The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by radx.

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

Obama better get a second term... he's got a helluva lot of catching up to do.

"You're not pinning this turd on us." That is when I upvoted.

I can't hardly stand this.

>> ^hpqp:

Obama better get a second term... he's got a helluva lot of catching up to do.


No he had his shot, fuck him. I voted for him once but he proved this is just a game to get the Rich Richer...I'm not playing anymore. Fuck them, fuck him.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^hpqp:
Obama better get a second term... he's got a helluva lot of catching up to do.

No he had his shot, fuck him. I voted for him once but he proved this is just a game to get the Rich Richer...I'm not playing anymore. Fuck them, fuck him.


Damn straight!

@Duckman33 and @Yogi

Think about it for a second: a first term prez will bow before the teabaggers and opposition like this one did, whereas a second term prez can do stuff - like the CHANGE he promised - without giving two shits about his political future (yes america, your politics ar this bad).

And if the rethuglicans win in 2012, what with the runners they have now... well, let's just say that at that point you might as well start believing in the Jeebs (or Allah, etc); at least magical thinking might take your mind of the shit you'll be drowning in.

>> ^hpqp:

@Duckman33 and @Yogi
Think about it for a second: a first term prez will bow before the teabaggers and opposition like this one did, whereas a second term prez can do stuff - like the CHANGE he promised - without giving two shits about his political future (yes america, your politics ar this bad).
And if the rethuglicans win in 2012, what with the runners they have now... well, let's just say that at that point you might as well start believing in the Jeebs (or Allah, etc); at least magical thinking might take your mind of the shit you'll be drowning in.


The sad thing is, there will probably be no one else to vote for. So I hope you're right.

Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^hpqp:
Obama better get a second term... he's got a helluva lot of catching up to do.

No he had his shot, fuck him. I voted for him once but he proved this is just a game to get the Rich Richer...I'm not playing anymore. Fuck them, fuck him.


So... who? Palin? No one?

>> ^direpickle:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^hpqp:
Obama better get a second term... he's got a helluva lot of catching up to do.

No he had his shot, fuck him. I voted for him once but he proved this is just a game to get the Rich Richer...I'm not playing anymore. Fuck them, fuck him.

So... who? Palin? No one?


Whomever is the candidate that will destroy the United States...just fucking rip it to shreds. Apparently we're all too fucking comfortable with our TVs and our couches and our fatass burgers. So lets let the monkeys loose, have them destroy this country and then we'll see how fucking fast the American people wake up and start running their own damn country. And if they don't, then we deserve nothing.

Who's with me! VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE WHO'LL DESTROY AMERICA!!!

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^hpqp:
Obama better get a second term... he's got a helluva lot of catching up to do.

No he had his shot, fuck him. I voted for him once but he proved this is just a game to get the Rich Richer...I'm not playing anymore. Fuck them, fuck him.

Damn straight!


Word. Third Party 2012.

The sooner we abolish parties, the better. Party politics is what got us here.

>> ^VoodooV:

The sooner we abolish parties, the better. Party politics is what got us here.


How exactly would you do that?

You'd pretty much have to take away people's right to freely assemble, or forbid politicians from saying what they think about the issues before they're elected...

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^VoodooV:
The sooner we abolish parties, the better. Party politics is what got us here.

How exactly would you do that?
You'd pretty much have to take away people's right to freely assemble, or forbid politicians from saying what they think about the issues before they're elected...


Uhh...no, not quite taking it that far. Not interested in slashing the Bill of Rights. There will always be unofficial groups and coalitions and there will be nothing you can do to stop that, nor should you. But what we can do is just refuse to recognize people as Reps or Dems, we can abolish any sort of official backing. Disband the RNC and the DNC. Simply refuse to give it legitimacy. When the state of the union happens, refuse to give a "opposition party rebuttal" At the very least! abolish this whole "reps sit on one side of the aisle, dems sit on the other side" nonsense. There is nothing wrong with people getting together, but the gov't doesn't have to recognize it and give it legitimacy so that the party eclipses the person as it is now.

The founders were definitely wary of parties and rightfully so. I don't see any problem with a concerted effort to at the VERY LEAST, discourage parties. We're seeing first hand the damage that can be done when party comes before country.

That and make all elections publicly funded..period. You'd see some drastic changes for the better

>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^VoodooV:
The sooner we abolish parties, the better. Party politics is what got us here.

How exactly would you do that?
You'd pretty much have to take away people's right to freely assemble, or forbid politicians from saying what they think about the issues before they're elected...

