Highest Rated Comments


skaliton120 karma

so for #2 allow me to explain:

It is de-facto impossible unless you have trained FOR A LONG TIME. it is equivalent to walking on a tight rope but even worse.

I wish I could find the video that explains it but essentially don't think of it as a ladder, think of it as a single line (dead center where your balance actually works) you MUST keep even weight on each side at all times (by the third rung it is so unstable that a few lbs/kg/stone off center will make you fall)

So what happens? When you move opposite limbs (arm/leg) together you stay 'mostly' center which is good enough. . . until you reach for the bell or whatever is at the end. you MUST adjust the weight in such a way that you don't fall at the last second.

If it isn't obvious I am a giant nerd.

skaliton56 karma

Why are you so awful?

I mean collectively, you are basically the most corrupt group of people in America and value your own interests over the public at virtually every instance. The only reason you are reelected is because most of the public is oblivious and name recognition/party affiliation is more important than anything else combined with voting districts literally designed to keep you in power (I can cite virtually any of them for this)

I'm entirely aware that voting districts are a legislative issue and the courts won't do anything unless they are drawn based on race but why can't you be decent and . . . well represent the public instead of your own bank account?

skaliton54 karma

guh

skaliton32 karma

Cliff- I want to make an opposing view to "Every Member of Congress makes an effort to meet the voters, either through town hall meetings, speeches that he or she gives in the District, radio and television interviews."

right now especially how many hide from their constituents? https://mic.com/articles/175321/republicans-avoiding-town-halls-democrats#.Zn8P0yQNP

skaliton22 karma

I've never understood this. The average person is not knowledgeable enough about most things to have an opinion as to the truth of it.

I could post a random science article concerning thyroid cancer (if that is even a thing) and people will rate the accuracy of something they know nothing about. They can have an 'opinion' on the matter but that doesn't make it a valid one.

Now if you had a way to only allow say Dr.'s and medical scientists to vote then it is valid.

I could have picked virtually any topic that requires a level of expertise and made the same argument. Have you considered a way to relieve this problem?