omg the worlds gone nutz

I've just been reading this article on the net about "Americas army" a game some of you I belive have played. The article talks about the influence of videogaming on the younger generation of video gamers and states how the game is basically a front for recretment for George dubawas "War on terror"

[size=13]But America's Army's real purpose is to be a recruiting tool, which is why the game has been made freely [color=white]available since July

[/color][/size]

The link to the article is here

I was just wondering what the rest of you people though of this.

Thats crazy.

BRAVO 2 GO GO GO, THE CHICKEN HAS TAKEN THE BAIT.

Sorry, that happens time to time since Ive been playing Americas Army.

Red team go..

Uhm well this game has been out since CLINTons Term..

Have you seen the TV ad that compairs Hitler to Bush?

Anything to get a Democrap back in the White house..

($)

Got you coverd.. move move move..

The Democratic side of the 2004 election is absolutely ridiculous - Dean is a flat out joke. Come on, a five foot five fiftysomething politician rolling up his sleeves and yelling his ass off is supposed to conjure the image of a tough fighter? Please. Send that garbage back where it belongs (though it is quite hilarious that for all the liberal talk about Bush's propaganda and rhetoric that they've suddenly jumped on the bandwagon with someone even worse).

Of course AA is a recruitment tool! Why would the US army put so much time and money into such a great game if they didn't expect to see a return? Plus, I bet it offers those who play a head start in training.

just to be clear about this, I have no problem with the idea of a game as propaganda. it's an awsome idea on their part.

.....just the simple fact that you can discern the fact that it is a recruiting/propaganda tool tells me yer smart enough not to fall into a political quagmire over it.....

nuff said.... :wink:

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

Cassius said:
The Democratic side of the 2004 election is absolutely ridiculous - Dean is a flat out joke. Come on, a five foot five fiftysomething politician rolling up his sleeves and yelling his ass off is supposed to conjure the image of a tough fighter? Please. Send that garbage back where it belongs (though it is quite hilarious that for all the liberal talk about Bush's propaganda and rhetoric that they've suddenly jumped on the bandwagon with someone even worse).

Yes, because that's exactly the image Dean wants to portray. A badass tough fighter. :rolleyes: Well, at least people are trying a different argument now that that whole 'unelectable' thing has been shown to be bulls**t time and time again.

dean is a shmuck....he'll step on his dick at least one more good time before the election, mark my words....

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

Eh, let Bush finish what he started. I haven't noticed if any of the democrats are running on a pro-war yet different domestic policy platform... that would be the only way I might vote for one. Pulling out of Iraq now would have far worse consequences than attacking it in the first place.

And way to be like 4 years late on the realization that America's Army is a recruitment tool. :razz:

Kucinich is the only Democrat advocating pulling out immediately. Dean was against the war but he realizes that we need to fix the mess now that Bush got us into it.

Tracer Bullet said:
Of course AA is a recruitment tool! Why would the US army put so much time and money into such a great game if they didn't expect to see a return? Plus, I bet it offers those who play a head start in training.

just to be clear about this, I have no problem with the idea of a game as propaganda. it's an awsome idea on their part.

To me it's just a game, since the proper demographic it's geared towards is not my nationality. I played it in its early versions, haven't played in a few years now though.

SuperCrazy said:

Cassius said:
The Democratic side of the 2004 election is absolutely ridiculous - Dean is a flat out joke. Come on, a five foot five fiftysomething politician rolling up his sleeves and yelling his ass off is supposed to conjure the image of a tough fighter? Please. Send that garbage back where it belongs (though it is quite hilarious that for all the liberal talk about Bush's propaganda and rhetoric that they've suddenly jumped on the bandwagon with someone even worse).

Yes, because that's exactly the image Dean wants to portray. A badass tough fighter. :rolleyes: Well, at least people are trying a different argument now that that whole 'unelectable' thing has been shown to be bulls**t time and time again.

Though your ability to make spontaneous and baseless assumptions about my political affiliations is quite admirable, I still think it's around that time to call you an ignorant bastard.

