Stop flirting with me.

In reply to this comment by volumptuous:
This is just beautiful. Blanky using Fox Business to justify his passion and love for Ron Paul.

Are you flirting with me?

*gay

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
http://videosift.com/video/Proof-The-Tea-Party-isn-t-Racist

You got an upvote from me. Boom. Why? Because I'm a bigger man. Where? All over. In my penis. In my arms. In my penis. Everywhere.

wtf? have you all lost your minds?

1. you can't compare a womans vagina to a wad full of cash. but presuming that you could... just because i flashed my wad full of cash does not make it less wrong or even permissible for someone to steal it. your rights end where mine begin.

2. women don't get raped because they're scantily clad. rape is less about sexual gratification and more about power and control. i was a wild ass teenager and i put myself in a lot of unwholesome situations, i experienced my fair share of unwanted, boundary violating sexual advances. i was also a raging tomboy/baby crusty... my clothing didn't have anything to do with the creeps who wanted/tried/did take advantage, it was ALWAYS about power and superiority and control. ALWAYS about some mental defect that made dudes get off on the ability to overpower.

3. you can't blame anyone for mistaking your flirtation with interest. anyone who does is probably being a bitch. but flirting and be provocative is not "stepping into the lion's den and asking to get bit" and you're not contractually obligated to put out... anyone who thinks that it is does is a defective asshole and possibly predatory and almost certainly has issues with women and their ability to own their sexual power, again.. its about power and dominance and control.

4. i sort of agree with the notion that you attract what you put out there. like i chat it up with a lot of mentally ill/homeless men... so a lot of these guys tend to want to marry me.... when i go dancing at the hip hop club, i dont get offended when i get balls rubbed on my leg or some horny drunk guy wants to take me home.... i just go find a girl to dance with after that.... when i go dancing at the gay bar looking like a big dyke, i dont get pissed off when a lesbian flirts with me... i go bowling a lot, i dont get mad when bowling alley people hit on me.... if you dress and behave in a certain way in a certain place, you're bound to attract someone.. you have no right to be surprised or offended when that happens... it may even be what you're looking for.. ... but it does not negate someone else's responsibility to control themselves and respect your words more than your tits. and anyone who doesn't see that, has issues with women and their sexual power. and rape is, once again, about power and control. it is not about cleavage or temptation.

edit: there is also offensive language... i dont get mad if you thought i was flirting with you and expressed an interest, i do get mad if you don't speak to me with respect. again, its about power and control ooorrr maybe you're a social piarha with no idea how interact with people, either way, you're getting turned down and that doesnt make me a tease. it's your problem.

(self post for archival reasons)

You confuse free markets with free people. Where free market reforms have been put into place in Chile, Argentina, Russia, Bolivia and here at home in the states, you see a pattern of hyper-inflation, massive unemployment, low wages, massive income inequality, the gutting of the middle class, labor exploitation, abuse and attacks (physical or economic) on unions and the diminishing of civil rights. I know that your free market intentions are pure, but as Milton Friedman himself said "One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results."

Free markets provide liberty to employers at the expense of employee liberty; they provide liberty to the wealthy at the expense of the poor. It's the Soviet communism of the rich.

I know you draw a big distinction between free markets and corporatism in your mind, but historically, free markets always lead to corporatism and generally require violence and authoritarianism to implement and sustain.

Corporations latched on to Milton Friedman, because he was able to make a persuasive moral argument in favor plutocracy that could be embraced by people who do not benefit from corporatism (like you). Rather than say the rich should be free to dominate, he makes it an issue of 'individual liberty'. If "individual liberty" just so happens to lead plutocracy, it's not Uncle Miltie's fault, because "Freedom is dangerous" as you have said many times.

I know I sound like a broken record, but you need to read that book. Friedman and his Chicago school of economics cronies repeatedly worked closely with despotic governments (including our own) and despotic businesses. You'll be "shocked". He and his colleagues hijacked the IMF and World Bank and have been using those institutions to beat down poor nations and force them to sell of their natural resources to multinational corporations.

I don't have a problem with capitalism, just so long as it does not have a monopoly over the system. I think capitalism has many good traits, but that it is not capable of performing tasks in which value cannot be measured in dollars, like health, education, infrastructure and other social programs. I want a system where government is free to do what it does best, and where business if free to do what it does best. Balance > Ideological monopolies.

