Fungi Forums

Miscellaneous => General Chat => Not at the Dinner Table => Topic started by: Lizard Dude on September 06, 2008, 07:09:35 PM

Title: TMK Votes
Post by: Lizard Dude on September 06, 2008, 07:09:35 PM
If the Fungi Forums alone decided the presidential election, who would win? Vote here!

---------------------------------

I'm going Obama for three reasons:

1) A couple years ago, I bet my sister ten bucks that the next President would be either black or female. I was very pleased by the Democratic primary race. :)

2) McCain is too old. The older a brain is the harder it learns things, the harder it changes its mind based on new information, and the easier it goes crazy.

3) I'm "liberal".
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 06, 2008, 07:56:45 PM
I'd support Obama, because he appears to be the least stupid of the two main candidates, but since you asked about the Fungi Forums alone, I think Deezer and MB might win.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 06, 2008, 08:12:29 PM
Were I in a sillier mood, I might have voted for Deezer/MEGAߥTE.  Seriously, I'm going for McCain.  For me, he's the lesser of two evils, I can't stand the thought of Obama in office.  Not because he's black, because he's:

1. Inexperienced

2. Will tax us until we're wearing barrels

3. "Liberal"

I think Palin would make a better president than McCain, actually...Wouldn't this thread be under the category of "political discussion?"
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 06, 2008, 08:15:48 PM
I was going to vote for Chuck Baldwin, but I think Palin has pretty much swayed me over to McCain. I won't vote for Obama because Marxism has never worked out very well. And I also echo the "Hey, isn't this political discussion?" question.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 06, 2008, 08:37:18 PM
I'm conservative, but I don't really like McCain. He made a bad decision picking Palin as his running mate (I don't dislike her, but she really needs more years under her belt), and he's really more liberal than he lets on. I really wish the canadite was Mitt Romney, but that isn't the case. I'll vote for McCain only because not voting is really, really stupid and voting for a third party canadite is a huge waste.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 06, 2008, 08:46:08 PM
LD's idea was simple and didn't necessarily require discussion. Listing your reasons is one thing. That said:
Turtlekid, I would advise you to take a moment to use your mind, if possible and compare Palin's amount of "experience" to Obama's.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: BP on September 06, 2008, 08:50:08 PM
lol @ parties. This man's got some great ideas. His promises look... promising. And I claim that I'm not racist, so it doesn't bother me that he could be president. Wait WHAT he's a democrat oh sh I can't oh no let's get that skeleton back on the mic
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MEGAߥTE on September 06, 2008, 09:00:45 PM
2. Will tax us until we're wearing barrels
You do realize that McCain's tax plan will tax all but the very rich more, while most people will actually get tax cuts under Obama.  Look it up rather than believing the talking points.

I can't stand the thought of Obama in office.  Not because he's black, because he's:
1. Inexperienced

I think Palin would make a better president than McCain, actually
This is a huge contradiction since Palin has less experience than Obama.

(And just FYI, I'm not pro-Obama either, just saying your arguments are ridiculous).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Shyguy92 on September 06, 2008, 09:19:43 PM
I was going to vote for Chuck NORRIS AND I DID
this is what i read from that
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MaxVance on September 06, 2008, 09:32:00 PM
After much thought, I have to support the Obama and Biden (and the Democratic Party as a whole), even though I do not agree with all their views. The Libertarian Party best reflects my views, but even then I find myself disagreeing with their strongest points of corporate deregualtion. Such a shame they are so small! Curse America's two-party system.

lol
Did you just say that? You did not just say that.


Edit: I spent 42 minutes thinking over this post.  And I don't even have a vote.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on September 06, 2008, 09:35:06 PM
*Puts hands over ears and closes eyes* Political discussion! Political discussion!

Also, Obama FTW.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 06, 2008, 09:45:13 PM
I'm for McCain.  I actually dislike McCain very much but here's the reasons why I would vote for him:

1)  His vice president and how she plans to really change this country for the better

3)  I'm "conservative"  (extremely conservative actually,  I fit more in the catagory of constitutionalist)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on September 06, 2008, 10:52:51 PM
I'm voting Nader in '08 because

1) He's got a lazy eye so he can see in multiple directions

2) He proved something about cars or something

3) I thought starting a political discussion would get you pushed off a building
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 07, 2008, 07:49:18 AM
Are you kidding me? Nadar is running again?!

EDIT: Doh! It's Nader, not "Nadar."
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 07, 2008, 09:15:34 AM
I think you mean Nadir (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nadir).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on September 07, 2008, 11:46:56 AM
How are we going to make a decision without knowing any of Deezer's or Megabyte's policies?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Eclipsed Moon on September 07, 2008, 12:32:28 PM
Rule them out.  MEGAߥTE is too young and Deezer has never held public office.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on September 07, 2008, 01:47:33 PM
Good idea! Since I don't like any of the running candidates, I chose two not running!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: TEM on September 07, 2008, 04:35:34 PM
http://themushroomkingdom.net/board/index.php?topic=11963.0 lol wut
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on September 07, 2008, 05:41:03 PM
*Puts hands over ears and closes eyes* Political discussion! Political discussion!

3) I thought starting a political discussion would get you pushed off a building
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Eclipsed Moon on September 07, 2008, 06:15:17 PM
Good idea! Since I don't like any of the running candidates, I chose two not running!
Yes, that will show them.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 07, 2008, 09:20:46 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flolbamas.com%2Fblog%2Fwenudonvote4128646868454351057.jpg&hash=2bda50e6de3d9f3b60de6b5d79d8fe9a) (https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.icanhascheezburger.com%2Fcompletestore%2F2008%2F6%2F27%2F128590671773426336.jpg&hash=9e02ceee70dffb421c5b03f9e093f13e)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: SolidShroom on September 07, 2008, 09:21:14 PM
Biden is from Delaware so that's pretty cool, and since I'm also fairly "liberal," I'm inclined to say that Obama is a pretty cool guy, although I'm not a real political guy. I'd vote for him if I could vote.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: WarpRattler on September 07, 2008, 09:27:05 PM
If I was able to vote, I'd be voting Cthulhu (http://www.cthulhu.org/) (take note of the spelling, ShadowBrian). However, since that's not an option, I chose the TMK Party nomination.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Rao on September 08, 2008, 08:45:29 AM
If I could vote, I'd definitely vote for Obama.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Insane Steve on September 08, 2008, 01:36:27 PM
This is the first election in my life I can vote. It's also the first election in my life where my vote would not be against a Presidental candidate. I'm not a terribly big fan of Obama or McCain. Obama shares my views closer, but I hate hate HATE liberal fiscal policy.

That said... instead of voting against a presidental candidate... I'm voting against a VICE presidental candidate. The thought that Sarah Palin is an election and missed heartbeat away from becoming president scares me A LOT. Never mind her relative lack of experience. Never mind teaching creationism in science. Never mind abstinence only sex ed (if you have any questions about how well this works, look at her daughter. Her 17 year old pregnant unwed daughter.) Never mind banning -all- abortions, including pregnancies where the faetus get stuck in the Fallopian tubes... which is very dangerous (can be fatal) to the mother and practically never results in a viable child (in the history of recorded medicine... well, however long this is recorded, only one child in the history of the world has EVER survived a pregnancy of this type). I mean, how can you call yourself "pro-life" when you support banning a practice that saves lives (and support the death penalty, of course I support the death penalty too but I don't run around calling myself "pro-life" in the same breath) Sarah Palin is worse than a typical politician; she's perfectly willing to abuse even her own family to get ahead in politics. Show off your child with Down's Syndrome to show how family-oriented you are? Yep. Force your pregnant daughter to shotgun marry a self-proclaimed "f[---]ing redneck", AT AGE 17, so you look better to the social conservative base? Yep. Lie about who gave birth to the aforementioned Down's Syndrome child so the public can't say that your daughter got pregnant prior to hitting the age of consent? ...maybe, this one's a mere rumor but it wouldn't surprise me. She's on record as telling Bristol that if she were raped and got pregnant, she would be forced to have the child. WHEN SHE WAS 14. She's also on record as referring to Barack Obama as "Sambo", a racial slur that's not too much less degrading to blacks as the well-known one starting with "n".

And yet, despite all this, she's more popular with the American public than any of the other presidental or vice presidental candidates.

"Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve."
~George Bernard Shaw

Also, who seriously names their eldest son "Track"? Seriously? That's a only a half step above "Neveah" and the same level of WHY as "Madison".

PS: Also I'll be watching this thread, first sign of it becoming uncivil and it's getting closed. It'll stay open for now because MB didn't close it yet.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on September 08, 2008, 01:46:23 PM
YOUR BELIEFS ARE WROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 08, 2008, 02:15:39 PM
Palin is popular with the American public because she's a woman. It's stupid, I know, but that's the sad, sad truth. I don't really like Joe Biden (hell, I'd never heard of him before this election) but I really, really don't like Palin. McCain should've picked Romney. But he decided to play the gender card and attempt to win the election with a woman with practically no experience backing him. And it seems to have worked because McCain has jumped ahead in the polls.

Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Insane Steve on September 08, 2008, 02:24:50 PM
No, the Republican Party (READ: Not McCain) chose Palin because the religious right doesn't like McCain all that much. The religious right also tends to vote in droves, so the party needed someone who these people can back. Mitt Romney would be suicide to the GOP because of his religion and how the social cons view McCain.

Also, notice how the Republicans are losing seats in Congress. This VP pick will not only cause the social cons to vote for the McCain ticket, they'll vote (R) down the board and maybe stop the bleeding in Congress/state positions. I mean, as much as I hate Palin, she does make sense from the party's goal of getting as many officials elected as possible. The fact that she's a woman is moot in this case.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 08, 2008, 02:29:55 PM
No, the Republican Party (READ: Not McCain) chose Palin because the religious right doesn't like McCain all that much. The religious right also tends to vote in droves, so the party needed someone who these people can back.

Why Palin then? If that's the case then he should've picked Mike Huckabee, unless he isn't popular with the right for some reason. At least he has a lot of experience, but McCain picked Palin instead. Why? I'm asking you because if what you say is true, he would've picked Huckabee.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MaxVance on September 08, 2008, 02:36:40 PM
I thought Sarah Palin was also chosen as a tactic to grab disaffected female Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton in the primaries. I had never considered her ties to the religious right.

"Any publicity is good publicity." Sad, but I fear that this may be true.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 08, 2008, 02:39:59 PM
I thought Sarah Palin was also chosen as a tactic to grab disaffected female Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton in the primaries. I had never considered her ties to the religious right.

"Any publicity is good publicity." Sad, but I fear that this may be true.

I agree. Palin is only there because she's a woman.

Also, the religious right aren't the only ones who "vote in droves." They just vote like everyone else. Heck, I consider myself one and I'm questioning whether or not I should vote at all this year.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MaxVance on September 08, 2008, 02:42:38 PM
Vote, but don't vote based off of what your peers think. Vote based on what you believe to be correct. America has secret voting for a reason.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 08, 2008, 02:58:41 PM
Why Palin then? If that's the case then he should've picked Mike Huckabee, unless he isn't popular with the right for some reason.

Because we (I would definitely say I'm part of the "religious right") want someone who will practice their faith in the white house, not just claim to be a member of that faith.

I hate hate HATE liberal fiscal policy.

I agree with you there.

Never mind teaching creationism in science.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

Never mind abstinence only sex ed (if you have any questions about how well this works, look at her daughter. Her 17 year old pregnant unwed daughter.)

Again, you put that in a bad light.  And her 17 year old pregnant unwed daughter may be pregnant because she wasn't taught abstinence-only.  Even if she was, no one is perfect (you think that if one person doesn't do something right, it reflects on everyone else in that person's group?  Well, yes, it does, but it shouldn't).  

Never mind banning -all- abortions, including pregnancies where the faetus get stuck in the Fallopian tubes... which is very dangerous (can be fatal) to the mother and practically never results in a viable child (in the history of recorded medicine... well, however long this is recorded, only one child in the history of the world has EVER survived a pregnancy of this type).

Forgive me for being skeptical, but... aren't you invoking the exception instead of the rule?

Sarah Palin is worse than a typical politician; she's perfectly willing to abuse even her own family to get ahead in politics. Show off your child with Down's Syndrome to show how family-oriented you are? Yep.

Showing off her child with Down's Syndrome?  As far as I know, that shows consistency; she didn't abort her disabled kid.

Force your pregnant daughter to shotgun marry a self-proclaimed "f[---]ing redneck", AT AGE 17, so you look better to the social conservative base? Yep.

Forcing her daughter to marry a... when did you hear him proclaim himself a "****ing Redneck?"... anyway, she's just trying to make her daughter respectable for her (daughter's) own good as well as her (Palin's) own.

Lie about who gave birth to the aforementioned Down's Syndrome child so the public can't say that your daughter got pregnant prior to hitting the age of consent? ...maybe, this one's a mere rumor but it wouldn't surprise me.

Given your custom title, it doesn't surprise me that it wouldn't surprise you...

She's on record as telling Bristol that if she were raped and got pregnant, she would be forced to have the child. WHEN SHE WAS 14.

If she was raped and got pregnant at 14 and had the child, good for her!



...Lest you should take this post as being "uncivil," please don't take it personally/close the thread.  I'm sorry if I offended anyone.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Insane Steve on September 08, 2008, 03:50:26 PM
1) Because we (I would definitely say I'm part of the "religious right") want someone who will practice their faith in the white house, not just claim to be a member of that faith.

2) I agree with you there.

3) You say that like it's a bad thing...

4) Again, you put that in a bad light.  And her 17 year old pregnant unwed daughter may be pregnant because she wasn't taught abstinence-only.  Even if she was, no one is perfect (you think that if one person doesn't do something right, it reflects on everyone else in that person's group?  Well, yes, it does, but it shouldn't).  

5) Forgive me for being skeptical, but... aren't you invoking the exception instead of the rule?

6) Showing off her child with Down's Syndrome?  As far as I know, that shows consistency; she didn't abort her disabled kid.

7) Forcing her daughter to marry a... when did you hear him proclaim himself a "****ing Redneck?"... anyway, she's just trying to make her daughter respectable for her (daughter's) own good as well as her (Palin's) own.

8) Given your custom title, it doesn't surprise me that it wouldn't surprise you...

9) If she was raped and got pregnant at 14 and had the child, good for her!



10) ...Lest you should take this post as being "uncivil," please don't take it personally/close the thread.  I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

1) Meh, I always thought that this goes against the whole "separation of church and state thing" but then again I just don't get religion as an institution so I'll back off this comment.

2) In general I support most (not all, most) things where the government stands back and doesn't get actively involved in social or fiscal policy. So I tend to be more conservative fiscally.

3) Creationism is NOT SCIENCE. Again, church and state, don't mix them. Take an optional theology course somewhere if you're interested in Creationism as a theory.

4) From what I can tell, telling most 15-17 year olds "DON'T DO THIS" makes them want to do it more. There's exceptions, obviously, but just because she's the daughter of a governor doesn't make her exempt from this human tendency.

5) The exception is important because it's the one case where even the "abortion kills babies" argument doesn't fly -- the faetus will not become viable in this state. Period. You're risking the lives of people who did nothing wrong by forcing your ideologies on them.

6) By "show off", I mean the GOP is planning to use the child in their ad campaigns. Basically her child is being used in a way he can't approve of to further a political agenda.

7) His MySpace said it, in those exact words, before it was deleted. Also, explain how being forced to marry at 17 is a GOOD thing again?

8) I've seen a few pictures that suggest this, it's not just whacko liberal slander. It may not be true, but it's not exactly baseless, either.

9) Yea, we'll never see eye to eye on this. Moving on.

