Moderator: Community Team
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis

So you pretended Obama was a Paladin and McCain was a crusty old Zombie and you played Dungeon and Dragons to see who would win and that's who you voted for?GabonX wrote:The ballot was confusing...
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis

Wait, why would you need to pretend McCain was a crusty old zombie?DaGip wrote:So you pretended Obama was a Paladin and McCain was a crusty old Zombie and you played Dungeon and Dragons to see who would win and that's who you voted for?GabonX wrote:The ballot was confusing...
You are so right...Snorri1234 wrote:Wait, why would you need to pretend McCain was a crusty old zombie?DaGip wrote:So you pretended Obama was a Paladin and McCain was a crusty old Zombie and you played Dungeon and Dragons to see who would win and that's who you voted for?GabonX wrote:The ballot was confusing...
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis

I knew it!Snorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis

QFTSnorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.
Pretty much...Frigidus wrote:QFTSnorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.
I think it was more of a lack of charisma and media attention. He would've been a decent candidate if it weren't for the others being far more interresting. I mean, who wouldn't see the potential for high ratings in Clinton or Obama? They got all the attention because of what they were and not so much who they were.GabonX wrote:Pretty much...Frigidus wrote:QFTSnorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.
John Edwards is pretty much the white version of Obama, an inexperienced yet well spoken former lawyer turned Senator of the Democratic party, and we all know how far he got. He had a full term in the senate and he couldn't get any steam which leads me to believe that people were voting for Clinton and Obama over him solely on the basis of race and gender.
Oh yes that too.PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.
But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!
It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.
It doesn't bother you that he is all about gigantic government and heavy taxes? I prefer someone in favor of a leaner government.PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.
But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!
It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.
ICAN wrote: im not finishing this game ball-less wonder go find another eunich to play with.
I am not anti government.black elk speaks wrote:It doesn't bother you that he is all about gigantic government and heavy taxes? I prefer someone in favor of a leaner government.PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.
But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!
It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.
Its funny that you mention the deregulation thing... I heard today that it was actually Clinton that started that deregulation of the banking system on his way out. You also have to keep in mind that it has been democrats that have been largely in power over the senate and house recently. They are all bad and they are all in favor of larger government. Its too big already.PLAYER57832 wrote:I am not anti government.black elk speaks wrote:It doesn't bother you that he is all about gigantic government and heavy taxes? I prefer someone in favor of a leaner government.PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.
But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!
It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.
We had a time of no government. It was the time when Vanderbilt, Rockafeller, etc. got very, very rich ... and most other people were very poor. I prefer the 1950's, when a man go work hard for 40-50 hours a week, come home and, if he kept his nose clean, he'd have a decent house, be able to send his kids to college and even have a pension to fall back upon.
I also rather like having national parks (museums), Forests (play/harvest areas) and clean water to drink, air to breath. Not to far north of here is a place called Love Canal... not to mention a place far less famous just down my street (where every employee ended up dying of cancer). Regulations helped ensure that we won't have that exact thing again.
I also think our highway system works better than our rail system. The first is public. The second is private. Granted, there have been a few notable failures in recent years ... but compare that to the many failures rail has experienced due to poor maintenance, etc.
And, yes, I feel schools are fundamental to a democracy. Education is key to everything. It is far to important to be subject to whims of profits and the voice of whomever happens to have the money at the time.
BUT, as for that "leaner government" part. No one has done more to erode the basic freedoms of the American citizen than George W. Bush.
A big part of why we are IN this mess is the whole move to deregulate the banking system. The banks got into something they did not understand ... and now WE have to pick up the tab, because they were allowed to ignore safeguards regarding minimum deposits and holdings previously in place.
And, the worst part about it is we had been essentially down this road before .. or a very similar one. .. back with the S & L collapse.
ICAN wrote: im not finishing this game ball-less wonder go find another eunich to play with.
Since you are a scientist, then it should interest you that Palin is not the only one in this country (or the world for that matter) that believes in the End of Days and that the AntiChrist now walks among us. Behold:PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.
But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!
It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis

black elk speaks wrote:Its funny that you mention the deregulation thing... I heard today that it was actually Clinton that started that deregulation of the banking system on his way out. You also have to keep in mind that it has been democrats that have been largely in power over the senate and house recently. They are all bad and they are all in favor of larger government. Its too big already.PLAYER57832 wrote:
BUT, as for that "leaner government" part. No one has done more to erode the basic freedoms of the American citizen than George W. Bush.
A big part of why we are IN this mess is the whole move to deregulate the banking system. The banks got into something they did not understand ... and now WE have to pick up the tab, because they were allowed to ignore safeguards regarding minimum deposits and holdings previously in place.
And, the worst part about it is we had been essentially down this road before .. or a very similar one. .. back with the S & L collapse.
precisely what the constitution says. But the way that the government (which is really just the power mongers at the top anymore) sucks power and responsibility up from the people, its only a matter of time before our government collapses like the Soviet Union did. Only a matter of time.PLAYER57832 wrote: Back it up to Reagan .. nay Nixon. ... nay ...
It is a constant battle ... at least in public. The REAL battle is over control of the presidency.
It is not a matter of government being big or small. It must be effective. Effectiveness means that government takes care of infrastructure, and protects the rights of the individual.
We need government because not all of us are rich or powerful. Without government, you have anarchy until someone big enough and strong enough to take over comes in ... and then you have a dictatorship.
Freedom is not the opposit of government. Freedom is here because we have a decent (not perfect) government.
ICAN wrote: im not finishing this game ball-less wonder go find another eunich to play with.
Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.black elk speaks wrote:precisely what the constitution says. But the way that the government (which is really just the power mongers at the top anymore) sucks power and responsibility up from the people, its only a matter of time before our government collapses like the Soviet Union did. Only a matter of time.PLAYER57832 wrote: Back it up to Reagan .. nay Nixon. ... nay ...
It is a constant battle ... at least in public. The REAL battle is over control of the presidency.
It is not a matter of government being big or small. It must be effective. Effectiveness means that government takes care of infrastructure, and protects the rights of the individual.
We need government because not all of us are rich or powerful. Without government, you have anarchy until someone big enough and strong enough to take over comes in ... and then you have a dictatorship.
Freedom is not the opposit of government. Freedom is here because we have a decent (not perfect) government.
you have been drinking again.Snorri1234 wrote:Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.
The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.
ICAN wrote: im not finishing this game ball-less wonder go find another eunich to play with.
Yes, but it's still true. The world fuckings sucks. The government is controlling people through television (people in your country watch 4 it four hours a day)and other shit and using fear and anger to guide your thougths. People are tricked into giving away power, people are told they are free when they are really not. It's all just a bunch of fucking lies and people don't understand that.black elk speaks wrote:you have been drinking again.Snorri1234 wrote:Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.
The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.
maybe in your country. People in this country still have the right to bear arms. We also have the moral obligation to rip our government apart if it is deserving. I think that it is deserving already but that is just me... maybe a few others. Hey... snorri... did you see that? trails...Snorri1234 wrote:Yes, but it's still true. The world fuckings sucks. The government is controlling people through television (people in your country watch 4 it four hours a day)and other shit and using fear and anger to guide your thougths. People are tricked into giving away power, people are told they are free when they are really not. It's all just a bunch of fucking lies and people don't understand that.black elk speaks wrote:you have been drinking again.Snorri1234 wrote:Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.
The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.
And it will always be this way because the people who have the power to change it are the people who get the most benefit from keeping the situation exactly like it is.
ICAN wrote: im not finishing this game ball-less wonder go find another eunich to play with.
Hahaha, bullshit. Your right to bear arms doesn't help. Nearly every newsshow there has a couple of murders or bad things at least to make people afraid of nearly everything and give away their security or rights to the government because they think the government can help them. The government created that feeling, so they basically don't have to deal with the problem because it isn't there. People are so engrossed by television and it shapes their thoughts and emotions like nothing seen before. Fear is one of the most powerfull emotions you can have and it blocks out reason with ease. This is why GW Bush had nearly no problem leading you guys into a war against Iraq by playing on your fears of terrorism and WMD's. He didn't need any evidence. (Did you know people are willing to pay more for flightinsurance against "acts of terrorism resulting in death" than flightinsurance against "all possible causes of death"? Logically, all causes of death includes terrorism and a vast amount of other shit so it would be reasonable to pay more for that, but people are just too fucking scared by the word "terrorism" that their reasoning-skills stop working.)black elk speaks wrote:
maybe in your country. People in this country still have the right to bear arms. We also have the moral obligation to rip our government apart if it is deserving. I think that it is deserving already but that is just me... maybe a few others. Hey... snorri... did you see that? trails...