ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:33 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2004 10:47 pm 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 139
I don't see anywhere in Chris' post where he advocates goign to war against India or Pakistan. Rather he is noting the contradictions between Bush's actions and his stated policy.

The right to keep and bear arms presents, to me, an interesting dichotomy. I've seen two interpretations: first that it was intended to allow us to form a civilian militia for the defense of the nation; second that it was to allow us the opportunity to create a revolutionary force should the government turn overly dictatorial. Me, I think they were borrowing a page from Machievelli and trying to win some confidence in the new government by allowing people to remain armed. Regardless of how you interpret it, though, it's clear the by "arms" the intent was military weapons rahter than simple self-defense and hunting type devices. And in principle I agree with that
Unfortunately, in practice the people most likely to exercise this right are the ones that I'm not sure I would entrust with plastic safety scissors, much less the ability to take out a tank.

And, returning to topic.... right now my first goal as far as the presidential election is to get Bush and the interests he represents out of office. I don't believe a third party candidate - whether libertarian or green or any of the others - stands a realistic chance of that. Even if by some strange twist of fate it does happen, I don't think such a president would have sufficient backing in Congress to be effective in office anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2004 11:49 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3447
Location: New York
I'll note that I live in New York State, which, thanks to NYC, is almost guaranteed to give its electoral college votes to the Democratic candidate. Therefore, I can safely use my vote to make a political statement by voting Nader, without having to worry whether I will be indirectly aiding Bush. As much as I hate the Electoral College, times like this it can be useful.

Why Nader? Well, I'm a left-liberal, as most of you probably know. America, in my opinion, is slowly turning into a plutocracy ruled by corporate interests. Large conglomerates contribute millions upon millions of dollars to both parties in order to ensure their continued loyalty. Because of this, the two major parties, though still different in many ways, are virtually identical when it comes to the issues most important for their corporate overlords. (What ever happened to campaign finance reform?)The only person with the balls to stand up to the large corporations, it seems, is our friend Ralph.

I personally would prefer a multi-party system to our current two-party one. I mean, what the hell? When it comes to choosing the leader of our country, we should be given more than two options. Unfortunately, in order to create a strong third party that could inject more variety into American political discourse, people have to overcome their idea that voting for a third party is "wasting" your vote. No third party will ever become powerful enough to challenge the rule of the Republicans and Democrats without people taking risks and "wasting" their votes on that party when it is still small. Admittedly, the American electoral system seems to be inherently structured against a multi-party election, but we're certainly not going to change that until we create an awareness of third parties as viable political entities.

Of course, Nader's running as an idependent rather than a Green this time; however, the principle still applies. In this case, rather than strengthening a particular third party, a vote for Nader would lend support to the idea that the two major parties should not be the only possible options in an election.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:42 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: Not a hellish, Onionian future...
I'm voting Bush. Personally, I despise the guy due to his policies at home (though I like his policies overseas) but I hate the democratic candidates more.

I am still thanking the powers that be that Dean's campaign spontainiously combusted... the guy creeps me out. My mantra has been "anyone but Dean" for so long. The whole lot of them seem to ooze various illogical positions and theories that all equate to "Bush is the Anti-Christ" and that somehow he is both a diabolical genius and a moron at the same time. Leiberman was the sanest voice in the pack but nobody seems to have wanted that.

And no offense anyone, but Nader and Kusinich are mutants.

_________________
actor_au wrote:
Labrat's friends can't run away, as they are only the skins of the people he's drowned in his own semen, carefully stitched together and stuffed with cooking chocolate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:13 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
Labrat wrote:
And no offense anyone, but Nader and Kusinich are mutants.
It's true!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:17 am 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
If the price was right, I'd have sex with George Bush.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:39 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
So would I, money is a powerful force.

Icy's right about the College, both in its uses and its flaws. In fact... *quick search* Hmm, new thread time.

Anyhoo, kudos to Hasu for catching Grey. I don't see where Chris advocated going to war with India & Pakistan either. Any comments Grey?

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 3:12 pm 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
Aside from "Your all hippies who read too much indymedia."? Not really.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:42 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 308
Location: http://the-expatriates.com
Yeah, I don't advocate any war, especially with people that are likely to nuke you guys...


Up in Canada, I don't think we have restrictions...I'm to lazy to check.
Anyway, you CAN buy weapons grade plutonium. Costs perhaps $20000 a kilogram though, or something crazy like that. Maybe it was $200000. I can't remember offhand. Homeland security would probably not like that either. For a bomb you need perhaps 10 kg, unless you can construct a very good design, then maybe only 4kg.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:48 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
You'd be surprised how often weapons grade plutonium is bought and sold. I have read though that what usually tips off the government to someone planning to build "the bomb" is the pieces for the trigger. It is supposed to involve some highly specialized metals.

That's just something I heard somewhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:37 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
Chris THe Great wrote:
Anyway, you CAN buy weapons grade plutonium. Costs perhaps $20000 a kilogram though, or something crazy like that.


:o












:o

We need to start a fund: "Kyhm Forums for holding Australia Hostage!"
I'd contribute a quarter

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:43 pm 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
You do realise with our oil platforms in the Timor sea, our uranium mines in the Norther Terrirory, and iron and chemical deposts trough our fair land we could mass produce our own home-grown nukes, right?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 3:23 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 308
Location: http://the-expatriates.com
revolutio wrote:
You'd be surprised how often weapons grade plutonium is bought and sold. I have read though that what usually tips off the government to someone planning to build "the bomb" is the pieces for the trigger. It is supposed to involve some highly specialized metals.

That's just something I heard somewhere.


No, nothing special with triggers and stuff, I could build a high precision detonator with household items and a few capacitors from ebay.
So the only thing that will tip them off is if someone buys ALOT of plutonium, because at the kind of price it sells for, most people can't really buy that much.

And yes, alot of countries could easily mass produce nuclear weapons should the need arise.
Oh, and we would probably want to go with enriched uranium because it is cheaper and won't require a precision implosion system. Plus Uranium gun-type bombs are basically fool-proof, and have no chance of fizzling and not producing a high yield explosion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:37 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 198
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada. Unfortunately.
Quote:
All I see is one terrorist attack that killed as many people as car accidents do in a month, and nothing else in 30 months


See, I would usually blow a gasket here over someone saying "ONLY THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE DIED", but I'm just gonna let it go...
Would you prefer we have a string of car bombings? Really, the fact that we have had no attacks since 9-11 means that we're doing something right. Call it dumb luck or strong security, but we've captured or killed a whole shitload of potential terrorists, including some here in America.
The Patriot Act isnt' such a bad thing.

Quote:
Yeah, I don't advocate any war, especially with people that are likely to nuke you guys...


Hey, does anyone have that hippie pic that says "OMG WAR IS TEH BAD", or something similar?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:45 am 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 10551
Location: Bris-Vegas Australia
Everytime people debate about American Politics Zod becomes more powerful:

Image

Actor.

_________________
"Why can't we go back to living like cavemen? I know it was a rough and ready existence - the men where always rough and the women were always ready! " - Santa.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who are you?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:50 am 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
Image
SHODAN wrote:
LOOK AT YOU, HACKER, A PATHETIC CREATURE OF MEAT AND BONE, HOW CAN YOU DEFEAT A PERFECT, IMMORTAL MACHINE?


Shodan ALWAYS wins. You lose.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:35 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:33 am
Posts: 187
Location: Undisclosed at this time.
.....Shodan does not always win. She has never done anything but lose, the pathetic, electronic bitch. She can take her goddess complex and go design the new windows OS. DIE, SHODAN! *Shoots shodan with assualt rifle, hacks her nodes, and laughs as she dies.*

And Kerry is the man. Although Iam neither over 18 nor american, I would be voting for him. Ive yet to see a proper argument against him other then "He was a soldier in Vietnam, then he said war was bad! OMG! And we have a photoshopped picture of him standing near Jane Fonda! Jane Fonda is a cum-guzzling little whore, and that makes Kerry one, too!"

_________________
I came to see the CIRCUS, not some half dressed tart spouting dire warnings. -BG2, Shadows of Amn


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:26 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
General Gir wrote:
...we've captured or killed a whole shitload of potential terrorists, including some here in America.
The Patriot Act isnt' such a bad thing.



Fixed it for you.

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:00 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: The Murky depths of Northern Virginia
Grey, isn't this place for INTELLECTUAL and STRONG debate, not just flaming and random postings?

I only call you on it because i've seen it now in just about EVERY active thread here from you

_________________
BDM was here


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:13 am 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 10551
Location: Bris-Vegas Australia
Okay, firstly, sorry for that picture, I started it, not Grey.

Secondly, The Problem I have with the United States Presidency is that its position is won by acting domestically but the majority of its responsibility is International.

The result is you get someone that the rest of the world hates and America Loves(Bush) or Vise Versa (Clinton). This means that to hold office often a President has to work for the greater good, not of humanity but his own political survival. Thus calling the role the Leader of the Free world pisses me off.

/I am drunk right now.

Actor.

_________________
"Why can't we go back to living like cavemen? I know it was a rough and ready existence - the men where always rough and the women were always ready! " - Santa.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2004 10:11 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: The Murky depths of Northern Virginia
Well...starting this back up, cuz I saw Nader at my college today. He sold me. Basically same as below:

IcyMonkey wrote:
Why Nader? Well, I'm a left-liberal, as most of you probably know. America, in my opinion, is slowly turning into a plutocracy ruled by corporate interests. Large conglomerates contribute millions upon millions of dollars to both parties in order to ensure their continued loyalty. Because of this, the two major parties, though still different in many ways, are virtually identical when it comes to the issues most important for their corporate overlords. (What ever happened to campaign finance reform?)The only person with the balls to stand up to the large corporations, it seems, is our friend Ralph.

I personally would prefer a multi-party system to our current two-party one. I mean, what the hell? When it comes to choosing the leader of our country, we should be given more than two options. Unfortunately, in order to create a strong third party that could inject more variety into American political discourse, people have to overcome their idea that voting for a third party is "wasting" your vote. No third party will ever become powerful enough to challenge the rule of the Republicans and Democrats without people taking risks and "wasting" their votes on that party when it is still small. Admittedly, the American electoral system seems to be inherently structured against a multi-party election, but we're certainly not going to change that until we create an awareness of third parties as viable political entities.

Of course, Nader's running as an idependent rather than a Green this time; however, the principle still applies. In this case, rather than strengthening a particular third party, a vote for Nader would lend support to the idea that the two major parties should not be the only possible options in an election.


like I said, pretty much the same reasons. And I REALLY do think he's a VERY viable candidate, his problem is that he has NO exposure, he's blocked from the major debates, since the major parties control them, he doesn't take major corporation money, so TV ads are very hard...hell all he has is his own speaking and mostly word of mouth.

And anyway, he's the only candidate i've seen with NO flaws besides getting his messege out, so there's my vote already.

Hell, I'm goin out to get petition signatures so he can at least get on the presidential ballots.

Texas apperently has been a HUGE battle for him...he needs 100,000 sigs apperently, which is 20k more than the major candidates, and he has to do it in 2 weeks less time than the others. He's since sued over the whole issue.

_________________
BDM was here


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group