Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
hide menu

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Highest Rated Top Rated Newest
auto-refresh every 1 2 3 5 seconds

Per page:
Latest users (1): youregaylol, anonymous(76).
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#43264 - pebar (07/27/2013) [-]
Let's say, hypothetically, the richest 1% of Americans died and all their wealth went to fund things like roads and schools and other tax-funded things. How do you think the country would react?

Let's say, hypothetically, the richest 1% of Americans died and all their wealth went to fund things like roads and schools and other tax-funded things. How do you think the country would react?
#43279 to #43264 - duudegladiator (07/27/2013) [-]
I must see larger picture plz.
#43267 to #43264 - repostsrepost (07/27/2013) [-]
The richest one% wouldn't even be a drop in a bucket compared to the money the government is already spending. Also, this columnist is an idiot. If America is a two-tier country, what is a one tier country? The collapsing societies of Europe, or maybe the communist regimes in Cuba and North Korea?
User avatar #43266 to #43264 - akkere (07/27/2013) [-]
Does that "wealth" include capital from the companies they owned? Because that would cause a bit of a catastrophe if those companies were to suddenly just.... poof, for the sake of filling out a few pot holes. I'm not quite sure if the stocks would have a similar effect.

It would probably depend on how carefully funneled the wealth is placed into certain tax-funded elements; priorities wise, setting up labor jobs for maintenance on bridges, or even building up facilities that could have long-term profit would be more important than filling up pot holes (although because that does damage people's cars it would be of some importance to maintain severe ones).

It'd also depend on where you're spreading those funds; without Capital or stock, it's hard to say if it'd have much actual effect if you tried to spread it evenly across the 50 states, and it'd have to be focused on areas that would maximize the effect.
User avatar #43250 - roliga (07/27/2013) [-]
Why haven't American presidency terms been changed to six years now instead of four? Every president seems to spend the last two years of their first term as president trying to get elected and ignores any issues they could be working on, so why not make it so they get six years to work and if they can't get it done in that time then too bad, no more excuses, they can't be reelected for another six years. Six years would be more than enough time for them to get shit done and they wouldn't focus on getting reelected. No more "Oh I didn't get shit done because I only had four years (even though I only worked for two years)!
#43254 to #43250 - repostsrepost (07/27/2013) [-]
Hell, the less a president works, the less shit he can fuck up. But what you're talking about, was discussed at the Constitutional Convention so I couldn't say its inconsistent with the intent of the framers.
#43247 - mr skeltal (07/27/2013) [-]
nigguh shit fuck shit
bitch git dat money shit
fuck smoke weed
nigguh nigguh
ooga booga fuck
shit bitch ass
nigga ass bitch
nigguh shit bitch
ooga booga dat ass
money money yo!
#43240 - byposted (07/26/2013) [-]
You have all heard of the degenerate kike Weiner running for mayor of New York City, correct? His wife, Huma, worked in the State Department as an aid to Hillary Clinton. At the same time, she was working for a private company named Teneo.   
Teneo is an independent advisory firm that offers strategic communications, investment banking, business intelligence and restructuring services.

You have all heard of the degenerate kike Weiner running for mayor of New York City, correct? His wife, Huma, worked in the State Department as an aid to Hillary Clinton. At the same time, she was working for a private company named Teneo.

Teneo is an independent advisory firm that offers strategic communications, investment banking, business intelligence and restructuring services.
#43252 to #43240 - repostsrepost (07/27/2013) [-]
Don't forget that Huma Abedein has family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
#43242 to #43240 - byposted (07/26/2013) [-]
The President of the company is Douglas Band, the former Chief Adviser to Bill Blowjob Clinton.
#43238 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
anyone up for a game of civ 4?
#43237 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
osama hussein
User avatar #43231 - akkere (07/26/2013) [-]
Whole lotta shitfest going on here. Time for some news.

An anthropologist from UCLA developed a program called PredPol, a software of which he believes can predict when crimes would happen based on statistical analysis of previous crimes. Say one particular area has pretty gnarly frequency of crimes happening, the program would take those statistics into account and mark it on a map for a Police Department to ensure that a higher portion of their on-duty officers to patrol. It also analyzes the statistics time, so say crimes more frequently happen at 4 PM in a particular area, more police officers would be stationed around that time, whereas they'd be more spread out in later hours.

Some criticisms of the program include a fear that criminals will be able to figure out which areas the Police focus on, and in turn counteract by focusing criminal actions in other areas. This causes a dilemma when a majority of the policy force is focused on a larger area, and have a lot more distance on areas initially marked as more or less safe. Another issue would be the fear that officers would profile others less on the cause of "reasonable suspicion" and instead derive their suspicion solely from the program.

#43170 - levchenko (07/26/2013) [-]
This image has expired
- User 1


-User 2

This board in a Nutshell
#43177 to #43170 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
You're expecting too much of some people, It helps to be quite selective about who you bother seriously discussing with. Picture semi related.
User avatar #43117 - pebar (07/26/2013) [-]
User avatar #43146 to #43117 - akkere (07/26/2013) [-]
I feel like he's trying to swing a blow at the people who turned him into a metaphorical punching bag when he immediately accepted Obama's help in the Sandy disaster, and every conservative media pundit - as well as GOP and even general Republican political figures - wanted to put him on the stake to burn.

Too bad Christie's knowledge on swinging a punch is the equivalent to his knowledge on dieting.

Still, it's perplexing why he targets Libertarians exclusively.
#43130 to #43117 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
"You need to login to view this link"

fuckin' DJ 4DM1N
#43137 to #43130 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
#43112 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
Ok guys, this topic usually causes a shitstorm, but I feel like bringing it up.

Was America, Britain, or the USSR necessary to victory in WWII?
My conclusion, after doing a little research (IE I am not an Expert), I have come to the conclusion that all of these countries were absolutely vital to the allied victory.

The USA seems to be vital because it pretty much won the pacific theater by itself as well as through the "arms of democracy" sent to both Britain and the USSR. Britain probably would've starved to death had it not been for US Naval forces and such. The USSR would have fallen at stalingrad without all the raw matierials and war mats given to them by the USA.

Britain seems absolutely vital since it caused Hitler to fight a two front war, and had hitler been able to focus on the USSR alone, he would have been able to take it, i believe even with the USA's help. I think the greatest help Britain performed was the invention of radar, which allowed for the winning of the Battle of Britain as well as the Pacific theater.

The USSR was absolutely vital in massive manpower and turning the tides of the war at Stalingrad, no debating this, if not for them, Britain would have been gone as fast as France, but we have soviet supermen to thank for tying up most of hitler's forces. However, these soviet supermen needed food and arms like the rest of us, which was supplied by Russia and the Ural mountains post-43, but pre-43, the aid sent there from the USA was vital to their victory against nazi scum.

So, I think that all 3 were necessary to defeat the Axis, but if just two had to face off against them, My best bet would be the USA and USSR, since they are the countries that are self sufficient for food and raw matierials with hundreds of millions of people to supply manpower.
User avatar #43257 to #43112 - oxan (07/27/2013) [-]
Lend-Lease aid to the USSR isn't really as significant as many would think. Sure, it helped, but it's not a matter of without the aid the USSR would have collapsed.

In the end, Operation Overlord only served to quicken the end of the war. The Soviets were already on their way to Berlin. Of course, more Soviets would have died if the US didn't arrive at the end of the war again, but the Soviets still could've won the war.
#43113 to #43112 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
I think you're forgetting China who tied up quite a bit of Japans manpower and the British Empire fighting in Burma against Japan the US didn't take on Japan alone The USSR was tying up German and Japanese manpower since Japan feared the USSR would break their NAP, the US did very little aside from profiteer and only put their feet on the ground meaningfully late in the war, also with Russia you had a very small window to wage a mobile war in (You've got the middle of summer until the middle of Autumn otherwise you get bogged in snow which then melts and you get covered in mud all of this with constantly bad weather) , you've also got to remember The Red Army scorched the Earth, their infrastructure and had partisans and air raids destroying supply lines, this was all quite organized but a bit messy after the war, picture semi related Ukrainian Partisans.
#43115 to #43113 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
I acknowledge that the USA wasnt the only allied force in the pacific, but they were undoubtedly the ones that played the biggest role in that theater, ie destroyed most of the carriers and destroyers/battleships.

