Irate about something? Let it out in an unhinged overreaction.


* * *


I was going to kick-off this thread with a post about something that made me mad. But by the time I got around to putting it down, I cooled off. Damn and blast it.

I can't fucking believe you'd make a god ass stupid thread like this, my god !!!

;)

And there goes another stupid, meaningless, Shrine thread.

;)

People were able to see my true face without doing the chore of clicking a large amount of spoilers.
;)

Good Lord!! Why!?

Come on!!

Good Lord!! Why!?

You know why.

Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OH FOR THE LOVE OF MOBY DICK.

OH HELL NO!!!

Well, what do you know? THE HOUSE BROKE!!! NO!

For realsies ?

People not using those partitioning thingies at the supermarket checkout.

Bothers me way more than it should.

That Titanic thread....what in the actual fuck. I'm glad it was closed last night.

Pft
Me too.

Why?

Why?

Alright, I'll bite.

Because no one, and I mean NO ONE simply starts a thread asking people if they want the most desired film score of all time. You know that. I know that. Everyone here knows that. 90% of people in that thread called bullshit.

It was a completely unnecessary thread that caused completely unnecessary drama. People were drawn to it like moths to a flame. And I'm willing to bet you got a kick out of that. It fed you. Made you feel good for all the attention it got. There's a reason I said "peace" and unsubscribed from the thread.

If you do have it, good for you. Post it. Don't just ask people if they want something so desirable and then not deliver.

:this:
This right here, is why.

You were just stirring up excitement, Casey.
You should have just posted in the Film Music Download Links, instead of posting a thread in General Discussion saying: "Who wants this".

Everyone wants it.
You post that, you will be so rich and knee-deep in reputation points, I guarantee you.

Only if you do actually have it, of course.

If he ever had it, we won't have because "oh we overreacted"

I predicted that happening since the thread was started, him being offline for days, coming to a shitstorm and then saying "nO"

This is the place for overreaction.

I made a mug of coffee this morning. But I got distracted for a while, and when I took a sip it wasn't as hot as I like it. Man, did I go ape. I hate it when that happens. The next one was ok, I drank it down while it still had heat in it. Let that be a lesson. Don't leave your coffee, or other hot drinks unattended, or you'll forget about them.

Incidentally, I didn't go to the Titanic thread. Why? Because James Cameron had is head up his ass when he made that movie. He should have made T3 and concluded what would've been a splendid trilogy.

Oh GOD I HATE COLD COFFEE !!!!!

:awsm:

Sorry, but Titanic sessions are not for everybody...



Alright, I'll bite.

Because no one, and I mean NO ONE simply starts a thread asking people if they want the most desired film score of all time. You know that. I know that. Everyone here knows that. 90% of people in that thread called bullshit.

It was a completely unnecessary thread that caused completely unnecessary drama. People were drawn to it like moths to a flame. And I'm willing to bet you got a kick out of that. It fed you. Made you feel good for all the attention it got. There's a reason I said "peace" and unsubscribed from the thread.

If you do have it, good for you. Post it. Don't just ask people if they want something so desirable and then not deliver.

Sorry, but Titanic sessions are not for everybody...
They're not for you either, because you don't have them.

They're not for you either, because you don't have them.

Apparently he wanted to upload 'em, but the giver of the sessions said he was not allowed to.

Because if he does, the Titanic sessions lose their value, and the fatass, egocentrical asshole etilists who want to get exclusive scores for themselves only, get nothing valuable to trade. It's all about selfish assholes, really.

I swear you believe everything you're told. He doesn't have them.

I swear you believe everything you're told. He doesn't have them.

Seemed obvious from the beginning.

I swear you believe everything you're told. He doesn't have them.

No, he didn't tell me anything, I'm just thinking that's what could have happened.

Who Cares... Its Over Now, Forget It.

Well it's not. He shared some sessions here recently that are worth nothing. He doesn't have Titanic lol.

Oh Well Nothing Lost. I Must Admit I Was Pleased With Total Recall (Worth Anything or Not) :D

Apparently he wanted to upload 'em, but the giver of the sessions said he was not allowed to.

Because if he does, the Titanic sessions lose their value, and the fatass, egocentrical asshole etilists who want to get exclusive scores for themselves only, get nothing valuable to trade. It's all about selfish assholes, really.

he doesn't have them. for fuck sake is it THAT hard to understand ? the titanic sessions are probably the only thing more inaccessible Coca cola original recipe.

he doesn't have them. for fuck sake is it THAT hard to understand ? the titanic sessions are probably the only thing more inaccessible Coca cola original recipe.

:D

OH FOR THE LOVE OF MOBY DICK.

That's a social disease, right?



Well it's not. He shared some sessions here recently that are worth nothing. He doesn't have Titanic lol.

And if anyone believes he has them, I've got a bridge for sale. :)

Excellent, I Need One to Cross My Huge Moat In Front of My Castle :awsm:

And if anyone believes he has them, I've got a bridge for sale. :)

I'LL GIVE YOU A BILLION DALLUHS!

And if anyone believes he has them, I've got a bridge for sale. :)

It better be the golden gate. nothing else wil do for Herr Gold.

Never understood the brouhaha anyway, Horner's Titanic ain't all that to begin with.

THE FUCKING PEN...... It..... Won't...... WRITE!!!

it won't write...

IT WONT WRITE

NERAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

It better be the golden gate. nothing else wil do for Herr Gold.


I've got the Golden Gate, also the GW, Akashi Kaikyo and Tower Bridges. Offers.

People, you did it again.

People, you did it again.

Oh yeah, we really done fucked up this time.

he doesn't have them. for fuck sake is it THAT hard to understand ? the titanic sessions are probably the only thing more inaccessible Coca cola original recipe.

I seem to recall Doc's yoga pants being pretty hard to get one's hands on after the great petting zoo incident of 2014.

Oh yeah, we really done fucked up this time.



http://i.imgur.com/sunLV4q.gif

he doesn't have them. for fuck sake is it THAT hard to understand ? the titanic sessions are probably the only thing more inaccessible Coca cola original recipe.

That and my cold, dead heart.

People, you did it again.
https://media.giphy.com/media/l3zoz8eFqMbW43alq/giphy.gif
"We're Bad Guys, It's What We Do!"

That and my cold, dead heart.

Sometimes I lay under your bed in the dark and when you fall asleep I finally become calm. :)
I can feel my cold, dead heartbeat slow down...
and beat...

just...

like...

yours.

That sounds like witchcraft. Something right out of Pan's Labyrinth. :erm:

You're thinking of Voodoo as adopted by the Pentagon as seen in The Man Who Stare at Goats.

Never understood the brouhaha anyway, Horner's Titanic ain't all that to begin with.

Yet so many want it in complete form and think it's a great score, which it is. Go figure.

Yes it is

Yes it is

Oh yeah, you would know that, huh? 'Cause you have the sessions and all? :rolleyes:

:facepalm:

:facepalm:

LETS GO!!!

IM FEELIN A RUSH!!!

BRING IT ON!!!!!!!

SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH-ha.

3 weeks

3 weeks

So this is our punishment?

Alright.

But you had better own up to it.

If he posts the Titanic sessions I'll post the Harry Potter 3 sessions.

All this is rubbish. Ignore it.

If he posts the Titanic sessions I'll post the Harry Potter 3 sessions.

...And then I'll post the Star Wars Episode I-VII sessions.

Not if I do it first

Not if I do it first

Yellow!

Looking forward to the Potter 3 sessions

Okay, I've been working on this for a long time (i.e. past five-ten minutes) and it's finally ready to release to the public

Here is my tier list of Street Fighter characters according to how cool they are



sssss
Makoto

a+
chun li,

a
oro, gen, dudley

b
Q, ryu, akuma, hugo, m. bison (dictator)

c
all those other people I guess

d
blanka, poison, c. viper, oni, necalli

f
F.A.N.G., ingrid, gill, rufus




Feel free to debate if you feel anyone should be in a different position but you'll be wrong

---------- Post added at 01:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 AM ----------

Oh I forgot to mention I didn't include EX characters because I don't know anything about them so theoretically it's possible any of them could be in any tier except SSSSS

...And then I'll post the Star Wars Episode I-VII sessions.

And I'll post the complete episode VIII and IX sessions.




Okay, I've been working on this for a long time (i.e. past five-ten minutes) and it's finally ready to release to the public

Here is my tier list of Street Fighter characters according to how cool they are



sssss
Makoto

a+
chun li,

a
oro, gen, dudley

b
Q, ryu, akuma, hugo, m. bison (dictator)

c
all those other people I guess

d
blanka, poison, c. viper, oni, necalli

f
F.A.N.G., ingrid, gill, rufus




Feel free to debate if you feel anyone should be in a different position but you'll be wrong

---------- Post added at 01:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 AM ----------

Oh I forgot to mention I didn't include EX characters because I don't know anything about them so theoretically it's possible any of them could be in any tier except SSSSS



http://i.imgur.com/KQCqOcr.gif
"I AM #1!!!"

Looking forward to the Potter 3 sessions

So am I.

I'll post the Zootopia sessions.

Alongside the sessions of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and every hyped thing in here.

http://i.imgur.com/KQCqOcr.gif
"I AM #1!!!"


You're not even the real dictator ya goof

I'll post the Zootopia sessions.

I already have a few seconds of Zootopia music, via stems. :parrot:

I already have a few seconds of Zootopia music, via stems. :parrot:

I love that.

:parrot:

I already have a few seconds of Zootopia music, via stems. :parrot:

You beat me to it! Damn it, what am I gonna do now with my life? How dare you do it before me??

You're not even the real dictator ya goof

Why are you posting a picture of donald trump

Why are you posting a picture of donald trump

Exactly my question.

Hm?

'cause if I 'eren't French, I would vote for Trump

'cause if I 'eren't French, I would vote for Trump

You have my agreement.

Though, I am American, and if I weren't 15, I would vote for said candidate.

C'est vrai!

You have my agreement.

Though, I am American, and if I weren't 15, I would vote for said candidate.

Which is precisely why 15 year olds aren't allowed to vote.

Which is precisely why 15 year olds aren't allowed to vote.
Pft.

Exactly what I would expect to hear from someone who is "of age". :laugh:

Pft.

Exactly what I would expect to hear from someone who is "of age". :laugh:

Sarah Palin is of age.

She'll happily welcome you into her camp with the other trump supporting redneck hatemongers when you turn 18.

If Americans really voted Trump into office, then America would deserve whatever pile of dog shit they would have coming to them, served with a gold plated shovel with a tag signed by the rest of the world.

You know, I'll just start collecting my contribution from my dog and get ready to submit it to the world pile.

I feel the same about Sanders. All the ignorant college kids chouting "free college" (and where does the money come from in order to make their education free, I wonder?). Passed a car with a "Bernie 2016" bumper sticker on my way to work 20 minutes ago. As I pass it, sure enough I see 2 college kids driving.

If America elects a socialist into office, then we deserve it.

^Yep.

(and where does the money come from in order to make their education free, I wonder?)

Even the college students don't know. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e50fQLyebI)

Good job, eating that propaganda fellas!

:billymays:

Since when every Bernie voter is a college student wanting free college? In fact WHAT THE HELL is wrong with FREE college? Hundreds of people who had the talent but couldn't do anything cuz getting on college is literally loaning you for life. :) Also, there's more to Bernie than "free college" and free college does not mean "people who don't want to work their asses".. other countries have free college and they do alright. More people have chances to actually do studies. Not to mention, Bernie Sanders is the one who wants to actually please the americans, instead of just obeying the ups and he's not a conservative idiot, who either doesn't want gay marriage, or wants to fucking get the hell outta the world in a stupid war, what does war do but actually make you guys lose more money and have more debt to pay? WWI and WWII results are the proof.. besides, Sanders in an economist. He knows to do shit. The others are all just rich cocksuckers.

If Trump wins, I'll be happy, cuz then I'll have every single right in the world to shit in America all I want, and with a darn good reason.

Uh Oh, Politics Talk......

https://memecrunch.com/meme/2BWR3/jusy-slowly-back-away/image.gif?w=400&c=1

In fact WHAT THE HELL is wrong with FREE college?

Ponyo, how many things in your life are free? Like, totally free (aside from soundtracks :p)?

---------- Post added at 02:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 PM ----------


https://memecrunch.com/meme/2BWR3/jusy-slowly-back-away/image.gif?w=400&c=1

https://external.xx.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQA9WD6lQW8UQHif&url=http%3A%2F%2F45.media.tumblr.com%2Fa7b821924cb d321d6d01f4007af76ec8%2Ftumblr_mqsg8rKTvF1s6hol6o1 _250.gif&ext=gif

The United States of America, the only glorious country, where literally, a racist sick bigot with extremists, stupid ideals would be considered for a president, and supported. The only country where he could ever even have a presentation. I mean, come on, he's still on it because he's paying himself for the whole campaign, or else, he'd have been taken away from a long time. Since he pays for his own shit, legally and by the law, no one can do shit to him.

Trump represents all of you more than you want to admit. :)

You can pick Hilary rich-cocksucker and SJW, or you can pick the hella rest of racist, bigoted conservatives americans who want to either spend it all in a stupid war, or are also worse racists than Trump.

:facepalm:

:facepalm:

"Don't give me that shit!" - Owen Grady, Jurassic World.

But really, this is what this thread is for. Are you pissed off? Come here and let it all out!

A discussion about politics!? So be it.

The United States of America, the only glorious country, where literally, a racist sick bigot with extremists, stupid ideals would be considered for a president, and supported. The only country where he could ever even have a presentation. I mean, come on, he's still on it because he's paying himself for the whole campaign, or else, he'd have been taken away from a long time. Since he pays for his own shit, legally and by the law, no one can do shit to him.

Trump represents all of you more than you want to admit. :)

You can pick Hilary rich-cocksucker and SJW, or you can pick the hella rest of racist, bigoted conservatives americans who want to either spend it all in a stupid war, or are also worse racists than Trump.

:laugh:

Now that is an overreaction if I ever saw one.

---------- Post added at 03:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 PM ----------


But really, this is what this thread is for. Are you pissed off? Come here and let it all out!

No, that's what Amanda's butt-hurt thread is for.

That Is Just Another "I Think I Know" Essay...

No, that's what Amanda's butt-hurt thread is for.

Well, its kind of similar.

Well, its kind of similar.

No! You're wrong! It's not true! AIIIEEEEEE!

http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfit784OnQ1qb5yooo1_400.gif

^Overreaction!

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/3213796/george-costanza-annoyed-o.gif

Duh. I'm always right. Y'all just wrong. Bow down to me.

Duh. I'm always right. Y'all just wrong. Bow down to me.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/xEpTspH9hGwHS/200_s.gif

I'd rather shoot out my own knees than bow to you.

:this:

No! You're wrong! It's not true! AIIIEEEEEE!

http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfit784OnQ1qb5yooo1_400.gif


^Overreaction!

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/3213796/george-costanza-annoyed-o.gif


Duh. I'm always right. Y'all just wrong. Bow down to me.


https://media1.giphy.com/media/xEpTspH9hGwHS/200_s.gif


I'd rather shoot out my own knees than bow to you.


:this:

:this:

I'd rather shoot out my own knees than bow to you.



Follow the example of your very wise friend Mr. Constanza, and joke along with it.

Don't treat me like I'm shit just because I have a different opinion than you.

Ponyo, I'm pretty sure he was joking.

Shoot me if I'm wrong---

You wanna think that, he's just mad I voiced my opinion. Which like Mr. Gold said once, it's impossible to do here. :erm:

I was just overreacting! It's the point of this thread :ohgod:

:laugh:

Now that is an overreaction if I ever saw one.

Not really. He's right. It's very sad (but of course not surprising) that there are people in this thread mocking policy ideas that would attempt to guarantee an affordable education to young people, while advocating a man who has publicly expressed racism and xenophobia as key aspects of his policy ideas. Someone even went so far as to link Fox News. Do you even read the internet? You know what fox news is, right? I mean, I can sort of give clonemaster a pass, because he's a kid and probably agrees with whatever his parents say about the election. When I was his age I had about the same level of ignorance of the political system. The real sin is adults who are apparently able to be suckered in by the kind of vile rhetoric Trump spouts every time he gets in front of a microphone as if they never aged past 15.

The US is supposed to be the most prosperous nation on earth. You, and Fox News, apparently think it will be a big problem for us to find the money to do it if we want to send people to college for free. You know who sends their kids to college for free? Sweden. Norway. Finland. The countries Sanders is specifically aiming to emulate in that department. Not just them, though! Germany does, hell Brazil does. If you want to let go of the "free" concept, and just go with "cheap" or "reasonably affordable," practically the entire developed world opens up. An American can literally go to China and get an education from a major university there for less money than most major universities here. That's without any of the assistance the Chinese government provides to its own citizens. China, a fascist dictatorship. WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?

In Sanders's concept, at least some of the funding would come from taxing Wall Street speculation. I'm sure your objection to this will be something you got from Fox News about how this will topple the American economy because the poor wall st bankers who don't actually create anything won't be able to afford as many hookers that year.

Also, we spend 600 billion a year on "defense" (our most common act of "defense" being to bomb people in other countries, very often people who were doing nothing wrong, like having a wedding party (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/01/yemenis-seek-justice-wedding-drone-strike-201418135352298935.html). Sanders's education bill calls for 47 billion. A lot of money, but a pittance we could, if we wanted to, take out of our Flying Murder Robot budget and all it would mean is we might take a few years longer to develop the next new airplane that will be marginally more effective than our existing airplanes at causing misery and suffering in third world shitholes we don't care about.

I sure don't agree with Sanders on everything, and people who think getting him in office will automatically bring in a rush of sweeping changes like free eduction are deluding themselves -- he'd have to fight with congress on that one. However, Sanders is the only serious contender for the candidacy this country has had in decades who does not have any financial ties to corporate and wall st interests (no, Trump does not count, he IS corporate interests), and that is something we desperately need. We even need it just to prove that it can happen, so we can start trying to take our political system back from the people who have bought it out from under us over the years. So fuck you, you Rupert Murdoch smegma-licking douchebag.

I know, I know, Mr Gold will reply to this post with a facepalm image and someone else to go "oh great now we're off topic in this thread and HPG is calling people names." Well, we're in a completely useless joke thread anyway, so anybody who can't handle talking about something that actually matters can go post a funny animated GIF in Mr Gold's random corner and pretend this doesn't matter. Here, use this one:

http://i.imgur.com/i86KspC.gif

Not really. He's right. It's very sad (but of course not surprising) that there are people in this thread mocking policy ideas that would attempt to guarantee an affordable education to young people, while advocating a man who has publicly expressed racism and xenophobia as key aspects of his policy ideas. Someone even went so far as to link Fox News. Do you even read the internet? You know what fox news is, right? I mean, I can sort of give clonemaster a pass, because he's a kid and probably agrees with whatever his parents say about the election. When I was his age I had about the same level of ignorance of the political system. The real sin is adults who are apparently able to be suckered in by the kind of vile rhetoric Trump spouts every time he gets in front of a microphone as if they never aged past 15.

The US is supposed to be the most prosperous nation on earth. You, and Fox News, apparently think it will be a big problem for us to find the money to do it if we want to send people to college for free. You know who sends their kids to college for free? Sweden. Norway. Finland. The countries Sanders is specifically aiming to emulate in that department. Not just them, though! Germany does, hell Brazil does. If you want to let go of the "free" concept, and just go with "cheap" or "reasonably affordable," practically the entire developed world opens up. An American can literally go to China and get an education from a major university there for less money than most major universities here. That's without any of the assistance the Chinese government provides to its own citizens. China, a fascist dictatorship. WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?

In Sanders's concept, at least some of the funding would come from taxing Wall Street speculation. I'm sure your objection to this will be something you got from Fox News about how this will topple the American economy because the poor wall st bankers who don't actually create anything won't be able to afford as many hookers that year.

Also, we spend 600 billion a year on "defense" (our most common act of "defense" being to bomb people in other countries, very often people who were doing nothing wrong, like having a wedding party (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/01/yemenis-seek-justice-wedding-drone-strike-201418135352298935.html). Sanders's education bill calls for 47 billion. A lot of money, but a pittance we could, if we wanted to, take out of our Flying Murder Robot budget and all it would mean is we might take a few years longer to develop the next new airplane that will be marginally more effective than our existing airplanes at causing misery and suffering in third world shitholes we don't care about.

I sure don't agree with Sanders on everything, and people who think getting him in office will automatically bring in a rush of sweeping changes like free eduction are deluding themselves -- he'd have to fight with congress on that one. However, Sanders is the only serious contender for the candidacy this country has had in decades who does not have any financial ties to corporate and wall st interests (no, Trump does not count, he IS corporate interests), and that is something we desperately need. We even need it just to prove that it can happen, so we can start trying to take our political system back from the people who have bought it out from under us over the years. So fuck you, you Rupert Murdoch smegma-licking douchebag.

I know, I know, Mr Gold will reply to this post with a facepalm image and someone else to go "oh great now we're off topic in this thread and HPG is calling people names." Well, we're in a completely useless joke thread anyway, so anybody who can't handle talking about something that actually matters can go post a funny animated GIF in Mr Gold's random corner and pretend this doesn't matter. Here, use this one:

http://i.imgur.com/i86KspC.gif

https://i.imgur.com/P5ORDUK.gif

tl;dr

https://i.imgur.com/P5ORDUK.gif

tl;dr

:laugh:

THAT is still one of the funniest gifs I've seen you post, now I know why you're the GIF King again. :laugh:

I like how TK made a huge point, but everyone's gonna ignore it.

Mr. TK, you'd be amazed at how powerful propaganda is, and how little people really think in this world. There was once a test that proved that 90% of the people of the world don't think. And that's why propaganda is really strong. Want a proof? Planned parenthood; an actual good thing for the americans; removed, why? Because propaganda that everyone ate, that being against planned parenthood would mean you were against abortion. But hey, since literally most of the US is religious or christian, they ate it up, and they never ever knew that planned parenthood is MORE than abortion, and abortion is the latest, and the most tiniest things of importance in the things that planned parenthood does. But people ate the propaganda, and now americans have one important thing taken from themselves.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/RIlMEagfdY1kk/200_s.gif

And I You.

tl;dr

Lol, thanks for proving I'm more mature than you. Impressed that'd happen because I don't consider me more mature than any, but wow. Completely, not read and ignore a huge point just because you don't want to be proven wrong? Congratulations.

And this, ladies and gentleman, is why the world sucks!

I actually did skim through TK's post.

The countries you cited: all waaaay smaller than the USA. I won't pretend to know anything about politics, but I have to imagine that Sanders' little system works a lot better in smaller countries than bigger ones.

And I know Fox News is goofy as shit sometimes, but I think the video made a fair point.

Is college really worth the trouble of making it a free thing anyway?

I like how TK made a huge point, but everyone's gonna ignore it.

Mr. TK, you'd be amazed at how powerful propaganda is, and how little people really think in this world.

No, I'm not amazed by it at all.

Planned Parenthood isn't gone, by the way.

And I You.

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/matthew-broderick-oh-my-god.gif

I actually did skim through TK's post. The countries you cited: all waaaay smaller than the USA. I won't pretend to know anything about politics, but I have to imagine that Sanders' little system works a lot better in smaller countries than bigger ones. Is college really worth the trouble of making it a free thing anyway?

Does any of what Trump or any other racist candidate want to do, sound any more promising or logical than what Bernie wants to do? Okay, free college aside, what else is oh so bad about mister Bernie? He fights for the americans, not for the rich people.

It's not just Trump vs. the Bern. You realize that, right? They aren't the only options.

Does any of what Trump or any other racist candidate want to do, sound any more promising or logical than what Bernie wants to do?

Definitely.


He fights for the americans, not for the rich people.

So does Trumpet.

So does Trumpet.

^Finally, it has been done.

It's not just Trump vs. the Bern. You realize that, right? They aren't the only options.

They are, however, the only options worth talking about. Everyone else is more of the exact same we've always had.

---------- Post added at 04:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 PM ----------




So does Trumpet.

Name one policy idea Donald Trump has proposed that will benefit average Americans.

Clonemaster, you make me laugh. Please, don't watch too much TV or follows what your conservative parents follow. Trump does not fight for America, he could give less shits about America, he just wants exposition, which he's getting.

