Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

It has been raining none stop since yesterday. One of my relatives had a tree fall and punch a hole into their bedroom.

I'm a little confuses, the pictures of s-video cables I'm finding look nothing like A/V Cables.

This is what I'm using

At 9/18/10 11:12 PM, KeroKeroMario wrote: Are you using A/V cables or an S-Video input? Using an S-Video input produces a much higher quality video signal. If you are, check the software and see what settings it records on.

You'll have to excuse me if I'm dumb or something, I don't know much about Dazzle hardware/software.

That may be the problem.

not really, never saw any importance over it.

I'm using dazzle to capture footage on my xbox 360 and ps2 and using pinnacle studio 14 HD to put on my laptop but I don't know how to make it high quality, can anyone help.

I've tried looking on youtube but most seem to be of earlier versions and the few I have found, I've still been unable to get good quality

I'm using dazzle to capture footage on my xbox 360 and ps2 and using pinnacle studio 14 HD to put on my laptop but I don't know how to make it high quality, can anyone help.

At 9/15/10 08:54 PM, RydiaLockheart wrote: Turns out she tried to kill herself yesterday. And here I thought it was just a normal missed call.

My best wishes to you and your friend.

Seemed like Dante to me based on his attitude, but the trailer doesn't reveal much so its kind of stupid to start making assumptions.

At 9/15/10 05:22 PM, morefngdbs wrote: But we are the only mammal to continue to drink milk after we've outgrown our baby stage... sorry most of us not All of us ~;)

Oh I wouldn't say that, you would be surprised what you see on a farm.

At 9/14/10 01:44 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 9/14/10 01:38 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: My beef is why are you heavily defending then when you've said it's not a big deal and it's counter-intuitive?

My point here is that it's a stupid policy that's not needed.

it's very low-cost and it doesn't hurt anyone. why NOT have it?

Lets see, discriminating against homosexuals, giving them dishonorable discharges which will effect there future attempts at employment, yep doest hurt anyone at all.

At 9/14/10 01:27 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 9/14/10 01:18 AM, LordJaric wrote:

Doesn't mean others wont find it uncomfortable.

i can't see why any RATIONAL person would have a problem with peaceful religious expression. (keyword: peaceful)

Did it occur to you that not all people are rational, you have clearly mentioned homophobia.

Doesn't mean others wont find it uncomfortable.

then "others" are anti-semites.

and that's different from homophobes

That was the point.

wait, I'm confused, are you calling YOURSELF a racist?

*facepalm* no I'm implying that there are racist in the military

Because even if you don't tell anyone and it is found out you are gay you can still get kicked out.

i believe i responded to that in a previous post.

Why don't you clarify a little more

And what makes you think they will be looking at you ass. just because they are gay, what being gay adomadicly means they are pervertes? you do realize that those in the military are highly disciplined right. and even if they follow DADT whats stoping them from looking at your ass.

once again... IF THEY'RE HIGHLY DISCIPLINED THEN WHAT'S THE BIG FUCKING DEAL?

then why do we need the DADT

At 9/14/10 01:02 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 9/14/10 12:41 AM, LordJaric wrote:

At 9/14/10 12:28 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

a. a silent prayer to vishnu?

Those who aren't Hindu might find it uncomfortable

i'm not hindu, and i won't find it uncomfortable.

Doesn't mean others wont find it uncomfortable.

b. celebrating channukah (or however it's spelled)

Those who aren't Hebrew might find it uncomfortable

i'm not jewish, and hell, i just might celebrate with him.

Doesn't mean others wont find it uncomfortable.

c. having dark skin (ZOMG!!!!)

Those who don't have dark skin may find them uncomfortable

and you don't see how that statement might be racist in any way?

That was the point.

or d. a flaming homosexual

Not all homosexuals are "flaming". why don't you take the time to look at the real world instead of what the media feeds you

i was hoping for just that response. since we all know that flaming homosexuals are a small minority in the gay population, why is it a big deal to ask them to keep their sexuality to themselves?

Because even if you don't tell anyone and it is found out you are gay you can still get kicked out.

who puts his soldiers in uncomfortable situations (especially since bathrooms are gender-separate),

it would only be uncomfortable if they say "want to have sex" which I highly doubt any would say

actually, since a world without DADT would mean that every soldier knows every other soldier's orientation, wouldn't you be a bit uncomfortable if the gay guy saw you naked?

And what makes you think they will be looking at you ass. just because they are gay, what being gay adomadicly means they are pervertes? you do realize that those in the military are highly disciplined right. and even if they follow DADT whats stoping them from looking at your ass.

and leaves the door open to being the laughingstock of the base because he's, well, gay.

and you said this wasn't about discrimination.

i meant that open gays would be more subject to homophobia than DADT gays.

And all the things I pointed out earlier fall under the same catagory

At 9/14/10 12:28 AM, RightWingGamer wrote: that's a pretty stupid comparison.

the law was meant to stop (potentially) harmful behavioral differences. in other words, which of these actions sounds most harmful to the uniform:

a. a silent prayer to vishnu?

Those who aren't Hindu might find it uncomfortable

b. celebrating channukah (or however it's spelled)

Those who aren't Hebrew might find it uncomfortable

c. having dark skin (ZOMG!!!!)

Those who don't have dark skin may find them uncomfortable

or d. a flaming homosexual

Not all homosexuals are "flaming". why don't you take the time to look at the real world instead of what the media feeds you

who puts his soldiers in uncomfortable situations (especially since bathrooms are gender-separate),

it would only be uncomfortable if they say "want to have sex" which I highly doubt any would say

and leaves the door open to being the laughingstock of the base because he's, well, gay.

and you said this wasn't about discrimination.

At 9/14/10 12:07 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 9/13/10 11:58 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: If it was any other discriminatory act that prevented a group of people from serving in the military, would you be fine with that?

IT DOESN'T DISCRIMINATE!!!

IT DOESN'T PREVENT HOMOSEXUALS FROM SERVING!!!

ALL IT DOES IS SAY "keep it to yourself". You seem to have a problem with that most basic of facts.

Even if they don't tell anyone they can still get kicked out if it is found out they are gay, so yeah it discriminates, hell the "keep it to yourself" is still discrimination.

I was 12 and was in an english class and through out the day we just watched the news, that's all I remember.

At 8/29/10 04:02 AM, TB1ZZL3 wrote:

At 8/29/10 02:27 AM, HibiscusKazeneko wrote: The Obama administration and Monsanto are actively working to put poisons in our food supply.

I took your post seriously until I read this.

Same here.

So much for having to respect the families

At 8/25/10 09:48 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: well why would they build one if its not popular and there is another mosque already built 7 blocks away from it?

it's more then a mosque, it is also a community center.

You know, I've been hearing that the building there is already a mosque, all they want to do is tear it down so they can add a community center with a mosque.

At 8/22/10 09:01 AM, Proteas wrote:

Well, look on the bright side; you're not allergic to codeine. I am. All I could take when I had mine out was Tylenol.... but that was after two or three days of vertigo the likes of which you wouldn't believe.

the pain hasn't been that bad actually, I've only took one mild painkiller so far, ibuprofen, right now it only feels like the bottom two are soar.

At 8/21/10 09:35 PM, SevenSeize wrote: owwww I had just one pulled a few months ago and that was enough for me. Feel better :-(

yeah I'm good, still soar, and for someone like me to have to be on a very strict diet sucks, but other then that I'm good. Apparently using tea bags can help stop the bleeding.

The problem with me when it comes to reading stories is that I can't usually figure out how I want to start them, all my brain storming comes up with ideas always go from middle to end. Got a lot of story ideas just no idea how to start them.

At 8/21/10 02:05 AM, poxpower wrote: Here's a list of buildings that shouldn't be built there based on the same "logic"

- A flight school
- A plane/helicopter rental company
- A travel agency
- A gun store
- A video game store that carries flight simulators

Feel free to add to this list!

movie stores, for they may have movies, they many sell stand up comedys that bring up 9/11.

At 8/21/10 12:41 AM, TheThing wrote: protesting the homosexual scourge that the military is protecting.

The military, protecting homosexuality, ha.

Had my wisdom teeth pulled today (all 4), still bleeding, god this sucks, especially with a overreactive saliva

The first amendment doesn't truly grant freedom of speech, try saying fire in a movie threat and see what happens, protesting at a funeral is harassment.

At 8/16/10 10:24 PM, bobsaget4life wrote: Yes an existing mosque already exists. Why the need for the new one. Why the need for the insensitivity.

As someone already said it is a community center, and like I've said before in this thread just because one is already there doesn't mean there can't be another one, I group up near a small town with 3 churches two are right next to another the other is down the street. If anyone is be insensitive it is those who hold all Muslims accountable for 9/11

I heard that there was talk about it opening on 9/11. I'm pretty sure I even saw it in this thread, maybe in another one closely related.

No it is not being opened on 9/11

They did it in the NAME of their God.

The same god that Christians and Jews worship, I guess we can't have Churches or Synagogues there either.

Although I don't feel like stating what the 3 or 4 people have been arguing this whole time. I just wanted to put in my two cents. I'm still confused as to what of my opinion had been "debunked" as I was told earlier.. but w.e.

Because everything you have been saying has be debated to death already, trying reading through the thread before posting.

At 8/14/10 09:56 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

either way, obama CLEARLY stated that he wouldn't use nukes to retaliate against a non-nuclear WMD, he never mentioned Russia at all, nor did he mention guidelines.

And why would he respond to a non-nuclear attack with nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons haven't been used since world war 2, you can't use them on terrorist, North Korea is just acting the way it has always acted ask any South Korean hell ask TheMason and they will say that they are always like that, Iran isn't going to do anything with nukes knowing for well that Israel or the US can wipe them out same can be said for NK.

2. you act like he CAUSED katrina. granted, his job during the relief was lazy at best, but unlike the bailouts, he didn't cause it.

Obama didn't cause the oil spill either.

At 8/14/10 02:43 PM, Haszor wrote: The fact that they have the guts to build it right next to Ground Zero and open it to the public on 9/11 just seems to attempt to enrage the public.

9/11 this year happens to be a holy day for Islam.