As for the small window to wage war in the SOviet Union, it would have been long enough with blitzcrieg and how the lines moved at the speed of tanks pretty much.

Again for the red army, they did invlauble things without which, the war would have been probably lost, but they needed considerable mats and stuff from the USA to do so.
#43124 to #43115 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
I think you're forgetting that the pacific theater didn't simply take place at sea, the Chinese armies (Who were basically warlords, nationalists and communists in an anti-japanese alliance) were fighting from 1937-1945 and took out and tied up the majority of the Imperial army (We're talking around 4 million men here), if they surrendered or broke for peace the US would've had millions more men to fight their way through. When the Soviets fully got involved and Invaded Machuria I think they captured something like half a million Japanese soldiers alone on that border.

(Pic related the reason why the soviets destroyed their roads) When you consider it Took them a month and a bit to secure france this being with little resistance The USSR was a lot more stubborn, I'd estimate you've got 2-3 months of fully mechanized mobile war. before you get bogged in snow, then you get the mud with no lasting roads or terrain you end up with pic related. So over the course of 3 years they've only really got 7-9 months in which they can actively use a blitzkrieg doctrine the rest they can't do anything what so ever, and in total the lend lease scheme lent around 11 billion to the USSR who was actively fighting the largest part and had the largest population but lent 30 billion to Britain so it makes you think how much the Soviet union wasn't actually reliant on the US. And I forgot where I was going with this.
#43127 to #43124 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
Well, China didnt offer too much resistance, and Japan quite literally raped them (Nanking).
As for the Soviet union fighting the Japanese land forces in China, Im gonna need a source, as i ve never heard of that, but even then, the war in the pacific was mainly naval and air, and land forces wouldnt make a huge difference
#43128 to #43127 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Japanese_border_conflicts - This resulted in this. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Japanese_Neutrality_Pact
Japan was afraid they would break it so they maintained a Large army there and they did so it ended like this.
No but imagine if every single one of those men were digging up resources building war resources or serving in the pacific instead of being stuck in China, once again most people include the Sino Japanese war as part of the pacific war.

Inb4 wikipedia the citations are at the bottom.
#43129 to #43128 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
If those people had been in Japan, I dont think much would have changed for two reasons, one is that the extra labor force would exceed the employment availability in manufacturing war mats, Ie more people than jobs, so production would not increase by too much and also Japan is a very resource starved land, so the extra manpower to get more resources would be negligible.
#43131 to #43129 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
There was a reason they invaded China you know, and I doubt if peace was made with China that Japan would give up any land it gained, you've also got to remember Japan held Korea and Manchuria, so it wouldn't necessarily mean going back to Japan to work in raw materials or manufacturing arms, Manchuria is quite resource rich as is Korea there's a reason they were taken by Japan.
#43132 to #43131 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
And the USA still beat them. Soviet and US presence in China wasnt the reason that Japan had so many troops in China to keep a hold of it, it was because there was a metric fuckton of Chinese peasants with shitty guns trying to take back their homeland.

Japan essentially won the Sino-Japanese war until it surrendered due to nukes, so they were able to take all the resources from that area, pretty much.
The USA still beat Japan even though it was bolstered with resources from Manchukuo, so if the USA beat them with resources, the US probably still would have beat them if Japan hadnt wasted manpower on China, as they would lose resources.
#43134 to #43132 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
Wait I get it. I think.
#43133 to #43132 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
I'm really confused as to what you're trying to get across here..
#43135 to #43133 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
i interpreted the point you were trying to make as the USA did not solely win the pacific theater, and that the opposition faced by Japan in China was Soviet mixed with Chinese(Soviets captured 500000 japanese, comment 43124), and had Japan been able to use those 4 million men in China to fight the pacific theater, the USA would not have been successful in the war.

The point I was trying to make was that Soviet and US presence in the Sino-Japan war was nil, and Japan was engaged in that due to only Chinese peasant alliance.
Also, I was trying to make the point that Japan was able to benefit from the resources in Manchukuo, which would have been more helpful than 4 million men in their own resource starved country, and as the USA was able to beat the Japanese even with their acquirement of resources, the USA would be able to beat the Japanese even had the Japanese forgone the war in china and focused their manpower into the pacific war with the USA.
#43136 to #43135 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
I'm mostly trying to get across that if Japan had not have to hold several fronts then Americas war would've been a lot more harder, let's say that Russia demobilized on the Far eastern front, Japan would've had those men in other industries or actively serving in the pacific which would've made Americas Job a lot harder, still a winnable war just a lot harder then when they Had the soviets and China making Japan have to focus on several fronts, I doubt Japan would've put those 4 million men to work back in Japan they'd probably be working in the occupied China, Manchuria or Korea where they can actually produce war resources to carry on fighting America and possibly make more a match for Americas Industrial capacity, the Japanese Army in China was mostly veterans whilst those serving in the island garrisons were a lot more, fresh and inexperienced, I'm mostly trying to get across that without China Americas war would've been harder and they would've been required to make more of a contribution then they did, apply the same to the USSR in fighting Germany and the Germans building the atlantic wall and stationing troops there, (Although still 85% of german casualties it made it easier then it could've been), also curious have you ever played hearts of Iron?
#43140 to #43136 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
I disagree with you on the whole soviet contribution to Japan fighting a two war front.\
It was mainly the 5 million chinese that warranted the 4 million Japanese soldiers, the soviets and the US didnt play a large role in causing the japanese to keep soldiers in China.
Also, I think the war with China, in the long run actually strengthened Japan more then it weakened it, as 4 million men are useless on the mainland if they dont contribute to manufacturing, while them taking hold of Manchukuo actually helped Japan in its war effort against the USA, and as the USA still beat the Japanese, not having a Sino-japanese war would have made the USA's victory easier, not harder.
And NO I have not played hearts of iron, is it good?
#43141 to #43140 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
(Manchuria was annexed before the second Sino-Japanese war/World war 2) A Soviet force near the Japanese border meant that the Japanese felt compelled to keep those soldiers in Manchuria and China because they feared a soviet invasion and that they would break their NAP and attack, giving them another front, (Which they did in the end), and I don't think the Japanese are stupid they wouldn't have placed 4 million men into unemployment they would've simply moved them around, you've got to remember in Japan it was a government says "Move to X to do Y" You moved to X to do Y because it was your duty to do so, so 4 million more men either working in arms production, raw material production in Manchuria or Korea or Serving against America would've made Americas war harder. I think we're misinterpreting each other a bit here. Hearts of Iron 3 is basically a game where you can play as any country that existed between 1936 and 1948.
#43143 to #43141 - rety ONLINE (07/26/2013) [-]
I don't think the soviets did that, This is what I learned their involvement was

while japan had 4 million men in china for this reason
#43171 to #43143 - valeriya (07/26/2013) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Japanese_War_(1945) Double back here, they still had quite a lot of soldiers tied up in Manchuria worried about their border with the soviet union being invaded, the thing is with China the war was as you said mostly leaning towards a Japanese Victory, (Remembering China wasn't very well united it was mostly political factions and warlords) they were terribly organized and by 1942 most major military operations had stopped and they were more focused on exploitation of resources and maintaining power then over extending, trying to avoid going into what if's but if Chinas factions had surrendered and left Japan at (See picture) this level of expansions it'd have meant an entirely different situation, I'm trying to avoid repeating myself now.
#43092 - levchenko (07/26/2013) [-]
This image has expired
People these days...
#43093 to #43092 - levchenko (07/26/2013) [-]
This image has expired
English version...
User avatar #43108 to #43093 - undeadwill (07/26/2013) [-]
We won WW2. Without us you would have lost.
User avatar #43259 to #43108 - oxan (07/27/2013) [-]
D-Day: America and several other countries fight fresh conscript brigades while the Red Army and the Wehrmacht fight the real war in the East.
User avatar #43145 to #43108 - levchenko (07/26/2013) [-]
80% of the German forces were lost on the Eastern Front...
User avatar #43204 to #43145 - undeadwill (07/26/2013) [-]
The winter took out most of them other than that you used our resources to hold them off long enough to built up a decent force. I mean look at Finland you are going to tell me that all powerful Russia that lost to Finland would have survived the onslaught of both Germany and Japan? Doubt it. Germans were ahead in technology and the Japanese infantry are the last thing you want to face. Even if you could take Berlin they could have made the atom bomb by then and the Marot line would be repaired thus you took Germany but they still hold France.
User avatar #43261 to #43204 - oxan (07/27/2013) [-]
>Be Winter War
>Be Winter
>Have shitty commanders because Finns were underestimated
>Get pwned
>Change commanders
>Winter's over
>Pwn Finns

Winter War in a nutshell. As soon as the Finnish winter was over, guerrilla warfare counted for nothing.
User avatar #43075 - mayormilkman (07/26/2013) [-]
You need to login to view this link

This makes me more concerned about that whole situation regarding dying bees.
#43072 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
i will invade your ass
User avatar #43138 to #43072 - yourbed (07/26/2013) [-]
Show no mercy.
#43071 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
3x more people die from drug overdose than from gun violence in the US.
User avatar #43086 to #43071 - byposted (07/26/2013) [-]

We all know that boogeyman state only uses petty drug offenses (e.g. possessing hundreds of sacks of cocaine) as an excuse to oppress black men and somehow get a hard-on via their power. And so what if people die from taking drugs? The STATE does not represent the POPULACE, and, in effect, should not provide any services to it outside the minimum; those which are inherent in your simple "KIKE-FREE" state.
#43085 to #43071 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
#43030 - merpdederp (07/25/2013) [-]
This board would be thriving if we adopted a more controversial political leaning.
User avatar #43241 to #43030 - undeadwill (07/26/2013) [-]
We need a new Civil war in America
User avatar #43054 to #43030 - akkere (07/26/2013) [-]
You mean, make the board into a circlejerk?
User avatar #43050 to #43030 - oxan (07/25/2013) [-]
Is Leninism not contoversial enough?
#43044 to #43030 - mr skeltal (07/25/2013) [-]
Nagant > Springfield
User avatar #43088 to #43044 - undeadwill (07/26/2013) [-]
M1911> Pussy russian gun.
#43035 to #43030 - mr skeltal (07/25/2013) [-]
User avatar #43036 to #43035 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
That's like a poll tax... if you have to do something to gain the right to vote, then it's not a right and this is not a democratic nation.
User avatar #43038 to #43036 - roliga (07/25/2013) [-]
Well it's a good thing America isn't a democracy then...
User avatar #43039 to #43038 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
democratic republic is still democratic
User avatar #43040 to #43039 - roliga (07/25/2013) [-]
There's a big difference between a democratic republic and a democracy
User avatar #43052 to #43040 - oxan (07/26/2013) [-]
Pebar handled you well himself, but I really hate when people go on about the differences between republics and democracies.

As a general rule of thumb, when people say democracy they're simply referring to the democratic process, i.e. electing people, and not pure direct democracy that 'America is a Republic'ans are so afraid of.
User avatar #43041 to #43040 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
I never said we were a democracy
#43037 to #43036 - mr skeltal (07/25/2013) [-]

User avatar #43090 to #43037 - undeadwill (07/26/2013) [-]
We need a new holocaust for stupid people.
#43091 to #43090 - mr skeltal (07/26/2013) [-]
There goes a lot of niggers.
#43034 to #43030 - mr skeltal (07/25/2013) [-]
.40 S&W vs 9mm
User avatar #43042 to #43034 - roliga (07/25/2013) [-]
Either pick between .45 auto or 9mm

.40S7W really has nothing to offer that can better the two other calibers.
User avatar #43043 to #43042 - roliga (07/25/2013) [-]
User avatar #43031 to #43030 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
I think we should use a scorched earth tactic with Israel... that way nobody gets it
use radioactive waste or something
we could use it as the world's dumping ground
User avatar #43033 to #43031 - merpdederp (07/25/2013) [-]
Israel receives 3 billion a year in US aid, already has a thriving economy of its own, and Detroit goes bankrupt. Women who are promiscuous have less happy marriages and enjoy sex less. Slut shaming is good for society, no man wants a slut. Some races have lower IQ's on average than others, and are more likely to commit crime. Stereotypes exist for a reason. A court respects the privacy of the perpetrator more than the victim. People's taste are controlled by what's popular, but who says what that is? We need posts like these here more often.
User avatar #43056 to #43033 - oxan (07/26/2013) [-]
No point being edgy just to be edy, merpdederp.

Detroit lost pretty much all its industry.
Probably true, whatever.
Few men want a slut, but slut shaming isn't necessarily good. Encouraging promsicuity isn't good either.
Sociological explanations exist for variations in IQ, and there's no proof that IQ is connected to race. The studies that say so are rare, and their results are contradicted by the majority of studies.
As for being more like to commit crime, crime is generally related to poverty.
Yes; bourgeoisie.
User avatar #43057 to #43056 - merpdederp (07/26/2013) [-]
commie scum...
User avatar #43058 to #43057 - oxan (07/26/2013) [-]
u avin a issue m8?
#43032 to #43031 - valeriya (07/25/2013) [-]
Yeah but if it goes wrong it becomes a burdon on the american tax payers.
#43023 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
Do you think CCTV (to such an extent that the UK has) in America would be a violation of privacy rights, same with drones patrols, etc? Does the 4th amendment really protect absolute privacy or just invasive searches by police to stop the government from harassing people?
Do you think CCTV (to such an extent that the UK has) in America would be a violation of privacy rights, same with drones patrols, etc? Does the 4th amendment really protect absolute privacy or just invasive searches by police to stop the government from harassing people?
User avatar #43049 to #43023 - oxan (07/25/2013) [-]
Public places are public, I guess. I don't think the 4th Amendment would really come into play, so long as cameras cannot see into private buildings, would it?
User avatar #43016 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
#43045 to #43016 - repostsrepost (07/25/2013) [-]
You are at a paradox because it is a republican bill.
User avatar #43047 to #43045 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
The party seems to be divided; there's the Rand Paul side that I support and the McCain side that I don't.
#43048 to #43047 - repostsrepost (07/25/2013) [-]
It was sponsored by Justin Amash(R-MI) and you have republicans and democrats supporting it. it was cosponsored by some democrats. The opposers were the statist democrats and the democrats wearing Rs.
User avatar #43046 to #43045 - paradox (07/25/2013) [-]
i didnt kno they were at me?
User avatar #43020 to #43016 - azumeow (07/25/2013) [-]
Fucking hell.
User avatar #43017 to #43016 - feelythefeel (07/25/2013) [-]
And you haven't already lost it all because....?
User avatar #43022 to #43017 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
they keep the democrats from causing too much trouble
User avatar #43024 to #43022 - akkere (07/25/2013) [-]
You are aware that the Republicans helped build PRISM back in the Bush my filthy item daddyistration (he's even admitted to it) and have just as much fingerprints on this as the Democrats do for maintaining it, right?

