should we just let celebrities run the world?

nick the sick maniac

nick the sick maniac

Well-Known Member
because apparently their the most important thing in the world? im so fucking sick of all the utter shit on tv and the news praising celebrities. i dont wanna hear about what britney spears is wearing or what the fuck oprah is doing its just complete shit. i could go on a huge rant all day but i dont want to have a heart attack *collapses on floor clutching chest* :cuss::finger:bongsmilie*
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
nick the sick maniac said:
because apparently their the most important thing in the world? im so fucking sick of all the utter shit on tv and the news praising celebrities. i dont wanna hear about what britney spears is wearing or what the fuck oprah is doing its just complete shit. i could go on a huge rant all day but i dont want to have a heart attack *collapses on floor clutching chest* :cuss::finger:bongsmilie*
Click to expand...
Read my mind!

FUCK CELEBRITY SHIT, NOBODY GIVES A FLYING FUCK! :evil:
 
Zig Zag Zane

Zig Zag Zane

Well-Known Member
I completely agree....I could give a fuck about ANY celeb, and im sooooooooooooooo fuckingggggg tired of hearing about Michael Jackson! hes fucking DEAD! fuck him! i know how y'all feel.
 
TheBrutalTruth

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
nick the sick maniac said:
because apparently their the most important thing in the world? im so fucking sick of all the utter shit on tv and the news praising celebrities. i dont wanna hear about what britney spears is wearing or what the fuck oprah is doing its just complete shit. i could go on a huge rant all day but i dont want to have a heart attack *collapses on floor clutching chest* :cuss::finger:bongsmilie*
Click to expand...
The last people I would trust to run the world are celebrities, but one must consider the method of election of representatives, senators and the president. It is nothing more than a popularity contest, one could argue quite reasonably that we already have allowed celebrities to run the world.

In the senate, and the presidency, such a thing may not be that bad, but it is the flaw of the House of Representatives, which if we had remained true to the founder's intentions would be a much bigger body (1,700/10000+ depending on methodology.)

Instead of one representative "representing" 700,000 people the first would give one representative per 200,000 and the second would give one per 30,000, thus ensuring that more people would have a vote, and it would serve as a way to allow more political parties to get elected, thus ending the duopolism of the Republicans and Democrats.

No, the real question is, do we want to continue allowing "celebrities" to run the world?
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
TheBrutalTruth said:
The last people I would trust to run the world are celebrities, but one must consider the method of election of representatives, senators and the president. It is nothing more than a popularity contest, one could argue quite reasonably that we already have allowed celebrities to run the world.

In the senate, and the presidency, such a thing may not be that bad, but it is the flaw of the House of Representatives, which if we had remained true to the founder's intentions would be a much bigger body (1,700/10000+ depending on methodology.)

Instead of one representative "representing" 700,000 people the first would give one representative per 200,000 and the second would give one per 30,000, thus ensuring that more people would have a vote, and it would serve as a way to allow more political parties to get elected, thus ending the duopolism of the Republicans and Democrats.

No, the real question is, do we want to continue allowing "celebrities" to run the world?
Click to expand...

Dude, that is seriously a genius idea that I havn't considered.

Well done, I totally agree with this.
 
Purplekrunchie

Purplekrunchie

Well-Known Member
Agreed brutal , but tell me this, how to we talk some sense into the masses?
They go for the dressed up super canidates and ignore the ones who may actually have our best interests in mind. If this shit going on now dont open some eyes, im afraid nothing will. The one with the most TV ads wins fuck its just insane, so in a sense that is electing celebs.
 
P

polar

Well-Known Member
People just need to learn that news stations are just there to give the Daily Show and the colbair report something to talk about ;-)
A month ago it was all about how the economy is failing and all hell is breaking lose. Now, they wont stop talking about Michael Jackson. What happened to that urgency there used to be with world destruction? It's all a load of BS. It's entertainment people. The news show what sells, and they discovered that if people are scared and they have "the up-to-the-minute news on our impending doom", then it sells.
 
001

001

Active Member
welcome to the real world.......

personally I don't have a t.v or look at a news paper..... if you want news look for an underground new group or independent news group.....

the celebritys are just their to distract you from the truths.....

my mum knows more about the celebrity life style then my own......
 
Bon3z

Bon3z

Active Member
I cant tell you how many times i've plead with my girl to turn VH1 off of my tv..... i even ask her, why watch the reality tv shows? what can you gain from watching that trash? Its not even reality! in WHAT reality do you, the bachelor/bachelorette get to choose between 10-20 suitors, and take weeks getting to your "final decision"? ludicrous, absolutely ludicrous.

I just wait for the Soup to come on friday nights, then i get to laugh my ass off at the stupid things the morons on "reality" TV did during the week. I can say this one thing though, there have been some episodes that make me happy to be me, made my life seem not so bad lol.

Daily Show and Colbert Report have more validity than any CNN, ABC, FOX, or wtf ever other network on tv, however, this is just my opinion.
 
TheBrutalTruth

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
PadawanBater said:
Dude, that is seriously a genius idea that I havn't considered.

Well done, I totally agree with this.
Click to expand...
I wish I could take credit for it, but alas I can not, not even I thought of it, until I heard about it, but now, I agree with it. The House of Representatives should be more representative. It is entirely irrational that in some states the Representatives "represent" more people than the Senators of that state (Wyoming 2 Senators, 1 Representative)

I think the website where they go into a discussion on the idea is thirty-thousand.org, or something like that.

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/
 
TheBrutalTruth

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Purplekrunchie said:
Agreed brutal , but tell me this, how to we talk some sense into the masses?
They go for the dressed up super canidates and ignore the ones who may actually have our best interests in mind. If this shit going on now dont open some eyes, im afraid nothing will. The one with the most TV ads wins fuck its just insane, so in a sense that is electing celebs.
Click to expand...
If we only have 30,000 people per Representative then a Representative will find running commercials inefficient in both time and money. They would have to start meeting with their constitutients again, face to face, and talking to the public instead of dictating to them.

Instead of not knowing our representatives as people, we would know them as people, they would be once again our neighbors, chosen because they share the beliefs of people in a neighborhood. It would deliver more representation to the lower and middle classes.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Purplekrunchie said:
Agreed brutal , but tell me this, how to we talk some sense into the masses?
They go for the dressed up super canidates and ignore the ones who may actually have our best interests in mind. If this shit going on now dont open some eyes, im afraid nothing will. The one with the most TV ads wins fuck its just insane, so in a sense that is electing celebs.
Click to expand...
The American political class is made up of elites that went to the "proper" schools, belong to the "right" families and backed by the state media, also known as the Main Stream Media. When a candidate of the people comes along, someone like Ron Paul or Sarah Palin, they are simply ignored, or attacked and belittled. The average American does what she/he is told to do by the media.

Vi
 
TheBrutalTruth

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
ViRedd said:
The American political class is made up of elites that went to the "proper" schools, belong to the "right" families and backed by the state media, also known as the Main Stream Media. When a candidate of the people comes along, someone like Ron Paul or Sarah Palin, they are simply ignored, or attacked and belittled. The average American does what she/he is told to do by the media.

Vi
Click to expand...
Maybe that's why I'm capable of independent thought. I never made it a habit to allow the boobtube to dictate my thoughts for me.

Media, hardly, they are not a medium of communication, they are a tool of the politicians and their backers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top