DeathBug

[quote name='JJRiddler']No you see the deal with Bush was that they attacked us so we go destory two countries and ruin countless people's lives so we have revenge.[/quote] Presient Bush said, the night of 9/11, that we would make no distinction between the terrorists and the countries hiding them. That was a cue for every country with terrorists to surrender them. Yes, we sure ruined lives in Afghanistan. Look at all those women not getting beaten to death for going to school! The horror! [quote name='JJRiddler']With WWII, they bombed us and we knew exactly who to get back. [/quote] We knew the Japanese bombed us, yet we struck the Germans first. According to your logic, that was completely wrong; we should have left the poor Nazi's alone, because they didn't bomb us. [QUOTE=JJRiddler]They knew bombing us would cost them thier country. [/QUOTE] If by "they" you mean the Japanese, it didn't. After WWII, we helped rebuild their country to the point where they were economically stronger than us in the early nineties. [quote name='JJRiddler']Oh so its Clinton this Clinton that. Just becuase Clinton was a pimp, and he got caught doesn't mean that everything Bush has screwed up was his fault. [/quote] President Bush didn't screw up education, which was my point. Niether did President Clinton; education was already screwed up, and had been for a while. My point was, President Clinton had eight years to fix it, and didn't. If President Bush must take blame for education, so must President Clinton. If Clinton doesn't, Bush doesn't. [QUOTE=JJRiddler]You do know that due to his "No Child Left Behind Act" that some schools have taken time out of thier Social Studies programs to make time for Math and Reading? [/QUOTE] Including yours? That would explain your misconceptions of WWII and current events. [QUOTE=JJRiddler]Hello. Documents can be fake. Hussein probably planted those to make Bush gain confidence and then when he least expects it BAM! He strikes with Great Vengence. [/QUOTE] That has got to be the most nonsensical paragraph I've ever read. Yes, I'm sure Hussein thought it would a great idea to give the "cowboy" yet another reason to go after him. And I'm sure his "Great Vengence" will be great; I'm just wondering how he's going to pull it off inside a prison cell. [quote name='JJRiddler']THERE WERE NO WEAPONS! There prpbably were,[/quote] Are you sure you're not John Kerry? [quote name='JJR']What Iraq does to its people is no business of ours. [/quote] What Hitler does to his people is no concern of ours. Prior to Pearl Harbour, the US ran a news story about a concentration camp in, I think, Austria. Just a single camp. The US knew that Hitler was killing people; they just didn't know the horrible full scope. And people still said not to get involved in the war effort. Knowing what we know now, that's kind of a stupid and selfish sentiment, isn't it? [QUOTE=JJR]It ridculus that we as a nation are forced to suffer so some egomanic can save some people who don't want to be saved. [/QUOTE] We're sure suffering, huh, with our free elections, economic growth, free press, trial by jury and general safety. The insurgents in Iraq acount for less that 5% of the total Iraqi population. The rest of the people, who can now be educated, open free businesses, speak their minds and not live in fear of their government gassing them, have a much more positive opinion. [quote name='JJR']Because its immoral.[/quote] And apathy to murder isn't? [quote name='JJR']For all our "good we're doing for the Iraqis they don't seem to like it[/quote] The insurgents in Iraq acount for less that 5% of the total Iraqi population. The rest of the people, who can now be educated, open free businesses, speak their minds and not live in fear of their government gassing them, have a much more positive opinion. [quote name='JJR']Because they're rich. I mean if you have enough money that you can't handle giving the goverment some then you really shouldn't have that money in the first place.[/quote] Thank you, Karl Marx. I sincerely hope you become rich one day, so you might understand why some people don't like the idea of being punished for being hard-working and successful. [quote name='JJR']Um. Hello. JFK had something going. Hmm. Let's see the MOON! Perhaps. I mean thats a reachable goal. NOT MARS! [/quote] Mars is completely reachable. [quote name='JJR']Stem Cell Research is a much better way to spend government money.[/quote] Except that most of President Bush's voting constituents are opposed to stem cell research. whether it's right or wrong is irrelevent, the President's electoral base doesn't like it, so he won't act towards it. [QUOTE=JJR]They could use the embros from the Abortionist Clinic. [/QUOTE] We're already killing them, so let's harvest their parts while we're at it? Have I stepped into Brave New World? [quote name='JJR']Well the subject of the matter is they went in on thought ot belief. If I jumped in a a shark's mouth in belief that someone ten miles away would see me, is that a good thing?[/quote] Probably. Unless you started explaing politics to the shark, in which case the poor thing would vomit. Between 1984 and 1988, six seperate teams of UN investigators documented instances of Iraq using chemical weapons on Iranians. In 1988, the Security Council blamed Iraq for using mustard gas in attacks against Iranian cities. The same year, Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz openly admitted that poson gas was enshrined in official Iraqi war policy. Iraq failed to account for hundreds of tons of chemical precursors and tens of thousands of unfilled warheads. Nor has it accounted for 550 artillary shells filled with mustard gas. In the early eighties, Sadaam built a nuclear plantt that would have given him the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons; however, it was destroyed in an air strike by Isreal. So, yes, the UN believed Sadaam had WMD's. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']In any case, it can be spun a whole bunch of ways depending on what you want to prove as shown in many examples [/quote] Indeed; I'd like to see where you got this data from. The only people I've heard make a similar claim are Al Gore and NPR. [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman']We didn't have support from Russia, Germany or France. In less than two weeks we lose Spain for sure and possibly a few other countries. [/quote] Except that last week's UN decision passed 15-0 in favor of the US plan. The situation has rapidy improved, wouldn't you agree? [quote name='CHW']Have you ever been to France? Okay neither have I unless you count the Paris Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, but it's kinda crappy to say taht a whole country sucks for not wanting to go to some foriegn country[/quote] Yes, I wqent to Paris for one day. Beautiful city. Don't misunderstand me; I've held my opinion of France and their suckage long before the war in Iraq, based on their long history of sucking. [QUOTE=CHW]I'm sure if we give them a few years and someone invades them again they'll turn around right? [/QUOTE] ROTFL! ^___^ [quote name='CHW']I don't seem to recall Clinton ever saying he was going to invade Iraq in the eight years he was president[/quote] "We gave saddam a chance, not a liscence. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibilty of US power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction; we will also have fatally undercut the fear of frorce that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination of the region." -Bill Clinton, 1998. Wow, even President Clinton believed Saddam to have WMD's. [quote name='CHW']Thee Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on the 7th of December 1941 and FDR retaliated by joining the allied forces to defeat a known enemy[/quote] Again, we wnt after Germany at first, not Japan. But that wasn't my point; your original statement was that you hate war, [i]therefore[/i] you hate President Bush. If that is your logic, than any president who got us into wars is to be hated, including FDR, JFK, and Bush Sr. [quote name='CHW']Iraq never attacked us[/quote] Again, niether did Germany. But we fought them, defeated them, rebuilt them, and watched them prosper. Again, history doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes often. [QUOTE=CHW]Rooselvelt got us out of a depression and Bush is helping us get into one. [/QUOTE] Forgive my saying so, but Roosevelt was an incompetent president who saddled the US with ineffective entitlement programs that still haunt us today, allowed Washington to be riddled with Soviet spies, and surrendered Polland to Joeseph Stalin. The one thing he did right was push for US entrence into WWII, and show great fortitude during it. [quote name='CHW']A friend of mine who worked with my husband stateside said that she may have voted for Bush sr if he ran again [/quote] I'd have voted for Bush Sr. because he was eighty and jumped out of an airplane. ^__^ However, I'm not talking about personal aqquaintances; I'm talking about national survies. I heard it on NPR, I believe. [QUOTE=CHW]We've had quite a few debates about such matters. [/QUOTE] Interesting; Mister Lincoln Chibihorsewoman is for the war? [quote name='CHW']You're basically giving an example of a military conflict which ended in countless MIAs KIAs and eventually a retreat by the US after the fall of Saigon.[/quote] Yes, there were great casulties on both sides, but it was undeniably a disaster for the Viet Cong. However, they never intended to win the battle. Commanders interviewed later said that they knew of the anti-war movement in the US, and wanted to create such a bloodly spectacle as to reverse public opinion, thus demoralizing the troops and leadingt o a retreat. It worked. Public opinion of a war matters greatly. [quote name='CHW']Yeah, but did you read what Undefeated wrote above my reply? They say fight fire with fire right?[/quote] Yeah, I did, but you're too smart to have to lower yourself to that. [QUOTE=CHW]This decision on his part has made a bishop from MIssori decide that Kerry shouldn't be allowed to receive communion which is quite important to the Catholic faith. [/QUOTE] Stupid Catholic bishop expecting Catholics to adhere to Catholic beliefs. [quote name='CHW']Bush is still largely pro-life which makes me want to vote for Kerry.[/quote] Sounds fair; Kerry's still not trustworthy, in my opinion. [quote name='CHW']When taking a stand on a subject concerning such heavy topics you should usually try to weigh both sides and see what you get in the outcome.[/quote] You presented one side, I opresented the opposite side. THat's why I called it Devil's advocate; I doin't subscribe to what I said there. BTW, less than 10% of abortions take place because of rape. The rape argument personally irritates me because it's an emotional ploy not based on science, statistics, or even religion. It's a cheap shot. The pro-life reply is: "Try telling a baby it has to die because of its parents irresponsibility and see how far you get." [quote name='CHW']For example I belive that if Bush got his way and Roe vs Wade was overturned you'd have more women dying from illegal abortions which are performed without any medical guidelines instead of legal abortions which are relatively safe. [/quote] This particular pro-abortion argument is also fundamentally flawed, and you really should'nt use it. "They'll do illegal stuff anyway, so you might as well make it legal". Is that what you're saying? And, again, a pro-life person would say: "All types ofabortion are dangerous, to the baby." [quote name='CHW']I think Brittany was more of a threat to the sanctityy of marriage than anyone in California could hoppe to be.[/quote] That argument rests upon the assumption that I agree with celebrity Jiffy-Wed, which I don't. You're completely right on that: Spears, Lopez and their ilk are making a mockery of the institution. My opinion of marriges on the whole is that the government shouldn't recognize them at all, seeing as they're a religious institution. Each individual church should decide for themselves their stance. [quote name='CHW']Call it a hunch. You get rid of one thing, soon you'll get rid of another[/quote] That's an illogical conclusion, though. "If I chop down a tree in my lawn, it's not long before I'm wiping out whole forests." Besides, President Bush isn't God; hhe has to pass things through Congress like everyone else. [quote name='CHW']YOu only put that quote in as some sort of self gratyfication, didn't you?[/quote] Well, actually, I put it in because I appreciated the gesture and wanted to thank you. However, if I'm going to be an [url=www.evilconservatives.com]Evil Conservative[/url], the proper answer would be, "Yes, I did, because I am great." [QUOTE=CHW]There is also question as to if the military may have already begun okaying tourture such as being stripped, intimidation and forced sleep loss. [/QUOTE] That's just ridiculous. We have much better ways of making people talk that don't humiliate or harm. [QUOTE=CHW]I think we need a few more choices! [/QUOTE] Ralph Nadar, the Devil No One Seems to Care About?

Yeah, I'm just going to reply to random points. I've already explained my voting policy, but, meh. [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman']Yes, if you call turning one of the largest surpluses our nation has had in a while into one of the largest deficites our country has had in a while a plan for economy-well sure I guess it is.[/quote] Actually, I do, in a fashion; surpluses are bad. Economically, a macro surplus is a sign of inefficiency; not all resources are being used to their fullest capabilities. The formula for Gross National Product is G+I+C+NX. That's government spending plus investments plus consumption plus net exports. If you increase any of these, all things remaining equal, the GNP will rise. Increasing government spending will lead to a greater return as long as the other factors remain stable; you have to spend money to make money. Therefore, we can see that a surplus is actually a bad thing; the surplus that Clinton gets credit for should actually be the surplus he gets blame for, as it heralded economic downtimes. ("G" went down, so GNP went down.) That said, I personally find President Bush's spending a bit exessive for my taste; it will most likely bring a wave of inflation. [quote name='Chibihorsewoman']Add that onto the uneployment rate going up due to jobs going over seas and yes Bush has a plan for sending this country's economy to Hell in handbasket[/quote] That's just flat-out wrong; the unemployment rate has been falling since the end of '03. It's June, now, and President Bush has reached half of the jobs he promised to bring back into the economy. We'll be back to pre-9/11 levels before thje year is through. And, quite frankly, who cares if jobs are going over seas? It's only economical for certain types of jobs to be outsourced, which means that others jobs in America are open. Jobs are there, but in different fields than they were before. Outsourcing is also beneficial to GNP; it leads to an increase in foreign investment. Speaking of foreign investors, did you know that several indian companies have actually started to outsource to us? As Austin Powers said, "Yay, capitalism." [quote name='Chibihorswoman']I fail to see how going to war when you have no support from your allies or the rest of the world for that matter give you credibility[/quote] Actually, we had support from our allies; just not all of them. And, I'm sorry, but France just sucks. with a passion. As for the "credibility" issue, it's actually irrelevent; I wouldn't go to a war just for that. However, the war does give the US credibility; the president said we would do something, and we did. After eight years of empty threats, it's rather refreshing. [quote name='Chibihorsewoman']As for the war in general I hate it with a passion therefore I detest Bush for getting us into this whole ordeal [/quote] Your logic is flawed; do you hate FDR for getting us into WWII? [quote name='Chibihorsewoman']risking their lives and not knowing why.[/quote] Maybe you don't know why, but survey data clearly shows that the men and women actually fighting the war know why. Not only is the militarily vastlysupports the war (almost twice as many who supported opperations in Bosnia), but the vast majority of the military personal survied said they would vote for President Bush. [QUOTE=Chibihorsewoman]you Bush administration for another Vietnam. [/QUOTE] I'm surprised and a little dissappointed in you, CHW. As the wife of a serviceman, surely you realize that such comparisons are horribly demoralizing for deployed troops. REmember, the Tet offensive was a victory for the Viet Cong even though it was a military disaster for them; they didn't win a single battle except in the minds of the American people. [quote name='CHW']That doesn't sound like a very good plan for education to me. [/quote] Education decays for a decade under Clinton, and now it's Bush's fault he can't fix it? Right. [quote name='CHW']Perhaps if our nation got more in touch with its feminine side instead of going with the masculine don't stop and ask for directions idealism that's been so predominant in this administration this country could go back up hill instead of down hill as it is right now.[/quote] Wow, that was sexist. [quote name='CHW']Morality is a very debateable subject.[/quote] On many issues, yes, it is. However, President Bush has been consistant on his stance on these issues, while John Kerry has flipped like a pancake on most of them. [quote name='CHW']You find the government getting involved in a woman's right to reproduce, and telling people who are in love that they can't be married legally because they're the same sex as a moral obligation. [/quote] I'm gonna play Devil's Advocate for a second: If you're against the above, you don't consider it a woman's righ to reproduce, you consider it a child's right to live. You also aren't opposed to gay marrige because it's neccessarily immoral, but because it's impossible by the definition of marrige. I'm not trying to pick a fight on either of those issues; I'm just saying, the other side has valids points of their own that can't be simply dismissed. [quote name='CHW']Does that make me an immoral person?[/quote] No; disagreeing with me does. ~_^ [quote name='CHW']I also believe that after Bush gets rid of abortion-birth control is next[/quote] And your support for this is...? He's not Catholic, you know. [quote name='CHW']If Bush is willing to involve himself in people's sex lives[/quote] Which he isn't; he's acknowledging certain legal rammifications that some peoples' sex lives can cause. [quote name='CHW']who's to say he wouldn't consider revoking people's freedom of religion as well?[/quote] If you leta barber cut your hair, how long before he's hacking off your limbs? [quote name='CHW']And as for being a liberal thinker-what's so bad about being a forward thinker and trying to change the world?[/quote] Well, 'liberal' and conservative have taken on connotations not originally associated with their initial definitions. However, not everything needs changing; if it ain't broke, don't fix it. [QUOTE=CHW]That would be Deathbug, right? [/QUOTE] Yes, yes it would. Gracias, senora. ^__^ [QUOTE=CHW]As my mom says 'If you can't say something without swearing it's not worth saying in the first place' [/QUOTE] Agreed; don't interpret my comments as approval of Undefeated's behavior. [quote name='CHW']True, we don't need backing to go start a war, but having support from an international community while starting a war sure as hell does help.[/quote] A paramedic really likes to have his tools availible to him when he's helping an injured person, but them not being there doesn't stop him from helping. [QUOTE=CHW]Just ask any soldier over there, I'm sure they'd rather have some positive reinforcements in this stupid 'war on terror' than all the crap they keep getting. [/QUOTE] Then why don't we give them positive support instead of dumping all this crap on them? Who do you think is doing the crap dumping? Ask a soldier in iraq if he cares what France has to say. [quote name='CHW']We're hardly a superpower [/quote] No, that's just wrong. Undefeated actually got a point right, but the wrong reasoing. The US is, in fact, the last superpower. Our political, social, and economical influence is unmatched by any country in the world. why do you think we're being watched? [quote name='CHW']I believe Donald Rumsfeld stated that the detanies at Guantanamo Bay were even to be denied basic rights under the GEneva Conventions[/quote] No, he didn't. [quote name='Crimson Spider']There are no longer any "bad" presidents. Only ones you disagree with.[/quote] There are no longer any 'bad' actions; only ones you disagree with. Sorry, but I'll argue against that line of thought until I'm blue in the face. (I'm asthmatic, so that might be earlier than you think.) [quote name='Chibihorsewoman']Bush is very strongly pro-life, I don't know Kerry's actual opinion on the subject.[/quote] If you find it out, be sure to tell kerry. He'd probably like to know, too. [quote name='CHW']But Bush seems determined to over turn Roe vs Wade and as a woman and some one who is very strongly pro choice that worries me. [/quote] Cool, but understand, this isn't President Bush's personal holy crusade; a great deal of Americans feel the same way he does. Abortion is a very devisive issue. [quote name='CHW']The government has no place in the bedrooms of the people it governs.[/quote] But doesn't already have one? Isn't giving freedom to have an abortion just as much of a presense as revoking that freedom? Besides, the government does't care what your doing with whom; it's more concerned about the human being those actions give life to. (At least, if you're pro-life, that's how you see it.) [quote name='pbfrontmanvdp']My question has always been, how do you know if a teacher is considered "highly qualified" by simple taking a test in your subject area.[/quote] Our entire social system is based on taking tests in your subject area. Passing the Bar exam doesn't make you a good lawyer, for example. Heck, schooling itself can be boiled down to a series of tests, and most of them are simple info-regurgetation on the part of the student. [QUOTE]I feel that by staying in Iraq and trying to solve the problems there is just a waste of time[/QUOTE] I'm sorry you feel that way. [QUOTE]Many people don't really realize how badly unemployment is currently[/QUOTE] Because, as I've already said, it's not that bad; unemployment is falling. [quote name='CHW']the US should try what they've done in other countries after wars and set up small bases in the area.[/quote] That's actually the plan; currently, the country with the largest coalition in Iraq is...Iraq. The transition is working as planned. [quote name='CHW']I really wish I knew more about where Kerry stands on issues like economy and the whole 'War on Terror' issue.[/quote] Well, Kerry used to just be the Anti-Bush, but a recent New York Times article analyzed both candidates' Iraq strategies; guess what? They're almost identical. So....who knows where Kerry stands? He sure doesn't. [quote name='CHW']But what if the devil you know is leading you down a road to ruin and the devil you don't know could help you out? [/quote] The devil we don't know doesn't even have a road map. [quote name='cloricus']Last time I checked America was having a hell of a time holding their own let a lone asserting complete control over the country.[/quote] Checked with who? Lady Cleo? Despite your fondest wishes to the contrary, the US plan for Iraq is on-track. Yes, there was violence. Yes, there will be other attacks. Guess what? They were expected, and mostly unavoidable. [QUOTE=cloricus]They are not a sovereign country and even after this 'hand over' takes place they still will not control their own country. [/QUOTE] Take a history class; the same question were posed after the reconstruction of Germany at the end of WWII. Is Germany a soveriegn nation? Again, there will be problems, have no doubt about that. However, the end result will be the same: a free, democratic Iraq in control of its own destiny. [quote name='cloricus']Oh wait, you guys are getting all the 'why we went to war' propaganda. ...What is it now? [/quote] Funny you should mention that; the new Iraqi Prime Minister recently presented documents from Hussein's government that clealy show a connection between Hussein and al Queida. Yet the international community hasn't heard of them, because to do so would mean to admit that President Bush was *gasp* right. Who's being fed propaganda? [quote name='CHW']This could go one of two ways: America pre 1789 or what brought Afghanistan to the lovely mess that allowed Al Queda to take over. [/quote] Or Germany, 1945. Remember, history doen't repeat itself, but it rhymes. [quote name='MistressRoxie']I'd vote for him anyways because his name isn't Bush,[/quote] A word of warning: "Anybody but Bush" is a horrible foundation for any party or candidate. [quote name='MistressRoxie']but there's so many people who vote on the way they feel about the issues[/quote] Voting based on the issues? The fools. [quote name='Tamaway']If he does, then that means we (the United States of America) will have to be with him and his decisions for an another four whole years [/quote] But, if he wins, wouldn't that mean that the majority of the United States wants to be with him and his decisions? [quote name='Terrax']im very anti-bush so anybody other than him would be an improvement[/quote] A word of warning: "Anybody but Bush" is a horrible foundation for any party or candidate. [quote name='NaturalBlue']I loathe Kerry with a vengence.[/quote] Why? I can certainly understanding not liking his policies (or lack thereof) and his political party, but why would you loathe the man personally? Petty, vindictive character remarks are for Democrats, and I'd hate to see someone with the good sense to vote conservative fall into the same pattern ofbehavior. [quote name='cloricus']you have not seen Kerry in office.[/quote] Actually, that's not entirely true; Kerry's been a Senator since 1984. He has a record of decision-making that can easily be referenced. What do we learn from this record? Kerry waffles. A lot. [quote name='cloricus']we can all see how unstable and knee-jerkish he is. [/quote] 'Unstable'? [quote name='cloricus']Can anything honestly be worse than a man who declares war on some one he hasn't liked for ten years for no reason? [/quote] Actually, the existance of WMD's was acknowledged by the entire international community; that was never the question. The question was what should be done about them. Also, remember, the Iraqi Prime Minister presented the paoperwork showing the financial link between Iraq and a Queida. But, to answer the question, "Ignoring a government that rapes and tortures its own citizens." [quote name='cloricus']Also Bush seems to be pulling out of this war as fast as possible[/quote] So, first President Bush is wrong for going to war, now he's wrong for trying to end it as quickly as possible? Would'nt you try to end a war as soon as possible? [quote name='cloricus']Also do you even know why you support this war? [/quote] Yes. Do you know why you hate it? [QUOTE=cloricus]Do you even get it past your bias skull that you have been lied to, on many occasions, that has lead to this whole situation in the first place? [/QUOTE] Yes; I call that the "Democratic party". I wasn't a Republican when the war started; I was driven to be one after the disgusting display of many high-level democrats once the war started. [quote name='cloricus']not just think what your parents have indoctrinated you to follow[/quote] But wait... [quote name='cloricus']my family follows the party that Mark Latham is in, heck I don't even know it's name, all I care about is it is the party that is more for the people. [/quote] So, his family is wrong, and yours is right, because of Mark Latham and that...that party, whatever it's called? I sense a double-standard. [QUOTE=cloricus] what is best for the country and the world. [/QUOTE] Are we sure we're both in the same world? [quote name='cloricus']Now if you are not even thinking along that basic idea, let alone researching it, you really should not be voting.[/quote] How about if you can't name your party? [quote name='cloricus']It should be left to the people who have an idea of what's happening, not to some one who acts like a sheep.[/quote] Mark Latham wants you to baah. [QUOTE=Semjaza Azazel]So basically, you have a tax removed that mostly affects a very small percentage: the extremely wealthy. There goes tons of tax dollars that can be better used for nearly anything. [/QUOTE] Why should the "extremely wealthy" have to pay more taxes than the rest of the country? ("More taxes", not "More in taxes") [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']People knock Clinton, but he wasn't all that bad. [/quote] Yes, he was, but that's for another thread. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']Thanks to "Reaganomics", followed by the Bush Sr. years, this country was quite a bit in debt.[/quote] Except that, before Clinton had even announced his candecy, the economy began to grow, in Mach of 1991. Interestingly enough, the "Clinton Boom" didn't occurr until after the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']Over Clinton's term he managed to compeltely reverse this. We got out of the debt and were 240 billion dollars in surplus.[/quote] Exzcept that, as I explained, surpluses are bad, and herald economic reccession. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']Bush Jr. comes in and it's spend, spend, spend. We're now $500 billion in debt.[/quote] You're right; that is not acceptable. I want President Bush to be able to answer for that. However, it is not the end of the world. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']Unemployment is at its highest rate since the great depression.[/quote] That's flat-out wrong. Again, unemployment has been dropping since late last year. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']Again, this was on the rise under Clinton.[/quote] It started to fall under him, too. [QUOTE=Semjaza Azazel]Bush is willing to give tons of money to NASA for space exploration. That's all well and good, but what's more important right now? [/QUOTE] Reminds me of...what's that guy? Oh, yeah, John F. Kennedy. [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']I feel I can actually believe he'll do them.[/quote] Based on Kerry's stellar Congressional record? [quote name='Semjaza Azazel'] I couldn't vote for Bush with a clean conscience whatsoever. I really don't know how anyone could, but that's their perrogative[/quote] Well, it seems I'm Pure Evil (R), actually. Bummer, huh? [quote name='Semjaza Azazel']I hate politics.[/quote] I love it. :demon: [quote name='Terrax']the whole basis on invading was because of WMDs which weren't absolutly provene to exsist[/quote] Actually, the UN believed Iraq to have WMD's as well. That was never the question; the question was how to respond. [quote name='Terrax']in the end it all comes down to one thing, oil.[/quote] If the US went into iraq for oil...then where is it? And if we wanted oil, couldn't we have simply dropped our trade embargo with Iraq? Or maybe oil wasn't a factor?