Look, man, no offense, but I can't take you serious and any argument of you is invalid - if you're literally saying than anything Trump says; TRUMP, some millionaire who has had a couple of bakrupts, who has always had everything in life easily given to him - who has said plenty of hateful racist moves, and literally knows nothing of presidency, he's just making use of american's belief on freedom.. you can't literally tell me and live straight, than what Trump wants to do, sounds more logical than what Bernie wants to do, with a whole nicely shaped up plan, AND IS A SENATOR, AND A ECONOMIST, WITH 70 YEARS OF LIFE EXPERIENCE. AND EVEN WAY MORE AS A SENATOR. you can't LITERALLY tell me Trump has a way better plan than Bernie; the plans of Trump are nothing but the tramps any other citizen american would do; and they're obviously shit, and do no benefit to America, just more bad, have you even seen the video where they apply logic to what he wants to do and how terrible it would be? You dare to compare his shit of a election just made out of ideas, to Bernie Sanders' plan which is more logical?

They are, however, the only options worth talking about. Everyone else is more of the exact same we've always had.

"Worth talking about"? People only talk about Trump because he says - and does - crazy stuff so much of the time. He's like the troublemaker in 6th grade. People talk about him, but he's not worth talking about.

"Worth talking about"? People only talk about Trump because he says - and does - crazy stuff so much of the time. He's like the troublemaker in 6th grade. People talk about him, but he's not worth talking about.

That's why he's in the whole thing. He's a joke, and he knows it. He just wanted exposition all along. In fact I'm pretty sure that if Trump ever won, he wouldn't be able to be a president because he literally breaks the constitution and many other things. If he won, then the Government would be able to actually pull him down; unlike the campaign that no one can take down because he's paying it all.. with most likely, stolen money from americans.

Why in the name of hell is everyone supporting and believing an eccentric rich man who has always had it in his hands, money and luxuries.. and power.. someone who literally is just around because he is paying for his own campaign himself? Someone who literally just woke up and day and said, hey I'm gonna be president of the United States.

"Worth talking about"? People only talk about Trump because he says - and does - crazy stuff so much of the time. He's like the troublemaker in 6th grade. People talk about him, but he's not worth talking about.

Trump as a human being? I agree completely. But the phenomenon of his success as a political candidate is not only worth talking about but crucially important. It is a very powerful and scary phenomenon that tells us a lot about what's happening to the country right now.

Trump as a human being? I agree completely. But the phenomenon of his success as a political candidate is not only worth talking about but crucially important. It is a very powerful and scary phenomenon that tells us a lot about what's happening to the country right now.

The fact that he's being supported by a large number, is the scary thought, and does nothing but to represent and show the true color of the USA. Racism, homophobia, conservative, guns, and wars. That's all he's made of, and that's all he wants. And his supporters. And a fake freedom.

btw Ponyo, Trump is not funding his own campaign: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/donald-trump-fec-fundraising-214838

btw Ponyo, Trump is not funding his own campaign: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/donald-trump-fec-fundraising-214838

.. Holy shit, that's disgusting, are you seriously telling me PEOPLE ARE GIVING MONEY TO THIS FUCKER, WILLINGLY?

WE DESERVE A FUCKING ARMAGGEDON. I SWEAR TO GOD.

The "true color" of the USA is something more like a rainbow, and that's really what's being shown here. The people who are rallying behind Trump are a significant portion, but not a majority, of just the portion of registered Republicans who vote in the primaries -- not even all registered Republicans as many wait out the primaries and just vote for whoever gets elected the frontrunner when the actual presidential election comes around.

Though, like Trump, this minority is very vocal, they are still a minority. The other side of what you're talking about is Sanders, who is phenomenally successful -- I mean phenomenally, to the point that he is giving Hillary Clinton a hard time and seriously scaring her. He was a hair away from taking Iowa from her, an outcome literally no one, even Sander's supporters, would have predicted even a month ago. His success is just as telling about the USA as Trump's, so don't give up hope on us yet.

If Trump wins, I'll have every single right in the world to shit on America.

If Sanders wins, then America has hope to be "great again"... and I'll be darn happy. I hope so. And then I'll have proof than there's more smart people than I thought, in the US. Hilary Clinton is nothing but a rich cocksucker, and a SJW at that, so it'd be no good. I had always feared she'd win at first because of America's stupidness of wanting progress and being able to say "HEY, FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT, WOO, PROGRESS, AREN'T WE COOL?"

Even though, if Sanders win, it's just probably gonna be Obama again. As in, he's gonna do good shit but people are gonna shit over him anyway because why not? It's free, and bigots exist everywhere. Or even if he wins. Since he wants to take from the rich and give to the poor, the rich won't allow it and will do something, probably give terrible propaganda to him and people are gonna eat it up.

If Trump wins, I'll have every single right in the world to shit on America.

He won't. The momentum of the Republican primary voters who hadn't made their minds up when polled is shifting towards Rubio and Cruz. Cruz is not palatable to moderates but Rubio is. Outside of some major unforeseen shift, he probably has it in the bag.

Uh, last time I heard about them, they were less mediatic than Trump, but their politics were actually the same or even worse. Both want to go to war, too.

Name one policy idea Donald Trump has proposed that will benefit average Americans.

I don't know all of the details, I've not looked into it. But I just fucking know that if people like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders keep on getting elected, this country will not last.


Clonemaster, you make me laugh. Please, don't watch too much TV or follows what your conservative parents follow. Trump does not fight for America, he could give less shits about America, he just wants exposition, which he's getting.

Look, man, no offense, but I can't take you serious and any argument of you is invalid - if you're literally saying than anything Trump says; TRUMP, some millionaire who has had a couple of bakrupts, who has always had everything in life easily given to him - who has said plenty of hateful racist moves, and literally knows nothing of presidency, he's just making use of american's belief on freedom.. you can't literally tell me and live straight, than what Trump wants to do, sounds more logical than what Bernie wants to do, with a whole nicely shaped up plan, AND IS A SENATOR, AND A ECONOMIST, WITH 70 YEARS OF LIFE EXPERIENCE. AND EVEN WAY MORE AS A SENATOR. you can't LITERALLY tell me Trump has a way better plan than Bernie; the plans of Trump are nothing but the tramps any other citizen american would do; and they're obviously shit, and do no benefit to America, just more bad, have you even seen the video where they apply logic to what he wants to do and how terrible it would be? You dare to compare his shit of a election just made out of ideas, to Bernie Sanders' plan which is more logical?

I do, definitely dare.

I saw an advertisement for Bernie Sanders, of where he asked the question, "Is the economy rigged?" And then he went off on a whole other topic.
That man, Bernie Sanders, is just fuckin full of bullshit.

I'm not just believing what my parents believe, I'm taking into account what I, and other conservatives believe what is right for the United States.

I'm sorry man, you can insult my mother in your mind all you want, but you literally have no argument. And your belief is simply stupid. Hell, you're just 15, I'm sorry I pull the age card, but it's just the truth, you can't know wisely what to think for yourself, and your logic to go against Bernie is completely stupid. You're literally going with Trump just because he's the other option?

I'm not a man of politics - I don't trust 'em at all, at least in Spain, where the situation is horrible and politics laugh at us, but we spanish are really stupid to keep on voting the same shit. Because of that, I didn't vote, even though Podemos seems the only hope, I still didn't. Because my vote counts zero. But if I was american, I'd vote for Bernie. Because for me, that one would count and sounds way more prosperous.

Did you just pull the conservative card, though. So you mean to tell me the thought and belief of 50 years ago, it's still okay? People change, society change, and sometimes changes have to be done for the better. We can't just live off with the thinking of years ago.

I don't know all of the details, I've not looked into it. But I just fucking know that if people like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders keep on getting elected, this country will not last.

You just acknowledged that, although you say you would vote for the man, you have not looked into the details of the policy he proposes.

Hence, why 15 year olds are not allowed to vote. Sadly, many people don't get any more responsible than this when they reach adulthood. Please consider not being one of those people.

By the way, you might also want to do Sanders and other candidates the courtesy of actually looking into their policy ideas before criticizing them instead of making snap judgments based on your perception of one line in an advertisement. Just a suggestion.

This thread is no fun now.

Someone needs to start a new one.

You just acknowledged that, although you say you would vote for the man, you have not looked into the details of the policy he proposes.

Hence, why 15 year olds are not allowed to vote. Sadly, many people don't get any more responsible than this when they reach adulthood. Please consider not being one of those people.

By the way, you might also want to do Sanders and other candidates the courtesy of actually looking into their policy ideas before criticizing them instead of making snap judgments based on your perception of one line in an advertisement. Just a suggestion.

Hell TK, I don't trust politics, but had the parties here in Spain given me any publicity telling me what they wanted to do, I'd have read them, because I want to see what they can do, I don't want to be like the other idiots who literally vote knowing nothing, either because of fanastim of the party, or because they like the face.

Uh, last time I heard about them, they were less mediatic than Trump, but their politics were actually the same or even worse. Both want to go to war, too.

Oh, they're both warmongering assholes, that's for sure. I'm just talking about their personalities.

Policy wise, the republican candidates are all virtually the same. Trump's only difference policy wise is that he has almost none in the first place, aside from banning all immigrants. Trump is the most dangerous of them in my opinion, though, because if he were to succeed, it would send the message that lowering the overall level of discourse among the candidates even further would be a viable strategy. At least Rubio comports himself with dignity.

---------- Post added at 05:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:16 PM ----------


This thread is no fun now.

Someone needs to start a new one.

This is the best thread on the forum now.

This thread is no fun now.

Someone needs to start a new one.

I'm actually loving it, but probably only because TK is on my side and giving more reason than I am, I'd probably have a harder time if he wasn't around. However, I think it's really going well, but hey, we're just radicals and we have no logic in what they say, right? I don't care, but I'm really ready to accept the whole of the forum having a grudge on me from having a different opinion. Why is it that everyone in this forum is conservative, or a Trump supporter?

I'm actually loving it, but probably only because TK is on my side and giving more reason than I am, I'd probably have a harder time if he wasn't around. However, I think it's really going well, but hey, we're just radicals and we have no logic in what they say, right? I don't care, but I'm really ready to accept the whole of the forum having a grudge on me from having a different opinion. Why is it that everyone in this forum is conservative, or a Trump supporter?

Only a handful of people have mentioned anything here. And I doubt they're going to have a grudge against you.

Everyone has a grudge against Ponyo for plenty of reasons.


Policy wise, the republican candidates are all virtually the same.

And clothing-wise they're all the same. () What the hell?


Why is it that everyone in this forum is conservative, or a Trump supporter?

Why is it bad that you get exposed to a different point of view every once in a while, even if your opinion isn't swayed in the slightest?

And don't forget you used to get in catfights with TK all the time.

At least as far as I know, TK lives in the United States.

Ponyo, you do not.

You need to live here to actually KNOW what is going on, why it happening, etc.

If people still hold a grudge against me, I find they must be really stupid because I don't give reasons to have people hate me other than simply having different opinions. Are you trying to tell me I get mad when other people have a different opinion than me, though? Cause I don't think that's the case. All I see here is me expressing my opinion and people thinking I'm stupid for going passionate with it. Also, me and TK are fine now because we put our differences aside, and I learned to troll along with him and have fun. Hell, us being good was before this happened, lol.

You need to live here to actually KNOW what is going on, why it happening, etc.

Then why don't you? You just admitted you don't know what the policy ideas are of the man you said you'd vote for. How can you possibly criticize someone else for not knowing "what is going on"?

At least as far as I know, TK lives in the United States. Ponyo, you do not. You need to live here to actually KNOW what is going on, why it happening, etc.

First, how would I know not shit of what happens in the US, when the US is a first country which dominates some way or another the rest of the world, and second, I have PLENTY of american online friends? You literally just pulled a stupid card, once more, "lol you have no say in this cuz you ain't american".. that's really funny, kid.. seriously try to go out, and think for yourself in other ways, make up your mind, before you say shit like this. Not being american doesn't mean I don't have a say in having opinions.

If people still hold a grudge against me, I find they must be really stupid because I don't give reasons to have people hate me other than simply having different opinions.

Huh? I don't give a shit about your politics. I'm talking about all the goofy shit you used to do in the past that pissed everyone off.

At least as far as I know, TK lives in the United States.

Ponyo, you do not.

You need to live here to actually KNOW what is going on, why it happening, etc.

Now, let me find out some actual facts about Trump, so I can actuallly have some valid reasons as to why I support someone who was in Home Alone 2: Lost in New York for a couple seconds.

Now, let me find out some actual facts about Trump, so I can actuallly have some valid reasons as to why I support someone who was in Home Alone 2: Lost in New York for a couple seconds.

Ah, here it comes where he pretends he was joking the whole time when he gets backed into a corner.

Now, let me find out some actual facts about Trump

FACT: Donald Trump once beat up Vince McMahon. It was a stunt tho'.

http://i.imgur.com/yDQZqJJ.gif

Huh? I don't give a shit about your politics. I'm talking about all the goofy shit you used to do in the past that pissed everyone off.

Those are way more stupid reasons to hold a grudge against me than my view on politics. I literally didn't kill anyone. I hurt anyone? Never meant it, always apologized, I'm kinda fine with everyone as far as I know, don't really know why'd you pull out a "you're hated" card, because that's kinda dumb. Also, the "You've done lots of shit" card. Oh yes I did. Human mistakes from which I've learned with every mess up to the point I don't really do them as often anymore. (Prove me wrong in this.) So yeah. Don't see how anyone would really hold a grudge against me for things I did in the past, which were human mistakes, from which I learned, apologized and moved on.

Ah, here it comes where he pretends he was joking the whole time when he gets backed into a corner.

I never was joking.

I wouldn't be as backed into a corner if DAK was here. :p

Ah, here it comes where he pretends he was joking the whole time when he gets backed into a corner.

No, he'll just probably try to bring Fox News as a reliable source to back his thinking.. or he's just gonna really pull up any propaganda bait article, lol. There's ALWAYS a lot of them.


I never was joking.

I wouldn't be as backed into a corner if DAK was here. :p

That's a bit coward.

FACT: Donald Trump once beat up Vince McMahon. It was a stunt tho'.

http://i.imgur.com/yDQZqJJ.gif

People literally want this guy for president. Christ.

No, he'll just probably try to bring Fox News as a reliable source to back his thinking.

:laugh: You reminded me of a Seanbaby article I haven't read in a while.

The 8 Greatest Wars Ever Fought By Fox News (http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-8-greatest-wars-ever-fought-by-fox-news/)

No, he'll just probably try to bring Fox News as a reliable source to back his thinking.. or he's just gonna really pull up any propaganda bait article, lol.

Honestly, Fox News does not seem to be much "fairly balanced" anymore.


That's a bit coward.

Oh yeah.

No, he'll just probably try to bring Fox News as a reliable source to back his thinking.. or he's just gonna really pull up any propaganda bait article, lol. There's ALWAYS a lot of them.

Even Fox News has been antagonistic towards Trump. He antagonizes everyone. One of their anchors asked him hard questions at a debate and he at various times accused her of being a bitch and being on her period in response.

Even Fox News has been antagonistic towards Trump. He antagonizes everyone. One of their anchors asked him hard questions at a debate and he at various times accused her of being a bitch and being on her period in response.

AMERICANS SERIOUSLY SUPPORT THIS GUY AFTER THIS?? SERIOUSLY??

He also said he could shoot up Obama and he'd still have support. Worse is, HE'S RIGHT.


Honestly, Fox News does not seem to be much "fairly balanced" anymore.

Fox News was never any good, or a reliable source for political news, it's either propaganda, or made up bullshit, or retarded idiots saying all kinds of bullshit that no one else believes.

AMERICANS SERIOUSLY SUPPORT THIS GUY AFTER THIS?? SERIOUSLY??

People still support you after all the things you've said and done. Not an exact comparison, lol, but it's not that hard to comprehend. People support who they want, sometimes regardless of their pasts or craziness.

AMERICANS SERIOUSLY SUPPORT THIS GUY AFTER THIS?? SERIOUSLY??

He also said he could shoot up Obama and he'd still have support. Worse is, HE'S RIGHT.



Fox News was never any good, or a reliable source for political news, it's either propaganda, or made up bullshit, or retarded idiots saying all kinds of bullshit that no one else believes.

You might want to check out "The Blaze".

People still support you after all the things you've said and done. It's not that hard to comprehend.

:laugh: Excuse me for being Mr. Grinch! Because I've seriously done so many terrible, unspeakable things.. hahaha.

Seriously.. look, I'm on the verge of saying you two clear things. But I'm gonna be nice: stop trying to act like I'm the meanest asshole and like I have done the worst things because I have not. I haven't killed anyone, I haven't done anything as bad as you try to put me, ever. I've done mistakes. Human mistakes, being pissed off, being disrespectful, I'm not perfect, that's a thing anyone can do, but I get shat for it, just because you're trying to put me as an asshole just because I speak my mind. I didn't do anything but human mistakes, and I apologized, and made up for them, wether if you want to believe it or not. I don't deserve that kind of bullshit on me right now. At all. Get another argument against me.

People literally want this guy for president. Christ.

It was a stunt.

Use your eyes, bro. :p

:laugh: Excuse for being Mr. Grinch! Because I've seriously done so many terrible things..

I could make a list and PM it to you if you'd like.

I could make a list and PM it to you if you'd like.

Try me, I want to laugh. I really do, you'll most likely pull up the most stupidest bullshit ever to have me as a "unspeakable, unforgivable man"

You know what, have a selfie of me.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/854474/grinch-smile-o.gif

GIFs are better

I have a pretty grin.

I still don't really get how speaking my mind openly and being passionate deserves me hate.

AMERICANS SERIOUSLY SUPPORT THIS GUY AFTER THIS?? SERIOUSLY??

That's nothing. Oh, I forgot to mention he refused to attend the last Fox News-hosted Republican Primary debate because she would be there.

At one of Trump's rallies, some of his supporters physically assaulted and severely beat a black lives matter protester who showed up there in opposition. Trump's comment on the matter was, "maybe he should have been roughed up (http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/)."

He's remarked that he could shoot somebody and still wouldn't lose supporters. (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/index.php)

Among his supporters are Vladmir Putin (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/17/politics/russia-putin-trump/index.php), Russia's charming fascist president, and white supremacist groups (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/donald-trump-white-supremacists-216620?cmpid=sf) including the Ku Klux Klan.

And just for citation purposes, here's where Trump proposed banning all Muslims from entering the US (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/index.php). A man that people want to elect president of the United States, the land of the free and home of the brave, with freedom from religious persecution enshrined in its much-revered constitution by its equally revered "founding fathers," says that people should be banned from the country based on nothing but their religious beliefs.

I'm mainly posting all this for Clonemaster's benefit, since he expressed some interest in finding out a little more information about the man he thinks should lead his country. If you will take some time to actually look at this information objectively, this thread won't have been a waste.

I could make a list and PM it to you if you'd like.

Oh My...

Let's not forget, a muslim couple came in, in one of Trump's rallies, and even though they were doing nothing wrong, they were rudely and in a very racist way, taken off the group in disgust. This guy, only makes racism back, in 2016.[COLOR="Silver"]


Oh My...

Don't. Don't even dare. You're ALWAYS against me. Just for the heck of it. No matter how many times I've fucking TRIED things for you. DON'T make me speak up about you. Literally don't. Better stay quiet, if you have nothing to say, seriously, don't.

I know its really stupid for me to say I support Donald Trump with any actual facts, but I just know that he, or Cruz (not exactly sure) is right for America.

Prove me wrong if I cannot find any valid reasons.
http://media.giphy.com/media/wErJXg1tIgHXG/giphy.gif

And please, just because I am 15 does not mean I can not make up my own mind about this, let alone other subjects.
My beliefs in politics will not change.
Conservatives believe in less government, more like it was in 1776.

If ANY of the founding fathers (ahem, George Washington, is one) were to see how it is today, they would look in much disgust to how much of a shitty direction this country is heading.
The way it is now, is not, and never was what they intended.

I know, times change. But it is not always for the better.

Don't. Don't even dare. You're ALWAYS against me. Just for the heck of it. No matter how many times I've fucking TRIED things for you. DON'T make me speak up about you. Literally don't. Better stay quiet, if you have nothing to say, seriously, don't.

LOL. Threaten Me All You Want Dearie. I Never Said A Word Just "Oh My" At The Fact Skelly Has A "List" Means He Has Reasons For It.

They are literally the worse for America, how are they America's hope, when they are being racist fucks with a very hateful and separatist ideals? Just seriously stop eating propaganda.

Oh, this was a good one I almost forgot. The time he said that he would stop ISIS by "taking out their families (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/index.php)."

LOL. Threaten Me All You Want Dearie. I Never Said A Word Just "Oh My" At The Fact Skelly Has A "List" Means He Has Reasons For It.

How is that a threat? I'm just pretty tired of people against me for stupidest reasons and I literally do not need you butting in, because you're literally have the most stupidest reasons, you get offended by EVERYTHING, so of course I'd have lots of reasons for you to be against me. ANYTHING I do, a cough, a THING that goes a little far from what you think is right, makes me a despicable asshole, even though I've shown you, like a couple of times in the course of my stance in this forum, how nice I was sometimes for you. Just, if you're gonna speak up shit about me, have good reasons to, not your own offended by everything self reasons.

I tried to tell someone to not do something, because I knew it'd hurt you, and do you wrong, but hey, I don't care about you, right? I'm just a plain asshole because I speak my mind.

I Never Said A Word Against You.

And curse you Skelly for turning this into a "Ponyo is terrible" thing because now I literally cannot stop about it. It was just political.

They are literally the worse for America, how are they America's hope, when they are being racist fucks with a very hateful and separatist ideals? Just seriously stop eating propaganda.

Everything on the other side is propaganda.

I Never Said A Word Against You.

I know you more than you think. You're always with the most sly comments, a simple :this:, a simple LOL to a reply of someone saying something against me, it means you said something against me.

I know its really stupid for me to say I support Donald Trump with any actual facts, but I just know that he, or Cruz (not exactly sure) is right for America.

Prove me wrong if I cannot find any valid reasons.

I just gave you plenty to read.

Are you a creationist as well, by any chance? You certainly sound like it. "I don't actually have any facts to back this up, but I just know it's true anyway."

I'm sorry but for you to think that the entire country should be run by someone because you "just know" it is incredibly childish, and that is why your age is being brought up. You cannot "just know." Your feeling is that, a feeling. It is based on your upbringing, the social climate you live in, your own selfish desires, biases and preconceived notions. Only by objectively looking at the facts can you reach a valid conclusion. Otherwise you are telling the rest of the country they deserve to be governed by your gut.

Well, everyone else has a gut too, and operating according to it without actually analyzing any facts is usually a pretty bad way to go about anything, but especially choosing who is going to run your country.

In the immortal words of John Cusack, "I've been listening to my gut since I was 14 years old, and frankly speaking, I've come to the conclusion that my guts have shit for brains."

http://www.picgifs.com/reaction-gifs/reaction-gifs/abandon-thread-fuck-this-shit/picgifs-abandon-thread-fuck-this-shit-55904.gif

I'm With Ya Big Guy!

Because I know you more than you think, and those words, any little sly reply to anything against me, means you have something against me.

Because I know you more than you think, and those words, any little sly reply to anything against me, means you have something against me.

Just let it go. This isn't going to help you any.

---------- Post added at 05:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:57 PM ----------




Waiting for a response to all the information I gave you about trump. You asked me to prove your wrong, what is your reaction to his advocacy of beating people for expressing themselves, or his desire to ban people from the country for their religious beliefs? Do you have anything to say about this or will you ignore it so you can continue to let nothing but your first impulse guide you?

I just gave you plenty to read.

Are you a creationist as well, by any chance? You certainly sound like it. "I don't actually have any facts to back this up, but I just know it's true anyway."

I'm sorry but for you to think that the entire country should be run by someone because you "just know" it is incredibly childish, and that is why your age is being brought up. You cannot "just know." Your feeling is that, a feeling. It is based on your upbringing, the social climate you live in, your own selfish desires, biases and preconceived notions. Only by objectively looking at the facts can you reach a valid conclusion. Otherwise you are telling the rest of the country they deserve to be governed by your gut.

Well, everyone else has a gut too, and operating according to it without actually analyzing any facts is usually a pretty bad way to go about anything, but especially choosing who is going to run your country.

In the immortal words of John Cusack, "I've been listening to my gut since I was 14 years old, and frankly speaking, I've come to the conclusion that my guts have shit for brains."

Thank you for pointing that out.

This is not based on selfish desire, no bias, preconceive notions: I've none of these.

How is it selfish? Explain.



Waiting for a response to all the information I gave you about trump. You asked me to prove your wrong, what is your reaction to his advocacy of beating people for expressing themselves, or his desire to ban people from the country for their religious beliefs? Do you have anything to say about this or will you ignore it so you can continue to let nothing but your first impulse guide you?

