I was just in Shanghai and Beijing last December. Catbox is right about the pollution . . . it's a mother fucker in Shanghai. Any way, Does anyone else think that this slue of bad imports into the United States is actually just a political tactic to try and strong arm Beijing? I think that the quality of our Chinese imports has not changed in the last 8 - 12 years; and everything we're reading about now is actually a political maneuver from Washington. Agree Disagree?
Search
Search results: 115 found, showing up to 50
It's exactly this kind of talk that makes people not take anything else you say seriously. To me, these words are on par with saying we should just blow up the entire middle east to end terrorism -- as if threatening to blow up an entire region of the Earth thus committing genocide wasn't a terrorist tactic.ATG wrote:
Mexico is such an epic failure it should be annexed by the U.S., it's government replaced and the drug farms carpet bombed.
For me, it is difficult at best to defend your argument as wholly rational when you suggest annexing THE REST of Mexico for the United States. Although, if you think there's too many Mexicans in the US now, try extending the US border to Guatemala and see how you like the new demographic profile. Hell, throw in the right to vote for the former Mexican citizens and this idea is sounding better and better. . . if it wasn't completely psychotic.
P.S. Don't entertain the thought for a single minute that the US government isn't as completely broken as the Mexican.
So who got to swab for DNA evidence?!?
I guess that's a little worse than my situation. Somehow I ended up driving myself to the church on my wedding day. Then I ended up leaving the car in the parking lot. The next morning the back side window was broken out, but they never got in! At least there was no shit involved. Sorry man.
I guess that's a little worse than my situation. Somehow I ended up driving myself to the church on my wedding day. Then I ended up leaving the car in the parking lot. The next morning the back side window was broken out, but they never got in! At least there was no shit involved. Sorry man.
Well I know it's been a while but I'm back. It turns out there is no good advice for how to last a 16 hour flight!!! Wait I take that back; as I was leaving the plane it looked like the first class people didn't have it so bad. I guess I should say that there's no good advice for poor people LOL!
Any way, I just thought I'd post a clip of some of the video I took while I was over there. It's no Snoken clan vid or anything, but I hope ya'll like it just the same.
http://staff.gvsu.edu/aguilero/china.html
Any way, I just thought I'd post a clip of some of the video I took while I was over there. It's no Snoken clan vid or anything, but I hope ya'll like it just the same.
http://staff.gvsu.edu/aguilero/china.html
Hey Harmor, would you mind providing a citation/reference for those stats?
Bubbalo is right. Although Mexico has been reluctant to make any meaningful reforms on its own, Colonial Europe and the United States haven't done anything to help them out either. After Mexican Independence, American firms pillaged the mineral resources of Mexico. Imagine what other resources Mexico would have access to if the United States had not taken the land from California to Mexico, and as far North as Colorado!
If the United State is serious about immigration we as a nation will pressure our companies who do business there to pay a fair wage, and to not take advantage of any and all loopholes. When residents of Latin America are given a good reason to stay home . . . they probably will.
Bubbalo is right. Although Mexico has been reluctant to make any meaningful reforms on its own, Colonial Europe and the United States haven't done anything to help them out either. After Mexican Independence, American firms pillaged the mineral resources of Mexico. Imagine what other resources Mexico would have access to if the United States had not taken the land from California to Mexico, and as far North as Colorado!
If the United State is serious about immigration we as a nation will pressure our companies who do business there to pay a fair wage, and to not take advantage of any and all loopholes. When residents of Latin America are given a good reason to stay home . . . they probably will.
This rule has been around for a long time here in the US. It's not a bad one . . . and it has grounds in the legal system. The argument is this: When two people agree to have sex, they are entering into an agreement (basically a verbal contract). However, no one is allowed to enter a verbal contract unless they are of sound mind and body (ie. the ability to use good judgment). Therefore individuals are not able to consent to sex unless they are sober.
Now comes the obvious part. The law applies to men and women. The law is meant to give individuals the ability to press charges against predators. These predators are the people who intentionally target individuals who would not otherwise agree to have sex with them.
Basically, you should be careful when you go to a pub/bar. If you don't know the guy/girl, you may want to think twice about going home with them. In this age of sexually transmitted disease, that's good advice no matter what! If you know the girl, and she hasn't turned you down a few dozen times in the last 6 months, you're probably in the clear.
Now comes the obvious part. The law applies to men and women. The law is meant to give individuals the ability to press charges against predators. These predators are the people who intentionally target individuals who would not otherwise agree to have sex with them.
Basically, you should be careful when you go to a pub/bar. If you don't know the guy/girl, you may want to think twice about going home with them. In this age of sexually transmitted disease, that's good advice no matter what! If you know the girl, and she hasn't turned you down a few dozen times in the last 6 months, you're probably in the clear.
