That line cracks me up so much. I think it's very clever. And I think it's unfortunately one that's easy to overlook in the song. People who so to say DON'T see what he did there.
My liberal mother married a conservative man just last year. Unfortunately, she hasn't managed to change his mind yet. Miraculously, and I'm not certain how this works, they can actually enjoy being with one another and love one another. I don't understand how this works.
Liberals want to make the world perfect by slamming everyone who don't agree with their warped ideas of "tolerance." They are about as tolerant as the Rock of Gibraltar. They are just downright mean and use sarcasm and cruelty as "comedy." The country is sick of liberals, a liberal president (gas is STILL nearly $4 a gallon and the unemployment rate is nearly the highest in US history. Yeah, the liberals have really helped the US. Sing about that.
$4/gallon gas? Your problem is with capitalism not liberals, and don't forget who the party was that messed up the economy to begin with. Republicans created the mess and they're blaming the Democrats for not cleaning it up fast enough.
I really don't understand you. As a Republican you're against government regulation in the markets. Yet you want the government to do something about the $4/gallon gas. It's comparable to Republicans wanting government out of people's lives but supporting government bans on gay marriage and abortions. Are all Republicans hypocrits or what? You guys seem to talk out of both sides of your mouth. You want government in our lives and out of them at the same time. Pick a side.
If the welfare rolls are a bottomless hole of women bringing illegitimate babies into the world to live on taxpayer (read WORKING people) money and trying to rip off men for child support. (since liberal ideas of sexual "freedom" are constantly preached in films and tv sans VD, poverty, and unwanted pregnancies, thank a liberal. If women shack up with men only to be dumped for the "sports-model" because women think it's romantic to live with a man instead of marrying him, thank a liberal.
Some people on welfare legitimately need it, and don't forget, you're one injury or a layoff away from using the same social programs you're bitching about.
Also, the states with the higest divorce rates in the country are the reddest states. The states with the lowest divorce rates in the country are the blue states. You've got your facts mixed up. That's typical for a Republican.
@legolasgreenleaff Roy Zimmerman. He's got CDs on his website. It's in the info bar for which CD this song is on. I think it's also on iTunes, but don't quote me on that.
i love zimmerman, but i disagree with his politics.
i dislike republicans more than democrats. but as a classic libertarian, when he makes it out that some things, such as interest rates, or public education etc are such simple matters with obvious answer, its annoying.
especially when you know a lot of people tend to bandwagon with the beliefs of people they like, rather than an unbiased approach.
he just gives the impression that liberals hold the obvious political solution; so un-true.
@HeSheXie Definitely not...I once created some Facebook ads, and seeing how "keywords" targeted certain folks on my friend list, it's blatantly obvious that a computer is incapable of understanding sarcasm and/or irony (unless, I suppose, you include those in the keywords?)
Dont know much about USA but I have seen The Deliverance and the sound when you close the door on a USA made automobile, sounds like if you dropped a garbage truck from the empire state building.merr christmas
@Sasukekiss It's ez to explain why we crash and burn horribly. It's not our taxes are to low or to high. It's our bloated war budget, but whenever someone offers slashing the war budget for healthcare, it becomes socialist bull crap.
Why are we americans willing to spend on ending lives rather than saving lives?
Maybe the Swiss government is smarter than the US government because most of the time when a private company does something the US government does, they do it better. For example, the government said it was impossible to have overnight delivery until private companies formed mail services that offer it. When all telephones were run by "Ma Bell" (US government) service was terrible and phone variety was nonexistent.
@Sasukekiss Im happy that there are some people that see the Value of taxes.
I am a liberal democrat, from the US. No one ever likes to believe that there are Countries like yours that are good, with the ideas of Socialism for the most part.
I am going to try to be a politician, and i only hope i can truly show how good places like Sweden are... Peace out, and take care.
@Sasukekiss And you're taxes aren't oppressive because they are used for the good of the people. Our taxes are primarily used to fun foreign wars and bank bailouts.
"My Liberal Girlfriend" by Brian Haner is so much funnier than this crap. Half the things he mentions isn't even a 'conservative' thing. Its just a... woman thing. :/
I think its funny to watch Liberals defend Obama, who got the noble peace prize for not being George Bush, the bank bail outs; a hand out to the capitalist pigs they hate, mandatory health insurance purchase; 100% mandatory demand on their product, Obama's continuation of the Patriot Act...ect...
I give them one thing, they sure are loyal to their own, no matter how much they get lied too! Kind of make conservatives look like the real liberals!
You do realize that if Obama hadn't done those things, the economy would have completely collapsed, don't you? No one can honestly expect for the country to be reformed in only four years when we spent the last eight completely screwing it up. Prioritize the issues and work on them one at a time. That's the best way to get things done.
@HeSheXie Agreed - it takes many years, sometimes more then 8 years to fix an economy, We cant just keep electing people because something is not fixed in 2 years.. whats wrong with people.
@MrWatchdawg77 Actually MrWatchdawg, many liberals (or progressives) are quite vocally upset by many of these things. If we had our way, much would be different. Some remain "loyal" to Obama (who we/they believe would LIKE to do better, but has gotten stuck by a rotten system and/or rotten "filibusters"), but many are not ( did you notice the election?)
@MrWatchdawg77 I think the premature Nobel Prize was "wishful thinking." I don't really think its relevant to much one way or the other, though. I'm not impressed by it, certainly surprised by it, but not upset by it. It was the Nobel committee's decision, whatever their rationale. I believe that mandatory insurance without a strong public option is a pretty lousy idea. I'm disappointed. I'm not "anti-Obama" about it, though. I'm anti-blue dog dems and anti repugs, tho O could have done better.
@lisapeppin I think Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing diminishes the prize! I've lost respect for the Noble organization! What a joke!
Mandatory health insurance is a handout to the insurance companies! Crony Capitalism at its worst!
@MrWatchdawg77 Okay -- so that speaks to the Nobel organization. I still maintain that its not relevant to my view of Obama.
There is a logical reason for mandatory insurance -- insurance is supposed to be a "pool" balanced with healthy and unhealthy individuals. If the healthy opt-out, the proportional costs are higher to others. I'm not saying its a good thing. Just what the reason is. Now, mandatory insurance w/out cost controls == corporate give away. That's what the repugs wanted.
@MrWatchdawg77 I do not consider myself informed enough to have a strong opinion about illegal immigration. That said, I mostly prefer making less immigration "illegal" and more of it "legal," especially so that companies cannot abuse undocumented workers at the expense of lowering wages for all. But this is not an area a feel comfortable debating -- just stating an opinion.
@Sasukekiss Too bad America has a GDP per capita of $46,000, whereas Sweden's is only $36,600. Not to mention that America consistently has a lower unemployment rate. (As of right now, America's is a little higher, but that's because of the recession.)
blabla....PER CAPITA...u know what that means! so when u-r GDP is higher than Sweden s YET u have more homeless people +poor people that don t get a proper education and can t afford proper medical treatment(...again :EVEN THOUGH your GDPpc is higher )you should be sad not bragging about it coz it just shows the uneven distribution of wealth in US/ppl fought4basic human rights/health is1 education another1.u-r either greedy-rich or brainwashed-sheep(or anywhere in between)
@delagrazia I would argue if you could properly articulate an argument. But I don't understand a thing you type. Are you from America? Do you live here?
But what you DON'T have is sizable ethnic minorities with major chips on their shoulders who have been destroyed by multi-generational government dependency.
Of course, we'll get to see how you Swedes deal with your Islamist infection. Stay true to your socialist principles, now. Let them create and spread ghettos in the cities. Don't expect them to assimilate. They'll outbreed and displace you in your own country. It should be amusing to watch over the next several decades.
@Leutchik Yeah, and what about those christian cults, they don't outbreed, they inbreed! Don't expect them to assimilate, and don't expect them to know what "assimilate" is if it isn't in the bible. It'll be fun to watch to religious nutjobs destroy each other in the next decades,
I don't think that most Americans are against universal healthcare prima facie - the issue is that we can't even come close to affording it. Medicare reimbursements are driving up our enormous national debt to the tune of over $40 trillion (in present-value terms). As it is, we spend close to twice as much of our GDP on healthcare as any other developed country. The bottom line is that, objectively, before we can go universal, we have serious work to do on our broke ass system
@hahacharadeurful You are on poin heret , as the father of a us Marine,former Marine myself,and my father AND grandfather before me, if you think for a moment on what we,as a NATION are spending on the misc.campains we are currently prosacuting accross the globe, that money would quite completly cocer the expence of securing OUR OWN borders AND health care AND the evergrowing homeless problem with money to spare
@hahacharadeurful wouldn't the quickest way to reform it be to make it universal? If you take the special interests groups, and wallstreet out of the medical industry. Make it a public en devour then wouldn't costs go down significantly? Going back in history compare the cost of solving the polio problem, to what we spend in one year on cancer. Medicine is a lot cheaper when your goal is to cure the problems, not endless treatments so patients become cash cows.
(after doctors+managers and all those who actually work are paid we have the profit of the owner of the business who brought in the equation his money-his money make more money(not his direct work)why would that person be just anyone who will take this extra profit and not YOU?
(since..:)He ll reinvest his money(that his previous money created)in another business like:guns/clothes or spend it for himself for his pleasure on ..buying a vacation house in Dubai..(party/gamble..whatever
You pay the dr because he actually knows how to give your health back ,but u pay this person for investing his money in a no loose business/Why wouldnt that be YOUR money.your profit.?
and wouldnt he always be motivated that your sick?since thats where his profit comes from?
.with the profit not taken away by the investor (to spend as he likes) but always reinvested, your healthcare system has every interest to keep you healthy
@GhostInTheShel (and can never take the profit out of the healthcare system) so you pay less+less
coz Now your money makes money only that it s always used4 your health
this is obvious +the question is not WHY is better but HOW to be done correctly so that some people dont find ways of actually gaining(stealing the system-taking money out for their own interest to spend it for themselves for houses+parties+clothes etc)something that when its private happens anywayAND it s legal
also the ammount they can steal is considerably lower and punishable by law(instead of 0 when things run correctly)than the legal gain/profit when it s private.
so the moral question is:is it ok to lend money with 30%interest to a prsn for his cancer operation?and if is..why would that 30%interest go to 1or few people instead of WE lend this money,we gain the interest we take it and reinvest it to OUR healthcare..
..it s actually our investment to our healthcare ..Now if we have thieves around we should treat them as we always do..Are we saying that law can protect private companies but not public ones?is this the reason against public healthcare?
i just said WHY PUBLIC funding is better! Aftrer my first message the 2nd is missing(u-tube s fault)where i said that when it is private we have :1/doctors 2/manager 3/investor.The doctors get paid because they can give your health back /but the investor puts ONLY his money /his money make money for him(not his work or knowledge)For his investment he earns money that he will take and either reinvest to earn more money or spend it
When it s public it s like WE are the investor Through your taxes,you are indirectly the investor.I explainedit this way coz it s easier to understand why public healthcare.makes more sense.if you link it only to taxes,people think:"they wanna take our money"but like this you can understand why is more reasonable if you think of it as an investment made by the people to their own company.Thats what a public company is.belongs to everyone, only u get no money back but services
If u want quality life 4 u-r citizens u need some public companies .U already do it with roads /military etc Health should be included as public schools are.
i asked u if i left anything out as an argument of why public is better
coz i m trying to understand
why are americans are so against it.
what is it that they think it won t work/where do they disagree?
@delagrazia The way you described it got very confusing.. Why Americans are against it... Because they were told to be. Billions of dollars were spent by the health insurance companies in lobbying and advertising to kill the idea. I don't like to say Americans are stupid... because i think a lot of people throughout the world are stupid. But Americans are very emotional, and easily swayed.
@delagrazia For an emotional example, people were freaking out over there being "Death Panels" to decide if it would be worth saving someones life. Like a very elderly person with cancer. People were terrified by this idea that the government would decide if they lived or died.
But under the current system people without insurance won't get expensive cancer treatment, or organ replacement so they would just automatically die.
But people aren't very bright and not many realize this.
@GhostInTheShell29 i don t understand why they have this idea coz the system works independently and has the obligation to provide best treatment to all even if that means couple thousand $for AIDS treatment (it was expensive 10years ago)in a eastern country with 300$/month salary-or an 50000$operation abroads(when your hospitals dont have this technology/these are 2 cases i know.
i assumed the only think is:young people that might not want 2pay .
@Sasukekiss I admire Sweden's government, it sounds like they are doing their job. My personal opinion is that if the government is going to tax, then they need to implement the money well. Your country is doing. Our poor dumb government here in the States could probably take a leaf out of Sweden's book.
I wish there were more countries like Sweden and Finland... and that Americans would wake from fallacies, and outcome the paranoid nightmares that haunt the mind of imperialism..... because one thing is the government and other is the people as we are all part of the human family
@carlosrojasdeanda finland and sweden are drowning in islamism, just like france germany and britain. at least america will still be america in 50 years.
@TheJinkedful Drowning in islamism? 1) since when is that something bad? 2) Islam is the faster growing religion IN the US, remember Cassius Clay A.K.A. Muhammed Ali 3) If the US population became 98% swahili or korean or pakistani it would still be the US 4) Finland and Sweden, just like many others are laicisist states 5) How can you factically prove that christianism is in any way better than islam? or for this case, american born-again christianism over Europe's Islam.
@NachosaurusRex 1) islamism is a totalitarian political movement which holds that islam is a political rather than religious movement. it's aims are to destroy the west, kill all the jews, enslave woman and kill homosexuals. 2) so? islam isn't islamism per se 3) yes 4) except they both have laws to protect religion at the expense of free expression, like the UK, because they are scared of what happened with rushdie and the cartoons 5) what europe needs is active athiesm and securlarism
@TheJinkedful Islam is no more of a political movement than Christianity is, Conservative Christians don't support gay marriage because they consider it to be against their beliefs, so why would you expect Muslims to be in favour of gay marriage when most consider it to go against the teachings of the Koran.
But yes, people should have the right to criticize any religion as much as they criticize people's political views, and what's "active atheism" ?
@AinEstonia there is a political movement within islam called islamism. thats the point. you people need to actually learn whats been happening in the islamic community for the past 100 years. search wikipedia Islamism wikipedia Hizb_ut-Tahrir "Gay marriage?" i think you are a bit ignorant on this... It is a movement that prescribes the death penalty for homosexuality and enforces that in saudi, iran, sudan among others. active athieism = fighting all religion, not just fat old christians.
@TheJinkedful Every religion has a certain amount of political activity, but the fact remains that the overwhelming amount of Muslims don't go vote or do anything in strides, they just try to live their lives the way they see it fit. It's not like over a billion Muslims are marching on streets stoning every gay guy they come across.
But let's say that I do admit that there's such a thing as 'Islamism', what do you propose we do ? Ban the Qur'an ? And how should we 'fight religion' ?
@effyleven Thats bullshit, Im Hispanic and I speak English and Spanish I will probably teach both of these languages to my kids ( if I ever have any ) . And also America aint a country, thats 2 fucking continents, the USA is a country, Canada is a country, Argentina is a country all part of the American Continents, learn some Geography. God damn it.
@effyleven First the complete name is Bosnia and Herzegovina and that nation is Eastern Europe very close to Serbia. And you think that somehow youre smarter than all Americans just because youre from the UK ? Wow youre really special arent yo ?
@effyleven Who the fuck doesnt know that Bosnia is a nation ? And I know how to use an apostophe in you're, I just dont us it since is faster the other way, you think that you're smarter than me ? You said that in 50 years that the USA's official language will be Spanish, you are the moron, not me. If you knew anything about the USA you would know that kids that have Mexican or Latin American parents will be more fluent in English than Spanish once theyre older, you know nothing.
@edgarreyes14 You don't like the idea of a USA where Spanish is the language most spoken? Never mind what you like, it will happen.... according to official statistics produced in Washington. And it will be a sooner than 50 years, too..... that's unless some action is taken to establish English as the official language of USA (already rejected) and curtail the birthrate in Hispanics.. (not likely, but hey, Republican Tea party faction is pretty crazy and might be planning this right now!)
@effyleven Its not that I dont like Spanish being the most spoken language, hell I speak it too. But where I live here in California , the state with the most Hipanics, and most people here talk English. Their parents might not speak the language very fluently but their kids for the most part will speak English better than Spanish. Spanish will not be the most spoken language in this country, youre just being paranoid. So you think that Muslims are also taking over Europe ?
@edgarreyes14 Actually if you make your kids duel mother tongue, and able to read in both languages, they can write their own check in business. Being unilingual is a disadvantage in this world.
@carlosrojasdeanda European nations aren't that more liberal, in most EU nations drugs are illegal, blasphemy is a punishable crime in quite a few European nations, and a couple of nations have banned the burqa, could make more examples but you get my point.
And since I'm a gamer, I wouldn't like to live in Finland, because it has banned a few games if I'm not wrong.
I am rather sad that Europe isn't the beacon of liberalism it fancies itself as, perhaps it will be in the future.
