Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

no i'm not. IN fact. I've been giving a LOT of thought to this since 9/11. I still remember watching those planes, and thinking that it was all a joke. a bad one. do you know what I felt when I realized that it wasn't? anger. loads of it. and with every day that there is a terrorrist act. This anger increases. I have reached thepoint, where I believe in TOTAL war in the middle east, until we crush and destroy every last terrorrist. and I don't care HOW we do it. Too much is at stake. They will pay any price to kill us all, or die. I like the second one. SO it's either they kill us, or we kill them.(notice please how your sniping at me not the other way around)

At 10/4/04 05:53 PM, -Anthony- wrote: I hate to say this about the man I support but really Kerry wants to do what Bush wants to do, so really none of that held water, and I don't really see how NY is going to get nuked because we pulled out, it's stupid exaggerations like that, that make you lose all your credability in an argument.
Oh yeah, and Bush being liberal that was funny too.

Lol Bush IS liberal compared to me. The thing is if Iran got a nuke tomorrow. U REALLY don't think theyd use it? Jesus in all honesty I'm not that scared of N. Korea. Sure he's sadistic. He's got nukes. But he's seculuar. He know if he launcehs his nuke. We launch ours
he's fucked. and he's NOT going to heaven because he nuked USa. In fact He probably doesn't even believe in god/afterlife.

Now Iran. JESUS CHRIST. THey'll see allah in a dream commanding them to nuke Honduras they would do it. BUT currently allah seems to be commanding them to kill americans, see my point?

err right so care to explain what that was about? Anyway I tend to believe in an eye for an eye, so here's what I believe u should do(since u obviously have nuthin better to do then curse at conservatives) take a shotgun. Lock yourself up in your attic. Think long and hard about your life. Tell us the result. If u tell us the result, I'll hire sum1 to push u out of your window. If you don't I'll be happy.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*insert pledge here*

alright, instead of kicking and screaming, and cursing like I did b4(notice multiple bans) lets follow up with a few solid facts. Lets take it one at a time shall we? I'll start by answering Elfers question.
You see now Liberals have a crusade against our military. Originaly democrats like Roosevelt and Kennedy, no matter how flawed their domestic policied were, understood that america NEEDED to be strong if we want to remain a beacon of freedom. In the early 1970s Senator McGovern ran for president on an anti-war platform. By then the antiwar movement had taken the dm. party fully under it's control. Mcgovern lost an election in a landslide, but his movement kept gaining strength. Now it IS the dem. party. Now let's fast forward. At the heat of the arms race that would bring down the soviet union. Sen. Ted Kennedy called for a nuclear freeze measure this was in 1983. The soiets had just spend insane amounts of dollars to update theit weapons. It passed the reps, but got voted down in senate. voting FOR it were Al Gore, Joe Biden, Dick Gerphardt, Dukakis, etc. Luckily even if it had passed Reagan would have vetoed it. But that's beyond the point. THese people wanted to lock into place US military inferiority.
Now in 1969 in a private letter to Corporal HOlmes, Clinton stated:" I hope this letter will help to understand more clearly how so many fine people have come to find themselve loving their country but loathing their military." I'ma start by saying that loathing is a VERY strong word. As president he would follow up.(I'ma not go into details cause u all knonw anyway that was recent and yall know recent politics). I'ma no go nto Tom Dashle cause I can talk for hours. All i'm going to say. These people nominated Kerry. Kerry will push THEIR agenda. I may also add that he used to be an antimilitary activist during vietnam. Getting the picture? PS I can give sources if u want them just say so.

What most ppl don't realize, is that what is at stake in these elections is no more and no less then victory and defeat in the war on terrorrism. Granted Bush may be a bit too liberal, but between Bush and Kerry... anyway, lemme explain. Let us say Kerry wins:
Timeline:
Kerry wins
+2 days
begin to wirthdraw from Iraq
+5 days
cut down the military
+5 days own the CIA to shreds
+5 days withdraw from most places on the globe(military)
+5 days welfare/soccial security increase
+30 days withdrawal from Iraq complete
+5days all semblance of law and order collapse in IRaq
+5 days civil war in Iraq
+60 days Shiites win, genocide vs Sunnites/Kurds
+10 days Kurds hit at independence. Turkish Kurds join
+1 hour Turkey begins civil war *cough* genocide *cough* vs Kurds
+10 days Sunnites in Iraq slaughtered, Iraq allies with Iran
+10 days the two most powerfull arab countries beeing allies, Iran develops nuke
+5 days Jerusalem/ New York nuked

Meanwhile Us army downsized us Intelligence arena destroyed Us economy in slipping(due to welfare, affirmative action, and social security, not to mention shit education)

Nk sensing that USA is weakened hits S. Korea. USA does nothing. S. Korea overrun. etc. etc. Of course not drilling in Alaska, and the Arab world stronger, our oil is goona leave us=> our economy collapses and makes the great depression look like a slumber party.

Yall just wait and see. You'll be surprised I wasn't far off.

eat shit and die
/me looks around to make sure stupor isn't looking

lol wb me. You all thought you were rid of me didn't u. Guess what. I got more educated....and EVEN more conservative. Kinda hard to imagine isn't it? lol Anyway i'm back to corrupt your nice liberal board. Once I smoke a cig or two I'll be back to make my "first" serious post. lmao

At 2/26/04 06:45 PM, lunchbxpat wrote:

:i got it out of reader's digest, and the quote was just a little sidenote to the article. they didn't go into depth about it at all.

I just hope the readers digest pulled that quote out of there ass... If a REPUBLICAN sais something like that..... *shudders*

Bum? You used my quote?? I feel honored... lol

*Read tek wars site*
Damn.... And I thought I was a homophobe....

At 2/25/04 12:53 AM, -redskunk- wrote: Occasionally. Pimpdaddy69 is surprising me on this thread actually.

I'm surprising you because I'm not contradicting you OR bum for onece? Or I'm surprising you because I actually changed my mind over the internet on something?

Or both? lol

At 2/24/04 04:36 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: Life would be great.

It would be BUT, you would have to live your life with teh knowledge of having done NOTHING for society. I believe the term is leeching?

THE POINT OF THIS SYSTEM(affirmative action)WAS TO MAKE BLACKS AND WHITES EQUAL. Has it done that? No. I don't know about everyone.. But for me, it just increased the rift between me and blacks(please note this does not apply to blacks who actually study in schoo, etc. If he get's accepted over me because he DESERVED IT, I think it's fair. otherwise...). Why? BECAUSE I FUCKING RESSENT THAT. BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE HIRED ABOVE ME WITH WORSE CREDENTIALS/NEVER FIRED/etc.

At 2/24/04 10:25 PM, 70TA wrote:

At 2/24/04 10:19 PM, MKII wrote: i hate talking to liberals. they're too close minded, bent on banning guns and softening up the justice system.

MKII, these clowns don't give up complaining. It goes in one ear and out the other with these idiots. I totally agree with you. Don't let these morons try to get the better of you.

You know 70TA, I am one of teh more right wing people on this BBS, on this issue however, I think youd better listen to waht the others are saying. And you WOULD look alot less like a jackass, if you at least TRIED to argue with the liberal members on this board(please note, on just about all other issues, i would also be arguing). Just because their liberal, doesn't mean they CAN't be right on ANYTHING.

And MKII, all those statements, (london's crime rate, switzerland gun laws, etc.) EXCEPT for the crime rate in DC/NY compared to vermont, sound like utter bullshit you pulled out your ass. So unless you give me a hard source...
Now Vermont has NO large towns, doesnt produce ANYTHING, and is basically all woods. OF COURSE THERE IS GOING TO BE LESS CRIME. There is simply nobody to commit it against. It's like saying, Well the North pole has no gun laws, and that's why theres no crime on the north pole.

At 2/24/04 11:54 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

:accusing me of hypocrisy

Now I'm gonna reel this discussion a bit off topic, by saying that the very REASON, why so many blacks are racist, is because of affirmative action. They grow up thinking it's RIGHT, that they have a lower entry score into colleges, taht nobody ever fails them on exams, even when they should be failed(for fear of beeing accused of racism), that they get jobs easier, that's it's virtually impossible to fire them, that they get payed tax payer money for no reason, other than them beeing black etc., ALL because of Affirmative action.
Honestly, we should take away their race card. OR alternately give it to everyone(which will immediatly make it useless)...

At 2/24/04 12:07 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

:loads

:I hope you also chose to visit the page. Maybe you did. Sure, guns might help a tiny minority of people a year, but the readiness of the avaliability means they're the perfect weapon for suicides (instant and painless), also the perfect weapon for many spur-of-the-moment killings.

spur of the moment killings - agreed. I will alow myself to argue wether the painless and instant suicide thing is a bad thing. Sure, I wouldn't go shoot myself, but hey, if someone else want's to, that's none of my business...
On the other hand.( I wouldn't know, I haven't tried, but...)I think jumping head first of the roof of an 8 story building woud take only a second or two longer, so by that argument... what should we do? stop building appartment buildings?

Back to gun control... I believe, someone on a BBS has actually changed my mind on something.... I was always sure that's impossible(to changfe anybody's mind over BBs), wow, you learn something new everyday...

At 2/24/04 11:49 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: If you thinm it's pointless, then you must hold very weak views about it, therefore you shouldn't mind if it was changed, because you wouldn't care. Right?

I really wouldn't
c? even i have some non rightwing views.... lol

At 2/24/04 11:37 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: - Don't act like an idiot, and initiate conversations with black people with the words "Hey Black Boy"

I won't, providing the "black boy" in question is a prejudice n*****, like SO many black people(not all, probably not even most.)If he treats me like a piece of shit cause i'm white, quess how i'm gonna treat him.

I'd just like to say, that in my point of view, this topic is as close to unimportant, as it gets. Think for a second. Do you think criminals get their guns at stores? Criminals will ALWAYS be armed. There is this little thing called the blackmarket.
Now let's look at the other side(yes, I'm actualy gonna say something, which is favourable to the libs). Even if you buy a gun, are you going to sleep with it under your pillow, or are you gonna stow it away in some remote corner of the attic? I'm pretty sure the latter. Therefore, in the case that an armed robber DOES break into your house, by tthe time you reach your gun, he'll have shot you, or he'll be done and he'll have left, with all your valuables. Of course there are those rare cases, when your gun just happens to be nearby, you can protect yourself.
In retrospect, there are two reasons why i'm AGAINST gun control are as follows.
a)(this is EXTREMELY minor, this reason is SO MINOR it almost doesn't count)That one out of a million peopl, who DOEs have his gun close by, when attacked.
b)(this is the important one) Since I think this debate is SO FUCKING POINTLESS, it should be stopped as soon as possible, thereby leaving thins as they are(var=1, you don't change var, thereforfe var is still 1)

At 2/20/04 09:15 PM, InsaneWarlord wrote: Alone, these people would wither and die.

AHEM!.

Anyway. I just finished reading this post, and man am surprised EVERY time, how people can be FOR gay marriage. For me at least giving them MOST rights is fine. They should have the right to live together, tohave sex with each other spreading aids all they want. Hey, if they enjoy having aids, thats their problem, not mine. etc. The only two things i'm against is
a)marriage(the reasons against this have been repeated thousands of times before, so i won't even bother)
b)adopting children. Let's look at this in detail:
A lesbian couple adopts a son/daughter. He/she wil now grow up without a father./gay couple a dopts a daughter/son she/he will now grow up without a mother. Why is this important? Well the problem is, that men and women ARE different, no matter how much we try to ignore this. A woman can NOT teach her kids the same thing a man would and vice versa.
and secondly, children have a tendency to copy their parents/ older siblings. So, I don't know this one, this is just speculation, we might be SLIGHTLY increasing the chances of that kid becoming gay like his *cough* parents. With Lesbians all this has a problem, women can give birth. I really don't have a way to solve that one...