Enjoy!
http://epicsoccermaneuver.ytmnd.com/
http://epicsoccer.ytmnd.com/
http://footballkick.ytmnd.com/
http://epicitaliasoccer.ytmnd.com/
http://soccerfails.ytmnd.com/
http://soccertralala.ytmnd.com/
http://nonepicgoalie.ytmnd.com/
http://footballlol.ytmnd.com/
http://epicsoccergoalie.ytmnd.com/
http://esm.ytmnd.com/
http://boomsoccerfacecrush.ytmnd.com/
http://soccerfailure.ytmnd.com/
http://tttso.ytmnd.com/
http://epicsoccermaneuver.ytmnd.com/
http://epicsoccer.ytmnd.com/
http://footballkick.ytmnd.com/
http://epicitaliasoccer.ytmnd.com/
http://soccerfails.ytmnd.com/
http://soccertralala.ytmnd.com/
http://nonepicgoalie.ytmnd.com/
http://footballlol.ytmnd.com/
http://epicsoccergoalie.ytmnd.com/
http://esm.ytmnd.com/
http://boomsoccerfacecrush.ytmnd.com/
http://soccerfailure.ytmnd.com/
http://tttso.ytmnd.com/
You know BF2 has been out too long when when we're reduced to making up rules about how (not) to Karma people in a video game forum.
No flame intended; I just think this is kind of funny.
Back to real life!!!
No flame intended; I just think this is kind of funny.
Back to real life!!!
Freedom of speech would be advocating for the right to say something disagreeable.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
This must be the free speech people on these forums love to advocate.
This however was a desecration of a grave which I would guess is a crime in all 50 states.
It sounds like the only people who advocated for this were the neo-Nazi/skinheads who did it; and I'm sure we can all agree that it was disgusting.
LOL!
Oh well, thanks.
Oh well, thanks.
I hope no one beat me to it. I just happened across a story that turned my stomach. I guess we can add these skin heads to the list of people who know how to respect veterans. They should team up with nut-jobs from Kansas!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18910561/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18910561/
I got some advice when my dad died of cancer two years ago. You're so tiered (you'd be surprised how much energy it takes to prepare someone for their funeral) and in shock, it's hard to have everything sink in right away. The person told me that you can't predict when or why, but eventually the death will hit you like a ton of bricks. I'd say that there's a lot of truth in that. Sometimes it's a song, most of the time it's a dream for me. I'll wake up crying, but I'm happy that I got to know him. The only thing I can do is learn from what he did, and try to carry on the family name with some sense of pride.
When it happened, the most comforting thought I had was that burying my father was within the natural order of things. I'd rather bury him, than the other way around. I figured that I had grown up now . . . a little sooner than I would have wanted, but the order was correct all the same.
When it happened, the most comforting thought I had was that burying my father was within the natural order of things. I'd rather bury him, than the other way around. I figured that I had grown up now . . . a little sooner than I would have wanted, but the order was correct all the same.
There are a lot of good points being made, and a lot of hurt and disgust being expressed.
A brave man died in a way that no one should; let's just all pray/wish well for his family and let this man, and every man woman and child who has died in this (maybe all) war have some peace and dignity. It's bad enough that our politicians can't think straight, we can at least try to do the right thing here.
God rest his soul.
A brave man died in a way that no one should; let's just all pray/wish well for his family and let this man, and every man woman and child who has died in this (maybe all) war have some peace and dignity. It's bad enough that our politicians can't think straight, we can at least try to do the right thing here.
God rest his soul.
Ah, let Vilham be. The UK has enough to worry about with separatists gaining seats in Scotland! They're going to have to reinstate the voting rights of the House of Lords if they loose any more land.
P.S.
In reply to "1." Now that we've established that you "have a girl" ask her if she'll let you kiss her (it can be one of the first steps to having relations with her).
and
"2." In my opinion . . . your opinions suck. No one brought up support of the IRA before you did (see post # 60), and yet all you do is accuse others of supporting them. That's not a rational conclusion (i.e. opinion) it's a delusion. And I respectfully ask that you give it a rest.
Thanks in advance.
P.S.
In reply to "1." Now that we've established that you "have a girl" ask her if she'll let you kiss her (it can be one of the first steps to having relations with her).
and
"2." In my opinion . . . your opinions suck. No one brought up support of the IRA before you did (see post # 60), and yet all you do is accuse others of supporting them. That's not a rational conclusion (i.e. opinion) it's a delusion. And I respectfully ask that you give it a rest.
Thanks in advance.
Economic Left/Right: -6.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.59
Woo Hoo! Off the chart baby! LOL
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.59
Woo Hoo! Off the chart baby! LOL
As anti-war as France has been (based on UN voting records & etc.) it's amazing that the vote turned out the way that it did.
On a lighter note, I'll miss seeing Royal in the press. As far as heads of state go, she wasn't too hard on the eyes.
On a lighter note, I'll miss seeing Royal in the press. As far as heads of state go, she wasn't too hard on the eyes.
Get the fuck out of here. Jesus Mary and Joseph, will you leave your keyboard alone for ten minutes and get a hooker or something? Just get laid; it's amazing how much it will relieve the urge to fight with everyone for no good reason. Assuming that you can't get laid (even by a hooker) I would ask that at the very least you quit making shit up. This whole fucking thread is full of you just putting words in other people's mouths just so you can condemn it. We would all appreciate it if you would leave the verbal sparing confined to the voices in your head. Go fuck up someone else's thread for a little while so those of us who have an interest in this topic can enjoy ourselves for a while.Vilham wrote:
Well lets leave it at the fact that i believe that you and Poe both actually believe what the IRA did was ok, due to things you have said and havent said, thus making anything you say in my eyes not worthy of serious consideration. Shame really as i used to respect poes views.
Thanks in advance.
To fight does not mean to bare arms in conflict . . . . If you ask someone who would know (one of your grandparents or an uncle perhaps) I would be willing to wager that even your great-grand-dad sacrificed during that time. It was a very unique time in human history. Almost everyone was for or against something. Those who lived in countries like Germany and Great Briton had no choice but to pick sides. A lot of people in the US "fought" by donating nylon stockings, buying war bonds, and growing victory gardens.Shem wrote:
One of my great grand-dads didnt fight, guess he doesn't count.Shopvac wrote:
If Hillary wins you want to move to one of two significantly more socialist countries? Well done sir !?!HURLEY wrote:
I'm not British, but if Hillary Clinton gets elected, ill be moving there or Sweden. lol
By the way Shem (and I don't mean this to be insulting . . . honest), everyone fought back then. As far as Winston Churchill was concerned the fate of civilization was at steak. Thank God we never had to find out.
I'm loving this post already.
The other one was blown up in vehichle of some sort where he was the only survivor of the 6 in there, this was at dunkirk.
Neither of them did all that much during the war...
Not that liberties weren't taken . . . but . . . watch Michael Collins. It's a good movie and it is a good depiction of what happened when the UK did actually go to war with Ireland.UGADawgs wrote:
Lol, the UK would totally open up a can on Ireland. Wouldn't even be close.Vilham wrote:
Sein Fein for sure, then we can legally blow those UK mother fuckers up, maybe we could even start a war.
Of course there won't be a war, but I'm just saying that if there ever were one, the UK would so easily blockade Ireland and then bomb the hell out of it.
Plus, some 230 odd years ago people said the same thing about a bunch of rag tag colonies across the Atlantic!
If Hillary wins you want to move to one of two significantly more socialist countries? Well done sir !?!HURLEY wrote:
I'm not British, but if Hillary Clinton gets elected, ill be moving there or Sweden. lol
By the way Shem (and I don't mean this to be insulting . . . honest), everyone fought back then. As far as Winston Churchill was concerned the fate of civilization was at steak. Thank God we never had to find out.
I'm loving this post already.
BULLOCKS OF THE WORLD UNITE!!!fadedsteve wrote:
How about NO ONE CARES!!
Ireland is an insignificant island in terms of geopolitics!!
Regardless who is voted in, it will be some socialist liberal. . . . .
My beloved Irish will continue to enjoy the benefits of the Euro, and thats that! I wish Ireland the best, as I am Irish, but I find it laughable that anyone they elect is going to seriously effect global politics.
For christs sake, they dont even own their entire country! I would focus on electing someone who promises to unite the island!!
Boooooo!
By the way, the Irish economy known as the Celtic Tiger has been one of the most stable and fastest growing economies in Western Europe for the last 10 years. The Irish Pound was valued higher than the US Dollar until Ireland switched to the Euro. The peace process relating to Northern Ireland has set many significant precedents relating to terrorism, land and human rights, and peace negotiations. For many years this process has had an impact on similar situations around the world (US war on terror, land and human rights allegations in Eastern Europe and Africa). Also, because of the strong economy immigration has been an issue in Ireland and thus, the country expresses an important point of view on the topic in the European Parliament. . . thus it plays a role (significant or otherwise) in world affairs.
Any way, back to the actual debate. I would like to add one more candidate to the list. Dustin the Turkey. He's a straight shooter who cares about all the lovely boys and girls of Ireland (despite what that duck says about him). He'd be a great Taoiseach.
"Go on you good thing!!!"
The problem is this: If there are a total of 10,000 apples in the world, and you destroy the whole bunch, then there is no potential to start over. This is not an attack of your logic. Rather, it is an attack on the logic of people who advocate "nuking the (insert low-browed derogatory term here)'s." It seems they have a serious problem with their critical thinking abilities.Dersmikner wrote:
If you have a container full of 10,000 apples, and one is bad, you can honestly say "hey, do't let one bad apple spoil the whole bunch."
That's still a good bunch of apples.
If you have a container with 10,000 apples and 6,400 of them are bad, that's a bad bunch of apples, and you're jsut as well off destroying the whole bunch and starting over.
Someone on the first page (sorry for forgetting who it was) said that we should be careful because children are reading these posts. It occurs to me that some of the racist posts in here may be from are younger participants. They may be repeating what a parent says, or just trying to give as strong an argument as they're capable of. I would argue that it is our obligation to let them know that there are serious consequences to these types of flawed arguments. We should let them know that it is okay to disagree, and to despise the existence of another person. And we should also let them know that it is not okay to dislike every person who looks like the person that they hate.
To me it all boils down to this. If you pre-judge people, or judge someone without knowing anything about them, then you are the looser. I feel bad for people who do this. However, the aspect of the situation that bugs me the most is the pain that is inflicted on the oppressed because those in power squander their privilege, and ignore enlightenment for the sake of comfort.
Fear is no one's ally.
And all this time I wanted to move to the Netherlands because people there are better educated and tolerant. DAMN!
Everyone should just smoke another one and chill for a while huh?
Everyone should just smoke another one and chill for a while huh?
It's not really that funny if you look at the disparities between Americans in the majority and those in the minority. I would love for everyone to look at the difference in percentages of arrests, convictions, employment population, and wage parity. It's not a cop-out; it's a fact that there is some form of discrimination in this country and it is having a tangible effect on the livelihoods of every day Americans. I haven't seen anyone put up video of a Grand Wizard and say "see every white person is racist!!!" Instead, we find one nut job (every family has one) and say "look! They're as bad as we are." The example of Liberia is a red herring because the US is the richest country in the world. Every country in the world by comparison would not be as well-off as a whole; and I sincerely hope that no one is insinuating that people of African decent all over the world are inferior. That's already been discussed in other threads.superfly_cox wrote:
What's funny is that black people in America today are far better off than their African counterparts. Racism and discrimination (in America) is nothing when you compare it to disease, poverty, war, famine (in Africa).
What's even funnier is that the country of Liberia was founded as an independent nation for free-born and formerly enslaved African Americans. How'd that turn out?
Asian and Indian immigrants do fine in America. They also endure racism and discrimination but you don't see them bitching about it all the time. You also don't see them getting special minority perks even though they, too, are technically a minority. They work hard, don't blame others for their problems and make a life themselves.
Two wrongs don't make a right, and instead of pointing fingers we should be asking ourselves what we're doing to make things better. Unless we're all invested in being part of the solution, then we're part of the problem.
I wish you all peace.
Congrats Frank,
I envy you. I tried to follow my dad into the Air Force. I will be finishing a Master of Social Work degree in a about two weeks. I applied for a social work position in the AF, but the Col. I interviewed with turned me down for "lack of paid experience." I'm still a little sore over it. I thought my straight A's would be enough to carry me. I'm glad to hear that you found your way in, and that it's working out for you. Take full advantage and see as much of the world as you can. It's worth it! Keep us informed . . . but only about the declassified stuff
I envy you. I tried to follow my dad into the Air Force. I will be finishing a Master of Social Work degree in a about two weeks. I applied for a social work position in the AF, but the Col. I interviewed with turned me down for "lack of paid experience." I'm still a little sore over it. I thought my straight A's would be enough to carry me. I'm glad to hear that you found your way in, and that it's working out for you. Take full advantage and see as much of the world as you can. It's worth it! Keep us informed . . . but only about the declassified stuff
Maybe I'm not so smart . . . but doesn't hoping that a "jihad" flies a fucking plane into (the) whitehouse . . . make you a terrorist too? Isn't this just the sort of thing that the Secret Service take a lot of exception to? Way to be a patriot!Dezerteagal5 wrote:
Fucking stupid ass democrats, i cant fucking wait untill the next terrorist attack so i can run up to every scumbag cock sucking anti-war liberal and scream in there face about what a stupid mother fucker they are and how they should've listened to the fucking president. I hope a democrat gets elected and jihad flies a fucking plane into his whitehouse office...
Fuckin fuck
Dont even fucking quote me im not in the mood to fight
I DONT WANNA SEE A FUCKING AWM EITHER! This is pathetic enough to yell about!
A. For 300 fucking years this country has been trying (and not trying, at parts) to eliminate racism in American life.
B. During the civil rights movement, Blacks were striving just to be accepted into mainstream Americana as normal people.
C. Equal employment was rampant.
D. I was in class today, my teacher called on the one Black kid in my class, and he stood up and shouted "You just pick on me because I'm Black.." "HE" then walked out of the classroom. Its like "THEY" are trying so hard to be understood, but they aren't letting anyone understand them. Its fucking ridiculous.
Same with the Mexicans in this area. They are so against the way of life that "I" grew up in (as did most of them).
Bottom line: I know your people may have struggled in the past, but you really don't have to take it out on the rest of us just because you came from somewhere else and your family had it bad in the past.
Here's my response:
A. Let's take this statement in context. The part about "not trying at parts" deserves more than a parenthesise. America has NOT been trying to erase racism for 300 years. In fact it has encouraged it for a vast majority of that time. See Supreme Court Decisions on Plessy Vs Ferguson et. al.
B. During the civil rights period of the 1960's (there have been many periods dedicated to the search for civil rights), I think that the interested parties would have settled to be treated as human, and not "a part of mainstream Americana." When two things are combined, neither will ever be the same again. Therefore the definition of "Mainstream Americana" would have to be changed after these "Black people were accepted into it."
C. This statement troubles me on many different counts. But I'll leave my response to this one point. Even if "Equal employment was rampant" there has never been equity of jobs, nor wages. That includes the minute I write this, and the minute you read it.
D. I would like to point out how this paragraph was worded. The CAPS, and quotes are mine. You said that "ONE Black Kid" stood up in class, and then in conclusion you said "THEY are trying . . . " I understand and appreciate your anger and I suppose that you would like to resolve these feelings (hence your post). I therefore feel obligated to tell you that your generalizations about whole races based in majority on your personal observations is contributing to this problem.
You say in your "Bottom Line" that you know our people have struggled in the past. In truth I tell you that our people struggle today. In your home state crops are sprayed with chemicals while immigrant pregnant mothers are picking fruit. African Americans have much higher rates of unemployment, salary equity, infant mortality, and incarceration than whites. Yes our people struggle.
There is such a thing as institutional racism. We are all part of it despite our best efforts. In a friendly way I would like to extend an invitation for you to volunteer at a community center that caters to a culture that you would like to know more about. To join a community is to understand it. We all have problems; some of them are systemic. That doesn't mean that we all deserve the treatment that we get as a result.
Peace to all who have read this far.
B. During the civil rights movement, Blacks were striving just to be accepted into mainstream Americana as normal people.
C. Equal employment was rampant.
D. I was in class today, my teacher called on the one Black kid in my class, and he stood up and shouted "You just pick on me because I'm Black.." "HE" then walked out of the classroom. Its like "THEY" are trying so hard to be understood, but they aren't letting anyone understand them. Its fucking ridiculous.
Same with the Mexicans in this area. They are so against the way of life that "I" grew up in (as did most of them).
Bottom line: I know your people may have struggled in the past, but you really don't have to take it out on the rest of us just because you came from somewhere else and your family had it bad in the past.
Here's my response:
A. Let's take this statement in context. The part about "not trying at parts" deserves more than a parenthesise. America has NOT been trying to erase racism for 300 years. In fact it has encouraged it for a vast majority of that time. See Supreme Court Decisions on Plessy Vs Ferguson et. al.
B. During the civil rights period of the 1960's (there have been many periods dedicated to the search for civil rights), I think that the interested parties would have settled to be treated as human, and not "a part of mainstream Americana." When two things are combined, neither will ever be the same again. Therefore the definition of "Mainstream Americana" would have to be changed after these "Black people were accepted into it."
C. This statement troubles me on many different counts. But I'll leave my response to this one point. Even if "Equal employment was rampant" there has never been equity of jobs, nor wages. That includes the minute I write this, and the minute you read it.
D. I would like to point out how this paragraph was worded. The CAPS, and quotes are mine. You said that "ONE Black Kid" stood up in class, and then in conclusion you said "THEY are trying . . . " I understand and appreciate your anger and I suppose that you would like to resolve these feelings (hence your post). I therefore feel obligated to tell you that your generalizations about whole races based in majority on your personal observations is contributing to this problem.
You say in your "Bottom Line" that you know our people have struggled in the past. In truth I tell you that our people struggle today. In your home state crops are sprayed with chemicals while immigrant pregnant mothers are picking fruit. African Americans have much higher rates of unemployment, salary equity, infant mortality, and incarceration than whites. Yes our people struggle.
There is such a thing as institutional racism. We are all part of it despite our best efforts. In a friendly way I would like to extend an invitation for you to volunteer at a community center that caters to a culture that you would like to know more about. To join a community is to understand it. We all have problems; some of them are systemic. That doesn't mean that we all deserve the treatment that we get as a result.
Peace to all who have read this far.
There's a lot of good advice in here. In the end what you want won't matter more than what the Army needs; they'll put you where they have the most need. And we all know that right now, the need is in Inf. I had a buddy that was all about joining the SEALS. When he signed up, he scored too high on his test, and got put on reactors. The way the DoD sees it, your commitment is to your service first, and to yourself (i.e. your career aspirations) second. I wish you luck. I tried a similar route and was declined (long story), so I envy your opportunity. Just stay safe out there!!!
Cut and paste job, but at least it's of something that's kind of cool. 6/10.
Well hell, while we're at it we should pile on the Amish too. They speak Pennsylvania Dutch. Those fuckers are bringing the rest of us down, and you know they won't be on here to defend themselves so let's really take it to 'em. What do you say?!?
Back to reality. As the son of Mexican immigrants I won't say anything that hasn't already been said by Hunter. You should have seen my plus one already. Thanks. Furthermore I agree that anyone who is going to a different country should try to lean something about that country first. A good place to start is language.
Here's the dilemma in the US. European immigrants didn't always speak English when they arrived. In most cases it took three generations for the native language to be erased. With our proximity to Latin America this process may take longer. Geography alone will have an effect on the strength of the bonds with our various countries of origin.
In the mean time if any of us want real change in regard to this issue, we should take a strengths based approach. We should support reform instead of punishing individuals. Want to end illegal immigration . . . support economic reform in the target countries. Want to hear more people speak English . . . support increased availability of ESL programs. The bottom line is that deportation and imprisonment will do nothing to solve the problems we have with these issues.
Back to reality. As the son of Mexican immigrants I won't say anything that hasn't already been said by Hunter. You should have seen my plus one already. Thanks. Furthermore I agree that anyone who is going to a different country should try to lean something about that country first. A good place to start is language.
Here's the dilemma in the US. European immigrants didn't always speak English when they arrived. In most cases it took three generations for the native language to be erased. With our proximity to Latin America this process may take longer. Geography alone will have an effect on the strength of the bonds with our various countries of origin.
In the mean time if any of us want real change in regard to this issue, we should take a strengths based approach. We should support reform instead of punishing individuals. Want to end illegal immigration . . . support economic reform in the target countries. Want to hear more people speak English . . . support increased availability of ESL programs. The bottom line is that deportation and imprisonment will do nothing to solve the problems we have with these issues.
I'm a donor. I would concur with a lot of what Silo wrote. I just put myself in the shoes of the people who need those organs. If I were them I would be beside myself with frustration that all these people were dead and dying, and if they had just elected to donate, my loved one would not have to join them.
At first I put down "all organs for transplant minus cornea." The cornea thing freaked me out, but then I thought some more about it and decided "seriously, what the fcuk will I care?" I'll be dead!
Any way, for those of you who are young remember that your organs are the best for transplant. They have a better potential for lasting the longest in the recipient.
Also, PLEASE if you are going to donate. Tell as many family members as you can. Sometimes we don't know who the hospital will be able to contact. This way no matter who they reach first they can pass on your wishes.
At first I put down "all organs for transplant minus cornea." The cornea thing freaked me out, but then I thought some more about it and decided "seriously, what the fcuk will I care?" I'll be dead!
Any way, for those of you who are young remember that your organs are the best for transplant. They have a better potential for lasting the longest in the recipient.
Also, PLEASE if you are going to donate. Tell as many family members as you can. Sometimes we don't know who the hospital will be able to contact. This way no matter who they reach first they can pass on your wishes.
Thanks to everyone that responded. It was something I had passively wondered about for a while.
Dark Obsidian, having been an American my whole life, and having visited Ireland somewhat extensively I'll tell you that being called the "Y" word is often used as an endearing term these days. I'm sure we could start some worthless thread about the origin of the word or some BS like that but I'm sorry to tell you that you're the first person to ever object to me about that word.
I am wholeheartedly sorry to have offended you but maybe we could come to some agreement about when and where I can use that word and in what pretense. It is a word that I accept as a badge of membership not as a put down. Feel free to PM me and we can negotiate.
Dark Obsidian, having been an American my whole life, and having visited Ireland somewhat extensively I'll tell you that being called the "Y" word is often used as an endearing term these days. I'm sure we could start some worthless thread about the origin of the word or some BS like that but I'm sorry to tell you that you're the first person to ever object to me about that word.
I am wholeheartedly sorry to have offended you but maybe we could come to some agreement about when and where I can use that word and in what pretense. It is a word that I accept as a badge of membership not as a put down. Feel free to PM me and we can negotiate.
Wow!
So let me get this straight. . . . We're here discussing the merits of tactics and battle strategy in an on-line video game. We're also talking about if someone should really use a part of the game that was . . . (wait for it) . . . meant to be used.
Am I close?
Okay, well I'm glad we've got all the serious shit in our lives all figured out. Now that we've taken care of all that, I'm going to go work on that world hunger thing. Someone else can be in charge of nuclear proliferation. Good Luck.
GOD IN HEAVEN!
So let me get this straight. . . . We're here discussing the merits of tactics and battle strategy in an on-line video game. We're also talking about if someone should really use a part of the game that was . . . (wait for it) . . . meant to be used.
Am I close?
Okay, well I'm glad we've got all the serious shit in our lives all figured out. Now that we've taken care of all that, I'm going to go work on that world hunger thing. Someone else can be in charge of nuclear proliferation. Good Luck.
GOD IN HEAVEN!
Nice post Venom,
I didn't even know that Germany was still producing tanks post WWII. I'm glad they are. It seems that after WWI they've consistently been ahead of the engineering curve when it comes to tank development.
Us Yanks should also remember that we don't always get the whole story when it comes to our military. ie. Our tank armor was actually developed by the UK.
One last question though, am I right that Brittan uses a rifled main gun on the Challenger? If so, are the Brits the only country to use a rifled main gun on their tank?
+1 for the first person who can find me the answer.
I didn't even know that Germany was still producing tanks post WWII. I'm glad they are. It seems that after WWI they've consistently been ahead of the engineering curve when it comes to tank development.
Us Yanks should also remember that we don't always get the whole story when it comes to our military. ie. Our tank armor was actually developed by the UK.
One last question though, am I right that Brittan uses a rifled main gun on the Challenger? If so, are the Brits the only country to use a rifled main gun on their tank?
+1 for the first person who can find me the answer.
I haven't read through the four pages (so shut up right?) so I'm sorry if I'm redundant. Someone asked me about this same sort of thing not to long ago. As a fan of anthropological psychology, this is the answer I gave.
Lesbians are seen as more acceptable because of traditional gender roles.
Women are "supposed" to be loving, nurturing and affectionate.
Whereas men are supposed to be rugged, inexpressive, and even cold.
Thus, when women are seen in an affectionate position (such as making out) it does not shock our senses. Both women are fulfilling their traditional roles.
However if two men are seen in a loving embrace, we may find it shocking because they are not being cold and inexpressive.
When we see a man and a woman together we may say that he is just trying to provide for her needs, or he is relenting to her wishes, thus giving him a "pass" for his behavior. However, if it is two men, then we may decided that there is no excuse for this because neither of them should want to be so expressive.
Any way that's my working theory.
Flame away.
Lesbians are seen as more acceptable because of traditional gender roles.
Women are "supposed" to be loving, nurturing and affectionate.
Whereas men are supposed to be rugged, inexpressive, and even cold.
Thus, when women are seen in an affectionate position (such as making out) it does not shock our senses. Both women are fulfilling their traditional roles.
However if two men are seen in a loving embrace, we may find it shocking because they are not being cold and inexpressive.
When we see a man and a woman together we may say that he is just trying to provide for her needs, or he is relenting to her wishes, thus giving him a "pass" for his behavior. However, if it is two men, then we may decided that there is no excuse for this because neither of them should want to be so expressive.
Any way that's my working theory.
Flame away.
Here's my point . . . Freedom of the press was instituted so that the press could fulfill it's watchdog role without the danger of being thrown in jail.
Obvious I know.
As I interpret this freedom I submit that the press is an organized institution meant to safeguard the rights of the people. In other words, the media is responsible for delineating information about the actions of the government so that we as citizens may hold them accountable in the next round of elections if not sooner.
While Olberman often goes too far, and undoubtedly takes liberties in his "telling of the story" I find his brand of journalism less offensive. The reason is that he is taking the position of questioning the policies and decisions of our administration. While on the other hand, O'Riley is trying to strong arm his viewers into agreeing with him. He does this by saying that only idiots would disagree with his point of view. The problem with this is that O'Riley often borrows the talking points of the administration and its larger political party as his televised platform. He is a second press secretary who goes out to defend the administration every week night. This is not the job of the press, and it is in fact an insult to the pioneers of televised news like W. Cronkite.
That's the problem I have.
Last thing. I'm pretty sure Olberman doesn't refuse to show his political leanings. I know that none of them are supposed to say what their convictions are in an attempt to appear more independent. Even O'Riley calls himself such. Again, it's a very thin mask.
Obvious I know.
As I interpret this freedom I submit that the press is an organized institution meant to safeguard the rights of the people. In other words, the media is responsible for delineating information about the actions of the government so that we as citizens may hold them accountable in the next round of elections if not sooner.
While Olberman often goes too far, and undoubtedly takes liberties in his "telling of the story" I find his brand of journalism less offensive. The reason is that he is taking the position of questioning the policies and decisions of our administration. While on the other hand, O'Riley is trying to strong arm his viewers into agreeing with him. He does this by saying that only idiots would disagree with his point of view. The problem with this is that O'Riley often borrows the talking points of the administration and its larger political party as his televised platform. He is a second press secretary who goes out to defend the administration every week night. This is not the job of the press, and it is in fact an insult to the pioneers of televised news like W. Cronkite.
That's the problem I have.
Last thing. I'm pretty sure Olberman doesn't refuse to show his political leanings. I know that none of them are supposed to say what their convictions are in an attempt to appear more independent. Even O'Riley calls himself such. Again, it's a very thin mask.
Bill is anything but objective. I would say that most respected agents of the left are unwilling to go on his program, thus he's left with a 6th grade teacher from Falls Park Idaho to try and defend the actions of the entire National Teachers' Union. Then these lesser prepared representatives are sent in to debate the A-team form the right.
That is not fair and balanced, and it is propaganda. Screaming and yelling at people does not denote objectivity, and furthermore, it is not journalism. I watch and listen to the right, and I watch and listen to the left. What I do refuse to do is listen to the craziest parts of both sides. The only people who are on my permanent scratch list are Michael Savage, and Ann Colter. They are so far past the realm of reality that I feel like I need to take a shower after I hear them. Bill isn't on my permanent list, but he needs to retract his most recent statement about Hornback (please click on the link).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17015638/
As far as the Hilton comment, I wasn't calling her respectable, I was mealy denoting that popularity has little to do with truth, honesty, public service, or value. It has everything to do with sensationalism. Thus popularity is a poor measure of any public service or value of any of the media personalities listed. They're all just trying to make a buck.
That is not fair and balanced, and it is propaganda. Screaming and yelling at people does not denote objectivity, and furthermore, it is not journalism. I watch and listen to the right, and I watch and listen to the left. What I do refuse to do is listen to the craziest parts of both sides. The only people who are on my permanent scratch list are Michael Savage, and Ann Colter. They are so far past the realm of reality that I feel like I need to take a shower after I hear them. Bill isn't on my permanent list, but he needs to retract his most recent statement about Hornback (please click on the link).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17015638/
As far as the Hilton comment, I wasn't calling her respectable, I was mealy denoting that popularity has little to do with truth, honesty, public service, or value. It has everything to do with sensationalism. Thus popularity is a poor measure of any public service or value of any of the media personalities listed. They're all just trying to make a buck.
Any one who wants to (with all due respect) lick the nuts of conservative media personalities can go right ahead. As for me, I have a hard time stomaching people who just make shit up all the time. I thought Olberman hit it on the head last night when he called out "Mr. O'" about his comments about the Hornback kid "liking to some degree" the fact that he was being abused, and sexually assaulted. There can be no level of respect for comments like that.
But that's not the problem. EVERYONE says something truly asinine at least once a day. The really bad thing is when you believe that one side is always right, and one side is always wrong. When this happens, we loose the ability to pick out the good from the bad.
Ratings mean nothing as it relates to truth. Paris Hilton is popular, that doesn't make her right, or worthy of our adulation. Same is true for the left and the right. Please stay objective.
P.S. I really meant nothing by the licking nuts comment, I meant it in an affectionate non-sexual way!
But that's not the problem. EVERYONE says something truly asinine at least once a day. The really bad thing is when you believe that one side is always right, and one side is always wrong. When this happens, we loose the ability to pick out the good from the bad.
Ratings mean nothing as it relates to truth. Paris Hilton is popular, that doesn't make her right, or worthy of our adulation. Same is true for the left and the right. Please stay objective.
P.S. I really meant nothing by the licking nuts comment, I meant it in an affectionate non-sexual way!
So I'm reading this article about how screwed up a recent Marine Corp amphibious craft project is, and how the whole project is going to start all over again (delaying the acquisition date).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17015666/
And I'm also thinking about how I was hearing that a Chinook was shot down over Baghdad last night and I start wondering.
I wonder if anyone has an idea of how many lives we could have saved if the Pentagon had NOT scraped the US Army Comanche program. Does anyone have any information on any wouldbe critical failure prevention programs that would have been incorporated into the Comanche that are not a part of the current Apache Longbow (like the two that have been recently brought down by enemy fire)?
I just think it's sad that we're not doing EVERYTHING we can to keep our men and women safe. I think about how short a time it took to develop some of our most important weapon systems in the middle of World War Two, and how that sense of urgency doesn't seem to be there this time. Things are different when it's not your son or daughter out there getting shot at. I wish our politicians were more capable of taking their actions more seriously.
Any way, anyone who can comment on this will have my thanks.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17015666/
And I'm also thinking about how I was hearing that a Chinook was shot down over Baghdad last night and I start wondering.
I wonder if anyone has an idea of how many lives we could have saved if the Pentagon had NOT scraped the US Army Comanche program. Does anyone have any information on any wouldbe critical failure prevention programs that would have been incorporated into the Comanche that are not a part of the current Apache Longbow (like the two that have been recently brought down by enemy fire)?
I just think it's sad that we're not doing EVERYTHING we can to keep our men and women safe. I think about how short a time it took to develop some of our most important weapon systems in the middle of World War Two, and how that sense of urgency doesn't seem to be there this time. Things are different when it's not your son or daughter out there getting shot at. I wish our politicians were more capable of taking their actions more seriously.
Any way, anyone who can comment on this will have my thanks.
LOL. As a Detroit native I say this is a valid topic!
Get the fuck out of here. That's Bollox.
Personally, I think the issue is the notion of public space. If someone is sitting out in the middle of Central Park and plays a guitar, and happens to play a Clapton song, should he be sued too? This is copyright infringement if he didn't have permission to play the song, or if he didn't buy the music right?
But no one cares because he's not charging anything. He's just out in a park playing a guitar.
Can the same be said of Internet domains? Are places like Youtube just the public parks of the Internet? Or is it a nefarious service hell bent on robbing the poor poor industry executives of their hard earned money. It's like Latrell Spreewell said. He needs to feed his family too!
The wild card in all of this is the fact that TV networks are posting their episodes on Youtube for people to catch up if they missed an episode. Will a music company really want to shut down a site that NBC uses to advertise itself?
I vote for keeping Youtube, but greed has a nasty habit of trumping the common good.
But no one cares because he's not charging anything. He's just out in a park playing a guitar.
Can the same be said of Internet domains? Are places like Youtube just the public parks of the Internet? Or is it a nefarious service hell bent on robbing the poor poor industry executives of their hard earned money. It's like Latrell Spreewell said. He needs to feed his family too!
The wild card in all of this is the fact that TV networks are posting their episodes on Youtube for people to catch up if they missed an episode. Will a music company really want to shut down a site that NBC uses to advertise itself?
I vote for keeping Youtube, but greed has a nasty habit of trumping the common good.
Teflon, The attacks on WTC were revolting and make me want to vomit when I think about them. 3000 Innocent people died for the sake of ideological extremism.
However,
and this does not excuse any of the acts carried out by terrorists.
I would argue that a president who stops hundreds of thousands of people from being raped and murdered has still done a good job with his foreign policy. Even if that same president urged another nation (who was holding someone who later participated in an atrocity himself) to let go of someone in order to broker peace in the one region of the world that needs it most. By the way, trying to broker a peace agreement between Israel and Palestine, that's foreign policy too. Even conservatives would agree that this is a good goal for The US, and the rest of the world.
As for terrorism before Israel. Some of our Marine brethren need only sing their favorite song to tell you all about the first foreign invasion that the US took part in. That would be Libya on the "shores of Tripoli." Look up the story, that mission was in response to terrorism. The Nazi's also sunk many of our cargo ships just off the East Cost before we entered WWII. War had not been declared between the two countries, and so that should be considered terrorism too.
I wasn't able to fully understand the argument of the Japanese social conscious given by Berster. I apologize. I will however, say that the level and magnitude of indoctrination going on in mid 20th century Imperial Japan was at least equal to that of what we see coming out of the Mudrasas in the Islamic world. The Japanese were told that they were a superior race to all others. They were told that the Americans were barbarians and had no souls. That is why so many Japanese (military and civilians) were willing to kill themselves in defense of their Country. They felt that death was better than seeing Americans in charge of them. I would argue that things didn't work out so bad for Japan after the war was done. The 1980's were very kind to them. But that just proves my point of how misinformed the people of Japan were before the war.
However,
and this does not excuse any of the acts carried out by terrorists.
I would argue that a president who stops hundreds of thousands of people from being raped and murdered has still done a good job with his foreign policy. Even if that same president urged another nation (who was holding someone who later participated in an atrocity himself) to let go of someone in order to broker peace in the one region of the world that needs it most. By the way, trying to broker a peace agreement between Israel and Palestine, that's foreign policy too. Even conservatives would agree that this is a good goal for The US, and the rest of the world.
As for terrorism before Israel. Some of our Marine brethren need only sing their favorite song to tell you all about the first foreign invasion that the US took part in. That would be Libya on the "shores of Tripoli." Look up the story, that mission was in response to terrorism. The Nazi's also sunk many of our cargo ships just off the East Cost before we entered WWII. War had not been declared between the two countries, and so that should be considered terrorism too.
I wasn't able to fully understand the argument of the Japanese social conscious given by Berster. I apologize. I will however, say that the level and magnitude of indoctrination going on in mid 20th century Imperial Japan was at least equal to that of what we see coming out of the Mudrasas in the Islamic world. The Japanese were told that they were a superior race to all others. They were told that the Americans were barbarians and had no souls. That is why so many Japanese (military and civilians) were willing to kill themselves in defense of their Country. They felt that death was better than seeing Americans in charge of them. I would argue that things didn't work out so bad for Japan after the war was done. The 1980's were very kind to them. But that just proves my point of how misinformed the people of Japan were before the war.
Hey purple,=MCHD= arush5268d wrote:
. . . Well shit on me and call me purple. You're a damned kid. You haven't been around long enough to know what a bad life is.
Anger management . . . look into it.
Holy Crap!