You'll get a response, on why I support Trump.

Just let it go. This isn't going to help you any.

I am aware, it's just, anyone who knows me, knows I can never shut up in things like these. But I will shut up.

This is not based on selfish desire, no bias, preconceive notions: I've none of these.

If you are forming an opinion without any facts and based on nothing but a feeling of "just knowing," then these are the only things you can have to base the decision on.

It is selfish because it suggests you think your snap judgments are completely sound and that therefore you do not need to take into account any information from anyone else.

What goes before an election is debate. Not just between the candidates but on a national level. Media outlets debate. Journalists and political scientists debate. Everyday people debate, now over social media more than ever before. This national dialogue informs people, exchanges and spreads ideas, refines ideas.

You are saying that you do not need to participate in any of this, and just immediately have the answer without doing any thinking. Fuck everyone else, clonemaster knows who the right candidate is without any of your input. That's what you're saying.

Once more, TK is handling some logic and nice debate over the thread.. but as I'm pretty sure, Clonemaster is gonna hate you now just for that.. lol

It is selfish because it suggests you think your snap judgments are completely sound and that therefore you do not need to take into account any information from anyone else.

What goes before an election is debate. Not just between the candidates but on a national level. Media outlets debate. Journalists and political scientists debate. Everyday people debate, now over social media more than ever before. This national dialogue informs people, exchanges and spreads ideas, refines ideas.

You are saying that you do not need to participate in any of this, and just immediately have the answer without doing any thinking. Fuck everyone else, clonemaster knows who the right candidate is without any of your input. That's what you're saying.

Right, I am God. :p

But seriously, I've heard enough about Bernie Sanders recently, his are the only candidate advertisements I've seen for the past month.
Are you aware how close a socialist is to a communist? It is right up the alley. And free collage, great, but who is paying for it!?

Our government is in enough debt az it iz without it paying for everyone's collage tuition.


If you are forming an opinion without any facts and based on nothing but a feeling of "just knowing," then these are the only things you can have to base the decision on.

I've already outted myself for that one. It was immature of me, I'm aware.

.

But seriously, I've heard enough about Bernie Sanders recently, his are the only candidate advertisements I've seen for the past month.
Are you aware how close a socialist is to a communist? It is right up the alley. And free collage, great, but who is paying for it!?

Our government is in enough debt az it iz without it paying for everyone's collage tuition.

I already addressed the "who is going to pay for it" issue in my first post on this topic.

When Sanders describes himself as a socialist, he is referring to style of government of the Scandinavian countries, often referred to as the "middle way." Their style of government is not socialism, but the state benefits its people very heavily and very strictly controls private power, which are the elements Sanders wants the US to start learning from. Personally, I think calling himself a socialist is a mistake, since people like you who instinctively assume socialism is bad and can never work will write him off for it without considering his ideas, and he really isn't one. What he says is that he specifically considers himself a "democratic socialist" and means the "third way" approach he's advocating, but this isn't a widely understood meaning of the term. This is a mistake of terminology on his part, but not policy.

I don't think you are really all that familiar with what socialism actually is, incidentally. Your view of political systems is one that has been institutionally beaten into the heads of young people in the USA for generations, so I can't fault you for it, but it's wrong. You view things as a spectrum where on one end is communism and the other is capitalism, and socialism, for you, is just one step away from that extreme of communism. The reality is that political systems are far more complex than that and they are not just a straight line of good to evil.

Even the Wikipedia article about socialism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism) is very informative, I'd suggest that as a good place to learn from a less biased source than you've heard from in the past.

You are literally nothing but a 15 year old who doesn't think for himself and you're just eating the propaganda, really. You, what you just said, screams "propaganda" right now. Do you even KNOW what is a socialist or a comunist, really? Who's paying for it? It's the shit every stupid consertive american would say. TAXES. TAXES WOULD PAY FOR IT. AMERICANS would pay for it, at the coast of a more educated people who will do good for America in the future. WHERE to get the money from? Taking A SMALL LOAN of money from things that get too much money, like the military, like TK said, you guys spend too much for military EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTRY IS NOT AT WAR, but conservatives will cry out if anything is done to the military, because OUR HEROS who aren't fighting anything at all, DO NOT TOUCH!.. it's not like just a little less of money would do any harm to the military anyway..

A Socialist and Communist share a similar key belief: Taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

And, yeah, we are paying for it. The government would basically still be using our money to pay for a "free' collage tuition.

We may not be at war, but you must always be prepared. We have a weak military in these times.

A Socialist and Communist share a similar key belief: Taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

And, yeah, we are paying for it. The government would basically still be using our money to pay for a "free' collage tuition.

We may not be at war, but you must always be prepared. We have a weak military in these times.

I.. specially the latest statement.. I'm just.. leaving it here, really. I just.. wow... so yeah, it's completely okay to spend MILLIONS on the military although there's no use to it. I'm not saying completely remove it, but take just some funds of it. JUST A SMALL BIT. How do you have a weak military when there's thousands of people in the army, which is strong, and you also have the marines..? The US is one of the most powerful countries.. war people/ammo wise. You can't just tell me they are weak, just because they aren't at war at the moment.

UGH WHY DON'T I JUST SHUT THE HELL UP.

I.. specially the latest statement.. I'm just.. leaving it here, really. I just.. wow... so yeah, it's completely okay to spend MILLIONS on the military although there's no use to it. I'm not saying completely remove it, but take just some funds of it. JUST A SMALL BIT. How do you have a weak military when there's thousands of people in the army, which is strong, and you also have the marines..? The US is one of the most powerful countries.. war people/ammo wise. You can't just tell me they are weak, just because they aren't at war at the moment.

UGH WHY DON'T I JUST SHUT THE HELL UP.

Yes, I think that would be for the best. You seem to just be blindly calling people names now which is neither helping your position in the argument nor your perception by those who apparently have a grudge against you.

Yes, I think that would be for the best. You seem to just be blindly calling people names now which is neither helping your position in the argument nor your perception by those who apparently have a grudge against you.

You're right, sorry, I'm just gonna leave now.

You're right, sorry, I'm just gonna leave now.

No worries, you just got hotheaded because you care about things. It happens. Just cool down for a while so you can come back with levelheaded reactions if you want to.

I already addressed the "who is going to pay for it" issue in my first post on this topic.

When Sanders describes himself as a socialist, he is referring to style of government of the Scandinavian countries, often referred to as the "middle way." Their style of government is not socialism, but the state benefits its people very heavily and very strictly controls private power, which are the elements Sanders wants the US to start learning from. Personally, I think calling himself a socialist is a mistake, since people like you who instinctively assume socialism is bad and can never work will write him off for it without considering his ideas, and he really isn't one. What he says is that he specifically considers himself a "democratic socialist" and means the "third way" approach he's advocating, but this isn't a widely understood meaning of the term. This is a mistake of terminology on his part, but not policy.

I don't think you are really all that familiar with what socialism actually is, incidentally. Your view of political systems is one that has been institutionally beaten into the heads of young people in the USA for generations, so I can't fault you for it, but it's wrong. You view things as a spectrum where on one end is communism and the other is capitalism, and socialism, for you, is just one step away from that extreme of communism. The reality is that political systems are far more complex than that and they are not just a straight line of good to evil.

Even the Wikipedia article about socialism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism) is very informative, I'd suggest that as a good place to learn from a less biased source than you've heard from in the past.

Alright. *inhales* *exhales*
The thing is, here is the deal with the liberal spectrum: there is a Democrat. That’s like a Harry Truman Democrat, that just believes in, you know, things that typical [Americans believe].
Then you have the progressive, which is actually a slowed-down socialist, somebody who believes we have to take it step-by-step, but we’re heading towards socialism.
Then you have a full-out socialist, and after that, a communist. That’s the real spectrum on the left.

A Democrat is good, but definitely not the ones we have now. The government should be run more like a business, that is what Trumpet is going for.

Bernie Sanders seems to be promising everything for free, but that will not be possible without our government going dark within a couple of years.
Why so many people support him, is this reason: free tuition, free healthcare, more social security benefits without a tax increase.

And why does he want to start a revolution? What will that achieve? It will not end well, nor will the people who start it be in control at the end.
The Constitution is at stake here, and I'm not hearing anything about the second amendment from Sanders. And that amendment, no the whole damn constitution is not being respected by the government.

He may not be a full-out socialist, but he still wants to level out the playing field between the rich and poor, and that just doesn't work.
Neither does trying to incorporate the ideals of socialism within a Democratic system, and the Democrats have changed a lot since they were first established.

What they used to be like is how they should be now. Its all screwed up.


Waiting for a response to all the information I gave you about trump. You asked me to prove your wrong, what is your reaction to his advocacy of beating people for expressing themselves, or his desire to ban people from the country for their religious beliefs? Do you have anything to say about this or will you ignore it so you can continue to let nothing but your first impulse guide you?

Late response:
This situation about people and their religious beliefs mainly apply to the Muslims being in America.

They want freedom here and for us to respect their beliefs and for them to be allowed to practice their religious routines, yet they wouldn't allow that if the situation was turned opposite.

Trump only wants to TEMPORARILY ban any foreign Muslims from entering the United States until better security precautions are implemented.

The thing is, here is the deal with the liberal spectrum: there is a Democrat. That’s like a Harry Truman Democrat, that just believes in, you know, things that typical [Americans believe].
Then you have the progressive, which is actually a slowed-down socialist, somebody who believes we have to take it step-by-step, but we’re heading towards socialism.
Then you have a full-out socialist, and after that, a communist. That’s the real spectrum on the left.

That's an extremely oversimplified view which can be copied as a mirror image for the conservative side of things.

You are inferring that people you label progressives want to eventually lead things towards socialism, but that is not an element of the policy that progressive democrats propose. In fact, progressive democrats like Hillary Clinton as a whole are very much a part of the oligarchical capitalist system we have right now, and have every incentive for their careers and wallets to support capitalism. I'm not sure if she is one of the people you are lumping in this category, but she is generally considered a progressive on the left side of things so I'm taking a guess you mean people like her.


A Democrat is good, but definitely not the ones we have now. The government should be run more like a business, that is what Trumpet is going for.

This is a line that I hear parroted a lot without anything to support it. Can you explain in detail why, exactly, you think the government should be run like a business?

I can certainly explain why I think it should not. Simple: the goal of a business is profit, and specifically profit most for the people at the top. In capitalism, the goal of a business is to keep their expenses, including the wages they pay, as low as they possibly can get away with. Running the country like a business, the goal would be to generate wealth at the highest levels possible -- presumably here the government -- but to let as little of that wealth be distributed to the workers, here the citizens of the country, as possible.

Nations are not corporations. Corporations are not people. Nations are people. It is a very different thing to run a nation. However, right now, in many ways we DO run the country like a business. Our politicians are all bought by wealthy and powerful private interests who make up the vast majority of their campaign contributions. This is one of the respects in which Sanders is unique and highly valuable. For once we actually have someone running and getting a lot of support who is NOT treating the role like being president and CEO of a company, but rather being a public servant who leads a nation of human beings.


Bernie Sanders seems to be promising everything for free, but that will not be possible without our government going dark within a couple of years.
Why so many people support him, is this reason: free tuition, free healthcare, more social security benefits without a tax increase.

Again, have you actually looked at the details of the policy he proposes? Sanders's education bill will find much of its funding by introducing taxes on wall street speculation. This will be a good way for the people who crashed our economy in 2008 and who leech off of the financial system to make themselves wealthy while producing nothing of benefit to the rest of the country to start helping to contribute something back for all their luxury.

In addition, as I have pointed out earlier in this thread, the idea that we are too poor to do anything for our citizens is very misleading. The issue is not that we're broke but where we are doing our most excessive spending, and that nobody wants to talk about it because of fearmongering.

In 2015, the United States military budget was approximately 600 billion dollars.

Sanders's education reform bill would need 47 billions dollars.

I read your post earlier about how our military is "weak." This is patently absurd. Our military outclasses all other military forces on the planet and still we increase our spending on it every year. Our level of spending on "defense" (a ridiculous name considering that almost everything we do with it is aggressive) is so ridiculously high it is really hard to explain. The second biggest military spender in the world is Russia. Guess what they spend on "defense" (also ridiculous from them) every year? 200 billion. Our budget is three times theirs.

