Wow, what a CUNT you are. Fuck you, learn to spell. I will now point out your errors.
"one party system masquerading as one" ...what? sence=sense, whythe=why the, devisions=divisions, cuz=because, rediculous=ridiculous, bout=about, instence=instance, and I'm pretty sure there's no hyphen in uneducated. I don't see how being pushed down a flight of stairs will knock any 'sence' in to me either. You just proved your own (and my own) point about the general smartness of the common American, you obviously didn't catch I was referring to the lack of smartness, but meh. I wasn't referring to their ignorance about politics or the candidates either (hooray, you spelled candidates right atleast). I suppose I could've used the word stupidity instead of smartness so you'd understand it.
Anyway, lets get on with the show. All of their "FUCKING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT OPINIONS!!!!" seem to be about nothing that I really care about a whole lot. I don't see how someone's stance on abortion will affect my daily life. Both of the candidates are nearly the same to me because I don't see what either of them will directly do for me except raise/cut taxes or attempt to send me to war. I don't agree with the way our government is run, I don't agree with the average American, I don't want to even live in this fucking country and I plan on getting the fuck out as soon as I have the money personally. I mentioned religion because it obviously has a hold on not just the government but American society in general (Christianity in particular). But then again, I also have a bit of a bias against it and with many reasons that I feel are valid.
dude, you don't need to point out my spelling errors, i've been a shitty speller since 2nd grade, it's nothing new. so bash me for it all you want, cuz i think it's funny to see how many times i've screwed up.
and yes, stupidity would have been the correct term, not "smartness", if you're gonna be picky about spelling and grammer.
so in order for a politician to be worthy they have to focus on YOUR beliefs right. pretty selfish i must say. abortion actually might affect your life if you happen to get your gf(or whoever) pregnant. and it's how they're gonna raise/cut taxes and for who, maybe if you'ld pay attention you would realise that one caters to you more then the other. and good luck finding a government that works much better then ours that will cater to everything YOU want. i don't agree with the average american either, but you don't see me running for the border like a lil bitch.
personally, i think you're a spoiled lil brat who needs everything to be perfect for you or you think it sucks and don't understand how to make a compromise on things. i have no respect for someone who leaves a country cuz he dislikes it's set up(if it's cuz of war or any type of danger, then that's understandable, but this clearly isn't either of those). instead of being a lil baby maybe you should LEARN more about what you hate so you can help fix and improve it.
I'm not even going to try argueing with you because we wont get anywhere seeing as we have completely different views and opinions that cannot be proved as right or wrong. Thank you for the wishing of luck though, as far as a place that I say would probably be better, I say Canada isn't too bad.
Have you ever read the anti-semite and the jew? I don't want to spoil it for you, Jean-Paul Sartre is one of my favorite writers.
Unrelated to the book, I'm just saying that this system is what some people want. Improvement by one standard is regression by another. Your case seems to be that people should constantly be working towards their own ideal. I generally seem follow a non-Aristotelian logic system, and think that this is very dogmatic, and so choose not to agree. Beyond that, trying to change things in one place to conform to a model already present in another seems redundant to me.
(in my analogy, the balls were supposed to represent yourself, not your country. i suppose you could look at it the other way, which brings a fantastic isomorphism, that being between your position and alex's)
my brain was washed by a dicordian, a taoist and a physicist (bob wilson, alan watts, niels bohr). all of their major conclusions were that there "is" no objective reality (maybe i should also include korzybski). i believe that is why i tend to not comment on arguments. both sides ususally seem dogmatic and unreceptive to alternate explanations.
I truly do sympathize with your beliefs, and Alex's. I think that it should be a top priority of everybody to work towards peace and good spirits within these places we live. Never wars, only diplomacy.
first, thanx for the respectful comment(not sarcasm).
i see where you're comming from, and you seem to know damn well what you're talkin bout, so i respect what you're saying. but i can't say i agree(surprise surprise, no change of opinion :-P), prob due to a different up bringing and beliefs. a lot of times arguments may seem dogmatic, but everything when boiled down to it's core is dogmatic, you're own personal comment was dogmatic, the difference is it's kind of the lack there of it(like how an athiest's belief is their lack of it, if that makes sence). for me, what it boils down to is who has their facts straight and can show that their opinions can work because they have factual backing.
As far as progression = regretion, i think people should still follow their beliefs of what they think would be the best way to help out SOCIETY and give as much freedom as they can, since that's what america is about. there's always 2 choices at least, and all of them are NEVER perfect, but one is always the closest to it. it's like, which option should we chose if we wanna get to 10: 1: two steps forward 4 back 2: 5 steps forward 3 steps back 3:8 steps forward 1 step back obviously number three, and it's usually clear which one would be the closest step to moving towards freedom without taking more away.
don't sympathise for me. i don't need sympathy for my veiws, im in COMPLETE content with them. my top priority is peace and happyness, but i'm not gonna be unrealistic and say that it's what WILL happen. i'm pretty fatalistic and know the world will always suck to a degree, but for me it's about getting as close as we can, and if there's an option of 6 happy people with 4 sad as opposed to 8 happy against 2 sad, i'll go with the 8-2.
and finally, the anti-semite and the jew? sounds interesting and i'll prob look into it now you mention it.
"one party system masquerading as one" ...what?
sence=sense, whythe=why the, devisions=divisions, cuz=because, rediculous=ridiculous, bout=about, instence=instance, and I'm pretty sure there's no hyphen in uneducated. I don't see how being pushed down a flight of stairs will knock any 'sence' in to me either. You just proved your own (and my own) point about the general smartness of the common American, you obviously didn't catch I was referring to the lack of smartness, but meh. I wasn't referring to their ignorance about politics or the candidates either (hooray, you spelled candidates right atleast). I suppose I could've used the word stupidity instead of smartness so you'd understand it.
Anyway, lets get on with the show. All of their "FUCKING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT OPINIONS!!!!" seem to be about nothing that I really care about a whole lot. I don't see how someone's stance on abortion will affect my daily life. Both of the candidates are nearly the same to me because I don't see what either of them will directly do for me except raise/cut taxes or attempt to send me to war. I don't agree with the way our government is run, I don't agree with the average American, I don't want to even live in this fucking country and I plan on getting the fuck out as soon as I have the money personally. I mentioned religion because it obviously has a hold on not just the government but American society in general (Christianity in particular). But then again, I also have a bit of a bias against it and with many reasons that I feel are valid.
Reply
Reply
and yes, stupidity would have been the correct term, not "smartness", if you're gonna be picky about spelling and grammer.
so in order for a politician to be worthy they have to focus on YOUR beliefs right. pretty selfish i must say. abortion actually might affect your life if you happen to get your gf(or whoever) pregnant. and it's how they're gonna raise/cut taxes and for who, maybe if you'ld pay attention you would realise that one caters to you more then the other. and good luck finding a government that works much better then ours that will cater to everything YOU want. i don't agree with the average american either, but you don't see me running for the border like a lil bitch.
personally, i think you're a spoiled lil brat who needs everything to be perfect for you or you think it sucks and don't understand how to make a compromise on things. i have no respect for someone who leaves a country cuz he dislikes it's set up(if it's cuz of war or any type of danger, then that's understandable, but this clearly isn't either of those). instead of being a lil baby maybe you should LEARN more about what you hate so you can help fix and improve it.
good luck moving away.
Reply
Reply
yeah, that's what i thought.
Reply
don't you ever itch your balls?
Reply
yes i itch my balls, but i don't cut them off. i solve the problem, not separate my self from it.
Reply
Unrelated to the book, I'm just saying that this system is what some people want. Improvement by one standard is regression by another. Your case seems to be that people should constantly be working towards their own ideal. I generally seem follow a non-Aristotelian logic system, and think that this is very dogmatic, and so choose not to agree. Beyond that, trying to change things in one place to conform to a model already present in another seems redundant to me.
(in my analogy, the balls were supposed to represent yourself, not your country. i suppose you could look at it the other way, which brings a fantastic isomorphism, that being between your position and alex's)
my brain was washed by a dicordian, a taoist and a physicist (bob wilson, alan watts, niels bohr). all of their major conclusions were that there "is" no objective reality (maybe i should also include korzybski). i believe that is why i tend to not comment on arguments. both sides ususally seem dogmatic and unreceptive to alternate explanations.
I truly do sympathize with your beliefs, and Alex's. I think that it should be a top priority of everybody to work towards peace and good spirits within these places we live. Never wars, only diplomacy.
Reply
i see where you're comming from, and you seem to know damn well what you're talkin bout, so i respect what you're saying. but i can't say i agree(surprise surprise, no change of opinion :-P), prob due to a different up bringing and beliefs. a lot of times arguments may seem dogmatic, but everything when boiled down to it's core is dogmatic, you're own personal comment was dogmatic, the difference is it's kind of the lack there of it(like how an athiest's belief is their lack of it, if that makes sence). for me, what it boils down to is who has their facts straight and can show that their opinions can work because they have factual backing.
As far as progression = regretion, i think people should still follow their beliefs of what they think would be the best way to help out SOCIETY and give as much freedom as they can, since that's what america is about. there's always 2 choices at least, and all of them are NEVER perfect, but one is always the closest to it. it's like, which option should we chose if we wanna get to 10:
1: two steps forward 4 back
2: 5 steps forward 3 steps back
3:8 steps forward 1 step back
obviously number three, and it's usually clear which one would be the closest step to moving towards freedom without taking more away.
don't sympathise for me. i don't need sympathy for my veiws, im in COMPLETE content with them. my top priority is peace and happyness, but i'm not gonna be unrealistic and say that it's what WILL happen. i'm pretty fatalistic and know the world will always suck to a degree, but for me it's about getting as close as we can, and if there's an option of 6 happy people with 4 sad as opposed to 8 happy against 2 sad, i'll go with the 8-2.
and finally, the anti-semite and the jew? sounds interesting and i'll prob look into it now you mention it.
Reply
KEKEKE
Reply
Leave a comment