[quote name='BlueYoshi']Pretty much the same thing. They were bugs and dinosaurs because the makers wanted them to be bugs and dinosaurs; they thought that they'd suit those roles because of people's stereotypical views upon animals. What you said is probably just an explanation as to why they're in that form.[/quote] So? The Insectacons were Decepticons because people don't like bugs. The Dinobots were Autobots because people like dinosaurs. G1 Megatron is a gun, reinforceing negative views of guns. If this is the worst you can say about the series, that means something. By the way, Maximals have included sharks, bats, hyenas, manta rays, squids, and spiders, not exactly animals with "noble" perceptions. [quote name='BlueYoshi'] liked the Transformers more because of the amount of activity involved within it. Seeing Megatron take over an oilwell whilst taking hostages showed how keen he is as a leader, that's probably a quality that may have been shown in Beast Wars, but I don't think it could ever reach the extent that the Tarnsformers took it to, that's true lineage in every way.[/color][/quote] So, you haven't even seen Beast Wars, then? No wonder your qualms with it are so irreverent. Dude, do yourself a favor and rent the first and second seasons on DVD. The Agenda and Code of Hero alone will blow your G1 mind. And G1 Megatron was a crappy leader. Seriously. BW Megatron, on the other hand, actually won. Several times.

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Apparently, no one is going to show any common sense, so I will: Beast Wars (And its spin-off, Beast Machines) was the best Transformers series ever, and one of the best cartoons of all times. [quote name='BlueYoshi']It practically parades animals as good or bad in accordance to the nature they live by in wildlife[/quote] Uh...no, it didn't. the Predacons had insect and dinosaur forms because they crash-landed in a wasteland area, with nothing for their DNA-scanners to choose from except bugs and fossils. The Maximals landed in a lush area, and had more to choose from. Oh, and one of the main maximals characters was a rat, who, according to your theory, should have been a Predacon. Beast Wars had something the original Transformers solely lacked: depth beyond a mere 1/2 hour toy commercial. I mean, the fact that they kept a cast of only five-seven characters on each sidew was a vast improvement over G1 alone, where every character from the toys had to appear to get an animation clip to use in toy commercials. Hey, we also have real characters with real complexities. Dinobot alone is a case study. Optimus Primal, Megatron, Cheetor, Tarantulas , BlackArachniaa nd most of the other characters actually change and progress as the series evolves, stepping out of the shdows of sterotypical character archetypes. The Beast wars wasn't a black-and-white plotline. Megatron's speech in the last part of The Agenda actually explains Predacon behavior in a favorable light; his race has been agroup of second-class citizens, payin for the crimes of the Decepticons. Who wouldn't want to change that? (Granted, at this point, megs lost all his marbles, but still...) Characters switched sides, the Preadcons won a few, and characters really died. THe episode Code of Hero, where Dinobot dies (aftert aking on every Predacon in succession) is better than anything G1 produced in its entire run. The bottom line is, Beast WArs is the highest ring in terms of Transformer quality. When Hasbro abandoned thes tory line, things immediatly went downhill with RiD and Armada. If Beast Wars isn't "real Transformers", I'm not a "real" Transformers fan.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Ironically, I'm listening to Simple Plan's "God Must Hate Me" as I type this. My mother always told me that in most social situations, the two things you should never discuss are religion and politics, because everyone has a different view, and they hold them strongly. I've got to agree with the sentiment. If asked, I'll tell people my religion (unafilliated Christian), but I'm not going to make a huge point of explaining my entire belief system, or my political beliefs, for that matter. (Moderate conservative.) My best friend is Catholic, and one of my other close friends is agnostic. Does this create a problem? Nah. Why? Because we don't spend our time focussing on the differences that divide us. Our friendships are grounded in the simillarities between us and the differences that compliment each other. I really don't think religion will be a problem unless it's made into one. If you're a true friend, you'll respect your friends' faiths, and vice-versa. I also find myself agreeing with Boba, Akita. Maybe your friend was more upset by the fact that you damaged her property woithout asking than the fact that you have different beliefs. That's just rude, and shows a disrespect to your friend by disrespecting her property. (Property is an extension of the person.) I wouldn't bat an eye if a friend of mine said s/he was into witchcraft, but if they said they "have a fancy for...anything sharp", then I'd be concerned, especially if they sliced-n-diced my stuff.[/color][/size][/font]

