Be a Supporter!
Response to: Oil Prices Posted August 14th, 2005 in Politics

There really is something to bitch about -- oil prices shouldn't be this high. But because of all the tenstion in the middle east, they are being driven up. If the US had a better foreign policy in the middle east -- promoting stability rather than destabilizing countries, oil prices would drop. Also, the recent death of king Fahad has sent oil prices up because of the uncertainty brought about by his death.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted January 5th, 2005 in Politics

There are always influxes of n00bs when school gets out on break. Its a cycle. But don't wory, within a month, all but the most calous and toughened ones will survive. The rest will migrate to General.

Response to: Censoship? Good or bad? Posted January 5th, 2005 in Politics

Damien_FLAGG,

The FCC is an unelected body that decides what gets on TV and radio. It it isn't a tool for political censorship, I don't know what is. Although I agree that very extreme media should be kept out of the hands of children, it should be the parents' decision, not taht of the government.

Response to: Revolution: Starts Today Posted January 5th, 2005 in Politics

Alright. Although there is rampant corruption in our government, there is nothing you can do about it. 51% of the country supports teh government. ANd, if you planned to do something about it, the NG politics BBS is not the place to start.

Response to: Censoship? Good or bad? Posted January 5th, 2005 in Politics

I am assuming that you mean stuff like prevent "inappropriate" material from being sold to minors? I mean, the personal views of lawmakers, or the appointees who decide to censor music shouldn't really decide what gets released to the public. I mean, what defines "inappropriate," and will we ever agree what "inappropriate" is? And also, music censorship opens the door for all kinds of political abuse. For example, if a certian political party control of the censorship body, they could use it to ban material that conflicts with their political views. So, in short, no, I don't think any form of censorship of art is permisible.

Response to: Abbas & Anti-Israel propaganda. Posted January 5th, 2005 in Politics

Well, wheather he is serious or not, this is really his only viable political option. He has always been tarred as being too much of a suckup to the "infidels," and enhancing his image as a conservative hardliner seems to be his only way of assuring a second presidency.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted January 5th, 2005 in Politics

Teh Quanzinator hath returned. He shalt bring his firey wrath upon the unbelievers. Anyway, I was having some computer problems that were being resolved, and now, I'm probably back for good. Like it or not, here I am.

Piconjo/Star Syndicate Posted January 5th, 2005 in General

Just a question. Why the hell to crapy movies made by the afformentioned authors (not to mention a few others, like some of the clocks) ALWAYS get saved? I mean, they are crapy movies. Do they all have just enormous fan bases who vote for their stuff no matter what? just a question.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted December 7th, 2004 in Politics

huh? wah happen with gooie/wade?

Response to: Reading books Posted December 6th, 2004 in Politics

10 different books. duh. the same book ten times is boring.

Response to: My Solution to National Debt... Posted December 3rd, 2004 in Politics

well, not that extreme, but taxing religious institutions would go a long way towards ending the deficit. The catholic church has money flowing out of its ass, and taxing the prime real estate that churches occupy would pay for alot. I say, we definitely should tax religion, it is a burden upon socioety.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted December 3rd, 2004 in Politics

but that would mean that Befell would win, because after all, the law did "won"

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 30th, 2004 in Politics

spani, its just more proof of John Stewart's theory of obeausity. That we will soon realize that it is easier to to change our standards of beauty than to diet. SOON, 300 POUND GIRLS WILL BE CONSIDERED EXTREMELY ATTRACTIVE!!!! Britney spears will be the postergirl of this movement.

Response to: Medical Marijuana Posted November 30th, 2004 in Politics

And didn't those anti-masturbation people used to say that
jerking it would make you go blind? Were they right?

UAHHGGGGG!! I CAN"T SEE!!!!

Response to: Medical Marijuana Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

the only downside of pot (asside from its illegality) is that if you smoke it in joint form, it has as much as 10 times as much tar as cigarettes. But, if you use a water bong, or even better, a pressure bong, then the ammount of tar is reduced exponentally.

Weed: safe, natural, and mmmmmmm so good!!

don't panic, its organic!!!

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

I did delete Quanze's topic, but only because it was
unnecessary.
Speaking of, Quanze: Don't make topics whose sole purpose is
to be a host for a flame war.

it didn't seem right to request a ban, but i despised the fact that they were cluttering up the lounge.

heh, in the "who's happy with the elections topic," it looks like quanze was the one who locked it.

you shouldn't be suprised. you are the one who nominated me for mod-dom. way back in the day. or, it could be just more evidence that i an FUNK's alt. AND BWS WAS A MOLE!!!

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

gooie, wtf is that picture.

Response to: Sex Platforms Posted November 29th, 2004 in General

ten thousand angry porcupines.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

Michael, you don't need to see a doctor. just cauterize the area. that should clean things up. : )

Response to: Who's happy with the elections Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

seriously guys, this stuff has to stay in the official Bush Topic.

Response to: Dems for Bush Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

People who don't support Bush
1. Bakshi
2. Quanze
3. FunkBRS
There, that's the truth.

evil drunken facist moderators

1. Funk

there, thats the truth

Response to: Dems for Bush Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

3. Quanze13

wtf?......

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

poop

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 29th, 2004 in Politics

drama drama in our lives

god damn it, just bring it here

make the voices stop!!!

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 28th, 2004 in Politics

Because you're only... what? 14?

and your only... what? 16? (according to your prof)

Response to: Dems for Bush Posted November 28th, 2004 in Politics

Yeah, i have the list of their members right here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------

Democrats for Bush Membership List

1. Zell Miller
2. yeah, thats all

you get my point

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted November 28th, 2004 in Politics

I've always tried to make a special point of not getting angry at other users. I mean, what am I going to do? E-kick their E-ass? Bickering just seems so pointless.

i duno FUNK, back in the day, you smacked me with your e-p3n0r. the wound still smarts.

What has happened to the reg lounge. It has gone from a sanctum of drunkennes to a refuge of angry arguments among gen regs. Reminds me of the freakin 3rd grade schoolyard. comeon guys, lets get back on topic.

anybody know of any cheap highs?

Response to: Patriotism Is Bad Posted November 28th, 2004 in Politics

Patriotisim and respect for your country and heritige is good. It helps preserve a sense of national unity, and dissolves racial and religious barriers by reminding everybody that you are all of the same nation. Jingoistic intolerance however, isn't. It leads to unnessacerry violence, hatred, and bloodshed.

Response to: Let's Kill the President Posted November 28th, 2004 in Politics

point 1: its funny how half the people resoponding to this thread didn't even read your post, they just reply with "O NOES!!! DONT KILL BUSH! HE R TEH AMAZGIN!!!" or "YAY KIL THAT FUCK!!!".

point 2: when Bush was going to Columbia, the columbian parliment had to pass a bill giving Bush immunity when within Columbian borders. They had to do this because hundreds of would be vigilantes were lining up at Columbian magistrates and asking for warrents to arrest Bush for violations of international law (invading iraq).

Response to: "Underwear Goes Inside the Pants" Posted November 28th, 2004 in Politics

song I talked about almost a month ago

yeah. i love it. Its one of the most played songs on my ipod right now. Although i highly dobut that it will make a dent in the stupidity of the american people.