Cheap Northern Drugs, Cheap Southern Guns,and The Mob on Top

General chitchat, advertisements for other services, and other non-Cantr-related topics

Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department

rklenseth
Posts: 4736
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 12:46 am

Postby rklenseth » Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:18 am

schme wrote:No, politicians, espicially in the states, consistently do coarperations political favors in exchange for campaign funds and party donations.

Look at the countless environmental disasters that the Republican and Democratic partis of America have allowed coarperations to negotiate, not to mention social disaster.


Umm....hello. It is illegal in the US. I'm not saying that 'some' don't do these things but it is political suicide for them and the minute they do they are either kicked out office, arrested, or come around next election year they are replaced by the people. Most don't do this.


Now name me one favor that a politician in the US has done for a corporation (or any lobby group for that matter) that has led to a enviromental or social disaster that has gone unpunished or where that elected official is still in power?
Schme
Posts: 2067
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Schme » Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:40 am

George W. Bush kicked millions off welfare and drill the Alaska oil fields
He got two terms.

Bill Clinton let coarperations dump arsenic in water and lay off millions upon millions of people after making profits. He got two terms.

Not to mention countless Senators, governors and congressmen on countless issues.

Wake up man. It happens all the time.


Up here too. A bunch of damn coarperate gangsters run both our countries.
"One death is a tragedy, a million is just statistics."
Joseph Stalin
User avatar
TatteredShoeLace
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:50 am

Postby TatteredShoeLace » Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:34 am

schme wrote:No, I don't want to talk about it right now, espicially not with you, whitey.

SARS? Canada had SARS? I didn't know countries good get diseases. I don't remember that happening at all.


Question... Who brought the *explicitive deleted*? Scheme you are ridiculus. I have no respect for you or your lack of intellect.

Don't make racial comments about people scheme. You want to be treated like a big girl? Then act an adult. And as for SARS, you must not include Toronto as part of Canada, they had the second largest outbreak of SARS during the big scare, so much so that the Blue Jays stopped getting people to go to their games.

Seriously man, you're a joke. And you'll double or triple post with some pointless reply, or quote and put stuff like 'oh yeah' and 'you got that right'. So from now on, I will just do the same.

PS- I'm glad GW pulled welfare on folks. It'll motivate them to get jobs.
User avatar
wichita
Administrator Emeritus
Posts: 4427
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: Suomessa!

Postby wichita » Mon Apr 18, 2005 3:38 am

Dubbya isn't perfect or probably the best man we have available for the job right now. I would just like to let everyone on the outside who thinks they understand our political situation right now btter than we do know that you guys don't want to even begin to imagine the tremendous clusterf*** we would have had if the other guy we had to chose from had won the election. Stop yelling at us for re-electing the man. I'm sick of having to listen to the short sighted propaganda day in and day out. Could you please just deal with it? :evil: Tough decsions have to be made, and it takes tough people to step up and make them, even if that means putting up with all the crap coming out of naysayers and fairweather Johnsons.

I'm trying really hard not to reply to this stupid thread (and all of the other stupid threads that he has started just to piss us off) because I hope ignoring it will help it just die. It's getting incredibly difficult for me to hold back though, because the last thing we need on the net is just one more selection of rantings that show just how difficult it is for a majority of modern society to recognize true reasonable thought today.

Man, I wish I could just move back home where my vote or place in world politics doesn't matter so I can just kick back and think about more important things like how I am going to pay rent, is steak on sale this week, and who are the Chiefs playing on Sunday. I miss political apathy so much because life is so much more pleasant when I don't have to listen to everyone's friggin opinion all the time. Maybe that's the biggest problem I have with free liberal democratic societies. They seem to foster this belief that everyone's opinion is important despite their level of ignorance on what ever topic they are rambling on about. Does that make me a bad person? If so too bad. That's my opinion and if you don't like it then pucker up buttercup 'cause I guess you have to listen to me for a change.

I'm sure somebody will point out where my "reasoning" fell apart and why their random collection of cockamamey, fragmented ideas is superior to my random collection of cockamamey, fragmented ideas. Frankly, I can't wait.
"Y-O-U! It's just two extra letters! Come on, people! This is the internet, not a barn!" --Kid President
rklenseth
Posts: 4736
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 12:46 am

Postby rklenseth » Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:05 am

schme wrote:George W. Bush kicked millions off welfare and drill the Alaska oil fields
He got two terms.

Bill Clinton let coarperations dump arsenic in water and lay off millions upon millions of people after making profits. He got two terms.

Not to mention countless Senators, governors and congressmen on countless issues.

Wake up man. It happens all the time.


Up here too. A bunch of damn coarperate gangsters run both our countries.



Oh, we're drilling in the Alaska tundra now? That is a new one for me. And he kicked people off welfare? Considering how people misuse welfare I don't blame him. But do any of your claims have legit sources that can be quoted?

The same with Clinton dumping arsenic in the water and laying off people. Anyways, who did he lay off? If it has anything to do with the over inflated government beaucracy than good for him. Democrats are known for cutting back on that even if it isn't eating up tax payers hard earned money.

Please, enlighten me.
User avatar
wichita
Administrator Emeritus
Posts: 4427
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: Suomessa!

Postby wichita » Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:14 am

And last I heard, a lot of Alaskans approved of the drilling in Alaska. It's a good thing that we have wise and responsbile individuals elsewhere to protect them from themselves. :roll:
"Y-O-U! It's just two extra letters! Come on, people! This is the internet, not a barn!" --Kid President
User avatar
TatteredShoeLace
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:50 am

Postby TatteredShoeLace » Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:35 am

I thought the Alaskan pipeline was just for looks... :lol: Drill it all.
User avatar
Yo_Yo
Posts: 725
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 2:32 am
Location: Hiding in the bush

Postby Yo_Yo » Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:55 am

wichita wrote:Man, I wish I could just move back home where my vote or place in world politics doesn't matter so I can just kick back and think about more important things like how I am going to pay rent, is steak on sale this week, and who are the Chiefs playing on Sunday..



Go Chiefs! :D

And as for this whole arguement... stop following the popular trend and blaming us. We can do no wrong. We are the US of A!
Vicki Vale: You're insane!
Joker: I thought I was a Pisces!
User avatar
AoM
Posts: 1806
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 12:52 am
Location: Right where I want to be.

Postby AoM » Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:58 am

*smiles* I'm torn. I want to stand with my American comrades, but (un)/fortunately I'm a democrat and voted for Kerry. But as Schme would say, that's a whole other kettle of fish...

Perhaps it will take annoying America bashers to bring us red and blue state folk back together again... it's almost working in my case.
west
Posts: 4649
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 5:23 pm

Postby west » Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:16 am

I'm a GDI and I voted for Kerry, as the newer of two evils :lol:

I'm a firm believer in gun control in that I believe people should be able to have guns for hunting and such (and self defense, if they leave them in the home)

My family owns a 20ga shotgun, a .22 rifle, a 30.06 rifle, a .22 handgun (not big at all--when we moved out to the country dad said he'd buy my mom either a dog or a gun...we ended up getting both), and a 1942 9mm Turkish Mauser (w/ bayonet-though he doesn't use it)

All legally bought and paid for, and all kept in a locked case. My dad hunts with them. We eat 3-4 deer per year in my family and we've completely gone off beef (except ground beef to mix with ground venison for tacos)

I don't think people need assault weapons to hunt or for any other reason.

I don't think background checks/waiting periods are at all unreasonable.

...I also don't think you're right in saying all or even most of the guns illegally in Canada are manf'd in the US.

...oh, and just to cover all my bases I'm not against legalization of pot (in fact I'm strongly for decriminalizing it at least).
I'm not dead; I'm dormant.
User avatar
Yo_Yo
Posts: 725
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 2:32 am
Location: Hiding in the bush

Postby Yo_Yo » Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:25 am

I agree with west. No one really wants an american assault riffle. If you've ever used/kept up with the condition of one, you'd know it was a pain in the ass. Thats the problem with alot of american assault riffles. They are precision made. So even if a very small amount of dirt or sand or whatnot gets into the gun, you're gonna jam it up.

You're more likely to see an AK-47 in a gangsters hands then say an M-16, even though the M-16 is just as easily purchased. And we all know Ak-47's aren't solely made and manufactures in the USA (if they are at all). As for the pistols... well yeah we are leading in them. But out of all the handguns I preffer, I like the Israelie Desert Eagle. That thing could knock a hole in an engine block.

I currently own two. Ones for messing around with, and the other is an official Israelie military model. Not fake in one bit (I traced the cerial numbers).

Man I love guns. I'll send some up as a present for you Scheme :D
Vicki Vale: You're insane!

Joker: I thought I was a Pisces!
User avatar
wichita
Administrator Emeritus
Posts: 4427
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: Suomessa!

Postby wichita » Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:32 am

I would like to see a white party finally form that was strong enough to fight the red and blue. Two party politics is pretty irritating, but it's too bad none of the third parties are worth voting for. I'm not against voting for a democrat - I like many of the social programs they talk about fixing - I just feel like they consistently shank it on a regular basis. I lean towards republicans because they stand for small government, and in most cases succeed in that goal.

In the last election, I just couldn't get a concrete direction out of Kerry. Basically the only reason to vote for him is because he's not Bush...which was not good enough. The biggest problem with Bush is the war, which Congress supported whether they want to admit it or not. What I think everyone seems to be overlooking is that the motivation behind operations has completely changed over there. Everyone is still arguing about whether or not it was justified when the real thing to worry about now is how do we fix it and come home. The worst thing that could be done is to upset the chain of command in the middle of that, especially replacing it with a guy who is all talk. His big plan was to renegotiate with all the countries we've managed to piss off lately. What would happen when that didn't work (and talking and diplomacy was not going to go anywhere, that bridge is burning). Clusterf*** that's what would've happened. I couldn't see voting for a guy during wartime whose entire political career has been spent rallying against war.

Now if Dean would have gotten the nomination, it would have been a much different ballgame. Dean stood for stuff and when he made up his mind he would stick with it until presented with good reason to change it. If anyone from the DNC had the chutzpah to fix the mess it would've been him. Unfortunately, like Bush, he is too passionate about his positions so people marked him as a loose cannon. It's impossible to be honest in politics now because the electorate just wants someone to blow smoke at them and kiss babies. Maybe it's time to raise the voting age back to 21.
"Y-O-U! It's just two extra letters! Come on, people! This is the internet, not a barn!" --Kid President
The Industriallist
Posts: 1862
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 7:25 pm

Postby The Industriallist » Mon Apr 18, 2005 8:53 am

west wrote:I don't think people need assault weapons to hunt or for any other reason.


http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/AR15/aw94.htm wrote:In 1994, the Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 was passed. This law banned rifles that had detachable magazines and two or more of the following characteristics:

* A folding or telescoping stock
* A pistol grip
* A bayonet mount
* A flash suppressor, or threads to attach one (a flash suppressor reduces the amount of flash that the rifle shot makes. It is the small birdcage-like item on the muzzle of the rifle)
* A grenade launcher.

So...I don't see why you need them, true. But calling them assault weapons is a truely deluded legal fiction. Unless you weren't referring to that law?

Actual automatic weapons, including real assault rifles, seem to be covered by an (unlapsed) law from 1934.

wichita wrote:It's impossible to be honest in politics now because the electorate just wants someone to blow smoke at them and kiss babies. Maybe it's time to raise the voting age back to 21.

Do you actually think eliminating 3 years worth of voters will do you the least bit of good? I've no reason to think the better voters are the older ones...
"If I can be a good crackhead, I can be a good Christian"

-A subway preacher
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Halifax, Canada

Postby Nick » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:51 am

http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/AR15/aw94.htm wrote:In 1994, the Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 was passed. This law banned rifles that had detachable magazines and two or more of the following characteristics:

* A folding or telescoping stock
* A pistol grip
* A bayonet mount
* A flash suppressor, or threads to attach one (a flash suppressor reduces the amount of flash that the rifle shot makes. It is the small birdcage-like item on the muzzle of the rifle)
* A grenade launcher.


So grenade launchers are legal in the States, then? :shock:
User avatar
TatteredShoeLace
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:50 am

Postby TatteredShoeLace » Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:37 am

It says banned Nick. I do not believe I've heard of normal citizens being able to access those, but law enforcement officers and militas may be able to own them privately I believe....maybe.

Return to “Non-Cantr-Related Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest