Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor S
Sorry, I come from the school of "say what you mean and mean what you say". The "say dumb shit to aggravate people" school never made sense to me...
|
I suppose that's the difference between us.
I was educated at both of those fine establishments.
The only times I purposely try to aggravate people is either when I'm very drunk and bored - which doesn't happen anymore- or am on the internet. It just so happens that since I stopped drinking, this is the only outlet I have.
But don't get me wrong. As after-school-special as this thread has become, the OP was legit, despite being irrational rage. I really did
make this thread because those type of Republicans frustrate me. Other political people frustrate me, and especially the leaders of my own country, and some other things - so it's not like it's
only that type of Republican that I dislike. It's that type of
person I dislike.
It just happens that a lot of ignorant racists
do tend to be very extreme on the political scale, and in your country those people are Republican. You have to admit, there aren't many offensively racist people (or people very ignorant to other cultures - having a completely closed mind) who consider
themselves to be Democrats. I
do mean that seriously. I doubt anyone could argue there is an equal number of racists between Republicans and Democrats. I'm not saying Democratic racists don't exist, (or racists who consider themselves to be impartial or in other parties or what-have-you) I'm just saying there are far more people that consider themselves to be
some type of Republican who happen to be so ignorantly and offensively racist. And it is those
people I dislike. Not their political affiliation. But when referring to them it is much easier to refer to them as "Republicans", just as it's easier to refer to a fucking hippy as a "Democrat".
Now, in reality I am aware the Republican party is not a racist party, or a pro-white party. They are a pro-business party; They are a pro-senate party. They are, in essence - a party that wants a Republic. (I guess that's what it actually is - the Democratic People's Republic of America. Much like North Korea, minus the communism...depending on who you ask.) A country run by high ranking senate members who make the best decisions for the mob. Where the Democrats aim to be a country which is run by the echo of the voters, whatever their sexual preference, religion, or skin colour. I'm fine with that. It is what it is, and it's not even my country - so really -
Big deal to me.
I have nothing against "Republicans". But there are certain people who consider themselves to be Republican whom I think there is a special circle of hell reserved for; which consists of an eternity of owning nothing but failing businesses (or successful abortion clinics) in poor neighbourhoods populated by no white people who all are in same-sex marriages and nobody speaks English.
To be fair, I hate hippies. Can't stand 'em. The full on no-showering-dreadlock-having-shady-tree-sitting-guitar-strumming-no-shoe-wearing-tree-hugging-smelly-fuckin'-hippy.
I hate the college kids who do it as a statement, and I hate the people who do it for a living. They're just as ignorant, but in the exact opposite way. You can't put people 100% ahead of the 'Country'. If you have a failing economy, social policies will not pull you out of that. (Hell, in the Occupy Wallstreet thread when I was saying those people need to get a fucking job, I meant it. Not getting a job definitely isn't the way to boost your economy. Number of jobs available is a different subject, but I assume half of those jerkwads don't actively look for a job.)
This is why I believe you've got such a problem now - before when both parties worked together that achieved the perfect middle of social change and corporate growth. But now that nobody is working together, the view is seemingly "one or the other". What
actually bugs me is that it appears that nobody in your country is willing to work with the other side for the betterment of future generations of people not related to themselves. IE: Bettering the country
as a whole, rather than bettering part A, or part B, while diminishing part C (and of course part C is always whatever the other guy wanted to improve).
It appears like most have lost what leading a country actually means, and are simply putting winning, and
their views ahead of "How will I affect my country in 10 years time" or "Will this honestly better the lives of everyone in the country I am the head of."
It seems as if these people (all of them, both sides) are slowly forgetting they're not "ruling" a Country. They're the figurehead of the masses.
Like Agent Smith said in V for Vendetta: "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of it's people."
Re: Michele Bachmann made me think [Mostly in rage]
Linear Mode
