Greased_Lightning

I think you meant "mormon" At least I hope you did

I've been to Fargo, too bad there's nothing to do there However, if you're ever in Minneapolis or St. Paul, hit me up. heh. All kinds of things to do in the Twin Cities. As far as NYC, see if you can find some cyber cafe's, like the one in the movie Hackers. They look interesting. That's not true, there's tons of stuff to do in Fargo! There's a mall... kind of. And a river. Well, that floods a lot I guess. There's a few movie theaters, oh wait everyone has those. Hmm... there's not even a hill in Fargo. Oh wait, we have bars. No shortage of bars. And white people. Lots and lots of us white people... blend in with the snow. Fargo does suck !@#$%^&* because it's full of Fargo-ans and just too many people in general. Now Portal, North Dakota... that's where the party's at! But hey, if you are in Fargo... Chub's Pub. And yes, there are tons of things to do in the Cities... like get your throat cut.

Punctuation and Grammar, meet manhunt432... manhunt432, Punctuation and Grammar. I think you guys could really hit it off.

I would recommend not growing out a beard, duct taping a bunch of hotdogs together and wearing them around your torso and asking for directions to where people are. Just a friendly suggestion. Having never been to NYC I can't help you, but next time you're in Fargo I can help.

Hmm, only bird species I can think of that had that many numbers to be hunted so badly was the Dodo, which is now extinct but I don't think they were a flocking bird... any other bird species I know of with numbers that low now aren't of the flocking type (i.e. whooping crane or condor) If you find out what species it was please post it as you've piqued my interest.

I think you refer to the North American Bison, or buffalo. The meat isn't too bad, a little too lean so you got to chew it more. Plus, bison are ornery SOBs.

90 more minutes till our day... central time that is... Oh no! I haven't gotten my fireworks yet! You know that buying fireworks on July 4th is like trying to do you Christmas shopping the night before, well, except for the fact that IT'S FIREWORKS!! Hands off those roman candles, grandma! That's my Goliath Artillery System, !@#$%^&*bag! Get your own sparklers !@#$%^&*hole! Oh yeah, go get your daddy! Oh what's that? I can cry too! WAAAAA WAAAA WAAAAAAA Pretty annoying isn't it?! Too PC to spank your kid Herb? Here's one for free!! (SMACK) Oh it's so pretty watching fireworks from county jail.

Thunder: Yeah I took out of Dulles to Chicago then home to North Dakota

Happy Canada Day! Drink Canada Dry, and I don't mean the soft drink

Sever, don't you see where that is inherently wrong? You put most of the power in the hands of one group of people, they will vote to give themselves more power. Studies show that minorities in this country generally are less educated, so under that system you could easily justify racism in voting by awarding fewer 'points' to certain ethnic groups because as a whole they don't match up as well with another. Again, you assume that education or occupation makes a person better. In many cases, yes it helps make them more informed. But there are still a lot of people who are highly educated that have no business doling out power. Again the wealth example fits very well: a family that comes from wealth can better afford higher education, can use influence to get family and friends better jobs, and thus more 'points' for their own purposes. The fact that they are wealthy doesn't mean jack, but the fact that this gives them an automatic advantage and more political clout is not fair nor is it just. Power could be handed down family lines like a monarchy, only it would be a lot of small monarchies holding power. What would be the point of representatives for the lower classes under this system? Why would there be a need for equal representation when equality isn't an issue? An yes, all people are created equal because we all share the same biology. When one person is born, they are no better or worse than someone else. THAT is what equality is and that is vital. Everyone has a chance at being who they want to be. Granted, some people get a leg up due to family finances, where they're from, what their name is, etc. But everyone still has the potential and that is what we are about. Who is to judge a person's acheivement? A person's worth? How do you judge whether one person is better than another? Who makes that decision? NO ONE CAN. Who has the authority, moral or otherwise, to decide who is better than another? As far as what jobs are more beneficial to society, so then you would say farmers, machinists, city workers, etc aren't good enough? How long would society endure without people to do the 'lesser' jobs? You can have all the doctors, teachers, nurses, lawyers, physicists in the world, but without someone to keep the power going, the food coming, and the toilets flushing, that society isn't going to last very long. It is very arrogant to believe that education and a better job makes a better person or someone who is more qualified to make decisions for everyone else. That kind of system sets itself up so nicely for violent revolution. Hitler appealed to the working-class, the farmers, the laborers, the masses of people who didn't have the white collar jobs and high-priced educations to fuel his movement. All this system does is give a motivated person a genuine reason to overthrow a government, and if this person is sufficiently 'motivated' you could easily find genocide. Just look at what happened in China under Mao. My problem with that system is that it !@#$%^&*umes that people are better than others which goes from racist to classist to elitist. It is unjust and unfair and it only provides a breeding ground for violence, revolution, and terrorism. Any system of government that is set up to benefit one group of people at the expense of a larger group is doomed to failure, most likely in a very bloody way. You can't expect people, no matter their education, to NOT abuse power that they are given over others that are deemed less worthy or important. It's a slippery slope from this to discrimination to human rights violations. We've seen time and time again in history where one group of people believes itself superior and either tries to eliminate the inferior, are themselves eliminated, or a horrible combination of both. You really think that giving 'the stupid people' less say in their lives than others will really make a difference in leadership? The only difference is how long it takes for those people to overthrow their ruling class and how bloody it will be. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are ins!@#$%^&*uted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to ins!@#$%^&*ute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." Words as true today as they were almost 231 years ago. I don't care how you would set this up, if it ever came to be in this country, I would fight it to the death, whatever my educational and occupational status notwithstanding.

