Facebook killed the radio star. And by radio star, I mean the premise of distributed forums around the internet. And that got got by Instagram/SnapChat. And that got got by TikTok. Where the fuck is the internet we once knew?
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
[17:32:45] * xar sets mode: -oooooooooo algorithm ban chris cipher newby stdio TehUser tnarongi|away vursed warz[17:32:54] * xar sets mode: +o newby[17:32:58] <xar> new rule[17:33:02] <xar> me and newby rule all
Quote from: CrAz3D on June 30, 2008, 10:38:22 amI'd bet that you're currently bloated like a water ballon on a hot summer's day.That analogy doesn't even make sense. Why would a water balloon be especially bloated on a hot summer's day? For your sake, I hope there wasn't too much logic testing on your LSAT.
I'd bet that you're currently bloated like a water ballon on a hot summer's day.
Haha, as much as I don't like Bush, that's going too far. I don't suppose this falls under "Free Speech", does it? I don't really think so, but I can see some people arguing that it does
Quote from: iago on October 14, 2006, 11:22:22 amHaha, as much as I don't like Bush, that's going too far. I don't suppose this falls under "Free Speech", does it? I don't really think so, but I can see some people arguing that it doesNo because it's a threat to national security.
Quote from: OG Trust on October 14, 2006, 11:55:35 amQuote from: iago on October 14, 2006, 11:22:22 amHaha, as much as I don't like Bush, that's going too far. I don't suppose this falls under "Free Speech", does it? I don't really think so, but I can see some people arguing that it doesNo because it's a threat to national security.That doesn't sound right to me, because of the basis of your constitution (armed militia groups are encouraged?), but that's ok. I have a bigger question. Is killing the president really a threat to national security? I mean, there's other people ready to take over, and it's not like she's planning a coup or something..
No offense to anyone of either party, but you are going to get very biased answers to those kinds of questions from republicans and democrats.
Quote from: unTactical on October 14, 2006, 01:24:26 pmNo offense to anyone of either party, but you are going to get very biased answers to those kinds of questions from republicans and democrats. Then we can pretend they wanted to kill Clinton, too. My answer would be the same either way.
I wasn't referring to Bush at all. Chances are if you ask any given Republican a question about 'National Security', freedom of speech, or constitutional rights their answer will differ consideratly from any given Democrat. Those are all topics of considerable controversy between the two parties. Personally, I prefer to not be associated with any set of ideals and vote on what I think is important, not what I think is more likely to win based on a party affiliation.
National security cause we're without a leader for a short amount of time & then the whole country is in some state of vulnerability.
I think the definition of existing constitutional rights is pretty objective, isn't it?
I agree with being politically independant, though. I'm generally more conservative than I am liberal, but I still don't think I'd want to be a republican.
Not at all, I don't think.
independent*
But anyway, I agree. I think all politicians suck, the people who are good at getting votes should NOT be the people who run a country. People are too gullible. Democracy sucks.