[quote name='Lady Macaiodh][color=darkblue']Reagan performed some of the greatest presidential acts since Kennedy desegregated public schools. A celebration of Reagan's political career is a celebration of what makes America great.[/color][/quote] [quote name='Lady Macaiodh][color=darkblue]I'm so sick of the spoiled, bratty attitudes around this place. You'd think we were living in a third world country, the way you [i]kids[/i'] complain about America and politicians all the time.[/color][/quote] [quote name='Lady Macaiodh][color=darkblue] If you don't like Reagan, just have some respect for the dead and stay away from the thread, [i]kids.[/i'] [/color][/quote] [color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Lady M, you're my hero.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]To answer the opening question, I'm not afraid of dying, I'm afraid of being stabbed. It hurts. Any reflection on death should bring you to the conclusion that life is short, and shouldn't be squuandered thinking about death. Death is eternal; you'll have plenty of time to think about it when you're there.[/color][/size][/font]

[QUOTE]Morals are one of the most relative things in human society. Everyone has different personal moral standards. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Morals are interchangeable for everyone.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]As for morals, I'd have to agree that they're relative.[/QUOTE] [color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Then any and all behaviors can be deemed accetable. That's the loggical progression of moral relavitism: anything goes. Speaking of things going, this post is going off-topic, so I'm go to show a rare moment of intellectual self-discipline and end my sentiments about moral relavitism here. Back on topic now.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]It should also be pointed out that US immigrants who don't learn English are doing themselves an extreme disservice. tHey are limiting their opportunities in this country, as well as allowing themselves to become culturally isolated.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]I'll say it once more, in case you weren't listening: [QUOTE]A person who can't show respect to someone else's death is a cretin. This isn't about politics, and I have no interest in making it so. This is about common courtesy, human decency, and having respect for the dead.[/QUOTE] If you hate Regan, then he's dead. Bully for you. Show respect for the dead, and the loss and feelings of others.[/color][/size][/font]

[quote name='Adora']Unfortunately, I know too much about Raegan's policies to be able to respect him as a human being or a politician. I will not deny he had a great impact on the US and the rest of the world. I will not deny he did some great (as in large, far-reaching in their consequences) things in his life. [/quote] You mean, like place political and economic pressure on the Soviet Union, hastening it's collapse? [quote name='Adora']Maybe *now* though, Bushy will re-neg on his deals not to ban stem-cell research outright. Dear Mrs Raegan only prevented him doing so by whinging because poor Ronny had a disease they're investigating the techniques in.[/quote] Yeah, it was all Mrs. Reagan who influenced Bush's decision.. I'm sure the majority of the Republican party and a good chunk of their constituency being against stem-cell research had absolutly nothing to do with it. Do you think before opening your mouth? [quote name='Adora']The man invented Raeganomics, so as far as I'm concerned, I hope he burns in the icy farthest region of Dante's hell.[/quote] The man deserved to die for an economic system? One that [i]worked[/i]? Regan cut taxes axross the board by 25% in 1981. As a result, the economy grew by 31% between 1983 and 1989, for an annual economic growth rate of 3.1%. In the process, Reganomics created almost 20 million new jobs, doubled the value of the stock market, and reduced povery and unemployment rates. [quote name='DeathBug']A person who can't show respect to someone else's death is a cretin. This isn't about politics, and I have no interest in making it so. This is about common courtesy, human decency, and having respect for the dead.[/quote]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']You ARE being overly paranoid (and absolutely unreasonable) in this case. [/quote] If I'm being overly-paranoid, then so are Aldous Huxley, Lois Lowry, George Orwell...buncha' losers, right? [quote name='ScirosDarkblade']You find homosexuality becoming more accepted as some malfunction of our society, [/quote] Hate to break you off mid-sentence, but I don't. I find it as a trend oif our society, one that applies to many other soial patterns. SExual displays, for another example; Elvis' hip swivling was once edited out of tV broadcasts, and now we're at Janet and the Super Bowl. Whether or not this tendency is positive depends on the trend itself. Obviously, I don't find an increase in civil rights to be a bad thing, but public nudity is another issue. [quote name='ScirosDarkblade']and then you use that to reason that euthanasia will end up extending to conditions that are even considered by the goddamn patient to be better than death? Good luck convincing me...[/quote] I don't care about convincing you; I'm just stating my opinion. [quote name='ScirosDarkblade']If the Hippocratic Oath prevents a doctor from performing euthanasia, then someone else has to, because otherwise, as Panda said, the person who wants suicide can do it himself. [/quote] So, we might as well kill 'em, because they'll just kill themselves anyway?

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']I fail to see how you're more mature than me with your name calling. And telling Adora that you wish the same things to be said about her. Take some time to step back and look at what you say before you say it. [/color][/quote] I did not wish the same thing to be said about Adora; I only wished to point out that if your disrespectful towards someone's death, you shouldn't expect different treatment from others. A person who can't show respect to someone else's death [i]is[/i] a cretin. I'm not going to feel sorry for calling a spade a spade. [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']I don't wish for anyone's death and it's cruel of you to say so.[/color][/quote] Erhm... [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']I was hoping it was Bush.[/color][/quote] If that's not what you meant, that's fine, but it's sure how it came across. [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']I was just admitting that I was kind of hoping it would be bush and you can't tell me that other people may or may not feel the same way.[/color][/quote] They and you can feel the same way, and it'd still be wrong. I can't stand hillary Clinton; we are so ideologically opposed that, if we ever came into physical contact, we would both disappear, having cancelled each other's existance out. But I don't want her to die, just her career in politics. [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']Get over it, you probably aren't even old enough to remember any of his policies for the nation.[/color][/quote] Erhm, again... [QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet]I don't know too much of his politics becaus eI was only a baby to a second grader (as were most of you or younger) so I can't make much of a judgement.[/color] [/QUOTE] And that's tangenial to the point, anyway. This isn't about politics, and I have no interest in making it so. This is about common courtesy, human decency, and having respect for the dead.

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']Both of you need a time out.[/color][/quote] No, I don't. I was not angry when I posted, and I stand by what I said. If your view of the world is so petty that you take pleasure in the death of someone ideaologically opposed to you, and in such a flippant and disrespectful manner, then you're a cretin. [quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']I heard that on the car radio yesturday, but had jus t tuned in so I heard them say president and I was hoping it was Bush. I know that sounds bad, but I'm not for BUsh.[/color][/quote] So you would wish death on him? See above. CHW, I respect you and your opinions, but that's disgusting.

[quote name='The Hippocratic Oath (Modern Version)'] I will neither prescribe nor administer a lethal dose of medicine to any patient even if asked nor counsel any such thing nor perform the utmost respect for every human life from fertilization to natural death and reject abortion that deliberately takes a unique human life. [/quote] [QUOTE=Dictionary.com]oath A solemn, formal declaration or promise to fulfill a pledge, often calling on God, a god, or a sacred object as witness. [/QUOTE] [color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]The instant a physician advocates PAS, or agrees to take part in it, s/he violates his/her oath. This concerns me a great deal, if we have physicians who are willing to do so. If you want to edit the oath, that's another matter, but at the beginning of their career, they swore againstt his type of behavior. The reason I am opposed to euthanasia is because of the ramifications endorsing this activity would create. What is the basis behind euthenasia? That the patient wil be in pain that can't be cured. THat's great, but who defines 'pain'? Who says whether or not a life is worth living? The hypocrite doctors? Emotionally distraught family? The person in pain? There is a natural progression in our society for taboo activities to gain more and more acception as time goes on. Take homosexulaity, for example; in the past fifty years, it's become decidely mainstream. If we allow "mercy killings" now, how long until we're killing those with conditions like alzheimers or AIDS? How about amputees? I am not being overly paranoid; this is the natural progression of society. Allowing PAS wil create a society I don't want to be a part of.[/color][/size][/font]

[quote name='Adora][i]FINALLY[/i']. I was waiting for him to drop off the perch.[/quote] [color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]We'll be sure to say the same thing about you.[/color][/size][/font]

[QUOTE=Lady Asphyxia][font=Verdana][size=1]This thread would be more at home in the [url=http://otakuboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=46]Adventure Arena[/url]. If you take a look at the [url=http://otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=39627]Adventure Arena Basics[/url], you'll see that an RPG is defined as: [/size][/font] [size=1][font=Verdana][i]Collaborative story writing, in which each player mainly controls one specific character.[/i] [/font][/size] [font=Verdana][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=1]Which is what you have here. ^.~[/size][/font][/QUOTE] [color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]My apologies; I wasn't quite sure where it would fit, and at the time, I didn't know others would follow. ^^; If it needs to be moved, or if I should simply start a new thread in the RPG area and abandon this one, please let me know.[/size] [center][size=3]-----[/size][/center] [size=1]Ladies and Gentlemen, my name is DeathBug, and I am running for President of the United States of America. I'd like a few minutes of your time to explain what I would like to do for you and our nation. Ask yourself a question: who would you like to lead the nation? A person of innovation, or a follower? One who sets a trend, or one who buys into them? A simple look at this thread will tell you, I blaze a trail, and my opponent merely walk in my shadow. We need bold innovation in our country, ladies and gentlemen. My Secretary of Defense, Alexander Harris, has suggested giving pigs guns. It takes a special kind of visionary to not only keep a man with ideas like that on staff, but to also support him one hundred percent. Many today feel that politics is a game for the rich, with the average person loosing out to the Almighty Dollar. I can assure you, the Bug Party is a true grassroots organization, and not just because no one will donate campain contributions to us. No, we're a grassroots party because all of our activities are free, and money ceases to be an issue. You'll notice I said 'campain' instead of 'campaign'. That's because, in the Bug Party, we like puns. The more, the better. Studies have shown that those who engage in such world play are more creative and intelligent than those who don't. In other words, use a pun, go to Yale. The real reason you should vote for me and my party is because I have your best interests at heart. Far too often, the Comman Constituent is left behind in the mire of partisan politics. Because I'm not really in the election, I can safely ignore the other parties, and focus solely on you. [strike]It also means I can make all the campaign promises I want, and never have to commit to them.[/strike] So, when you go to the polls in November, ask yourself, Who do I want to lead this country, a stalwart sheapard, or the mindless sheep that follow in his path? Also, to my respected opponenents: Baaa! Baaa![/color][/size][/font] [center][img]http://www.sighost.us/members/DeathBug/usabug.jpg[/img][/center]

[quote name='Aanallein']Very true. But that is just a relativity issue. I mean, if you wish to think that if you robbed a bank it was moral and right. Then that is your own thought. That is all that matters then right? So there is no guidelines of morality and thought process. That is to assume there is no societal control over thought and what not. [it is a bit vague the response, but time is running short, and I would like to address everything.][/quote] This isn't in regards to morals, it's in regard to legacy. Did he want to be rememebered as a black man, an American man, etcetera. What you're describing is moral relativism, which is a dangerous and socially corrosive concept. [quote name='Aanallein']Well, I assumed we were talking in terms of equality of result.[/quote] I'm sorry, but I can't subscribe to any school of thought that promotes "equality of result". People, regardless of social differences, are going to get different results because they are different. They are different in character, ability, fortitude and desire. Equality, to me, means that I can say, "Okay, here are your opportunities; they're mostly the same as anyone else. You can go anywhere you're willing to go, do anything you want, provided that you are willing to work towards it and make neccessary sacrifices, just like everyone else." Equality of opportunity is a great ideal worth striving for. equality of result is communism, an "equal sharing of miseries". And communism is evil. [quote name='Aanallein']Well, we have such laws in America as affirmative action and what not, that seem to be taken advantage of by those who it helps. I mean, there are a bunch of little laws and discrepancies in the law that I can research if you'd like. PM me about it. I just feel that it destroys the equality of opportunity and result.[/quote] Again, equiality of opportunity is all that matters. Like the adverts say, "Results may vary". And affirmative action is a whole other issue, but I see your point. Is it proper to have any sort of race-based benefits program sponsered by the national government? I don't think so, myself. [quote name='Aanallein']Best way to go then eh? It may be the law, but that doesn't matter, it is how I follow it.[/quote] Well, I support the right for a private citizen to be bigoted. I don't like it, and I will tell them they're wrong, but it's their right. However, the government, and any program that recieves government aid or endosement should be color-blind. [quote name='Aanallein']It is not only that. I know that nationality exists throughout the world. If it didn't then countries would not be so self sufficiently strong. I know that I myself am arrogant, it is nationality and pride to the extent that it is a flaw. There is nationality mixed in with the never wrong attitude. I know it exists in other nations, maybe it is just me, but I think it is rampant in America. Don't get me wrong. I say that I am part of the problem as well. But meh. It may just be me as I said.[/quote] Again, that is not an American problem, that's a human problem. The reason the focus is on America is because we're the only world super power, and many other nations *cough*France!*cough* are looking for any opportunity to put us down a notch. So, we're not patriotic, we're jingoistic and arrogant. It's life in the spotlight that magnifies flaws. For example, did you know that one of the strongest political parties in France, the National Front party, is openly racist? They're against any and all immigration, and are xenophobic to a fault. Yet they're not only in a position of respectable power, they're passing legislature. Why doesn't this ever make the news? Because the world focus isn't on France; it's on us. It's lonely at the top.

[quote name='Aanallein'] Does it matter who resolved it? I mean this in the context of his heritage, race, and country background? [/quote] The only person who could really say if it matters is ralph Bunch himself. I would grant him the right to determine how hes' remembered, by race, nationality, or what have you. However, I'd also grant everyone else the right to decide for themselves how to remember Mr. Bunch. [quote name='Aanallein']As of equality? What is equality? You can't have it.[/quote] Depends; do you mean equality of opportunity, or equlity of result? [quote name='Aanallein']The civil rights movement did what it wanted, except now, I feel that the movement has gone so far as to need to be worked in reverse to even the playing field in other directions. [/quote] Explain, please. [quote name='Aanallein'] I say for private they can be turned away as much as they wish. That is the perogitive of the private institution. As for public, I say they can turn them away with resonable cause or threat.[/quote] Nice call; that's already what the law says. [quote name='Aanallein']Yet, I still think that Americans hold an arrogance that puts them above many others.[/quote] I've lived in Europe, and I will say this: pride in your country is not an American-specific trait. The french, British, Spanish, german, believe themselves to be the best, and take pride in (most parts) of their long history. If that is defined as arrogance, then just about every country is.

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]I agree with Semjaza and his reasoning towards the first question. Had the event happened after the Civil Rights movement, I wouldn't consider his race all that much, but because it happened prior to that, it is an even greater accomplishment. Something to consider when it comes to minority communities is that much of our information regarding their status comes from those whose best interests it is to continually have racial disharmony. Jesse Jackson, for example, would be out of a very lucrative job if there was not a sense of racial tension in parts of the united states. An excellant book to read is "The Death oif Right and Wrong", by former President of the LA chapter of NOW, Tammy Bruce. Bruce, a lesbian and gay/feminist rights activist, believes that the children of the civil rights movemement have lost their way. She makes an excellant case against many organizations, including NOW, for victemizing rather than empowering their constituencies, in order to sustain themselves and their political clout. Logically, a successful civils rights advocacy group should become less and less active over time, because as greater equality is achieved, instances of injustice against minorites should become fewer and fewer. So, either most major CRA groups are inept and discrimination is widespread, or these groups no longer have the best interests of their constituency at heart. Perhaps I just live in an incredibly enlighted area, but I've never seen real social, and only rarely seen rascism, homophobia or sexism. And, if you look at American pop culture, you'll see most walks of life well represented, and crossing social boundaries. As for the second question, that's a bit trickier. While all people are equal regardless of race, there are times when a case can be made to take race into account. Consider: All organized airplane hijackings within the past ten years were carried out by young middle-easter males. All of them. Ann Coulter once said, "If you have a record of %100, that ceases to be a profile; it becomes a discription of the suspect." The people who have to make racial profiles are usually those involved in life-or-death scenarios: police officers, airport security, etc. If you work at an airport, and a young middle eastern male looks suspicious, are you going to let him get on a plane without investigating, first? Or, by making that judegement, are you violating the 14th Amendment? It's a tricky issue, and I don't believe there's a clear-cut solution.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Another band I forgot, yet I can't believe no one else mentioned, is the Ramones. Come on, the Ramones! That is some classic stuff right there. [i]I wanna be Sedated, The KKK Took my Baby Away, Rock N Roll Hig School, Blitzkrieg Bop[/i]....The music that started a revolution. Heck, I'm listening to them right now. The Tribute to the Ramones was also nice, except Marilyn Manson's cover of KKK. Way to kill a song, Herma. (Will not get involved in the political debate a few pages up. Being good, being good...)[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Here's something else to consider, on the subject of the Aliens kicking major Predator arse: an Alien only has to win once. All the Aliens need are one dead Predator, and then what do you get? You get an offshoot group of alien/predator hybrids, loyal to the Aliens. Alien 3 showed us that the Aliens mutate according to the creature they laid eggs in; we had the dog alien, and Kenner produced a whole managerie of alien/animal toys. (My favorite was the Alien cobra). I'm actually hoping we see an alien/predator hybrid in AvP. This new breed of alien would turn the tides in the favor of the Aliens. True, the Predators rely mainly on technology, but they're not afraid to go [i]mano y mano[/i]. And now, they'd face an enemy that has their best physical traits and instincts, along with the best traits of the aliens, including sheer numbers. As for Sarah versus Ellen, I'd have to give it to Ripley, on the basis of longevity. She simply survived so much more than Connor did, then died, then was brought back to survive through even more. And, of course, in Resurrection, she's got superhuman abilities. That always helps.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]It's a game as old as time itself. Many people all across the world partake in its grand tradition without even realizing it. It can make enemies of friends, and turn brother against brother, neighbor against neighbor. Who would win in a fight? Who'd win in a fight, Fred Flintstone or George Jetson? Who'd win in a fight, Van Helsing or Buffy the Vampire slayer? George Washington or Abraham Lincoln? Megatron or the Cobra Commander? Mary Kate and Ashley or Tia and Tamera? Bob Barker or Dick Clark? So, what I would like to do is bring this eternal debate to the OtakuBoards. The rules of the debate are simple: The combatants must be similar in character, ability, profession or reputation. Clear and elaborate reasons must be given for your desicion. The combatatents in your scenario may use any and all resources at their disposal. Please don't turn this into spam. After one potential battle has been debated thoroughly, a new one may be proposed. Multiple debates may go on simultaniously, as long as participants are clear in who they refer to. So, I'll start us off with a simple one: Who'd win in a fight, the Aliens or the Predators? I've got to put my money on the Aliens. Seriously, these guys have proven, again and again, that they are the perfect killing machines. Alien trumps everybody. An individual Predator would probably beat an individual Alien (unless it was close combat, in which case the Alien's acid blood would get all over the Predator, killing ormaiming it), but traditionally, Aliens hunt in packs. And, after they win, they layt eggs in the fallen Predators, thus taking on the skills and abilities of the slain. If you really don't understand why Aliens would win, just remember all the havoc a single Alien caused in the original movie. Then recall that the alien in that movie was just a baby. :demon: I await the Predator supporters. [/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Favorite bands, eh? Eh? Well, in no particular order after #1, here we go. ^__^ [b]#1-The Offspring[/b] Okay, how these guys [i]haven't[/i] showed up on anyone's list yet is beyond me, but they kick arse. I'm only missingt heir second album, really. They're a smart band, and many of their song lyrics are inside jokes, or just plain clever. (Original Prankster is about Bill Clinton, for example) While the album Conspiracy of One was a disappointing retread of Americana, Splinter was unique and reminded me why these guys rock. Only problem is, Splinter's barely a half-hour long. :( Here's hoping their next album is both good [i]and[/i] lengthy. [b]#2-The Barenaked Ladies[/b] One of my favorite Canadian exports, BNL has an odd bag of music, most of it great. They range from thoughtful to irrevent, similar to myself. Of course, their biggest hit album was Stunt, but Maroon and Born on a Pirate ship ain't half bad, either. [b]#3-Blink-182[/b] Yeah, I like pop-punk. Got a problem with it? While I oftentimes find some of their earlier works a bit immature for my tastes, the good greatly outnumbers the bad. tHe song that got me hooked on them was What's My Age Again?, and their most recent album was such a refreshing update of their style. All of This is a masterpiece. [b]#4- REM[/b] Ah, REM. Though many of their songs are politically dated, it's still good listening. Exhuming McCarthy was featured in one of my history class projects... And, of course, everyone remembers End of the World. Someday, I'll learn all the lyrics. [b]#5-Gorillaz[/b] Weep for the greatest band to ever produce only one original album. At a time when the music landscape was littered with Boy Bands and Pop Whores, Gorillaz offered a creative and vibtrant breath of fresh air. Unfortunatly, their lack of existance proved to be their downfall. ;_; And because the thread wouldn't be complete if I didn't argue with somebody.... [quote name='Chibihorsewoman']Plus, Natalie Maines doesn't like Bush so there's another plus.[/quote] Yet she publically retracted her statements from London, which is why I don't respect her opinion. I don't care what you say about who, really; celebrities getting political is nothing new. What I really must insist on is that you [i]stand by[/i] what you say, which she did not. Sometimes it's hard to be a consrvative who likes punk and alternative bands.[/color][/size][/font]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]The scene is a press conference in a small office. There are many reporters and press officials around. A podium sits in the center of the room. DeathBug and his associates, dressed in navy blue suits, enter from a door in the back. He steps behind the podium, and then adjusts the mic. DeathBug: Is this thing on? Can you hear me now? Testing? The mic seems to be working perfectly, but DeathBug is unsure. DB: Hello? Ollie ollie in-come-free? *taps mic* Yo? DeathBug pulls out a small chalk slate. Bringing it to the mic, he drags his nails across it, screeching horribly into the mic. All present hold their ears. DB: You hear me? Everyone else: Yes!! DB: Ah, good. *Drops slate* Anyway, I bet you?re probably wondering why I?ve called you all here today. Reporter #1: You?re running for president. DB: What? Who told you?! Reporter #1: Uh, that?s what the banner says. DeathBug looks behind him; there?s a huge banner that reads ?DeathBug for President?. DB: Well, a banner?s never lied to me before. So, yeah, I?m throwing my hat into the race. *Tosses a large sombrero into the crowd* I?m sure ya?ll have lots of questions. Reporter #2: Not really. I mean, you?re not really running; this is just an imaginary conference in a short OtakuBoards post. DB: Hey! In DeathBug?s America, we?ll respect the fourth wall, ma?am. Now, can I please have a few questions? Utter silence. DB: Uhh? Crickets chirp. DB: There?ll be Oreos in the lobby after the conference. Everyone?s hands rise. Reporter #3: Mr. DeathBug! DB: Please, Mr. DeathBug is my father?well, okay, not really. Just call me DeathBug. Now, what?s on your mind? Reporter #3: How do you stand on the economy? DB: Very carefully. Yes, you? Reporter #4: How do you feel about the war? DB: Which one? The domestic war on terror, the war in Iraq, or the war in Afghanistan? Next question? Reporter #5: What?s your stance on gay marriage? DB: I think all marriages should be happy. Reporter #5: No, I mean homosexuals getting married. DB: Do you want to know how I feel about homosexuals getting married, or do you want to know how I feel about the media circus that?s being made of a vitally important civil issue? Reporter #5: That doesn?t make any sense? DB: Maybe you misunderstood your question. Reporter #2: Do you have any real stance on any important issues at all? DB: :rolleyes: Look, if you want a real stance on real issues, go bother a real candidate who?s actually in the race. Reporter #1: Uhm, okay. What party are you in? DB: The Bug party, of course. Reporter #3: What policies would you implement if elected? DB: I?m glad you asked. I?d like to hire a group to write a punk rock version of the national anthem. I will also place Matt Groening?s face on a currency note, and install trap doors in the press conference room. Reporter #2: That?s stupid. DB: Is it really? *Holds up a remote* I?ve already done it in here. Reporter #2: Yeah, right. DB: That?s it. Buh-bye! *Presses button* A random person behind DeathBug falls through a trapdoor. Random person: Ahhh! I regret noooottthhhiiiinnnnggggg?.. DB: Uh, oops. ^^; Wires were a little crossed?next question? Reporter #4: Do you have a first lady? DB: Of course; my OB wife, the lovely and talented Bandit Joeykuba. Reporter #5: Isn?t that a boy? DB: Careful; she?ll kill you for that. Next question? Reporter #1: Howw ould you respond to political pundits such as Bill o'Reily or Micheal Moore? DB: With wedgies, mostly. Except for Micheal Moore; I don't actually wanna' touch him. Cootie central, man. Are there any other questions? Reporter #2: Yeah; why are you even running? DB: To that, there is a grand story. After recommending a drastic and revolutionary change to the traditional debate system between political candidates, my peers saw my great leadership potential and advised my to run for office. Reporter #1: What were those changes? DB: Huh? Reporter #1: The changes you wanted to make to the debate system? DB: Oh, yeah. I said the candidates should duel with batons on rotating platforms, like on American Gladiators. I-hey, where are you going? Reporter #5: The Oreos are in the lobby now, so we?re out of here. DB: Wait! I still need you! You have to get the word out! I?m accepting applications for cabinet positions! I need a VP, a secretary, all sorts of stuff. People just need to PM me, and?aren?t you going to report any oft his. Reporter #2: Oh, don?t worry; I will. I?ll be sure to report what a conceited loser you are, and how moronic your ?Bug party? is! When I?m done with you, your own mother wouldn?t vote for you! I-ah! DB: *holds up remote* Heh, I got the trap door working. God bless America! ------ So, as you might have noticed, I'm looking for cabinet members to join the Bug party. Anyone interested should give me a PM with their qualifications, possible contributions to make to the party, and the position being applied for. Check back here for future campain updates. (That's not a typo; I put the 'pain' in 'campaign'.) [center][b]DeathBug For President in 2004[/b] [i]For a Weirder America[/i][/center][/color][/size][/font]