NPC.

Never even heard of this individual prior to this thread.

After reading her bio she appears to be very talented........and a suicide in the making.

Like what we see with most celebs and leftist media personalities, this is just pure narcissism expressed through shallow elitist moralism. And their mindless, adoring minions lap it up.

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

---

No, you absolutely DON'T need more than 5 seconds to realize that what Jesus stood for and what progressives stand for are diametrically opposed. At least intelligent people don't. You did spend more than 5 seconds on thinking, but unfortunately it was faulty thinking, which is what "childish ignorance" is based on.

Robert Wilson said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

---

No, you absolutely DON'T need more than 5 seconds to realize that what Jesus stood for and what progressives stand for are diametrically opposed. At least intelligent people don't. You did spend more than 5 seconds on thinking, but unfortunately it was faulty thinking, which is what "childish ignorance" is based on.

---

Now y'all are just arguing about what the word "progressive" means.

---

That's kind of the point. The left has to equivocate in order to argue that progressive beliefs are "Christian". They're only fooling themselves.

historian said:

---

Here's an amusing take on Billie Ellis's demonstrating incredible stupidity at the Grammy's:

https://notthebee.com/article/billie-eilish-just-did-one-of-the-bravest-things-youll-ever-see

It's also a lot her illustration of why I don't waste my time watching any of these awards shows which are nothing but elitists stroking each others' egos.

---

I am pretty sure they are stroking more than egos backstage.

More on Billie:

https://notthebee.com/article/native-tribe-confirms-billie-eilishs-home-sits-on-their-ancestral-land

AWFUL

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

---

No, you absolutely DON'T need more than 5 seconds to realize that what Jesus stood for and what progressives stand for are diametrically opposed. At least intelligent people don't. You did spend more than 5 seconds on thinking, but unfortunately it was faulty thinking, which is what "childish ignorance" is based on.

---

Before we go ham intentionally misunderstanding each other, I am using the term progressive, not modern American progressive. Does that help you understand?

She wasn't even particularly good in her delivery.
Came off as totally performative, and not even convincing.
Like a robot spouting words and then, pause, wait for the obligatory applause and hooting and hollering. Okay, now go. Hmm, what else to say off the cuff. Oh yeah, throw out an expletive against ICE. Cue the walk off stage.
What a ditz. And a contrived one at that.

At least the dude performing at the Super Bowl, you sense, probably believes what he spouts.
Even though his saying he won't be performing in the USA anymore, while shortly afterwards being announced as the "headliner" at what is probably the most Americana of American things outside of the World Series, is pretty humorous.

I guess that might suggest which side of the bread he puts his butter on.

A lot of people can be drawn away (bought?) from their own words and "stands" for a few bucks. Maybe those bucks don't come from the NFL directly, but you know it will come to him because of the exposure.

Now maybe he's donating that money to help the poor. Maybe that's what happens.

If he gives the majority of his wealth over to the underprivileged, and she gives her house over to the Tongva, I'll cut them some slack. Until then they can move some of the illegal criminals into their homes. That would make for a nice gesture in the interim.

I feel sorry for her on some level. She has souless SSRI eyes and she was probably bad touched as an underage girl by some record exec. I saw some interview where she said she was exposed to porn at 12 and became addicted to it

TrojanMoondoggie said:

---

She wasn't even particularly good in her delivery.
Came off as totally performative, and not even convincing.
Like a robot spouting words and then, pause, wait for the obligatory applause and hooting and hollering. Okay, now go. Hmm, what else to say off the cuff. Oh yeah, throw out an expletive against ICE. Cue the walk off stage.
What a ditz. And a contrived one at that.

At least the dude performing at the Super Bowl, you sense, probably believes what he spouts.
Even though his saying he won't be performing in the USA anymore, while shortly afterwards being announced as the "headliner" at what is probably the most Americana of American things outside of the World Series, is pretty humorous.

I guess that might suggest which side of the bread he puts his butter on.

A lot of people can be drawn away (bought?) from their own words and "stands" for a few bucks. Maybe those bucks don't come from the NFL directly, but you know it will come to him because of the exposure.

Now maybe he's donating that money to help the poor. Maybe that's what happens.

If he gives the majority of his wealth over to the underprivileged, and she gives her house over to the Tongva, I'll cut them some slack. Until then they can move some of the illegal criminals into their homes. That would make for a nice gesture in the interim.

---

Apparently she might sell her $12m property to the tribe for $1m. According to a post i saw.

She has enough money that it just doesn't matter to her.

And yes she is a vapid shell of a person, but I don't blame her. It's the same with all celebs. Society actually worships them, talks non-stop about every little outfit they wear while getting coffee... we make people like this by mindlessly consuming their mindless music. She has a certain sound, a take, and it hit gold with the populace. Why would she need to be any more intelligent than she is? She has more fans than any rocket scientist. She is giving the people what they want. Probably by accident.

KaiBear said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Everyone hates stupid white liberal womenz.

---

True

Even other stupid liberal white women.

---

https://expression.fire.org/p/male-students-show-more-tolerance

Porteroso said:

---

TrojanMoondoggie said:

---

She wasn't even particularly good in her delivery.
Came off as totally performative, and not even convincing.
Like a robot spouting words and then, pause, wait for the obligatory applause and hooting and hollering. Okay, now go. Hmm, what else to say off the cuff. Oh yeah, throw out an expletive against ICE. Cue the walk off stage.
What a ditz. And a contrived one at that.

At least the dude performing at the Super Bowl, you sense, probably believes what he spouts.
Even though his saying he won't be performing in the USA anymore, while shortly afterwards being announced as the "headliner" at what is probably the most Americana of American things outside of the World Series, is pretty humorous.

I guess that might suggest which side of the bread he puts his butter on.

A lot of people can be drawn away (bought?) from their own words and "stands" for a few bucks. Maybe those bucks don't come from the NFL directly, but you know it will come to him because of the exposure.

Now maybe he's donating that money to help the poor. Maybe that's what happens.

If he gives the majority of his wealth over to the underprivileged, and she gives her house over to the Tongva, I'll cut them some slack. Until then they can move some of the illegal criminals into their homes. That would make for a nice gesture in the interim.

---

Apparently she might sell her $12m property to the tribe for $1m. According to a post i saw.

She has enough money that it just doesn't matter to her.

---

Ha. I hope it plays out so that I can see what's she going to do about her next house, which under her evaluation will inevitably also be on stolen land. Figure out who to give that one to and just keep moving?

Robert Wilson said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

TrojanMoondoggie said:

---

She wasn't even particularly good in her delivery.
Came off as totally performative, and not even convincing.
Like a robot spouting words and then, pause, wait for the obligatory applause and hooting and hollering. Okay, now go. Hmm, what else to say off the cuff. Oh yeah, throw out an expletive against ICE. Cue the walk off stage.
What a ditz. And a contrived one at that.

At least the dude performing at the Super Bowl, you sense, probably believes what he spouts.
Even though his saying he won't be performing in the USA anymore, while shortly afterwards being announced as the "headliner" at what is probably the most Americana of American things outside of the World Series, is pretty humorous.

I guess that might suggest which side of the bread he puts his butter on.

A lot of people can be drawn away (bought?) from their own words and "stands" for a few bucks. Maybe those bucks don't come from the NFL directly, but you know it will come to him because of the exposure.

Now maybe he's donating that money to help the poor. Maybe that's what happens.

If he gives the majority of his wealth over to the underprivileged, and she gives her house over to the Tongva, I'll cut them some slack. Until then they can move some of the illegal criminals into their homes. That would make for a nice gesture in the interim.

---

Apparently she might sell her $12m property to the tribe for $1m. According to a post i saw.

She has enough money that it just doesn't matter to her.

---

Ha. I hope it plays out so that I can see what's she going to do about her next house, which under her evaluation will inevitably also be on stolen land? Figure out who to give that one to and just keep moving?

---

Maybe so. Beats me.

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

---

"Any definition" is a bit far, I think, given that movement's current fadish devotion to all things identity and sexual.. I'll absolutely agree with "a radical."

Didn't tribes conquer other tribes? So who is the true owner of a given section of land?

In a vacuum this **** sounds sooo good, but very unpractical

Bruisers Burner Phone said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

---

"Any definition" is a bit far, I think, given that movement's current fadish devotion to all things identity and sexual.. I'll absolutely agree with "a radical."

---

I don't think what you mentioned is in any real dictionary. But yes I should have said any dictionary definition.

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

It's just childish ignorance. Many things sound profound when you first think about them, then become less profound if the length of thinking can pass about 5 seconds.

---

Like when someone says that Jesus was "a progressive"?

---

This is the opposite, because you would need many more than 5 seconds to understand Roman culture, and to understand why what Jesus asked of his followers was so progressive and profound. From refusing to participate in the local economy, to telling a major religion he was its rightful king, to rewriting the major rules of society, he was a radical, a progressive by any definition of the word.

---

No, you absolutely DON'T need more than 5 seconds to realize that what Jesus stood for and what progressives stand for are diametrically opposed. At least intelligent people don't. You did spend more than 5 seconds on thinking, but unfortunately it was faulty thinking, which is what "childish ignorance" is based on.

---

Before we go ham intentionally misunderstanding each other, I am using the term progressive, not modern American progressive. Does that help you understand?

---

I already understand that progress is movement toward any destination.

Including decay, degradation, deterioration, decadence, demolition, destruction, death, etc.

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Didn't tribes conquer other tribes? So who is the true owner of a given section of land?

In a vacuum this **** sounds sooo good, but very unpractical

---

And there are those who believe that even the Native Americans here in the USA came over the land bridge of Beringia.
So yes, if you subscribe to that theory, they might have been the first to arrive here, but they aren't necessarily from here originally either.
But when it comes to land here in Southern California, it wasn't stolen from Mexico per se. Did Mexico "sell" the land voluntarily? No. It was ceded after the Mexican-American War. But there was compensation.
Whereas some tribe fought other tribes over land and resources; one country fought another over land as well.
Take it for what you will.