10) Actually that's a rather civil post. I disagree with most of it, but it's substantial, which is more than I can say for most politiks debate. Well, compared to the post below yours at least that I deleted for being idiotic (it was, essentially, "you're wrong because I have different beliefs than you"). -_-
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Reading on September 08, 2008, 05:49:28 PM
10) Actually that's a rather civil post. I disagree with most of it, but it's substantial, which is more than I can say for most politiks debate. Well, compared to the post below yours at least that I deleted for being idiotic (it was, essentially, "you're wrong because I have different beliefs than you"). -_-
...Wow. You have just won my respect for being pretty much the only political debator I've seen who actually doesn't act like their opinions are obvious fact. Turtlekid too. I'm really liking the Fungi Forum's atmosphere of debate.

Might it actually be safe here for me to post my opinion without conservative/liberal/environmentalist/elitist/whatever extremists jumping all over me? I never get into political discussions for that very reason. Well, OK. I support McCain. I'm not old enough to vote at the moment, but he's an experienced guy with some good plans, and his VP has the energy they need to keep it going. I don't like Obama's policies.

If I had to, I would classify myself as mid-conservative, but I consider myself outside of the political spectrum. If that makes me an elitist or whatever other name you can come up with, I don't care.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 08, 2008, 05:53:04 PM
Well, if by "elitist" you mean "not satisfied with the average," nothing wrong with that! ;)

Also, I like how Insane Steve's "8" followed by a ")" reads as a sunglasses smiley.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 08, 2008, 06:33:38 PM
Because we (I would definitely say I'm part of the "religious right") want someone who will practice their faith in the white house, not just claim to be a member of that faith.
Well, I don't know whether "Christians" take offense at this stuff, but... Palin's oldest child had to have been conceived before she was married, and I think that goes against Christian beliefs, right? (As well as her daughter being pregnant before being 18/before being married.)
Aside from that, I personally don't think that shooting tons of wild animals from planes (and trying to invalidate wildlife preserves) is in any way a good thing to do.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 08, 2008, 06:35:51 PM
You know, there's actually a fair chance that we'll end up with Obama as president and Palin as vice. If Obama and McCain each get 269 electoral votes, which is quite possible (just a few states need to shift 5 or so percentage points from where they are now), then the election goes into Congress. The House of Representatives chooses the president, with each state getting one vote. The Democrats do control Congress by a fair margin now, but a lot of those are out of the 30 reps from New York and 50 reps from California. With each state getting only one vote, it would be pretty close, though Obama would probably still come out on top. Meanwhile, the vice-president is chosen independently by Senate, with each state again getting one vote. By my rough estimations, it could still be pretty close to a tie there -- and if it is, I'm guessing the current vice-president, as President of the Senate, would break the tie like he normally does, and I doubt Cheney would choose Biden.

That's an interesting thought, isn't it?

Anyway, as for this:
Palin's oldest child had to have been conceived before she was married, and I think that goes against Christian beliefs, right?
Christians believe in forgiveness.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 08, 2008, 06:45:53 PM
But they believe in just ignoring it and saying that it's perfectly fine?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 08, 2008, 07:33:50 PM
This is why politics and Christianity don't mix. In Christianity, you're supposed to see a person's evil actions as a sin and do your best to forgive them no matter what. In politics, you hold everyone accountable to their evil actions (this could be anything from being a hypocrite about a policy you made to having sex with an intern) and no one forgives anyone (I doubt anyone is gonna want to forgive Bush for Iraq). In this way, being private about your religion is a great thing, but politicians do a grand job of mixing a secular idea and a spiritual idea together. I'm guilty of it too because I just said I was a "member" of the "religious right" when it came to politics, mainly because I really don't know who else I belong to. I'm torn between both my country (secular) and religion (spiritual). If I had to give up one of them I'd give up my country. Then I'd be a spiritual monk/nomad, and there are people that do this.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 08, 2008, 07:42:35 PM
What I'm trying to get at here is that I don't see her practicing her faith at all, and also while I'm down with forgiveness, forgiveness doesn't mean that you just turn a blind eye. You still realize that it's wrong according to your belief system, and then the act of overcoming that somehow makes you a better person, or somesuch. It doesn't erase what they've actually done.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 20, 2008, 11:34:06 AM
You gave the definition for secular/human forgiveness.  I think CrossEyed7 was talking about the Christian/biblical definition.  Also, the more I think about it, the more I realize the point is moot.  Sarah Palin isn't the one who got pregnant before marriage in the first place.  I'm not going to vote for/against her because of what her daughter did.  Her daughter isn't the one who would be in the white house.

PS: Great solution to the political discussion!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 20, 2008, 03:07:55 PM
I have to admit that my judgment is probably a bit skewed. Whenever I hear of some high-profile pregnancy like this, I'm so happy that they didn't abort that I can't find it in me to be upset about it being premarital. Maybe I should be, I don't know. But anyway, I don't think you can combine Christian and political ethics like that.

Palin's oldest child had to have been conceived before she was married, and I think that goes against Christian beliefs, right?
In here, it sounds like you're saying that from a Christian perspective, premarital sex is wrong, and from a political perspective, if you do something wrong, it never gets erased from your slate. But from a Christian perspective, if she's received Christ's sacrifice, then she's been forgiven, and from a political perspective, premarital sex isn't that significant in the first place. You can't mix them like that.

I'm not, however, saying that religion shouldn't play a role in politics. I think it is incredibly detrimental to ignore religion and act like politicians aren't affected by their religious beliefs. Religions are just a subset of worldviews, something everyone, religious or not, has. It's the filter through which you see the world, and every decision you make is based on how you see things. Palin primarily has a traditional conservative Protestant worldview. Obama primarily has a globalist humanist worldview, with some elements of Marxism (seeming to mainly be in the form of black liberation theology). Those worldviews will profoundly impact the way they approach every decision they make in the White House, and so I think it is perfectly legitimate to explore the doctrines of their respective churches, and let the voters make their decisions based on which worldviews they want their president and vice-president to have. I don't think that the media should mesh together pieces of a Christian worldview and a secular worldview as it's convenient. But I'm way off on a tangent here.

Aside from that, I personally don't think that shooting tons of wild animals from planes (and trying to invalidate wildlife preserves) is in any way a good thing to do.
I haven't done much research on this yet, but for now, I trust that the governor of Alaska knows more about Alaskan species than I do. I will look into it when I get a chance, but I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt, and trying not to be swayed by the cuteness of the animals in question.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 20, 2008, 10:19:32 PM
Might I mention, she's trying to get the wildlife preserves un-preserved in order to drill for oil.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 20, 2008, 10:29:41 PM
We need oil. Eventually we need to transition to something else, but in the interim, we need oil. If there's a solution that gets gas prices back down to something reasonable while also making us less dependent on enemy nations, I think a few frightened moose are an acceptable price to pay for that. Besides, most proposals have us drilling into ANWR kinda sideways, so the animals probably wouldn't even notice.

As for the aerial wolf hunting thing, I don't see how it's that much worse than regular wolf hunting. I think it's mostly the fact that wolves look so much like doggies.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 21, 2008, 12:21:12 AM
Mostly that it's totally unnecessary, and she just rides around and shoots them for no reason except to shoot them. People that do things without any good reason (because you feel like it is not a good reason) don't get high marks in my book.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 21, 2008, 12:36:45 AM
How dare she shoot innocent animals (wolves no less) from the safety of her plane? I disliked Palin's actions before but I had no idea she was an animal killer. This is inexcusable and I am voting for Obama in November. I am both angry and glad this came up because now I can make my decision without any regrets.

How can anyone support her after she pulled something like this? Have you no shame? Those were innocent animals she gunned down, and without reason either. They weren't attacking her, nor did she need them for food. She claims she did it for "predator control." Yeah, screw that. Haven't wolves been roaming in Alaska for thousands of years? If the people there can't put up with it they should move out of Alaska. I looked this info up and it says that she also offered 150 dollars to anyone who hacked off a wolf's paw and brought it in. How cold hearted is that?! I hate hunting with a passion and now I have even less respect for Palin than I did before.

****. I don't know how I'll be able to forgive her for this. All I feel is complete and utter rage. I don't want anyone that would voluntarily kill innocent wolves for sport or "predator control" in office. This is just horrible.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 21, 2008, 07:50:26 AM
If it's true that she was killing wolves for no reason than I agree with PL that it is very wrong.  Although I don't even think it's true because I haven't heard it anywhere than here.  Maybe if someone posts a "ligit" link to an article or something I'll believe it.  Killing animals for no reason is wrong but hunting is not.  Think of deer,  if humans and other animals didn't hunt and kill deer (to eat of course) than there would be so much deer that they would eat most of the plants in the forest, which will make them and other hervavores in the forest starve, there would also be so much of their crap around that it would cause disease.  Hunting is not a bad thing if you plan on using your kill for a good purpose, it's good to limit the population of the forest because if we didn't than lots of bad things could happen to the animals and plants inside it.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 21, 2008, 08:38:42 AM
Can you even eat wolf meat? If not, and if the wolf population really did need to be reduced, then I don't see a problem with hunting them from a safe vantage point.

Anyway, if you don't want to vote for someone who kills things, have fun voting for the guy who voted against (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24481) the Induced Infant Liability Act three times, including one time (http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2008/01/top-10-reasons.html) (scroll down to number 1) when the language of the bill was effectively identical to the federal Born Alive Infants Act, which he said he would have voted for.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 21, 2008, 08:53:54 AM
Palin voluntarily murdered the wolves with her own hands. Obama casted a vote. I'm still voting for Obama.

Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 21, 2008, 09:01:42 AM
I can't find any proof that she did, but even if she did, human life is weightier than wolf life.

Roger Taney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford) didn't personally kill anyone, but the piece of paper he wrote pretty much caused the Civil War. Obama is the one who said "Don't tell me words don't matter. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ffwY74XbS4)"
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 21, 2008, 09:04:31 AM
Yes, but which is worse? Voluntarily killing something with your own hands or voting on a proposed bill? Yes, what Obama did was wrong (even people who support abortion have to find something wrong with that) but I've gotta vote for someone. Not voting is foolish.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 21, 2008, 09:11:14 AM
Then vote for a third party. Your vote for Obama or McCain probably isn't going to matter in the end. Your state is either going red or blue, and at the end of the day, your vote will just be one of 60,000,000. Your vote will have a lot more meaning as one of a few hundred thousand for a third-party candidate. They won't win, but they will get noticed, and you'll get to vote your conscience. I think voting for a third party is actually the exact opposite of "throwing your vote away."
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 21, 2008, 01:06:47 PM
Palin voluntarily murdered the wolves with her own hands. Obama casted a vote. I'm still voting for Obama.

1.
human life is weightier than wolf life.
2. You can't murder animals.  They're animals.
3. Yes, he voted on a bill, that, if passed, wouldn't just be a bill anymore.  Didn't you ever watch School House Rock? 
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on September 21, 2008, 04:45:09 PM
Now I want to see a bunch of School House Rock characters shoot a wolf from a plane. Oh, and sing a song about it.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 21, 2008, 07:14:11 PM
Wait, how can you not murder animals? Humans are animals too.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 21, 2008, 07:31:19 PM
1.2. You can't murder animals.  They're animals.

Just because a wolf is less intelligent than a human doesn't mean it isn't alive. I am not voting for an animal killer.

Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 21, 2008, 07:40:04 PM
And I'm not voting for a baby killer.

(Also, I think you should come up with a more specific guideline there, unless you really plan on not voting for anyone who has ever killed any animal).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 21, 2008, 09:34:25 PM
I'm not voting for anyone who would make it part of her policy to kill animals. Is that more specific? I forgive Palin for what she did, but I don't think I can vote for her. Your information has also influenced me to consider voting for a third party candidate, but I just don't know if that's the right decision.

CrossEyed7, I do believe this is the first thing the two of us have disagreed on. I don't like arguing against you. I hate it, actually. We normally agree on everything.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 21, 2008, 10:12:31 PM
I'm not voting for anyone who would make it part of her policy to kill animals. Is that more specific?
I pretty much get what you mean, but the stickler in me says you should probably still clarify it a bit to allow the USDA to exist (unless you're a closet PeTA supporter, in which case we've got a lot more to disagree on). "Kill animals cruelly and/or unnecessarily" would probably cover it. And that I would agree on; it's the case-by-case definitions of cruelty and necessity that we differ on.

I actually don't mind disagreeing with you that much, although you're right that it's a strange new experience (there've been a few other minor things, but obviously nothing notable enough yet for me to debate you on). If I had to get in an argument with someone, though, you're a pretty good choice. You're a good communicator, you stay civil, and all in all, it's a lot nicer than disagreeing with Chup.

Shake?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: PaperLuigi on September 21, 2008, 10:25:22 PM
Shake. I don't support PETA. I just...don't like them.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 22, 2008, 04:31:28 AM
Yay, we're friends again!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 22, 2008, 12:59:23 PM
It's good you guys are mature enough to not turn this into a "YOUR BELIFS ARE WROOOOOOONG LOLZ" argument.  It's nice your not making the mods regret their desicion to allow political disscussion. :)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on September 22, 2008, 01:36:14 PM
Um ya thats kinda the point
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 22, 2008, 01:51:03 PM
The point is to talk about politics. Not "how were mature enough to talk about an arguable topic without the mods regret letting us talk about it".
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: The Chef on September 22, 2008, 02:03:05 PM
And I'm not voting for a baby killer.

Obama doesn't make a big deal out of abortion like Palin does. That makes him a baby killer. Sure.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 22, 2008, 04:32:03 PM
No, in fact, he advocates it.  Abortion should be made a big deal of, especially if killing animals is.  On a related note...

Wait, how can you not murder animals? Humans are animals too.

Can you guess what this defines?

Quote
The principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part. 


I'll give you a hint.  It's what separates us (humans) from animals (which we aren't).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 22, 2008, 04:49:51 PM
Can you guess what this defines?

I agree with TurtleKid.  To say that humans are just animals is to say that everyone here is no more important than....a turtle!

This should be the most sensible answer to this argument:  Killing animals other than for self defense or to eat is wrong.  Abortion is wrong because it kills humans, unborn babys are not just "skin cells".  People who support pro-death don't even think of themselves being aborted when they were a baby or their children.  I'd like to say to people who support abortion "Ok, your children first", or people who want to control the population by murdering the old "Ok, your mother and father first.".  Heartless people who support death deserve to experience the first losses.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 22, 2008, 06:02:08 PM
So wait, you're saying that Obama goes around telling people to get abortions?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: The Chef on September 22, 2008, 07:23:38 PM
I thought he was saying that Obama goes around personally aborting unborn babies.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 22, 2008, 07:45:21 PM
He might as well be if he's voting to allow abortion; he's responsible for it whether he commits the act directly or not.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 22, 2008, 08:16:25 PM
No, the people that decide to do it are responsible.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 22, 2008, 08:20:19 PM
...A group of which he is a part if he's voting to allow abortion...
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 22, 2008, 08:21:20 PM
How do you figure that? He isn't making anyone else's decision for them, as far as I know.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Insane Steve on September 22, 2008, 08:22:18 PM
Wait, so if you don't vehemently want to ban something, you completely and undeniably support it?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 22, 2008, 08:29:10 PM
If you allow something wrong to happen, you might as well have done it yourself.  What I'm saying is, is that a person in power (like Obama) especially needs to lead well (which he would not).  Great responsibility with great power and all that.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 22, 2008, 08:42:34 PM
I'm trying to understand how he's less responsible than McCain, and especially than Palin, a person who is apparently only out to fulfill her own agenda. And that baloney about allowing stuff to happen isn't logical either. "Might as well have" does by no means equal "did", and I know this is hard for you to understand, but people these days do have the right to make decisions for themselves. Abortion happened before it was legal, anyway. You're not going to stop people from doing things no matter if you "allow" it or not. Granted, a good percentage of people follow the law, but my point here is that you're not going to make everybody in the world follow it.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Insane Steve on September 22, 2008, 08:50:53 PM
If you ban abortions, people are still going to have them. They'll just be back alley. And unsafe. And unsterile.

But at least it's banned, right?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on September 22, 2008, 09:30:46 PM
There are laws against stealing. People still steal. Some people die in robberies. We still have laws against stealing. Because it's wrong.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 23, 2008, 06:37:36 AM
I'm trying to understand how he's less responsible than McCain, and especially than Palin, a person who is apparently only out to fulfill her own agenda.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a huge McCain fan either, but at this point he's the lesser of two evils, if you will.  As for Palin, why do you think anyone would run for office if not to fulfill their own agenda?  It's certainly what Obama's doing, the difference being he doesn't seem to have a moral or economical code.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 23, 2008, 09:42:21 AM
And Palin does? Please tell me how.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 23, 2008, 09:50:12 AM
This argument is just going in circles.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 23, 2008, 10:21:49 AM
And Palin does? Please tell me how.

She won't tax every penny we own, and she is against abortion and homosexuality.  There's your economical and moral code (as examples).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 23, 2008, 11:39:06 AM
Homosexuality doesn't have anything to do with morals. It's not something you can really do anything about.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 23, 2008, 03:25:13 PM
Beg to differ.  It is, like any other temptation people struggle with.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Insane Steve on September 23, 2008, 04:26:21 PM
Can you give one or two actual reasons -why- homosexuality is a conscious choice? Just curious.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on September 25, 2008, 08:58:37 AM
I may have been misunderstood in the past.  You can't help how you are made.  Being gay is an inclination, not a cemented part of anyone's nature.  Not being gay is a
choice you can make.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 25, 2008, 11:17:53 AM
Go tell that to some gay people. Really, do it.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Luigison on September 25, 2008, 06:18:21 PM
Turtlekid1, you should try to be gay.  Really try.  Give it a few of weeks.  Go on a date.  Watch some gay entertainment.  Look longingly into your dates eyes for several minutes.  Make out.  Enjoy it.  Want to do it again.  Be gay.

If you can force yourself to be gay, really gay, then it is a choice.  If you can't decide to be gay then someone who is gay probably can't just decide to be straight.  If you find it impossible to change your sexual orientation then stop calling others people's orientation a choice.

Do this sound like a fair challenge? 
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 25, 2008, 06:27:10 PM
you should try to be gay.  Really try.  Give it a few of weeks.  Go on a date.  Watch some gay entertainment.  Look longingly into your dates eyes for several minutes.  Make out.  Enjoy it.  Want to do it again.  Be gay.

ROFL!!!!!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on September 25, 2008, 07:08:58 PM
Except it isn't a joke. It's just as ridiculous the other way around.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Lizard Dude on September 25, 2008, 07:36:35 PM
It isn't a joke, but I'm still


LMAO!!!!!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 25, 2008, 07:37:36 PM
I know its really funny when you first read it!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on September 26, 2008, 05:14:02 PM
Uh-oh...

(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fbloghoax%2Fmccain_screenshot.jpg&hash=170c36b67ee4849bf2b78dc77ae1e449)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on September 27, 2008, 09:18:58 AM
I know its really funny when you first read it!

MJ, are you, perchance, a ten-year-old schoolboy?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MushroomJunkie on September 27, 2008, 11:35:52 AM
MJ, are you, perchance, a ten-year-old schoolboy?

I'm in tenth GRADE.  But I'm not 10 yrs.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Markio on September 28, 2008, 02:19:44 PM
It was funny out of context, but grounded in discussion it makes a valid point.

I don't see how anyone can claim what a politician will do when in office.  What politicians want to do, what they say they want to do, and what they actually do are often very different.  Instead of claiming we know what a politician will do when/if elected, it makes more sense to admit that all nominees are subject to failure in fulfilling some of their promises.  I know most of us know this, I'm just bringing it up to clarify some of the "facts" being shared.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glitchy on September 29, 2008, 07:44:06 PM
I am not voting for an animal killer.

Actually, it would be beneficial to vote for her. She would spend more time in the White House then if she was at her own house in Alaska, where she usually hunts.

McCain FTW.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on September 29, 2008, 10:29:28 PM
McCain's worse. He hunts the most dangerous game of all.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glitchy on October 01, 2008, 06:30:29 PM
McCain's worse. He hunts the most dangerous game of all.

Er...Obama?

Tastes like democracy?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: TEM on October 01, 2008, 08:26:04 PM
I'm voting for Obama because he's black, he smokes and once on the TV while flipping through channels I heard him talking about mortality in law and he didn't sound like he was BSing, a first in stuff I hear politicians say on TV.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on October 08, 2008, 07:44:46 AM
Those people (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/07/obama-hatred-on-display-a_n_132572.html) deserve to go to hell.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Toad on October 08, 2008, 07:17:14 PM
I don't recall if I've already said this in this topic or any other voting topic, but..

Don't vote for Sarah Palin. (sp?) She supports the slaughter of wolves.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on October 08, 2008, 09:53:14 PM
Yeah, you spelled it right, but Sarah Palin's anti-wolf tendancies have very little to do with my dislike of her.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on October 08, 2008, 11:28:52 PM
There are plenty of reasons to dislike her. Shooting wolves is just one of them.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Boo Dudley on October 09, 2008, 08:03:12 AM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpspiso.us%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F04%2Fmega-man-maverick-hunter-x.jpg&hash=4e2dda299d41db4f31bec2c966616ccc)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on October 09, 2008, 10:28:31 AM
I'm repeating myself here, but while he was in the state senate, Obama voted three times against (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo) the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have made it illegal for hospitals to leave fully birthed human babies in closets to die because they had tried to abort them. Including at least once when it included the exact language that was in the federal act that he said would have convinced him to vote for it. (He said that he voted against it because it would have undermined Roe v. Wade, but that if it had had a paragraph saying that it didn't undermine Roe v. Wade, like the federal Born Alive Infants Act, which he wasn't around for, then he would have voted for it. However, the third time he voted against it, it did have a paragraph saying exactly that. And he still voted against it.)

I'm not saying that Obama's support of infanticide makes Palin's wolf-shooting okay, just that if killing wolves is the main thing that convinces you not to vote for Palin, then you'd better be voting third party.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on October 09, 2008, 11:24:08 AM
Like I said before, there are plenty of other reasons.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Lizard Dude on October 09, 2008, 04:37:48 PM
Obama's support of infanticide makes me like him even more.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on October 09, 2008, 04:53:24 PM
I'm repeating myself here, but while he was in the state senate, Obama voted three times against (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo) the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have made it illegal for hospitals to leave fully birthed human babies in closets to die because they had tried to abort them.
Yeah, that seems totally wrong, but would you really want to live the rest of your life knowing your mom tried to kill you?

That being said, I almost LOL'd when I saw a thing in Time magazine with a screengrab from a McCain ad blasting Obama's alleged position on abortion (or something like that): It was some women billed as an "abortion survivor". Like almost not existing is somehow medal-worthy.

But this is the wrong thread to keep up this discussion on. I'll stop.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Toad on October 09, 2008, 05:48:14 PM
I'm not saying that Obama's support of infanticide makes Palin's wolf-shooting okay, just that if killing wolves is the main thing that convinces you not to vote for Palin, then you'd better be voting third party.

If I do vote, I will be a.. non-denomiator?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on October 10, 2008, 11:12:04 AM
Like I said before, there are plenty of other reasons.

Examples, please?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on October 10, 2008, 12:07:47 PM
Turtlekid, you've lost your example privileges.

EDIT: Bullcrap this (http://www.yahoo.com/s/968595) was an accident.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on October 13, 2008, 12:32:14 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpunditkitchen.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F10%2Fpolitical-pictures-john-mccain-distance-himself-bush-following-me.jpg&hash=7f650dfb837c256dde30ac69b0c2eff5)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on October 16, 2008, 03:31:50 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa335%2FTrevornater%2Fjoe.png%3Ft%3D1224192577&hash=ada8d41712cd863d4c620c13d5e3d68b)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on October 23, 2008, 02:20:26 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgs.xkcd.com%2Fcomics%2Fcanada.png&hash=3d6cf0b98a20b06db233884ea7e91657)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on October 29, 2008, 09:30:36 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg509.imageshack.us%2Fimg509%2F697%2Fthatsracist3hc1.gif&hash=448bb4495fc772590947e908a9124b99)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 03, 2008, 04:11:24 PM
Shadowbrain, you're kidding right? You're claiming that New York, one of the most leftist states in the entire nation, which has been a democratic stronghold since the political realignment of the 1960s, is part of the so-called right wing conspiracy? Dream on.

What I do find amusing is that Obama's entire campaign is essentially "McCain = Bush", while McCain keeps denying it. This entire election has played out like an argument between two grade schoolers. Obama yells CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE and then McCain hops up there to say he's gonna change things too. McCain calls Obama a socialist, a week later Obama calls McCain a socialist. McCain keeps trying to play the nice guy when all of us know that Republicans aren't nice.

Seriously. The entire election is a disgrace. Both of them should be ashamed of themselves. (Even though I'm voting for McCain.)


Oh and while I'm here, if you dislike a person simply because they hunt, they you're not a man.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 03, 2008, 06:06:23 PM
Right... correctly judging the needless killing of animals as a bad and pointless thing makes you female. Got it.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 03, 2008, 06:17:22 PM
Tell me something, you a vegetarian, Chupperson?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 03, 2008, 06:24:08 PM
He's right people were not meant to eat meat and other naturally living things.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Trainman on November 03, 2008, 06:34:02 PM
Eh.... needless? Hunting I don't necessarilly care for (I just like to shoot guns at a shooting range), but I mean, do you eat pizza, chicken, chinese, burgers, fish, etc..... or do people you know use makeup, wear leather, etc. etc. etc.? If so, we apparently need animals create those things we use in daily life typically, so I wouldn't pin it as pointless and bad. It's not like you can just go out and kill as many living things as you can see... then you'd be a poacher. That's why you can only hunt in certain seasons and shoot a certain number of animals and certain types.... such as Texas, you can shoot a buck, spike, and two does and that's it where my dad hunts.

If Obama gets it.... then he's gonna pull a Bill Clinton and try and get rid of firearms or make you wait an extremely long time to obtain them and whatnot. Also the fact that he'd jack ammunition prices up to obscene amount somehow so you couldn't even hunt if you wanted to... and on and on...
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 03, 2008, 06:37:34 PM
Yeah hunting is wrong. And that's the governments way to control us; taking away our American rights to bear arms.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 03, 2008, 07:01:05 PM
I'm not vegetarian. I dislike red meat. I don't begrudge those who eat it, though.
I don't think you grasp that food and consumer products are not made from animals that were hunted. (Breeding animals for these purposes is a questionable practice as well.) Hunting is an anachronism and I am of the opinion that it is cruel and callous unless necessary (extremely rare cases). On the other hand, the way meat is processed now, meat you catch yourself might be better for you (but that depends on how healthy the animal was in the first place). I'll just go for organic veggies.

I'm sure I've mentioned before that I think makeup is a stupid idea.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 03, 2008, 07:10:28 PM
Makeup testing is a cruel practice, yes. I will only eat vegetables and fruits if they are organic only. I will eat any kind of meat that is fairly cooked that does include medium-rare cooked.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: The Chef on November 03, 2008, 07:38:06 PM
I eat more poultry and fish than beef. I'm not really a beef person anyway, unless it's beef jerky we're talking about.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 03, 2008, 07:39:58 PM
I eat beef more (because I love homemade tacos) then poultry because chicken is not as tasty and fish hate high mercury concentrations.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Trainman on November 03, 2008, 07:45:27 PM
I just don't understand how hunting legally is wrong, since people have been doing it since forever... and before domestication of animals, that was the only way to live.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: NintendoExpert89 on November 03, 2008, 07:46:25 PM
Yeah hunting is wrong. And that's the governments way to control us; taking away our American rights to bear arms.
Wait a minute... that made no sense at all.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 03, 2008, 07:47:53 PM
Time to fix that.

I don't believe hunting for sport is humane. That last part was part of a reply to another forum.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on November 03, 2008, 08:33:08 PM
I agree with NB mostly kinda. Hunting just for kicks amounts to murder in my book, since you're simply ending this creature's life just for your own amusement. On the other hand, hunting for meat is fine with me, as long as it doesn't put the animal through any unnecessary suffering.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 03, 2008, 08:56:56 PM
I just don't understand how hunting legally is wrong, since people have been doing it since forever... and before domestication of animals, that was the only way to live.
Note that I am referring specifically to the present, and not the past.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: TEM on November 03, 2008, 08:59:46 PM
Remember to vote tomorrow, 5 people on the board that are old enough to do so!
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on November 03, 2008, 10:16:32 PM
Hunting is an anachronism and I am of the opinion that it is cruel and callous unless necessary (extremely rare cases).

I really hope you're pro-life.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 03, 2008, 10:32:34 PM
My point, Chupperson, is not the point that hunted animals should be used for food or anything like that. My argument is that if you continue to support the meat industry while denouncing the sport of hunting, it's hypocritical. You don't absolutely need to eat meat, so it's unnecessary killing of all those chickens and pigs that you still eat. See now me, I recognize that I don't have to eat meat, however I don't hold a double standard against anything short of ritualistic genocide of a given animal (which I can't really think of one).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 03, 2008, 10:39:00 PM
Shadowbrain, you're kidding right? You're claiming that New York, one of the most leftist states in the entire nation, which has been a democratic stronghold since the political realignment of the 1960s, is part of the so-called right wing conspiracy? Dream on.
"B" is nowhere near "S" on the keyboard (and do you notice the connection between those two words?). Besides, it's not like the whole state converged to write that thing. And I posted that link almost a month ago.

(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgonintendo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fphotos%2Fthumb_mariobama2.jpg&hash=608088d3f6ec0d47ae9bc5ce2d08875a)
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgonintendo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fphotos%2Fthumb_tomnook.jpg&hash=298a8606c702a1ed2121d622d283443c)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 03, 2008, 10:46:51 PM
It may not be the entire state which typed that but New York's voter groups are almost exclusively left wing. Whoever made that "typo" (I'll admit it's hard to buy it was a mistake) was likely either a democrat who doesnt like Obama or just someone with a sense of humor.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 04, 2008, 12:44:08 AM
Like I said on the last page, I'm not comfortable with meat in general. I don't really agree with killing things in order to eat (or for any reason at all). I don't have as much of a problem with poultry and fish, and those are the only kinds of meat I eat. If I get to thinking about it, it grosses me out, and as a result I eat mostly non-meat foods.
Everyone in the world is a hypocrite, so I'd warn against delving too deeply into that. Even so, your allegations of hypocrisy are pretty feeble. My argument is that you darn well better use the animal for food or something if you kill it. Hunting as a "sport" and for trophies and whatnot is absolutely detestable. And Sarah Palin.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 04, 2008, 12:53:55 AM
But how can you say that you should kill an animal for food if it's not necessary? Using them for consumption isn't necessary, using them for entertainment is necessary. However, different strokes for different blokes. We eat them because we like the taste of meat. We hunt them because we like the feeling of sport. Again, using a double standard is ridiculous in such a scenario.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 04, 2008, 01:13:08 AM
What? I'm not an insane person who tries to stop people from doing things, because I know they won't. That chicken is going to be turned into meat whether I eat it or not. The fact that I think people shouldn't hunt doesn't mean I'm going to go punch them when they do. Animals bred for consumption are treated inhumanely, and so are animals you just shot. But why not let them live if you personally have the choice? If I shot something, all I would feel was bad, not sport. It isn't sporting to end something's life for no reason aside from that you feel like it. That just makes you a cruel and heartless #@$&@*!.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 04, 2008, 01:27:36 AM
Well, I dunno about anyone else, but I admit to being a cruel and heartless #@$&@*!.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Mr. Wiggles on November 04, 2008, 01:43:57 AM
Tomorrow can't come soon enough.

The best thing about this is that the liberal media will finally stop their horrific sensationalization of this presidential race, and hopefully the republican bashing jokes will finally be laid to rest. They stopped being funny years ago.

Too bad I never received an assigned voting location, so I'll be wandering aroun town for a place to vote.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Trainman on November 04, 2008, 02:06:23 AM
Note that I am referring specifically to the present, and not the past.

Yes, what I'm saying is it's like a past-time of just.... what people do.


I think the thing is here is that I've never ran into anyone who hunts "just for kicks." Yeah, that doesn't make any sense just to kill stuff for no reason.... and everyone I know hunts for the meat or use the animal in another way... not just "YEAH I GOT HIM... okay let's leave."
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on November 04, 2008, 07:48:59 AM
Well, this is it... I may not be here if Obama wins for a couple reasons:

1. The economy is so bad when he gets in office, my family won't be able to pay for internet.

2. I've moved to Canada and don't have a computer just yet.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 04, 2008, 08:57:29 AM
Sean Malstrom to the rescue again! (http://seanmalstrom.wordpress.com/2008/11/03/toast/)

I would marry that guy if I was a woman. Or if he was.

Also I just voted. McCain for president, Libertarian on all the positions they were running for other than president, and a write-in for Michael Savage for the position where that one guy was running unopposed. I had considered shaving off my beard and dressing as Sarah Palin to go to the polls, but in the end I just settled on wearing a red t-shirt.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: TEM on November 04, 2008, 11:58:00 AM
Compare voting line wait times; I waited for about an hour.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 04, 2008, 12:50:42 PM
I think it was probably 15 minutes or so for me. Surprisingly short.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Eclipsed Moon on November 04, 2008, 01:48:07 PM
No line.  As soon as I signed in, there was a booth open for me.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 04, 2008, 02:08:03 PM
It's about a seven-minute walk from my door to the polling place. I left at 9 and got back before 9:30. Waiting times are apparently pretty short during work hours.

Did your places have the booths in a room, or were they just lined up in a hallway?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 04, 2008, 03:02:02 PM
All this animal killing talk is making me sad. Is anyone here an animal rights activist?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Markio on November 04, 2008, 03:03:25 PM
No.  I voted by mail, so I didn't have to wait in a line.  Too bad, because waiting in line for something important is practically the only way to do nothing and feel like you're getting something accomplished.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Eclipsed Moon on November 04, 2008, 03:42:34 PM
Did your places have the booths in a room, or were they just lined up in a hallway?
A small building in the back, the size of my bedroom.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Lizard Dude on November 04, 2008, 09:54:21 PM
Well, this is it... I may not be here if Obama wins for a couple reasons:

1. The economy is so bad when he gets in office, my family won't be able to pay for internet.

2. I've moved to Canada and don't have a computer just yet.
Canada? That's that country with universal health care, full relations with Cuba, and declined to participate in the Iraq War? Man, you'll love it up in that conservative bastion!

(Oh well, no one ever said McCain supporters were smart.)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: NintendoExpert89 on November 04, 2008, 10:07:32 PM
Some girls down the hall were screaming joyfully. Apparently Obama won the Presidency.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 04, 2008, 10:17:14 PM
Yes, yes he has.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Toad on November 04, 2008, 10:23:59 PM
This is pretty exciting, actually. We've seen history being made.. The 44th president of the US is a black man, the first one.. I think.

Ironically, I forgot to vote today.. ( - _ - ; )
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: MaxVance on November 04, 2008, 10:25:51 PM
For those who could vote, who voted early? I managed to talk my parents into doing it.

Also, it looks like the TMK Election is going to the TMK House of Representatives.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Eclipsed Moon on November 04, 2008, 10:27:38 PM
The 44th president of the US is not only the youngest
He (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt) is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy) not. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Toad on November 04, 2008, 10:32:44 PM
Ah, I see. Pardon my insanity.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 04, 2008, 11:21:28 PM
He's also not black, technically. But it doesn't matter. Go Obama!

...Gee, John McCain didn't have to get me anything.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Lizard Dude on November 04, 2008, 11:42:58 PM
Looks pretty black to me.

What does "technically black" mean, when we all are the same species and blackness is a matter of just one letter in 3.1 billion letters of DNA?


Also, what are you trying to hide with that edit Toad? We all know what you said.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Trainman on November 05, 2008, 12:25:43 AM
I ran the early voting course. I went the second day early voting was open. Out of about 15 booths with paper ballots (I didn't wanna use the slot machine to vote on Super Tuesday haha) there were about 6 people voting including me and my parents. When we were leaving, however, hoards of people were coming to vote (got done voting right after 9 AM).
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Lizard Dude on November 05, 2008, 12:50:00 AM
Who was hoarding those people?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Trainman on November 05, 2008, 01:01:13 AM
The need to vote....?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 05, 2008, 08:02:29 AM
Looks pretty black to me.

What does "technically black" mean, when we all are the same species and blackness is a matter of just one letter in 3.1 billion letters of DNA?
In that he is biracial. It matters not to me, though, I'm just saying.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Turtlekid1 on November 05, 2008, 11:19:44 AM
Canada? That's that country with universal health care, full relations with Cuba, and declined to participate in the Iraq War? Man, you'll love it up in that conservative bastion!

(Oh well, no one ever said McCain supporters were smart.)

1. No one ever said Obama supporters had a sense of humor

2. I don't know if you could call me a "McCain supporter."  He wasn't my favorite guy, either.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Mr. Wiggles on November 05, 2008, 04:05:40 PM
I voted McCain, but I'm not surprised Obama won. He's a fine candidate and I'm expecting great work from him.

I didn't see the live announcement though, since I was at a stand up show featuring Joel McHale. He did say he won though, but I thought he was joking since he mentioned he won Jupiter, Saturn and Narnia.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 05, 2008, 04:21:29 PM
You're serious?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Luigison on November 05, 2008, 04:39:43 PM
If so, he's an idiot in my opinion.  Voting is serious business.  The internet, on the other hand, is for Rick Rolls. 
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Toad on November 05, 2008, 04:43:35 PM
Why so serious?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: nensondubois on November 05, 2008, 04:55:25 PM
At least He won't be assassinated.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 05, 2008, 05:24:16 PM
http://www.2pstart.com/2008/11/05/fixing-an-election/
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glitchy on November 05, 2008, 07:40:14 PM
Chuck Baldwin FTW.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 06, 2008, 08:08:54 AM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgonintendo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fphotos%2Fthumb_OBAMA_by_spacecoyote.jpg&hash=0893c4dcd1d10573c8cef7282e182eb1)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 06, 2008, 11:49:29 AM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb181%2Fjmlockart%2Fobama.jpg&hash=3c25ab438d11cbf2ddf74e11a01d2991)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 06, 2008, 02:08:06 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.g4tv.com%2Fimages%2Fblog%2F2008%2F05%2F05%2F633455964472780004.bmp&hash=caa99c9ad8a0003c04737cfc9f819d02)

Also, I fixed the Obama Okami thing:
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 06, 2008, 05:25:24 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgonintendo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fphotos%2Fthumb_sow.jpg&hash=cf8a39ea771d68d6ad5fe4d9aea0fcb0)

http://superobamaworld.com/
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 09, 2008, 07:46:57 PM
See, I don't even dislike Obama that much. It's his ignorant, zombie supporters that truly bother me. A ton of people who voted for him didn't even know anything about him or politics in general.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuEMbfmk_CE&feature=related

Watch that video. it's a perfect example of how we take our right to vote for granted. It's a mockery of American politics.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 09, 2008, 09:58:14 PM
See also: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_XWkSUcrDQI
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 09, 2008, 10:01:16 PM
If you wanna talk mindless zombie supporters, and people that have no idea what's going on, looks like it goes both ways. Course, you can go find people to interview about anything and find people that have no clue about what they think they're talking about.
http://www.dancehallareaz.com/forum/videos/86/if-obama-wins-black-will-take-over.html
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 10, 2008, 01:51:10 AM
Ah but see, Chupperson, the ones in that video are just as stupid in my video, however, they're ignorant of the opposing candidate, not the one they're voting for. It's much worse to vote for someone you know nothing about than to vote against someone you know nothing about.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Eclipsed Moon on November 10, 2008, 02:00:03 AM
I fail to see how that's any smarter as opposed to option 3.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 10, 2008, 02:07:43 AM
Because at least when you vote against someone you know nothing about, you know something about the person you're voting for. At least they have a general concept of the political system that way. At least they know HMM JON MCCANE LIEKS WARZ. I LIEK WARZ 2 SO I SHULD VOTE 4 CANE. That's nowhere near as bad as 'I like Barack Obama's plan to keep the troops in Iraq.'
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 10, 2008, 07:05:43 PM
Where's the video where the deceitful interviewer goes and talks to people about stuff McCain doesn't do? You can create propaganda to promote or demean whatever you want. Your line of reasoning is invalid.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 10, 2008, 11:38:14 PM
It's not invalid. I've seen at least five other videos where they don't entrap the Obama supporters. Perfect example is an interview in which some of them stated
"I don't think McCain would make a good president. You know, he's old, he could catch a heart attack and then we'd have to go through another vote."
"I think Obama will be good with the finances. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage no more."
"Who's Joe Biden?"

My reasoning is not invalid. You can be prejudice and still be smart (i.e. old ladies who voted for McCain), however as I said before it's just plain stupid to vote for someone without knowing anything about them. Go ahead, try and justify it. You're only legitimizing the stupidity of the average American voter.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 11, 2008, 12:37:33 AM
What I'm doing is pointing out that plenty of idiots were on the McCain bandwagon too. Obama didn't hold a monopoly on ignorant voters. You seem to think that Obama was the only one who got votes from people that didn't know things about him. I guarantee you there were plenty of people just like that who voted for McCain because he was the conservative candidate or whatever. Or because they got a notion that they should without knowing why they should.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 11, 2008, 12:53:29 AM
I'm not saying there weren't ignorant McCain supporters. I'm saying there were a ton more Obama voters who are dumb. Hence the mindless celebrating in the streets following his victory.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 11, 2008, 08:12:11 AM
Yeah, because having the first non-old white dude president is a cause to quietly go home and get some sleep.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 11, 2008, 12:06:25 PM
Yeah, I don't buy it, Meow. I don't see any more dumb Obama supporters than dumb McCain supporters.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Trainman on November 13, 2008, 01:41:51 AM
Why doesn't everyone just go watch the new South Park dealing with the election to get the REAL story? (Good episode, although I really don't like south park)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: BP on November 13, 2008, 07:42:07 PM
Yeah, really, people who think that Jesus is going to destroy the world because the U.S. will have a foreign leader* and that that relates to the end of the Mayan calendar ending when Obama's term does... aren't... that... smart.

*Barack Obama is not a foreigner. He is an American.**

**Actually we're all British and Irish and Filipino and Portuguese and Polish and German and Chinese and Japanese and Indian and whatever else if your ancestors' origins really have anything to do with yours. If I'm not mistaken there's no such thing as a true Native American either, as the original people here came from what's now Russia across the land bridge where the Bering Strait is now.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on November 13, 2008, 07:46:48 PM
Technically we're all Africans.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: ShadowBrain on November 13, 2008, 07:47:29 PM
Everybody in the world is related to eachother and we all came from Africa. Now, while a few people are busy trying to grasp that concept, I'll be over here enjoying my life.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: The Chef on November 13, 2008, 08:12:10 PM
We're all human. There's only one species of human too, so don't try to pull any punches.

Funny how there's more than one species of dog, yet you never see black and white dogs of the same species discriminating against one another.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: BP on November 13, 2008, 09:42:07 PM
Actually, if you're referring to housepet-type dogs, they're all canis domesticus. But they're different breeds, like there are different races of humans--look different, are essentially the same. It'd be pretty crazy if there were races of humans five times the sizes of others.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: The Chef on November 14, 2008, 06:59:02 PM
That would actually be kinda cool... if a bit dangerous. There would be nice giants that try to help us...and jerkface giants that try to kill us... sort like Fraggle Rock or Transformers or something.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: TEM on November 14, 2008, 11:08:40 PM
I'd just like to point out there are dwarves and giants, both human.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: BP on November 15, 2008, 12:03:28 AM
Well, sure, but it's not like the Irish are consistently a quarter the size of the Taiwanese or anything like that, while fully-grown chihuahuas are still the size of golden retriever puppies.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 16, 2008, 09:19:50 PM
If the tickets had been the other way around:

(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fheroeswiki.com%2Fimages%2F8%2F8d%2FAngela_petrelli.jpg&hash=c2bdc95f182b3846ea8fb439c3207141)(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F8%2F8a%2FMcCain_at_Annapolis.JPG&hash=eebe4304cc9b31b6d801637d7f6cc60a)

VS.

(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs.buzzfeed.com%2Fstatic%2Fimagebuzz%2Fweb02%2F2008%2F8%2F27%2F10%2F0e1ed3cca66e145e9ff4b9bb6e1b7baf.jpg&hash=a9f5eb9873de394666ddddfd3d7fe549)(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fb%2Fb5%2FMorgan_Freeman%252C_2006.jpg%2F180px-Morgan_Freeman%252C_2006.jpg&hash=b6ae5d76d05a66e2581937923ae82dcc)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 16, 2008, 09:35:44 PM
So
Instead of an old grandpa with a harebrained female sidekick vs. a younger black guy with a sidekick no one's heard of
we would get
An old(er) woman with an apparently smart male sidekick vs. a harebrained baby no one's heard of with an old black grandpa sidekick?
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on November 17, 2008, 12:07:54 AM
At first I got the impression that the photo on the left was a younger version of the one on the right, but then the second pairing wouldn't make any sense. Morgan Freeman doesn't have red hair.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Toad on November 17, 2008, 06:07:03 PM
I like Morgan Freeman. I should have written him into my ballot, except I forgot to vote.. typical.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 20, 2008, 09:42:26 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffailblog.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F11%2Ffail-owned-obama-mccain-ad-placement-fail.jpg%3Fw%3D500%26amp%3Bh%3D374&hash=9a140f3db32be360014f1a24419cd2ee)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Luigison on November 21, 2008, 06:21:43 AM
At first I got the impression that the photo on the left was a younger version of the one on the right, but then the second pairing wouldn't make any sense. Morgan Freeman doesn't have red hair.
Haha.  Of course not.  It turned gray. 
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: CrossEyed7 on November 21, 2008, 01:23:20 PM
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fminnesota.publicradio.org%2Ffeatures%2F2008%2F11%2F19_challenged_ballots%2Fimages%2Flizardpeopleb.jpg&hash=38bc55b55caf29638aeac04aa52d86c2)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on November 24, 2008, 06:44:44 PM
Dogs can't discriminate one another because they're not intelligent enough.

And because I didn't vote for Obama, I'm prejudice? Well played.

So far so good. Obama's been talking about doing a lot of moderate stuff, so good for him. I hope he does well. (Doesn't change the fact his supporters are primarily imbeciles.)
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on November 24, 2008, 07:39:39 PM
And McCain's.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: The Chef on November 24, 2008, 08:23:17 PM
Dogs can't discriminate one another because they're not intelligent enough.

Which is ironic, considering how discriminating against certain people is one of the least intelligent things a person can do.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Glorb on November 25, 2008, 02:31:36 AM
He means they lack the capability to decide that other dogs are "inferior" since they're more concerned with important matters like burying bones and biting burglars.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Markio on November 29, 2008, 05:59:26 PM
The concept of intelligence is culturally defined by humans anyway.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on December 05, 2008, 05:27:33 PM
Yeah, because we're intelligent.
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Chupperson Weird on December 05, 2008, 09:09:33 PM
Some of us are, anyway.

Note: this was not a rag on Meowrik's intelligence
Title: Re: TMK Votes
Post by: Forest Guy on December 08, 2008, 04:58:24 PM
Okay, you're right. I exaggerated. Some, not all of the human population aare intelligent. What I meant was that we are capable of recognizing our ability to think.