SMG Rulez Go speedball league!

SeVeR, what part of 'all men are created equal' and 'certain inalienable rights' is so offensive? If we start !@#$%^&*igning more political worth to one group of people and less to another, how is that democracy? You would set up a class-based system where the educated and rich are given more power than they already get over middle and lower class people? And who's to say that a university professor in political science knows what's better for people than your average Joe Paycheck? Does a professor of biology necessarily make a good doctor or someone who should make healthcare policy? I wouldn't put too much trust in academia, as the saying goes, 'those who can't do, teach'. I've seen plently of examples of that in college. Now as far as your example of unemployed drug addicts, well, illegal drug use is a crime, a felony, and thus those people shouldn't be able to vote in the first place. But if we start setting standards of intelligence or !@#$%^&*igning worthiness of a vote based on occupation or education, how the !@#$%^&* could we call ourselves a free society? Not too long ago, minorities and women weren't allowed to vote, there were tests that people had to p!@#$%^&* in order to vote, which was struck down as uncons!@#$%^&*utional. When African Americans were given voting rights, how many of them were very educated? Should we have not allowed them to vote? There are plenty of highly educated idiots out there, and there are plenty of them who have a great deal of control in american politics. Since so many people hate President Bush here, under that plan, he could conceivably have even more control simply because he went to an Ivy-league school. There are also a lot of unqualified people in high positions in business simply because they know the right people. Does that make them better than someone else? And where does it stop if we did that with voting rights? What's next? No guarantee of police or fire protection for the lower castes? Social Security only for people whose lives are believed worth more than others? Citizenship only for those who earn it? All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others? I for one don't want an oligarchy. We've got too much of an elitist society as it stands. Yes, there are a lot of people out there who vote for stupid reasons, be it blindly following a political party, religion, or a freaking ouiji board. The way to fix that is to actually fix who we have running and how they are allowed to get their message out. Also, to get people to think about what's best not just who agrees with you on the hot-button topics. Voter apathy is the biggest problem and the media is largely to blame for that through distraction from real issues. SeVeR, there's topics here on this forum on which I don't agree with you and some that I do, but I've always appreciated the rational thought behind your views. However, and please don't take any offense at this, on that particular subject, I think you are dead wrong and I think that road of thought is dangerous to personal freedom and equality. Sorry that this didn't really have anything to do with the main topic.

train

I had a flight from DC to Chicago 5 years ago where the plane was rolling down the runway on takeoff when all the power went out. They taxied back to the tarmac where we had to sit in the dark plane for two hours while they fixed it. We couldnt get back off cuz it was just 4 months after 9/11. Anyhoo, got to Chicago too late to make my connection home but they put me up in the O'Hare Hilton for the night. Got room service from a hispanic guy that I couldn't understand what he said so he had to write down 'That's $18.00 please'. Then went to pop machine to get a pop that cost $1.75 for a freaking can. Went back the next morning, made my flight, then found out they lost all my luggage which I didn't get back for 2 weeks. What pissed me off the most was that night was the Super Bowl and I missed it all sitting in a dark plane in D.C. United Airlines again. Haven't flown again since.

America doesn't have a religion. Sure, the majority of people follow Christianity but there's still a huge population of Jews and Muslims as well as Hindu, Buddhists, and smaller denominations. There is no Church of America as there is the Church of England. Yes, our currency does have the words 'In God We Trust' engraved on it. If what you imply were true, then why would our Pledge of Allegiance have been ruled uncons!@#$%^&*utional due to the words "under God"? Why would historical monuments with any religious meaning be forced to be removed from government buildings, public parks, etc because of the vast MINORITY of people who don't like them? If anything, the US goes way too far out of its way to accomodate anybody who finds even the most minor things mildly offensive and then pay them for their inconvenience. Sure, politicians wear their beliefs on their sleeves and there are plenty of televangelists making a stink every day it seems, but you can find that and much worse in many places around the world. There is no American religion. If you don't like the US or Americans, fine. Shut up and mind your own business. I'm so !@#$%^&*ed sick and tired of hearing about how evil we are and how everything bad is our fault. Get a freaking life.

to all of life's problems

I had to use wikipedia to find out what runescape is... that's probably sad to the rest of you. Anyways, to the point, posting this in a political forum just reinforces any preconceived notions anyone has had about you. Forever.

Uhm... Vietnam?

Pretty much anything can be addictive in an extreme case, but that doesn't mean it should qualify for a disease. I could be addicted to watching flies get zapped by a bug zapper but I doubt I would get any money for it. Actually, to me that's pretty close to what a video game addiction would be like: bug zapper watching... flashing lights, sounds, smells, and funny !@#$%^&*. The only problem is that I'm not steering the zapper.... unless I get an extension cord... hmm... and the squirrel could be like the end of level big bad guy. Sweet. I've invented a new game! Oh wait, off topic. Uhm, yeah... uhh... video game addiction not a disease, just an excuse for laziness. I'm gonna get me a bug zapper and a case!

The fact that millions of people died because the US didnt enter WWII earlier is A: not our fault (our meaning america then), and B: not our problem. Even when the US entered the war, Great Britain made no secret that they didn't want americans there. There was even a common saying: 'The problem with Americans is they are overpaid, oversexed, and over here.' Maybe if the countries that bordered Germany & Italy had actually enforced the Versailles Treaty stipulations on German rearmament, they wouldn't have found themselves in such a mess. THAT would have saved more lives than any earlier American involvement. Instead, France and GB decided to make tons of money by providing Germany with materials and technology (British aircraft engine patents for the same German planes that would eventually bomb them for example). The simple fact is that at the time, Europe didn't want American involvement and neither did Americans. If you're going to bring out the 'moral responsibility' argument, maybe you should level that finger at the neighboring countries that turned a blind eye to the Nazi social practices in the several years leading up to hostilities. Or better yet, at the sickos who actually carried out the acts. I'm not saying our hands are clean, but they are a !@#$%^&* of a lot cleaner than most involved. I'm all for the US adopting more of an isolationist policy. Let's cut off all the humanitarian aid we send out all over the world and focus on fixing things here. You think that will be better or worse for people? Next time a tsunami hits, too bad. AIDS in Africa? Oh well. Genocide in Eastern Europe? Have fun UN!

!@#$%^&*bag (points to bag of !@#$%^&* sitting the middle of room) Well someone had to say it

The American Medical !@#$%^&*ociation will be debating whether to consider video game addiction a mental illness, which would then make 'sufferers' eligible for insurance for treatment. In the AP article it said some doctors believe the addiction can be compared to heroin in some cases. If this happens, are we going to find rehab centers for video gamers? I think this is just a crock. If someone is hooked on video games, it's probably their parents fault for overindulging them. What does everyone else think?

Why soitenly

Wow I didn't read this one last night because it took awhile to read some other stuff. Everyone please don't take Knightflame to be anything of a representative of Christians. Most of us don't go around shouting fire and brimstone on those who disagree with the MINOR points of faith that have been brought out. The Bible shouldn't be taken literally word for word. If that's the case, we should all be cannibals and holy people should expect to live 400 years. Knightflame, you aren't helping anything by continuing this here. All you've really done is to give Christianity and belief in God in general a bad name. If you want to continue trying to convert others and preach the word, may I suggest that you consider the seminary or being a missionary? Whoever said it here said it well that the best way to be an amb!@#$%^&*ador of Christianity is to just be a good person and don't go tooting your own horn or losing your cool with others who disagree. There will always be people who disagree with others' beliefs, but it is in no way acceptable to chew them out and say 'ZOMG SATAN 4 YER BALLZ!!!' That's not exactly very Christian now is it? Anywho, that's enough religious debate for me for a good long while. The AMA is thinking about labelling video game addiction (addiction, that's funny by itself) a mental health disease (disorder?). Now that's just messed up.