ferris209

skyjedi2005 said:

I had to LOL when he started this thread in response to something i wrote.

Because I am a registered Independent, not a Republican and I don't watch Fox News.

My opinions are my own.

 

They come from life experience and my faith.

 

I happen to come from the most liberal state in the union   Massachusetts. 

Where the legislature illegally pushed through Gay marriage without it even coming to a vote.

That's the liberal way, do it regardless of what the populous thinks (i.e. NO DRILLING DESPITE 70% OF THE U.S. POPULATION DEMANDING IT).

BTW, I don't think anyone who watches Fox News is immediately a consevrative who speaks only talking points. I love Fox News mostly because they are truely unbiased. Now, I think where most people always seem to think that Fox News is biased is because they were the pioneering news organization who allowed pundits and commentators have their own shows (Bill O'Reilly, Hannity & Colmes). I think that's where the misconception often comes in. Now if you watch their strictly news programs (Brit Hume or Fox News Sunday) they always have both side of the argument (O'Reilly and H&C also do to, but the libs usually lose because their arguments suck). Anyhow, that's the way I see it, but I'm just another conservative who is bitter and  clings to my guns, religion, antipathy to people who aren't like me, harbors anti-immigrant sentiments has a way to explain my frustations.

yeah, I'm totally getting one. I'm gonna try to snag some over-time next week to cover it. But I'm gonna own it, no doubt.

http://gizmodo.com/5033369/guest-review-millennium-falcon-legacy-edition-by-heroes-producer-jesse-alexander

This thing look super awesome. I will own one, yes I will own one.

GhostAlpha26 said:

This thread is to help C3PX find the best Homosexual XXX sites out there, please help him find the best the internet has to offer.

And all because of the biggest summer blockbuster.

GhostAlpha26 said:

C3PX, How much homosexual porn do you beat off to in a day? 2 3 Hours?

Wow, you guys are really sinking in your debating abilities.

Damn C3PX, that was probably the oddest post I've ever seen from you.

lordjedi said:

Mielr said:

Janskeet said:

I thought you guys were smart? I go into the politics thread and I see all this republican biased talk and people labeling Democrats as socialists/communists?

 

I was thinking the exact opposite-  there seem to be a lot of conservatives here, so it follows that there must be a lot of smart people here! (which I already knew, of course. Star Wars fans are naturally smart).

;-)

 

For the record, I'm as disappointed about what's happened to the Republican party as anyone. I'm voting for John McCain, but he was not my #1 choice for nominee.

Tiptup said:

"Sorry, no, these studies were done by media analysts. Your average american of the conservative persuasion is much more interested in the details of issues and the news than the other side for whatever reason. I'm convinced that's why Fox News made so much money and why the other news networks tried to have programming that would attract conservatives (at least for a while)."

Yup, that's why conservative talk-radio is so successful, and liberal talk-radio is failing miserably.

 

 

Well, I wouldn't say it's all failing miserably.  Air America has failed miserably yes, but liberals like Alan Colmes and a few others have pretty successful radio shows.  I don't personally listen to them, but I do appreciate their point of view (however wrong I think it might be).

That's because Alan Colmes is one of the VERY FEW liberals to take on the conservative viewpoint head-on and challenge it. Plus, he is supported by Fox News' structure & money.

Colmes usually gets blown out of the water in arguments, but so does the typical liberal argument. But I like the guy, nonetheless. At least he has the testes enough to argue his point, even when he's dead wrong. Sadly, idiots like Al Franken, Barbara Streisand, Rosie O'Donnell, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, Vermont House Rep Bill Lippert (who seems to totally support child molesters) all run away at the utterance of the name "Bill O'Rielly". That is because they would be proven by O'Rielly to be dead wrong and are scared to go on his show. If O'Reilly was the moron they play him out to be, then surely they'd be happy to go on his show and expose his ignorance. But alas, they never do, because they are morons who cannot come up with decent talking points to support their point of view (or treasonous beliefs).

Dang, he is one of my all time favorite actors. Great man. Hope he is okay.

C3PX said:

Jay said:

 

It never ceases to amaze me how much people will bitch and complain about something that costs them nothing to use and in which their participation is entirely optional.

 

No kidding.

IMHO this place is perfect, the policies on alot of things, especially the off topic, couldn't be better, and there is really nothing that needs changing.

Yeah, this is my favorite forum for that very reason. I can talk about the things that interest and concern me (POLITICS). Somehow, just constatntly chatting about video games, toys, movies seems a little off kilter to me seeing as how none of the afformentioned items will have a great effect on anyones life, unlike politics.

GhostAlpha26 said:

Janskeet said:  I haven't resorted to childish insults 

Janskeet said: I thought you guys were smart?

 

Why bother with this one

heh, heh, good point.

Janskeet said:

originally poisted by ferris209: A trained monkey could have stood in for Clinton. The reason he looked so good is because he happened to be President during the "Technological Revolution" and he was President when the "Reaganomics" theory was in full swing. All of the money Reagan put back into the pockets of entrepreneurs in the 80's was paying off all through the 90's.

How dare you compare Clinton to a trained monkey. I haven't resorted to childish insults and I get labled as the self-righteous person. I don't label people as "liberal" or "conservative" because I don't think that accurately portrays who they are. Democrats are the ones who are more conservative with our budget. They're usually so busy trying to pay off all the money the republicans blew they don't even get a chance to show how much more responsibly they would spend it.

Dude, I said "a trained monkey could have" not Clinton is a trained monkey because of x, x, and x. It is a form of speech and used to create a point of reference.

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

 

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

Whatever you say, programs that give money to people in need is not what is bankrupting our country like republicans want you to think. It's corperate scandals and giveaways to big businesses and that is continually putting the country in deeper dept. 9 trillion dollars in dept? And that's low estimates! How can we say we are the wealthiest country in the world? At least poor countries are not in dept like we are. I guess it is because we have the industrial capacity to pay it off. Everytime we have a republican in office, they blow the budget, give wealthy people enough tax breaks to the point where they are actualy making money off the system, make the working class pay more, and basically just take advantage of working class citizens to benifit the rich. And then what do they do, they blame it on democrats and wellfare programs. They're just trying to brainwash you into thinking we are not capable of doing nearly as much with our money as we truely are. Frankly, I've always found democrats to be much more intelligent on the issues and trustworhty on manging our tax dollars so that it will benift all of us in one way or another, not just the rich. Giving tax breaks to the weathest people in the country is only making our econemy weaker and eventually will turn it into a third world country, which is what they want.

 

I will disagree with you. I truely believe in "Reaganomics", and I have the 90's as evidence that it can succeed. If you give the wealthy tax breaks and put more money in thier pockets to invest, they will grow their businesses and create more jobs. In short, the working man has a better opportunity becuase the wealthy has more money. If you attempt to punish the rich for being wealthy, like Obama wants to do, then not only will the job market decrease, but all of the products you buy will go up. The rich have to offset their loss somehow and what better way than to charge more for the product and take it out of your pocket.

 

I do not believe that taxes go up under Republicans, but they sure do under Democrats! Isn't it funny how you and I both live in the same country but have such different perspectives.

Right, and comparing America's econemy during the Clinton Administration to the Bush administration, your theory proves me wrong? If you compare government or union to non-union jobs, you will find the union ones have better pay, better rights for their workers, and better quality work to non-union industries in most cases. You don't realize how sick people are. We would still probably be having people work for slave labor if it wasn't for unions. The governemnt system (run under democrats) is looking out for people more then private businesses.

A trained monkey could have stood in for Clinton. The reason he looked so good is because he happened to be President during the "Technological Revolution" and he was President when the "Reaganomics" theory was in full swing. All of the money Reagan put back into the pockets of entrepreneurs in the 80's was paying off all through the 90's.  

As far as unions, they drive prices of the final product WAY UP. Because of them you pay about 30% more for anything you buy than you would otherwise. While they do some good, I think they are disastrous to our system overall. Let the market determine benefits and pay, not a mob run institution that strong arms the heads of businesses.  

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

 

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

Whatever you say, programs that give money to people in need is not what is bankrupting our country like republicans want you to think. It's corperate scandals and giveaways to big businesses and that is continually putting the country in deeper dept. 9 trillion dollars in dept? And that's low estimates! How can we say we are the wealthiest country in the world? At least poor countries are not in dept like we are. I guess it is because we have the industrial capacity to pay it off. Everytime we have a republican in office, they blow the budget, give wealthy people enough tax breaks to the point where they are actualy making money off the system, make the working class pay more, and basically just take advantage of working class citizens to benifit the rich. And then what do they do, they blame it on democrats and wellfare programs. They're just trying to brainwash you into thinking we are not capable of doing nearly as much with our money as we truely are. Frankly, I've always found democrats to be much more intelligent on the issues and trustworhty on manging our tax dollars so that it will benift all of us in one way or another, not just the rich. Giving tax breaks to the weathest people in the country is only making our econemy weaker and eventually will turn it into a third world country, which is what they want.

I will disagree with you. I truely believe in "Reaganomics", and I have the 90's as evidence that it can succeed. If you give the wealthy tax breaks and put more money in thier pockets to invest, they will grow their businesses and create more jobs. In short, the working man has a better opportunity becuase the wealthy has more money. If you attempt to punish the rich for being wealthy, like Obama wants to do, then not only will the job market decrease, but all of the products you buy will go up. The rich have to offset their loss somehow and what better way than to charge more for the product and take it out of your pocket.

I do not believe that taxes go up under Republicans, but they sure do under Democrats! Isn't it funny how you and I both live in the same country but have such different perspectives.

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Have you tried unplugging everything and taking the card out for a minute and then putting it back in. Could not be seated correctly.

spoiler/

Well I loved the movie. I thought that Heath Ledger was wonderful. Although for some reason, I was laughing hystrically during his scenes and noticed that nobdoy else was (TADA!!!) I guess I have a morbid sense of humor, but I luaghed my ass off. Anyhow, anyone else REALLY look forward to seeing Rachel Dawson (Maggie GYllenhaal) bite it. not only was she annoying, but that bitch is damn ugly to me. And they kept zooming in real close to her mug. Kaite Holmes was way hotter. After she exploded, I leaned over to my wife said, "It's about time, I don't think I could take another minute of her ugliness". Maybe I'm in the moniority there too I guess.

But I loved the movie.

/spoiler

1. Toy Story
2. The Incredibles
3. Wall-E
4. Toy Story 2
5. Monsters Inc.
6. Ratatoulie
7. Cars
8. A Bugs Life
9. Finding Nemo

hellevu thread. Kind of like watching tennis. But replace the ball with grenades.

sean wookie said:

ferris209 said:

I thought I was about to read a suicidal statement. I guess I'm out of the loop.

I haven't been like that way since I graduated. Your batshit crazy.

Ironically, I've been told that before. :)

Loved Toy Story.

Bug's Life was boring.

Toy Story 2 was enjoyable.

Liked Monster's Inc.

Finding Nemo was a mind numbing bore of a movie. Terrible. IMHO.

Love The Incredibles.

Cars was mildly entertaining. Wouldn't watch it again. Confirmed why I hate Larry the cable guy.

Ratatoulie was okay.

Wall-E was great.

That my synopisis of Pixar films.

Interesting that Wall-E is the highest rated Pixar film on IMDB.com with an 8.8 average, Metacritic gives it a 94. Whereas Cars is second to the last of the Pixar films on IMDB with a 7.6 and dead last on metacritic with a 73 and the worst on Rotton Tomatoes with a 75. Only one worse than Cars on IMDB is A Bug's Life which as a 7.3 rating and it is better on Metacritic with a 77. I guess Cars blows to everybody else too, comparitivly speaking with other Pixar films that is.

Altough it was not a Pixar blue, but a Blue Sky Studios film, I also hated Robots. It sucked.

I thought I was about to read a suicidal statement. I guess I'm out of the loop.

I sure hated to hear this, he is the only one I've heard fill in for Bill O'Reilly on the Radio Factor that I really didn't mind listening to when Bill was out. Good family man, true conservative, honorable, and a kind heart. Rest in peace Tony.