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

hide menu
Anonymous commenting is allowed
User avatar #93 - Fgner (09/14/2012) [-]
Oh yes, let's bring politics, one of those things in the real world that cause us stress, which is one of the reasons we come to the internet to begin with, TO THE INTERNET. I'm suprised this got so many thumbs. People on the internet are all socialist, democratic, college kids, or European.

Europeans, I mean you no offense, but shut the **** up when it comes to American politics, we are a huge country compared to any of you, and Sweden may be freaking amazing, but amplify Sweden's size by a few dozen and the same system wouldn't work for **** .

To the socialists, read that last statement. Socialism can't work on a large scale unless we are all utopians. There will always be lazy ******* that will ruin it by not doing their part.

Democrats, no, just any ******* American out there, I don't give a **** who you are, but you aren't better than the other party, you aren't worse. You are just americans, stop voting because the other person isn't on your party. Jesus ******* Christ, I doubt half of you "knowledgable voters" don't know the speaker of the house or even 2 of the judges without using Google.

And College Kids: Don't vote. You are young and stupid. I'm one of you. 99% of you don't watch news. I bet the only reason you really like Obama is because he's black and "young" and democratic. When you are done being know it all college kids and get your head out of your ass in 10 years, then feel free to give politics a try.

Red thumbs, I embrace you dearly.
#111 to #93 - lefish (09/15/2012) [-]
So the hundreds of thousands of middle aged people who are less educated and more racist and more religious SHOULD vote, but we college kids are too young and stupid?
User avatar #115 to #111 - Fgner (09/15/2012) [-]
^ Thanks for proving my point. You just made yourself into a superior person just because you are young and in college. Just saying.
User avatar #98 to #93 - awesomenessdefined (09/14/2012) [-]
How many pages of your Social Studies Book did you have to go through to make that argument.
User avatar #100 to #98 - Fgner (09/14/2012) [-]
How long did it take you to type that amazing counter argument?
User avatar #103 to #100 - awesomenessdefined (09/14/2012) [-]
It wasn't an argument.
#96 to #93 - anonymous (09/14/2012) [-]
Offending Europeans about politcs?

You do realize it all started in Greece. Secondly you can't judge the whole group of college kids on one view, what about the college kids that study social studies and have to watch the news? Third, socialism was actually created for a big country, but indeed it didn't work out in russia because they lacked basic recourses.

Red thumb for being a complete idiot, just give better arguments next time. I embrace the anymous hate c:
User avatar #99 to #96 - psydoc (09/14/2012) [-]
That's interesting that you (at least appear to) put social studies above business, medicine, and law.
User avatar #102 to #99 - Fgner (09/14/2012) [-]
I'd put law, business and political studies over the sciences, really. Just because the latter tend to care more about their studies and not the petty argument of whether to vote in a giant douche or a turd sandwich.
User avatar #104 to #102 - psydoc (09/14/2012) [-]
If I'm being really frank, I'd like to see more people with business background in the legislature, and probably a few more doctors. Business people because you learn how to make an organization effective, how to measure success, and benchmark achievement and such, and a few more doctors, because I think we need some expertise in that field when laws are being made.

It also seems to me that teachers, artists, and scientists tend to lean left because their work is largely supported by the government, and they'll support whoever will spend more on them. Lawyers also seem to lean left because the left doesn't' support caps on lawsuits.
User avatar #107 to #104 - Fgner (09/14/2012) [-]
The way I see it politics shouldn't be a career. You shouldn't really be paid (much) for it. It's like jury duty, you do it for the benefit of your country. I'd rather great men in all sorts of fields that know what the people and country need get put in based on their character and beliefs, than politicians go in based on how well they can ******** their way out of a can and attack the other candidate. I agree with you completely.

And yes, that's completely true. Except scientists, scientists usually hate all politicians because nomatter who is in it doesn't matter. Maybe in some fields where one party going in would mean your field might get cut based on beliefs, but other than that not really.

I like you.
User avatar #112 to #107 - psydoc (09/15/2012) [-]
You know, almost all of the scientists I've know have also worked in education... so that might be biasing my opinion.

I don't really think politics should be a career either. I'd rather see people come from backgrounds where they have a record of success or failure you can look at. In politics, no matter what people do, no matter what happens, they always claim success.

When we elect someone to congress, they vote on everything, but they're really only heavily involved in whatever committee they're on. So we vote in people who we like then they wind up on committees that write legislation for stuff they know nothing about. It just seems like something needs to be fixed there.
User avatar #114 to #112 - Fgner (09/15/2012) [-]
That last statement isn't true. Congressmen are allowed to vote "present" on anything. AKA they don't vote, just say they were there to listen to everything. Obama voted present on all but ONE bill, which he ran with someone. Not bashing Obama, just an example I know off the top of my head. They don't need to read nor vote on anything, just pretend they're doing something at all. And then they get paid more than most people with unbelievable benefits and get 1/3 of the year of Vacation. Definitely a fair system. The people who decide how the country works rigged it for themselves? No. Blasphemy.
User avatar #118 to #114 - psydoc (09/15/2012) [-]
Well, in Congress you can choose to not vote, but it was in the Illinois state legislature that Obama voted "present". That was one of the troubles Hillary had debating Obama. She had a record that she had to defend, whereas Obama could vote "present" on controversial issues, and say he supports the idea, but had problems with the way the bill was drafted.
User avatar #97 to #96 - Fgner (09/14/2012) [-]
1) I meant no offense if I did. I even said no offense, and I meant that sincerely.
2) What are you talking about? Democracy started in Greece? Well, that's not even true. Some of the first forms of government were democracy, because when you have a small tribe, it makes a lot of sense for everyone to have a say instead of let one person rule. And anyway, why does it matter that it started in Greece? Greece was an empire back then, not a single European country in the 21st century.
3) Sure I can, just like I can judge a hundred black guys in a room. On average college kids think they are all that simply because they are in college. They think it makes them immediately smarter and their opinion mean more. Kids involved in political science? Maybe. Informed college kids? Maybe. But that's MAYBE 5% of the college kids in America.
4) Socialism wasn't created for russia. It's an idea. And the first person to think of it was a French man named Henri de Saint-Simon. Want some better arguement? Socialism needs utopians to work. Otherwise human nature kicks in. An experiment was once done. College students were told that they are going to receive the same grade as the average. No matter how bad or good they did. The first test the average was a B, then a C, then the third dropped to an F. Why? Because the try hards stopped trying when it accomplished nothing, and the non try hards just stopped because they figured the try hards would do it for them. AND THEN ALL the kids complained about their Fs to the university, none of them taking responsibility in the fact that pretty much not a single one did a thing to get a good grade anyway. Yes. That's a very, very dumbed down way of describing socialism, but the basic principle applies here. Socialism doesn't work with NORMAL human beings and NORMAL human behavior. I'd love the idea of socialism if it could work properly.
#105 to #97 - yarson (09/14/2012) [-]
1) Sorry for that though.
2) Most tribes had a leader, because humans want power, so in smaller tribes, the strongest person had the power. The point I am trying to make here is that, in the western world, most is based on the concept of free thinking. Just because someone is from a smaller country doesn't mean they don't understand the consquences of being a big country.
3)We probably won't know if that 5% , there are no statistics known about it, so we can better drop this one before it ends up in endless rambling. Let's just call the newspaper reading students the minority.
4)Did I ever state it was CREATED in Russia, I just pointed out that it didn't work out.
If you want something like that to work out, there will be no freedom.

Nothing more to say though, sorry for the first furious reaction. A small misjudgement I made out of your first comment.
User avatar #108 to #105 - Fgner (09/14/2012) [-]
1) No problem.
2) Most hunter gatherer societies were actually democratic, some had "elders" that they went to for knowledge and such. I'm talking very small tribes at the beginning of humanity. And you'd have the alpha male warrior and such of course. But there's no point of having a king in a society of a whopping 20ish people. How would you make people obey? Beat one of them, great you just lost one of your people and you made the other 18 want to ****** you, which they probably will.
3) Agreed.
4) That was my bad of course. I misinterpreted your comment.

All good man. No hard feelings.
 Friends (0)