BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Well, looks like Kerry gave up on us. Crap, I better not get drafted to the Iraq war.

thought anyone?

move to canada

tbh I'm not into politics at all, so, basically I don't know the
difference between the two :biggrin: but it seems like most people are
disappointed with the results

OtZman said:
tbh I'm not into politics at all, so, basically I don't know the difference between the two :biggrin: but it seems like most people are disappointed with the results

i think you are missing the point, it was a "no win" scenario.. no matter who wins/won the election, its a dark day indeed..

this whole election puts me in the mind of being asked "would you rather be gang raped by this group, or that group of cons?"

Ok, I keep seeing you complain about why Kerry was spawned from the very bowels of Hell, but you've never really seemed to give any reason... What is so bad about him, may I ask?

And Half-Dude, Kerry didn't "give up," it was just statistically improbable that he would be able to pull off a victory. I for one am glad he seceded. I think that saves more face than not graciously accepting defeat.

Another bad four years for the world it seems... Should we bet where Bushman strikes next?

My money is on Finland.

Call it a hunch :razz:

OtZman said:
tbh I'm not into politics at all, so, basically I don't know the difference between the two :biggrin: but it seems like most people are disappointed with the results

i think you are missing the point, it was a "no win" scenario.. no matter who wins/won the election, its a dark day indeed..

this whole election puts me in the mind of being asked "would you rather be gang raped by this group, or that group of cons?"

lol , that doesn't sound fun

Yes, Finland's icy hills are a commodity that the United States is distinctly lacking. :wink:

And Sweden will believe that they'll be attacked since they believe they are the greatest nation after the USA

Sweden is. Perhaps not in an economic or militaristic sense, but certainly cultural. I mean sweet Jebus. Great music, good architecture, excellent blondes.

Hugh said:
Sweden is. Perhaps not in an economic or militaristic sense, but certainly cultural. I mean sweet Jebus. Great music, good architecture, excellent blondes.

um

-Death/Black metal is not good music. Most of what I've heard is overly pretentious or retarded with terrible lyrics.
-Who cares about architecture? It's all about gameplay damnit!!!
-Brunettes are better :razz:

Sweden is. Perhaps not in an economic or militaristic sense, but
certainly cultural. I mean sweet Jebus. Great music, good architecture,
excellent blondes.

Honestly, the one about the blondes are a wee over exaggerated. Perhaps
its just me, but I dont believe that swedish girls are better in any
way than other countries'. Perhaps Sweden is special, just that I can't
see it since I've been here all my life :biggrin: .

Hugh said:
Sweden is. Perhaps not in an economic or
militaristic sense, but certainly cultural. I mean sweet Jebus. Great
music, good architecture, excellent blondes.

um

-Death/Black metal is not good music. Most of what I've heard is overly pretentious or retarded with terrible lyrics.
-Who cares about architecture? It's all about gameplay damnit!!!
-Brunettes are better :razz:

lol , but hey, sweden is among the best in CS :razz:

1. Sweden has bands outside of death/black metal, surprisingly, and besides... Swedish... death metal? It's not like American death metal, probably because the Swedes just can't get their voices that deep. :biggrin:

2. Then we'd be all be playing killboxes with more cover.

3. Yeah, brunettes are better, but their blondes are mighty fine.

1. Sweden has bands outside of death/black metal,
surprisingly, and besides... Swedish... death metal? It's not like
American death metal, probably because the Swedes just can't get their
voices that deep. :biggrin:

Like ABBA

Most of all, I dislike the weather over here and people over here tend to be a little "stiff"

Hahaha, ABBA :biggrin:

I'm surprised that people are "stiff" in Sweden. :eek: Every other Swedish person I've talked to is a manwhore or wants to be. Anyway, I'm spamming like a bitch and I've got homework.

I think people over here are generally more stiff then others.. or at least above average in stiffness ^_^.

Hugh said:
Anyway, I'm spamming like a bitch and I've got homework.

me too, me too

Monqui said:
Ok, I keep seeing you complain about why Kerry was spawned from the very bowels of Hell, but you've never really seemed to give any reason... What is so bad about him, may I ask?

you know that can of worms we almost opened the other day?? kerry is in there.. he supports almost everything i detest.. but as we have proven on countless times.. opinions are like asshole, we all have them and they all stink.

i would however like to hear, as i asked many times already what is OK about kerry.. everyone has avoided it JUST AS MUCH as i have.. :rolleyes:

fishy said:
move to canada

I told my friend that Bush would get re-elected and it would send the world into despair. Bush will continue his "war on terror" defying the allied Countries and the UN and will bully other Countries as he is already doing. In the end, we will go to war with the US.

But thats just my prediction. I've been telling my friends this, and now Bush gets re-elected. Wonder if the rest will come true.

And good 'ol Jon is right.

Orpheus said:

OtZman said:
tbh I'm not into politics at all, so, basically I don't know the difference between the two :biggrin: but it seems like most people are disappointed with the results

i think you are missing the point, it was a "no win" scenario.. no matter who wins/won the election, its a dark day indeed..

this whole election puts me in the mind of being asked "would you rather be gang raped by this group, or that group of cons?"

I'm sorry to bring it to you Hugh, but our icy hills were stolen by the last ice age... But we have trees. Lots of them. And lakes! Over 60.000 lakes! Fear our lakes! :cool: :cool:

...and I must say that I like death-metal, but it could be just me... I also like ABBA... :rolleyes:

I suppose you could, erm... drown people in those lakes. :shocked:

And every other Finnish person I've talked to agrees with me about those icy hills... I really need to get decent sources. :rolleyes:

...and I must say that I like death-metal, but it could be just me... I also like ABBA... :rolleyes:

I sometimes listen to black metal, but I also like Thomas Di Leva (for you who he is), so ^_^

OtZman said:
tbh I'm not into politics at all, so, basically I don't know the difference between the two :biggrin: but it seems like most people are disappointed with the results

Um... Bush got 51% of the popular vote... Maybe "most people" has a different definition in your mind.

I'm happy he got elected because I don't want the U.S. to turn into Canada. :razz: (I.e. nationalized health care, high taxes, high unemployment) Besides, anyone who thinks there will be a draft needs to have their head examined.

Remember kids: Freedom is on the march!! We shall spread freedom and democracy! The enemy is weak!

~

/me bangs head against a wall

Has anyone noticed that we seem to have a disproportionate number of Swedes for the size of the country? Do you guys have better English instruction than the rest of
Europe or something?

f**k! Same damned thing happened here in Aus when John 'I want to f**k Australia as much as possible before I leave office' Howard got in as prime minister again. I was hoping that Kerry would get in so we wouldn't be dragged of to another illegal war and get screwed by anymore US trade agreements. f**k!

Tracer Bullet said:
Has anyone noticed that we seem to have a disproportionate number of Swedes for the size of the country? Do you guys have better English instruction than the rest of
Europe or something?

It can all be explained by this: small_country + uncommon_language + high_education + no_wars / best_internet_connections_in_europe = answer

Sweden was never in WW2 and had, basicly, nothing to do with Soviet and has therefore not had a wartorn land in about 200 years. When the Swedes were in war the last time, it was still about killing soldiers instead of civil people and more about capturing land instead of destroying it. Sweden was also a European superpower back in the good old days, weve controlled Norway, Finland, all the baltic states, Denmark, and parts of Germany.

Basicly, we rock, and thats why you see so many of us.

Oh and btw, about 1/3 of the Swedish population emigrated to America when that time was. That way, we got rid of most of the scum. You can tell by looking at USA. ;E

i do not feel the least bit obligated to define, or defend what i consider evil, but i also know that some of you are not smart enough to accept that and will continue to ask till i say something you will not like so, lets get this s**t over with..

the 3 most important reasons i feel kerry is evil are: (in order of importance)

1) kerry supports pro-choice, i have heard that he doesn't even separate the levels of abortion, its all the same to him, from cell cluster to full term, the mother should be allowed to terminate the pregnancy.. i heard he will push through any legislation it takes to make it legal nation wide..

2) kerry wants to make gun ownership illegal, i do not currently own any sort of a gun, but i would purchase one just to protest such an action.. i was in the military, i know how to hurt you just fine without resorting to a gun, hence i own none, but i know exactly how to use one if the need arose.. i firmly believe guns do not kill, people do.

3) kerry supports gay marriages.. this should never have even become a consideration, but alas it has.. gay marriages are no more morally apprehensible than brother and sister marriages, yet it is forbidden, even if both partners are sterilized, reducing the odds of pregnancy to zero.. i do not support brother/sister marriages, but on rare occasions adopted siblings beat all the odds and meet.. without the prior knowledge they are related, they fall in love and marry.. if it becomes known somehow, they are forced, BY LAW to divorce.. in spite of the strong love attachments.. gays have no more rights.. wrong, is wrong.

now remember #1 is the most important reason i label him evil, the other 2 reasons are not even worth mentioning, except in passing because once you read #1 there is no further reasons to vote for kerry.

so there you have it, i think kerry is evil incarnate, now if i heard incorrectly, i apologize for wasting your time with my wild allegations.. i have mentioned repeatedly i do NOT follow politics.. i will gladly swap sides to pro kerry if all three of these things are incorrect.. i may be an ass, but i admit errors when i have made them.

remember though, even if you totally disagree with my opinions, you are not entitled to tell me i am wrong for having them, just say i support abortion,gun-control and gay marriage without mentioning my name at all..

I'm Finnish, although I speak Swedish as well.

People without guns won't result in people killing people with guns. Thus, guns facilitate killing.

Wild Card said:

fishy said:
move to canada

I told my friend that Bush would get re-elected and it would send the world into despair. Bush will continue his "war on terror" defying the allied Countries and the UN and will bully other Countries as he is already doing. In the end, we will go to war with the US.

:rolleyes: Bring it. You'd get crushed so fast your head would spin. Besides, what would you attack us with? Rusty old submarines that sink better than float?

-Stratesiz- said:
I'm Finnish, although I speak Swedish as well.

People without guns won't result in people killing people with guns. Thus, guns facilitate killing.

people with a predisposition to killing others will do so with or without a gun.. i could kill you in a dozen ways or more, and no gun would be present for any of them.

people, kill people.

-Stratesiz- said:
I'm Finnish, although I speak Swedish as well.

People without guns won't result in people killing people with guns. Thus, guns facilitate killing.

people with a predisposition to killing others will do so with or
without a gun.. i could kill you in a dozen ways or more, and no gun
would be present for any of them.

people, kill people.

Perhaps guns, by adding another way to kill someone else, makes it easier for people to kill, if they want to do so.

Yet the killing rate with guns in the US is ridicilously high. Guns lower the bar for killing because all you have to do is to pull the trigger and it also doesn't require any strength. You also don't need to be within close range ruling out other methods of killing.

If guns wouldn't be the primary option for killing, what would the army do? Choke people to death? Poison them? Even a child can kill with a gun, which has been seen several times already. Thus it makes killing easy and if something is made easy it facilitates the use of that something. Take alcohol for example, remove the taxes and age limits and see what happens. You would facilitate people getting killed of alcohol.

Guns, don't kill people, people do... with guns.

-Stratesiz- said:
Yet the killing rate with guns in the US is ridicilously high. Guns lower the bar for killing because all you have to do is to pull the trigger and it also doesn't require any strength. You also don't need to be within close range ruling out other methods of killing.

If guns wouldn't be the primary option for killing, what would the army do? Choke people to death? Poison them? Even a child can kill with a gun, which has been seen several times already.

Guns, don't kill people, people do... with guns.

Yeah ok, you don't know what you're talking about. It's not like the US is a constant battleground where people with machine guns and sniper rifles duking it out with each other in the city streets. They don't need those things to kill each other.

Banning guns wouldn't reduce the number of violent crimes committed, just the number of violent crimes committed with a gun. If a criminal wants a gun they will get one. If a person wants to defend themselves they can't, and there is no way to deter a criminal. If someone is really bent on killing they will do it with a knife, club, or car, and it's not like removing guns will magically remove crime.

America needs to concentrate more on banning guns in public places than cigarette smoking...

I never said banning guns would reduce crime. It's still an obvious fact that a gun is more effective in killing people than a knife or a baseball bat. How about a school massacre with a knife or a golf club? But obviously, you don't solve violence by using violence. Banning automatic rifles, restricting gun control would reduce the number of guns, thus reduce the number of people getting killed with guns and since other forms of killing are not as effective or easy, it would also increase the bar for a crime as it becomes more challenging.

I used to live in Texas and my sister lives in NY so I know what it's like.

Adam Hawkins said:
America needs to concentrate more on banning guns in public places than cigarette smoking...

WTF you think this is the old west??

i drive cross country, i have yet to see a gun prominently displayed.. its not as if hip holsters are still used

gun control will not inhibit killings, unless you are saying that people are so weak willed that the gun controls their actions???

people will kill only if they are predisposed to doing so.. i would be willing to bet that some other form of homicide out ranks guns in total kills.. what about vehicular homicide?? people kill with cars every day.. some, sadly.. on purpose.

-Stratesiz- said:
I never said banning guns would reduce crime. It's still an obvious fact that a gun is more effective in killing people than a knife or a baseball bat. How about a school massacre with a knife or a golf club? But obviously, you don't solve violence by using violence. Banning automatic rifles, restricting gun control would reduce the number of guns, thus reduce the number of people getting killed with guns and since other forms of killing are not as effective or easy, it would also increase the bar for a crime as it becomes more challenging.

I used to live in Texas and my sister lives in NY so I know what it's like.

Then what is the point of banning guns if it doesn't reduce crime? And a lack of guns doesn't make crimes harder to commit. If thugs have no fear of being shot they could do whatever the f**k they wanted. That's a point of having guns, to deter others from committing physical violence upon you. Just having a gun doesn't mean you're a murderous reckless nutcase who is looking for the slightest excuse to plug someone.

Yes you can kill with vechiles but it isn't as effective as using guns. Ever heard of a group of robbers driving a car inside a bank and threatening people with a car? Don't move or I'll squash you!

Drive by shootings with knives or rocks?

Guns do lower the bar.

Bah, we can complain all we want. Its not like most of us could do anything to change how things went down. Heck most of us arent from the US so its not like we can vote.

Yak_Fighter said:

-Stratesiz- said:
I never said banning guns would reduce crime. It's still an obvious fact that a gun is more effective in killing people than a knife or a baseball bat. How about a school massacre with a knife or a golf club? But obviously, you don't solve violence by using violence. Banning automatic rifles, restricting gun control would reduce the number of guns, thus reduce the number of people getting killed with guns and since other forms of killing are not as effective or easy, it would also increase the bar for a crime as it becomes more challenging.

I used to live in Texas and my sister lives in NY so I know what it's like.

Then what is the point of banning guns if it doesn't reduce crime? And a lack of guns doesn't make crimes harder to commit. If thugs have no fear of being shot they could do whatever the f**k they wanted. That's a point of having guns, to deter others from committing physical violence upon you. Just having a gun doesn't mean you're a murderous reckless nutcase who is looking for the slightest excuse to plug someone.

Guns make crimes easier to commit as stated above. The police force would still use guns.

-Stratesiz- said:
Yes you can kill with vechiles but it isn't as effective as using guns. Ever heard of a group of robbers driving a car inside a bank and threatening people with a car? Don't move or I'll squash you!

Drive by shootings with knives or rocks?

Guns do lower the bar.

ok, you seem really confused.. lets elaberate..

1) criminals use guns.
2) the reason they call them criminals is??? because they break the law.
3) pass a law to ban guns.
4) criminals will abide by this law, cause it makes more sense, afterall they don't wanna be shot while breaking other laws.

5) you need to wake up and smell the coffee :rolleyes: cause only honest people would obey this law, and they are less likely to kill than criminals..

i live in gun central arkansas, and guns are hardly ever reported as the weapon in a crime.. guns make noise, noise brings unwanted attention. silent weapons are preferred..

On the brightside of all this election business: Setting up Hillary Clinton for 2008. "You go, girl."

I just think assault weapons should be banned; I mean, there's
not much of a practical need for civilians to own one. Or a need that I
can see, anyway.

-Stratesiz- said:
Guns make crimes easier to commit as stated above. The police force would still use guns.

Ha, the police, they couldn't catch a cold.

Seriously though, some people aren't interested in waiting for the police if their lives are in danger. You're looking at this in high profile situations like bank robberies and kidnapping where the police would be called in to shoot it out with the criminals. That's not the majority of crime in the US. What are you going to do if somebody tries to break into your house? Sob silently in the corner while you dial 911 and wait 10 minutes for the police to show up?

double post

Do you want the King of England coming in here and pushing you around? Huh? Do ya?

EDIT: from below: It depends on the body. I really won't shed a tear if a burglar gets his head blown off.

Double post of doom!

It's still better to have some form of crime than crime with bodies as a result of shots being fired.

How about just using a pepper spray, baseball bat a household knife or anything less leathal than a gun as you would both be better off with less harm done as a result of the "Prisoner's Dilemma" in Game Theory. It would also reduce the odds of a break in since they wouldn't have a gun either.

Orpheus said:
the 3 most important reasons i feel kerry is evil are: (in order of importance)

1) kerry supports pro-choice, i have heard that he doesn't even separate the levels of abortion, its all the same to him, from cell cluster to full term, the mother should be allowed to terminate the pregnancy.. i heard he will push through any legislation it takes to make it legal nation wide..

2) kerry wants to make gun ownership illegal, i do not currently own any sort of a gun, but i would purchase one just to protest such an action.. i was in the military, i know how to hurt you just fine without resorting to a gun, hence i own none, but i know exactly how to use one if the need arose.. i firmly believe guns do not kill, people do.

3) kerry supports gay marriages.. this should never have even become a consideration, but alas it has.. gay marriages are no more morally apprehensible than brother and sister marriages, yet it is forbidden, even if both partners are sterilized, reducing the odds of pregnancy to zero.. i do not support brother/sister marriages, but on rare occasions adopted siblings beat all the odds and meet.. without the prior knowledge they are related, they fall in love and marry.. if it becomes known somehow, they are forced, BY LAW to divorce.. in spite of the strong love attachments.. gays have no more rights.. wrong, is wrong.

1) I think being pro-choice is a great position to be in, and one that you can really only argue against "effectively" from a religious point of view.

2) Give me one reason why any sane person needs an assault rifle that can fire 10's of rounds per minute. I can understand why they may "need" another gun of some kind, but unfortunately it is a fact that in countries with tougher gun laws that there is less violent crime- compare the US with the UK, Canada, Australia, Germany etc... If owning a gun is so necessary for "self-defence", then why do you still need to be able to buy shotguns, Desert Eagles etc.? I'm sure that if your government said "We'll let you only keep this one type of gun for self-defence" that people would be up in arms, simply because there is some strange "addiction" to them; similarly if someone came up with an effective non-lethal device. On one hand you're ok over killing thieves, but on the other it's totally wrong to kill an unborn child!!

3) I too am against gay marriage; however, it is utterly taking things out of proportion if you judge a presidential candidate based on a view that affects only minorities and will probably not ever affect you. To be honest, I don't think anyone has ever shown that having gay parents will harm children (like someone else once pointed out, straight parents turn out gay kids sometimes!) and it's just homophobia, which is no better than being racist... meh, anyway, prejudices exist and you can't do much about them, except not to treat others badly because of them.