DeathBug

This show has been out for a few months, and it's re-ignited my love of cartoons. Unlike most of Cartoon Network's new offerings, it's not trying to be "edgy" or "styalyzed", and is a cartoon in the classic mold. The simple premise, the existance of imaginary friends created by young children, allows for all sorts of plotlines, and characters of any design. (And filler characters for all occassions.) The characters are each unique and clearly-defined, and Bloo is this generation's Daffy Duck. So, does anyone else dig this show?

The best commericals of all time are the Quizno's Spong Monkey commericals. "We love de subbs! 'Cuz they are good to us!" Apparently, they were too creepy for most people, so Quizno's doesn't use them anymore. Their premiere is still on [url]www.rathergood.com[/url]. (DeathBug is not responsible for the vontent of rathergood.com...) I also miss the Taco Bell Dog. "Here, leezard, leezard, leezard." Good times.

[QUOTE=r2vq]I forgot about GX. There's also a new Yu-Gi-Oh! Manga. It's not made by Takahashi and it takes place in an alternate universe. I think it's called Yu-Gi-Oh R. [/QUOTE] Actually, Yu-Gi-Oh! R [i]is[/i] written by Takahashi, and is more of an "untold story" involving [spoiler]Pegasus' apprentice, Bandit Keith, and the dark god cards.[/spoiler] I still enjoy YGO!, but I much prefer the manga to the anime; however, I enjoy the original arcs in the anime better than their manga adaptation. I'm awaiting GX, because it's entirely original. And, of course, i play the card game semi-professionally.

[quote name='SadBlue']So what's more important? The techno-paradise we lavish in or our Planet Earth?[/quote] Well, I'm far from convinced the two are mutually exclusive. After all, the lowest point in air quality was the 70's, and we've made great strides in cleaning up the enviornment while simultaneously improving our technology and standard of living. [QUOTE]Sure, the Kyoto Accord was flawed.[/QUOTE] That wasn't what you said a few posts back :[QUOTE][b]the Kyoto Accord would really help things. [/b][/QUOTE] Make up your mind. [QUOTE] And sure, we probably will need to influence the poor countries more.[/QUOTE] We do, but not in matters of enviornmentalism. At least, that's not a top priority. It'd be maddness to demand that they create and EPA while they're still trying to put food on the table. One of the reasons that America, Europe and other western nations can afford to care about the enviornment is that we're economically prosperous enough to have the luxery of devoting resources to it. And guess why we're prosperous? Our industry. [QUOTE] But we need to start with the largest polluters of all, The US, Canada, China, UK etc, then deal with the 3rd world.[/QUOTE] With the exception of China, the countries you list pollute less, proportionatly, than most South American or Middle Eastern countries. And they spend much, much more from both their governments and private industries to help the enviornment that anyone else on Earth. Enviormentalism is a concern of the wealthy. [QUOTE]I can tell ya, if it wasn't for the money countries make by trading oil for the industrialized nations like the US and Canada, than we'd all be driving around Electric cars and powering our houses with Solar or Geothermal energy.[/QUOTE] And you base this assessment on...? [QUOTE] Frankly, almost all trade passes through the US at some point. Without the US, certain countries wouldn't be able to profit off of Fossil Fuels,[/QUOTE] Right; so, let's make poor nations poorer by stripping away their most valid export. That'll make everything better. Here's another idea: let's try to export our economic systems to these countries so that thet became stable and prosperous, then can have the resources to conserve their own enviornment. [QUOTE]and we'd be able to go back in time a bit and start over.[/QUOTE] Read this next line very carefully: regression is never a valid option. [QUOTE] Frankly, I think that's more important than Globilazation and Industrialization, which doesn't work to well to begin with.[/QUOTE] Why, you're absolutly right! They don't work at all! It's just a lucky fluke that I can walk into a store and see more food that I could ever eat, or sleep in a bedroom that I can heat or cool to my liking, or communicate with people on the extreme opposite side of the contenent, or don't have to worry about the cleanliness of my driking water, or can survive past the age of twelve despite seasonal asthema attacks. [/sarcasm] Globalized and industrialized nations have the highest quality of life out of any nations in the world. They have lower infant mortality rates, longer life expectencies, and more individually wealthy citizens. And, once again, it is because of all these factors that we have the resources to conserve our enviornment in a manner pleasing to us. Yes, some factors of industrialization are causing (relativly minor) problems, but remember: you only want to dump the bath water, not the baby.

[quote name='Blackjack][color=DarkGreen][font=Trebuchet MS]I'm a Brit, so I didn't have any say, but I actually wanted Kerry to get into power (as much of a slimeball as he appears to be) purely because he said he'd sign the Kyoto Agreement. The USA is the biggest air polluter in the world, and yet is the only country holding back from signing the Agreement. [/font'][/color][/quote] Maybe because the Kyoto Agreement is unmeetable tripe? It's a flawed idea that penalizes industrialized countries (IE: US, Europe), while leaving the biggest pollutors (China, for example) alone. It's common sense that the richest nations in the world already expend the most money to clean the enviornment. The flip side is that the most pollution is done by poor nations that can't afford to monitor their enviornments. (Because when it comes to cleaning litter in the park or actually eating, guess what wins?) The Kyoto Agreement placed restrictions that would have basically allowed the US to run at modest capacity for about three months before having to shut own industrialization completely, slightly longer for Europe. It would be moronic to sign it.

I'm a conservative; we really should be teaching folks to fish instead of just giving them fish. I'm actually pretty libertarian, but I vote Republican for the time being, because I'm a realist.

[QUOTE=J2Assassin]My friend and I argue this all the time, and our favorite examples are Naruto's techniques. We prefer Kagebushin no jutsu and Sexy no jutsu to the translations tha SJ has given them; Shadow Replication and Ninja Centerfold. (shudders) [/QUOTE] So...you're mad at the SJ translations for actually being...translations?

[QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet] If you crash and burn, that's no problem. At least you tried.[/color][/QUOTE] And if you do crash and burn, try to make it a colorful explosion that will delight and amuse all your friends. That's what I always do, anyway.

Unfit For Command...Farenheight 9/11...Moveon.Pac....Teresa Heinz-Kerry....God, the memories...get them out of my head!!! Oh, you mean school presidential election? Thank God. Well, in my experience, they're mostly shallow popularity contests. However, at my school, candidates gave out candy. And I took as much as I could get, and then didn't vote. I'm an unfaithful political whore, apparently.

My summer shall be spent working at the Florida State Attorney's office (where I actually am at this very moment, on my lunch break...12:19). Granted, I may be the lowest of the lowly, but it beats making frappacinos all summer. I hate frappacinos with a burning passion hot enough to melt frappacinos. And I know I'm spelling frappacinos wrong, but I hate them too much to look up the proper spelling. I also plan to get a job that doesn't involve making frappacinos once my internship is over. What I'm really looking forward to is the Lost Millenium pre-release event on Saturday. We get to use the newest Yu-Gi-Oh! set before it's released to the public. I want Wight King's, and lots of them.

Godel's right: if you like her, ask her out. There's nothing you can do if she likes someone else. Don't complicate things.

I recently changed my web browser from Internet Explorer to Mozilla FireFox; I've had no problems with any Otaku or MyOtaku functions except one: Firefox doesn't support the MIdi player function. Is there a way to fix this?

[quote name='Mitch]I'm assuming you meant 50,000 [i]word[/i] novel - a 50,000 [i]page[/i'] novel is quite insane, and highly unlikely. [/quote] Nah, you just gotta' find a big enough font size. ^^; Typo corrected.

[QUOTE=Godelsensei] Additionally, any one who can validly be described as "hardcore against women" is not an "okay guy". Unless it's coming from some one who has it in for their mom or something.)[/QUOTE] There's a great difference between saying that women cannot hold a single position based on the religious doctrine and discriminating against women. According to Catholic dogma, a only a man can recieve sacrament because Jesus was a man, and any priests must be able to recieve sacrament. Granted, I doubt the validity of this practice myself, but I'm not Catholic. I'm just saying that there's a difference between what they do and the scenario you describe.

I've read the most interesting book at work, and I'm quite excited about the prospect it introduces. "No Plot? No Problem!" is an outline of writing a 50,000 word novel in the span of one month, by cutting away frivilous activities for a time, and imposing a deadline upon yourself. I've decided to use the principles in this book to finally complete a draft of my pet project, "The Sol Chronicals". (Search the archieves of this site if you want to see an earlier, unfinished draft.) Would any other aspiring noelists like to take the plunge with me? From June 1 to June 30 will be a busy time.

[QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet] People's ideas have to change some time it's a matter of evolution. [/color][/QUOTE] Agreed. However, some ideas must remain solid, wouldn't you agree? If you don't have core beliefs that don't change, then you really don't have a center.

[QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet] One of the bases that the Pentagon is considering closing is a very useful base. I forot which one it is, but they keep the military supplied with the armor used on the Humvees. From what I understand that is rather useful.... Unless you think that armor isn't a necessity.[/color] Well, obviously, that task is going to another base. Honestly, it's not a hard concept. I don't see why everyone is freaking out. If the base had a task that isn't being done elsewhere, then they wouldn't have closed it. Really, this is all common sense. [color=darkviolet] Yes, because the 4 million less to keep them open is just pocket change and it can't be used for anything else. Relocation and re structuring platoons is a major hassle from what I've heard. Never mind the fact that along with the military bases there are military families living on the bases who will also have to be relocated. Why not just keep everyone where they are. The bases are being utilized, they're not standing empty.[/color] "Utilized" and "Useful" aren't the same thing. If the base doesn't exist for a strategic purpose, then it's not useful, regardless of the number of people there. And I'm well aware of the stress and hassels of relocation. [color=darkviolet] Was that comment really necessary?[/color][/QUOTE] Probably not, but I didn't think "DOWN WITH BUSH!" was, either. (Not directing that at you.)

Honestly, I don't see what the fuss is all about. Military bases are evaluated for usefulness rather routinely, every time there's a shift in military focus. It's common sense; why keep pouring money, resources and manpower into bases that serve no strategic purpose? We closed many more down after the fall of the Soviet Union, and since the military focus has changed once again, this really shouldn't be surprising. To say it costs more to close bases than keep them open is really a stretch. Yes, you have to pay to relocate the troops and resources to different bases, but in the long run, it's more effective that leaving leech bases that suck in resources for absolutly no reason? Oh, I forgot; this is the Bush administration. Therefore, every single action they take is evil incarnate, designed specifically to kill foreign babies. Common sense be damned, right?

I don't drink, and I'm not going to start; my family has a history of alcoholism on both sides, and I know that I have an obsessive personality besides that. I'm perfectly content being a soda junkie, as well as a life-long designated driver. However, I do like hanging out with people that are drunk; it's like being the Seeing Man in the Land of the Blind.

Retribution made the point I wanted to make: Catholic dogma is what makes Catholocism Catholocism. If you disagree with Catholic tennents, then don't be Catholic. Religions don't change to suit you; you change to suit them. I know nothing about Pope Benedict as a person, but I know enough of Pope John Paul to trust his judgement. If he thought Pope Benedict was a good guy, I do, too.

You know, it's not as though I have any sort of dislike for Clamp manga; it's just that, half the time, I don't understand what's going on in them. I guess I really don't get a connection to their stories, as a reader. However, I'll gladly admit that their artwork is amazing, even if I don't really get the story its depicting.

I'd rather not live in Neo Tokyo as portrayed in [i]Akira[/i], gracias mucho. With its incredibly high crime rate and its tendency to be blown up every decade or so, it...it just sucks.

Money is a big factor in whether or not to branch out from your beaten anime path. With manga, it's not nearly as big a deal, but when you're talking twenty dollar DVD's, most folks don't have the capital to go samplin' willy-nilly.

[quote name='ShadO MagE']Actuly the statement there was not an insult directed at you, I was mearly pointing out the political alighnment of those who say it may mor may not be true, or is not true, and those who say it is true.[/quote] Well, don't you see that if that's the case, then every stance on it is thrown into balance? If people who are "pro-business", as you say, disavow global warming, then logically, people who are anti-business support the theory. So, they can't be trusted either, since they don't like businesses. [QUOTE]For the most part my assupmtion is true.[/QUOTE] No, Skippy, it's not; that's why it's an "assumption". You know what assumptions do, right? [QUOTE]Based on the economic principals of the conservatives and the liberals, it can be an assumption based on logic.[/QUOTE] Maybe I just want Condi elected because she's a smokin' hottie. [QUOTE]Edit: Also, even if it wasn't true, wouldn't iit be better to just take the safty measures now and if it stil happens, no one can blame it on big business?[/QUOTE] So, then, if we use that logic, how many other safety measures will we have to take for every single theoretically possible danger that we concieve. [QUOTE]Because the easiest way to prove if it is true or not, is to do what the environmentalists ask, and if it still happens, then we know its false, but if it stops we know its true.[/QUOTE] ......there's a sentence that probably made a lot more sense in your head than before you typed it out, eh? Look, we're a pretty arrogant species, and we like to attribute things to us. The fact is, the Earth's climate chanfes on a regular basis; remember the Ice Age? The temperature changes all the time; only now are we smart enough to notice it. Read Chrichton's "State of Fear".

[QUOTE=Siren]Don't forget that if Kirk had lost to Kahn, there would be no Borg (actually, nothing to challenge Picard--hell, Picard wouldn't even be around, lol). [/QUOTE] Well, yeah, but that's not a valid argument. Is it a fault of Piccard that he wasn't alive in time to stop Khan?