."
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      I'm ancient and we had junk food back in our schools probably before you were born. The gov't is out of control..and equating smokes with a snickers bar..typical lib move.

      Delete
    8. Just goes to show how much of a liar you are, anon1.
      If you were really that "ancient", you would have been in school BEFORE the advent of the vending machines in school cafeterias ...placed there by marketing geniuses from Coke and Pepsi and Frito-Lay.
      In fact, if you are so "ancient", you'd remember when kids WERE allowed to smoke in school in designated areas.

      Get back to the Cluck Bucket, anon1.
      I'm sure the wrinkle bag crowd down there enjoy your tall tales, ha ha ha ha ha.

      Delete
    9. So you're saying that because schools are not allowed to serve unhealthy food to our children, that's evidence that government is regulating all food for everyone? What's to stop a parent from packing Powdered Donut Pancake Surprise in their child's lunchbox? Free clue, dumbass, the schools are, and always have been, run by the government! I know, it's a shock, right? What business does the government have in regulating a service the government provides? Please, get a clue and stop embarrassing yourself here. The only thing you've ever bitch-slapped here is your own credibility (a difficult thing to do for something so tiny).

      Delete
    10. I'm not even much of a liberal but i'm 100% pro-banning junk food in school cafeterias.

      Once you're an adult you can make decisions for yourself but while you're a kid the government should protect you from taking harmful substance.

      It's the same as banning alcohol and cigarettes to kids

      Delete
  4. She might be on to something with the carpool lane thing here in Southern CA. I've often wondered if they actually help with traffic, especially when they also function as the shoulder on some of the freeways. Of course, I don't get all spittle angry about it like she did. If I really cared about the issue, I'm sure they are some wonderful studies done by traffic engineers that would be enlightening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Didn't Chris Christie just complete a traffic study?

      Delete
  5. "It finally started to dawn on me just how MUCH most of Regular Joe and Jane Americans reject liberalism when I started to read the reader comments on non-conservative news sites like Yahoo News and the L.A. Times. It's a real eye-opener, in a good way."

    Hilarious. Actual LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL squared.

      Delete
    2. I wish I could LOL because my brain just melted

      Delete
  6. Can you imagine the Westward Expansion today?

    You mean when the federal government was giving away free land?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And it was not theirs to give.

      Delete