@carlosrojasdeanda I can't disagree with you, Carlos, but I wish you could connect your ideas better.First, I'm not sure why this is a comment on Roy Zimmerman's posted song "My Conservative Girlfriend;" next, I'm not sure what you like about the two Scandinavian countries you mentioned; next, although I like the metaphorical feel of "wake from fallacies," you don't spell out what particular fallacies Americans entertain (and by the way, "outcome" is a noun, not a verb).The last bit's good, tho.
@cincybones I don't think English is his first language. (I'm not being a dick--even ignoring the user name, he's got sort of a Spanish accent.) As for Sweden and Finland...I'm not sure if the success of their education systems (what impresses me most about them) can be adapted for the US, but it wouldn't kill us to try.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Sasukekiss u r really a socialist arent u?wake up! do u swedish idiots really think your money should be going to people who are too lazy to work?and dont u dare call me racist ,cas im swedish,too.and im an american too i win by default.
@TheQuestioner132 Your point being? Mine was that America lags far behind most of the developed world when it comes to provision of universal healthcare, something that almost every developed nation has. Healthcare in the US doesn't suck because of regulation, it sucks due to a lack of investment. Universal healthcare necessarily requires regulation - and most countries with public healthcare still have a private system as well...
you're so full of shit. Sweden is doing well, yes. But only after the Swedish government started lowering taxes and deregulating the economy. Look at Sweden over the past 50 years, and you'll see the pattern. More government control = more poverty, even in Sweden.
@willzyx1980 ok, show us why that is. Anyone can manipulate statistics, but show us exactly how one can deduce from emperical data that more goverment=more poverty?
google "Index of Economic Freedom," look at the categories of economic freedom (more freedom is defined as less government intervention). Then look at the ranking or the map, and think about which countries are rich and which are poor. Ceteris paribus, the freer a country is, the higher its standard of living.
If you want more data, get a copy of In Defense of Global Capitalism by Johan Norberg (from Sweden, btw). He has all his data well cited, so you can check the sources yourself
Correlation isn't causation, but it IS evidence. If you want logical inference you need to take a course on economics. I obviously can't convey the entire science of development economics in a 500 word youtube comment, but I can recommend some books. Try the Norberg book, and Easterly's book The Elusive Quest for Growth, and Rosenberg and Birdzell's book How the West Grew Rich.
@willzyx1980 The problem rests in the disparity between the highest and lowest income earners, the quality of products, the methods of production etc.
America was 'free' in the 1970's, and the lack of Government intervention saw a salmonella outbreak because of the presence of shit in the meat. Regulation is absolutely necessary.
If you think regulation is what's keeping you safe, you should check your facts. Workplace safety, consumer product safety, and highway safety were all improving for decades before regulation. To see why, read the chapter "Who Protects the Consumer?" in Friedman's book Free to Choose.
And I'm sure this is suprising, but the fact is that FDA drug testing requirements actually kill more people than they save. Just google FDAReview and click the top link for the data, with citations.
Of course drug testing kills people. The problem is called "drug lag," and it's well recognized. During the testing process drugs are kept off the market. During this delay people die who might have been saved by the drug. Ideally, testing should save more people than it kills. But under current FDA regulations, so much testing is required that the number of people who die due to delays exceeds the number saved from bad drugs. Look it up.
@willzyx1980 Unfortunately for you my father is a doctor and my mother is a nurse. I know enough about the medical industry without your nonsense.
If you release an untested drug on the market, how many lives would be at risk? Every one of them. You have no idea what the possible effectswould be, therefore any predictions about untested drugs being 'safer' are absolutely ludicrous.
And current testing has demonstrated the importance in understanding medications before releasing them.
What's unfortunate for both of us is that your ignorance is exceeded only by your arrogance. All you have to do to educate yourself is google the term "drug lag" to find volumes written on the topic. There's a Time magazine article that sums up the issue very concisely.
But instead you set up a straw man, implying that I claimed that untested drugs are safer, which I never said and has nothing to do with my point.
You hold a belief that is false. Clearly you don't know enough.
Yes it is a straw man, because I never said "drug testing kills more people than it saves." What I said was "FDA drug testing requirements actually kill more people than they save."
This does not imply that "untested drugs are safer." It implies that reduced drug testing requirements would result in fewer overall deaths, because while it would increase the # who die from unsafe drugs, it would decrease the # who die waiting for safe drugs by even more. Once again, just look it up!
@willzyx1980 What about China? It's been an economic powerhouse and there is serious Government control and regulation. In fact, it's grown so rapidly that its major problem is that it has to sustain the level of growth which is impossible.
Are you at all familiar with China’s history? China’s economy only began growing after they began freeing up their market. And that growth is in the private sector. The state-owned enterprises are all losing money. The industries that are creating the most growth are those that are most free from regulation.
You should study the history of China and Hong Kong before you try to use it as an example. China proves my point, not yours.
@TheQuestioner132 A lot of economic studies have suggested other causes for the housing bubble - the promotion of real estate as a good investment, the incredibly high valuations of properties, selling of very large or high-risk mortgage products etc.
@TheQuestioner132 The fact remains that the fundamental problem was banks lending money to people that they wouldn't be able to pay back. They offered very low initial rates on mortgage loans, which then sky-rocketed, leaving the banks with a shit-load of credit that no-one else wanted to touch. If they'd been less greedy, a lot of this could have been prevented...
@TheQuestioner132 And it's still not regulated well enough - predatory lending practices, loan deals that amounted to 'bait-and-switch' scams, the sub-prime catastrophe and to top it off, the government using public money to shore up the financial sector in return for now added power over the banks while the directors who ruined them claiming six and seven-figure bonuses. That's not regulation - that's us getting fucked.
Ahh you're one of those ppl who just think in terms of more or less regulation without considering what kind.
There's regulation to protect peoples' rights, and there's regulation to grow power. The 2nd type works in opposition of the 1st.
Liberals don't care about the 1st, they just want more and more regulation (govt power) without caring for the fact that concentrated power = corruption.
"were fine until the capitalist implosion of the financial sector"
You should investigate a little more and believe your lib media less. The "implosion" was directly government caused.
You're implying a free market failure when in fact a market interfered with by a heavy handed govt is nothing of the kind. Thanks though for proving my point. :-)
And you not begrudging your taxes gives you no right to forcefully take others' earnings.
@Sasukekiss Congratz for Sweden. Unfortunately, Sweden wasn't founded on a free market like the USA. You can't introduce outstanding socialistic ideologies into a system based on free market society. That's like taking all your money and putting it into a nice engine for your race car, and not having any money left to buy wheels.
... anyway, what you might want to consider though, if your point is that white ppl suck... is that Mr. Obama has done and continues to do everything he can to kill the economy. Raising taxes, socializing industries, sending free market investors to the back of the line while ushering socialized unions to the front... etc.
And did you just tout the UK and France as strong economies? lol!!!!! God that's a good one, tell me another!! lol!!!!!
Respond to this video... I'm not saying white people suck - I'm just pointing out much of the worlds power and wealth lies in the hands of a few old, rich, white guys, who made silly bets with our money. They lost and the economy of the world hit the crapper. Nothing to do with immigrants. And as for the devil of 'socialism', Sweden and Norway have amount the highest GDP per capita, the best public services and the highest standards of living in the world. And they are very much socialists
Well statistically white people are the majority of people in the US, so it's logical and reasonable to believe that all other things being equal, it would be white people as the majority of people who do anything, unless there's a high underlying correlation to race that offsets that statistical average.
@sailcats77 "Over active environmentalism for instance, is why BP was drilling in mile deep water instead of where the risk is lower."
*
You can, of course, document this allegation? What is "over pollution"? At what point does the profit incentive outweigh concerns about protecting the environment? Instead of seeking new ways to exploit dwindling fossil fuels, we should be seeking to develop alternative, renewable, environmentally safe resources.
Are you suggesting zero polution should be the standard? If so, we better shut down all human development because that is unattainable with any semblance of modern life.
Are you also suggesting that BP would be drilling at a mole depth, with total drill depth of over 35,000 feet just b/c they like being that far out on the ocean? If they could drill closer they would. If that blowout had happened in anwr it would have been shut down in hours.
@sailcats77 You just don'[t get it. The course that you advocate leads ultimately to oblivion. We must free ourselves from dependence on fossil fuels. We must stop fouling our own nest. The answer does not lay in more of the same. The answer can only be found in new technology and alternate sources of energy. It IS possible -- but people like you will never see that, because all you have is your mean-spirited, arrogant self-interest and your dedication to short-term solutions and outmoded models
I agree eventually new tech will replace internal combustion. I also know the likely generator of that tech.. free market and certainly not govt mandates. You can't legislate innovation. Sorry. The real world doesn't work that way. Artificially limiting supply will only stall our economy, lengthening the time til we have a truly revolutionary tech to replace ice's.
Until then there is NO replacement for oil. None. Zero. Nothing can do what it does. Period.
Fact is, I'm for individual liberty which includes liberals not interfering in free market. Make over polution illegal, sure... like has been the correct case for years. Otherwise mind your own business.
Libs are always like, "the bipartisan bickering gets US nowhere, why can't we just get along" ... when it's liberalism that drives you to interfere in others' lives.
There is no evidence that higher taxes on the upper tax brackets has any adverse effect on economic growth as measured by the GDP. The highest tax bracket prior to the Great Depression was just 25%, and growth in the GDP then was MINUS 10%. After FDR took office, the highest tax bracket rate tripled, to 75%, and remained over 70% for the next 50 years, during which time annual growth in the GDP averaged 7% or better. Taxing those who have the money is just common sense.
The 1920's tax rate you're talking about of 25% was a drop from the previous 70% in the early '20's. Ever heard of the roaring '20's, marked by economic prosperity...aaaaand surprise surprise, the rich paying a higher share of taxes BECAUSE of the lower tax rates.
In 1920, unemployment was ~20%. Between '21 and '29, the economy grew 59%.
You're contradicting yourself saying to make the rich pay more, raise the tax rate. LOWERing tax rates result in the rich paying more.
In the '30's the tax rates were raised from 25% to 63% and then FDR raised them to 79%. I wouldn't point to the '30's exactly as a model of economic prosperity, would you?
Reagan's tax cuts resulted in the nation's longest peace time economic expansion... ~20 million new jobs. Great across the board personal wealth. ...and dare I say it?.... the rich with the lower rates, ended up paying a higher share of taxes.
@sailcats77 "Reagan's tax cuts resulted in the nation's longest peace time economic expansion"
*
They also resulted in the largest expansion of the National Debt as a percentage of GDP during any similar period in history, and in the longer term actually undermined the nation's economic stability. The notion that there is some mystical benefit to be derived from catering to the avarice of the extremely wealthy is absolutely bogus, because it is the industry of people who create wealth.
Over spending causes debt and thank liberalism for the irresponsible govt spending. Are you aware the defense spending you're talking about brought down the soviet threat, while the liberal massive socialist spending accounts for about 60% of our total fed budget?
Defense spending is constitutional, socialist spending is not.
You're so wrong its scary. The common ppl don't create wealth typically. They work a job. the ppl who are driven to create wealth are those who by definition become rich.
I don't advocate we "cater" to anyone over others. I'm saying keep this a free country and keep out of peoples' ways as they decide for themselves how much money to make, how important it is to them, etc.
You point to this as "catering" despite the fact right now the top 50% of earners pay 97% of income tax
The spotted owl omelet - whites only. XD
That line cracks me up so much. I think it's very clever. And I think it's unfortunately one that's easy to overlook in the song. People who so to say DON'T see what he did there.
TheSkunkCat 1 month ago
My liberal mother married a conservative man just last year. Unfortunately, she hasn't managed to change his mind yet. Miraculously, and I'm not certain how this works, they can actually enjoy being with one another and love one another. I don't understand how this works.
OrionoftheStar 1 month ago
Liberals want to make the world perfect by slamming everyone who don't agree with their warped ideas of "tolerance." They are about as tolerant as the Rock of Gibraltar. They are just downright mean and use sarcasm and cruelty as "comedy." The country is sick of liberals, a liberal president (gas is STILL nearly $4 a gallon and the unemployment rate is nearly the highest in US history. Yeah, the liberals have really helped the US. Sing about that.
rrmjvand 2 months ago
@rrmjvand
$4/gallon gas? Your problem is with capitalism not liberals, and don't forget who the party was that messed up the economy to begin with. Republicans created the mess and they're blaming the Democrats for not cleaning it up fast enough.
heinj98 2 months ago
@rrmjvand
I really don't understand you. As a Republican you're against government regulation in the markets. Yet you want the government to do something about the $4/gallon gas. It's comparable to Republicans wanting government out of people's lives but supporting government bans on gay marriage and abortions. Are all Republicans hypocrits or what? You guys seem to talk out of both sides of your mouth. You want government in our lives and out of them at the same time. Pick a side.
heinj98 2 months ago
@rrmjvand What the hell is your problem with Gibraltar?! You leave monolithic promontories alone.
I believe there is a song lyric for you though: "Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer, We'll keep the red flag flying here."
protectthehuman 2 months ago
If the welfare rolls are a bottomless hole of women bringing illegitimate babies into the world to live on taxpayer (read WORKING people) money and trying to rip off men for child support. (since liberal ideas of sexual "freedom" are constantly preached in films and tv sans VD, poverty, and unwanted pregnancies, thank a liberal. If women shack up with men only to be dumped for the "sports-model" because women think it's romantic to live with a man instead of marrying him, thank a liberal.
rrmjvand 2 months ago
@rrmjvand
Some people on welfare legitimately need it, and don't forget, you're one injury or a layoff away from using the same social programs you're bitching about.
heinj98 2 months ago
@rrmjvand
Also, the states with the higest divorce rates in the country are the reddest states. The states with the lowest divorce rates in the country are the blue states. You've got your facts mixed up. That's typical for a Republican.
heinj98 2 months ago
Not Bob Dylan's cousin
wildbobandronnie 2 months ago
I changed the wikipedia page for the word "preternatural" to list Ann Coulter under "See also"
:D
thedukeziggy 4 months ago 4
Ha. The ad next to this video is the official "Bachmann for President" video by TeamBachmann
jneely77 4 months ago
the hell....I can barely hear half his words. the other half are blaring.
over18irish 5 months ago
shoulda been singing about protecting gun rights, babies and protecting jobs provided by the rich, but still funny!
JerFish12 6 months ago
@JerFish12- R U being tharcastic or therious?
See Vote Republican 2.0 where he explains supply
side non-trickle down economics and the laugher curve.-)
danger0usknowledge 4 months ago
Perhaps one of the funniest videos I've ever seen!
jeffreydebra1 6 months ago
who is this singer where can i get a cd of his song i think he is good i like his songs
legolasgreenleaff 9 months ago
@legolasgreenleaff Roy Zimmerman. He's got CDs on his website. It's in the info bar for which CD this song is on. I think it's also on iTunes, but don't quote me on that.
HeSheXie 7 months ago
does anyone know if the guitar from this song came from another song? Because I cant find any tabs on it
faramier321 9 months ago
HAAAhahaha there's an Ann Coulter ad at the bottom of the video.
typacsk 10 months ago
i love zimmerman, but i disagree with his politics.
i dislike republicans more than democrats. but as a classic libertarian, when he makes it out that some things, such as interest rates, or public education etc are such simple matters with obvious answer, its annoying.
especially when you know a lot of people tend to bandwagon with the beliefs of people they like, rather than an unbiased approach.
he just gives the impression that liberals hold the obvious political solution; so un-true.
CytherLynx 11 months ago
Highly disappointed with the song. Ann is such easy fodder. The funniest thing was the ad for Ann's blog that popped up.
poidog44 11 months ago
Youtube fails at ads. I'm staring at two different conservative messages, one featuring Anne herself. I don't think Adbot understands sarcasm.
HeSheXie 11 months ago 30
@HeSheXie Definitely not...I once created some Facebook ads, and seeing how "keywords" targeted certain folks on my friend list, it's blatantly obvious that a computer is incapable of understanding sarcasm and/or irony (unless, I suppose, you include those in the keywords?)
MoviManATL 3 months ago
It's hilarious that, while this video played, an ad came up for That Woman's blog.
OgreVI 1 year ago
gay politically infused humor. anti climatic, what a bummer after hearing his ted haggard song
omghai2u 1 year ago
Thirty-four people had the spotted owl omelet.
Ryoukawaii 1 year ago
Dont know much about USA but I have seen The Deliverance and the sound when you close the door on a USA made automobile, sounds like if you dropped a garbage truck from the empire state building.merr christmas
gothicstar6 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss It's ez to explain why we crash and burn horribly. It's not our taxes are to low or to high. It's our bloated war budget, but whenever someone offers slashing the war budget for healthcare, it becomes socialist bull crap.
Why are we americans willing to spend on ending lives rather than saving lives?
Who the fuck knows.
Microtardz 1 year ago 17
@Microtardz So. True.
TheSecretEye 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss
Maybe the Swiss government is smarter than the US government because most of the time when a private company does something the US government does, they do it better. For example, the government said it was impossible to have overnight delivery until private companies formed mail services that offer it. When all telephones were run by "Ma Bell" (US government) service was terrible and phone variety was nonexistent.
elzoog 1 year ago
The Swiss tax haven works for a little country, that attracts billions of German capital...but I highly doubt it would work in the US
AustrianAtheist 1 year ago
@elzoog Just to make it clear, the message you're responding too was about Sweden, where-as you mentioned Switzerland.
tttc 1 year ago
I thought this was going to be a song about Roy and his girlfriend, Barnie Frank. Leaving disappointed. They would make such a cute couple.
OhNoYouCant 1 year ago
Coulter's 34 jealous ex-boy/girlfriends disliked this video.
Makingnewnamesisdumb 1 year ago
Comment removed
Makingnewnamesisdumb 1 year ago
This is such a beautiful song.
Makingnewnamesisdumb 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss
Not only that, Swedish prisons have the lowest rates of relapse in the world.
nrevelations777 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss Im happy that there are some people that see the Value of taxes.
I am a liberal democrat, from the US. No one ever likes to believe that there are Countries like yours that are good, with the ideas of Socialism for the most part.
I am going to try to be a politician, and i only hope i can truly show how good places like Sweden are... Peace out, and take care.
wensel911 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss And you're taxes aren't oppressive because they are used for the good of the people. Our taxes are primarily used to fun foreign wars and bank bailouts.
MisforMystery 1 year ago
"My Liberal Girlfriend" by Brian Haner is so much funnier than this crap. Half the things he mentions isn't even a 'conservative' thing. Its just a... woman thing. :/
m61glass 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss It's not coincidental that Sweden, Norway and Denmark (where I'm from) have the highest taxes in the world AND the most happy people.
Kofod 1 year ago
I think its funny to watch Liberals defend Obama, who got the noble peace prize for not being George Bush, the bank bail outs; a hand out to the capitalist pigs they hate, mandatory health insurance purchase; 100% mandatory demand on their product, Obama's continuation of the Patriot Act...ect...
I give them one thing, they sure are loyal to their own, no matter how much they get lied too! Kind of make conservatives look like the real liberals!
MrWatchdawg77 1 year ago
@MrWatchdawg77
You do realize that if Obama hadn't done those things, the economy would have completely collapsed, don't you? No one can honestly expect for the country to be reformed in only four years when we spent the last eight completely screwing it up. Prioritize the issues and work on them one at a time. That's the best way to get things done.
HeSheXie 1 year ago
@HeSheXie The sky is falling!!! Quick, we need your money!!!
MrWatchdawg77 1 year ago
@HeSheXie Agreed - it takes many years, sometimes more then 8 years to fix an economy, We cant just keep electing people because something is not fixed in 2 years.. whats wrong with people.
wensel911 1 year ago
@MrWatchdawg77 Actually MrWatchdawg, many liberals (or progressives) are quite vocally upset by many of these things. If we had our way, much would be different. Some remain "loyal" to Obama (who we/they believe would LIKE to do better, but has gotten stuck by a rotten system and/or rotten "filibusters"), but many are not ( did you notice the election?)
lisapeppin 1 year ago
@lisapeppin What do you think about Obama getting the Noble Peace Prize? What do you think about mandatory health insurance?
MrWatchdawg77 1 year ago
@MrWatchdawg77 I think the premature Nobel Prize was "wishful thinking." I don't really think its relevant to much one way or the other, though. I'm not impressed by it, certainly surprised by it, but not upset by it. It was the Nobel committee's decision, whatever their rationale. I believe that mandatory insurance without a strong public option is a pretty lousy idea. I'm disappointed. I'm not "anti-Obama" about it, though. I'm anti-blue dog dems and anti repugs, tho O could have done better.
lisapeppin 1 year ago
@lisapeppin I think Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing diminishes the prize! I've lost respect for the Noble organization! What a joke!
Mandatory health insurance is a handout to the insurance companies! Crony Capitalism at its worst!
What's your views on illegal immigration?
MrWatchdawg77 1 year ago
@MrWatchdawg77 Okay -- so that speaks to the Nobel organization. I still maintain that its not relevant to my view of Obama.
There is a logical reason for mandatory insurance -- insurance is supposed to be a "pool" balanced with healthy and unhealthy individuals. If the healthy opt-out, the proportional costs are higher to others. I'm not saying its a good thing. Just what the reason is. Now, mandatory insurance w/out cost controls == corporate give away. That's what the repugs wanted.
lisapeppin 1 year ago
@MrWatchdawg77 I do not consider myself informed enough to have a strong opinion about illegal immigration. That said, I mostly prefer making less immigration "illegal" and more of it "legal," especially so that companies cannot abuse undocumented workers at the expense of lowering wages for all. But this is not an area a feel comfortable debating -- just stating an opinion.
lisapeppin 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss
Damn right...
When will America realise that its wealth distribution is shocking...
Being against public healthcare?
Keeping poor people out of college by charging ridiculously high prices (unless theyre good at sports)?
and I bet there are plenty of Americans who wish there was no benifit system for the unemployed at all...
christovskymck 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss how many illegal aliens to you have pouring over your border every day.
guitphil 1 year ago
Ah, man ! Hilarious. Get this guy on a double-bill with Billy Bragg !
bmoregan 1 year ago 3
@Sasukekiss Too bad America has a GDP per capita of $46,000, whereas Sweden's is only $36,600. Not to mention that America consistently has a lower unemployment rate. (As of right now, America's is a little higher, but that's because of the recession.)
pantherfanatic7 1 year ago
@pantherfanatic7
blabla....PER CAPITA...u know what that means! so when u-r GDP is higher than Sweden s YET u have more homeless people +poor people that don t get a proper education and can t afford proper medical treatment(...again :EVEN THOUGH your GDPpc is higher )you should be sad not bragging about it coz it just shows the uneven distribution of wealth in US/ppl fought4basic human rights/health is1 education another1.u-r either greedy-rich or brainwashed-sheep(or anywhere in between)
delagrazia 1 year ago
@delagrazia haha. Because you clearly got a proper education.
pantherfanatic7 1 year ago
@pantherfanatic7
what s u-r point?
i do?
i don t?
can u know?
DOES IT MATTER?
try some arguments next time...
delagrazia 1 year ago
@delagrazia I would argue if you could properly articulate an argument. But I don't understand a thing you type. Are you from America? Do you live here?
pantherfanatic7 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss how's SAAB doing?
gregatyis 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss
But what you DON'T have is sizable ethnic minorities with major chips on their shoulders who have been destroyed by multi-generational government dependency.
Of course, we'll get to see how you Swedes deal with your Islamist infection. Stay true to your socialist principles, now. Let them create and spread ghettos in the cities. Don't expect them to assimilate. They'll outbreed and displace you in your own country. It should be amusing to watch over the next several decades.
Leutchik 1 year ago
@Leutchik Yeah, and what about those christian cults, they don't outbreed, they inbreed! Don't expect them to assimilate, and don't expect them to know what "assimilate" is if it isn't in the bible. It'll be fun to watch to religious nutjobs destroy each other in the next decades,
imorio 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss It mean Sweden dont have the mark of the B*****t
triplem3m 1 year ago
I don't think that most Americans are against universal healthcare prima facie - the issue is that we can't even come close to affording it. Medicare reimbursements are driving up our enormous national debt to the tune of over $40 trillion (in present-value terms). As it is, we spend close to twice as much of our GDP on healthcare as any other developed country. The bottom line is that, objectively, before we can go universal, we have serious work to do on our broke ass system
hahacharadeurful 1 year ago
@hahacharadeurful You are on poin heret , as the father of a us Marine,former Marine myself,and my father AND grandfather before me, if you think for a moment on what we,as a NATION are spending on the misc.campains we are currently prosacuting accross the globe, that money would quite completly cocer the expence of securing OUR OWN borders AND health care AND the evergrowing homeless problem with money to spare
crossingzero 1 year ago
@hahacharadeurful wouldn't the quickest way to reform it be to make it universal? If you take the special interests groups, and wallstreet out of the medical industry. Make it a public en devour then wouldn't costs go down significantly? Going back in history compare the cost of solving the polio problem, to what we spend in one year on cancer. Medicine is a lot cheaper when your goal is to cure the problems, not endless treatments so patients become cash cows.
GhostInTheShell29 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell29
"Make it a public en devour then wouldn't costs go down significantly?"Yes,
also the question is: there are2choices:
1/people cant afford so dont spend on healthcare or
2/can afford and the money they pay goes to a public("non-profit")institution or to private pockets.
delagrazia 1 year ago
@GhostIn
(after doctors+managers and all those who actually work are paid we have the profit of the owner of the business who brought in the equation his money-his money make more money(not his direct work)why would that person be just anyone who will take this extra profit and not YOU?
(since..:)He ll reinvest his money(that his previous money created)in another business like:guns/clothes or spend it for himself for his pleasure on ..buying a vacation house in Dubai..(party/gamble..whatever
delagrazia 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShe
" Is that even ethical in the first place?..
You pay the dr because he actually knows how to give your health back ,but u pay this person for investing his money in a no loose business/Why wouldnt that be YOUR money.your profit.?
and wouldnt he always be motivated that your sick?since thats where his profit comes from?
.with the profit not taken away by the investor (to spend as he likes) but always reinvested, your healthcare system has every interest to keep you healthy
delagrazia 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShel (and can never take the profit out of the healthcare system) so you pay less+less
coz Now your money makes money only that it s always used4 your health
this is obvious +the question is not WHY is better but HOW to be done correctly so that some people dont find ways of actually gaining(stealing the system-taking money out for their own interest to spend it for themselves for houses+parties+clothes etc)something that when its private happens anywayAND it s legal
delagrazia 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell29
also the ammount they can steal is considerably lower and punishable by law(instead of 0 when things run correctly)than the legal gain/profit when it s private.
so the moral question is:is it ok to lend money with 30%interest to a prsn for his cancer operation?and if is..why would that 30%interest go to 1or few people instead of WE lend this money,we gain the interest we take it and reinvest it to OUR healthcare..
delagrazia 1 year ago
@"ghostinTheShell
..it s actually our investment to our healthcare ..Now if we have thieves around we should treat them as we always do..Are we saying that law can protect private companies but not public ones?is this the reason against public healthcare?
what do you think?do i miss something?
delagrazia 1 year ago
@delagrazia That system doesn't make any sense. Just do public funding its simpler.
GhostInTheShell29 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell29 i didnt describe a NEW system!
i just said WHY PUBLIC funding is better! Aftrer my first message the 2nd is missing(u-tube s fault)where i said that when it is private we have :1/doctors 2/manager 3/investor.The doctors get paid because they can give your health back /but the investor puts ONLY his money /his money make money for him(not his work or knowledge)For his investment he earns money that he will take and either reinvest to earn more money or spend it
delagrazia 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell
When it s public it s like WE are the investor Through your taxes,you are indirectly the investor.I explainedit this way coz it s easier to understand why public healthcare.makes more sense.if you link it only to taxes,people think:"they wanna take our money"but like this you can understand why is more reasonable if you think of it as an investment made by the people to their own company.Thats what a public company is.belongs to everyone, only u get no money back but services
delagrazia 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell29
If u want quality life 4 u-r citizens u need some public companies .U already do it with roads /military etc Health should be included as public schools are.
i asked u if i left anything out as an argument of why public is better
coz i m trying to understand
why are americans are so against it.
what is it that they think it won t work/where do they disagree?
delagrazia 1 year ago
@delagrazia The way you described it got very confusing.. Why Americans are against it... Because they were told to be. Billions of dollars were spent by the health insurance companies in lobbying and advertising to kill the idea. I don't like to say Americans are stupid... because i think a lot of people throughout the world are stupid. But Americans are very emotional, and easily swayed.
GhostInTheShell29 1 year ago
@delagrazia For an emotional example, people were freaking out over there being "Death Panels" to decide if it would be worth saving someones life. Like a very elderly person with cancer. People were terrified by this idea that the government would decide if they lived or died.
But under the current system people without insurance won't get expensive cancer treatment, or organ replacement so they would just automatically die.
But people aren't very bright and not many realize this.
GhostInTheShell29 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell29 i don t understand why they have this idea coz the system works independently and has the obligation to provide best treatment to all even if that means couple thousand $for AIDS treatment (it was expensive 10years ago)in a eastern country with 300$/month salary-or an 50000$operation abroads(when your hospitals dont have this technology/these are 2 cases i know.
i assumed the only think is:young people that might not want 2pay .
Health is2expensive 2be private.
delagrazia 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss I admire Sweden's government, it sounds like they are doing their job. My personal opinion is that if the government is going to tax, then they need to implement the money well. Your country is doing. Our poor dumb government here in the States could probably take a leaf out of Sweden's book.
aperkausn 1 year ago
@Menak666, You're welcome. Bring some beef jerky. I've always wanted to try that.
swooch 1 year ago
He kinda looks like Ted Raimi.
sentient 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sasukekiss And your women are smoking hot.
OpensVeryLargeDoors 1 year ago
When the first two words in a video are Ann Coulter you know the vid will be either really stupid, or a neat piece of Satire :D
MarkArandjus 1 year ago
audio levels are kinda low
Ocker3 1 year ago
I wish there were more countries like Sweden and Finland... and that Americans would wake from fallacies, and outcome the paranoid nightmares that haunt the mind of imperialism..... because one thing is the government and other is the people as we are all part of the human family
carlosrojasdeanda 1 year ago 46
@carlosrojasdeanda finland and sweden are drowning in islamism, just like france germany and britain. at least america will still be america in 50 years.
TheJinkedful 1 year ago
@TheJinkedful Drowning in islamism? 1) since when is that something bad? 2) Islam is the faster growing religion IN the US, remember Cassius Clay A.K.A. Muhammed Ali 3) If the US population became 98% swahili or korean or pakistani it would still be the US 4) Finland and Sweden, just like many others are laicisist states 5) How can you factically prove that christianism is in any way better than islam? or for this case, american born-again christianism over Europe's Islam.
NachosaurusRex 1 year ago
@NachosaurusRex 1) islamism is a totalitarian political movement which holds that islam is a political rather than religious movement. it's aims are to destroy the west, kill all the jews, enslave woman and kill homosexuals. 2) so? islam isn't islamism per se 3) yes 4) except they both have laws to protect religion at the expense of free expression, like the UK, because they are scared of what happened with rushdie and the cartoons 5) what europe needs is active athiesm and securlarism
TheJinkedful 1 year ago
@TheJinkedful Islam is no more of a political movement than Christianity is, Conservative Christians don't support gay marriage because they consider it to be against their beliefs, so why would you expect Muslims to be in favour of gay marriage when most consider it to go against the teachings of the Koran.
But yes, people should have the right to criticize any religion as much as they criticize people's political views, and what's "active atheism" ?
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@AinEstonia there is a political movement within islam called islamism. thats the point. you people need to actually learn whats been happening in the islamic community for the past 100 years. search wikipedia Islamism wikipedia Hizb_ut-Tahrir "Gay marriage?" i think you are a bit ignorant on this... It is a movement that prescribes the death penalty for homosexuality and enforces that in saudi, iran, sudan among others. active athieism = fighting all religion, not just fat old christians.
TheJinkedful 1 year ago
@TheJinkedful Every religion has a certain amount of political activity, but the fact remains that the overwhelming amount of Muslims don't go vote or do anything in strides, they just try to live their lives the way they see it fit. It's not like over a billion Muslims are marching on streets stoning every gay guy they come across.
But let's say that I do admit that there's such a thing as 'Islamism', what do you propose we do ? Ban the Qur'an ? And how should we 'fight religion' ?
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@TheJinkedful In 50 years America will speak Spanish! It's already well on the way.
effyleven 1 year ago
@effyleven Thats bullshit, Im Hispanic and I speak English and Spanish I will probably teach both of these languages to my kids ( if I ever have any ) . And also America aint a country, thats 2 fucking continents, the USA is a country, Canada is a country, Argentina is a country all part of the American Continents, learn some Geography. God damn it.
edgarreyes14 1 year ago
@edgarreyes14 You and I both know USA = United States of America... or America for short.
Any other countries with "America" in their name? Let me think...... errr.... NO!
And the last person I'm gonna learn geography from is an American, for gawd sake! Mention "Bosnia" and Americans ask... "Is that Bosnia, Wisconsin?"
effyleven 1 year ago
@effyleven First the complete name is Bosnia and Herzegovina and that nation is Eastern Europe very close to Serbia. And you think that somehow youre smarter than all Americans just because youre from the UK ? Wow youre really special arent yo ?
edgarreyes14 1 year ago
@edgarreyes14 So you are bright enough to Google, huh? What are you gonna look up now, fellah? How to use an apostophe in you're? :-)
effyleven 1 year ago
@effyleven Who the fuck doesnt know that Bosnia is a nation ? And I know how to use an apostophe in you're, I just dont us it since is faster the other way, you think that you're smarter than me ? You said that in 50 years that the USA's official language will be Spanish, you are the moron, not me. If you knew anything about the USA you would know that kids that have Mexican or Latin American parents will be more fluent in English than Spanish once theyre older, you know nothing.
edgarreyes14 1 year ago
@edgarreyes14 You don't like the idea of a USA where Spanish is the language most spoken? Never mind what you like, it will happen.... according to official statistics produced in Washington. And it will be a sooner than 50 years, too..... that's unless some action is taken to establish English as the official language of USA (already rejected) and curtail the birthrate in Hispanics.. (not likely, but hey, Republican Tea party faction is pretty crazy and might be planning this right now!)
effyleven 1 year ago
@effyleven Its not that I dont like Spanish being the most spoken language, hell I speak it too. But where I live here in California , the state with the most Hipanics, and most people here talk English. Their parents might not speak the language very fluently but their kids for the most part will speak English better than Spanish. Spanish will not be the most spoken language in this country, youre just being paranoid. So you think that Muslims are also taking over Europe ?
edgarreyes14 1 year ago
@effyleven
dude, you're kinda being a git.
Stop trollin'.
smt4242 1 year ago
@edgarreyes14 Actually if you make your kids duel mother tongue, and able to read in both languages, they can write their own check in business. Being unilingual is a disadvantage in this world.
Newenlightenmentnow 10 months ago
@effyleven doubtful. American's immigratns become american, eventually. Such is the way of things.
TheJinkedful 1 year ago
@carlosrojasdeanda European nations aren't that more liberal, in most EU nations drugs are illegal, blasphemy is a punishable crime in quite a few European nations, and a couple of nations have banned the burqa, could make more examples but you get my point.
And since I'm a gamer, I wouldn't like to live in Finland, because it has banned a few games if I'm not wrong.
I am rather sad that Europe isn't the beacon of liberalism it fancies itself as, perhaps it will be in the future.
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@carlosrojasdeanda I can't disagree with you, Carlos, but I wish you could connect your ideas better.First, I'm not sure why this is a comment on Roy Zimmerman's posted song "My Conservative Girlfriend;" next, I'm not sure what you like about the two Scandinavian countries you mentioned; next, although I like the metaphorical feel of "wake from fallacies," you don't spell out what particular fallacies Americans entertain (and by the way, "outcome" is a noun, not a verb).The last bit's good, tho.
cincybones 10 months ago
@cincybones I don't think English is his first language. (I'm not being a dick--even ignoring the user name, he's got sort of a Spanish accent.) As for Sweden and Finland...I'm not sure if the success of their education systems (what impresses me most about them) can be adapted for the US, but it wouldn't kill us to try.
typacsk 10 months ago
@carlosrojasdeanda yeah same family . just like cain and abel
daniel91pereira 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Sasukekiss u r really a socialist arent u?wake up! do u swedish idiots really think your money should be going to people who are too lazy to work?and dont u dare call me racist ,cas im swedish,too.and im an american too i win by default.
birdishtheword 1 year ago
@birdishtheword
...Wow. You win automatically because you're American?
How, exactly? Most American contacts I have don't claim automatic racial superiority to other people.
Singemeister 1 year ago 2
God Ann Coulter is such a moron..
This man is hilarious!
tobehonestirl 1 year ago 39
@tobehonestirl Weird. I thought hilarious meant "really funny".
the13thof12 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss Hey!!! Shut up !!! what do you think you are to criticize other people??
If you are so fine i guess that recession that you guys are having is not real right??
meroguasa 1 year ago
@meroguasa We are human beings. We have the right to speak. you have the right not to listen, but you don't have the right to shut us up.
Criticize all you want, just don't tell me I can't criticize.
Regardless of which side I stand on regarding a particular issue, I stand firmly on the side that says you shouldn't try to shut someone else up.
Shame on you.
drfoxcourt 1 year ago
@TheQuestioner132 Your point being? Mine was that America lags far behind most of the developed world when it comes to provision of universal healthcare, something that almost every developed nation has. Healthcare in the US doesn't suck because of regulation, it sucks due to a lack of investment. Universal healthcare necessarily requires regulation - and most countries with public healthcare still have a private system as well...
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
holy crap! "her white collar and her redneck are clashing" LOL
plonqz 1 year ago 4
@Sasukekiss
you're so full of shit. Sweden is doing well, yes. But only after the Swedish government started lowering taxes and deregulating the economy. Look at Sweden over the past 50 years, and you'll see the pattern. More government control = more poverty, even in Sweden.
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 ok, show us why that is. Anyone can manipulate statistics, but show us exactly how one can deduce from emperical data that more goverment=more poverty?
imorio 1 year ago
@imorio
google "Index of Economic Freedom," look at the categories of economic freedom (more freedom is defined as less government intervention). Then look at the ranking or the map, and think about which countries are rich and which are poor. Ceteris paribus, the freer a country is, the higher its standard of living.
If you want more data, get a copy of In Defense of Global Capitalism by Johan Norberg (from Sweden, btw). He has all his data well cited, so you can check the sources yourself
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 Correlation doesn't prove causation.
imorio 1 year ago
@imorio
Correlation isn't causation, but it IS evidence. If you want logical inference you need to take a course on economics. I obviously can't convey the entire science of development economics in a 500 word youtube comment, but I can recommend some books. Try the Norberg book, and Easterly's book The Elusive Quest for Growth, and Rosenberg and Birdzell's book How the West Grew Rich.
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 The problem rests in the disparity between the highest and lowest income earners, the quality of products, the methods of production etc.
America was 'free' in the 1970's, and the lack of Government intervention saw a salmonella outbreak because of the presence of shit in the meat. Regulation is absolutely necessary.
qqs764 1 year ago
@qqs764
If you think regulation is what's keeping you safe, you should check your facts. Workplace safety, consumer product safety, and highway safety were all improving for decades before regulation. To see why, read the chapter "Who Protects the Consumer?" in Friedman's book Free to Choose.
And I'm sure this is suprising, but the fact is that FDA drug testing requirements actually kill more people than they save. Just google FDAReview and click the top link for the data, with citations.
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 Drug testing kills people?
Amazing. You must have some inept doctors and nurses over there.
Poor regulation of qualifications, obviously.
qqs764 1 year ago
@qqs764
Of course drug testing kills people. The problem is called "drug lag," and it's well recognized. During the testing process drugs are kept off the market. During this delay people die who might have been saved by the drug. Ideally, testing should save more people than it kills. But under current FDA regulations, so much testing is required that the number of people who die due to delays exceeds the number saved from bad drugs. Look it up.
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 Unfortunately for you my father is a doctor and my mother is a nurse. I know enough about the medical industry without your nonsense.
If you release an untested drug on the market, how many lives would be at risk? Every one of them. You have no idea what the possible effectswould be, therefore any predictions about untested drugs being 'safer' are absolutely ludicrous.
And current testing has demonstrated the importance in understanding medications before releasing them.
qqs764 1 year ago
@qqs764
What's unfortunate for both of us is that your ignorance is exceeded only by your arrogance. All you have to do to educate yourself is google the term "drug lag" to find volumes written on the topic. There's a Time magazine article that sums up the issue very concisely.
But instead you set up a straw man, implying that I claimed that untested drugs are safer, which I never said and has nothing to do with my point.
You hold a belief that is false. Clearly you don't know enough.
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 Not a straw man at all. By saying drug testing kills more people than it saves, you imply that untested drugs are safer.
If you were even as remotely educated as you would believe, you wouldn't use blanket statements as "drug testing kills more people than it saves".
qqs764 1 year ago
@qqs764
Yes it is a straw man, because I never said "drug testing kills more people than it saves." What I said was "FDA drug testing requirements actually kill more people than they save."
This does not imply that "untested drugs are safer." It implies that reduced drug testing requirements would result in fewer overall deaths, because while it would increase the # who die from unsafe drugs, it would decrease the # who die waiting for safe drugs by even more. Once again, just look it up!
willzyx1980 1 year ago
@willzyx1980 What about China? It's been an economic powerhouse and there is serious Government control and regulation. In fact, it's grown so rapidly that its major problem is that it has to sustain the level of growth which is impossible.
qqs764 1 year ago
@qqs764
Are you at all familiar with China’s history? China’s economy only began growing after they began freeing up their market. And that growth is in the private sector. The state-owned enterprises are all losing money. The industries that are creating the most growth are those that are most free from regulation.
You should study the history of China and Hong Kong before you try to use it as an example. China proves my point, not yours.
willzyx1980 1 year ago
Great playing.
lovebanditt 1 year ago
@TheQuestioner132 A lot of economic studies have suggested other causes for the housing bubble - the promotion of real estate as a good investment, the incredibly high valuations of properties, selling of very large or high-risk mortgage products etc.
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
@TheQuestioner132 The fact remains that the fundamental problem was banks lending money to people that they wouldn't be able to pay back. They offered very low initial rates on mortgage loans, which then sky-rocketed, leaving the banks with a shit-load of credit that no-one else wanted to touch. If they'd been less greedy, a lot of this could have been prevented...
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
@TheQuestioner132 And it's still not regulated well enough - predatory lending practices, loan deals that amounted to 'bait-and-switch' scams, the sub-prime catastrophe and to top it off, the government using public money to shore up the financial sector in return for now added power over the banks while the directors who ruined them claiming six and seven-figure bonuses. That's not regulation - that's us getting fucked.
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
@triskaidekaphobe13
Ahh you're one of those ppl who just think in terms of more or less regulation without considering what kind.
There's regulation to protect peoples' rights, and there's regulation to grow power. The 2nd type works in opposition of the 1st.
Liberals don't care about the 1st, they just want more and more regulation (govt power) without caring for the fact that concentrated power = corruption.
lol lib.
sailcats77 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss You are my friend :)
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
@sailcats77 We were fine until the capitalist implosion of the financial sector... And I still don't begrudge my taxes.
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
@triskaidekaphobe13
"were fine until the capitalist implosion of the financial sector"
You should investigate a little more and believe your lib media less. The "implosion" was directly government caused.
You're implying a free market failure when in fact a market interfered with by a heavy handed govt is nothing of the kind. Thanks though for proving my point. :-)
And you not begrudging your taxes gives you no right to forcefully take others' earnings.
sailcats77 1 year ago
@Sasukekiss Congratz for Sweden. Unfortunately, Sweden wasn't founded on a free market like the USA. You can't introduce outstanding socialistic ideologies into a system based on free market society. That's like taking all your money and putting it into a nice engine for your race car, and not having any money left to buy wheels.
Headcase009 1 year ago
@Headcase009 America does not have a free market system. That is the biggest lie I have ever heard repeatedly stated about this country.
Fuctmentality 1 year ago
And still, we're happy, despite all this help we get from tax money. Weird, isn't it?
Sasukekiss 1 year ago
@triskaidekaphobe13
... anyway, what you might want to consider though, if your point is that white ppl suck... is that Mr. Obama has done and continues to do everything he can to kill the economy. Raising taxes, socializing industries, sending free market investors to the back of the line while ushering socialized unions to the front... etc.
And did you just tout the UK and France as strong economies? lol!!!!! God that's a good one, tell me another!! lol!!!!!
sailcats77 1 year ago
Respond to this video... I'm not saying white people suck - I'm just pointing out much of the worlds power and wealth lies in the hands of a few old, rich, white guys, who made silly bets with our money. They lost and the economy of the world hit the crapper. Nothing to do with immigrants. And as for the devil of 'socialism', Sweden and Norway have amount the highest GDP per capita, the best public services and the highest standards of living in the world. And they are very much socialists
triskaidekaphobe13 1 year ago
@triskaidekaphobe13
"rich white guys who screwed up the economy"
Well statistically white people are the majority of people in the US, so it's logical and reasonable to believe that all other things being equal, it would be white people as the majority of people who do anything, unless there's a high underlying correlation to race that offsets that statistical average.
What point are you trying to make again?
sailcats77 1 year ago
He looks a litle like Bill O'reilly.
Lol... Ironic
Lsawyer88 1 year ago
@Lsawyer88 But this guy doesnt have evil soulless eyes. ^^
TheCokesnorter 1 year ago
well thanks for being A left wing moon bat. sadly you are the ones doing all the Damage.
cldump 1 year ago
@cldump How do you figure that?
AlexanderRoder 1 year ago
@AlexanderRoder
cldump 1 year ago
@AlexanderRoder blocking clean up of the gulf. falsely claiming Tea party protesters are violent the list goes on and on.
cldump 1 year ago
Ann Coulter can go to hell.
One of the most evil women around today... FUCK NEO-CONS!
qqqqqqqq 1 year ago
if this guy was my teacher....
grnmon 1 year ago
I really appreciate the Republican Values Book advertisment while I was watching this...oh the irony :-)
toaorp 1 year ago
@sailcats77 "Over active environmentalism for instance, is why BP was drilling in mile deep water instead of where the risk is lower."
*
You can, of course, document this allegation? What is "over pollution"? At what point does the profit incentive outweigh concerns about protecting the environment? Instead of seeking new ways to exploit dwindling fossil fuels, we should be seeking to develop alternative, renewable, environmentally safe resources.
SilverDawnBat 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
Are you suggesting zero polution should be the standard? If so, we better shut down all human development because that is unattainable with any semblance of modern life.
Are you also suggesting that BP would be drilling at a mole depth, with total drill depth of over 35,000 feet just b/c they like being that far out on the ocean? If they could drill closer they would. If that blowout had happened in anwr it would have been shut down in hours.
sailcats77 1 year ago
@sailcats77 You just don'[t get it. The course that you advocate leads ultimately to oblivion. We must free ourselves from dependence on fossil fuels. We must stop fouling our own nest. The answer does not lay in more of the same. The answer can only be found in new technology and alternate sources of energy. It IS possible -- but people like you will never see that, because all you have is your mean-spirited, arrogant self-interest and your dedication to short-term solutions and outmoded models
SilverDawnBat 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
I agree eventually new tech will replace internal combustion. I also know the likely generator of that tech.. free market and certainly not govt mandates. You can't legislate innovation. Sorry. The real world doesn't work that way. Artificially limiting supply will only stall our economy, lengthening the time til we have a truly revolutionary tech to replace ice's.
Until then there is NO replacement for oil. None. Zero. Nothing can do what it does. Period.
sailcats77 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
You can call me selfish, arrogant , whatever.
Fact is, I'm for individual liberty which includes liberals not interfering in free market. Make over polution illegal, sure... like has been the correct case for years. Otherwise mind your own business.
Libs are always like, "the bipartisan bickering gets US nowhere, why can't we just get along" ... when it's liberalism that drives you to interfere in others' lives.
sailcats77 1 year ago
Her white collar and her red neck are clashing xD
TrueBritons 1 year ago 6
@TrueBritons rimshot!
mikeellerbeck 1 year ago
rum.....sfeld! lol
saveusmilkboy 1 year ago
Hey, I'm a conservative and I love this guy! Funny & creative.
thedudespeaks1 1 year ago
There is no evidence that higher taxes on the upper tax brackets has any adverse effect on economic growth as measured by the GDP. The highest tax bracket prior to the Great Depression was just 25%, and growth in the GDP then was MINUS 10%. After FDR took office, the highest tax bracket rate tripled, to 75%, and remained over 70% for the next 50 years, during which time annual growth in the GDP averaged 7% or better. Taxing those who have the money is just common sense.
SilverDawnBat 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
The 1920's tax rate you're talking about of 25% was a drop from the previous 70% in the early '20's. Ever heard of the roaring '20's, marked by economic prosperity...aaaaand surprise surprise, the rich paying a higher share of taxes BECAUSE of the lower tax rates.
In 1920, unemployment was ~20%. Between '21 and '29, the economy grew 59%.
You're contradicting yourself saying to make the rich pay more, raise the tax rate. LOWERing tax rates result in the rich paying more.
sailcats77 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
In the '30's the tax rates were raised from 25% to 63% and then FDR raised them to 79%. I wouldn't point to the '30's exactly as a model of economic prosperity, would you?
Reagan's tax cuts resulted in the nation's longest peace time economic expansion... ~20 million new jobs. Great across the board personal wealth. ...and dare I say it?.... the rich with the lower rates, ended up paying a higher share of taxes.
...
sailcats77 1 year ago
@sailcats77 "Reagan's tax cuts resulted in the nation's longest peace time economic expansion"
*
They also resulted in the largest expansion of the National Debt as a percentage of GDP during any similar period in history, and in the longer term actually undermined the nation's economic stability. The notion that there is some mystical benefit to be derived from catering to the avarice of the extremely wealthy is absolutely bogus, because it is the industry of people who create wealth.
SilverDawnBat 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
Over spending causes debt and thank liberalism for the irresponsible govt spending. Are you aware the defense spending you're talking about brought down the soviet threat, while the liberal massive socialist spending accounts for about 60% of our total fed budget?
Defense spending is constitutional, socialist spending is not.
sailcats77 1 year ago
@SilverDawnBat
You're so wrong its scary. The common ppl don't create wealth typically. They work a job. the ppl who are driven to create wealth are those who by definition become rich.
I don't advocate we "cater" to anyone over others. I'm saying keep this a free country and keep out of peoples' ways as they decide for themselves how much money to make, how important it is to them, etc.
You point to this as "catering" despite the fact right now the top 50% of earners pay 97% of income tax
sailcats77 1 year ago