|Reviews for Guidelines of Republicanism|
| AntiPleasure chapter 2 . 3/16/2005
LMAO you've got a lot of people heated in your writings and I dig it. People need to stop being so passionate, this leads to way TOO MUCH conflict. Meh.
I particularly liked the first bit and laughed most about dubbya, gay, K, and blacks. It's twisted, I quite liked it. You're quickly becoming a favorite of mine deary.
| chocoholic chapter 2 . 12/27/2004
Yes, it's completely biased, kinda childish, and the ones written by republicans about liberals really piss me off. But I don't care, I laughed my arse off! For shame!
Especially love: "Rich people’s posterity – worth more than the poor, and too valuable to go to war." and "George Bush – A great guy with a great cabinet! Is there any more to say? Oh yeah,
nuc-u-lar" he he he
| Kon Savage chapter 2 . 12/24/2004
Why is this under humor if its not funny...well except for this line "I do recognize that some of these views are still biased, but I believe they are all together more realistic." Don't become a comedian.
| fugiguru chapter 2 . 12/23/2004
"Capitalism – one man obtains luxury at the expense of another man’s suffering and inferiority (economically). This is a good thing, for Americans are civilized and developed."
what do you suggest instead?
"I do recognize that some of these views are still biased, but I believe they are all together more realistic."
| Evil Neptune chapter 2 . 12/23/2004
So true... unfortunately. I think very low of my chances of surviving the next four years with W. as president.
| fanturmandos chapter 1 . 12/15/2004
"Republican conception is incredibly biased"
(sarcastically) Yeah, those Republicans are so biased.
| Calvin Fitzgerald chapter 1 . 12/12/2004
The point of satire is to be subtle, not to beat someone over the head with it. Otherwise it loses all meaning and humor.
This is a prime example of that.
| holocaustpulp chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
To all viewers: "I read the original, could this possibly be worse! Well sequels usually do suck," along with "This remains as inanely overdone as the first time you posted it..." are misconceptions; the only thing I changed from the original "guidelines of republicanism" is the language. Thus, this is not a sequel and elementarily has had nothing done to alter it.- Holocaustpulp
| Carrollesque chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
An interesting little essay. Clear and to the point. A good summary of the republican platitudes. I think you could write a good essay using any of the things you mentioned. The only major flaw of this is that it lacks a clear thesis, and therefore, comes out as more of a scattergun affect. Try a nice, well organized essay, it'll peirce like the sharpest of blades.
| Cthulhu chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
Wow Stein, when are you gonna stop ripping off Lord of the Rings in your lame-arse reveiws? I wasn't funny the first time, or the second or the third or the...
"And an essay saying: "I'M NOT A LIBERAL! GA A A AH! STUPID REPUBLICANZES!" is an example of utter genius"
Dude, I explained that essay in its own reveiw section.
I find it hilarious that you call my works boring and imply that they are not the work of intelligence. I am yet to see originality spew from your mouth, whilst I do seem to get quite a few reveiws...
| J. Stein chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
Cthulhu, you're right. Boring talks about the non-existence of the deity and the dearth of evidence for his actuality is far more entertaining. And an essay saying: "I'M NOT A LIBERAL! GA A A AH! STUPID REPUBLICANZES!" is an example of utter genius.
| On Mercury chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
The note at the end made me laugh. Wasn't as funny as it could have been, but still pretty right on most stuff...like the michael moore thing!
| No Trust chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
I'm with Flames. This remains as inanely overdone as the first time you posted it, and it mostly plays on stereotypes that are too absurd to be funny.
| Pavane chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
the Catholic thing miffed me a bit...but i loved the other stuff.
| Cthulhu chapter 1 . 12/11/2004
Not very well done, but I dont think that Steiny can criticise it much seeing as his "Guidelines of Liberalism" was no less crap.