• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

AP News: "Let's go, Brandon" is really code for "**** Joe Biden"

I just recently saw a post commenting on Trump's new nickname "Big 'T'", morphing that into "Big T**s", and then using the phrase
"Let's go, Bra Don!"
 
plague311 said:
So he says he doesn't want to be associated with the phrase but now wants the acronym painted on his car? Seems legit.
Click to expand...

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. There's plenty of stuff I'd rather not be involved in, that I go along with anyway because it's still the lesser of two evils. If advertising pays my bills, and an advertiser is willing to pay me good money to put up with something I'd otherwise prefer to avoid, I'm gonna give their offer serious consideration.

I'd prefer not to have to work for a living, but if the price is right...
 
theprestige said:
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. There's plenty of stuff I'd rather not be involved in, that I go along with anyway because it's still the lesser of two evils. If advertising pays my bills, and an advertiser is willing to pay me good money to put up with something I'd otherwise prefer to avoid, I'm gonna give their offer serious consideration.

I'd prefer not to have to work for a living, but if the price is right...
Click to expand...

If being a hypocritical douche makes no difference to him then I say he should go for it. That money compromises morals and values isn't anything new, that's for sure.
 
plague311 said:
If being a hypocritical douche makes no difference to him then I say he should go for it. That money compromises morals and values isn't anything new, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Begging the question that this is a moral issue for him, rather than just one of personal preference.

And like I said, there's nothing inherently hypocritical or ethically compromising about doing stuff for money that you would otherwise rather not do.

Of course I will change my opinion if it turns out he really did say something like publicly insulting the president is morally wrong and he wants no part of it. But nobody in this thread thinks publicly insulting the president is morally wrong, and I doubt he does, either.
 
theprestige said:
Begging the question that this is a moral issue for him, rather than just one of personal preference.
Click to expand...

If that's how you view it, then that's how you view it. To me if I were to say, "I will not endorse Biden", and then someone said, "We'll pay you money to endorse Biden", and then I did, I would be seen as being a sellout. I've sold out what I think for money. It's fine, people are sellouts all the time. I'm just not going to call it anything else.

theprestige said:
And like I said, there's nothing inherently hypocritical or ethically compromising about doing stuff for money that you would otherwise rather not do, to me.
Click to expand...

FTFY. Before we go further, we can disagree here. Just because that's what you think doesn't mean we have to agree. I think doing something for money that you don't believe in or ethically find sketchy is a moral issue, though there are situations I find acceptable for it to happen. This just isn't one of them.

theprestige said:
Of course I will change my opinion if it turns out he really did say something like publicly insulting the president is morally wrong and he wants no part of it. But nobody in this thread thinks publicly insulting the president is morally wrong, and I doubt he does, either.
Click to expand...

He said he wanted nothing to do with the LGB slogan. Those were his words, no one said it for him, he came out and said it. He said he wasn't political and wanted nothing to do with the whole fiasco. That changed when he was offered a sponsorship by a company with LGB in it that wanted to capitalize off of the event Brandon claimed to not want anything to do with.
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
If that's how you view it, then that's how you view it. To me if I were to say, "I will not endorse Biden", and then someone said, "We'll pay you money to endorse Biden", and then I did, I would be seen as being a sellout. I've sold out what I think for money. It's fine, people are sellouts all the time. I'm just not going to call it anything else.
Click to expand...
He's only selling out if he actually has a principled objection, rather than just a personal preference to stay out of it. It's not selling out simply because you're willing to set aside personal preference if someone pays you enough.

My personal preference is not to hold down a job. But I need food and shelter, and I have certain skills. So if someone offers me enough money, I will indeed set aside my personal preference and take the job. That's not selling out. There are some jobs I'm ethically opposed to. Taking money to do those jobs would be selling out. You're assuming that's the case here. But that's your assumption.

FTFY. Before we go further, we can disagree here. Just because that's what you think doesn't mean we have to agree. I think doing something for money that you don't believe in or ethically find sketchy is a moral issue, though there are situations I find acceptable for it to happen. This just isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
You're begging the question that this is something he doesn't believe in, or finds ethically sketchy. That's entirely your assumption. You could just as easily assume it's a controversy he'd rather not be involved in, but since he can't escape it he might as well be compensated for the inconvenience. If you make that assumption, you'd arrive at a totally different conclusion.

What justifies the assumption you're making, rather than the other assumption?

He said he wanted nothing to do with the LGB slogan. Those were his words, no one said it for him, he came out and said it. He said he wasn't political and wanted nothing to do with the whole fiasco. That changed when he was offered a sponsorship by a company with LGB in it that wanted to capitalize off of the event Brandon claimed to not want anything to do with.
Click to expand...
Yeah. If I were him, I would want nothing to do with it either. But it turns out it's not up to him. The slogan persists in spite of his preferences. Its origin story is out there regardless of what he wants. As a celebrity, it's probably in his commercial interest to avoid political controversies if possible. But there's still room there for a principled decision to cash in on a controversy he can't avoid, even after saying he'd rather it wasn't that way.
 
Last edited:
mgidm86 said:
Rejected:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/05/sport/nascar-brandon-brown-lgbcoin/index.html
Click to expand...

Yeah, the previous article mentioned that NASCAR was reviewing it and that they were most likely to deny it.

So now this dumbass has another problem on his hands. He jumped the gun and went all in on backing the phrase because he thought he had a corporate sponsor. Now that they're going to deny it, he's in the exact position he didn't want to be in, in the first place. He supported the phrase, got political, and now he's shopping for sponsors. Tough break, what an ass hat.
 
plague311 said:
The fact it caught on in the first place is concerning if you ask me, but that's where we are in the U.S.
Click to expand...

No more concerning than any other anti-president catchphrase that's caught on in the past thirty years or so. Honestly the whole trivialization of Nazism as a tool for demonizing political opponents, from "Bushhitler" onwards, is a lot more concerning to me than this.
 
Get back to the thread topic and stay there, please.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
plague311 said:
The fact it caught on in the first place is concerning if you ask me, but that's where we are in the U.S.
Click to expand...

What puzzles me is that we all know what the original chant was. If the repugnicans were so macho about what they felt, why didn't they admit it and cork screw this utterly wierd version and tack on meanings to it.

the prestige said:
No more concerning than any other anti-president catchphrase that's caught on in the past thirty years or so. Honestly the whole trivialization of Nazism as a tool for demonizing political opponents, from "Bushhitler" onwards, is a lot more concerning to me than this.
Click to expand...

At least in those cases they didn't try to camouflage it and "Told it like it is..." isn't that what you guys loved about Trump?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom