Well forgive me for stating this so bluntly... but I really don't care that this country was founded as a Republic. Just because it's the way the Founding Fathers wanted the country to be organized, doesn't mean it's the way it should be. Although I do agree with some of the principles this country was founded on, this country was still founded on some pretty fucked up principles. I do think that some things should be left decided the Republican way (for instance, Congress), but the president should be elected by a popular vote and not through the Electoral College.
Actually, last I checked, after all the recounts had stopped (the ones that went on after Fuckhead assumed the presidency), Gore was still ahead. This was not even counting the votes that were thrown out.
Besides, the issue shouldn't be who won Florida, the issue *should* be the fact that Gore won the popular vote in the nation as a whole.
"So we end up with people who are great on privacy and free speech. So what! What if they're also xenophobic anti-environmental nut cases who wanna use taxpayer money to teach kids about Jesus?"
Well... the idea is that certain issues are generally linked together. I'd like to clearly state that I am not for simply drawing a line between "liberal" and "conservative" and then distributing all issues on either side; but one has to admit that certain issues can commonly be found on either side.
I'd like to say I agree with you on the single-issue ordeal; but if a candidate as the one you described becomes a famous, then that doesn't mean we HAVE to vote for him or her. That's just the problem, people seem to think they only have limited options.
We have that right because it's freedom of speech/press, which is all that that post is advocating. Speaking one's mind is not "making touble" in the least bit.
The reason why scientist still want to use embryonic stem cells is because they can be obtained with much greater ease than stem cells from a fully grown human. I'm just surprised that they didn't mention that in the article.
I don't have faith that the government is going to save us from ourselves. In fact, I'm against that. However, it is the governments job to make sure that companies aren't lying aboot their products, and the only way to do that is to test the products themselves. And while "EVERYTHING" (I should have reworded that) doesn't need to be known aboot a product, a fairly large amount does. And you are wrong to say that "it's never been done and it never will". The government has been doing this and will continue to do this. That is why their are surgeon general warnings on cigarettes, that is why their are regulations on cars emissions, that is why cars also have safety standards, and that is why many chemicals are not allowed to be sold (or even allowed in a persons possession).
Actually, they were also held liable for lying aboot the effects of nicotine, but the government should be held equally responsible for not ensuring that EVERYTHING was known aboot the product before it went to sale on a mass market. Even considering the governments blunder, tobacco companies still lied (and continue to lie) aboot their product.
It seems I already have a nice little gathering of morons who have nothing better to do but say bad things aboot me. Oh no, he doesn't like me. Now I'm going to cry. Do you possibly think you could not act like a 7th grader for atleast some part of your life?
I was unaware of this (as with many other "hip" terms). It's true that people as a whole are morons, its just really annoying when I (or anyone else that is not stupid) get lumped together with them just for living in a certain area.
"fidiots", eh? What a great revelation from someone who can't even spell. I'm not saying that americans are the smartest people in the world or something (or even close for that matter), but you are looking at the views of a few and assigning them to the entire country. The views of a few morons DO NOT represent that of the whole country.
I have seen and know many black people who even find using it as a term of endearment to be offensive. And when asked why they find it offensive, they commonly reply that it is disrespectful to those that were a part of the Civil Rights movement. I was unaware of its usage at that early of a time. But one still has to admit that it is hypoctical to use it, and then say only you can use it in a way that is not insulting.
"They also demonstrate just how impratical solar cars are going to be for a while: A one-person vehicle, nothing to speak of in the way of creature comforts, no night driving, no real safety if you get hit by something, etc.
Did you ever stop to think that it is built that way because that is what is best for the race? The same reason why a nascar stock car isn't even street legal. It's only a one person car because that is all they need it to be. They aren't going to waste material and time on things they don't need. The whole point of the race is just that, a race. It is not a way to show off consumer-ready vehicles.
Re:I hope I like it, I hated the first one
on
Review: Rush Hour 2
·
· Score: 1
You obviously don't know much aboot major hollywood "comedy" if you think they are going to put a myriad of comedians in major budget films. They will put in the film what is popular, and sadly, cheap shots like these are what is popular. And you obviously don't know much aboot stand up comedy if you think that there are no black comedians that have a style that is not "Chris Tucker's" style. I suggest you tune into Comedy central more often.
Re:tell that to the whiney hypocrites (liberals)
on
Review: Rush Hour 2
·
· Score: 1
Being a "non white", I can honestly say I do not refer to people of my ethnicity or ANYONE for that matter by a derogatory term. The people you refer to that call each other "nigger" are actually calling each other "nigga" (there is still, however mute, a difference). It is a slang term that came from rap culture. There are many people (namely black people) that find even this offensive and I agree with them as it is something that trivializes the fight for equality.
Re:with the possible exception of Shrek?
on
Review: Rush Hour 2
·
· Score: 1
Can you actually call a plot original that starts out by saying "Once upon a time..."? The humor itself may not have been very good (better than expected), but the fact that its a children's movie makes the jokes even funnier. These are jokes that probably made parents cringe but forget about it when they relized that their kid doesn't get it.
As for the "cost effective" measures, a $20 water filter isn't going to get arsenic out of water. And calling someone a nazi doesn't always imply race, when I called you a nazi, I meant it in the since that you are a follower that beleives anything he/she is told to beleive and will defend it at all costs. It's the same as when someone calls someone else a grammar nazi. It's called figurative language. And the fact that you would "invoke" a "law" that was made solely to keep people from slinging mud proves how much of a hypocrite you really are. You have repeatedly called me "junior" (which IS a derugatory term for a youth) and labeled me a democrat post after post and then precede to tell me that I am slinging mud. You are a very pathedic person. To take this so seriously shows you have little to do in your life (and most likely have done little at that). You now force me to show you the true power of the force.
And like the good little republican nazi shithead you are, you have only been able to keep in stride with the "no real risk" and "need more scientific data" and "other countries are bad" that have been trademarks of the party. So just sit tight in your little dellusional world and make beleive that your glorious leader will save us all from hippies (cause hippies are obviously evil). But just for that sake of others, stop spouting off your retro-political rhetoric, because it didn't work in the 80's and it's not going to work now.
If you arent going to stop screaming democrat at anything that moves (atleast you stopped with the stupid intern jokes awhile ago) then there is no point to be doing this. As they say, you just can't argue with a moron, and you are a moron.
Then make that known to politicions. It would be better than a gas mask. Unless you think you can fit a gas mask over plants (you know, the things that produce air and food).
What's wrong with public transportation (i agree people shouldn't be forced to use it)? But it's not like (when properly implemented) that it doesn't work.
I'm not saying that those (or other) countries don't dislike america (or anything "western" for that matter), but they aren't going to attack us. Just because they dislike america doesn't mean that they don't care aboot their country or the people that live in it (they aren't saints but they do care aboot their own country). Nobody ever said that clinton did anything aboot presciption drugs. So why bring it up? Oh yeah, you need to nit pick to convince yourself that you hate him. I agree that things should change as well, and I agree (with clinton's proposed bill) that Canada's system should be used as a blueprint (not copied) to make a universal health care system.
I said we MAY not be aware of nuclear capabilities. Believe it or not, america is not doesn't know EVERYTHING. I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, but there is still a possibility that there is something america doesn't know (and in case you know nothing aboot the military, that is the mind set they always have because they know they can't afford to take chances). (hypocrisy alert) Just because I didn't say that america monitors these things (and everything they can for that matter) doesn't mean I am unaware of it. And do you think MAD isn't working or something? It has been working for a some time now and will continue to do so. Outmatched in health care? How is that? Do you know why presciption drugs cost half as much in Canada (couldn't have anyhting to do with their health care system now could it)? And it is not as if people in america going to get drugs there is taking money away from Canada. If it was, then the Canadian government would do something to stop it.
Well, if bush is such a well informed person, then why not make the information known? Because he isn't informed on anything except for what his advisors tell him to do. It is obvious when he speaks that he doesn't have much of a clue of what he is talking aboot. And MAD works with pretty much everyone, even small countries that we may not be aware of their nuclear capabilities. Guess what, they fire nukes at us and before the first one hits us, we have already fired back at them. And not just us, our allies fire at them, and then their allies fire back at us and our allies, and it doesn't end until everyone is dead or everyone is out of nukes. I think thats a pretty damn good reason for NOT using nukes. And besides, we are more at risk of someone using one nuke in front of our white house. And it doesn't seem to bother Canada that much. This must be a new thing for you to understand, yes, there are actually people who care aboot more than their pocket book. Especially when they know they can afford it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well forgive me for stating this so bluntly... but I really don't care that this country was founded as a Republic. Just because it's the way the Founding Fathers wanted the country to be organized, doesn't mean it's the way it should be. Although I do agree with some of the principles this country was founded on, this country was still founded on some pretty fucked up principles. I do think that some things should be left decided the Republican way (for instance, Congress), but the president should be elected by a popular vote and not through the Electoral College.
Actually, last I checked, after all the recounts had stopped (the ones that went on after Fuckhead assumed the presidency), Gore was still ahead. This was not even counting the votes that were thrown out.
Besides, the issue shouldn't be who won Florida, the issue *should* be the fact that Gore won the popular vote in the nation as a whole.
"So we end up with people who are great on privacy and free speech. So what! What if they're also xenophobic anti-environmental nut cases who wanna use taxpayer money to teach kids about Jesus?"
Well... the idea is that certain issues are generally linked together. I'd like to clearly state that I am not for simply drawing a line between "liberal" and "conservative" and then distributing all issues on either side; but one has to admit that certain issues can commonly be found on either side.
I'd like to say I agree with you on the single-issue ordeal; but if a candidate as the one you described becomes a famous, then that doesn't mean we HAVE to vote for him or her. That's just the problem, people seem to think they only have limited options.
We have that right because it's freedom of speech/press, which is all that that post is advocating. Speaking one's mind is not "making touble" in the least bit.
The reason why scientist still want to use embryonic stem cells is because they can be obtained with much greater ease than stem cells from a fully grown human. I'm just surprised that they didn't mention that in the article.
I don't have faith that the government is going to save us from ourselves. In fact, I'm against that. However, it is the governments job to make sure that companies aren't lying aboot their products, and the only way to do that is to test the products themselves. And while "EVERYTHING" (I should have reworded that) doesn't need to be known aboot a product, a fairly large amount does. And you are wrong to say that "it's never been done and it never will". The government has been doing this and will continue to do this. That is why their are surgeon general warnings on cigarettes, that is why their are regulations on cars emissions, that is why cars also have safety standards, and that is why many chemicals are not allowed to be sold (or even allowed in a persons possession).
Actually, they were also held liable for lying aboot the effects of nicotine, but the government should be held equally responsible for not ensuring that EVERYTHING was known aboot the product before it went to sale on a mass market. Even considering the governments blunder, tobacco companies still lied (and continue to lie) aboot their product.
It seems I already have a nice little gathering of morons who have nothing better to do but say bad things aboot me. Oh no, he doesn't like me. Now I'm going to cry. Do you possibly think you could not act like a 7th grader for atleast some part of your life?
I was unaware of this (as with many other "hip" terms). It's true that people as a whole are morons, its just really annoying when I (or anyone else that is not stupid) get lumped together with them just for living in a certain area.
"fidiots", eh? What a great revelation from someone who can't even spell. I'm not saying that americans are the smartest people in the world or something (or even close for that matter), but you are looking at the views of a few and assigning them to the entire country. The views of a few morons DO NOT represent that of the whole country.
I have seen and know many black people who even find using it as a term of endearment to be offensive. And when asked why they find it offensive, they commonly reply that it is disrespectful to those that were a part of the Civil Rights movement. I was unaware of its usage at that early of a time. But one still has to admit that it is hypoctical to use it, and then say only you can use it in a way that is not insulting.
"They also demonstrate just how impratical solar cars are going to be for a while: A one-person vehicle, nothing to speak of in the way of creature comforts, no night driving, no real safety if you get hit by something, etc.
Did you ever stop to think that it is built that way because that is what is best for the race? The same reason why a nascar stock car isn't even street legal. It's only a one person car because that is all they need it to be. They aren't going to waste material and time on things they don't need. The whole point of the race is just that, a race. It is not a way to show off consumer-ready vehicles.
You obviously don't know much aboot major hollywood "comedy" if you think they are going to put a myriad of comedians in major budget films. They will put in the film what is popular, and sadly, cheap shots like these are what is popular. And you obviously don't know much aboot stand up comedy if you think that there are no black comedians that have a style that is not "Chris Tucker's" style. I suggest you tune into Comedy central more often.
Being a "non white", I can honestly say I do not refer to people of my ethnicity or ANYONE for that matter by a derogatory term. The people you refer to that call each other "nigger" are actually calling each other "nigga" (there is still, however mute, a difference). It is a slang term that came from rap culture. There are many people (namely black people) that find even this offensive and I agree with them as it is something that trivializes the fight for equality.
Can you actually call a plot original that starts out by saying "Once upon a time..."? The humor itself may not have been very good (better than expected), but the fact that its a children's movie makes the jokes even funnier. These are jokes that probably made parents cringe but forget about it when they relized that their kid doesn't get it.
As for the "cost effective" measures, a $20 water filter isn't going to get arsenic out of water. And calling someone a nazi doesn't always imply race, when I called you a nazi, I meant it in the since that you are a follower that beleives anything he/she is told to beleive and will defend it at all costs. It's the same as when someone calls someone else a grammar nazi. It's called figurative language. And the fact that you would "invoke" a "law" that was made solely to keep people from slinging mud proves how much of a hypocrite you really are. You have repeatedly called me "junior" (which IS a derugatory term for a youth) and labeled me a democrat post after post and then precede to tell me that I am slinging mud. You are a very pathedic person. To take this so seriously shows you have little to do in your life (and most likely have done little at that). You now force me to show you the true power of the force.
And like the good little republican nazi shithead you are, you have only been able to keep in stride with the "no real risk" and "need more scientific data" and "other countries are bad" that have been trademarks of the party. So just sit tight in your little dellusional world and make beleive that your glorious leader will save us all from hippies (cause hippies are obviously evil). But just for that sake of others, stop spouting off your retro-political rhetoric, because it didn't work in the 80's and it's not going to work now.
You seem to be taking this pretty seriously, I think you need take a nap.
If you arent going to stop screaming democrat at anything that moves (atleast you stopped with the stupid intern jokes awhile ago) then there is no point to be doing this. As they say, you just can't argue with a moron, and you are a moron.
Then make that known to politicions. It would be better than a gas mask. Unless you think you can fit a gas mask over plants (you know, the things that produce air and food).
What's wrong with public transportation (i agree people shouldn't be forced to use it)? But it's not like (when properly implemented) that it doesn't work.
Information is officially now a controlled substance.
I'm not saying that those (or other) countries don't dislike america (or anything "western" for that matter), but they aren't going to attack us. Just because they dislike america doesn't mean that they don't care aboot their country or the people that live in it (they aren't saints but they do care aboot their own country). Nobody ever said that clinton did anything aboot presciption drugs. So why bring it up? Oh yeah, you need to nit pick to convince yourself that you hate him. I agree that things should change as well, and I agree (with clinton's proposed bill) that Canada's system should be used as a blueprint (not copied) to make a universal health care system.
I said we MAY not be aware of nuclear capabilities. Believe it or not, america is not doesn't know EVERYTHING. I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, but there is still a possibility that there is something america doesn't know (and in case you know nothing aboot the military, that is the mind set they always have because they know they can't afford to take chances). (hypocrisy alert) Just because I didn't say that america monitors these things (and everything they can for that matter) doesn't mean I am unaware of it. And do you think MAD isn't working or something? It has been working for a some time now and will continue to do so. Outmatched in health care? How is that? Do you know why presciption drugs cost half as much in Canada (couldn't have anyhting to do with their health care system now could it)? And it is not as if people in america going to get drugs there is taking money away from Canada. If it was, then the Canadian government would do something to stop it.
Well, if bush is such a well informed person, then why not make the information known? Because he isn't informed on anything except for what his advisors tell him to do. It is obvious when he speaks that he doesn't have much of a clue of what he is talking aboot. And MAD works with pretty much everyone, even small countries that we may not be aware of their nuclear capabilities. Guess what, they fire nukes at us and before the first one hits us, we have already fired back at them. And not just us, our allies fire at them, and then their allies fire back at us and our allies, and it doesn't end until everyone is dead or everyone is out of nukes. I think thats a pretty damn good reason for NOT using nukes. And besides, we are more at risk of someone using one nuke in front of our white house. And it doesn't seem to bother Canada that much. This must be a new thing for you to understand, yes, there are actually people who care aboot more than their pocket book. Especially when they know they can afford it.