Everyone in Congress knew about it, everyone.
User avatar #43027 to #43024 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
it's not PRISM that I'm concerned about, it's more economic concerns
and if I had to choose a single issue to vote on, it would be gun control
User avatar #43021 to #43017 - undeadwill (07/25/2013) [-]
Libertarian use to be Republicans till Nixon ruined it.
#43018 to #43017 - valeriya (07/25/2013) [-]
Well there's a liberal/libertarian faction within the republican party, so I guess that's what he's backing.
#42976 - mr skeltal (07/24/2013) [-]
did britain block porn from thr internet
User avatar #43000 to #42976 - pebar (07/24/2013) [-]
From what I've heard, they require the ISPs to have the porn filter on by default (instead of off by default). People can turn the filter off simply by calling their ISP.
User avatar #43006 to #43000 - oxan (07/24/2013) [-]
Awkward as shit.
User avatar #43009 to #43006 - pebar (07/24/2013) [-]
it's common for conservative leaning parties to try to promote moral behavior
User avatar #43010 to #43009 - oxan (07/25/2013) [-]
Of course. But having to call your ISP to get porn unblocked would be awkward.
User avatar #43011 to #43010 - pebar (07/25/2013) [-]
I think that's the point
User avatar #43012 to #43011 - oxan (07/25/2013) [-]
David Cameron's a cunt.
User avatar #42978 to #42976 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
Only more 'aggressive' porn, I think.
User avatar #42945 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
Favorite culture food?
User avatar #43073 to #42945 - pebar (07/26/2013) [-]
I'm a big fan of english muffins
User avatar #43007 to #42945 - oxan (07/24/2013) [-]

I died a little inside when I came back from Italy.

Shitty, fastfood Italian pizza > Expensive gourmet (gourmet? Fuck spelling) pizzas in Australia
User avatar #43013 to #43007 - undeadwill (07/25/2013) [-]
lol. My favorite restaurant has a guy from Italy cooking~ Texas. Fuck yeah.
User avatar #43014 to #43013 - oxan (07/25/2013) [-]
My favourite resturaunt is called A Taste of Italy. It's... It's just not the same...
User avatar #43015 to #43014 - undeadwill (07/25/2013) [-]
Mine's Uncle Bill's Pizza.
User avatar #42968 to #42945 - ragnarfag (07/24/2013) [-]
My own.
User avatar #42980 to #42968 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
Which is?
User avatar #42981 to #42980 - ragnarfag (07/24/2013) [-]
Bavarian cuisine.
User avatar #42989 to #42981 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
...And now I'm embarassed.
User avatar #42991 to #42989 - ragnarfag (07/24/2013) [-]
Don't need to.
User avatar #42984 to #42981 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
User avatar #42993 to #42984 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
Bavaria is a region in south east Germany, I think.
User avatar #42986 to #42984 - ragnarfag (07/24/2013) [-]
Elaborate your question.
User avatar #42995 to #42986 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
Never mind.
#42948 to #42945 - valeriya (07/24/2013) [-]
Culture food? Like which type of cuisine I like best?
User avatar #42946 to #42945 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
German. Lol, just kidding. Could you imagine?
User avatar #42982 to #42946 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
German food is really good.
User avatar #42972 to #42946 - pebar (07/24/2013) [-]
i like german food....
User avatar #42974 to #42972 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
I'm not saying it's terrible, I just don't think it's anything special.
User avatar #42975 to #42974 - ragnarfag (07/24/2013) [-]
I think on "german" you need to be a little more specific.
User avatar #42977 to #42975 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
I refer mostly to sausages and sausage-shaped things whose name in english I don't know, the idea I have of german food basically revolves around that.
User avatar #42983 to #42977 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
#42973 to #42972 - jewishcommunazi has deleted their comment [-]
#42951 to #42946 - undeadwill has deleted their comment [-]
#42920 - mr skeltal (07/24/2013) [-]
User avatar #42985 to #42949 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
I love that show.
User avatar #42987 to #42985 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
Me too, except I didn't understand what the hell they talked about when I was a kid because it wasn't translated or subtitled. I still like it now though.
User avatar #42996 to #42987 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
It was in English right?
User avatar #42997 to #42996 - jewishcommunazi (07/24/2013) [-]
Yes. Stupid dog, can't even speak portuguese.
Stupid dog, you make me look bad
User avatar #42998 to #42997 - undeadwill (07/24/2013) [-]
Lol. Silly commie.
 Friends (0)