Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:3/14/2010
Last Login:10/22/2016
Location:FJ Island
Comment Ranking:#7234
Highest Content Rank:#8501
Highest Comment Rank:#2450
Content Thumbs: 49 total,  62 ,  13
Comment Thumbs: 2880 total,  3296 ,  416
Content Level Progress: 88.13% (52/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 78% (78/100)
Level 224 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 225 Comments: Mind Blower
Content Views:3134
Times Content Favorited:1 times
Total Comments Made:612
FJ Points:2436
Been an anon for the longest time, finally made an account. Probably wont be posting many pics.

  • Views: 1721
    Thumbs Up 15 Thumbs Down 5 Total: +10
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 1
    Uploaded: 08/10/14
    Punchline Punchline

latest user's comments

#45 - The four minutes statistic is widely known and has been public…  [+] (3 replies) 10/20/2016 on This is classified information +26
User avatar
#194 - toosexyforyou (10/21/2016) [-]
Prove your point by telling us Russia's nuclear response time.
User avatar
#153 - thatoneiranianguy (10/21/2016) [-]
I don't think that statistic was ever confirmed though because it's not something people are supposed to know.
User avatar
#69 - huntergriff (10/20/2016) [-]
#69 - He repeated himself at least as much as she did.  [+] (1 reply) 10/20/2016 on ((((CNN)))) does it again +6
User avatar
#73 - Sewallman (10/20/2016) [-]
By giving her the same answers. Trump may have had 3 of the same trainer cards he's played but each debate he's come with a new Pokémon deck. Hillary has used the same cards with the same strategy.. Trump adjusted his Pokémon accordingly.
#167 - He lost the last debate.  [+] (2 replies) 10/20/2016 on Tune into the Debate Tonight -1
User avatar
#171 - infinitereaper (10/20/2016) [-]
Trump won the last debate* proof below
User avatar
#170 - infinitereaper (10/20/2016) [-]
No she didn't.
And I have proof
>Tides are Turning
>Trump Playing 4D Chess
>Even Google
#42 - It was mostly a joke and racist was a convenient replacement f…  [+] (1 reply) 10/08/2016 on Bo's advice for young people 0
User avatar
#61 - epicbanjoman (10/08/2016) [-]
To deal with the claim for racism against Mexico, here's the full quote.
"When Mexico (meaning the Mexican Government) sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you (pointing to the audience). They’re not sending you (pointing again). They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems to us. They’re bringing drugs.They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people! But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people. It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.”" Don't twist it. You know what he's talking about. He's talking about illegals.
He also suggested lending a hand to Mexico, if he became President, to work together to take down the drug cartels and to halt illegal immigration coming from Central America.

Let's talk about those claims. For the first one, that case was not successful against him. Just because a case was made does not mean it happened. With the second one, info tells me that Trump made that decision because his consumer base (old, white, racist people) were going to be lost if he didn't make that decision. Was it stupid? Absolutely. Does that necessarily make him a racist? No. Why would a racist go and give a speech at an all black church if he hates black people? www.theroot.com/articles/news/2016/08/entire-black-church-endorses-donald-trump-for-president/
Wouldn't he rather go hangout with the old, racist, KKK leader David Duke who supported him instead? No. He didn't even want his support.
Why would someone who's racist do that? If he was racist, wouldn't he not care or maybe even accept it?
#19 - Hm, you're right. By that logic, Clinton wouldn't be too bad. …  [+] (12 replies) 10/07/2016 on Bo's advice for young people -2
User avatar
#53 - thegamepixel (10/08/2016) [-]
Well, she's gotta know a damn lot about politics. That doesn't mean her viewpoint is right, but it takes a lot of skill to get this far.
User avatar
#23 - KazumaKyu (10/07/2016) [-]
Clinton is a criminal. Trump is not. One of them is directly responsible for the loss of American lives, and it isn't the businessman. That's bottom line for me. I'll take the racist who hasn't gotten anybody killed over the liar who has.
User avatar
#24 - avatice (10/07/2016) [-]
If you think that anyone who made it to the top like he did isn't a criminal in some way or another I got news for you bubby.
User avatar
#52 - thegamepixel (10/08/2016) [-]
"Most people in power are criminals therefore everyone in power must be a criminal" is not a logically sound argument. Until you can prove that he is (or at least is likely to be) a criminal, assuming he is is silly.
User avatar
#65 - avatice (10/08/2016) [-]
Statistics is a thing.
User avatar
#67 - KazumaKyu (10/08/2016) [-]
Statistically speaking, it is extremely unlikely that you haven't stolen something at some point in your life. The same can be said of all Americans. So I propose that all Americans should be arrested and fined, because of the likelihood that they've committed a crime. We have no proof and they might not even know what crime they've committed, but statistics is a thing and ignorance is no excuse.
User avatar
#70 - avatice (10/08/2016) [-]
Well given his position, the probability of him being a criminal in some way is so high that I'd be willing to bet my left testicle that he has done something illegal. Be it fraud, or tax evasion or something else I don't know, but my point was is that it's naive to believe he's a completely honest man.
Now is he more honest than Hillary Clinton? I would say... yes. She is more a political sleazebag type of dishonest. The most I can say with any certainty about Donald Trump is that he probably at some point cheated either the government or someone else out of their money. It's just what businessman of that caliber do. And Hillary Clinton in all likelihood was responsible for American deaths, and insecure classified information. Both are corrupt and I don't trust either
User avatar
#25 - KazumaKyu (10/07/2016) [-]
Unless we're just to assume he too is responsible for American deaths and the mismanaging of classified documents, I'd say he's still the most morally sound option.

... Unless you equate something like tax evasion or another equally white-collar crime with gross negligence and incompetence of such magnitude that it gets people killed, anyway.
User avatar
#26 - avatice (10/07/2016) [-]
Well to be fair you just said he wasn't a criminal. I just pointed out that he likely is.
And he may have caused a death before. You never know. But of course speculation is not a valid reason to discredit someone.
User avatar
#33 - blacknightshade (10/07/2016) [-]
Just because he "may have," or "likely is," means absolutely nothing. Literally anybody "may have" done anything, without proof that's just baseless accusations and speculation. The fact of the matter is, Clinton's actions have definitively, without question, caused harm and loss of life. I could claim that Clinton or Trump may have eaten aborted fetuses and roasted orphans in a dumpster fire. It's possible, they may have, since you can't pull proof that they didn't, but that means NOTHING if you can't prove they DID.
User avatar
#34 - avatice (10/07/2016) [-]
You're dumb as fuck. Read the last sentence.
User avatar
#36 - blacknightshade (10/07/2016) [-]
Yet in the same post you were still trying to throw out "maybes" as potential reason.

user's friends