Adam Ruins Politics

[gusto]

Have you seen the gaywad show "Adam Ruins Everything?" He tried his best to ruin politics. (I wonder if he is jewish) If only he was a cigarette. Then I could call him the English slang term for one. A fag!

Recently he did a show on immigration. Which I couldn't watch very much of. It started out with a fantasy scenario of a couple latinos who were against illegal immigration. If any latino tells you that, you will know that you are being LIED to! I myself wouldn't be greatly bothered by White European illegal immigrants. As long as they acted American. Because we ARE the same species of human.

He also brought up some bullshit about building a border wall being a bad idea. But it would be a wonderful idea. Though I would add landmines to it. (Other things should be done too) He also said that it would cost something like 26 billion dollars to build. Hell, as it is, in legal trade, about 65 billion dollars more leaves the U.S. from the trade imbalance with them. Not only that, but every year the U.S. has to pay 420 billion dollars just on the interest of our national debt. I don't hear anybody making a big stink about affording that.

More recently, Adam the traitor did a show about the election. Being mostly more bullshit, I had to fast forward through much of it. But the gist of most of it was to vote for Hillary instead of Trump. What a surprise! Take my word for it. You need to vote for TRUMP!

 

[candycorn]

Watched many of his episodes and I’ll note that you offer nothing except anecdotes and personal feelings to argue against his fact-based presentation. It’s okay, neither do I. A lot of what he says is true. Like, for example, there is no stipulation in our constitution that the Senate or House operate on a majority rule system. Meaning tomorrow that Ryan and the Republicans there and McConnell and the Republicans there could change the rules to state that every new spending bill must pass by unanimous margins. If he wanted to make an episode highlighting this fact as a way to get people to support a new amendment or whatever…he could do it with factual backing. The thing is that neither major party would do it…. Could they? Sure. Would they? No.

 

[gusto]

Watched many of his episodes and I’ll note that you offer nothing except anecdotes and personal feelings to argue against his fact-based presentation. It’s okay, neither do I. A lot of what he says is true. Like, for example, there is no stipulation in our constitution that the Senate or House operate on a majority rule system. Meaning tomorrow that Ryan and the Republicans there and McConnell and the Republicans there could change the rules to state that every new spending bill must pass by unanimous margins. If he wanted to make an episode highlighting this fact as a way to get people to support a new amendment or whatever…he could do it with factual backing. The thing is that neither major party would do it…. Could they? Sure. Would they? No.

Tell me anything I said that isn't absolute fact.

 

[candycorn]

Watched many of his episodes and I’ll note that you offer nothing except anecdotes and personal feelings to argue against his fact-based presentation. It’s okay, neither do I. A lot of what he says is true. Like, for example, there is no stipulation in our constitution that the Senate or House operate on a majority rule system. Meaning tomorrow that Ryan and the Republicans there and McConnell and the Republicans there could change the rules to state that every new spending bill must pass by unanimous margins. If he wanted to make an episode highlighting this fact as a way to get people to support a new amendment or whatever…he could do it with factual backing. The thing is that neither major party would do it…. Could they? Sure. Would they? No.

Tell me anything I said that isn't absolute fact.

Indicating the wall would limit trade; for one.
I agree with you on the show; it’s designed to get eyeballs on it; nothing else. Much like 1,000 ways to die

 

[gusto]

Watched many of his episodes and I’ll note that you offer nothing except anecdotes and personal feelings to argue against his fact-based presentation. It’s okay, neither do I. A lot of what he says is true. Like, for example, there is no stipulation in our constitution that the Senate or House operate on a majority rule system. Meaning tomorrow that Ryan and the Republicans there and McConnell and the Republicans there could change the rules to state that every new spending bill must pass by unanimous margins. If he wanted to make an episode highlighting this fact as a way to get people to support a new amendment or whatever…he could do it with factual backing. The thing is that neither major party would do it…. Could they? Sure. Would they? No.

Tell me anything I said that isn't absolute fact.

Indicating the wall would limit trade; for one.
I agree with you on the show; it’s designed to get eyeballs on it; nothing else. Much like 1,000 ways to die

If you saw me say anywhere that a wall would limit trade, you were hallucinating. That aside, there should be just about no trade with anybody to begin with. If American's can't produce it, American's shouldn't have it. Period! The thing is, America CAN produce just about anything it needs. And if we tried real hard, we could produce everything we need. Such as things that aren't grown here like bananas and the trees for chocolate.

Also, I did happen to see one thing on Adam Ruins Everything that I didn't already know. Which is that in about half of the cases, everything that is generally accepted about "busting a virgin's cherry" is bullshit. As to the TV show 1000 ways to die, everything in it was bullshit.