Wake the fuck up

Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Wake the fuck up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDTT1yRNsFE&feature=youtu.be

 

Interesting ad for Obama by Samuel L Jackson

 

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3093
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is onlineOnline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:Wake the

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Wake the fuck up  

whoa!  yes, good morning, darling.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3506
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
 A filthy rich, black,

 A filthy rich, black, one-percenter  telling us to fear a filthy rich, white, one-percenter. Good production values though.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDTT1yRNsFE&feature=youtu.be

 Interesting ad for Obama by Samuel L Jackson

Yeah. I saw that last week. It was funny until I got in trouble for having my speakers on at work.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4172
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
no sane person who has woke

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:no sane

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

Since we both know Johnson won't win (just like we know Stein won't win) what choices do we have?

You, at least, will win with either Obama or Romney.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4172
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Beyond Saving

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

Since we both know Johnson won't win (just like we know Stein won't win) what choices do we have?

You, at least, will win with either Obama or Romney.

What use is winning when it doesn't make you any better off? Is there virtue in winning for the sake of winning? I don't believe there is. 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:jcgadfly

Beyond Saving wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

Since we both know Johnson won't win (just like we know Stein won't win) what choices do we have?

You, at least, will win with either Obama or Romney.

What use is winning when it doesn't make you any better off? Is there virtue in winning for the sake of winning? I don't believe there is. 

Again, you will be better off no matter who wins. If Obama wins nothing will change and you will not lose money. If Romney wins you'll get more money.

How will you not be better off?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3093
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is onlineOnline
jcgadfly wrote:Beyond Saving

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

Since we both know Johnson won't win (just like we know Stein won't win) what choices do we have?

You, at least, will win with either Obama or Romney.

What use is winning when it doesn't make you any better off? Is there virtue in winning for the sake of winning? I don't believe there is. 

Again, you will be better off no matter who wins. If Obama wins nothing will change and you will not lose money. If Romney wins you'll get more money.

How will you not be better off?

 

nothing changes no matter who wins.  the differences between the democrats and republicans are purely cosmetic.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1704
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Beyond Saving

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

Since we both know Johnson won't win (just like we know Stein won't win) what choices do we have?

You, at least, will win with either Obama or Romney.

What use is winning when it doesn't make you any better off? Is there virtue in winning for the sake of winning? I don't believe there is. 

Again, you will be better off no matter who wins. If Obama wins nothing will change and you will not lose money. If Romney wins you'll get more money.

How will you not be better off?

If Romney wins, Romney will get more money. FTFY

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:no sane

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

LMAO. Romney is a better choice? That's like saying eating shit from an elephant is better than eating shit from a donkey.

Wake the fuck up? You are definitely in need of an alarm clock.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
ex-minister wrote:jcgadfly

ex-minister wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

Since we both know Johnson won't win (just like we know Stein won't win) what choices do we have?

You, at least, will win with either Obama or Romney.

What use is winning when it doesn't make you any better off? Is there virtue in winning for the sake of winning? I don't believe there is. 

Again, you will be better off no matter who wins. If Obama wins nothing will change and you will not lose money. If Romney wins you'll get more money.

How will you not be better off?

If Romney wins, Romney will get more money. FTFY

You forget about Romney's friends who will get more tax cuts than they have now...

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4172
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:Beyond

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

no sane person who has woke the fuck up would vote for bama. 

LMAO. Romney is a better choice? That's like saying eating shit from an elephant is better than eating shit from a donkey.

Wake the fuck up? You are definitely in need of an alarm clock.

No I don't think he is, I don't support Romney. It is dumbasses who need alarm clocks that keep voting for the two large parties because they believe otherwise is "throwing away" their vote so they choose which shit they want to eat. The only reason voting third party is "throwing" away your vote is because no one is throwing away their vote. I don't think it is sane to eat shit just because you get to choose what kind you want. 


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1704
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
It certainly would be good

It certainly would be good if we had more than 2 choices. I don't know how we got into this. Is it religious - there is god and satan? The dialogue seems to be just like that. How good it would be if we could scare both parties with a third party vote. And does the third party have to be a crazy person?

Anybody like a third party candidate?

Do the two parties have us by the short and curlies? 

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3093
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is onlineOnline
ex-minister wrote:It

ex-minister wrote:

It certainly would be good if we had more than 2 choices. I don't know how we got into this. Is it religious - there is god and satan? The dialogue seems to be just like that. How good it would be if we could scare both parties with a third party vote. And does the third party have to be a crazy person?

Anybody like a third party candidate?

Do the two parties have us by the short and curlies? 

 

i think it has something to do with the fact that we have majority elections rather than proportional elections.  in most european countries (including slovakia, where i now live), they have at least a partially proportional election.  what that means is you can't vote across party lines: when you go to the polls, you choose a balliot according to which party you support, then choose four or five people from that party you really want to see in parliament.  therefore, more parties have a chance to make it into parliament.

i'm actually against the proportional system, as it allows a lot of unknown mediocrities to get into parliament pretty easily.  also, it doesn't really eliminate bipartisan thinking, since you still end up with a government and an opposition.  in slovakia, unless a party gets 51% of the vote (which very rarely happens), a coalition government must be formed, and then the premiership and the ministry of the interior pretty much always go to the strongest party, and none of the other parties in the coalition is realistically ever going to go against them.

i think bipartisanship in politics is unavoidable--except in a one-party system.  i've never seen anything in history to make me think otherwise.

i also think the US government is designed well.  the fact that our president is the head of the government and his department and elections are totally separate from the legislature is a good idea.  the only thing i think needs serious overhaul is the judicial branch.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:No I

Beyond Saving wrote:
No I don't think he is, I don't support Romney. It is dumbasses who need alarm clocks that keep voting for the two large parties because they believe otherwise is "throwing away" their vote so they choose which shit they want to eat. The only reason voting third party is "throwing" away your vote is because no one is throwing away their vote. I don't think it is sane to eat shit just because you get to choose what kind you want. 

I can agree with that in a sense it makes me concerned that this is a "two party" system. Where is the democracy in that?

I don't vote for the platform of either party and I wish there was more parties down at the local level rather that at the federal level. I think that is where the change needs to start.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams