America, what the fuck?

"WHY DID YOU TELL ME YOU DIDN'T MONEY FROM LOBBYISTS WHEN YOU GOT IT FROM THREE? DO YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU LIE TO ME? WHY DID YOU LIE TO ME? YOU DON'T KNOW? OKAY, LET'S GO TO THE BATHROOM."

 

The CAPS LOCK lends just the right amount of psychosis to your response.

Bravo!

 

Absolutely, but the misspelling of "THERE" makes it confusing to a drunk person.

 

Are you speaking against The Queen, Zanza?

 

The word 'there' is never used in that post.

 

I think he read "THREE" and later interpreted it to be "THERE."

 

In the 2008 election, Ron Paul was able to generate a sufficient source of funds to be a contender in the opening half of the primaries. Here's hoping that he can generate a sufficient level of acceptablity so that he is still a contender in the latter half.

I think of this way, Truth is stranger than fiction. The person we want as president must be speak the truth, and for that he will initially be considered strange because Truth is a stranger to most people who happily lie to themselves because they can't handle the truth. Therefore, the strange truths about Ron Paul must be dumped on the people early enough so that they can learn to ignore it before they vote (and so it isn't news by that time).

Ron Paul might get my vote if he is still a contender by the time that my state votes (which is in the later half of the primaries).

 

:roll:

 

Xyle, due to your reputation here, you're making me look even more crazy for wanting Ron Paul in office. Still going to vote for him, but I wasn't going to bring him up because I'm bad at swaying viewpoints. Everyone I know who's of voting age is voting for him, however.
Bachmann actually used The Lion King to show people a cultural bias for homosexuals. What she said was that a teacher might bring up the fact that Elton John wrote the music, and is gay. Her thinking is that if children learn he's gay, they'll think gay people are better at what they do simply because they're gay.

 

Well, it certainly doesn't hurt.

 

Hahaha!

No.

 

My view is it's not detrimental or beneficial in any way. Gay people, per capita, are no more (or less) likely to be talented than people who are straight. And I've never thought being gay would make me a better musician, despite the knowledge that Elton John is gay.
Da Vinci is thought to have been gay. Upon finding this out, I didn't suddenly think that was why he was so talented. I assumed it was because he was left handed. :lol: Edit; just found out "left-handed" was old slang for gay. Still, I meant literally left-handed. Also he was a genius.

Ugh, I know...bad choice of words.

 

Great ideas tend to be viewed as crazy due to the cost of implimenting them. A good government will require sacrificing the present benefits in order to pay off the debt so that the future won't be over-burdened by compound interest. Is America "crazy" enough to pay the price for a responsible fiscal government? I hope so, because the cost if continuously delayed will be too great for the future generations to bear. But I have little faith that we will elect a president that will require the sacrifice necessary because who is willing to sacrifice in the midst of our "bounty" that has the average American overweight?

 

Xyle, the fact that the cost of implementing most of your ideas is our very lives is a key factor in everybody thinking they are crazy.

 

If an idea is "great," but seems crazy due to the cost of implementing it, it's most likely crazy. For example, if there was a way to actually make superheroes to help police the world, but it meant killing off half of the available food on the planet, it would be deemed crazy. I mean, eugenics seemed like a great idea for a while, but many people opposed it on the grounds that it was wholly immoral. Plus, it was recently shown that genetic defects are recessive, and even by reducing the appearance of certain traits in a certain population, there are simply too many carriers to completely eradicate them.

 

:roll:

 

GE made around 14 billion dollars last year and didn't have to pay any tax on it. Sure, nine billion was made outside of the US, but that still leaves five billion made within the country that wasn't taxed. They actually got around three billion in tax benefits. They say they're "scrupulous" about their taxes, and the reason they didn't pay anything was due to the Wall Street Meltdown.
Tax the damned rich.

 

I don't recall any ideas of mine that extreme. Maybe your way of life, but not your life.

Agreed; the rich can afford lawyers to find the loopholes. Either we increase their taxes or eliminate the loopholes. The principal problem is that money is needed to run a election campaign and the rich are the ones with the money, & America is run by people who can keep themselves getting re-elected.

 

:roll: