Neil DeGrasse Tyson on What's Wrong with Congress (Bill Maher)

No description available.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Neil DeGrasse Tyson
• Congress
• Lawyers

[MetrazolElectricity]

tyson is just too god damn good

[Xesumaidem]

this was a good episode. always have liked neils degrasse.

[Eepicman]

@DAVROSS44 Bwahahahahahaha for a second there I thought you were trying to say that Britain somehow has a worse problem than America. Legit questions, idk the answers; does britain have an ovesity epidemic? Are gay rights an issue? Does the entire world hate you for being inexpressably stupid?

[Andysingtoyou]

The Creator is smarter thats how it is..

[DAVROSS44]

@Petey0707

Its the same here in uk mate, politicians having 3 homes, fucking MOATS in their gardens ffs all on "expenses".

Its "britain is ruined because the other party done this" instead of solutions.

[tomitstube]

good point, i always thought their profession was millionaire.

if you want regular people in congress you have to make it possible for them to compete financially. all elections should be publicly funded with mandatory public debates on issues. no more - the richest guy wins.

our current system of money buys congress prohibits inclusion and participation, of course that's just the way millionaires like it.

[claton95]

Neil is a boss

[Petey0707]

@peymaania Unless he's a war mongering, neo-conservative Christian who believes spreading corporatism and pushing westernized ideations on others is a good thing, then he won't get elected.

[Petey0707]

law, law, law, law, business man, we get paid off by corrupt corporations to do as they say, as long as I get my yacht, paid vacation and family taken care then fuck the populace of the US. that's the facade of our politicians, no engineers, no blue collars, no nothing. just corrupt, greedy, ugly fat faggot fucking business men who take bribes for a corrupt DC.

[NotAsOldAsILook]

If you define success as "out-arguing" the other guy, then you can declare yourself successful in a scenario in which trhe only result is the end of the argument. If success is defined as reaching a result which serves the interests of the majority of the people without violating widely-accepted principles, then you have a means of solving problems which most people would sign onto. Unfortunately, we (the people) allow our representatives to define success in a way that suits them, not us.

[misinglink15]

I know not all lawyers are a-holes, but I've tried to hold a conversation with many outside of their jobs, and its frustrating. Even in normal social situations they try to out argue me, even if they agree with me, can't they just be human for once?