So here's my plan. Give them ALL the rights of a civil union, including, taxes, social security, etc. Do NOT let them amrry, and DEFFINITELY do not let them adopt children(To bad this one isn't even an issue. I personally believe it EVEN more important then the issue about gay marriage).

At 2/14/04 10:30 AM, Stuporman wrote: Hmm, sounds like this other famous book I know...

*self control, pimp, self control*

At 2/13/04 05:10 PM, re-ds-ku-nk wrote: Could WWII of been avoided had Wilson's plan been enacted?

It depends on what you see as WWII... war with germany? More than likely could have been avoided. Japan's imperial ambitions=> war with Japan eventually? Wouldn't count on it...

At 2/11/04 08:42 PM, red_skunk wrote: And to the poster above me: Bush is determined to be out by June, and he'll lose a lot of respect / poll numbers if he doesn't. We're out of there, for better or worse, by June. Mark my words.

The ONE thing that can make me stop supporting Bush, is if he DOES pull out in June. Oh, wait. Neither Gerphardt nor Liebermann are democratic candidates anymore,and the republicans don't even have a different candidate. I guess i'll HAVE to stick with Bush. The difference is now I LIKE Bush, if he does withdraw, it'll be for lack of suitable alternative.

At 2/12/04 04:19 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: I will only lend my support to the death penalty though, when i can see that there is a system whereby 100% of the guity get punished, and no innocent person gets sent to prison. When we implement that system, I will support the Death penalty. Not before.

Interesting. And how would you suggest we go about doing this? IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for gods sake, there will always be that one person who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that other person, who somehow manages not to get caught, although, both of these types of people are getting rarer and rarer as criminalistics/forensic techniques(is this wat is called?) get more and more advanced

Alright. Here's my question. How would I make a pointer to an arary in C++.

Would it just be.
<code>
int a[75];
a*p_a;
</code>

That up there is my guess. Can someone please tell me how it is actually done?

Thanks in advance.

At 2/11/04 11:38 PM, red_skunk wrote: That's what Bush sold the war as. Iraqis were going to greet US troops with flowers.

Some did. some didn't. Youre point?

At 2/11/04 08:14 PM, RugbyMacDaddy wrote: Can anyone explain to me what the difference between Affirmative Action and discrimination are? I think they are just the same thing only a more PC term.

<sarcasm>
oh but you see, AA helps those poor, disadvantaged, PREVIOUSLy discrimanated against minotities, to take away positions from those, opppressive, all powerfull racist whites...
</sarcasm>

actually there is none...

At 2/11/04 08:48 PM, Adun wrote:

Thats the biggest load of shit i've ever heared. More than 9000 Iraqi civilians killed, plus the defending army, just to get one person who the usa saw as unfit to run a country. He never had anything to do with Osama Bin Laiden, they both hated each other

I never said they loved, or even supported each other. I do however know, that Hussein paid the families of all palestinian suicide bombers big bucks? Which ahppens to also be qualified as terrorrism, and in my point of view, isn't any better than supporting Bin LAde. wait.... Weren't you teh guy with the whole bullshit *zionist mafia thread?*
I just talked with someone who agrees with you about an hour ago btw. I swear to god when he started on the subject, he would spit, and his eyes would light up insanely. It was pretty freaky.... lol just goes to show what type of people agree with you.

Many Iraquis have lost someone close to them, just so they can be ruled by someone worse. From the protests, they see bush as worse than saddam. Saddam may have been a dick, but if he was crasy, how could he manage to become the ruler of the country?