You claim that we need to boost our military at the expense of all other things. For what? Explain what this outlandish military spending has accomplished. Nowadays, supporters will tell us we need it because ever since 9/11 terrorists are out to get us. Well yes, I agree, there are terrorists out there who want to attack the United States and other civilized countries. So in our fear, since 9/11 we have invaded Iraq, bombed the hell out of areas all across the Middle East resulting in literally countless innocent deaths caught in the crossfire, and we have attempted to hunt down and destroy Al Quaeda wherever it may be.

The results of our efforts? Well, ISIS, for one. We turned Iraq into a worse place than it used to be and created an even worse version of Al-Quaeda there. Al-Quaeda meanwhile also still exists despite our killing many of its leaders and a whole lot of innocent people in our path. Terrorist attacks still hit us at home and are hitting people in Europe. Where is the victory, after all these years? All we've done and if anything at all, we have actually made things worse.

And over those years, untold trillions of dollars have been put towards this efforts. And people have the nerve to claim that those who want to pay for our education and our healthcare are being financially irresponsible. This is a joke of the highest order, it does not even merit consideration. I don't care how scared you are of religious fundamentalist groups -- you cannot logically justify letting our people get into life long debt, bankrupt themselves with hospital bills because they are sick, starve and search aimlessly for jobs that don't exist and aren't coming back because you have to outspend the entire rest of the civilized world on building legions of flying death robots to blow up weddings across the ocean. You just can't.

Those trillions of dollars we spent on wars that have destabilized the middle east could have erased all student loan debt across the country, paid for everyone's college eduction, covered healthcare for all, and maybe even had a little leftover to go towards that deficit that your camp likes to use as an excuse to say we can't help people. And you want to look at all the millions of people who are suffering because of those problems, who could have been free of them, and say sorry, it was more important for us to spend that money taking a giant explosive shit on Iraq and turning it into a breeding ground for ISIS. Fuck you.


And why does he want to start a revolution?

Because of everything I just said up there. Mic drop.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/IOCXHPvn3WErm/200.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/RCFM5fLMPyJAQ/giphy.gif

To think there'd still be people trying to say you're wrong right after you just single handedly owned everyone..

Oh, I almost forgot. Got a little caught up there.

On the subject of the second amendment, you might be interested to know that, while Sanders most definitely supports increased controls on firearms (as any sane person does), he is pro gun ownership and in fact Hillary has constantly tried to attack him as being on the NRA's side.

In reality his view is pro guns for hunting/sport but against assault weapons and in favor of stricter regulation on who gets hold of guns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq86YXlQ4d0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-80XOYQD1qs

Which is pretty much the best way to solve the massive gun problems America has, but hey.. "MUH GUNS"...

Some americans would let children have fire guns and live happily with the thought. "It's freedom, it's for defense"

More on Sanders's gun control record:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm

He has consistently voted in favor of gun control, but, for example, #2 on this list is when he voted yes to allowing firearms in baggage on trains.

He does get an F from the NRA, so if clonemaster plans to be a card carryin', guns 'n' god, right wingin' bitter-clingin' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cs9jP2ILOw) patriot I guess he won't be feeling the Bern anytime soon.

In response to post #197:


This is a line that I hear parroted a lot without anything to support it. Can you explain in detail why, exactly, you think the government should be run like a business?

I can certainly explain why I think it should not. Simple: the goal of a business is profit, and specifically profit most for the people at the top. In capitalism, the goal of a business is to keep their expenses, including the wages they pay, as low as they possibly can get away with. Running the country like a business, the goal would be to generate wealth at the highest levels possible -- presumably here the government -- but to let as little of that wealth be distributed to the workers, here the citizens of the country, as possible.

Nations are not corporations. Corporations are not people. Nations are people. It is a very different thing to run a nation. However, right now, in many ways we DO run the country like a business. Our politicians are all bought by wealthy and powerful private interests who make up the vast majority of their campaign contributions. This is one of the respects in which Sanders is unique and highly valuable. For once we actually have someone running and getting a lot of support who is NOT treating the role like being president and CEO of a company, but rather being a public servant who leads a nation of human beings.

Okay, this took additional reading for certain subjects I was not completely sure on, but here is why the government should be run like a business.

First, a big step for the government would be to spend less than it makes. The federal budget has a number of "unfunded liabilities," including Social Security, federal pensions, Medicare and Medicaid, which are preventing positive cash flow. Unfortunately, when the positive side of the income statement decreases as it has in the last four years, the expense side does not. And because many of those liabilities have cost of living adjustments, they are rising every year. Curbing those expenses or putting a cap on them would be a great step towards solvency.

Second, businesses do not have an unlimited checkbook, nor should the Federal Reserve. Right now, the government can print money at its discretion and as we have seen, it does more often than we care to remember. Printing money means there is more cash on hand to go around, which sounds good, but it dilutes the value of U.S. currency and therefore causes inflation. That means it will require more of that diluted money to purchase goods and services.

Third, the government should asses all of its employees according to their work flow, production, and output. And if any employees are not pulling their weight, they should be let go. But, we all know that will not happen. It is almost impossible to lose your job if you work for the government.

That is not how a business is run.

Fourth, the benefit plans offered by the U.S. government are not balanced. Its health plan with all of its options is phenomenal, while its 401(k) plan (the Thrift Savings Plan or TSP) with its five investment options is awful. Having meaningful but fair, competitive, and economical employee benefits helps both the employee and the employer. It also could save us some tax dollars.

Finally, sometimes businesses need to realize that they are not productive or financially stable in one area or another. When that is the case, they should cease operations in that area. For example, the U.S. Post Office has been struggling for years, but nothing has been done about it. This is definitely one area in which our government could become more efficient. They could sell off that unit by making it a private entity. It would likely be more competitive and more efficient and not put such a burden on the federal budget.

As you know, big businesses are not always easy to run, but you also know that if you are leading a large company, you must always watch your revenues and expenses and make good business decisions by looking into the future. If our government officials, both Democrats and Republicans, would begin to do that, we would have a better economy, a more productive nation, be the global power we once were, and our stock market would likely be doing much better.

All the more reason to run our government like a business. It is a business.


I read your post earlier about how our military is "weak." This is patently absurd. Our military outclasses all other military forces on the planet and still we increase our spending on it every year. Our level of spending on "defense" (a ridiculous name considering that almost everything we do with it is aggressive) is so ridiculously high it is really hard to explain. The second biggest military spender in the world is Russia. Guess what they spend on "defense" (also ridiculous from them) every year? 200 billion. Our budget is three times theirs.

You claim that we need to boost our military at the expense of all other things. For what? Explain what this outlandish military spending has accomplished. Nowadays, supporters will tell us we need it because ever since 9/11 terrorists are out to get us. Well yes, I agree, there are terrorists out there who want to attack the United States and other civilized countries. So in our fear, since 9/11 we have invaded Iraq, bombed the hell out of areas all across the Middle East resulting in literally countless innocent deaths caught in the crossfire, and we have attempted to hunt down and destroy Al Quaeda wherever it may be.

The results of our efforts? Well, ISIS, for one. We turned Iraq into a worse place than it used to be and created an even worse version of Al-Quaeda there. Al-Quaeda meanwhile also still exists despite our killing many of its leaders and a whole lot of innocent people in our path. Terrorist attacks still hit us at home and are hitting people in Europe. Where is the victory, after all these years? All we've done and if anything at all, we have actually made things worse.

And over those years, untold trillions of dollars have been put towards this efforts. And people have the nerve to claim that those who want to pay for our education and our healthcare are being financially irresponsible. This is a joke of the highest order, it does not even merit consideration. I don't care how scared you are of religious fundamentalist groups -- you cannot logically justify letting our people get into life long debt, bankrupt themselves with hospital bills because they are sick, starve and search aimlessly for jobs that don't exist and aren't coming back because you have to outspend the entire rest of the civilized world on building legions of flying death robots to blow up weddings across the ocean. You just can't.

Those trillions of dollars we spent on wars that have destabilized the middle east could have erased all student loan debt across the country, paid for everyone's college eduction, covered healthcare for all, and maybe even had a little leftover to go towards that deficit that your camp likes to use as an excuse to say we can't help people. And you want to look at all the millions of people who are suffering because of those problems, who could have been free of them, and say sorry, it was more important for us to spend that money taking a giant explosive shit on Iraq and turning it into a breeding ground for ISIS. Fuck you.

My comment to how our military is weak is not "patently absurd". It is entirely true. Our military used to outclass all other military forces on the planet, but with poor command; direction, being under the Obomber administration, the US military has basically reverted back to its former state before and during World War I.

Here are two articles (there are definitely more) that explain in more detail.

One (http://www.inquisitr.com/1877546/u-s-military-now-too-weak-to-defend-the-nation-new-report-says/)
Two (http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/24/report-us-military-capabilities-are-surprisingly-weak/)

So, we do need to rebuild our military to be fit and able to meet standard requirements, which they do not now.
This is another thing Donald Trumpet wants to accomplish and something I am seeing nothing about from Bernie Sandman.

Speaking of which, he escaped a draft into the military back during World War II, which was illegal to do at the time. But somehow, nobody gives a shit.

Politics is an interesting subject. :laugh:

and,

Cocaine is a hell of a drug. *chuckles*

Thats quite an overreaction thread!

I am glad I am not a US citizen.

Thats quite an overreaction thread!

Oh yeah! :p


I am glad I am not a US citizen.

Yeah. The US government has got themselves into a lot of shit:

https://49.media.tumblr.com/25ec3589084d28e05f48bb57a472a996/tumblr_nf33rslPxk1qhz95yo1_500.gif

he he

I am glad I am not a US citizen.

At times I'm ashamed and hate that I'm a US citizen. But I'm not responsible for my government.

At times I'm ashamed and hate that I'm a US citizen. But I'm not responsible for my government.

I feel the same.

They're responsible for their own crap, most definitely.

This thread.. I love it.

This is where I'd want to go whenever I see that continual scheisse about where Bart Oss "really gets his shares from". :)

Where does he get his shares from?

The moon.

The moon.

Naw brah it's gotta be from Mars.

Are there sessions on se moon?

Well I know where ostgems gets his from.

Are there sessions on se moon?

All the major studios beam their scores to the moon for safekeeping, but Bart Oss has an uncle who works at NASA and gets them through him.

^This is definitely what's going on.

I'm still a lil pissed off that the Mars Bar was discontinued and supposedly re-released under the name Snickers Almond.

Mars bar!?

Why the government should be run like a business

The crux of what you're arguing here seems to revolve around the idea that the federal government has institutional programs whose costs exceed its earnings. This could of course eventually be a problem. However you're not considering the goal of the government opposed to the goal of businesses. The goal of businesses is to profit. Is this the goal of the federal government?

I want to examine one particular point here: the US postal service.

This is a classically misleading example, and it leads me to believe that you are parroting things, not doing in depth research. Because if you had, you'd know this: The US Postal Service does not receive any of its funding from taxpayer dollars. The US Postal Service really *is* a business; it makes its money for postage stamps, not tax dollars. Except for one thing. In 2006, congress passed a law requiring the postal service to spend billions of dollars a year pre-funding its retirees health benefits. This is a requirement that no other business is held to, not even any other government agency. This was, incidentally, also when the USPS's financial troubles began. It actually made a profit every year before that.

It has borrowed money from the treasury since then because of those financial troubles and is currently trying to get congress to change the law again so it can balance its checkbook and repay the loans.

But there's something else I think you're probably not aware of. Remember when you brought up the 2nd amendment before? I assume the constitution and sticking to it is a big issue for you, correct? Well, as it turns out, the USPS is part of the constitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause). Oops.

And that really gets to the heart of the issue, I'd say. The constitution. Businesses don't have constitutions. They don't have democratic processes by which constitutions can be amended. That is because governments exist for fundamentally different reasons: to protect their citizenry and improve the quality of their lives. Businesses exist to make profits, and that is all.

That is why programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security exist. Because people need them. The checkbook is not the issue. Humanity is the issue. You're right -- no business would keep a program like Social Security. The US Government is not a business. It is a government.




My comment to how our military is weak is not "patently absurd". It is entirely true. Our military used to outclass all other military forces on the planet, but with poor command; direction, being under the Obomber administration, the US military has basically reverted back to its former state before and during World War I.

Here are two articles (there are definitely more) that explain in more detail.

One (http://www.inquisitr.com/1877546/u-s-military-now-too-weak-to-defend-the-nation-new-report-says/)
Two (http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/24/report-us-military-capabilities-are-surprisingly-weak/)

Both of these articles reference a report by The Heritage Foundation. Have you checked it out?

