Yeah yeah, I know, correlation does not imply causation. But at the end of the day, all of this violent rhetoric would certainly not want us to be cheerful to each other. What violent rhetoric? All of it, but for the purposes of this discussion and my blog (Because yes, you can go off-topic in off-topic), we'll be talking about the current anger exhibited by the Tea Party crowd in North America (Considering the fact that Canadians participate within these also, and Mexicans are indeed being targeted by *some* of the tea party crowds, it is important to get the whole continent involved in this). All of this angry rhetoric will surely evolve into violent mania, all of which could be prevented through cheerful and calm discourse, even with each other. Don't laugh at me, we can get along, I'm sure of it! If not with our opposites, at least with ourselves, yes even calm rational equal discourse with each other will produce a much healthier output for the rest of us. 
 
Why do I pick on the Tea Party crowd? Because it's not one group, but two. One of self-proclaimed libertarians (An affiliation that does not exist, you have to be a "Something-Libertarian") and the other is the obvious troll-worthy group. Am I being a jerk by saying I might troll them? Sorry, I'll stop that, starting now. Anyways, the anger is absolutely intense. Starting with the "libertarian" crowd, I've been shouted down in conversations with them multiple times. I'm not talking about the stuff with Suicrat, that's a different emotional status. I'm talking about stuff outside of the internet. But I've been shouted down by people. who share my beliefs on social issues because I said the government should take a more progressive stance on these issues. How dare I right? Apparently they take that as "The government should control free speech", and then proceed to call me a statist. I then argue that if the group in power that holds representation held explicit positions on issues, then people would be more likely to not be aching great cocks about these issues. They then call me a genius in a passive aggressive way, and then yell at me. Every, single, time. Forget how statist isn't even a word (Statism is though), but I've been yelled at very loudly by people who more or less hold the same positions that I do. Why do we not love each other? We would get along so well, and you wouldn't have to hate me for a reason that is incredibly stupid. How strange indeed, discourse was cut off because of one thing, one very stupid thing. This has happened multiple times. Sometimes I am shocked that it had not ended in violence (Thank god those libertarians are total pussies, sorry, I'll stop again). 
 
Now with that in mind, picture the tea parties. The angry tea parties. I mean the ones that will have you shit your pants in fear for the future. You know which ones, the crowds in which you can pick out the violent maniacs and the really stupid people, and the people who wish they were at another one with the libertarians right before they realized that they are just as stupidly pissed off. Let's simply say that violent rhetoric begets violence. I cannot believe that there haven't been more violent attacks recently. The amount of vilification from these parties is incredibly frightening. Let's go back to the murder of the census worker in Kentucky, let's never go back again. There's no doubt that the murderers were insane anarchists or other tea party people (Or militia men). Do I need to go on? The violent rhetoric surely without a doubt will spawn more terrorist violence across the continent.
 
All I'm saying is that we should start being nice to each other despite how angry we are. By the end of the day, we both leave learning something, instead of learning you hate another person. Just a suggestion, I'd rather end my debate with a foe with a shake of hands and a hug, rather than a fist in the face. 
 
ARTICLE OF THE DAY  
_____________________________________________________________ 
 
Why hugs? Because hugs are awesome. Nothing speaks to comfort more than a hug... maybe a La-Z-Boy chair or sofa... but nothing else. Handshakes can still be aggressive, in a bad way. The understanding between people is merely businesslike, emotionally it is empty. That's why one should end a debate with a hug. Will people ever do that? Most likely not, but it is a thought. 
 
Oh yeah, Assassins Creed II is awesome. Cheers folks, until next time. This has been Snipzor wishing you a happy weekend. If you are reading this monday, you are too late. Sorry.