x
Click to expand

cabbagemayhem

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 31
Consoles Owned: PC
Date Signed Up:2/19/2011
Last Login:7/31/2015
Location:Tennessee
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#4233
Comment Ranking:#1768
Highest Content Rank:#1878
Highest Comment Rank:#1634
Content Thumbs: 6248 total,  6752 ,  504
Comment Thumbs: 6083 total,  9009 ,  2926
Content Level Progress: 99% (99/100)
Level 160 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 161 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Comment Level Progress: 85% (85/100)
Level 253 Comments: Contaminated Win → Level 254 Comments: Contaminated Win
Subscribers:1
Content Views:192562
Times Content Favorited:434 times
Total Comments Made:5096
FJ Points:11740
Favorite Tags: chan appendix (2)

latest user's comments

#339 - Probably bad, but you're in good company 07/01/2015 on Everyone likes fitness, right? 0
#328 - Take levvy out of the equation and holy **** you're the…  [+] (4 new replies) 07/01/2015 on Everyone likes fitness, right? 0
#337 - cutenesseverypost (07/01/2015) [-]
Is that good or bad?
User avatar #344 - cabbagemayhem (07/01/2015) [-]
Actually, I know some people in rl who definitely deserve to get owned like that.
#345 - cutenesseverypost (07/01/2015) [-]
ye
User avatar #339 - cabbagemayhem (07/01/2015) [-]
Probably bad, but you're in good company
#2 - Picture 07/01/2015 on Drunk Woman +1
#176 - It's timing and ignorance. When this content was young, the sh… 07/01/2015 on Dog's Birthday Surprise 0
#72 - "I like giiiiiirls" 07/01/2015 on How to get girls to send... +3
#85 - This. And, did you start FJ? Were you the guy running it when … 06/30/2015 on Admin 0
#78 - Picture 06/30/2015 on Admin 0
#153 - I was already blue when the name-color feature was added to th… 06/30/2015 on Dog's Birthday Surprise 0
#138 - My name color hasn't changed a long time. It might have gotten…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/30/2015 on Dog's Birthday Surprise 0
User avatar #139 - moldybreadcrumb (06/30/2015) [-]
Naaah i coulda sworn it was a pale-yellow or pale-green or something, kinda like donnymuffin down at number 4!
but then again i don't have any proof of that so what do i have to back up that claim? oh well, i'll continue to live in my dream world!
User avatar #153 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
I was already blue when the name-color feature was added to the site. That yellow color was just added a few weeks ago.
#118 - Bulbasaur! It's Bulbasaur! Right?  [+] (1 new reply) 06/30/2015 on The future is now +1
#119 - summin (06/30/2015) [-]
I'm sorry, but its not...
#173 - You still talk (and write) like you lack education. I'll be wi…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/30/2015 on Its not about color 0
User avatar #174 - xxkosukexx (06/30/2015) [-]
I'm just a hood nigga who grew up around other hood niggas doing hood nigga shit. Lol there is a difference between street niggas and hood niggas.
#104 - >newfag walks in >copy pastes joke he doesn't unders…  [+] (8 new replies) 06/30/2015 on Dog's Birthday Surprise +9
#175 - lecorbi (07/01/2015) [-]
I dont understand at all why is traelos thumbed down. Comment #2 doesnt really make sense, and people agree with that because they thumbed you up, which makes our community judgement absolutely contradictory
User avatar #178 - traelos (07/01/2015) [-]
Don't worry buddy, it only gets worse from here.
User avatar #176 - cabbagemayhem (07/01/2015) [-]
It's timing and ignorance. When this content was young, the sheep liked the OP, so they automatically thumbed down the complainer. After I posted, many people who read it chose the other side and thumbed me up instead. But, not everyone sees my post, so the complainer still gets thumbed down. Most people are like sleeping giants - they already know which way to thumb, but someone still needs to write the post to rouse them.
User avatar #134 - moldybreadcrumb (06/30/2015) [-]
Ayyyy your name color changed!
I originally thought it was the color for new users (i don't know why, i knew you've been here a while)!
User avatar #138 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
My name color hasn't changed a long time. It might have gotten very slightly darker in the last week, but that's it.
User avatar #139 - moldybreadcrumb (06/30/2015) [-]
Naaah i coulda sworn it was a pale-yellow or pale-green or something, kinda like donnymuffin down at number 4!
but then again i don't have any proof of that so what do i have to back up that claim? oh well, i'll continue to live in my dream world!
User avatar #153 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
I was already blue when the name-color feature was added to the site. That yellow color was just added a few weeks ago.
#108 - thrifty (06/30/2015) [-]
I'm just fucking bore of all the 'misused meme' shit. If it's relevant I don't really care.

And in this case the majority thought it was fine, chiming in late like the meme police is fucking gash.

I stand by my comment.
#288 - What? The South didn't reject the constitution. They definitel… 06/30/2015 on USA right now 0
#282 - After. And no, states seceding does not justify undermining th…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/30/2015 on USA right now 0
User avatar #285 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
The South sought to reject the constitution and reject change to the nation that the electorate demanded. They rebelled because they lost the elect, where a majority of people stated they disagreed with their way of thinking. Instead of debating it in congress they took up arms. There is no morality in that.
User avatar #288 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
What? The South didn't reject the constitution. They definitely had the constitutional right to secede, and there was no real union among states at that point. Had Lincoln made it known that he would even be willing to work with the South to provide a medium where they could redress their grievances, the war could have been avoided. But, he played aggressive politics and the way he handled Fort Sumter poorly, definitely angered them and they decided to not lay down and take it. Remember, Lincoln is the one who took up arms, not the South. The South intended to secede peacefully.

tl;dr - The North rejected the constitution, refused to compromise in congress, and then they were the ones who took up arms against the South when the South decided to just govern themselves.
#280 - At the same time, a new precedent was set to disregard the ten…  [+] (4 new replies) 06/30/2015 on USA right now 0
User avatar #281 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
Was this before or after the southern states declared independence because they lost the election? You can doll it up all you want, but you sought to subvert the laws and rights of the United States. If you want to talk ends justifying the means, again: 600,000 Americans dead. For an unjust cause.
User avatar #282 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
After. And no, states seceding does not justify undermining the constitutional values that made us great, especially if your cause is to reunite the union that was based on those values. The south only sought to reject the laws of others and rule themselves. How is that unjust at all?
User avatar #285 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
The South sought to reject the constitution and reject change to the nation that the electorate demanded. They rebelled because they lost the elect, where a majority of people stated they disagreed with their way of thinking. Instead of debating it in congress they took up arms. There is no morality in that.
User avatar #288 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
What? The South didn't reject the constitution. They definitely had the constitutional right to secede, and there was no real union among states at that point. Had Lincoln made it known that he would even be willing to work with the South to provide a medium where they could redress their grievances, the war could have been avoided. But, he played aggressive politics and the way he handled Fort Sumter poorly, definitely angered them and they decided to not lay down and take it. Remember, Lincoln is the one who took up arms, not the South. The South intended to secede peacefully.

tl;dr - The North rejected the constitution, refused to compromise in congress, and then they were the ones who took up arms against the South when the South decided to just govern themselves.
#278 - Less than 1% of people actually owned slaves. The civil war wa…  [+] (6 new replies) 06/29/2015 on USA right now 0
User avatar #279 - dwarfman (06/29/2015) [-]
"State's Rights" to subvert the rights of others. There's a reason I sleep well at night knowing my Bohemian ancestors came to this country and shot southerners to earn their citizenship. The ruling class of the south created a cult of personality around their culture, which was unsustainable due to changing economic conditions. Instead of adapting they sought a scapegoat, and cost the United States 600,000 noble souls. Good to know those dead upon the hallow fields of Georgia did so in vain.
User avatar #280 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
At the same time, a new precedent was set to disregard the tenth amendment of the constitution. It is responsible for most of the problems we have with our government today. It has cost more people more freedom than you know, and will cost much more before its over. But, what do you care about Americans and our constitution?
User avatar #281 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
Was this before or after the southern states declared independence because they lost the election? You can doll it up all you want, but you sought to subvert the laws and rights of the United States. If you want to talk ends justifying the means, again: 600,000 Americans dead. For an unjust cause.
User avatar #282 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
After. And no, states seceding does not justify undermining the constitutional values that made us great, especially if your cause is to reunite the union that was based on those values. The south only sought to reject the laws of others and rule themselves. How is that unjust at all?
User avatar #285 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
The South sought to reject the constitution and reject change to the nation that the electorate demanded. They rebelled because they lost the elect, where a majority of people stated they disagreed with their way of thinking. Instead of debating it in congress they took up arms. There is no morality in that.
User avatar #288 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
What? The South didn't reject the constitution. They definitely had the constitutional right to secede, and there was no real union among states at that point. Had Lincoln made it known that he would even be willing to work with the South to provide a medium where they could redress their grievances, the war could have been avoided. But, he played aggressive politics and the way he handled Fort Sumter poorly, definitely angered them and they decided to not lay down and take it. Remember, Lincoln is the one who took up arms, not the South. The South intended to secede peacefully.