The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank which has a well established political agenda in favor of deregulation of the financial sector, increased military spending, and tax breaks for the wealthy. The report that they filed is their interpretation of data -- their conclusion is not fact.

If you look at the Heritage Foundation report these articles are referring to, they refer to "budget cuts" in the military. This is not strictly true and is a misleading representation of the facts. The US military budget in fact has continued to increase every year -- however, the rate at which it is increasing has been reduced under the Obama administration, this is true. Also true is that the army has been reduced to a pre-WW2 level. This (unlike most things he has done) is actually quite in keeping with the promises Obama made that got him elected. He claimed he was going to end our wars altogether, a very popular suggestion since most people with good sense hate wars and want nothing to do with them unless there is literally no other choice. Reducing the rate of military spending growth is a sad imitation of what he actually said he would do, but at least it is something.

The report concludes that our forces are inadequate because we don't have sufficient resources to "fight two wars at once." That is beyond ridiculous. No nation should ever be fighting two wars at once, there has never been a good reason for this in history and there most certain isn't now. You made no response to all of what I posted above explaining why the wars we've been fighting for the last decade have been: A) a huge waste of money, B) a loss of countless innocent lives so I assume you have no objection to it. Since we've clearly established that there is no legitimate reason on earth we should be involved in all these wars in the first place, concluding that our military strength is insufficient because we're struggling to do so is completely illogical.

Keep this in perspective. The report you are citing lists Russia as one of our major threats. As I have just pointed out, our military budget is three times that of Russia, and somehow we are not safe from them. Not to mention that this does not factor in all the resources of our allies in the United Nations who would fight on our side if we somehow got into a war with Russia (a possibility which is incredibly unlikely.)





So, we do need to rebuild our military to be fit and able to meet standard requirements, which they do not now.
This is another thing Donald Trumpet wants to accomplish and something I am seeing nothing about from Bernie Sanders.

That's because Bernie Sanders doesn't listen to a report from a think tank with a well established agenda of increasing military spending to benefit corporate interests as much as possible.


Speaking of which, he escaped a draft into the military back during World War II, which was illegal to do at the time. But somehow, nobody gives a shit.

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

The last year of WW2 was 1945. In 1945 Bernie Sanders was four years old.

What you are attempting to talk about is the Vietnam war. He avoided the draft in Vietnam by applying for conscientious objector status, which is a legal process. I'd have done the same thing. You know why? Because according to my conscience, I damn well would have objected to the Vietnam war, just like Sanders did. It was a horribly unjust war, one in which the US government mislead the public to justify its actions (sound like anything that has happened recently?)

The Vietnam war over time became overwhelmingly unpopular among the American public. They hated that their children had been sent overseas to fight a bullshit war with no end in sight. I admire Sanders for gaining conscientious objector status and recognizing that the war was completely unjust.

---------- Post added at 10:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 PM ----------


At times I'm ashamed and hate that I'm a US citizen. But I'm not responsible for my government.

Yes you are. Your taxes fund its actions, and your elected officials control it.

Every single one of us is responsible for it, and we all have an immense amount of blood on our hands.

Mars bar!?

Someone up there^^ said Mars. It made me think of that. Grr.

Yes you are. Your taxes fund its actions, and your elected officials control it.

Every single one of us is responsible for it, and we all have an immense amount of blood on our hands.

My taxes may fund my government's actions, but that is beyond my control.

What I meant was I'm not responsible for those who are in office.

My taxes may fund my government's actions, but that is beyond my control.

What I meant was I'm not responsible for those who are in office.

They are your elected officials. You are responsible for them.

I hear this defense a lot. Here's the thing -- you are an American. So, you will use America's infrastructure. You will benefit from the protection of its police and its military. You will use its government-issued currency. In every way you will participate and reap every benefit you can from being an American citizen.

These benefits were all enacted by your elected officials. They are maintained by your government with your tax dollars. You have no problem accepting that you are entitled to them, even though you're "not responsible" for those who are in office.

If you're "not responsible" for those in office, but you are still entitled as a citizen to benefit from the good things they do, then how are you not also accountable for the bad? You can't have it both ways. You cannot reap the benefits of the American government while accepting no responsibility for its impact on other people. You participate in the system like the rest of us, and the system does what it does.

Your hands and my hands are just as dirty, but at least I'm not wearing gloves and pretending they're my skin.

My taxes may fund my government's actions, but that is beyond my control.

What I meant was I'm not responsible for those who are in office.

Exactly. Just because we give them money does not mean we can control what they do with it.

And we don't have a choice to not give them money, it illegal not to pay taxes.

As an Australian who isn't really following the American politics happenings my opinion is that Bernie looks pretty alrite

:parrot:

As an Australian who isn't really following the American politics happenings my opinion is that Bernie looks pretty alrite

:parrot:

Good to see ya, Penguin.

Between you posting, Nanami posting a while ago and me making really long posts on the bullshit of the American political system, I almost feel like it's ten years ago. I wish Odin was here.

:autobots:

Good to see ya, Penguin.

Between you posting, Nanami posting a while ago and me making really long posts on the bullshit of the American political system, I almost feel like it's ten years ago. I wish Odin was here.

:autobots:

I miss reading Atom Narmors multiple page long lime green tirades.

And all the funposting

Fucking atom narmor. Fuck yeah.

Nowadays all we have is shit like James P Sullivan III, Esquire to fill that role. It's not even close.

The crux of what you're arguing here seems to revolve around the idea that the federal government has institutional programs whose costs exceed its earnings. This could of course eventually be a problem. However you're not considering the goal of the government opposed to the goal of businesses. The goal of businesses is to profit. Is this the goal of the federal government?

I want to examine one particular point here: the US postal service.

This is a classically misleading example, and it leads me to believe that you are parroting things, not doing in depth research. Because if you had, you'd know this: The US Postal Service does not receive any of its funding from taxpayer dollars. The US Postal Service really *is* a business; it makes its money for postage stamps, not tax dollars. Except for one thing. In 2006, congress passed a law requiring the postal service to spend billions of dollars a year pre-funding its retirees health benefits. This is a requirement that no other business is held to, not even any other government agency. This was, incidentally, also when the USPS's financial troubles began. It actually made a profit every year before that.

It has borrowed money from the treasury since then because of those financial troubles and is currently trying to get congress to change the law again so it can balance its checkbook and repay the loans.

But there's something else I think you're probably not aware of. Remember when you brought up the 2nd amendment before? I assume the constitution and sticking to it is a big issue for you, correct? Well, as it turns out, the USPS is part of the constitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause). Oops.

And that really gets to the heart of the issue, I'd say. The constitution. Businesses don't have constitutions. They don't have democratic processes by which constitutions can be amended. That is because governments exist for fundamentally different reasons: to protect their citizenry and improve the quality of their lives. Businesses exist to make profits, and that is all.

That is why programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security exist. Because people need them. The checkbook is not the issue. Humanity is the issue. You're right -- no business would keep a program like Social Security. The US Government is not a business. It is a government.

Of course it is a government, but it needs to be run more like a business, with the goal you stated: to protect our citizenry and improve the quality of our lives. Have the righteous goal of a government, be run more like a business, get the picture?

The US government agencies are involved where they don't need to be: spending money they don't need to, on programs we do not need. It is nice to have them, but we just don't need them.
This is one of the places the government is spending money they do not have. These programs are not all bad, at least the people are putting money into it.

And no, the USPS is not apart of the constitution. The article you linked to, only states that congress is empowered to "establish post offices and post roads", that does not mean that the USPS specifically is part of the constitution. And you said that like I was proposing to eliminate the United States Postal Service, I clearly was not. Now, this brings me to another point: Why do you think FedEx and UPS are so successful? Because they are private companies. The USPS is not, it is owned and apart of our currently inadequate government, and they obviously do not know how to run it. I proposed it be sold to a private company, so it can actually make money, just like UPS and FedEx is and does, and so that would be another way to cut expenses for the government. The USPS would not be having all the struggles and would not be losing more money each year if they were a private business like FedEx and UPS.


Both of these articles reference a report by The Heritage Foundation. Have you checked it out?

The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank which has a well established political agenda in favor of deregulation of the financial sector, increased military spending, and tax breaks for the wealthy. The report that they filed is their interpretation of data -- their conclusion is not fact.

If you look at the Heritage Foundation report these articles are referring to, they refer to "budget cuts" in the military. This is not strictly true and is a misleading representation of the facts. The US military budget in fact has continued to increase every year -- however, the rate at which it is increasing has been reduced under the Obama administration, this is true. Also true is that the army has been reduced to a pre-WW2 level. This (unlike most things he has done) is actually quite in keeping with the promises Obama made that got him elected. He claimed he was going to end our wars altogether, a very popular suggestion since most people with good sense hate wars and want nothing to do with them unless there is literally no other choice. Reducing the rate of military spending growth is a sad imitation of what he actually said he would do, but at least it is something.

The report concludes that our forces are inadequate because we don't have sufficient resources to "fight two wars at once." That is beyond ridiculous. No nation should ever be fighting two wars at once, there has never been a good reason for this in history and there most certain isn't now. You made no response to all of what I posted above explaining why the wars we've been fighting for the last decade have been: A) a huge waste of money, B) a loss of countless innocent lives so I assume you have no objection to it. Since we've clearly established that there is no legitimate reason on earth we should be involved in all these wars in the first place, concluding that our military strength is insufficient because we're struggling to do so is completely illogical.

Keep this in perspective. The report you are citing lists Russia as one of our major threats. As I have just pointed out, our military budget is three times that of Russia, and somehow we are not safe from them. Not to mention that this does not factor in all the resources of our allies in the United Nations who would fight on our side if we somehow got into a war with Russia (a possibility which is incredibly unlikely.)

Under the Obomber Administration, the military has turned weak, because Obama has fired many Generals because they did not follow orders. This clearly is because they knew what they were ordered to do was not right, hence what happened. When George W. Bush was president, our military was adequate, and under most of the presidents before him. Obomber really done fucked things up.

The budget for the military may be large, but here is the thing: The government is obviously not putting the money to good use for the military; to any use for the military, possibly.
We need someone in office to make sure the money is being used for and on the military. Actually, saying to increase the budget is misleading, it is how its being used and what its being used for, is the problem.

The requirement to fight two wars at once is not beyond ridiculous, it is pretty standard, actually. With the fucked up shape of the world, the middle east, ISIS, Al Qaeda, the other communist nations who could pose a threat in the future: There are plenty valid reasons for this to be a requirement; one we cannot meet due to the presidential service and ill decisions of Obomber for 6 or 7 years.

The Heritage Foundation, yeah I've checked out, and it checks out. The fact that they are conservative, means they determine fact, it is not biased, but that is not what liberals might think.
Their interpretation of data, is correct. The conclusion was made by facts. It makes me feel like you've not read it yourself, or your'e just not understanding the truth what is right in front of you.



You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

The last year of WW2 was 1945. In 1945 Bernie Sanders was four years old.

What you are attempting to talk about is the Vietnam war. He avoided the draft in Vietnam by applying for conscientious objector status, which is a legal process. I'd have done the same thing. You know why? Because according to my conscience, I damn well would have objected to the Vietnam war, just like Sanders did. It was a horribly unjust war, one in which the US government mislead the public to justify its actions (sound like anything that has happened recently?)

The Vietnam war over time became overwhelmingly unpopular among the American public. They hated that their children had been sent overseas to fight a bullshit war with no end in sight. I admire Sanders for gaining conscientious objector status and recognizing that the war was completely unjust.

That was an honest mistake on my part, I thought it was World War II, but after what you stated and finding out when Bernie Sandman was born, I was incorrect.

The war was not unjust, if Kennedy was president throughout the whole war, we would've won. Johnson and Nixon did not know what they were doing.
Not everything our troops did in Vietnam was just. I've read of them burning villages, with innocent people in them. This is an unspeakable act, but that was sort of beyond our military's control.

As for Sanders, I guess you weren't aware that his conscientious objector status application was eventually rejected, but by that time he was too old to be drafted.

Here is what Steve Wikert of Cedar Falls, Iowa wrote about the subject when asked how a Democratic Socialist like Sanders, who did not serve in the military by applying for the conscientious objector status, could be commander in chief:
I enlisted in the military while I was still in high school. Around that time Bernie Sanders’ draft board was deciding on his claim that he refused to do military service because he was a conscientious objector. He did so to avoid having to serve his country in the Vietnam War. Soon after he turned 26, too old to be drafted, and no longer needed ways to avoid the draft. Sanders was just settling down in his new home in Vermont in 1970-1971 while I served my country as a military policeman in jeep patrols in Vietnam.

His decision to refuse to fulfill his wartime civic and patriotic duties claiming conscientious objection follows him his entire life.

Ah, yeah, the typical american conservative thinking that war is everything, and that if you haven't gone to the army, you're one useless piece of shit who does not deserve to be called american :laugh: Same with if you don't have a gun!

Americans have an obsession with guns, patriotism and war. Whoever wants to deny that, it's completely desilusional.

Of course it is a government, but it needs to be run more like a business, with the goal you stated: to protect our citizenry and improve the quality of our lives. Have the righteous goal of a government, be run more like a business, get the picture?

The US government agencies are involved where they don't need to be: spending money they don't need to, on programs we do not need. It is nice to have them, but we just don't need them.
This is one of the places the government is spending money they do not have. These programs are not all bad, at least the people are putting money into it.

Spending money you do not have is a common thing for a business (or individual) to do. It is called credit. There is nothing inherently unlike a business about it.

If the debt gets out of control, it is a problem. On that we are agreed. However you seem to be insisting on repeating this mantra, as far as I can tell, purely in the belief that controlling debt = behaving like a business. As I have repeatedly pointed out, this is false. Again -- and you have yet to respond to this, so I assume you accept it -- the goal of a business is to profit, which is not the goal of the federal government. Therefore if the federal government were run like a business this would be harmful rather than helpful. Why? Because much-needed aspects of the government's services to its citizens would be cut out in the name of making a profit.

You refer above to "programs we do not need." You mentioned earlier programs including Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Would you like to explain to me what, precisely, the people currently benefiting from those programs would do if they were pulled out from under them? The programs were not invented in a vacuum. They were invented because millions of people were struggling without them.

If you want to talk about finding ways to alter the programs so that they are less expensive in order to keep the deficit down, sure. Many reasonable people are talking about that. Raising the retirement age, for example. This is a perfectly reasonable suggestion given that lifespans have increased since SS/medicare was introduced.

However, if the country were to be run like a business, they would be scrapped altogether because they will never be profitable, causing immense suffering for the people who rely on them.


And no, the USPS is not apart of the constitution. The article you linked to, only states that congress is empowered to "establish post offices and post roads", that does not mean that the USPS specifically is part of the constitution. And you said that like I was proposing to eliminate the United States Postal Service, I clearly was not. Now, this brings me to another point: Why do you think FedEx and UPS are so successful? Because they are private companies. The USPS is not, it is owned and apart of our currently inadequate government, and they obviously do not know how to run it. I proposed it be sold to a private company, so it can actually make money, just like UPS and FedEx is and does, and so that would be another way to cut expenses for the government. The USPS would not be having all the struggles and would not be losing more money each year if they were a private business like FedEx and UPS.

Boy, you are really reaching now. What do you think the USPS is? It is "post offices and post roads." No, it doesn't specifically say "And it shall be the US Postal Service organization established in 1792!"

Now you backpedal and say you weren't proposing to eliminate the USPS. Well, what you said was "When that is the case, they should cease operations in that area." Now you are suggesting that rather than drop it altogether they should privatize it, but this is the first you've mentioned of that possibility, so no, I don't think you "clearly" were not suggesting they eliminate it.

But what you still don't seem to understand is that the USPS already does operate like a private business. The government doesn't come in and tell it how to operate. They established and it does its own thing, pulling in its own revenue from postage stamps just like any other business. Aside from the one thing I mentioned before, which you also ignored, that congress requires them to pre-fund enormous amounts of their retirees' medical funds, something which no private business is required to do. Again, prior to that change, the post office has always made a profit, just like the businesses you are praising here which are NOT held to such a requirement by congress. If you were running a business and congress suddenly told you that you were legally required to spend several billion extra dollars a year on things that were not really necessary at the time, don't you think this would negatively impact your operations as well? So, I don't buy your argument that privatizing the post office would make it inherently different. For most of its history it has run just fine, and there is no reason in the world it can't be brought back to profitability with some work.


Under the Obomber Administration, the military has turned weak, because Obama has fired many Generals because they did not follow orders. This clearly is because they knew what they were ordered to do was not right, hence what happened. When George W. Bush was president, our military was adequate, and under most of the presidents before him. Obomber really done fucked things up.

Haha. Where are you getting this from? The generals didn't follow orders because what they were ordered to do was not right? But wait a minute -- what was this? Did Obama order them to kill a puppy or something?

Under George Bush who you seem to be a fan of, the US military knowingly invaded a foreign country resulting in an enormous loss of innocent life in crossfire. They destabilized the region, turning it into a breeding ground for ISIS. And you're telling me under Obama -- who told them to, what, keep fighting terrorists, which is exactly what Bush had them doing? -- they suddenly developed a conscience about this and refused?

Please give me a citation for this generals quit because of Obama's evil orders bullshit you're pedaling. I'd like to see it. And no, not the opinion of a conservative journalist, I mean give me facts.



The budget for the military may be large, but here is the thing: The government is obviously not putting the money to good use for the military; to any use for the military, possibly.
We need someone in office to make sure the money is being used for and on the military. Actually, saying to increase the budget is misleading, it is how its being used and what its being used for, is the problem.

The requirement to fight two wars at once is not beyond ridiculous, it is pretty standard, actually. With the fucked up shape of the world, the middle east, ISIS, Al Qaeda, the other communist nations who could pose a threat in the future: There are plenty valid reasons for this to be a requirement; one we cannot meet due to the presidential service and ill decisions of Obomber for 6 or 7 years.

The Heritage Foundation, yeah I've checked out, and it checks out. The fact that they are conservative, means they determine fact, it is not biased, but that is not what liberals might think.
Their interpretation of data, is correct. The conclusion was made by facts. It makes me feel like you've not read it yourself, or your'e just not understanding the truth what is right in front of you.

The fact that they are conservative means they agree with your opinion. You already held an opinion so you went out and looked for someone who agreed with it, then posted that as if it proved your point. Clearly, you've been impressed by my ability to cite sources for my claims over the course of this conversation, and that's good, because you're at least trying to do the same thing now, but you still need to understand the difference between backing up an opinion by citing facts, and backing up an opinion by citing someone else who holds the same opinion. Regardless of how true you think it is, it isn't a fact that our military power is insufficient because some people believe that based on data. The facts are the budget, what the goals of the military are, what it has and hasn't been successful at. From there we interpret those facts to get to a conclusion.

Fighting multiple wars at once is not "standard" in any way shape or form. To my knowledge no other country on earth is doing this right now. It is not even standard for the United States; though we have been in a rather disgusting amount of wars throughout our history, fighting more than one at once is practically unheard of.

As I pointed out previously, your belief that the state of the world requires this excessive use of military force -- the existence of terrorist organizations and your laughable claim that any "communist" country is a threat to us as if we're still at the height of the cold war -- is what we have been operating under since the Bush administration, and the outcome of it has been overwhelmingly negative for us and literally every one else. I asked previously for you to explain to me what has been accomplished by this enormous military effort we've undergone all these years. I pointed out that Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq destabilized the region, gave a birthplace to ISIS and cost countless innocent lives in the process. You have still not explained what good any of that did. Our efforts in Afghanistan have been similarly fruitless. The "War on terror" has been fought by young Americans for over ten years now, with no victory, no end in sight, and for what?

Again, if you think that our military strength is insufficient because we're struggling to keep these atrocities up, you're going to need to justify them with some hard evidence. Show me what the benefit is of doing this.




That was an honest mistake on my part, I thought it was World War II, but after what you stated and finding out when Bernie Sandman was born, I was incorrect.

The war was not unjust, if Kennedy was president throughout the whole war, we would've won. Johnson and Nixon did not know what they were doing.
Not everything our troops did in Vietnam was just. I've read of them burning villages, with innocent people in them. This is an unspeakable act, but that was sort of beyond our military's control.

As for Sanders, I guess you weren't aware that his conscientious objector status application was eventually rejected, but by that time he was too old to be drafted.

Here is what Steve Wikert of Cedar Falls, Iowa wrote about the subject when asked how a Democratic Socialist like Sanders, who did not serve in the military by applying for the conscientious objector status, could be commander in chief:
I enlisted in the military while I was still in high school. Around that time Bernie Sanders’ draft board was deciding on his claim that he refused to do military service because he was a conscientious objector. He did so to avoid having to serve his country in the Vietnam War. Soon after he turned 26, too old to be drafted, and no longer needed ways to avoid the draft. Sanders was just settling down in his new home in Vermont in 1970-1971 while I served my country as a military policeman in jeep patrols in Vietnam.

His decision to refuse to fulfill his wartime civic and patriotic duties claiming conscientious objection follows him his entire life.

I don't have any doubt it was an honest mistake. Your problem isn't honesty, it's ignorance. No one with the most basic understanding of US history could possibly confuse World War 2 with Vietnam. You are simply talking out of your ass repeating things you've heard. You claim you know that our getting involved in the war was justified, but I'm not even confident you know what war you're talking about.

The "Soldiers burning villages" you are probably thinking of is the My Lai Massacre. A vile (and mostly unpunished) act on the part of US troops for sure, but you don't need to go there. We bombed the North Vietnamese for years, resulting in huge amounts of collateral damage, destroying the country's infrastructure and countless towns and villages. As always, it was the people who suffered most, not the military. Even after we withdrew our troops, leftover unexploded ordnance continued to kill people.

We unleashed this hell for what? Explain what the reason was that it was so important for us to get into this war that it was worth killing millions of people. Explain it in a way that you could justify it to the Vietnamese mother of a child who was killed in a US bombing, or someone who got his legs blown off and spent the rest of his life without them. You have never known the horror of war yourself because you are a sheltered, privileged American. You have never had to live under an extended bombing campaign by a foreign power. Explain how it's warranted as if you're speaking to someone who has, in your infinite wisdom.


Interesting tale about the way Sanders's CO status turned out, by the way -- I had not heard that. I did a quick search and didn't find any information about it. Do you have a source? I would like to see. However, I don't really see how that changes anything. What you're describing still isn't illegal as you initially baselessly claimed that it was. The point that people try to make when they bring this up is that they think it's in some way shameful and that he would not be fit to be president because of it. There is no shame in standing up for your principles and refusing to do something that is wrong.

EDIT! because this post just wasn't long enough, obviously.

In fact this only just occurred to me, but hilariously, what you're accusing Sanders of, refusing to follow military orders on principle, is what you are also claiming (again, I think with no basis in fact) generals under Obama did, refusing to follow the orders of their commander in chief because they "knew it was wrong." So conveniently for you, if someone refuses to follow a wartime order from Obama that's noble because you don't like him, but if Bernie Sanders does the same thing from his own convictions then he's bad and a coward because you don't like him.

Your entire worldview sounds like it rolled right off of a tea party factory line.

I want to add to this that when I called you ignorant above that was not an insult. Nothing I'm saying here should be taken that way. Not saying you did, but I want it here as a disclaimer. If anything, your education is probably more at fault than you are -- whoever taught you US history ought to be fired, for one thing. But whatever the case, you do have some responsibility to educate yourself as well, especially given the enormous wealth of information that is available to you with the internet.

I don't want to sit here and act like I'm always right. I've been wrong plenty of times in my life and I will be wrong again. But what I do have that you haven't displayed here is an approach of thinking critically about any and all claims or sources that are put in front of me. If there is one thing I honestly hope you'll take away from this exchange it is the value of that. Thinking critically about even the things you yourself hold to be true is the first step to really being able to educate yourself and understand the world around you. Right now I don't think you are willing to criticize your own worldview, and I get that. I wasn't either at your age. But hopefully this conversation will stick in your memory the next time you want to make a claim to someone and you realize you haven't fact-checked it. That's a start.

https://scontent-mad1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/12687952_1334414030043124_1984171713333259560_n.pn g?oh=9445d802f63fddbc2b762d5da85cc18d&oe=57318895

For what it's worth, I'd really appreciate it if my scheduling manager would schedule according to statistics and not what will save us money.
Sorry for my rant.

For what it's worth, I'd really appreciate it if my scheduling manager would schedule according to statistics and not what will save us money.
Sorry for my rant.

I would like to see more of your rants!

Let's rant together. As this thread amply demonstrated, I'm all about rants.