There was an absolutely shocking photo on the cover of Newsweek (not sure if that's the one, I'll check tomorrow) with Dean, both fists in the air, mouth wide open, face red, yelling. He'd rolled up his sleeves before going on stage, where he immediately started screaming about the fight to take the country back - tell me that's not just the same 'emotional propaganda' that Bush uses, and I'll call you a fool.

As if we cared if you feel we're a fool Cass.. You tend to run off at the mouth alot.. why dont you stick something in it, and shut the f**k up. Sheeesh man your full of your self. you think your the autority on everything.. and you come off like an ass.. but then thats just my opinion.

($)

Replys like that are the best way to prove someone is wrong, where did you come up with such an amazing retort? Oh wait i forgot something </sarcasm>

I'm not much up on US politics, but whatever happens, surly noody wants Bush replaced by someone worse. Just thinking about that man gets me livid.

matt said:
surly noody wants Bush replaced by someone worse.

Like, say, Bush again for another 4 years? From my comfy armchair critiquing position, it seems he's just in it for himself and his family, rather than the betterment of the American people (and certainly not the world)

/leaves his filthy ignorant European ass out of this for the rest of the thread :razz:

Sure AA is a recruitement tool, but it can only take one so far. It only shows the good side of the military. Mind you I love the military so I am not trying to bash it. Simply showing the thruth.

The army isnt like in the game, sure you get to shoot and do mock up combat senarios but what they dont show is the actual basic training.

You've all played OP4 boot camp, The sarge yelling at you and insulting you is daily routine in basic training. If you've seen Full Metal Jacket, the sarge yelling at the soldiers and insulting them is the same as in the real deal. They want to test your breaking limits. But they dont show that in AA. They dont show all the physical training, they just show the shooting.

And on top of that, its not everybody that can pick up an M-16 and fire off 5 rounds on a 100 foot range with an average grouping WHILE standing. I've shot alot in my life, ranging from air rifles, BB pistols, .22 cal, Lee Enfields and up to the real deal, C7 (Canadian version of M-16), HK-91 sniper, and the Steyr Aug which you all know. But never was I able to shoot staning to military standards. Even if I was able to get my sniper quals in AA I am still can only reach basic marksman in real life.

AA shouldnt really be considered a recuirtment tool but more of a real life shooter just like the Rainbow Six series.

AA is a good game. The army is a great organisation. But AA does not fully depict military life. My dad was in the military, I am affiliated with the military to a certain extent. And I can tell you AA only shows off the good stuff. If you join the military only because you want to shoot the s**t out of someone like in AA, you are in for a suprise.

/my 2 cents

? posted by <a href=""http://www.snarkpit.com/users.php?name=Leperous"">Leperous</a>

Like, say, Bush again for another 4 years? From my comfy armchair critiquing position, it seems he's just in it for himself and his family, rather than the betterment of the American people (and certainly not the world)

oh no no no...yer not getting out of it that easy , especially after a statement like that...

back up yer statement with some facts Lep....sitting in yer comfy armchair.....how can you say that "hes in it for himself"..." ?? christ almighty....have you become so complacent that you dont remember the first bombing in london that effected yer head?....this isnt about oil, this isnt about colonialization, this isnt about money...its about keeping yer ass safe too man....not just the US, BUT YER ASS TOO....!! what....are they gonnahave to be knocking on yer door AGAIN before you say...help??

....so much for me biting my tongue.....yer up.

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

AA also doesn't have anyof the real life gore and blood. They say that they want a larger audience, but it also shields people from the reality.

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">


But America's Army's real purpose is to be a recruiting tool, which is why the game has been made freely available since July

[/quote]
Clearly George Dubbya and crew have watched "The Last Starfighter" a few too many times.

bah....what a crock of sheit.... :rolleyes:

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

Though your ability to make spontaneous and baseless assumptions about my political affiliations is quite admirable, I still think it's around that time to call you an ignorant bastard.

I commented specifically because I've seen your posts before and I know at a general level where you stand. Although I vehemently disagree with basically every political opinion you've posted, you do seem fairly intelligent. I was hoping you'd reply with something more than ad hominems, but I've been disappointed. (And yes, I'm well aware you're not trying to impress me.)