tl;dr - The North rejected the constitution, refused to compromise in congress, and then they were the ones who took up arms against the South when the South decided to just govern themselves.
#276 - Yes, because you are the enemy of freedom, but you can never s…  [+] (8 new replies) 06/29/2015 on USA right now 0
User avatar #277 - dwarfman (06/29/2015) [-]
Says the slavers whom are locked in their station by those sitting in their manors.
User avatar #278 - cabbagemayhem (06/29/2015) [-]
Less than 1% of people actually owned slaves. The civil war was fought over more important issues. Slavery was just the moral cause the north rallied behind.
User avatar #279 - dwarfman (06/29/2015) [-]
"State's Rights" to subvert the rights of others. There's a reason I sleep well at night knowing my Bohemian ancestors came to this country and shot southerners to earn their citizenship. The ruling class of the south created a cult of personality around their culture, which was unsustainable due to changing economic conditions. Instead of adapting they sought a scapegoat, and cost the United States 600,000 noble souls. Good to know those dead upon the hallow fields of Georgia did so in vain.
User avatar #280 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
At the same time, a new precedent was set to disregard the tenth amendment of the constitution. It is responsible for most of the problems we have with our government today. It has cost more people more freedom than you know, and will cost much more before its over. But, what do you care about Americans and our constitution?
User avatar #281 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
Was this before or after the southern states declared independence because they lost the election? You can doll it up all you want, but you sought to subvert the laws and rights of the United States. If you want to talk ends justifying the means, again: 600,000 Americans dead. For an unjust cause.
User avatar #282 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
After. And no, states seceding does not justify undermining the constitutional values that made us great, especially if your cause is to reunite the union that was based on those values. The south only sought to reject the laws of others and rule themselves. How is that unjust at all?
User avatar #285 - dwarfman (06/30/2015) [-]
The South sought to reject the constitution and reject change to the nation that the electorate demanded. They rebelled because they lost the elect, where a majority of people stated they disagreed with their way of thinking. Instead of debating it in congress they took up arms. There is no morality in that.
User avatar #288 - cabbagemayhem (06/30/2015) [-]
What? The South didn't reject the constitution. They definitely had the constitutional right to secede, and there was no real union among states at that point. Had Lincoln made it known that he would even be willing to work with the South to provide a medium where they could redress their grievances, the war could have been avoided. But, he played aggressive politics and the way he handled Fort Sumter poorly, definitely angered them and they decided to not lay down and take it. Remember, Lincoln is the one who took up arms, not the South. The South intended to secede peacefully.

tl;dr - The North rejected the constitution, refused to compromise in congress, and then they were the ones who took up arms against the South when the South decided to just govern themselves.
#84 - There are always going to be whores, but at least don't encour… 06/29/2015 on Lemon stealing whores 0
#72 - People looking for real relationships are continually disturbe…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/29/2015 on Lemon stealing whores +1
User avatar #73 - TheseChocodiles (06/29/2015) [-]
If people were more open about what they want, be it a sexual relationship or whatever, then that wouldn't be a problem. You are always going to get people who just want to have sex, I think it's human nature. I'm sorry but I don't think hiding sex is ever the answer, call me a liberal twat but it's just how I see it.
User avatar #84 - cabbagemayhem (06/29/2015) [-]
There are always going to be whores, but at least don't encourage those who aren't meant to be to follow their genitals.
#274 - And, in a month, it'll seem like last year! 06/29/2015 on USA right now 0
#272 - Oh that was just a few days ago, and it was really high-profil…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/29/2015 on USA right now 0
User avatar #273 - moldybreadcrumb (06/29/2015) [-]
Holy dickballs it was recent, i thought that was like two weeks ago
User avatar #274 - cabbagemayhem (06/29/2015) [-]
And, in a month, it'll seem like last year!
#1107 - Comment deleted 06/29/2015 on This goes up your butt 0
#63 - The next generation usually does have some new ideas that wo… 06/29/2015 on 15 year olds 0
#98 - Uh yeah, where do you think it came from? 06/29/2015 on Joshlol Cat 0
#102 - Implying it would matter if they aren't into you 06/29/2015 on The Gay Agenda 0

items

Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1150
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #32 - iatedub (07/18/2015) [-]
Kill yourself you ****** loving poor piece of **** , literally no one loves you.
 Friends (0)