Uhh...no, not quite taking it that far. Not interested in slashing the Bill of Rights. There will always be unofficial groups and coalitions and there will be nothing you can do to stop that, nor should you. But what we can do is just refuse to recognize people as Reps or Dems, we can abolish any sort of official backing. Disband the RNC and the DNC. Simply refuse to give it legitimacy. When the state of the union happens, refuse to give a "opposition party rebuttal" At the very least! abolish this whole "reps sit on one side of the aisle, dems sit on the other side" nonsense. There is nothing wrong with people getting together, but the gov't doesn't have to recognize it and give it legitimacy so that the party eclipses the person as it is now.
The founders were definitely wary of parties and rightfully so. I don't see any problem with a concerted effort to at the VERY LEAST, discourage parties. We're seeing first hand the damage that can be done when party comes before country.
That and make all elections publicly funded..period. You'd see some drastic changes for the better


I guess my point is you're not being realistic about the dynamic at work. What's that going to cure? Are blankfist and I going to accidentally start voting for the same candidates? Probably not. Will liberals and conservatives generally refuse to organize into voting blocs to maximize their influence? Definitely not.

More to the point, what mechanism would prevent unofficial voting blocs from forming in the House and Senate? Once they form, are we really making things better by forcing them to pretend they don't exist? By refusing to let people come up with some shorthand word for them like Democrat or Republican (or Green, Monster Raving Looney, etc.)? By refusing to give TV air time to someone who wants to rebut the President?

It'd be a bit like trying to ban "alliances" in the game of Survivor. You'd have to intervene in almost every conversation to successfully do it, and even then people will still constantly be trying to do it under the radar, because the advantages are just too great. And that's a situation with at most 20 people under the most Orwellian level of surveillance possible...

Publicly funded elections on the other hand are a great idea, but that's wholly different from trying to kill organized parties. Publicly funded elections are about trying to neutralize the effect of money on the electoral process, and that's the real issue, IMO.

@VoodooV

The way to destroy political parties, oddly enough, is to make more of them viable. It's easy to be "not the other guys" when there's only 1 "other guy". When there's 3, 4 or 5 "other guys", some of them are bound to agree with each other now and then. Eventually it gets very muddy and you've got a semblance of people voting on issues rather than brand loyalty.

http://videosift.com/video/Skunk-Likes-Him-Some-Peanut-Butter

it physically hurts me to have to acknowledge all this bizarro world logic as "reality". @_@

>> ^Yogi:
Whomever is the candidate that will destroy the United States...just fucking rip it to shreds. Apparently we're all too fucking comfortable with our TVs and our couches and our fatass burgers. So lets let the monkeys loose, have them destroy this country and then we'll see how fucking fast the American people wake up and start running their own damn country. And if they don't, then we deserve nothing.
Who's with me! VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE WHO'LL DESTROY AMERICA!!!

I find your ideas intriguing, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. I think you should call it: "Why things have to get worse before they can get better".

Any way you look at it this country is screwed. Take a look at this:
http://www.taxrates.cc/html/us-tax-rates.html
So our tax rates are at 35% for Corporate and income tax. These are some of the highest in the world. But then look at this:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/are-taxes-in-the-u-s-high-or-low/
When compared against our GDP our national tax income plummets to an 18.2% average

So this means 2 things to me -
1) Loopholes in the current tax system allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share (AKA: GE and Obama appointee Jeffrey Immelt, numerous oil corporations and any company that can afford a slew of accountants)
2) The middle class is getting screwed. Not able to afford a slew of tax accountants they are forced to run off to H&R block to file complicated tax forms they don't understand and miss out on the various savings the rich get. All while the lower income group pays little or no tax and may even get money back beyond that which they paid.

This lead me to the conclusion that the government doesn't need to increase taxes, just like they don't need to make more laws. They need to enforce what they've got, or simplify the tax code to a very basic flat tax that is free from exemptions and incentives.
Since our current administration, congress and senate aren't going to make that happen - I heartily promote Yogi's slash and burn strategy.

>> ^MilkmanDan:

>> ^Yogi:
Whomever is the candidate that will destroy the United States...just fucking rip it to shreds. Apparently we're all too fucking comfortable with our TVs and our couches and our fatass burgers. So lets let the monkeys loose, have them destroy this country and then we'll see how fucking fast the American people wake up and start running their own damn country. And if they don't, then we deserve nothing.
Who's with me! VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE WHO'LL DESTROY AMERICA!!!

I find your ideas intriguing, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. I think you should call it: "Why things have to get worse before they can get better".


A LOT Fucking worse. Like Mad Max worse!

http://www.businessinsider.com/an-open-hate-letter-to-the-democratic-party-i-hate-you-2011-8

It comes down to something very simple. Republicans would rather destroy the economy then be seen compromising with a black man.
Thats it.

If you're not already familiar with it: Americans Elect. Because neither the republicans or democrats give a shit about the American people anymore, so fuck them - let's find our own candidates.

I'm starting to think Obama's not a bad guy, but he's just a really shitty negotiator.

http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/#clip509600

For the Canadians who want to watch

There is a BIG solution to this whole mess. Run primary opponents against that snake-in-the-grass in the White House, run REAL progressives.

Hell, even run Hilary again... I'd vote for her any day of the week over this obvious wolf in sheep's clothing; this shill to corporate power.