Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

this link has already been posted twice in this thread, but I don't think It's possible to stress enough that we the human race need to fact check more.

At 3/31/12 10:28 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote: wow, typical liberal (especially on the internet)...dont you have any constructive arguments against mr. santorum and his views other than ad hominem attacks?

The funny thing is, I actually consider myself a Republican. But Santorum and Romney are stupid to the point that even registered Republicans don't want them to win the election.

At 3/31/12 10:28 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote: wow, typical liberal (especially on the internet)...dont you have any constructive arguments against mr. santorum and his views other than ad hominem attacks?

You realize that your comment is in itself an ad hominem attack right?

At 3/31/12 10:33 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote:

At 3/31/12 10:30 PM, TheSporkLord wrote:

At 3/31/12 10:28 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote: wow, typical liberal (especially on the internet)...dont you have any constructive arguments against mr. santorum and his views other than ad hominem attacks?

You realize that your comment is in itself an ad hominem attack right?

how so?

Because you stereotype all liberals the same way and offer no actual argument. Only insults towards the characteristics of a person or group of people.

The funny thing is, I actually consider myself a Republican. But Santorum and Romney are stupid to the point that even registered Republicans don't want them to win the election.

Tell that to the idiots who vote for them.

At 3/31/12 10:33 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote: Barak Obummer

Yeah for stooping down to the level of the person you're arguing with. Way to go. Anyways the only two I'm in favor of are Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. I like Ron Paul on some ideas, but not all, and Rick Santorum will stand no chance against Obama. He just won't.

Mitt Romney's ideas are switching constantly now, but when he gets the nomination, which he will... that could change when he goes one on one with Obama.

Also Republican Liberal.

Also Republican Liberal.

There's no such thing. You can't be a Republican and a Democrat at the same time. Personally, I believe a corrupt congress is not the answer here. If we elect ANYONE this year, it will be "SOSS" (Same ol' **** Syndrome) all over again! I'm in favor of keeping Obama in office and just cancelling this year's and the next one's elections until we can get PURE-HEARTED CANDIDATES WHO ACTUALLY GIVE A **** ABOUT THIS COUNTRY.

At 4/1/12 09:10 AM, HiryuGouki wrote: There's no such thing. You can't be a Republican and a Democrat at the same time.

Oh that's funny. Republican, Democrat, Conservative, and Liberal are all different things. You can be both a Republican and Democrat at the same time, it's called being an Independent. You can also be both a Conservative and a Liberal, that's called being a Moderate.

Any person that thinks denying gays the right to marry is doing anything worthwhile is unlikely to have an IQ that matches that of a potato.

He is living proof of the persisting flaws that are present in contemporary democracy.

At 4/1/12 11:24 AM, Pugberto wrote: He is living proof of the persisting flaws that are present in contemporary democracy.

Excellent quotation by an excellent writer.

I wholeheartedly agree that it simply is not just religion that is enveloping the political process but willful ignorance and confident stupidity.

And I'll have to agree with InsertFunnyUserNameHere that correlation is not causation. Politics is but a single factor in driving economies. Social, militaristic, and economic issues can drive economies to success or failure, and ultimately it was the lack of sufficient regulation in the housing market that allowed for banks to sell subprime mortgages to lendees whom bankers knew could not pay back in full, increasing profit and extending loan profitability. However, the stack of cards came down once the vicious cycle of debt reared it's ugly head and 'too big to fail' corporations plunged one after another.

Putting the blame on a simple political binary process deprives both arguers from reaching any form of understanding and the truth is clouded in crippling ideology.

As for the picture, as it's been debunked by more than one poster here, is really rather stupid of Santorum to say (at least out loud). Of course, I would not put it past the guy, but a message for the OP: Don't believe everything you see on the internet.

Sometimes I can't decide if he's really this stupid (probably is), or if he knows exactly what he's doing and he's just manipulating all the stupid people in this country (and there's a myriad to choose from). If he got elected, I'd be less afraid of any legislation he'd try and fail to pass, but more afraid that people are stupid enough to elect him. Luckily there's nearly no chance of that happening.

At 4/1/12 02:59 PM, C-Doodlez-Man wrote: Luckily there's nearly no chance of that happening.

Are you fucking insane. Bush got two terms didn't he? This country is possible of doing anything and when you one says anything, it truly does mean ANYTHING.

At 4/1/12 02:59 PM, funnyhomeboy wrote:

At 4/1/12 11:24 AM, Pugberto wrote: He is living proof of the persisting flaws that are present in contemporary democracy.

Excellent quotation by an excellent writer.

I wholeheartedly agree that it simply is not just religion that is enveloping the political process but willful ignorance and confident stupidity.

And I'll have to agree with InsertFunnyUserNameHere that correlation is not causation. Politics is but a single factor in driving economies. Social, militaristic, and economic issues can drive economies to success or failure, and ultimately it was the lack of sufficient regulation in the housing market that allowed for banks to sell subprime mortgages to lendees whom bankers knew could not pay back in full, increasing profit and extending loan profitability. However, the stack of cards came down once the vicious cycle of debt reared it's ugly head and 'too big to fail' corporations plunged one after another.

Putting the blame on a simple political binary process deprives both arguers from reaching any form of understanding and the truth is clouded in crippling ideology.

As for the picture, as it's been debunked by more than one poster here, is really rather stupid of Santorum to say (at least out loud). Of course, I would not put it past the guy, but a message for the OP: Don't believe everything you see on the internet.

This. It's been proven throughout all of history that it was not only Religion that extend it's influence over countries, but Economic, millitaristic, and Social agendas. Infact, said reasons were the driving force of New Imperialism during the Early 20th century within Western Europe. Of course, Europeans put it under the guise of religion, but it was to usurp raw materials from new colonies within Africa to benefit their industry.

Even Enlightenment Era philosophes including Volitaire (who hated religion to large extents) believed that it through Human ideaologies to not only live, but live with the most comfort, that would further the wealth of a nation. It was only within those Human ideaologies that enlightenment philospohes differed with the masses at the time; really.

At 4/1/12 03:05 PM, The-Great-One wrote:

At 4/1/12 02:59 PM, C-Doodlez-Man wrote: Luckily there's nearly no chance of that happening.

Are you fucking insane. Bush got two terms didn't he? This country is possible of doing anything and when you one says anything, it truly does mean ANYTHING.

Are you insane? George Bush is nothing compared to Rick Santorum. In fact, George Bush can actually be quoted saying he believes in the separation of church and state. The only people who are interested in Santorum are the far right, and that's just not that big enough of a demographic in this country to actually elect someone. Enough moderate republicans will be turned off by Rick Santorum, and vote for either someone else, or nobody.

Rick Santorum - Professional Troll for president.

But really, how is it possible for someone to be so fucking ignorant and blinded by religion? Better yet, how is someone like that a fucking presidential candidate?

Well guys, my parents told me today that they're voting for Mitt Romney.

Hanging my head in shame.

At 4/10/12 08:18 PM, Zippy-MyMusic wrote: Well guys, my parents told me today that they're voting for Mitt Romney.

Hanging my head in shame.

you prolly shouldn't do that just yet since mitt is a bit of a centrist and you may find that you take up many of the same stances as he does

At 3/31/12 04:02 AM, aListers wrote: all republican canadates are dumb fucks. Except ron paul who's simply crazy.

Statistically speaking, past presidents who have had some reports of mental instability tend to be the better presidents. So the crazier the president (not the stupider) usually are great.

At 4/10/12 09:47 PM, RyderOmega wrote:
Statistically speaking, past presidents who have had some reports of mental instability tend to be the better presidents. So the crazier the president (not the stupider) usually are great.

JFK had bipolar disorder, and look at him. One of our best.

yeah santorum is a plague to progress.

He thinks don't ask don't tell should be reinstated after gays have fought for years in order to get it abolished and be able to serve their country without having to pretend to be someone else.