Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Been a while eh? Finally got my internet back up, and wow I'm level 11. Of course someone deposited for me.

At 12/7/04 05:42 PM, HAcoreRD wrote: While agree that all movies should be watched till the end, but what about those shitty seizure movies or the gliding stick figure movies that been popping up on NG. You can whistle them but if you vote 0 (immediately) it'd be wrong?

Actually it's the other way around, you're supposed to vote 0, not whistle them. They don't break the rules, they're just blam material.

At 11/17/04 11:12 PM, WadeFulp wrote:
Watch the 4 entries on the page and I think you can figure it out. :)

So it's the jim norton one then? Good because that 100 grand remix was just that, a rehash, sure the joke is still funny but there's already a flash that used it(it was funnier than the remix even because of the final scene it had).

At 11/15/04 11:41 PM, _X-Ray_ wrote: stuff

Shit here in america if someone else's dog attacks you, YOU CAN'T EVEN KILL IT!!! Would you rather things go that way? I wish they'd ban dogs, lions, tigers, panthers, cheetas, and leopards, because then I wouldn't have to worry about persecution if I shoot them in self defence.

At 11/10/04 04:58 PM, Deurwaarder wrote:

heum, hasj is also legal

Hash is just as lame as weed really, there's much stronger shit I prefer.

At 11/10/04 03:56 PM, Deurwaarder wrote:

well, you can get legal weed in plenty other cities ;)
ofcourse if that is your motive lol, most ppl only know amsterdam for that.

I don't like marijuana, but I like other drugs.

At 11/10/04 03:43 PM, Mr_Fluffykins wrote: and now america is going to say weed is fueling the terroists

It wouldn't be if it were legal, because it wouldn't be so big in the black market and we could moniter these legal buisnesses much easier. So basically while the assertion is correct, it's moronic to use it as an arguement for keeping it(and all other drugs) illegal, if anything it should go the opposite way.

At 11/10/04 08:29 AM, Libidinor wrote: no, I'm in Amsterdam.

Lucky bastard, the best place to live in all of europe.

Micheal Moore is a liar and a traitor, plain and simple. If he hates americans so much, then why is he still here? America isn't forcing him to stay.

At 11/3/04 01:15 PM, ramagi wrote:
Well if your trying to keep your protects up with your blams, you are going to have a hard time doing that. There are far more blams than saves. Heck the last few list done by SK or D0GMA, my ratio close to 2 blams for everyone 1 save. It will take you longer to rank up that way.

Yeah but if you have a high blam-protect ratio and you make a mistake, you'll be more likely to have exp and b/p set to zero than if you don't.

At 11/3/04 11:28 AM, BeFell wrote: New update Bush just got Nevada bringing his current total up to 274. This and winning the popular vote leaves no doubt.

He's going to get New Mexico and Iowa too, Kerry will get Wisconson. So Bush can have a few of his electors vote for Kerry and still win because he'll have 289 electors to Kerry's 252.

Well I can finally start blamming again now that I've gotten 2000 protects. I just hope there's not a high blam-save onslaught again.

Thanks, and may you reach 16.00 votes someday.

At 11/2/04 08:20 PM, BarferPro wrote:
I can't vote. I'm 17.
But when I do, I hope you'll be dead by extreme ass-rapage by then. So your stupid vote won't cancel out my intelligent vote.

You know you really should take some pills, it would be good for you.

At 11/1/04 11:08 PM, BarferPro wrote:
OMG!!! You're a democrat after all? Wow! I thought you were a mindless, propaganda controlled, fear controlled, inbred, money-whoring Republican asswipe!

So you're saying anyone who pays no attention to propaganda is a democrat, and those who are susceptable to it are all republicans. You are a dumbass.

At 11/1/04 10:39 PM, BarferPro wrote:
Well, son, I suggest you start listening to Air America then. You'd be a Democratic liberal in no time!

I'm immune to propaganda, sorry.

At 11/1/04 10:26 PM, BarferPro wrote: Tantrum

Well that rebuttle took you forever. Okay so he said weeks and not months, big deal. It's still enough time that influence is more than possible.

Actually if zogby is right Bush will still win. If neither candidate gets at least 270 electoral votes, then the house will choose the president, and the senate will choose the vice president. Since both are republican run It's safe to assume he will win. The senate is up for grabs though(the house isn't really) so we might get edwards as vice president, but that depends on the senate race. Either way Bush will still run the white house.

At 11/1/04 10:06 PM, BarferPro wrote:
Let me rephrase: He has never been wrong about the Presidential elections.

He comes into a tenth of a percent of accuracy.

He predicted Bush would have a 5 point lead in 2000, that's hardly a tenth of a percent. It doesn't matter, whoever wins just wins and we'll all have to live with it.

At 11/1/04 09:14 PM, BarferPro wrote:
John Zogby has never been wrong, and he says Kerry's gonna win.

That's not true, he was wrong on a few of the 2002 races. He's just wrong less often than most famous pollsters.

At 10/29/04 11:11 PM, theburningliberal wrote:
Osama thanks God for Bush's failure to lead on 9-11!
That's about as close to an endorsement as you can get!

Calling him a failure is an endorsement? Maybe that's what he wants you to think. It's more likely he's trying to call him a failure on terror so that people will elect someone who will be softer on him.

Even Osama knows Bush sat in a classroom reading The Pet Goat while 3,000 terrified people died.

Yet somehow the teacher who was in that classroom(a registered democrat mind you) recalls a different story.

Even Osama thinks Bush's 'leadership' is a farce.

So he says, perhaps he says this so people won't vote for Bush?

How can Bush lead the nation in our 'war on terror' when the world's leading terrorist is laughing at him??

At the same time saying he will come after states that vote for Bush?(Yes, proper translations reveal he did say that)

How can America even consider four more years - of this????

Of continueing the war on terror?

At 11/1/04 08:01 PM, BarferPro wrote: <cry>

Aww poor baby. You're failing to make any points other than that I was right, I mean if I wasn't then why are you throwing such a temper tantrum. You couldn't be that upset if you were the one who was proven right.

At 11/1/04 06:55 PM, BarferPro wrote:

The point being: This kid swayed to a full-out Bush-supporter from listening to a radio show for a LITTLE WHILE!

So? He listened for several months, and while Hannity is far from the smatest radio talk show host around, people can still be influenced if they listen, it happens. If that was your entire point then you made a blind statement of the obvious, sucks to be you.

At 11/1/04 06:14 PM, BarferPro wrote: Listening to a radio show for a while will turn him from a centrist to a full-out Bush-supporter, then watching the Daily Show blah blahfor five minutes would easily pull him to a full-out Kerry-supporter.

Right so 5 minutes is enough to sway opinion? I don't care how persasive it is, any reasonable person knows that's bullshit, you must be a dumbass if you really believe that.

At 10/31/04 06:14 PM, red_skunk wrote:
Now, either find the original e-mail, and show how they directly blame bad weather on Bush (I'll give you a hint - they don't), or just admit that you made it all up.

He probably didn't, both conservative and liberal biased groups are known to occaisionally shoot themselves in the foot by saying stuff like that.

At 10/31/04 10:38 PM, BarferPro wrote: He didn't make any reference to anything close to the EXISTENCE of Kerry, nontheless him winning the election--that is, if you fucking watched the video.

The proper translation of the full video reveals him threatening states who vote Bush. I noticed you replied without responing to that also after I posted it. Must have taken your feeble mind some time to falsify a responce eh? Otherwise you would have replied right off when you posted earlier.

What the fuck is he gonna' say about Kerry?!
"Oh, and Massachusetts... Your representative in the Senate. He is, uh... Well, ya' know he... Um... Ten million people, uh... Okay, so... yeah. You know what I'm sayin'. Praise Allah to the bitches and hoes. Peace."

Exactly, he poses no real threat to Osama(maybe a minor one, but not as big of one as Bush), so therefore he has no reason to say anything about Kerry.

caveman

A caveman with a surprizing amount of wealth and a camera rew with which to broadcast his tapes. It's not much of a stratch to say he'd have a TV.

At 10/31/04 06:00 PM, -Anthony- wrote:
because Kerry hasn't DONE ANYTHING YET. For all we know Osama may not even know Kerry is running, it's not like he gets CNN, <blaspheme>

I suppose you're going to tell me that Saddam never did either?

At 10/31/04 02:26 AM, EnragedSephiroth wrote: I'm a Kerry supporter, mind you I did not see Farenheit 9/11, I dug up facts in school and online. You don't believe me? See the ton of dirt a couple months of asking college professors and digging up articles online and checking academic journals turns out, and I guarantee you'll be knee-deep in shit.

Yes, in BULLshit.

At 10/31/04 05:42 PM, -Anthony- wrote: He does not want either to win. Will people stop it with this Osama wants Kerry to win Bullshit.

Then why does he have more negative things to say about Bush? Especially when he knows our elections are coming up.

At 10/30/04 07:10 PM, BarferPro wrote: But then... Osama did thank god that Bush didn't do anything while the country was under attack, giving him three times the ammount of time needed to complete the operations.

Yet he still prefers Kerry wins.