Subtle
Full Member
Dynamic Sentai Vic Riot!
Posts: 716
|
Post by Subtle on May 30, 2007 23:10:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on May 31, 2007 0:00:43 GMT -5
Since you seem to have such trouble remembering to follow this rule. If you don't intend to discuss things in a responsible manner, don't bring your bashing here. I'm giving you a chance to change the tone of that post and, in turn, this thread. If it doesn't happen, this thread's going the same direction as Silva's Falwell thread.
|
|
Subtle
Full Member
Dynamic Sentai Vic Riot!
Posts: 716
|
Post by Subtle on May 31, 2007 15:38:13 GMT -5
This isn't hateful, I posted it with the intention of starting a civilized discussion. I haven't broken this rule.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on May 31, 2007 15:53:15 GMT -5
Yes, that sounded very civilized. Now, I know you don't usually mean to come across that way, but you need to be aware of how you present yourself. Like I said, I know it wasn't necessarily deliberate.
|
|
Subtle
Full Member
Dynamic Sentai Vic Riot!
Posts: 716
|
Post by Subtle on May 31, 2007 19:14:02 GMT -5
Well, it was negative, and I intended for it to sound that way, but if you look at evidence like that, it's also very true. It's not directly like I'm descriminating without reason or blatantly against a large group, its the same thing as anyone making a joke about bush.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on May 31, 2007 22:37:43 GMT -5
Which also is frowned upon, just so you have a heads up.
|
|
|
Post by scarmiglione on Jun 1, 2007 0:33:51 GMT -5
Subtle, those statements aren't inconsistent at all. One said he had no warning, the other said he was warned right before the towers fell. Could you have warned all the people inside to get out of a building that large with just a few minutes notice? You shouldn't take everything you read on the Internet at face value. It's just as easily skewed and manipulated as the mainstream media. I personally don't think that "bashing" and "making fun of a person who does something everyday that deserves to be made fun of" the same thing, but if that's how you want to interpret it, then I expect the same protection to extend to Democrats, as well. That means no Clinton jokes (either one), no Obama jokes, and, especially none of those Edwards is gay/a girl jokes that seem to be so popular these days. K? BTW, I'm voting for Obama.
|
|
|
Post by heybigkid on Jun 1, 2007 0:50:10 GMT -5
Whoa, whoa, we're way off topic, folks. I don't know too much about the candidates, but i think that a woman should be pres. (of course i gotta rep my own gender) anyone except Hilary. (<-- i'm not bashing her, she just supports the oppisite of everything i do.)
|
|
|
Post by EJP on Jun 1, 2007 0:57:45 GMT -5
I don't know who to vote for yet. Hell, I still have to register. But I will say this, I'm anti Hillary Clinton. No, not because she is a women, but because I haven't forgotten what she said and what she wants to do about violence in video games. She over reacted about the "hot coffee" part of the computer version of GTA: San Andreas. Even though, long before that, there have been similar patches you could download for PC games. Hell, a few of them were even "E" rated. So that is why I'm against her. Oh, and have you noticed how quickly she back off and got out of the spot light of being against video games? I see her plan and I shall not fall for it.
Oh a side note, No Bill Clinton jokes? COME ON! Can I atleast mention how popular he has become since Bush decided to go to war? Hell, people look back on the whole "is" thing and say, "well... it wasn't so bad".
|
|
|
Post by heybigkid on Jun 1, 2007 1:35:36 GMT -5
Yeah, i've pretty much stopped buying Heinz ketchup. That way, i support Hilary and her family in no way.
|
|
|
Post by scarmiglione on Jun 1, 2007 1:48:07 GMT -5
Yeah, i've pretty much stopped buying Heinz ketchup. That way, i support Hilary and her family in no way. Hilary has nothing to do with ketchup. That's John Kerry's wife, Teresa Heinz. @ EJP: That's really more of a Bush joke, anyways. My point was, if Ninmast doesn't want to have any Bush jokes, then there can't be any jokes about other politicians either. Otherwise, the forum has become biased and its rules become undermined by that bias. Personally, I'd like to have all political jokes allowed, other than ones that are inherently inappropriate. But if jokes against one politician or group of politicians aren't allowed, then NO jokes about politicians are allowed. No exceptions.
|
|
|
Post by heybigkid on Jun 1, 2007 1:53:57 GMT -5
shh...that's a secret, and everyone knows they're connected.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Jun 1, 2007 15:45:57 GMT -5
Actually, yes, Dems have similar protections. Please note that I said such jokes are frowned upon, not banworthy. We do expect you to remain civil, but an occassional TASTEFUL crack at one side or the other is fine. If it turns out to be all the thread is about, then you run into problems.
As for my own standing, politically, I don't claim a party. I vote for whomever I think will get the job done. I won't vote for Hilary, because, as Kid said, she stands for everything I don't. I might vote for Obama, though, depending on who the Republican candidate is.
|
|
|
Post by The Silent Orator on Jun 1, 2007 16:12:32 GMT -5
I personally don't want to follow either mainstream party. I find my views best follow Libertarians... or I think that's what they're called (I'll have to ask Steve again).
I don't like Hillary Clinton. Much as I would LOVE to have a female in the office... or a black person... or Mexican... or asian... I don't care. I think it's time power had to be shared. It's an "equal opportunity" country (or so eveyrone believes we are or something like that), yet it seems the minorities are hardly represented.
Anyway, Hillary Clinton. Hate her. She's with Jack Thompson. She's anti-video games, but when confronted, she hides. Rush Limbaugh was right about what he said about people who are anti-video games.
If I remember correctly (I don't have the link anymore, so I can't quote it), he was talking about (or to) Jack Thompson and his "anti-video games to stop violence" crap, and how he [Rush] believes this is wrong. Not to sound overly political or meaning to make a tasteless crack, but I have to admit that I RARELY agree with Rush on anything, and the mere thought that I'm agreeing with him sends slight shivers down my spine... I guess a broken clock is right twice a day.
Either way, sorry for the rant.
However, unless I can get some more research in the matter, it is most likely that I won't be voting in the 2008 elections. I'm just not informed enough to be able to make an intelligent enough vote.
|
|
|
Post by scarmiglione on Jun 1, 2007 18:09:44 GMT -5
Actually, yes, Dems have similar protections. Please note that I said such jokes are frowned upon, not banworthy. We do expect you to remain civil, but an occassional TASTEFUL crack at one side or the other is fine. If it turns out to be all the thread is about, then you run into problems. As for my own standing, politically, I don't claim a party. I vote for whomever I think will get the job done. I won't vote for Hilary, because, as Kid said, she stands for everything I don't. I might vote for Obama, though, depending on who the Republican candidate is. Good to know, both about the dems getting equal protection, and about you possibly voting for Obama. I personally hope to see an Obama-Edwards ticket on the ballot in 2008. If they ran together, I think they could easily carry a majority of electoral votes. I don't really like Hilary myself, either. I'm sorry to say, but the only good thing she could bring to the White House is her husband, who was a really good president. I'd still vote for her over any of the Republican candidates in a heartbeat, though. They have a very underwhelming field of candidates, to phrase it as politely as I can.
|
|