There was an absolutely shocking photo on the cover of Newsweek (not sure if that's the one, I'll check tomorrow) with Dean, both fists in the air, mouth wide open, face red, yelling. He'd rolled up his sleeves before going on stage, where he immediately started screaming about the fight to take the country back - tell me that's not just the same 'emotional propaganda' that Bush uses, and I'll call you a fool.

I didn't know Dean personally determined the cover of Newsweek. And no, I don't consider Dean promising to take the country back for the people to be on the same level as Bush exploiting September 11 for his own political gain.

? posted by <a href=""http://www.snarkpit.com/users.php?name=SuperCrazy"">SuperCrazy</a>

I didn't know Dean personally determined the cover of Newsweek. And no, I don't consider Dean promising to take the country back for the people to be on the same level as Bush exploiting September 11 for his own political gain.

jesus...you guys really push my buttons these days...and youve come across this revelation...how?

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

SuperCrazy said:
Bush exploiting September 11 for his own political gain.

Weather this statement is true or not, I honestly don't see how you can condemn the man for it! can you point to a single politician in the histry of the world who would not have used such a momentous event as a political tool. He would be as dumb as everyone says he is if he didn't use it as such!

he'll step on his dick

I've heard of hung like a donkey, but that's just insane!

MoneyShot said:
As if we cared if you feel we're a fool Cass.. You tend to run off at the mouth alot.. why dont you stick something in it, and shut the f**k up. Sheeesh man your full of your self. you think your the autority on everything.. and you come off like an ass.. but then thats just my opinion.

($)

That's because I am the authority on everything - why else would I have an opinion? Much less factual evidence to support it? Such is hubris at it's most vile, to be sure, but considering the fact that you had failed to yet recognize my roaring ego is cause for me to believe that you may not be the reigning authority on Cassius, either.

But anyway, as you were.

Smart reply Cass... I think you are unique in knowing these things to be true about your online persona and not caring - normally a person in your position would simply not care to know what they are like :smile:

Dr Brasso said:
back up yer statement with some facts Lep....sitting in yer comfy armchair.....how can you say that "hes in it for himself"..." ?? christ almighty....have you become so complacent that you dont remember the first bombing in london that effected yer head?....this isnt about oil, this isnt about colonialization, this isnt about money...its about keeping yer ass safe too man....not just the US, BUT YER ASS TOO....!! what....are they gonnahave to be knocking on yer door AGAIN before you say...help??

Brass, I've never been terribly good about arguing my ground and aren't going to start now (especially on someone just as stubborn as I :wink: ), although that's not to say I have no evidence and are being completely one sided. All I'm going to say is that all Bush is going to be remember for is f**king the world up, rather than this crap about making my ass safer! And I have no idea what you're on about with this 'first bombing in london'? Are you referring to these asshats (who have always been around as IRA members or whoever but are now branded as 'Islamic extremists' our to kill me and my unborn children and raise house prices, to keep me scared and under control) and a possible future occurence which hopefully won't happen due to our security services doing their job, rather than us Winning The War Against Terror (which can't happen unless you either wipe 'them' all out, or stop doing the things you're doing that piss them off)

posted by www.snarkpit.com http:>Leperous</A>

Brass, I've never been terribly good about arguing my ground and aren't going to start now (especially on someone just as stubborn as I :wink: ),

we are a pair of stubborn bastards arent we....**tips hat to brother Lep...speaking of hats....i love this phrase...seriously...

Are you referring to these asshats ...what a visual that conjures up...

....and actually, it occurs to me, when i was going to school in germay back in the early 70's, there were the groups such as the Bader Meinhoff gang etc, bombing s**t for really silly reasons..thats the time frame i had in mind whilst not realizing that was not a good example, prolly before yer time....my mistake....but yes, those kinds of "asshats"... it effected me then, and it bothers me still...and you have been dealing with it alot longer than we have, which is the reason for my "complacency" statement....but it actually predates the IRA "asshats" , if im not mistaken......anyway

maybe i missed something in the translation from english to...um...english....but i dont think ole uncle george is in it for anything other than trying to make the world a better place, even if his methods are f**ked up, which im not saying they are, or are not.... :wink:

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

btw...did we ever figure out why we have dissappearing "snarkmarks??....i seem to have ...um...."misplaced" about 50....

Your account should be forever banned in America's Army if you die once.

You know, for realism.

I think if anyone is guilty of complacency it's us Doc. not anymore certainly, but pre 9/11? there were terrorist bombings all over the world, just like those you speak of, and we did NOTHING. I supose there might have been covert operations, maybe some support for other countries, but nothing I know of. that above all else is what pisses me off. we should have been hunting all the "asshats" out there all along.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="95%" align=center>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style="FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: gold" bgColor=black>? posted by <A href="" target=_blank users.php?name="Tracer" ? <A>www.snarkpit.com</A> http: Bullet??>Tracer Bullet</A></TD>
<TR>
<TD bgColor=#151515>
I think if anyone is guilty of complacency it's us Doc. not anymore certainly, but pre 9/11? there were terrorist bombings all over the world, just like those you speak of, and we did NOTHING. I supose there might have been covert operations, maybe some support for other countries, but nothing I know of. that above all else is what pisses me off. we should have been hunting all the "asshats" out there all along.

well spoken TB.....

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
mark this day down sir, we are in 100% agreement on those facts....thats a beef of mine as well....nothing like standing around watching yer brother get his ass kicked, if you get my drift...

Hornpipe2 said:
Your account should be forever banned in America's Army if you die once.

You know, for realism.

kinda ruins the "recruitment factor" doesnt it??...

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

I think then that I misunderstood impression of your original post - it still does sound offensive to my eyes, but if that wasn't the intention, then I apologize. If it was, then eye for an eye; the Cassius bites only when threatened.

I'm no political scientest, but I know what I saw. The fact that Dean's picture was on the magazine had nothing to do with his manipulating it or whatnot - instead, it rather shows how completely ridiculous a scene he was making. Politics is a scene of complete pettiness today, at least for those politicians who are actually winning the elections. It's become a science of profit, rather than a science of morality, and I dare you to name one official in Congress or the President's cabinet, from any administration, that fought such a die-hard crusade against political corruption as to seriously reform the entire scene, while keeping his own sincerity. I believe that doing so is impossible - somebody who runs for President that's even good natured and honorable in life won't have a chance to sustain his own morality when put into office - the Commander in Chief is held by too many strings to count.

The Bush administration f**ked up badly. The fact that we now have the power to create real and visible change in the Middle East is awe-inspiring, and the fact that we caught Saddam is an amazing victory.

However, there were obvious ways to execute the entire situation better, and you probably have a good idea of many of them. In particular, he DID often (and wrongly) use 9/11 as a base to jusfity his war, and will play that same card in his reelection. But in NO LESS OF A WAY are the Democrats using the war in Iraq, which is an equal if not greater tradgedy, to propel their own campaigns. We have four hundred Americans and countless Iraqis dead. Obviously, the Administration should be held accountable for their part in creating the war, but ranting graphically about the deaths of Iraqi innocents and American soldiers - and saying that EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM WAS IN VAIN - is something just as disgusting as Bush's use of 9/11. That's my complaint against the Democrats, really. Both sides need to have some respect and realize what it is they're really dealing with.

Cassius said:
It's become a science of profit, rather than a science of morality

I'm not going to comment about the rest of the post. But it's quite nonsensical to talk about a "science" of morality. Morality is subjective by nature, which leaves no place for being scientific IMO. Politics always was and always will be a tool for profits or gain in some form.

I do think there are plenty of politicians who have fought and are fighting to fix our broken system and do what they think is right. However, they tend not to last long though, and even if they do, they can't take on the entire system that has been established by themselves.

I don't think we have much power for effective and lasting change in the Middle East at the current moment. The current situation has been created by decades of building conflict, and a quick-fix through diplomatic means is not going to work even in the short term, much less the long term. Change through military force is unreasonable considering we're already spread so thin, and it would likely be viewed as entirely unacceptable by the rest of the world, and on an even greater scale than Iraq. We can begin taking small steps towards eventual solutions, but I think "real and visible" change is a long way off.

I suppose the emotional pandering for anti-war purposes is less visible to me since I agree with what they're saying. I don't think emotion should be removed from politics. That's one of the many reasons I support Dean - he strikes me as passionate and real. I can see how this can be disgusting to people on the opposite side of the spectrum though, much like my disgust with the actions and words of many Republicans.

I agree with most of what your last post said, but I just wanted to throw out those comments.

I do think there are plenty of politicians who have fought and are fighting to fix our broken system and do what they think is right. However, they tend not to last long though, and even if they do, they can't take on the entire system that has been established by themselves.

which is why the people of the US should take matters into their own hands....a little revolution now and then is a good thing.

I don't think we have much power for effective and lasting change in the Middle East at the current moment. The current situation has been created by decades of building conflict, and a quick-fix through diplomatic means is not going to work even in the short term, much less the long term.

bah...90% of the population in iraq is elated at the thought of having true freedoms, whether the political and economic climate is charged or not....same thing in afghanistan....do yer homework ye liberal.... :smile:

Change through military force is unreasonable considering we're already spread so thin, and it would likely be viewed as entirely unacceptable by the rest of the world, and on an even greater scale than Iraq.

well lets see....if we are attacked again, or if the situation arises that we have to go into ANOTHER country, you can bet yer ass and yer housecat the draft would be reinstated in a new york second...security of this country will be determined on other playing fields than at home, bank on it...

We can begin taking small steps towards eventual solutions, but I think "real and visible" change is a long way off.

agreed....small steps, and cover our ass at the same time....you have to remember that these folks in the middle east for the most part are still living in the 18th century.....

I suppose the emotional pandering for anti-war purposes is less visible to me since I agree with what they're saying. I don't think emotion should be removed from politics.

well, if yer a believer in the liberal state of mind, then its inevitable that you will call a turd a tulip....and no, emotion IS a basis for political charging, but not necessarily the smartest one, imho...

That's one of the many reasons I support Dean - he strikes me as passionate and real. I can see how this can be disgusting to people on the opposite side of the spectrum though, much like my disgust with the actions and words of many Republicans.

this is the part of yer comments that frost my ass fully...do yer homework....the guy has no experience in anything other than bashing everyone, including his own party members, hes contradicting himself on a nearly weekly basis, he stumbles under pressure, he lacks foriegn policy skills in any arena....and yet youd follow him because hes "passionate"...and "real"....you must be kidding...i have this picture of a lemming jumping off a cliff.....be disgusted with whomever you'd care to, but beware....the republicans are not the enemy....and we are at war....i personally will take a little bit of s**t from a republican president in order to make sure that my child is safe, secure, and able to take care of herself when she is of that age.....here endeth the sermon....

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

fraggard said:

Cassius said:
It's become a science of profit, rather than a science of morality

I'm not going to comment about the rest of the post. But it's quite nonsensical to talk about a "science" of morality. Morality is subjective by nature, which leaves no place for being scientific IMO. Politics always was and always will be a tool for profits or gain in some form.

I use science in the figurative sense. Politics is a tool to create something positive, sure, but that doesn't degrade it in the least.

lol ube where are the awps :razz:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width='"95%"' align=center>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD bgColor=#151515>
which is why the people of the US should take matters into their own hands....a little revolution now and then is a good thing.

I don't think we need to throw everything away and start from scratch, we'd probably end up with something worse than we have now. There are a lot of things that need to change though.

bah...90% of the population in iraq is elated at the thought of having true freedoms, whether the political and economic climate is charged or not....same thing in afghanistan....do yer homework ye liberal.... :smile:

Yes, I agree that people generally enjoy freedom. I don't see what this has to do with what I said.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

well lets see....if we are attacked again, or if the situation arises that we have to go into ANOTHER country, you can bet yer ass and yer housecat the draft would be reinstated in a new york second...security of this country will be determined on other playing fields than at home, bank on it...

I fear for the future of freedom in this country if we have another attack even close to the level of 9/11.

agreed....small steps, and cover our ass at the same time....you have to remember that these folks in the middle east for the most part are still living in the 18th century.....

Correct.

well, if yer a believer in the liberal state of mind, then its inevitable that you will call a turd a tulip....and no, emotion IS a basis for political charging, but not necessarily the smartest one, imho...

Partisan bulls**t in an otherwise good reply.

this is the part of yer comments that frost my ass fully...do yer homework....the guy has no experience in anything other than bashing everyone, including his own party members, hes contradicting himself on a nearly weekly basis, he stumbles under pressure, he lacks foriegn policy skills in any arena....and yet youd follow him because hes "passionate"...and "real"....you must be kidding...i have this picture of a lemming jumping off a cliff.....be disgusted with whomever you'd care to, but beware....the republicans are not the enemy....and we are at war....i personally will take a little bit of s**t from a republican president in order to make sure that my child is safe, secure, and able to take care of herself when she is of that age.....here endeth the sermon....

You seem to have missed the "one of many reasons" part. I have done my research on Dean, thank you very much.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the term partisan only apply if he were directly supporting a party?

God Howard Dean... He poses a serious political question: Did the early media coverage make him popular or did his popularity gain him early media coverage? I believe the former. TV Stations and newspapers started crowning him king and boom he's "the frontrunner." He seems so wishy-washy to me, and for all he's attacked Bush on Iraq, he seems to have the least idea of how to get out. Kucinich has a pack-up and hit the road plan while people like Clark and Lieberman have actual strategies for getting out and stuff. (By the way, if you want a slightly more leftist moderate than our current commander in chief, Lieberman is that guy. He's like a Democratic John McCain.) On the domestic front, anybody read about Gephardt's 'Teacher Corps' proposal? That is some legislation I would be down with. Big time.

Dean smiles well though. And dammit, if a good smile isn't what I want in a president, then I don't know what is. Also, I imagine Bill Bradley's support is gonna bring the voters to the polls in droves. Seriously, the best things Dean has going for him are his smiles and the fact that he seems monolithic so some people (not all, just simply 'enough') are declaring his ascension inevitable...

By the way, just as an FYI to unwary Americans, any Englander not named "Tony Blair" loathes George W. Bush. Why is a fire hot? Why is a lake wet? Why is my left ear so sore? There's no good explanation for any of these things; they just are.

Cash Car Star said:
(By the way, if you want a slightly more leftist moderate than our current commander in chief, Lieberman is that guy. He's like a Democratic John McCain.)

He's also on an undying crusade to burn all videogames. It would of course be bad if suddenly I couldn't play Half-Life at my tender age, but the real problem is what his notions that it's good to ban material he considers 'dangerous' would portend for the rest of his platform.

Cash Car Star said:
God Howard Dean... He poses a serious political question: Did the early media coverage make him popular or did his popularity gain him early media coverage? I believe the former. TV Stations and newspapers started crowning him king and boom he's "the frontrunner." He seems so wishy-washy to me, and for all he's attacked Bush on Iraq, he seems to have the least idea of how to get out. Kucinich has a pack-up and hit the road plan while people like Clark and Lieberman have actual strategies for getting out and stuff. (By the way, if you want a slightly more leftist moderate than our current commander in chief, Lieberman is that guy. He's like a Democratic John McCain.) On the domestic front, anybody read about Gephardt's 'Teacher Corps' proposal? That is some legislation I would be down with. Big time.

Dean smiles well though. And dammit, if a good smile isn't what I want in a president, then I don't know what is. Also, I imagine Bill Bradley's support is gonna bring the voters to the polls in droves. Seriously, the best things Dean has going for him are his smiles and the fact that he seems monolithic so some people (not all, just simply 'enough') are declaring his ascension inevitable...

By the way, just as an FYI to unwary Americans, any Englander not named "Tony Blair" loathes George W. Bush. Why is a fire hot? Why is a lake wet? Why is my left ear so sore? There's no good explanation for any of these things; they just are.

I could come up with a good answer to any one of those (except your left ear), but I'm just being a smart ass.

I totaly agree with most of it.

Cassius said:

Cash Car Star said:
(By the way, if you want a slightly more leftist moderate than our current commander in chief, Lieberman is that guy. He's like a Democratic John McCain.)

He's also on an undying crusade to burn all videogames. It would of course be bad if suddenly I couldn't play Half-Life at my tender age, but the real problem is what his notions that it's good to ban material he considers 'dangerous' would portend for the rest of his platform.

Point. I think that particular agenda of his is pretty nutso.

ROFLMAO!!!!.. ..cash, you may now marry my sisters....all of em....ROFLMFAO..... :heee:

damn dude, ya took all my best stuff ....couldna spake it better if i was on fire....!!!!

ban HL??? say it aint so cass....!!! you may now marry my oldest daughter...!!! :wink:

....there ya go Supercrazy... :wink:

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

seriously tho....the guy is a facade of a polititian....doesnt know his ass from a bucket, and still, people flock to him like lemmings...i stand here utterly amazed...

I'm hoping these are younger sisters... much younger sisters. I'm not a fan of the Ashton Kutcher lifestyle.

...rest assured, they are younger, and much better looking than i... :heee:

...rest assured, they are younger, and much better looking than i... :heee:

.. so that does that leave your daughters free? *runs

• :smile:

Cassius said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the term partisan only apply if he were directly supporting a party?

Dictionary.com says it applies to anyone "devoted to or biased in support of a party, group, or cause."

Cash Car Star said:
God Howard Dean... He poses a serious political question: Did the early media coverage make him popular or did his popularity gain him early media coverage? I believe the former. TV Stations and newspapers started crowning him king and boom he's "the frontrunner."

Dean has become the frontrunner because of a very large base of activists volunteering for him and donating their money. His use of the Internet as a campaign tool played a huge role in this. He had the momentum that has taken him to where he is now long before the media began calling him the frontrunner.

<TABLE cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=2 width="95%" align=center bgColor=black>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style="FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: gold">
? posted by <a href=""http://www.snarkpit.com/users.php?name=Cash Car Star"">Cash Car Star</a>

</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD bgColor=#151515>
He seems so wishy-washy to me, and for all he's attacked Bush on Iraq, he seems to have the least idea of how to get out. Kucinich has a pack-up and hit the road plan while people like Clark and Lieberman have actual strategies for getting out and stuff.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Dean's plan for Iraqi reconstruction is on his site. I believe most of his attacks on Bush have been regarding getting us into the situation in the first place though, not on his handling of the reconstruction.

To Kucinich's credit, he also has a fairly detailed "actual strategy" for how to handle the situation. Whether you agree with it or not is another issue (I don't, for one).

Cassius said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the term partisan only apply if he were directly supporting a party?

? posted by <A href="" target=_blank users.php?name='SuperCrazy""' <A>www.snarkpit.com</A> http:>SuperCrazy</A>

Dictionary.com says it applies to anyone "devoted to or biased in support of a party, group, or cause."

then that leaves me out of it, as i will never conform to one party or the other....let alone, "devote to, or bias myself in support of a party, group, or cause."

plain and simply, i have always voted for whom i think is the best qualified candidate...i dont give a flyin s**t if hes dem or rep, black, white, or chinese...and im damn proud of that fact. and you cannot tell me that my statements so far have depicted myself as someone that would "devote to, or bias myself in support of a party, group, or cause."

the only party im interested in is my family... and the country as a whole... :smile: i think folks are losing site of the fact that in this "instant gratification based, me me me" society we've developed into, that weve only been involved in this iraq thing for little more than a year this go round, and no matter who is in the oval office, its gonna take time to deal with...dude, ive been in combat that had more loss of life in a week than we've had thru BOTH gulf wars...strategies take time, the world is a better place without sadaam, on both sides of the big pond, so dont even f**kin go there....

Doc Brass... :dodgy: