The reason MMA fights are more likely ending with getting choked out than having your limbs broken is quite simple. If you are the guy who breaks everybodys shit, nobody will want to fight you anymore because broken bones take you out of fighting (the thing you do to make money), training (the thing that allows to compete on such a level in the first place) and the enjoyments of life (ever tried to masturbate with two broken hands?) for weeks. Weeks or erven months.
Nobody will book you or allow you in their competitions anymore because 30 second fights aren't that interesting (which is why proffesional boxing matches rarely turn out to be like Muhammad Ali vs random guy from the audience), getting qualified and equal fighters as opponents becomes next to impossible (see above) and "liability" would be the word promoters mutter in their sleep while having nightmare about faceless lawyers.
MMA isn't the Kumite from Bloodsport. MMA matches are a business and their cash cows are their fighters otherwise it would be just bum fights. You can't milk a cow with a broken udder. But you can choke its nipples until the milk flows, you just gotta have the right technique.

The "it" that's about JS are fucking insane law-masturbation in Idaho and the inane in both camps duking it out to get their way. Like I said, 14-year-old girls kicking and screaming to have it the way they want it. Dude, it's fucking Idaho-Some of the most back-assward fucks from all over the country have relocated there to get the fuck away from everyone else and their bullshit, as they see it.

Think Utah when Joe Smith skipped the Northeast except with redder necks than clansmen with a history of blunt-force trauma to the head.

Prickville, USA
LGBT's have quite the battle ahead of them there-

> "I have little love for the state, but I do see a need for some actual 'higher power' (religious one's don't cut it) to further society in less harmful directions."

A "lesser evil" is still evil. I find this a contradiction at best. But you don't, so no need to get into it. So far you seem to be saying that such a "higher power" is or has to be the state, even though you say don't love the state.

> "If you feel a discussion is me forcing beliefs on you, that's just sad to me."

A "discussion" does not force beliefs on anyone. I understand that you are just stating/declaring what you believe. And like I said, I don't think your vote counts for much, so I can't even say that you are forcing your political view on me or on anyone else. So no, I don't think you are forcing anything on me, just stating your beliefs that I can chose to ignore.

> "To me, that means you're closed to any discussion that's not preaching to your choir, or to put it another way, you're only interested in mental masturbation, no distractions."

I'm not sure what you are interested in, so I can't really comment on it.

> "we obviously draw it in differing places, I'm OK with that."

Of course, you have to be ok with it because you can't really do anything about it one way or the other.

>"You need enough like minded people to vote thoughtfully and rationally and it will."

Good luck with that. I predict failure in this. But what do I know? And again, I am not stopping you. Go ahead and convince or find as many like-minded people as you need and vote to your heart's content. Obviously, I won't be one of those who agrees with you, as we have different ideas on what "thoughtfully" and "rationally" means. Voting is your strategy to get what you want out of the state. That's ok. That's your choice. Good luck. It obviously holds little to no interest to me. But I don't need to convince any "like-minded" people to do anything. I can just act on my own and take advantage of all the many ways there are to opt out.

> "So, you don't vote? No wonder you have no representation, that's your fault though.""

Wrong. None of the candidates represent me, so this is an idiotic thing to say. Who should I have voted for that would have "represented" me? Last I checked, there were two heinous options available. And unless there's a tie, your vote simply does not count. And then, will they do what I want them to do even when elected? Sorry. Waste of my time. But again, vote to your heart's content. I'm glad for you that you are being so well represented by your politicians of choice.

>"I can't find a group that fits me (or vice versa)."

Even more remarkable then that you have "representatives" that adequately "represent' you.

You are fortunate in so many ways.
Good for you.

If you change your citizenship to wherever you move they can't tax you anymore...why can't 'free marketers' buy a whole country and try it out fo realsies?
The country and state are owned by us all, we are represented by our government (no matter how poorly). Did school not teach you how that's set up? It should have.
You are saying it SHOULD be all private, which would make it the same thing with no recourse to move out of it, just to different controllers, the new one's not even elected or replaceable. Bad move.
Thank you, the implication that I'm unworthy of discussion with, then continued discussion was at best, odd.
I say the present government sucks, and sucks worse in some places than others. I'm saying we can make it better if we elect better reps, but never perfect for everyone, just not possible. I agree that there's too much 'governing' with far too little result, but I disagree that the answer is to stop governing.
I am surrounded by both cool people and losers, but we're spread out enough that it's easier to ignore the losers from here. I got lucky.
I do, I vote. That's how it's set up to be done, if people were more thoughtful, it would work better.
I only pointed out my situation because you had apparently decided I'm a worthless taker, and that's a mistaken assumption (but an understandable one, I'm odd).
Are you saying I said that 'who cares what you think'? because I never meant to. If you are saying that yourself, that's a problem for rational discussion.
I have little love for the state, but I do see a need for some actual 'higher power' (religious one's don't cut it) to further society in less harmful directions.
If you feel a discussion is me forcing beliefs on you, that's just sad to me. To me, that means you're closed to any discussion that's not preaching to your choir, or to put it another way, you're only interested in mental masturbation, no distractions.
There are degrees of being 'left alone'...just as there are degrees of 'able to do anything that doesn't HARM another'...it's about where you draw the line of 'left alone' or 'harm another'...we obviously draw it in differing places, I'm OK with that.

Tags for this video have been changed from '911, sex, masturbate' to '911, sex, masturbate, chewed up' - edited by xxovercastxx

See, this is a good example why I wouldn't consider myself an atheist. Just like the religious folk out there insist they know that god exists atheist insist that there can't be one.
The only thing we know as a fact is that many, if not all, the things people think they know about gods and the bigger questions of philosophy are wrong.
Atheism is, like it or not, a belief. Sure, it's guided by scientific fact and therefore much more acurate than most religions (yup, went there, called atheism a religion) but certain concepts (like the idea of divine creators) haven't been proven wrong so far. Maybe some day we will but the important part is this: we haven't yet. I don't even think we ever will. Somehow many people considering themselves atheist seem to think that since we have proven most religious texts to be false and/or unreliable is a proof of the nonexistence of any god. It is certainly not. We proved the bible to be wrong, that's all.
Personally I don't belief in any gods either. Heck, I even reject the concept of "souls". IMO were just happen to be self-aware machines of biological technology (for a lack of a better word) that are here because of whogivesafuckIdontknow. I am probably best characterised as an apatheist. Asking yourself and arguing about the question of any gods existence or possible life after death or even if we have a soul is pointless. At this point there is no answer that can be scientifically proven in sight. Why even bother asking? If the answer to such pressing questions (cause you have at best only 120 years until you die) is out there, it'll find us on it's own. We'll stumble over it if it's necessary.
I certainly support the fight against religious ignorance that has plagued mankind so far (and won't stop any time soon) but I just can't get past the irony of people who know to trust science (science is nothing you can believe in, just like math you accept it's as true or live as the fool who thinks 2+2=4 is a dirty lie) but still think they know answers to questions science can't answer yet.
I don't believe in a white, old, bearded dude living in the clouds watching me masturbate but I'm also not foolish enough to think I know more than the scientists of the world do. Somehow many atheist seem to be that kind of fool.
Let us just appreciate the fact that Pat Robertson of all people embraces the truth of evolution. Who cares if he thinks God is responsible? I doesn't matter. We can't prove him wrong. What matters is that he is siding with the smart people in this debate.

im no statist but this video is so childishly naive as to be laughable.

might as well call the free market jesus.

jesus is the way and the light.
follow jesus for salvation.
only jesus can absolve you of your sins.

this is about power.
if the libertarian is willing to acknowledge that the government is bloated and corrupt but unwilling to recognize the abuse of power wrought by corporations...because the corporation is part of the "free market"...they can end their sermon right there.

i am no longer interested.

if a libertarian preaches the importance of individual sovereignty and individual rights but dismisses that they are part of a community in a larger society.
they can proselytize at somebody elses door.

if a libertarian wishes to shower me with the glories of private property and ownership but ignore the importance and basic human dignity of the very workers who produce everything for those private owners.

then i say unto them that they wish to enslave their fellow man and the freedom they seek is for them alone and the rest of humanity be damned all in the name of profit and greed.

they can take their cult of ayn rand and masturbate somewhere else.

UNLESS....
they are willing to admit that:
1.as @VoodooV pointed out,we live in a society and a society is populated by PEOPLE.

2.that people deserve more than just the right to trade freely (which i agree with) but that human dignity and compassion,and yes..the right for life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

3.that the corporation is actually MORE vicious than a government.a corporation is amoral by design! so if we are going to address the abusive powers of government,the abuses of corporations should be recognized as well.

4.the argument that corporations would not exist without governments is a canard.that may have been true in 1910 but no longer.there are corporations that have a higher GDP than most nation states.

5.the argument that governments start wars are only half-truths.can you guess what the other half is? thats right! banks and corporations using their power and influence to oppress third world nations...through the use (or abuse to be more accurate) of this nations military.see:smedley butler.

6.while a non-state would be amazing i am not naive enough to believe it could ever happen in our lifetime.yes many arbitrary borders have been penned by empires but there will always be lines drawn by cultural,religious and ethnicity..lets be honest.

7.while i do not share voodoos optimism in this democratic representative republics current health status (i feel it is broken and dysfunctional),it is a FAR better thing than the authoritarian,totalitarian system that is the american corporation.unless they went all democratic on me and i didnt get the memo.

8.government does have a role in our society,though it should be limited.
defense (not illegal and pre-emptive wars of aggression).
fraud control and law enforcement.
roads,fire,police,education and health,because thats what a society does for each other.
we take care of each other.
you dont like that? move to the mountains..have fun!

9.the corporate charter should be re-written."for the public good" should be re-instated for one thing.
a.i was talking to a libertarian and he used the term "non-aggression" and i really REALLY liked this.so a corporation will be held responsible for any and all:destruction to the ecology (local and abroad),destruction of peoples health,home and property.externalization of any sort will be seen as "aggression" and the CEO and all officers will be held liable to be paid by:dissillusion of company of jail time,they can choose.
b.a corporation is NOT a person and ZERO funds will be drawn from company money to purchase a legislator.they may spend as much money as they wish from their own personal accounts,but ALL contributions shall be made public over a certain amount.
c.any corporation that has been found to pay their workers so little as to put the burden on the tax payer shall be found performing an "aggressive" act against the american people and shall either pay the amount in full or forfeit their company.

dammit.im rambling ...again.
but oh baby am i digging this non-aggression dealio!

can i rewrite the corporate charter?
please please please please.....

*promote the discussion

And to compare abortion with masturbation has always been pretty lame. Yes, the two are related like female circumcision and male circumcision, lol.

"who's viewing this post now (masturbating):
Yogi "-siftbot

Ceiling cat is still watching you masturbate, even after you fixed the hole up there...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'media, mayhem, montage, muse, mechanic, masturbation, masterful' to 'media, mayhem, montage, muse, mechanic, masturbation, warm gun' - edited by chingalera

dzonny n' poolcleaner, here's another vote just for you two and some unsolicited insight as to perhaps why this vid isn't enjoying some stellar erection err..ascension: Star Wars fans as advanced in age as those depicted here well, they're dying-off or have moved-on. The fond childhood memories of epic cinematic outer-space masturbation have given-way to the worries and trials of a civilization saturated with entertainment, regurgitate art and culture, and the concerns of real-world issues like, "My children will never experience the thrill of cinema like I did because all the fucking movie theaters are either closed, or packed with 16 pieces of cinematic crap that costs way too much for a poor-quality product. Oh that and the demise of language and culture, as the world is turned into a single amalgamate of herd-like automatons.

Plus this song has been parodied so many times as to become nauseating.

But I'm just a cynical bitch so give it some time....more SWG's will come out to play after I remind everyone how much the franchise SUCKS DONKEY BALLS!

Eric can recall from my past tenure here and since I opened my mouth concerning this asshole's brand of so-called "alternative or whteverthefuck" journalistic masturbation. He's a fucking douchebag, self-pimping, do-nothing of an editorializing windbag Cenk is, and his entire crew of ineffectual do-and-say-nothings.

SO no one even wants to touch the fact that all police and federal agents are felonious, eh? Either y'allera buncha, stoners-in-denial or silence is consent, just like the judge in his sheer, dime-store robe (masturbating to child-porn in his chamber of whore) says?

No, that's only for masturbation, if it's actual sex then god will kill a sentient being, and horribly if you had the nerve to enjoy it.