Meshugger

Criticism is boring, booo! Entertain us with your own scenario based on your own assumptions instead.

...The what now? I thought that you used a sentiment typical to the magyar culture and spirit, thus highlighting the social bond of what a citizenship constitutes in Hungary: being hungarian.

"Who wouldn't hollow out their humanity to become a transcendent god-monster" is probably an even better question, Gromnir's tongue-in-cheek interpretation aside. That got me thinking a bit. Lets say for arguments sake that it is achieved. First, we would have to stop reproducing since no one can die, but that's not possible because people like sex and not everyone fancies abortions. It will be diminished to a degree, sure, but not entirely. Then since there is no death or health problems really, and the healthcare industry will fall apart. After that people will not bother to work since they cannot starve to death either so the economy will fall apart too. Classical notions of love will also evaporate because no need for a man to protect his woman with his life and the woman will not have babies. Culture will stagnate as there will be no restlesness to achieve something before you die. Wars and violence in a classical sense will disappear as no one can get hurt or die. People will entertain themselves with their god-powers until there's nothing left to do but explore space and we become intergalactical locusts that do nothing but expand until the end of time, eradicating everything in its path. When everything is discovered and known we become bored again and realize that perhaps we need to come together and create the best entertainment ever known. So all man, all knowledge and all technology come together, conduct what needs to be done and says: "Let there be light!" "ok, ok, i got inspired by Asimov, sue me"

Stupid peasants, never doing what i think is good for them.

Most people... tend to have a decent grasp on their mother tongue, you do realize that, right? Not necessarily, I know many people who cant write English properly? The key to understand how bad things truly are in South Africa. As for citizenship, there has to be a stake in it. It's defines itself differently in different countries, but without anything in stake, there is no point of safeguarding it or defending it. If there is no point in defending it, then what is the point of enforcing it in the first place other than power of ruling over you? If the latter, then it will collapse on itself sooner or later. That's why Alumni is right by trying to invoke the common expression of his fellow citizens.

The refugees are a great currency for the Turks to bargain with, for the "left" to feel good about having and for the "right" to be using.

Immortality would remove one of the most necessary components of what makes us human so the better question would be "Why wouldn't you like to be human?".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue I sorry he's wearing the Gadsen flag. Easily one of the coolest symbols in US history. Nonono, all of you are quite mistaken, the guy is obviously a huge Metallica fan. I have the irrefutable proof just here:

While i haven't cared at all about basketball since the US "Dream Team" in Barcelona in '92, i have to admit that the Brazil - Argentina game was highly entertaining.

So are you saying its acceptable and normal for any politician to say what they want, promise what they want and publically attack anyone they want but the concept of political decorum is not a consideration? So in your analysis there is no such thing as reasonable or accurate political commentary? We must just accept endless hyperbole from the Trump campaign It's completely up to the media. For example, the guy had an 1 hour conference in Detroit highlighting his economic policies down to tax deduction for having your kids in kindergarden the other day but that went on pretty much unreported. If the media and the twitter-whores would've ignored what he says on social media or in real life and sticked to the issues and policies we might've had a completely different election. Your, or any other expert's, whimsical musings about what is acceptable or decorum has no influence what so ever. Your argument is inconsistent and doesn't reflect the reality of how Trump expects the media to respond His economic policies were discussed by many commentators, the perceived outcome of what he says he can achieve through some of his ideas like the tax breaks he plans to implement are subjective Many economists have many questions about the sustainability of Trumps economic views, look at Moodys views http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/07/29/moodys-where-trumps-economic-policies-might-spark-recession-clintons-could-boost-gdp-and-lower-unemployment/#dc57cf1234808 https://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/2016-06-17-Trumps-Economic-Policies.pdf But if Trump wants the media to focus just on his economic views which should be relevant than he should stop saying things that cause the media to focus on his divisive comments That gets zero coverage compared to his bantz. The media reports and it's completely in their hands on how much and in what way they report and Trump is using that against them as people love bantz, bantz give ratings and ratings give money. So we're back to where we started, he is admittingly playing them like a fiddle and the incompetent rage of 'experts' only fuel the exposure for more.

So are you saying its acceptable and normal for any politician to say what they want, promise what they want and publically attack anyone they want but the concept of political decorum is not a consideration? So in your analysis there is no such thing as reasonable or accurate political commentary? We must just accept endless hyperbole from the Trump campaign It's completely up to the media. For example, the guy had an 1 hour conference in Detroit highlighting his economic policies down to tax deduction for having your kids in kindergarden the other day but that went on pretty much unreported. If the media and the twitter-whores would've ignored what he says on social media or in real life and sticked to the issues and policies we might've had a completely different election. Your, or any other expert's, whimsical musings about what is acceptable or decorum has no influence what so ever.

As he's been saying in his book from the 80's, the point is to give hyperbole where the media cannot help themselves and giving him free coverage and manipulating the public perception. Right now he is instilling the words 'Obama', 'Hillary' and 'ISIS' into the public conciousness and here we are, talking about it. Thank you Bruce for following suit and spreading it accordingly.

Why is Soros dictating to the state department on what to do with Albania of all places? https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/28972 Oh, right. He's a big Clinton Foundation donor just cashing in, just business as usual.

https://twitter.com/MisterMetokur/status/763215339584794624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Bonus! https://twitter.com/MisterMetokur/status/763615337598169088?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw I love this election.

Nvm, the word is out that there's a Charizard Pokemon at the top of the tower. Just a really, really determined guy, that's all. Nothing to see here. Move along, folks. This looks like him, autist alert.

Some guy is climbing Trump Tower at the moment. Livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QobWf20dXs Someone derranged? Someone out for publicity for publicity's sake? Or even a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckservative

Posting here as well:

Wikileaks claims that Clinton's aide, Huma had access and used Clinton's private email account: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/763112662142164992

A blast from the past, Clinton and assassinations: https://twitter.com/JaredWyand/status/763249251182780416

Nations are constructs, not natural things. Ethnicity is mainly a function of culture. New ethnic groups can separate from others, or people can pass from one to another. Religion is one aspect that may be a deciding factor in this process. It is a question of self-identification, not for others to tell them.So while there may have been a time when there was no Bosnian people, there is now. The same with Serbs. Or Norwegians, or whatever. Neither is it necessary that all members of an ethnic group live in the same state. Or a state of their own. People make culture not the other way around. Also, i wouldn't compare Bosnia to similar multi-ethnic countries like Switzerland, which was created under significantly different circumstances. But anyways, the thread has gone exactly as expected. First you have the usual "who was there first/who has most historical claim to the land" and secondly, you have people from other countries trying to lecture the people of Balkan on how horrible their sense of ethnic identity is/was and how it is good to bomb them into submission in their vein sense of LARPing as Tito. As someone who has traveled to the Balkans and talked to the locals, i was surprised on how different they were from each other in terms of customs, looks and behaviour, even if they all have a slavic undertones. No wonder it required oppressive governments like the Austro-Hungarian/Ottoman/Yugoslav to make them to get along with each other. And then you have people like yourself feeding and encouraging the false narrative that war crimes weren't committed by Serbia and the NATO bombing was " completely frivolous and unfair " So I guess no one is really being helpful Did i struck a nerve? Good. The first step is to realize that in conflicts like the ones in the Balkans that there wasn't any 'good' sides as different groups were fighting for their own interests. For every siege of Dubrovnik there was a bombing of Mostar, for every Krajina there was a Kosovo, so on and so forth.

Nations are constructs, not natural things. Ethnicity is mainly a function of culture. New ethnic groups can separate from others, or people can pass from one to another. Religion is one aspect that may be a deciding factor in this process. It is a question of self-identification, not for others to tell them.So while there may have been a time when there was no Bosnian people, there is now. The same with Serbs. Or Norwegians, or whatever. Neither is it necessary that all members of an ethnic group live in the same state. Or a state of their own. People make culture not the other way around. Also, i wouldn't compare Bosnia to similar multi-ethnic countries like Switzerland, which was created under significantly different circumstances. But anyways, the thread has gone exactly as expected. First you have the usual "who was there first/who has most historical claim to the land" and secondly, you have people from other countries trying to lecture the people of Balkan on how horrible their sense of ethnic identity is/was and how it is good to bomb them into submission in their vein sense of LARPing as Tito. As someone who has traveled to the Balkans and talked to the locals, i was surprised on how different they were from each other in terms of customs, looks and behaviour, even if they all have a slavic undertones. No wonder it required oppressive governments like the Austro-Hungarian/Ottoman/Yugoslav to make them to get along with each other.

Elegant. The media took the bait and will now talk about him for another week with frothing expert opinions.

Of course not, but we have to come to terms that they might be patient zero the unknown neurophysological decease known as Clintonian Autonecrosis Syndrome. Symptoms include: - Sudden fall on stairs or bath tubs - Dropping heavy objects on own head or throat - Susceptible to being shot by strangers - Suicidial tendencies ending with multiple gunshot wounds in the neck by multiple weapons - Auto-destruction of financial records and property I really hope the medical science make a break on these cases, it would help a lot of people.

Ah, The Clintonian Autonecrosis Syndrome strikes again.