Dude. In Russia, I PERSONALLY saw a demonstration, on how great Stalin was. Iraq has just been freed from someone who was a virtual clone of Stalin(you do know, hussein thoght of Stalin as all powerfull, blah blah, read all of stalin's book, and his greates dream was to remake Iraq in the soviet union of Stalin years, complete with mass executions, world wide belligirency, and all those other nice things? Such as propaganda. Now think. If all you've EVER been told, is taht Hussein is the greatest, and close to god on earth, and everything he sais and does is correct, how likely are you to like it when he is ousted from power, and put up for trial, and likely for execution?

His 'capture' was used to distract people while bush passes the patriot act, which gives him the power of the country that Hitler and Stalin had. He obtained it through the same techniques as Hitler, which is why theres so many hitler-bush comparisons.

Fine. The patriot act is not a good thing. Although in a way it was necessary. Think of it this way. Without patriot act:
terrorrist a and terrorrist b regularly talk about blowing up the white house. Somehow the FBI get's a whiff of this.before patriot act, they have to get a warrant, and inform said terrorrsts, that they are going to be watched/ searched/ blah blah. How likely is that to procure evidence? BEtween the lesser of wo evils(patriot or terrorrism) I choose patriot.

American soldiers shot injured civilians instead of giving them medical attention.

source please?(can't argue yet)

American casualties are barley anything to worry about in comparison, they practically snipped the entire army, much of the casualties came from ambushes and bombings.

Which is why it's bad. If the Iraqis would take guns, and go fight army vs. army, that would be honorable, is they TRULY believe in what they are fighting for. I would have no problem with that. They prefer to revert to suicide bombs, and attacks on civilian targets, and therefore should be labeled: scum and terrorrists, and deserve to be hunted down and exterminated.

Some space-filling quotes..

"We shoot them down likethe morons they are."
-Brigadier-General John Kelly

"They're killing us and no one's talking about it"
Zahara Yassin

"The Iraquis are sick people and we are the chemotherapy. I am starting to hate this country. Wait till i get a hold of a friggin' Iraqi. No, I wont get a hold of one, I'll just kill him."
-Corporal Ryan Dupre, U.S.A. Marines.

1) source?
2) I (source=ucomeupwith)
{
You are stationed in a hostile enviroment. People tend to come up to you and blow themselves up along with you. Wouldn't you be a bit trigger happy, and hatefull??

I believe in free speech, something thats slipping away or already gone from america, but I cant stand for nonsence like that.

Has the patriot act specifically limited YOUR freedoms? EVER?

Nothing pisses me off more than some idot who makes claims like that and say he's 100% right and everyones wrong, go hei-hitler in hell.

a) you mean idiot?
b) so what timeline would you propose?
Iraqis all walk out signing happy songs, hugging and kissing each other, and then proceed to set up a democratic government, without any military action/inter race warfare happening? gimme a break...

At 2/11/04 10:54 PM, Izuamoto wrote: take it as a blessing your arguements may never be graced with again.

*stands in corner, crying*

So let's see. I'm gonna spoonfeed you all the damn reasons why we shouldn't:
Here is the timeline:
Whenever we withdraw
2 days later-----------------------------complete collapse of all semblance of order
1 month afterwords-----------------------------civil war: shiites vs sunniites vs Kurds.
1 month later-------------shiites and sunniites temporary truce to wipe out kurds
another month later------------------------Kurds have been annihilated, sunnites and shiites resume conflict
2 months later---------------------shiites have wiped out sunniites. Radical muslim state has been set up, akin to Iran.
several days later---------------------Iran and IRaq form an alliance
several weeks later-----------------mass executions resume, and what little was left of Husseins WMD program is started up again
several years from today--------------absolutely unfairly, the whole fiasco is blamed on Bush and his supportes, when actually, akin to Vietnam, it's all the fault of the libs, who pressured him into withdrawing, for the sake of world peace and all the other bullshit

Oh I realize I just said humanitarian stuff is bullshit, now thin of it, everybody is so worked up they don't have electricity in Iraq, do you think they had it under HUssein, would you prefer to be tortured and executed, or to live without electricity?

Now won't it be nice, when o of the more powerfull countries in the region form an alliance of radical, anti Israeli, muslim terrorrists?(Iraq and Iran)? That'll do SOO much moe to speed up the coming of world peace, then if we would stay in Iraq for several years, and systematically kill every single terrorrist wouldn't it?

Also quit whining about casualties. If you don't want to risk you life, don't join the army. simple. If you joined for the benefits(university AFTERWARDS, etc.), you should have thought of what hapens when ppl shoot at each other BEFORE you joined the military. jeez. and civilian casualties??? baah ever heard of collateral damage?

*leans back and waits for senseless counterarguments, KNOWING that i'm 100% right on this one* Ok fine, 90% happy?

At 2/10/04 08:37 PM, red_skunk wrote:

Yet blacks really only got the right to vote in the sixities. Before that, They were intimidated, forced away from the polls in many areas of the country. Women were emancipated only slightly before that. So you've got barely fifty years since America became a truly democratic country without an [official] government-orchestrated class structure.

Oh and guess what? 100 years before that they were enslaved. Maybe we should pay them reparations. And a hundred years before THAT there was a brutal indian genocide. and thousands of years before that., half of europe was enslaved/conquered by rome. Maybe italy should have to pay them all reparations.
Do you see what i'm trying to say?

They found that Latino men earned 81 cents for every dollar earned by white men, African American men earned 74 cents to a white man's dollar, and Asian American men earned $1.04 for every dollar earned by white men.

Among women, Latinas earned 79 cents relative to white women, African American women earned 86 cents, and Asian American women earned $1.15 for each dollar earned by white women.

I thought you just said(a bit earlier), that asians are also an ethnic minority, and subject to AA. Not by this study they ain't. Also by your logic, since asians earns more than whites. there should be a special aa for whites, and we should all also get the race card to use against asians.

"African American wages have fallen relative to whites over the past decade,

even though they are getting better educated," Reed said.

How is it possible, for ANYBODY to be better educated, with this public school system(which is btw yet ANOTHER product of AA) Why is it another product of AA? BEcause they had to create a school, where, those *poor, uneducated blacks* can go and learn? Umm yeahhh... and their gonna remain uneducated if you make the school system the way it is, the difference is, so will whites, could this be why we have to *impot brains from abroad*?<===figure of speach. You knjow what i'm trying to sya right?
/me wonders
therefore, there wages are RIGHTFULLY falling, since we still have the advantage that soem of our parents have hte money to send us to private school. HOWever. Of the white men, who go to private school, less and less will be able to send THEIR kids to private school, therefore the number of PROPERLY educated(as opposed to make-believe eduacated as in the public schools) will be falling.

Next stop:
Social security.

Black girl 16, is dumb enough to get pregnant. She doesn't finish school, and we pay her money(fine the government pays her out of our money) for the rest of her life. Reason beeing?

Black man. Homeless+workless. He is in great shape. We pay him through welfare(yet again a byproduct of AA). He COULD go and sweep the streets. He COULD go and work at Mcdonalds. But why should he. We pay him anyway....

I've looked up these numbers before. Of homeless people black homeless people, get more welfare then whites, so don't come with the bullshit about this not having anything to do with AA.

If said bum(do not confuse with bumcheekcity...lol), CAN'T work(mentally ustable) then put him in infirmarary (crippled) pay him money give him a wheelchair feed him. It's not his fault. But if he CAN work, but PREFERS to receive money for nothing, fuck no. If it'd be up to me, i'd cut that*lifeline* of this second, to FORCE him to go to work.

*gasp*

Medicare....
*looks at the paragraph on welfare*
Well since these arguments are SO similiar, i won't go into them, unless of course you don't understand what i would argue as. Then I'll chew it up for you, before spoonfeeding it to you...