Tyrphanax

Thanks for trying, though.

TV's Frink said:

He's a Brony.

On Kwanzaa, it's the opposite: a guy comes to your house and takes your TV.

sean wookie said:

Tyrphanax said:

Gratz bro. Even I have yet to see what "Facebook Official" is like.

Don't let that go to your head, though, I still hate your ponies with a passionate vitriol.

We actually met over ponies. I messaged her on OKCupid when I seen she said she said she liked ponies.  

Well it's fine for her, she's female.

TV's Frink said:

Sweet, they can then push to secede!

Ha haaa!

Bingowings said:

If you aren't ready for an all powerful monarch (it's always the monotheists who complain about this I notice) why don't you make a machine President?

It would be much more efficient and you wouldn't need to re-elect it as it could be programmed to move with the times.

Romney didn't make it in. Bad programmers.

Also: Professor Brothers = Win.

Used to be some of the old Rankin-Bass shows, A Christmas Story, and, of course, A Charlie Brown Christmas, along with Home Alone and whatever other holiday movies we caught. It was awesome.

Now that the family has started to fracture and there's so much distance between everybody, it's a lot less fun. Hopefully it'll get better, though!

lol you're joking right?

If you don't like the country, my general advice is to "personally secede" by moving somewhere else. Plenty of more conservative countries out there.

As for part of the country breaking away again, aside from being the overly dramatic whine of people who lose elections, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

The United States has only been successful up until now because it has remained united, proposing that a collection of states, or just one state break away from the union is laughable, because (depending on the size of the secession) it will result in that state being unable to sustain itself without the supportive network of the rest of the union, or, if the secession is large enough, it will result in the collapse of both new nations (though it is likely that the part of the nation that didn't secede would be able to lean upon its allies overseas as it would be the remnant of an already-established country in good standing [this is made more difficult by the financial status of Europe and the ready-to-burst China bubble, but "saving" the United States would arguably be very important to Europe] and be able to sustain itself as a much-diminished country, while the upstart new secession would be unable to garner the support it would need to establish itself as a legitimate nation and fail [especially hard gaining overseas support, as many of the other countries of the world support Obama as president]; either way the secessionist states would be wanting back into the Union rather quickly [however it is possible that they could gain the support of another country looking to exploit the secession for resource gain, but this would depend heavily on which states were included in the secession, and it is likely the the only countries willing to support a secessionist movement would likely have morals or religion or policies that would not jive with the very strong morals of said movement and therefore be denied until the situation was too desperate and likely already lost].

You also have to account for the fact that the part of the country that didn't secede will want to retain the nation, and that most [if not all] of the military will remain with them [the secessionists may gain a few radical military men and possibly brass, but this is no longer the 1800s and supporting/building a military is not as easy as obtaining some muskets, cannon, and horses and doing drills, so it would be a negligible statistic] and will likely bring that military to bear against the secessionists to preserve the union in a very ugly and likely quick war [I make the assumption that it would be quick based on the fact that secessionists would very likely not have access to much weapons technology above man-portable weapons or improvised armoured vehicle units, whereas the already-established United States military would have things like air power].

Also, it would likely be very difficult to convince the same number of states to secede as did in the 1800s. The secessionists would likely be spread out among many other states and unable to unify and present a cohesive front backed by entire states of people.

Basically, wanting to secede is absolutely, unequivocally ridiculous, I hope you're joking, man, but for anyone who is actually making serious claims about this... you have my pity, for you are obviously mentally incompetent; it was just a presidential election for the love of Christ, get over it, go outside and take a walk, enjoy life, calm down a bit, then come back, reenter politics, support the good policies and help America work and grow.)

Gratz bro. Even I have yet to see what "Facebook Official" is like.

Don't let that go to your head, though, I still hate your ponies with a passionate vitriol.

Don't anybody move!

Bingowings said:

Tyrphanax said:

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:

Obama is Mitt, Mitt is Obama.

that's bs.  Obama and Romney are very different people. 

This is true.

I always find the "both parties are the same, man" line to be silly. Just because things don't change drastically (generally) from President to President doesn't mean that every President is the same as the last.

While it's possible that they are very different people (we really don't know because all we have is what they tell us and what the journalists are allowed to print), what they could do as president is restricted by factors beyond their control.

Voting either of them in would probably have as near identical results as to make no odds.

Look at the promises they make before they get in and compare it to what they actually do (even the few that don't promise much).

That's not all, them being dishonest or lacking foresight, a large chunk of that is down to living in a chaotic world and being largely powerless.

Also true and I agree one hundred percent; but the parties are, indeed, quite different.

This is what I was saying in my earlier posts about it not really mattering which party gains the presidency; there's only so much the president can do.

Unfortunately the political climate is one of bickering about morals instead of just letting people do what they want and focusing on things that matter to the health of the country. The point is that you should be an American before your political party of choice, and you should support good policies, regardless of what party it's from or whether you agree 100% with every policy they stand for. I feel like people are losing sight of that.

*sigh*

I dunno how you people tricked me into posting in a politics thread.

God damn it.

SpilkaBilka said:

There's a Lucasfilm webisode about the design of episode I.  Doug Chiang says something like, "there was a lot I liked about the design of [the original] Star Wars, but there were a lot of things I DIDN'T like.  So at home I'd draw MY version of what an X-Wing fighter should look like..."

So this is who they picked to design new Star Wars movies?  SMH.

I was never a fan of his art, really. It just didn't have the same feel as McQuarrie's, obviously.

EyeShotFirst said:

It hurts to see how divided the country is. We all are passionate about this country.

This. Drives me up the wall how divided everyone is over everything. The focus should be on making the country better, not who's man is in office; America isn't going to be destroyed by Obama winning any more than it would have been destroyed if Romney won. I laughed my head off at the people saying they were going to move to Canada or Australia because Obama won, because if you think America is on the verge of Communism because of Obama's policies, I can't wait to see what they think of Canada or Australia's (or just stop being so dramatic because none of them will actually do it).

People need to work together on shit instead of just trying to make the other party look bad; let's all just support the other side's good ideas and decry their bad ones instead of just voting yes or no based on a colour or a D or an R. Things are so full of this ideological bullshit now that nothing will get done no matter who's in the White House, it's so bad that both sides will reply to this saying "but the other side doesn't HAVE any good ideas!".

Something tells me it was likely always this way (I've only seen four Presidents in my lifetime), but from what little I know, it just feels like we're moving further and further away from compromising and coming together in order to form a more perfect union and more and more towards not compromising ever because values and beliefs and whatever personal bullshit you ascribe to.

I'd like it if we could just set all of that aside, accept that one party won the Presidency, support that party unless the President starts calling himself Vermin Supreme and talks about nuking Canada because of moose crossing the border, and just see what happens and how we like it. Then in four years everyone can vote for the other party and they can do their thing. President doesn't even have all that much power anyway, so he's not going to single-handedly destroy America.

EyeShotFirst said:

Sure, there is corruption everywhere, because we aren't well balanced. Seems like we totter more towards capitalism everyday. We should be in the middle of the spectrum. I will not say that Socialism is the way to go, but it's not the Nazi life people paint it to be.

Just because it's a personal pet peeve of mine: While the Nazi party liked to call itself the "NAtionalsoZIalistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" (National Socialist German Worker's Party), in practice, they were actually about as far-right as a party could ever hope to be.

There's more than enough OT-era concept art banging around for them to use.

Dave Filoni uses it constantly to inspire designs for The Clone Wars.

News Corp. is way too big to buy. I doubt Murdoch would consider it.

Fang Zei said:

I could almost see Disney doing the following:

Bartering with Fox to get home video distribution rights on the six existing films (TPM 3D hasn't even hit blu-ray yet!). Fox would probably ask a pretty penny for those rights, so to sweeten the deal, Disney gives them theatrical distribution rights for the upcoming sequels. Disney would hold on to distribution rights for Blu-ray/dvd/download/television etc which is where the REAL money is anyway. Also, let's not forget, Fox would only be getting a small cut of the gross. The bulk of the box office would go to LFL and therefore to Disney.

Still, it would give Fox the pride of continuing to release this legendary franchise in theaters, and nostalgic nerds like me will get to hear Alfred Newman's music when the lights go down.

I think it's pretty obvious that Disney will fight tooth and nail to secure exclusive rights to the OT, and, in the end, they have the money to win that fight; otherwise it's the loss of a huge money-making opportunity for them, especially if the OOT is on the table.

HOW CAN YOU SING PERMISSION TO SING WITHOUT PERMISSION TO SING IN THE FIRST PLACE MY WORLD IS UPSIDE DOWN

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:

Obama is Mitt, Mitt is Obama.

that's bs.  Obama and Romney are very different people. 

This is true.

I always find the "both parties are the same, man" line to be silly. Just because things don't change drastically (generally) from President to President doesn't mean that every President is the same as the last.

DuracellEnergizer said:

January 1, 2000.

Heyo.

I remain optimistic. Things seem to be looking up so far, so I assume that'll keep going on.

I just hope we can get some bipartisan cooperation going on so we can have a better, less polarized country for god damned once.

Alas this message comes too late for me.

You just push on one nostril to close it and blow out the other. My fucking roommate does it all the time. It's always disgusted me.