What's going on in the world according to FlipMo & Friends.

[ArtsyGirl]

I can't tell if this is sarcasm. But I think in today's world, companies would collapse if they were run completely by one gender. But I think forcing quotas just allows for less qualified candidates (male or female) to enter into a profession in the name of "equality."

There's just this hit put on white males that lumps all males together and fucks all of them in the ass. Whether it be in business or in the family. A lot of times the guy gets royally fucked.

Women get fucked on things too. Maybe even more. But it seems like feminists attitudes are to get both sexes fucked on equal number of things, but the result is they get what they want at the expense of men. There needs to be a new movement for "human rights" and get this shit sorted out. It's almost like two political parties at odds, fighting it out. Everyone loses.

It was just a joke. But kudos on making that into a couple of paragraphs.

And Holy SHIT about the tanning bed. Ouchies. I never use them, Humans think they are so smart finding ways around using the sun, but it just never sat well with me. Plus I get the feeling I would get claustrophobic in there.

 

[Shadows]

My neighbors got into this big ass fist fight that last an hour and set a few car alarms before the cops showed up. Needless to say they drove off drunk n haven't been back for a day or two.

 

[Pittsey]

Do you have positive discrimination laws in the US?

Where you hire an ethnic minority over a more qualified National. Obviously not a huge difference in qualifications. But if there's 2 candidates of similar skill and experience, you pick the non-white one. Sounds wrong, but it's encouraged here.

 

[dilla]

OMG lawsuits in the post four posts above!!

 

[Bobby Sands]

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/28/husband-of-wrong-way-motorist-who-killed-seven-sues-state-other/

I totally agree in this situation with the husband. His wife was high and drunk when she made the decision to drive drunk. She shouldn't be held accountable for her actions while high and drunk. The people in the other lane should not have been driving if they were unable to avoid a car coming at them from the opposite direction. They should have known she was drunk and high and taken caution while driving past her. They could have taken action, but she clearly couldn't.

Plus, the husband's brother-in-law...what a lazy shit! He had someone else pick up his kids in his minivan? Throw him in jail too. Fucking asshole doesn't know his sister was gonna get drunk and high that day.

This is just sickening. RIP lady. The good die young.

 

[dilla]

If Ryan Dunn gets a pass, so does every other shit that Amy Winehouses themselves to an early grave.

I did start using Twitter, though. Guess that's news.

 

[Flipmo]

So, this video was released today on Ebaumsworld. Apparently this man was being ticketed for profanity, and then the rest - well police dealt with it.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81699465/

Extreme abuse of power? Deserved? What does everyone think?

 

[Flipmo]

What did everyone think of the picture that was run on the front page of the New York Times (the one with the starved Somali child)...? Some are saying it's way too much in your face. Others think it's about time we get in your face journalism... thoughts? I think it's a nice shot at the whole debt problem going on in the USA, maybe even a subliminal shot to the rich that keep on getting a break.

 

[Sebastian]

So, this video was released today on Ebaumsworld. Apparently this man was being ticketed for profanity, and then the rest - well police dealt with it.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81699465/

Extreme abuse of power? Deserved? What does everyone think?

I think the cops deserve a kick in the face. What were they doing? Ridiculous.

 

[vg4030]

What did everyone think of the picture that was run on the front page of the New York Times (the one with the starved Somali child)...? Some are saying it's way too much in your face. Others think it's about time we get in your face journalism... thoughts? I think it's a nice shot at the whole debt problem going on in the USA, maybe even a subliminal shot to the rich that keep on getting a break.

I dont see a problem with this picture. Most Americans live with their head in the sand and thousands of $$ worth of debt so they should be blasted with these types of images (as most cant read too well)

The ignorance in this country still amazes, and the fact that people still call it the greatest county on earth lmao

Im gonna go listen to some more Bill HIcks and hate the world some more

 

[Mr Marz]

i go this all on camera mang!

 

[tHuG $TyLe]

What did everyone think of the picture that was run on the front page of the New York Times (the one with the starved Somali child)...? Some are saying it's way too much in your face. Others think it's about time we get in your face journalism... thoughts? I think it's a nice shot at the whole debt problem going on in the USA, maybe even a subliminal shot to the rich that keep on getting a break.

I don't see why people are saying its too much, its a picture that should grab the average person who doesn't know anything outside their city what is going on in some parts of the world.

 

[dilla]

Perhaps pictures like this should be shown to illustrate a point, or to educate readers on what's going thousands of miles away. And not to be used to sensationalize or exaggerate a point just to sell papers.

With that being said, I don't think it's right to put that picture on the front page. That picture should be where the body of the article is, many pages into the front section. You'd be surprised at how many people don't read newspapers. Or the news, because I guess reading the news online is the same thing as a newspaper. Seeing that picture is not going to make them want to read one either.

For me, that picture isn't particularly gruesome. But neither is beating off in a park full of kindergarteners. People have different thresholds for these things and it should be respected if they don't want it staring them in the face as they drive or walk by the news stand.

