10,771 Forum Posts by "Tancrisism"
At 6/2/09 12:09 AM, fli wrote: What I'm trying to grip in terms is my own racism (or ethnocism else, somebody said... which is probably more like it.)
I don't hate White people.
But I've grown resentful at times a rich White guy makes the rules (other then a Kennedy).
I do make exceptions...
I liked Clinton, Lincoln, Roosevelt (some parts.)
What about when a rich Latin person makes the rules?
But then there are those who really grind my nerves and patience to the ground like Dubya Bush. And do I like the change of tides? Black president, blooming multi-culturalism, and all that?
Now imagine if Bush was slightly darker and had a Spanish or Portuguese last name.
Not at first... not when Bush picked the guys like Al Gonzalez who-- to me-- became strong people by conquering over their background (like Al Gonzalez) instead of embracing it (Sotomayor.)
Alberto Gonzalez is not the best example of a good person...
I guess it will take time for me to eliminate my old racist (ethnocist) ways... but I hope I could be a pleasant one in the meanwhile. C'est la vie...
Obviously it will. You still see people as colors, or their ethnic backgrounds. That's such a limited and inaccurate way to see people, and you will not understand anyone if you continue to do that, especially yourself.
At 6/1/09 07:15 PM, Flak wrote:At 6/1/09 06:29 PM, Tancrisism wrote: To be there would be sensory overload. I have no idea how someone could handle that much awesome in such a short amount of time.You do realize this is a multiple exposure photo, right?
Think real life collage. Notice the people who are slightly faded and look like ghosts.
This picture was not simply "taken" at one instant.
It was taken at the same period of time, in three different shots. Look at the cloud formations - you can tell where the images were cropped together by the faded people, but if you run your finger up the screen the clouds in the background are the same.
At 6/1/09 07:19 PM, Barrelsfox wrote: So why care?
Keep posting, you'll get cool.
At 6/1/09 07:24 PM, TheForumRaider wrote: It can't be real, Photoshop made it happen!
Photoshop did make it happen, but the pictures weren't altered except for being merged together.
At 6/1/09 08:26 PM, Proottalfain wrote: They'd learn how to use FL studio and make great electro music!
They would be amazed at the possibilities of the different sounds you can make with a computer. Tchaikovsky already used cannons for his 1812 overture, so I guess he'd be quite open to electro.
They'd be bored stiff by modern electronica though. Musically, it is not very complicated.
At 6/1/09 06:23 PM, AniMetal wrote: RUN YOU FOOL!
Odyssey references are always great, but that one is greater.
At 6/1/09 06:26 PM, dx5231 wrote: Holy shit, that picture is so fucking amazing.
To be there would be sensory overload. I have no idea how someone could handle that much awesome in such a short amount of time.
At 6/1/09 06:22 PM, jonthomson wrote: NG has a "post image" function. use it.
Did you see the picture? It's too wide to post on NG (I have to scroll in my browser to see the full thing), and I didn't want to diminish its quality since I am limited in my picture-altering programs to Paint.
At 5/31/09 06:36 PM, fli wrote: Being a famale is a challenge. Being a Latina another... all the while, being poor and being raised in a difficult neighborhood famous for its crime.
Being a Latina is a challenge?
I suppose it could be in some ways, but hardly. Being of any ethnicity is a challenge if you allow it to be one.
Some pictures are just too epic to be real.
This one, somehow, is real.
At 6/1/09 09:38 AM, Jack wrote: I've NEVER played a Silent hill game.
Is it available off the PSN store or did you buy it off eBay for a stupid amount of money?
10 dollars was really stupid.
At 6/1/09 10:02 AM, simon wrote:At 6/1/09 04:14 AM, POIZIN wrote: Well i've beaten the game and well it has those scary aspects but it isnt like the originals. It lacks that dark tone.What the fuck are you talking about? It's the darkest one.
Is he talking about the new one?
If so, I would say no. Homecoming was very disappointing.
Sorry, the real link to the Restoration Mod is here.
The fixes there are important after installing it.
Do yourself a favor, patch Fallout 2 up to what it requires to run the Restoration Mod.
Basically, in this mod some guys from Blackisle put everything that they left out from the original game.
It is an amazing update, and is really necessary to play the game.
Also, DO NOT PLAY THE GAME UNPATCHED. You will probably not be able to beat it due to glitches.
At 5/30/09 01:20 AM, Leo625 wrote: Plus now blacks can't say "Oh we'll never see a black president, this country is still racist"! And if he fucks up we can say, see that's why.
The amount of "us +/- them" rhetoric you use is sickening.
