Be a Supporter!
Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

Omfg Befell got the 20,100th post, u r teh uber postmaster. No seriously I was wating to get the 20,100th post because I'm just that bored, but I wasn't paying attention looking for a song in my library and when I noticed it was too late... another one of my dreams crushed by the Manchurian Candidate.

Response to: Big News Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/17/04 11:05 PM, Maus wrote: Nutty. Now - if they wouldn't cause the traffic headaches they do, it would be great.

Traffic? Now, you haven't been in Los Angeles... especially when Gas Prices are low and it's the holidays... my God man, I could crawl across the freeway faster than the cars move.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/17/04 11:01 PM, BeFell wrote: ... This is indeed a tricky thicket. Hold on I need to show complete disregard for my roomates personal space and dig through his stuff for his low level math book.

Yes, as opposed to your superior-level uber books.

Response to: Big News Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

You show them conservative bastards our superior liberal muscal talent. Play... PLAY like you've NEVER played BEFORE! >.< No but seriously go out there and kick some ass but don't be afraid to voice your political opinion if you are asked by anyone. The fate of Ohio rests on your marching band! Lol j/p I need to get some sleep, badly.

Response to: has god left us? Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

Bratpack, you have a bit of a Deist view going on there.
Although your theory is a bit more pessimistic and hateful towards the human race then Deism, it still posesses a Deist point of view. The Deist point of view (which I am pretty fond of myself) is that the Universe is like a wind-up clock, which was built, and wound by God, and left to tick on its own set of rules that God created in order for it to operate properly.

That is to say: God does not dirrectly intervene in our lives (although I believe in the occasional miracle) but instead he lets us run our show and be the masters of our own destiny. It's not atheistic in any kind of way, it just suggests that whether God exists or not, we still have the freedom to choose and it is choice that makes us and keeps us free.

Response to: Not Equipped for War? Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/17/04 08:20 PM, secondmessiah wrote: Two reasons your logic is flawed.
A: Soldiers sign a paper when they join the milatary, it says that they swear to follow orders barring a few resonable exceptions (if the orders violate other rules or the commander appears to be insane, etc). They aknowledge that they will have to risk their lives. What comes to mind when these people refused orders... cowardice.

So you inallienable right of freedom of choice has been reduced to a mere signature on paper?


B: The president can't do anything about their armor, he is not in charge of the budget, thats congress. John Kerry has vetoed every bill that would increase military funding that would allow them to armor the troops.

If you can prove that, your argument will be more than valid and accepted by the skeptics.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/17/04 07:36 PM, Proteas wrote: "Traditionally, the koto scale is pentatonic (five notes excluding the octave), and the most popular traditional Japanese tuning is called "hirajoshi," literally "tranquil tuning," D Eb G A Bb D."

I'll take the Shamisen any day.

Response to: Not Equipped for War? Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/17/04 05:24 PM, g3tLoST wrote: Soldiers should stop acting like pussies and go out there to get their asses blown off.

You first, if you've got the cojones.

If you check on SBC Yahoo!'s main page, you'll see that one of their top stories is that the delivery vehicles are STILL unarmored.

Response to: Gays should NOT be able to marry. Posted October 17th, 2004 in Politics

At 1/6/03 04:55 PM, calmius wrote: Because they're gay and marriage is for a man and woman.

Then you shouldn't be able to marry either.

Not Equipped for War? Posted October 16th, 2004 in Politics

I was watching the global news today on NBC, when a story came up of en entire military group refusing to follow orders because of lack of protection. The group was the 343rd quarter master company, they were set to deliver fuel to a location in Iraq, in order to reach the locationt hey had to drive through Fallujah, currently one of the most-violent places in the world.

The group refused to follow orders because they said their vehicles and they were not properly outfitted with armor, and they feared for their lives. Now they face a possibility of being reprimanded, or court-marshalled for their actions.

This issue reminds me of exactly what Kerry was pointing the finger at Bush about during the debates. There are troops out there going on dangerous missions who are not properly equipped, yet they still go out there and put their lives in danger, and the president isn't doing anything about it. You'd think Bush could at least make sure the troops are safe now that he's sending them to war.

So what would you do? Would you still drive through the city and face a high-risk of being ambushed, captured, shot, or even blown up? Or would you use your inalienable rights as a person and choose that the situation is far too dangerous and that you're not properly-equipped for it, and live to fight another day?

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 16th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/15/04 03:40 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:
At 10/15/04 05:52 AM, EnragedSephiroth wrote:
Buy an E-Machines... >.>
I luv my e-machine.

I was just joking about the E-Machines. I was gonna get one at first... then I remembered... these things are sold at Costco, and I've heard a lot of bad stuff about em', so I went with a Hewlett Packard instead :D I have to agree with Shrike though that the Mac OS is better than the Windows OS, I don't hear any complaints about Mac.

And avie... let's hope your E-Machines loves ya back.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 15th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/15/04 04:43 AM, TheShrike wrote:
BUY A MAC.

Buy an E-Machines... >.>

Response to: Kerry... Posted October 15th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/15/04 03:43 AM, Spookshow wrote: Just a quick question since noone can answer my posts...

Isn't this thread about Kerry not OMG BUSCH ISA LIARZ!

They go hand in hand right now. You can't mention one without mentioning the other.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 15th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/15/04 03:41 AM, Spookshow wrote: Anywho. I'm not running any apps except AOL, what could be sucking up multiple gigs?

You've at least either been hacked by someone, or you got some nasty adware in your computer dragging down the cpu like crazy.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 15th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/15/04 03:06 AM, BeFell wrote: Hey Shrike I was going through your posts, counting how many times you have posted, "buy a mac" and I was just wondering... well... um... what the hell is this?

http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/...p;terms=TheShrike&page=195

Oh in the five pages I checked I found four references to buying macs for a total estimated value of 166.4.

Well at least there's (what appears to be) a decent shot of Dr. Aki Ross from that horrid movie Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within butt nekid and somewhat tanned.

Response to: Kerry... Posted October 15th, 2004 in Politics

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... you're all nuts.

Bush went to war with Iraq for what reasons?
1. He said Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda and possibly to September 11th. Then we find that there were no ties confirmed to Al Qaeda, and much less September 11th.

2. Bush said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was planning them, they showed us skimatics, designs and everything. What we found later was... absolutely nothing in Iraq than a few empty missle shells? There were no labs, no nukes, no nothing. Yet the death toll sits at at least over 1020 American troops so far, for a was that we didn't even have tangible evidence of.

Point: Bush lied out of his ass, talking out of the side of his mouth HOPING that he'd find something to make him look like a hero if we invaded Iraq. Instead what do we find? Saddam Hussein in a spider hole? We've gotten over a thousand American troops killed and ruined over a thousand American families just to find a man that was so scared of the U.S. he only used his cell phone twice since 1991? That was worth the price of American lives? Don't even come at me with something like "we've liberated Iraq, they sacrificed their lives," yes because they have to take orders, they don't know both sides of the situation.

The troops out there and a lot of the American public is not aware that the U.S. in fact urged Iraq to invade Kuwait back in 1991, and when Iraq did, what did the U.S. do? They turn their back on Iraq, and so begins Operation Desert Storm. The U.S. did that in a very clever strategic manner in order that Saudi Arabia would still remain friends with them and the U.S. would look like heroes, while they now kick Iraq's ass and claim their oil.

After searching through this political forum, newspapers, television, radio broadcasts, and just about everywhere, I still have not been able to find a single notable good thing that Bush has done for this country other than take it to a war that should not have been. But he did it, he took us to war, and we have to finish what we started, but Bush needs to get the hell out of the white house because we can't afford another needless war.

Why can't Bush worry about the American educational system better, instead of underfunding the "no child left behind" act and sending other people to fight his battles in Iraq? Can't Bush worry a bit more about healthcare, retirement, and scientific research that are things his country is clamoring for? We didn't clamor for a war, the majority of the U.S. and congress was against Bush taking us to Iraq. I guess the majority doesn't rule when it comes to him.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 15th, 2004 in Politics

You're all nuts.

Response to: Kerry... Posted October 14th, 2004 in Politics

Bush is a C-grade student (he said it himself) who had a lot of pull at Yale University from good ol' dad (former president George Bush) at the time. If Bush didn't have his dad as a crutch to lean on, do you think he'd be where he is today? With his mental capacity? I seriously doubt it, I don't think he's skilled enough when it comes to worrying about other people's agendas and he would rather focus on tending to his own matters.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 14th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/14/04 08:07 PM, spanishfli wrote:
What does this mean?

It means you're gay....

Once again I am pointing out the obvious (like Gooie says), and I'm even pointing out that I'm pointing out the obvious... which is obviously stupid.

Response to: Xombie, Lego, etc. Posted October 13th, 2004 in NG News

Your corporate lawyers are preventing people from using their constitutional rights which guarantee freedom of speech. I am referring to the situation at www.newgrounds.com where LEGO corporate lawyers have contacted the site owner asking him to disallow LEGO flash movies of any sort.

I have been a lego-building fanatic for over fifteen years now as far back as I can remember, and the current situation of trying to forcefully shut people's mouths and imaginations at newgrounds.com has forced me to cease from purchasing any more LEGO products. I shal urge my friends, family, and aquaintances to cease purchasing any LEGO products or contributing any sort of profit to the LEGO corporation as well because of your hate for free publicity at newgrounds.com.

I regret to inform you that the flash authors at www.newgrounds.com did not know your corporate staff despised free publicity (seeing as most companies would actually appreciate any sort of publicity at all). Regardless of what the movies contain in regards to LEGO and lego products, the authors of the movie(s) have the right to express whatever they want (newgrounds has its own rules, regulations, administrators and rating systems which keep such things in check). The creators of the movie(s) bought the product, they can use it as they please. Furthermore, if you have any problems with a specific LEGO movie, contact the movie author, rather than the site owner or the site staff, which is not held responsible for the things people create, only for keeping them on check. Thank you for reading this, I look foward to a more-human and rational response from a LEGO representative in regards to the situation at www.newgrounds.com.

Response to: no goverment Posted October 13th, 2004 in Politics

Apparently you aren't only dumb, but you are also... nevermind.
Because of people like you, we need government. People cannot govern themselves unless they learn how to live with each other in harmony, and the way things seem, that takes a lot of understanding, wisdom, and patience, which is something the general American public lacks.

Response to: If Gore would've won... Posted October 13th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/12/04 03:06 AM, Spookshow wrote: I forgot to add... the whole "Anti-movie and anti-gaming part"... would NG even exist?

The anti rated R movies and anti videogames bit is Joseph Leiberman's notorious front for political battle. Leiberman needs to go crawl under a rock and suck his thumb.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 13th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/12/04 09:08 PM, -Gooie- wrote: Hey Funk, I have a great game for you to play someday; It's called "Drink the chemicals under the sink"

That's a quote from "Stewie" from Family Guy. Just thought I'd point that out... because it's not your own freshly-created material. Which reminds me... Leno's on... which reminds me... Conan will be on in about 40 mins :D

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

Yep, yer about 2 years behind, lol. The Rock left to do Hollywood movies. Mankind left to campaign for liberals >.> I guess? Chyna left to take Mr. Clean's spot on the household cleaner bottle.

Response to: Is abortion right? Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

14 years of age? :( rats. Go see the abortion topic in this politics forum. I only think it's murder once the child has developed its own organs and can live outside of the womb. A premature abortion wouldn't really count for me persay if you do it before 3 or 2 months. But a mature abortion after 4 months is completely out of the question. Why are you worried about abortion? You got kids already? I swear these young'uns keep getting knocked up earlier and earlier... just kidding by the way.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/12/04 03:11 AM, spanishfli wrote:
I haven't seen WWE since I was a kid. All I can remember was Jake the Snake, Hulk Hulgan, Andre the Giant... and that's about it.

How do you know it's WWE now and not WWF anymore if you haven't seen it since way back when it was called WWF? You must have seen something... I know.. you were looking for Rico weren't you? J/p, so j/p. But seriously >.> the change to WWE only happened about a couple years ago.

Response to: If Gore would've won... Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

Things might have been better, I'm not sure what Gore's political plans were, I wasn't as politically concerned four years ago when I was 15, as I am now. I do think that Gore would have much rather pursued a peaceful political resolution with other countries we are on bad terms with, rather than go invade Iraq for no reason at all. I also think he would have possibly tried to negociate situations with North Korea. But hey it's just my opinion, I'm not trying to make any sort of valid or cogent argument here.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/12/04 02:36 AM, spanishfli wrote:
Carlito-car--who?

Carlito Carribean Cool: some new idiot out with a shitty wrestling gimmick, helping perpetuate the latino stereotype of the "laid back lazy" person. He recently beat John Cena for the U.S. championship or something, by cheating, which further perpetuates the latino stereotype that we cheat or something, like Eddy Guerrero's slogan "we lie, cheat and steal." I just caught a glimpse of this by chance though >.> I was flipping through the channels, and I accidentally stumbled across Smackdown... yea, it's not like I was watching the broadcast or anything... I have to go vomit again.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/12/04 02:18 AM, spanishfli wrote:

:a lot of stuff about his ethnicity and mine...
Don't forget that Kerry is a catholic, hardcore catholic latinos might also appeal to that.

Because BeFell is cool like that.

Yeah... like Carlito Carribean Cool... how did he get so cool? -.- how lame I made a reference to wrestling, I'll brb I have to go regurgitate.

Response to: Drinking Age Posted October 12th, 2004 in Politics

At 10/10/04 08:58 AM, Sineal wrote: I don't like the idea of a limit to drinking ages. I've being drinking at home since I was 12 under parent supervision and going out since 16 (fake ID). I think that if it's strictly enforced and children can't drink till they are 18 or 21, they go crazy when they reach that age, don't know their limit and end up getting hurt.

That's why the slogan in the U.S. is "Drink responsibly." It doesn't say "drink till you're shit-faced and on the floor." You should know that you've hit your limit when you start to feel the slight buzz. I don't drink much in my life, never really drank as a kid. I drink from time to time socially and I always stop when I get a good buzz going. I don't go crazy over the alcohol and abuse it, I don't have to prove shit to anyone and show them that I'm a hardcore drinker, besides, people look and act quite stupid when they're drunk, especially women. Anyway, the 21year drinking age limit is there because of your liver's development. If you want to drink before 21, please go ahead, abuse all the alcohol you want and stunt your liver's growth, just don't go complaining about your liver failing on you when you're 50.