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

hide menu

davidispissed    

Rank #39919 on Subscribers
davidispissed Avatar Level 236 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Offline
Send mail to davidispissed Block davidispissed Invite davidispissed to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:7/11/2011
Last Login:10/31/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 279 total,  440 ,  161
Comment Thumbs: 3712 total,  5453 ,  1741
Content Level Progress: 40% (4/10)
Level 27 Content: Peasant → Level 28 Content: Peasant
Comment Level Progress: 70% (70/100)
Level 236 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 237 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:1
Content Views:27505
Times Content Favorited:16 times
Total Comments Made:1882
FJ Points:3953

latest user's comments

#13 - why? the .45 has better penetrating power and range.  [+] (7 new replies) 02/22/2014 on War Stories Pt.3 0
User avatar #14 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
Don't take my word for it, but from what I can gather....

Beretta M92:
-More bullets in a mag
-Women can handle it better (?) (more women in the military now a days)
-9mm more commonly made. 9mm can be used in most SMG/PDW's.
952 grams empty, 1,162 loaded
217 mm long

M1911:
-More stopping power
-Not many other types of guns (if any) chambered in .45 ACP
1,105 grams empty
210 mm long
User avatar #15 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
I must've been special then. I had a S&W .45 while i was in Kabul.
User avatar #16 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
M1911's are still being used, but if they get heavily damaged they usually get replaced by M9's.
#22 - Womens Study Major (02/22/2014) [-]
at least in teh marines, the 1911s dont ahve many interchangable parts. the Precision weapons shop down in Quantico Virginia has to specifically create or alter parts for each individial 1911. at least teh refurbished ones that still get put back into the fleet. therefore the 1911 can still be used but more commonly the M9 is used
User avatar #17 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
personally, I think if they're wanting an easily repairedd and replaced 9mm alternative, they sould go with a Stoeger Couger. The colt M9 isnt really that great and has more parts to clean, which means more points of failure.
User avatar #18 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
Well, who knows why the military does what they do.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
so the senators keep getting money to their corporation buddies.
#11 - number twoo is incorrect, US Marines (especially now days) do …  [+] (9 new replies) 02/22/2014 on War Stories Pt.3 -1
User avatar #12 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
It was Operation Iraqi Freedom (March of 2003). The Beretta M9 has been the standard sidearm of the United States Navy, United States Army and the United States Air Force since 1985, replacing the Colt M1911A1 in the Army and Navy and the Smith & Wesson .38 Special in the Air Force. The M9A1 is also seeing limited issue to the United States Marine Corps.
User avatar #13 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
why? the .45 has better penetrating power and range.
User avatar #14 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
Don't take my word for it, but from what I can gather....

Beretta M92:
-More bullets in a mag
-Women can handle it better (?) (more women in the military now a days)
-9mm more commonly made. 9mm can be used in most SMG/PDW's.
952 grams empty, 1,162 loaded
217 mm long

M1911:
-More stopping power
-Not many other types of guns (if any) chambered in .45 ACP
1,105 grams empty
210 mm long
User avatar #15 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
I must've been special then. I had a S&W .45 while i was in Kabul.
User avatar #16 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
M1911's are still being used, but if they get heavily damaged they usually get replaced by M9's.
#22 - Womens Study Major (02/22/2014) [-]
at least in teh marines, the 1911s dont ahve many interchangable parts. the Precision weapons shop down in Quantico Virginia has to specifically create or alter parts for each individial 1911. at least teh refurbished ones that still get put back into the fleet. therefore the 1911 can still be used but more commonly the M9 is used
User avatar #17 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
personally, I think if they're wanting an easily repairedd and replaced 9mm alternative, they sould go with a Stoeger Couger. The colt M9 isnt really that great and has more parts to clean, which means more points of failure.
User avatar #18 - ianmcgunny (02/22/2014) [-]
Well, who knows why the military does what they do.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/22/2014) [-]
so the senators keep getting money to their corporation buddies.
#5 - also, they make good pets 02/21/2014 on Stand your ground 0
#91 - Mythbusters 02/21/2014 on sounds like 0
#3 - you might wanna get both hard drives checked. 02/21/2014 on Craigslist - Missed... 0
#54 - I am the parent Gotham deserves, but not the one he needs righ… 02/21/2014 on I might just use this in... +2
#18 - fap 02/20/2014 on woooo +1
#30 - we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#28 - Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averagi…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#25 - actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due t…  [+] (5 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#22 - it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does ha…  [+] (7 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#19 - but the prerequisites put the exact same people back in power.…  [+] (9 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #20 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Out of the last presidents we've had, it would immediately disqualify Obama and Clinton. If we went for people having to hold 2 out of those 4 qualifications, it would disqualify every president I've looked at, all the way back to Taft. Out of the current senators, I think it would disqualify about 40% of them. I'm pretty okay with presidents and representatives, I just want it to be legally required that they have more qualifications to run a country than a winning smile and 35 years of age.
User avatar #22 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does have an appeal, but if we put a person in office that is only interested in his own business interests then the whole country would become a business. Now I know that sounds good, but businesses cut corners, especially when they need to care for their employees and injured workers. Also 80 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle that have businesses use those businesses to undermine other compnies. read up on the carlyle group, Endurance Specialty Holdings, and bain capital,
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#17 - I say we just dissolve congress and allow the people to vote o…  [+] (11 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #18 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'd be in favor of a form of constitutional democratic oligarchy. Elections happen once every ten years (because who can learn to rule a country in 4 or 8 years?) and to be eligible, you have to have served in the military, been the head of a company of more than 200 people for more than 5 years and made a profit, made a million dollars from scratch, or been a diplomatic representative to another country for more than a decade. 1 representative for each state, but the total percentage of vote that that representative wields is directly proportional to the portion of the US population that resides in that state. And there's a general poll every year on the president and the representatives; if more than 45% of people in the US or in the particular state are dissatisfied with the performance of the president or representatives, there's an immediate election held to either confirm the rest of their term or replace them with someone new.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
but the prerequisites put the exact same people back in power. I still think a pure democrcy would work best. mediated by a president and supreme court, but not controled by a select few.
User avatar #20 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Out of the last presidents we've had, it would immediately disqualify Obama and Clinton. If we went for people having to hold 2 out of those 4 qualifications, it would disqualify every president I've looked at, all the way back to Taft. Out of the current senators, I think it would disqualify about 40% of them. I'm pretty okay with presidents and representatives, I just want it to be legally required that they have more qualifications to run a country than a winning smile and 35 years of age.
User avatar #22 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does have an appeal, but if we put a person in office that is only interested in his own business interests then the whole country would become a business. Now I know that sounds good, but businesses cut corners, especially when they need to care for their employees and injured workers. Also 80 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle that have businesses use those businesses to undermine other compnies. read up on the carlyle group, Endurance Specialty Holdings, and bain capital,
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#15 - firstly, i did get them confused, scondly there are a few smar…  [+] (13 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
User avatar #16 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm not blaming Obama for anything. That's just when the actual instead of estimated numbers on debt and deficit are recorded. Beginning and end of presidency, beginning and end of fiscal year. Personally I think we should tear the entire governmental and judicial system down and start over fresh; there's a lot of bullshit accumulated.
User avatar #17 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
I say we just dissolve congress and allow the people to vote on bills themselves.
User avatar #18 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'd be in favor of a form of constitutional democratic oligarchy. Elections happen once every ten years (because who can learn to rule a country in 4 or 8 years?) and to be eligible, you have to have served in the military, been the head of a company of more than 200 people for more than 5 years and made a profit, made a million dollars from scratch, or been a diplomatic representative to another country for more than a decade. 1 representative for each state, but the total percentage of vote that that representative wields is directly proportional to the portion of the US population that resides in that state. And there's a general poll every year on the president and the representatives; if more than 45% of people in the US or in the particular state are dissatisfied with the performance of the president or representatives, there's an immediate election held to either confirm the rest of their term or replace them with someone new.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
but the prerequisites put the exact same people back in power. I still think a pure democrcy would work best. mediated by a president and supreme court, but not controled by a select few.
User avatar #20 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Out of the last presidents we've had, it would immediately disqualify Obama and Clinton. If we went for people having to hold 2 out of those 4 qualifications, it would disqualify every president I've looked at, all the way back to Taft. Out of the current senators, I think it would disqualify about 40% of them. I'm pretty okay with presidents and representatives, I just want it to be legally required that they have more qualifications to run a country than a winning smile and 35 years of age.
User avatar #22 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does have an appeal, but if we put a person in office that is only interested in his own business interests then the whole country would become a business. Now I know that sounds good, but businesses cut corners, especially when they need to care for their employees and injured workers. Also 80 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle that have businesses use those businesses to undermine other compnies. read up on the carlyle group, Endurance Specialty Holdings, and bain capital,
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#4 - Hit ENTER for chat type BIGDADDY hit enter again  [+] (2 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Age of Empires +1
User avatar #5 - processfailed (02/20/2014) [-]
I always thought it was "howdoyouturnthison"?
User avatar #6 - CyrilKeir (02/20/2014) [-]
It is for AoE: 2. Big Daddy was for AoE 1
#12 - first, you confuse debt with deficit, second you cant really b…  [+] (15 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
#13 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm pretty sure you're the one confusing debt with deficit. Debt is the total amount of money that our government owes to people, corporations, or countries; that's the numbers I posted above. Deficit is the amount of money by which we have overshot our budget in a particular fiscal year. And yes, while the deficit is lower than the time Bush was in office (680 billion at FY2103, 1.48 trillion at FY2009,) the total debt has gone up by a lot. We're borrowing a lot more money than before; we're just better at estimating how much we're going to borrow, when we make the budget.

And there's not a single cable news network that could be described as smart.

Here's a tip for you: know what you're talking about.
User avatar #15 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
firstly, i did get them confused, scondly there are a few smart news people on cable.
Olberman, Maher, Colbert, etc... Also youseem to confuse the bush presidency with the bush doctrine. Those are 2 different things. the bush doctrne is the Republican pledge to continue the bush tax cts and combatant foreign policy regardless of economic outcome. also, why do we owe corprations money if they are (by law) now regarded as just people?
User avatar #16 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm not blaming Obama for anything. That's just when the actual instead of estimated numbers on debt and deficit are recorded. Beginning and end of presidency, beginning and end of fiscal year. Personally I think we should tear the entire governmental and judicial system down and start over fresh; there's a lot of bullshit accumulated.
User avatar #17 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
I say we just dissolve congress and allow the people to vote on bills themselves.
User avatar #18 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'd be in favor of a form of constitutional democratic oligarchy. Elections happen once every ten years (because who can learn to rule a country in 4 or 8 years?) and to be eligible, you have to have served in the military, been the head of a company of more than 200 people for more than 5 years and made a profit, made a million dollars from scratch, or been a diplomatic representative to another country for more than a decade. 1 representative for each state, but the total percentage of vote that that representative wields is directly proportional to the portion of the US population that resides in that state. And there's a general poll every year on the president and the representatives; if more than 45% of people in the US or in the particular state are dissatisfied with the performance of the president or representatives, there's an immediate election held to either confirm the rest of their term or replace them with someone new.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
but the prerequisites put the exact same people back in power. I still think a pure democrcy would work best. mediated by a president and supreme court, but not controled by a select few.
User avatar #20 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Out of the last presidents we've had, it would immediately disqualify Obama and Clinton. If we went for people having to hold 2 out of those 4 qualifications, it would disqualify every president I've looked at, all the way back to Taft. Out of the current senators, I think it would disqualify about 40% of them. I'm pretty okay with presidents and representatives, I just want it to be legally required that they have more qualifications to run a country than a winning smile and 35 years of age.
User avatar #22 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does have an appeal, but if we put a person in office that is only interested in his own business interests then the whole country would become a business. Now I know that sounds good, but businesses cut corners, especially when they need to care for their employees and injured workers. Also 80 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle that have businesses use those businesses to undermine other compnies. read up on the carlyle group, Endurance Specialty Holdings, and bain capital,
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#10 - exactly. although in the last 4 years thyat debt went from 14.…  [+] (17 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant 0
#11 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
The fuck are you on about? Debt has gone up sharply in the last 4 years. In 2009 the total government debt was 11.9 trillion. Currently, it's about 17.3 trillion. The portion of the total debt that is publicly held as opposed to intergovernmental (meaning primarily US Treasury Securities, including bills, notes, and bonds, that are sold to anyone from individual investors to foreign governments) was at 6.3 trillion the day Obama took office, but hit 11.9 trillion the at the end of the 2013 fiscal year.
User avatar #12 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
first, you confuse debt with deficit, second you cant really blame Obama, seeing as the cause is a congressional action to continue the Bush Doctrine on foreign policy and taxes. Here's a tip for you: Be smarter than Fox News.
#13 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm pretty sure you're the one confusing debt with deficit. Debt is the total amount of money that our government owes to people, corporations, or countries; that's the numbers I posted above. Deficit is the amount of money by which we have overshot our budget in a particular fiscal year. And yes, while the deficit is lower than the time Bush was in office (680 billion at FY2103, 1.48 trillion at FY2009,) the total debt has gone up by a lot. We're borrowing a lot more money than before; we're just better at estimating how much we're going to borrow, when we make the budget.

