10,771 Forum Posts by "Tancrisism"
You sound like you are trying to rationalize being annoyed with them, when you know for a fact that they did the right thing.
I do rather fancy some fine miloko with a droogie, O my brothers...
At 5/17/09 04:38 PM, TheSporkLord wrote: listen even IF your little perfect human race comes along there WILL be a natural occurance that will wipe them out, its called natural selection. and i hope it picks you next.
Somebody sounds offended. Did he make you question your lust?
At 5/17/09 02:53 PM, POOPIES wrote: It is unbelievably selfish, bordering on unconscionable, to engage in such acts in these modern times, and to do so serves only to hold back the full transcendence of man into that golden plane upon which full self-control and happiness are exercised.
Selfish how? I'm usually pretty giving when I do it.
At 5/17/09 03:54 AM, TheFarseer wrote: Well if your openly gay, that can make your fellow same-sex squad members uncomfortable(especially in showers) and wouldn't be able to function properly as a group.
I would feel uncomfortable with Catholic squad members, does that mean they shouldn't be allowed in the military?
I say, had ourselves a bit of a drink did we? Ho hum!
At 5/17/09 02:04 AM, Phobotech wrote: "Shoot her! SHOOOT HERRR!!!!"
*name that movie
Clever girl.
There are lots of jokes about priests and rabbis. That's the point.
I didn't know there was any prejudice towards 4chan. A lot of people are just wary of it because of viruses and child porn.
It provides a lot of humor that defines the internet.
At 5/16/09 03:59 PM, Korriken wrote: The result of politicians lying their asses off... If you don't know the result... then you're living in a box under a bridge most likely.
The result is the world continues its natural course.
At 5/16/09 02:33 PM, Korriken wrote: Not everything is cream puffs and twinkies, kid. If you look at a politician with a naive mind, you're gonna fall right into their trap.
I like how you used outside links to explain your analogies, but none to back-up your claims.
At 5/14/09 02:42 AM, Ershin2009 wrote:At 5/12/09 02:20 AM, Tancrisism wrote:The Soviet Union was behind some of these leaders. If left alone, those countries would have become part of the Soviet Union.
The democratically elected, slightly socialist leaning presidents belonged to the Soviet Union? Just like Sweden belongs to China, right?
But I think it would have been better if the Soviet Union actually won. People from the USA are a bunch of crybabies who feel sorry for themselves
Wha?
and who are too busy with gay marriage while badmouthing beauty pageants
Badmouthing beauty pageants? Either I live under a rock, or I'm not sure what country you are talking about.
evidencing a decadent civilization, whereas Russians are proud people who don't think they owe anything to anyone. I despise the weak, I admire the strong.
That's all well and good, but I think your stereotypes are a bit off, pal.
At 5/14/09 10:17 PM, CatRobot wrote: Most of you have sympathy towards Castro.
Sympathy towards Castro? Recognizing that the embargo against Cuba failed does not mean we necessarily sympathise with Castro.
I hope most of you get to live in a communist society, where there are no richs or poors, and where nobody ever complains.
And at any rate, I hope most of you never make any decent money ever, or else end up like those hypocrites who talk socialism / communism while driving an expensive car.
Great.
At 5/16/09 02:13 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: Does anyone else besides me see the irony in this?
Republicans are going after her, right? And they're saying she knew, yet she didn't do anything about it.
I actually didn't see it until you pointed it out - that is absolutely beautiful.
At 5/15/09 06:31 PM, RazorHawk wrote: TS2 was fantastic, TS3 was also good, but yeah, I found TS2 to be better. I did find TS3's humor to be funnier though.
Agreed there.
The Chicago level on TS2's Story mode was the best. After playing that, you'd almost wish they'd base an entire game on just that setting alone.
Every setting was great in that game. I remember being so drawn in by the Russian level when I got the demo of it from the old Playstation Magazine. I must have played that demo so many times, it was so involving. TS2 was one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played.
The only thing that TS1 had that TS2 didn't was 4-team capture the flag...
At 5/15/09 01:37 PM, Ozcar wrote: Just don't buy anything from HP or Dell...Trust me, you'll regret it...
Agreed. If it's only for school projects, definitely go with a Mac.
At 5/15/09 01:19 PM, calamitykid wrote: I like all kinds of music to be honest.
I don't believe in the seperation of music into genres.
hip hop? GREAT
death metal? GREAT
/the end.
Okay, I like all kinds of music too, unless it focuses too much on monotony/loudness.
Death metal would be fun, but it's pure aggression - to me it is just as monotonous as rap.
< Types in "FFDS" as character name.
"ERROR: TRY AGAIN!"
< Types in "FFDS" as character name.
"THIS NAME IS TAKEN, TRY A DIFFERENT ONE."
I did this with several names that I'm quite certain don't exist in this game, but this same thing happened. So I lost interest.
At 5/15/09 03:31 AM, Drakim wrote: I agree. The problem though lies in when people use the words as synonyms. Saying, for example, that they are "americans", when they do mean a citizen of the US, and absolutely not of Mexio or Canada.
That's simply what the name for citizens of the USA have come to be known as. Perhaps it's because of the proliferation of English during the era of the British Empire, perhaps it's because of the growing power and dominance of the United States during and after the Monroe era. Perhaps it's because the United States of America was the first country in the Americas to declare its independence from its colonial power.
Regardless of the reason, it's for simplicity's sake. I have heard suggestions that we should be called "United Statesians", but that is frankly impractical and would never stick. People from Mexico have the fitting name "Mexican", and people from Canada have the fitting name "Canadian".
I honestly have no idea when it would ever be useful to categorize everyone from the Americas into one group name, just like I don't see the word "Asian" as useful, given that people from Indochina are completely different from China (who, themselves, have many different people) who are completely different from Japan, who are completely different from Siberia, who are completely different from India, who are completely different from Afghanistan.... And so on.
Grouping everyone from the Americas into the title "American" would be like grouping everyone from "Eurasia" into "Eurasian". Sure, you are all connected to the same landmass, but it wouldn't explain anything except that. And what does that have to do with anything?
Number 4 establishes our dominance. Obviously, we are the superior gender.
At 5/15/09 02:01 AM, Wuggawoot wrote: Anyone have anything to add?
You use a lot of really cool propaganda techniques.
I hate rap because, generally, I like music.
At 5/15/09 02:42 AM, gamerpeepinpa wrote: Connecticut because I used to live there.
That's definitely grounds for deciding definitively the best state in the Union. Thank you for your input.
At 5/15/09 02:08 AM, Infinite-one wrote: Jesus, is there enough talk about Twilight on this board yet?
Agreed, by recognizing its existence you are giving it the attention you wish it didn't receive.
Massachusetts, all the way.
Connecticut is full of traitors to the New England name, who live to suck New York's dick.
Already corrupt and lazy? You'll make a good politician.
At 5/15/09 12:42 AM, Ozcar wrote: Philosophy?
This looks more like a "Psychology" topic...
Exactly what I was thinking.
Looks like a picture taken directly from a television set with a bad camera.
At 5/14/09 10:36 PM, CatRobot wrote: Because the whole continent was originally called America, not just the USA. So either this is regarded, or maybe the name of the continent itself should be renamed to something else.
It still is called America. The United States is just the United States OF America. It's not saying that it is the only America, but the United States consisting that of the USA are OF (from/in) America.
Since everyone relates the word America to only the USA and not the whole continent, when I talk about the continent, I have ended up calling it "The new continent".
People say "The Americas" if they are talking about the entire (two) continent(s).
The world has 5 continents.
-Europe
-Asia
-Oceania
-Africa
-The New Continent
Actually, that depends on where in the world the people you are asking come from. If you ask us (Americans), there are 7 - Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, North America, South America, and Antarctica.
At 5/14/09 10:19 PM, CatRobot wrote: Maybe when the country was started, there was an implicit idea of taking over the ENTIRE continent, thus the "United States of America". What if tomorrow some Latin America nations join in a league and call it the "Republic of America" or the "Confederation of America". Will they still not be American?
I think the continent's name was hijacked.
I don't understand why Latin Americans are so upset over a name. Honestly, who cares? If Brazil or Canada had their revolution first, they could have taken the name "United States of America", and we probably would have chosen a different name. It's silly to get upset over a simple name.
At 5/14/09 07:17 PM, X-TERRORIST-X wrote: True, that is the history of black slavery, and it is reasonable to assume that stance based on where you grow up. Now I'm sure you don't live in the type of area I do, because if you did your view would be much different. Here, I would say 70% of people are black and EVERY ONE I personally know doesn't try in school and there only excuse is that they say it's okay since their "black".
They obviously share the same problem, they see their color as something that keeps them back. It doesn't, but it has become common in society for it to seem to.
That is the situation, that blacks were brought in here as slaves. But now, everyone in America is given equal opportunity to achieve success and they throw it away. Is it because of there socio-economic problems? I doubt it, because many live in my district. I get straight A's, and they drop out of school. We both have the same chance for success, they just chose not to grab it.
Sociological problems go much deeper than district. Look to the history, the way they have been treated for the past 400 years. Then look to the way they have been treated in the past 100 years. And then look deeper, and see how they have been treated in the past 50 years, and then in the past 20. Racism hasn't disappeared, they are not suddenly viewed without stereotype, and many do not view themselves without stereotype.
The color has nothing innately to do with it, it's the section of society that their color has caused them to be placed in.
If you want to disagree with me, fine. But I'm only stating what I GREW UP knowing. Maybe I grew up in a bad area and all these incidents are isolated to that. But don't try and make me seem like an idiot because of my life experience.
Or lack thereof. Travel, see the world, meet people. The more people you meet, the more you realize that race says absolutely nothing about people except it may point to the culture that they were raised in.
Or, and this may sound bizarre, try to meet some of these people you are talking about. You will find that while perhaps a large amount of them in your district may behave the way you say, this large amount is not necessarily a majority. And if you begin to learn about them, their personal pasts, and their family lives, you may begin to understand their positions.
At 5/14/09 06:00 PM, NeverHundred wrote:At 5/14/09 05:43 PM, GreenLanturn wrote: Originality isn't completely dead.As an artist I beg to differ. The secret to being an artist isn't coming up with something new... it's hiding the fact you're repackaging something that is old and unoriginal.
You should not be an artist.