At 5/28/09 12:50 PM, dudewithashotgun29 wrote: How do you get tricked into voting against gay marraige? Do people just go up to them while voting and say "Hey, that is a typo, that one is supposed to say yes for gay marraige, and the other one is supposed to say no for gay marriage" Confused? its a yes or no question, how does one get confused on "Do you want gay marriage"?
I am going to copy and paste what I said in the first page, because obviously you didn't read it:
Before the voting for Prop 8 took place, there were lots of thorough ad-campaigns that tried to paint Prop 8 as something that was going to prevent gayness from being encouraged in classrooms (and its main goal was to spread family values), when all it was doing was banning gay marriage. Lots of people saw the arguments made in these advertisements and thought they sounded reasonable and voted yes on 8 because of it (I have talked to many that regret it now).
At 5/28/09 12:47 PM, dudewithashotgun29 wrote: but the majority voted against it! Isn't america a democracy? Doesn't that mean it can't be overturned if the MAJORITY said "We don't want it"?
America is a republican democracy because of things like this:
A little old phenomenon called tyranny of the majority.
At 5/28/09 12:24 AM, Nosferatu-of-Worms wrote: The government shouldn't have control over marriage and it should remain religious as it has always been.
This is not true. Marriage is a societal thing that has always existed alongside religion. Saying that marriage has always been religious is ignoring everything before the Christian dominance around, let's say, 500 AD +. That ignores 5500 years of prime civilization.
Not to mention defining marriage by Christian standards is also limiting it to that culture, when marriage has existed since long before Jesus.
Look I'm against organized religion, but that doesn't take away from the fact that marriage is a religious term and the government shouldn't be involved, if people want to get married then it should be up to place that decides to marry them whether they will or not.
I agree with the rest of this.
At 5/27/09 10:19 PM, LynchedJohNNY wrote: Really?
All states had to have a constitution before becoming a state.
I guess I didn't do all my research this time.
I found A synopsis of a book about states and federal rights.
Interesting read so I won't bore others with the longer links.
I had assumed rather incorrectly that the Framers "Separation of powers" had remained intact but yet I find another example of how we've given up our rights to the Government.
The Framers' "Separation of Powers" was included in the Constitution - Separation of Powers divides the government into three branches, the executive, legislative, and judicial. But I'm positive you know this, and were just mistaking your terms.
The Federal system was also established in the Constitution, which may be what you are thinking of. We are not a Confederacy, we are a Federation - A collection of different states (political bodies) ruled by a strong central government. The Framers specifically created the Constitution this way, so I'm not sure how this is an example of how we've given up any rights that they hadn't already given up.
At 5/27/09 11:23 AM, LynchedJohNNY wrote: The Federal Government cannot control or force a state to change it's Constitution.
And as such the Supreme Court has no right to over turn a CA Constitutional Amendment.
The Federal Government can how ever change the National Constitution with 2/3ds of the states ratifying it and 2/3ds of the Senate approving it.
That isn't true. The Constitution says nothing about State Constitutions, it only allows them to exist under the 10th Amendment. The Federal Supreme Court has all the right in the world to overturn a State Constitutional Amendment due to the federal system.
At 5/26/09 09:09 PM, killa-teddy wrote: 1. What do you remember most about the decade of the 90's?
VH1, Pokemon, Starcraft, my experiences in the various towns in Massachusetts I lived (Martha's Vineyard, Otis Airforce Base, and Harwich).
2. What songs come to mind when you think about the 90's?
The pop crap I used to listen to - Goo Goo Dolls, Sugar Ray, Smashmouth. I was young.
3. What slang words do you remember using or hearing during the decade?
I used to say "wicked awesome" about everything.
4. What television shows do you remember watching? What were your favorites?
Looney Tunes, Ah! Real Monsters...
5. What movies were big hits in this decade?
They are all remembered historically, I'm not sure how this applies. Saving Private Ryan, Titanic, etc.
6. What sport stars were really popular?
Nomar Garciaparra was my favorite for a long time. NOMAAHHHHH
7. What new inventions or ideas were popular?
Playstation, N64.
8. How was school different then today?
It was a completely different school system - I lived in 2 other states since then, so everything changed. Not to mention I am out of highschool, so that's a dramatic difference.
9. How would you describe some of the clothing and hairstyles worn by guys and girls?
I never paid attention to clothing or hairstyles.
10. What were some of the common fears or social problems of the 90's?
Y2K IS GOING TO SHUT DOWN THE WORLDDDD
11. What did young people do for fun?
We played pretend and shit. We were little kids. I didn't really pay attention to the older kids much, but apparently heroin was pretty cool back then.
12. From these questions, what do you wish would return today?
Heroin. Fuck ecstasy.
Nah, I dunno. I suppose I don't wish anything would return.
I definitely have sympathy for the Somalian people, but I don't think that they can be excused for piracy. Something should be done to help stabilize their country so this decreases.
At 5/27/09 01:21 AM, TheLameSauce wrote: don't be fooled by this charlatan. coca cola is a false prophet.
No, don't listen to either heathenous bastard! They follow the old gods of the pagans! There is but one true prophet:
I guess the best way to find out is to sign up and give them your credit card numbers.
Actually, sometimes I find it entertaining to play really violent video games to fast-paced, upbeat, almost difficult to listen to happy music. It's humorous, and if the music is bad enough, you can channel your frustration into popping the next guy.
When I played World of Warcraft, really complicated progressive rock always got me through its monotony.
At 5/26/09 08:51 PM, Memorize wrote: Excuses are fun.
I was among those who voted that day, and when I read the bill I had to double check it several times to make sure I was voting correctly (I voted "no"). I have several friends that voted Yes after misunderstanding what it meant.
Before the voting for Prop 8 took place, there were lots of thorough ad-campaigns that tried to paint Prop 8 as something that was going to prevent gayness from being encouraged in classrooms, when all it was doing was banning gay marriage. Lots of people saw the arguments made in these advertisements and thought they sounded reasonable and voted yes on 8 because of it (I have talked to many that regret it now).
Though I think the government should stay out of marriage, I'm still hoping to one day see a gay rights protest at Jewish temples, Black churches, or mosques.
Since 70% of African Americans voted in favor of the amendment while whites were split down the middle, I find that many of these gay rights activists are cowards if they're only going to protest in mainly white christian churches.
I agree with both points. Marriage should either be universally accepted under the law, or it should not have anything to do with it.
At 5/26/09 07:36 PM, Bolo wrote: If the Supreme Court of California had gone against public opinion for a second time, there's no way they would still have the trust of the people, and there would be an outcry about judicial activism, etc. It is a sad fact that they must uphold the petty prejudices of their constituents expressed in the outcome of the 2008 elections.
Against the people? 52% (many of whom, I strongly believe, were tricked or confused) of the people =/= the people. As far as I am concerned, the Supreme Court went against the people in this ruling.
Within the next decade, probably, the ruling will be overturned, the citizens of California will apologize for their previous obstinacy, and the path to the pursuit of happiness will have been thusly paved.
I certainly hope so. I'm sickened by this state.
Makes me sick, those fucks.
At 5/26/09 02:44 PM, Reed wrote:At 5/22/09 06:34 AM, nsc007 wrote: It's a money grab disguised as a cult disguised as a religion.so what? Let the idiots fall for it, why do we have to bother them?
If it was that innocent I would agree, but they actively try to silence opposition.
At 5/26/09 02:53 PM, TheRipper00 wrote: Real question, Who gives a fuck if they wave a Confederate Flag? Is it hurting Blacks or Anyone for that matter?
Who gives a fuck if someone gives you the finger? Who gives a fuck if someone waves the Swastika? Is it hurting someone?
It is not directly hurting anyone, but the symbol is what matters. Flags are symbols, and the Confederate Flag is a symbol of the Confederacy, which was based entirely around the enslavement of a part of the human race. If not for slavery, the south would never have seceded, as that was the major political topic of the entire first half of the 19th century.
At 5/22/09 05:14 AM, ArtistGamerGal wrote: Okay so it seems like everywhere on the internet people rave about how much they hate Scientology. I honestly don't get it. I'm an atheist so I dislike all religions equally, but I just don't get what makes Scientologists any worse then Muslims, Mormons, or Christians.
Please, explain!
Scientology has become a corporation with extremely strong lawyers and they attempt to silence anyone who speaks badly about them.
It's a selective group of which one must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a full member.
And: It's based on a joke.
At 5/26/09 02:30 PM, Proottalfain wrote: I can't agree with you on this. A lot of French Canadians fly the Patriots flag. But that's because the current Québec flag is Christian and was introduced by a dictator of a prime minister, and the flag prior to it was an homage to England. The Patriots were defeated in 1838.
But at least they fought for their country, they didn't kill and enslave black people.
The South isn't quite as separate from the United States as Quebec is from Canada. The North, South, and West all speak English, so we aren't divided by that. The cultures are somewhat different, but every region of the US has a different culture.
Anyway:
The Confederate Flag was meant to represent states' rights, but that idea was also entirely wrapped around the enslavement of another part of the human race. A lot of Southerners like to conveniently forget that part.
At 5/26/09 02:21 PM, Dogbert581 wrote: Do I think Gordon Brown will call an election? No, he's not stupid as he knows if he calls one now he will lose heavily. I reckon he will wait until the last possible chance in the hope that he will be able to regain some popularity.
A vote of no confidence would do nicely. It might help the Labour party too: they could use Brown as a scapegoat! Those political sonsofbitches.