 

[Flipmo]

Didn't know where else to put this - it's not funny, and despite not being a pot smoker myself, it can be talked about I guess. That being said, enjoy...

 

[dilla]

I don't get it. Instead of not smoking pot until it is legalized (if it's legalized) people continue to get caught with it and add to these numbers.

There's a reason pot smokers are stereotyped as being stupid, dopey people. Because most of them are.

 

[S O F I]

I don't get it. Instead of not smoking pot until it is legalized (if it's legalized) people continue to get caught with it and add to these numbers.

There's a reason pot smokers are stereotyped as being stupid, dopey people. Because most of them are.

*blankest stare on Earth*

You're missing the point. Weed should be legalized is what the graphic is trying to convey.

 

[Ristol]

You're missing the point. Weed should be legalized is what the graphic is trying to convey.

The fact that he's missing the point is itself beside the point. He's still right.

 

[dilla]

*blankest stare on Earth*

You're missing the point. Weed should be legalized is what the graphic is trying to convey.

I know what the infograph is saying. It's saying "the horses and are primed and ready to bolt out the gates, why is no one shooting the starting gun?" That the information and unjust done to people using marijuana clearly shows that it should be legalized, but why is no one taking action? And then said people getting caught for possession. And then the cycle starts up again. "Why isn't weed legal?"

Because stupid shits can't follow the laws when it's illegal, why in fuck's cunt would they follow it when it is legal.

Weed isn't bad. Never done it, but I'm educated enough to know responsible people can use it like any other pharmaceutical drug. Or the way I use cigarettes to unwind. It's the people that are retarded that screw it up for those that can handle it.

One more thing: weed isn't addictive, right? But people can still build a dependency and build higher tolerance? So they'll need more and more? I'm bringing our addiction subject back in to this from a few weeks ago. Knowing that many people have lost control of their lives from drugs, in general, why should we legalize something we know will cause dependency in some people? This is how I see it.

We legalize weed.
Some use it responsibly and with control. Some lose jobs, drop out of school, blow money, lose interest in life, etc. and start..."struggling."
Society feels bad and scrutinizes all those that do not drop everything and "get help" for this person and their "demons."

Easiest thing to do is keep it illegal and let natural selection take its course. The smart ones go through a little risk in buying it under the table. The fuckasses fail the drug tests and lose their jobs as stock boys at Walgreens. I think it's worked out well so far.

Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[S O F I]

I'm not going to get into an argument about whether people who smoke weed are smart or not because that's a foolish one. The issue at hand is whether marijuana should be legal. I believe we as a people should make the conscious choice to consume the drug or not because we're able to educate ourselves on the pros and cons of it and should be allowed to make our own decisions. I'll quote Sam Harris here.

"While it isn’t explicitly protected by the U.S. Constitution, I can think of no political right more fundamental than the right to peacefully steward the contents of one’s own consciousness."

 

[S O F I]

Tell me I'm wrong.

I had to put this first. You're wrong.

I know what the infograph is saying. It's saying "the horses and are primed and ready to bolt out the gates, why is no one shooting the starting gun?" That the information and unjust done to people using marijuana clearly shows that it should be legalized, but why is no one taking action? And then said people getting caught for possession. And then the cycle starts up again. "Why isn't weed legal?"

Weed isn't legal because we have an uneducated, backward-thinking electorate. Every state is trying, though.

Because stupid shits can't follow the laws when it's illegal, why in fuck's cunt would they follow it when it is legal.

Weed isn't bad. Never done it, but I'm educated enough to know responsible people can use it like any other pharmaceutical drug. Or the way I use cigarettes to unwind. It's the people that are retarded that screw it up for those that can handle it.

One more thing: weed isn't addictive, right? But people can still build a dependency and build higher tolerance? So they'll need more and more? I'm bringing our addiction subject back in to this from a few weeks ago. Knowing that many people have lost control of their lives from drugs, in general, why should we legalize something we know will cause dependency in some people? This is how I see it.

We legalize weed.

Some use it responsibly and with control. Some lose jobs, drop out of school, blow money, lose interest in life, etc. and start..."struggling."
Society feels bad and scrutinizes all those that do not drop everything and "get help" for this person and their "demons."

The scenario you describe happens regardless of the legality of marijuana possession.

Easiest thing to do is keep it illegal and let natural selection take its course. The smart ones go through a little risk in buying it under the table. The fuckasses fail the drug tests and lose their jobs as stock boys at Walgreens. I think it's worked out well so far.

Now, here's why you are very, very wrong and the reason why I still don't think you understand the infographic. The issue at hand, or one of them, is that there's huge social waste in keeping drugs illegal. We are losing money to incarcerate drug posession while at the same time losing tax revenues from its use. Right now, 50% of all people in jail in the US are in jail because of drug offenses. There's a SIGNIFICANT COST to keeping weed (and other drugs) illegal as opposed to legal.