Top ten clues that the Free Market movement is a racket.

1. It states that altruism and empathy are bad; greed and selfishness are good.
2. It claims to be anti-corporate, yet is completely funded by corporations from the ground up.
3. It claims to be about liberty, volunteerism and non-aggression, but can only be implemented through force and terror.
4. It promotes irrational/anti-scientific thinking when science gets in the way of business. (read: Global Climate Change).
5. It is largely embraced by Republicans, whom are easily manipulated into believing corporatist falsehoods on a regular basis.
6. It is obsessed with keeping people from organizing, under the guise of 'individualism'. Corporatists know that we are much easier to dominate as separate individuals.
7. In cases where free market reforms have been implemented by a government, it has resulted in plutocracy.
8. In failed states where no government or taxes exist, chaos reigns. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vmn9asN-8AE
9. There is no empirical evidence to prove the merit of Free Market doctrine, and plenty of evidence against.
10. It is embraced by the biggest propagandists of our times, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Ayn Rand, etc.

http://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0805079831>> ^blankfist:

No. This is genuine discontent boiling over. Let me explain this one final time, so you know where I'm coming from, which is contrary to how you and your best friend NR try to paint me in every discussion thread.
I see a dangerous trend with people lumping together capitalism and free markets and corporatism. All three of them are equally different constructs, and not one of them is similar. Capitalism is working from savings (capital) to produce goods and services. A free market is a mutually beneficial, voluntary exchange between people without coercion. Corporations are government legitimized entities whose only purpose is to make profit in business.
If you asked me to help paint your house and in exchange you'd offer me a lunch, and I agreed voluntarily, that would be the free market. It doesn't necessarily necessitate the exchange of money. If you pulled $1000 from your savings to pay a painter, that would be capitalism and unless you held a gun to his head that too would be a free market exchange. If the state or city says you can only hire licensed painters, then that's not a free market exchange (but still capitalism).
If you had to hire Lowe's Inc. or Home Depot Inc. because they're the only show in town (because of corporate subsidies that make their prices so low no small business painter could compete with them, because the regulations or fees are too stringent for individuals to compete financially with the large corporations, etc.) then that's corporatism and capitalism - and that's absolutely not the free market.
I know you say you think we've been over this ad nauseum, but in every single discussion you seem to revert back to painting me with the same broad brush of capitalist/free marketeer/corporatist which is incredibly disingenuous. For the record: I agree with free markets, I agree with capitalism only as far as it's necessary, and I despise vehemently corporations because they're fictitious entities legitimized by government.
I've said on many accounts that I think capitalism is imperfect. But there's not a single human created economic construct out today that works as well as capitalism. When the day comes that a new system is introduced that is better, I will be more than happy to shake off the chains of capitalism and forge ahead. But no other system is better at the present moment. Not socialism, not communism, not marxism, not anything.
I don't have a problem challenging my belief system, because that's exactly what got me to where I am today. I've transitioned from apolitical/centrist to Democratic-leaning to what I am today. I've never been spoon-fed any pro-capitalist bullshit from teachers, instructors, peers or coworkers at any point in my life; this has all been an objective study on my part. And I take no issue with reading the Shock Doctrine, obviously, because I like to learn more from different perspectives on just about everything, especially politics. And always have! But I'm not your monkey that will rush out and buy a copy today, and that doesn't mean I'm hopeless or ignoring whatever information that book may offer.
If you want capitalism to crumble and be replaced with nationalist capitalism or socialism or whatever else, that's fine by me that you have those beliefs, but understand that I'm not the enemy in your long war against that.
In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Are you flirting with me?
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
You know how we look back on the dark ages and laugh at how stupid and primitive all the knuckleheads were back then? In a few hundred more years, people are going to laugh at us for the same way, and deservedly so.

The prophet hath spoken! Go readth the Shock Doctrine and cleanse thyselves!

No. This is genuine discontent boiling over. Let me explain this one final time, so you know where I'm coming from, which is contrary to how you and your best friend NR try to paint me in every discussion thread.

I see a dangerous trend with people lumping together capitalism and free markets and corporatism. All three of them are equally different constructs, and not one of them is similar. Capitalism is working from savings (capital) to produce goods and services. A free market is a mutually beneficial, voluntary exchange between people without coercion. Corporations are government legitimized entities whose only purpose is to make profit in business.

If you asked me to help paint your house and in exchange you'd offer me a lunch, and I agreed voluntarily, that would be the free market. It doesn't necessarily necessitate the exchange of money. If you pulled $1000 from your savings to pay a painter, that would be capitalism and unless you held a gun to his head that too would be a free market exchange. If the state or city says you can only hire licensed painters, then that's not a free market exchange (but still capitalism).

If you had to hire Lowe's Inc. or Home Depot Inc. because they're the only show in town (because of corporate subsidies that make their prices so low no small business painter could compete with them, because the regulations or fees are too stringent for individuals to compete financially with the large corporations, etc.) then that's corporatism and capitalism - and that's absolutely not the free market.

I know you say you think we've been over this ad nauseum, but in every single discussion you seem to revert back to painting me with the same broad brush of capitalist/free marketeer/corporatist which is incredibly disingenuous. For the record: I agree with free markets, I agree with capitalism only as far as it's necessary, and I despise vehemently corporations because they're fictitious entities legitimized by government.

I've said on many accounts that I think capitalism is imperfect. But there's not a single human created economic construct out today that works as well as capitalism. When the day comes that a new system is introduced that is better, I will be more than happy to shake off the chains of capitalism and forge ahead. But no other system is better at the present moment. Not socialism, not communism, not marxism, not anything.

I don't have a problem challenging my belief system, because that's exactly what got me to where I am today. I've transitioned from apolitical/centrist to Democratic-leaning to what I am today. I've never been spoon-fed any pro-capitalist bullshit from teachers, instructors, peers or coworkers at any point in my life; this has all been an objective study on my part. And I take no issue with reading the Shock Doctrine, obviously, because I like to learn more from different perspectives on just about everything, especially politics. And always have! But I'm not your monkey that will rush out and buy a copy today, and that doesn't mean I'm hopeless or ignoring whatever information that book may offer.

If you want capitalism to crumble and be replaced with nationalist capitalism or socialism or whatever else, that's fine by me that you have those beliefs, but understand that I'm not the enemy in your long war against that.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Are you flirting with me?

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

You know how we look back on the dark ages and laugh at how stupid and primitive all the knuckleheads were back then? In a few hundred more years, people are going to laugh at us for the same way, and deservedly so.


The prophet hath spoken! Go readth the Shock Doctrine and cleanse thyselves!

Are you flirting with me?

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

You know how we look back on the dark ages and laugh at how stupid and primitive all the knuckleheads were back then? In a few hundred more years, people are going to laugh at us for the same way, and deservedly so.


The prophet hath spoken! Go readth the Shock Doctrine and cleanse thyselves!

...and that's why I hate you.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Stop flirting with me.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
He had me at, "Black juice from your ass covers my mouth and face."

Stop flirting with me.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
He had me at, "Black juice from your ass covers my mouth and face."

Stop flirting with me.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
I guess you figure that if you keep at it eventually something's gotta work? It must be related to the law of large numbers or sumthin.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
More like DAGneto.

More Community goodness that needs some votes...

http://videosift.com/video/Abed-s-Vampire-Impersonation
http://videosift.com/video/Abed-s-Effective-Flirting
http://videosift.com/video/Abed-s-Impersonation-of-Jeff-and-a-white-Abed

The nerd and all of that type of nerdiness was stupid (mostly the on air--"Must Be A Morning Show™"--flirting). The rest was OK. Old news, but OK.

Stop flirting with me.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
With a mouth full of cock?

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
MGR, be careful or you'll turn out like me.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Flirting with the Sound Barrier. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

Rob Paulsen and his son or nephew were getting a tour thru a game company I was working at. One of my co-workers was on the phone when he passed by, and he got on the phone doing the "Pinky" voice. It was a girl on the other end of the line and he started flirting as Pinky... we couldn't hear what she was saying, but it became clear when he said "Me too, it means I'm happy!". She had just told him she was gay.

are you two still flirting?