And there's not a single cable news network that could be described as smart.

Here's a tip for you: know what you're talking about.
User avatar #15 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
firstly, i did get them confused, scondly there are a few smart news people on cable.
Olberman, Maher, Colbert, etc... Also youseem to confuse the bush presidency with the bush doctrine. Those are 2 different things. the bush doctrne is the Republican pledge to continue the bush tax cts and combatant foreign policy regardless of economic outcome. also, why do we owe corprations money if they are (by law) now regarded as just people?
User avatar #16 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm not blaming Obama for anything. That's just when the actual instead of estimated numbers on debt and deficit are recorded. Beginning and end of presidency, beginning and end of fiscal year. Personally I think we should tear the entire governmental and judicial system down and start over fresh; there's a lot of bullshit accumulated.
User avatar #17 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
I say we just dissolve congress and allow the people to vote on bills themselves.
User avatar #18 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'd be in favor of a form of constitutional democratic oligarchy. Elections happen once every ten years (because who can learn to rule a country in 4 or 8 years?) and to be eligible, you have to have served in the military, been the head of a company of more than 200 people for more than 5 years and made a profit, made a million dollars from scratch, or been a diplomatic representative to another country for more than a decade. 1 representative for each state, but the total percentage of vote that that representative wields is directly proportional to the portion of the US population that resides in that state. And there's a general poll every year on the president and the representatives; if more than 45% of people in the US or in the particular state are dissatisfied with the performance of the president or representatives, there's an immediate election held to either confirm the rest of their term or replace them with someone new.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
but the prerequisites put the exact same people back in power. I still think a pure democrcy would work best. mediated by a president and supreme court, but not controled by a select few.
User avatar #20 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Out of the last presidents we've had, it would immediately disqualify Obama and Clinton. If we went for people having to hold 2 out of those 4 qualifications, it would disqualify every president I've looked at, all the way back to Taft. Out of the current senators, I think it would disqualify about 40% of them. I'm pretty okay with presidents and representatives, I just want it to be legally required that they have more qualifications to run a country than a winning smile and 35 years of age.
User avatar #22 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does have an appeal, but if we put a person in office that is only interested in his own business interests then the whole country would become a business. Now I know that sounds good, but businesses cut corners, especially when they need to care for their employees and injured workers. Also 80 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle that have businesses use those businesses to undermine other compnies. read up on the carlyle group, Endurance Specialty Holdings, and bain capital,
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#8 - Same as it is everyday, pinky.  [+] (19 new replies) 02/20/2014 on Repost, but still relevant +2
User avatar #9 - sneleoparden (02/20/2014) [-]
make the world give them money and take over the world with the help of said money, so that there's no debt and they get world dominance?
User avatar #10 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
exactly. although in the last 4 years thyat debt went from 14.7 trillion to about 11 trillion, so we are attempting improvemet. So long as we dont end up with another warmonger in office.
#11 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
The fuck are you on about? Debt has gone up sharply in the last 4 years. In 2009 the total government debt was 11.9 trillion. Currently, it's about 17.3 trillion. The portion of the total debt that is publicly held as opposed to intergovernmental (meaning primarily US Treasury Securities, including bills, notes, and bonds, that are sold to anyone from individual investors to foreign governments) was at 6.3 trillion the day Obama took office, but hit 11.9 trillion the at the end of the 2013 fiscal year.
User avatar #12 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
first, you confuse debt with deficit, second you cant really blame Obama, seeing as the cause is a congressional action to continue the Bush Doctrine on foreign policy and taxes. Here's a tip for you: Be smarter than Fox News.
#13 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm pretty sure you're the one confusing debt with deficit. Debt is the total amount of money that our government owes to people, corporations, or countries; that's the numbers I posted above. Deficit is the amount of money by which we have overshot our budget in a particular fiscal year. And yes, while the deficit is lower than the time Bush was in office (680 billion at FY2103, 1.48 trillion at FY2009,) the total debt has gone up by a lot. We're borrowing a lot more money than before; we're just better at estimating how much we're going to borrow, when we make the budget.

And there's not a single cable news network that could be described as smart.

Here's a tip for you: know what you're talking about.
User avatar #15 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
firstly, i did get them confused, scondly there are a few smart news people on cable.
Olberman, Maher, Colbert, etc... Also youseem to confuse the bush presidency with the bush doctrine. Those are 2 different things. the bush doctrne is the Republican pledge to continue the bush tax cts and combatant foreign policy regardless of economic outcome. also, why do we owe corprations money if they are (by law) now regarded as just people?
User avatar #16 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'm not blaming Obama for anything. That's just when the actual instead of estimated numbers on debt and deficit are recorded. Beginning and end of presidency, beginning and end of fiscal year. Personally I think we should tear the entire governmental and judicial system down and start over fresh; there's a lot of bullshit accumulated.
User avatar #17 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
I say we just dissolve congress and allow the people to vote on bills themselves.
User avatar #18 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
I'd be in favor of a form of constitutional democratic oligarchy. Elections happen once every ten years (because who can learn to rule a country in 4 or 8 years?) and to be eligible, you have to have served in the military, been the head of a company of more than 200 people for more than 5 years and made a profit, made a million dollars from scratch, or been a diplomatic representative to another country for more than a decade. 1 representative for each state, but the total percentage of vote that that representative wields is directly proportional to the portion of the US population that resides in that state. And there's a general poll every year on the president and the representatives; if more than 45% of people in the US or in the particular state are dissatisfied with the performance of the president or representatives, there's an immediate election held to either confirm the rest of their term or replace them with someone new.
User avatar #19 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
but the prerequisites put the exact same people back in power. I still think a pure democrcy would work best. mediated by a president and supreme court, but not controled by a select few.
User avatar #20 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Out of the last presidents we've had, it would immediately disqualify Obama and Clinton. If we went for people having to hold 2 out of those 4 qualifications, it would disqualify every president I've looked at, all the way back to Taft. Out of the current senators, I think it would disqualify about 40% of them. I'm pretty okay with presidents and representatives, I just want it to be legally required that they have more qualifications to run a country than a winning smile and 35 years of age.
User avatar #22 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
it would also disqualify both bush's and reagan, so it does have an appeal, but if we put a person in office that is only interested in his own business interests then the whole country would become a business. Now I know that sounds good, but businesses cut corners, especially when they need to care for their employees and injured workers. Also 80 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle that have businesses use those businesses to undermine other compnies. read up on the carlyle group, Endurance Specialty Holdings, and bain capital,
User avatar #23 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
1 out of 4 qualifications wouldn't disqualify the bushes or Reagan, since they all served in the military, but 2 out of 4 would. To reduce the possibility of governmental abuse, when a candidate is elected, they must immediately and permanently sever all ties with their former company. No more wages, no stock options, no retirement plan. There will still be abuse, but a good deterrent would be to prosecute the confirmed use of a high government position to advance the interests of a corporation or group of corporations as treason; life in prison or death penalty. Sounds a little extreme, but with great power comes great responsibility, so saith Spiderman, our lord and pizzaboy, amen.
User avatar #25 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
actually raegan was discharged before any actual service due to eyesight and memory issues in Des Moines, Iowa. And W's records were all sealed during a controversy that stated he never actually enlisted. I am assuing your system would require evidence. Also, Clinton was chairman of the board at Tyson Foods, Inc. before becoming a governor and Obama had a legal firm in Illinois before running for Senator. George W. Bush owned the only oil company to go under in 5 years time, and was bailed out by a middle eatern real estate tycoon by the name of Shafiq bin Laden. Bush senior was two years shy of your foreign diplomat prerequisite as head of the CIA. The only person involved with the GOP that would ever have qualified is Dick Cheney. And I'm not even going down that road again.
User avatar #26 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
W's records were unsealed in 2005, he did serve, but he got out under strange circumstances. Reagan, on the other hand, did 5 years of reserve and 4 years of active duty; though he never saw combat, he served as a port liason officer, a public relations specialist, and oversaw the unit that produced training films for the Army Air Corps. He held leadership positions and had objectives to accomplish. If you count his earnings from being a movie star, Reagan might actually qualify, now that I think about it.
User avatar #28 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
Actually, Raegan used to bitch about is movie earnings averaging only $5000 a year, thats why he tried to get on TV, because a show would earn him more than his movies did. And i didn't know W's records were released, imma have to look into those. also, If your system calls for representatives to still be in use i say we go one step further and remove anyone with felonies or links to organized crime and you cannot trade one office for another meaning you have 10 years in office but you cannot be re-elected or elected into another office.

this is becoming a very interesting project, no?
User avatar #29 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
Oh, you can be elected to more than one office. But you can't move down, only up. You can be a state representative, then a US representative, then President.
User avatar #30 - davidispissed (02/20/2014) [-]
we dont need two kinds of representative, do we? we have these new things called phones and this wierd little system called the internet, why can't we represent ourselves?
User avatar #31 - dedaluminus (02/20/2014) [-]
So we have someone to burn when everything goes horribly wrong, of course.
#12 - telomeres break down due to oxidation 02/18/2014 on What If... +1
#14 - thats a 12 channel switch router. 02/14/2014 on lel no 0
#5 - i see christopher lee 02/13/2014 on Can YOU find Jesus? 0
#4 - thats not a computer.  [+] (4 new replies) 02/13/2014 on lel no +1
User avatar #8 - mookiez (02/14/2014) [-]
Technically it is a computer, it may not be a pc but it is still a computer. An xbox would be a computer, anything that carry's out a set of logical operations ( aka 1's and 0's ) would considered to be a computer. I could get a couple logic gates, the hardware portion of 1's and 0's, wire them in to make a full adder add 8 in series and have an 8 bit calculator, this thing can't add more that 9999 ( I believe) but a simple circuit that I could make within an hour would still considered to be a computer.
User avatar #13 - deathleprechaun (02/14/2014) [-]
Addendum: AMD E1 powered devices are not computers; they are paperweights with LCDs.
User avatar #14 - davidispissed (02/14/2014) [-]
thats a 12 channel switch router.
User avatar #7 - billybong (02/14/2014) [-]
I think it's a switch (because of the RJ45 ports with the extra lone console port).... but maybe it's a router or something similar.
#5 - Now beiber can pee standing up! 02/12/2014 on Now Girls Can Write In The... 0
#45 - Comment deleted 02/12/2014 on Infinite energy 0
#1 - duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu… 02/11/2014 on Well Shit 0
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1500

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #3 - badboywantsu (03/29/2014) [-]
i had to add you your name speaks to me since my names david too
User avatar #4 to #3 - davidispissed (03/29/2014) [-]
really? mine too.


*awkward realization*
User avatar #5 to #4 - badboywantsu (03/29/2014) [-]
i work in a place with 4 other people named dave it ends up with confusion all the time
User avatar #6 to #5 - davidispissed (03/29/2014) [-]
insay all the davids should unite and take over the world.
User avatar #7 to #6 - badboywantsu (03/29/2014) [-]
i'm in we are many we are strong we have a pretty awesome name ha
 Friends (0)