Obama Asks Congress to Delay Digital TV Switch

[Smokey]

Just about a month before television stations were scheduled to shut off their analog signal and switch to digital broadcasting, president-elect Barack Obama asked Congress to postpone the federally mandated switch to all-digital broadcast television, called DTV, scheduled to take place Feb. 17.

The incoming administration is warning that the TVs of millions of Americans could lose their pictures because of problems in the government's preparations.

The move follows the announcement this week by the Commerce Department that it had run out of money to provide $40 coupons for low-cost converter boxes to allow older TVs to receive the new digital signal. To complicate matters further, the coupons came with a 90 day expiration date and more than 13 million expired.

Those with expired converter box coupons cannot get new ones, unless they use a different address. According to Nielsen, a media research company, about 7.8 million households or nearly 7 percent of people with TV's are completely unprepared for the deadline.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-01/44429927.jpg

[Rich-n-Texas]

I'm not seeing nurse Ratchett in that picture there Festus. :idea:

Did you know that 7% number is the same as the amount of people currently unemployed in this country? Ironic ain't it?

[nightflier]

Good! It was a bad idea for government to mandate a technological advance that a large portion of Americans were not prepared for. In this instance, it would be better to let the technology set the pace, not government interference.

[Mr Peabody]

I say turn it off any way. It's not like it's a pacemaker. If Obama's for education, going without TV for a span may be a good thing. It might spur a bit more of the economy too. Maybe the advertisers should chip in or the networks themselves.We've been hearing about it forever, the stations were forced to do PSA's, turn it off already!!

Uncle Sam fumbles the ball, again. They should have never offer the stupid things in the first place. What would these people do if their TV broke? I don't think without would be an option.

Maybe Uncle Sam will give me a coupon for an electric car.

One morning I woke up and a small dumpster was in our drive way. What the..... I look around, everyone has one. What's going on, I think. Well as it turns out the County decides everyone has to recycle and we get billed each month for this ______ dumpster whether we recycle or not. Look there's in justice every where, it's just a TV signal, not the return of Y2k. Is no TV the reason pioneers had a short life span? Watch a VHS tape or play a game. Like that one where you can't talk and have to act and the others have to guess what you are trying to say, get some spoons and jugs, start a family band. charades!! that's the name of that game.

[kexodusc]

People are often reluctant to adopt new technologies, even if it is for the greater good, so I don't mind government accelerating things when it comes to regulated industries.

This isn't a big deal really, the government failed to meet its own goal so something has to give. Now that we have a problem, I suppose the only fair thing to do is extend it rather than punish people for government's mistakes. But at some point people have a duty to themselves and if they're too lazy to use the coupons on time, they should expire.

I can't even remember the reason why they made this shift in the first place. Something do with broadcasting bandwidth I'm sure...

[bobsticks]

Stuff

Punish people?

As a species we've come out of the cave, mastered fire and the atom, fjorded raging rivers and crossed the seas, put a man on the moon...it's forty freaking dollars. Shut that sum***** off and watch folks scramble. I, for one, would love to watch some ACLU lawyer try and argue in favor of people's right to watch television.

This ranks up there with "The Fairness in Media Doctrine" as yet another way to belittle the public.

[Feanor]

Good! It was a bad idea for government to mandate a technological advance that a large portion of Americans were not prepared for. In this instance, it would be better to let the technology set the pace, not government interference.

nightflier, I thought you were a progressive. :confused: Sometimes governments need to mandate things in the public interest. I presume they had somewhat valid reason doing it in the first place.

It's probably reasonable to ignore the voucher expiries and continue to issue them for awhile. The fact that the US gov has run out of funding for the $40 vouchers is bullsh!t. This must be view as liability of the government -- my creditors don't accept that I won't pay them because I've run out of funding.

I don't recall exactly what our governent is doing up here in the GWN, but the February deadline doesn't apply here. (O Kex, font of wisdom, do you happen to know?)

[E-Stat]

... about 7.8 million households or nearly 7 percent of people with TV's are completely unprepared for the deadline.
Since the legislation mandating the transition occurred over three years ago, this situation reminds me of all the folks who try to register to vote three days before an election and get their panties in a wad when they discover they've waited too late. Discrimination!

rw

[emaidel]

Since the legislation mandating the transition occurred over three years ago, this situation reminds me of all the folks who try to register to vote three days before an election and get their panties in a wad when they discover they've waited too late. Discrimination!

rw

That's the best response to this thread yet! The PR campaign for the upcoming changeover is unprecedented in its scope, yet there are still those 7 million folks who seemed to just look the other way, or ignore the situation altogether.

That the $40 credit from the government has run out (temporarily, I believe) is good enough reason to delay the transformation, but if it's people themselves not having paid attention to what's been in their faces now for over three years, that's another matter altogether.

I once rented an apartment that was going co-op. When the conversion plan arrived, several tenants created a Tenant Association that hired a lawyer to investigate the plan, and determine its fairness. This lawyer did an amazing job of taking a truly lousy plan, and turning it into a terrific one: Unfortunately, whenever a meeting was scheduled, only about 50 or so people turned up out of the 250 who were going to be affected. Once the deal was said and done, a final meeting took place to review what was forthcoming. Then the masses turned up, angry and yelling all over the place with, "I've got questions to ask!" and, "I never heard about this!" and other such nonsense.

I suspect much the same will be heard from those afffected by the changeover, no matter how much it's extended. Some people are just plain idiots.

[Mr Peabody]

Uh...., no, my post is the best, even if you do say so myself.

[mbbuchanan]

Why the hell not give every one a "free" box and then raise taxes 50 cents per check to recoup the dough?

[pixelthis]

Uh...., no, my post is the best, even if you do say so myself.


No its not, mine is, and here you go.
Like your typical liberal puke , excuse me, uninformed liberal puke, this thing he is proposing wont happen, the switch is being flipped.
AND to those of you who insist on being dragged kicking and screaming into the future...


tough cookies


Simply put, the bandwidth has already been SOLD.
The federales are bound to turn over these freaks, to not do so would cost BILLIONS
in fines, etc.
And Obama may , like most liberals, think hes above the law, but after paying the price for not turning over the freaks, the govt will be forced to turn them over anyway

As for you KEX I am surprized that you dont understand the importance of this.
Digital broadcasting has numerous advantages, including more channels for the one
bedroom walkup neon motel sign outside crowd.
Like RICHARD PRYOR said in the movie silver streak...
PAY THE MAN.
I pay 150+ a month for my media and modem, you will get no sympathy from me because your food stamps wont cover a 70 converter box.
Its not the end of the world.
THIS IS:1:

[Mr Peabody]

Pix, again, an excellent display of tact. I'm sure that not everyone who uses OTA is not receiving food stamps.

Saying "liberals think they're above the law" after the actions of the outgoing administration is so hypocritical I am left without words to even fire on you with. Not to mention the Reagan years, or Nixon.

[kexodusc]

nightflier, I thought you were a progressive. :confused: Sometimes governments need to mandate things in the public interest. I presume they had somewhat valid reason doing it in the first place.

It's probably reasonable to ignore the voucher expiries and continue to issue them for awhile. The fact that the US gov has run out of funding for the $40 vouchers is bullsh!t. This must be view as liability of the government -- my creditors don't accept that I won't pay them because I've run out of funding.

I don't recall exactly what our governent is doing up here in the GWN, but the February deadline doesn't apply here. (O Kex, font of wisdom, do you happen to know?)
No clue...I know even less about Canadian broadcast regulations (other than I've developed a severe hate-on for the CRTC in the time I've been here)...Okay, I vaguely recall Canada had a later deadline to give its industry time to adjust and make sure the message got out. Prolly coulda done that by 2009 though.

[kexodusc]

Punish people?

As a species we've come out of the cave, mastered fire and the atom, fjorded raging rivers and crossed the seas, put a man on the moon...it's forty freaking dollars. Shut that sum***** off and watch folks scramble. I, for one, would love to watch some ACLU lawyer try and argue in favor of people's right to watch television.

This ranks up there with "The Fairness in Media Doctrine" as yet another way to belittle the public.
Fair enough...we're not talking about rights here. I'm not a fan of a $40 voucher - I've been forced to upgrade technologies by my cell phone provider, internet provider, power and water utilities, etc, this coulda been the same deal-eeo...but once the government made that decision, it does have an obligation to honor them, make sure everyone gets them in a timely fashion, and they should probably have come with more than a 90 day limit.

I asked my folks and my bro about these...they don't know anything about them but they don't need'em either. Were they mailed to everyone or just available on demand? My guess is a good chunk of the 13 million unused vouchers are owned by people that have new TV's, cable boxes and don't need'em....

Think this is a bit of compassion mixed with optics on Obama's part. If you asked everyone who they thought were most likely to be affected by this, I'm betting "seniors" and "the poor" would be high on the list. Who wants to be the President that turned TV off on either of those groups in middle of a recession?

[Ajani]

I say turn it off any way. It's not like it's a pacemaker. If Obama's for education, going without TV for a span may be a good thing.

Ummm.... I see your point, but I think many of you are forgetting something:

TV is not just for watching comedies, sports and porn.... some people get all their NEWS from the TV.... that was the reason I saw cited as why Obama's team wants to delay the process.... they don't want to leave parts of America without access to local and national News.... If it was just a matter of a few hillbillies missing the current episode of Lost, they'd probably just make the switch and be done with it...

[Mr Peabody]

C'mon Kex, you know it takes a bit longer for the Mounty's to spread info up there.

Yes, the vouchers were available upon the asking. Why would you order one if you weren't planning to use it within 90 days? I think that is enough time. They shouldn't be asking for them if they couldn't use it at the time. I wonder though if they dated them the day they went out in the mail or if a bunch was printed with a date. That would be a different story if you received a 90 day voucher and only a week was left.

[Mr Peabody]

Ummm.... I see your point, but I think many of you are forgetting something:

TV is not just for watching comedies, sports and porn.... some people get all their NEWS from the TV.... that was the reason I saw cited as why Obama's team wants to delay the process.... they don't want to leave parts of America without access to local and national News.... If it was just a matter of a few hillbillies missing the current episode of Lost, they'd probably just make the switch and be done with it...

Yeah, I forgot, because of Pix's conservatives cutting back on wasteful spending like education in lieu of important stuff like over throwing other countries we now have people that are illiterate and can no longer read a newspaper or see no need to go to a library any more. Their radio may work though.

[Ajani]

Yeah, I forgot, because of Pix's conservatives cutting back on wasteful spending like education in lieu of important stuff like over throwing other countries we now have people that are illiterate and can no longer read a newspaper or see no need to go to a library any more. Their radio may work though.

Yep, sadly too many are illiterate, so newspaper is not an option and they may or may not have a working radio....

For people like most (or maybe all) of us on this site, we can: a) easily afford the $40 b) read - so that means internet and newspapers are other options for the news c) have or can afford to buy a working radio...

[02audionoob]

Although Pix's conservatives might have their priorities misplaced, spending more on coups than education didn't deny our nation's illiterates the right to learn to read. It's embarrassing that the illiteracy numbers are so high and that the USA's schools are low on the global totem pole, but the federal government couldn't have corrected that if they tried. There's something just basically different in our society. Go to south Texas where the illiteracy numbers are high and ask someone born and raised on the farms how important they think it is. The answer will not be what you'd hope.

[Luvin Da Blues]

C'mon Kex, you know it takes a bit longer for the Mounty's to spread info up there.

Bawawawawawa, maybe the Canadian government should issue $40 coupons to so we can all upgrade from horses to autos.

[kexodusc]

C'mon Kex, you know it takes a bit longer for the Mounty's to spread info up there.

Yes, the vouchers were available upon the asking. Why would you order one if you weren't planning to use it within 90 days? I think that is enough time. They shouldn't be asking for them if they couldn't use it at the time. I wonder though if they dated them the day they went out in the mail or if a bunch was printed with a date. That would be a different story if you received a 90 day voucher and only a week was left.

Okay, better informed now, I'm a bit angry. If people are stupid enough to order a voucher and let it expire, that's their own stupid fault. If they order it and it's late getting to them, or the program ran out of money, that's different.

[pixelthis]

Yeah, I forgot, because of Pix's conservatives cutting back on wasteful spending like education in lieu of important stuff like over throwing other countries we now have people that are illiterate and can no longer read a newspaper or see no need to go to a library any more. Their radio may work though.

MY conservatives?
I am a libertarian mr pee pee, figure out the diff between the two(its huge)
The one justification of govt is regulation of commerce, this is clearly in their perveiw.
THEY FIRST STARTED formulating HD in 1988, DTV was an outgrowth.
ITS OVER TWENTY YEARS NOW, TIME TO CUT THE CORD.
A converter is 45 bucks, gives you a better picture.
ITS TIME, time to MOVE THE FRACK ON.
If you dont like it or dont want to pay 45$, dont want to pay for anything you can get out of, you go to the library to rent DVD's, fine.
Sit in walmart and watch your "TV".:1:

[BradH]

Wait a minute, something doesn't add up. 14 million coupons expired and they still ran out of money? WTF??

I always knew this was going to be one huge cluster. It just had to be. The coupon deal just makes it worse. Sure, regulation of the broadcast frequencies is paid for by tax dollars so, in that sense, citizens do actually have a right to access the airwaves. But tax dollars fund regulation of all the airwaves. So, am I entitled to a coupon for a police scanner? Since when do citizens have a right to hardware? I don't buy the illiteracy argument either, it's a nonsensical extreme postiion. (If you're talking to a farmworker in south Texas you'd better be bilingual.) As for the poor, they can get their news from the newspapers and be better informed for it. TV journalism is about entertainment and nothing else. You want the weather? There's this new thing called a radio...

It's not as if anyone's going to suffer an information blackout. Rather, they're going to experience an entertainment brown out.

[nightflier]

Feanor,

I may be a progressive, but with moderation, my friend. I would rather let technology companies set the pace of change than let a sudden, and thus much more disruptive, switch do it overnight. There are enough examples in our history where a sudden change mandated by an overzealous government has caused more hardship than if the change was allowed to happen more slowly. Granted, corporations have also been guilty of this, but the real problem is with how sudden the change occurs. Society doesn't take kindly to that. Kind of like the difference between yelling fire in a crowded theater or asking people to leave calmly - surely we all agree that that second option will result in less problems all around.

Yes, I hear the chaos-mongers here screaming for someone to just flip the switch. But the fact is that they have either already purchased a digital medium or have the means to do without. If we were talking about something that would have the same result but would affect them too - something like a national day without power for example, they'd be reaching for their shotguns and raising the flag of rebellion yelling "Not on my watch!" Let's face it, very few of us are capable of turning off our TVs and stereos for a whole day. For the poor folks in South Texas, Appalachia, Indian Reservations, the inner cities, and our forgotten rural America, the TV is the stereo, the HT, and the entirety of the entertainment system; and they don't spend $150 a month on it, they get it OTA. Flipping the switch for this large underrepresented population will probably not be good for anyone.

Now, with that said, we're talking about TV, here. Mr. P brings up a good point that a day without it could be good for all of us and I would probably support such a proposal. But that ignores the wishes & fears of the broadcasters, the advertisers, and also our government. They all have their reasons for keeping people off the streets and captive to their consumerist pitches. Let's not forget that the biggest, most wasteful consumers in our society are also our poorest and least educated masses. Yes the upper crust buys up a lot or higher-priced goods, but the largest numbers of small, consumable, and low-quality goods and services are purchased by the poorer, less educated masses, and that stuff is hawked on the boob-tubes of America. It's not the "news" that the corporations and government want people to continue to receive from their programming, but the commercials in between the news. Commercials serve two purposes: they create demand for goods and services and they stupefy the viewers to keep watching in their homes.

I distinctly remember the last time we had rolling black-outs here in SoCal. I saw more people on the streets during those times than I ever saw before - it was almost surreal. Now imagine the same thing, but this time it's just the poor uneducated masses roaming the streets. Think the government wants that? Think businesses want that? No, not really. If you then also add to that the charged political climate with all the McCain supporters representing the vast majority of these folks (kind of funny how that works out, huh?). Many of these folks (Pix, this is you) having stocked up on guns and bullets in the last few months, and you throw in the unemployment numbers, the homeless, a couple of strikes, a demonstration or two (SAG, Teamsters, Pro-Israel/Pro-Palestine, whatever), and then just for good measure you toss in a controversial police shooting in SF, and you have the makings of a real problem. We can go even further, if you like: the National Guard is deployed on the other side of the globe, states can't afford to pay police officers, firefighters, and ambulance drivers, and for an extra little bit of spice we'll inaugurate the first black president in history.

Oh, trust me, there's a whole lot of people who would much rather have that old reliable opiate in place to keep people glued to their TVs. Let's admit, that all of us also would prefer that. Well maybe not Pix, but he's special.

[BradH]

If you then also add to that the charged political climate with all the McCain supporters representing the vast majority of these folks (kind of funny how that works out, huh?). Many of these folks (Pix, this is you) having stocked up on guns and bullets in the last few months, and you throw in the unemployment numbers, the homeless, a couple of strikes, a demonstration or two (SAG, Teamsters, Pro-Israel/Pro-Palestine, whatever),...

It would appear you're no stranger to "chaos mongering" yourself. You're also giving the Powers That Be too much credit for thinking about this in any strategic way. This is a common trait among people on the left and far right who obsess over imagined govt/corporate conspiracy theories. The federal govt. just isn't that smart or organized. Think about it: The masses already had televisions. If the govt. was so desparate to give them their opium they wouldn't have pushed for a switch to HDTV, at least certainly not in this drastic way with no downward compatibility like color in the '60's.

[bobsticks]

Now imagine the same thing, but this time it's just the poor uneducated masses roaming the streets.

That's a fairly proto-fascitic thing to type for a libertarian...hehehe. Seriously, though I think you're underestimating the resourcefulness of addicts, and by stating that I am recognizing the validity of your cribbed Marxist header. We're not talking about $500.00 or $1000.00 dollars, we're talking about 40 bucks. Any smackhead can come up with that.



(Thread Cross Alert)

Granted, I wouldn't want to claim pix either but when did anti-gun ownership formally become part of the Libertarian platform?

[Feanor]

Feanor,

I may be a progressive, but with moderation, my friend. ...

Oh, trust me, there's a whole lot of people who would much rather have that old reliable opiate in place to keep people glued to their TVs. Let's admit, that all of us also would prefer that. Well maybe not Pix, but he's special.

Me, I'm very progressive but I'm not a soft touch bleeding heart. If anything, I'd have just said "Digital only starting February '09: live with it". No $40 coupon, piss on ya.

Fears of an armed uprising on account of digital are apocryphal. On the other hand, no so much so on account of other problems the US has got. Can't blame the unwashed: it's all really the fault of the global economy, the rich, and a$$hole, head-in-the-ground, right-wing politicians. There have been plenty of a$$hole "liberal" politicians too, but their assholishness pales by comparison.

[Mr Peabody]

[QUOTE=BradH]Wait a minute, something doesn't add up. 14 million coupons expired and they still ran out of money? WTF??

Now there's a good observation.

[pixelthis]

Feanor,

I may be a progressive, but with moderation, my friend. I would rather let technology companies set the pace of change than let a sudden, and thus much more disruptive, switch do it overnight. There are enough examples in our history where a sudden change mandated by an overzealous government has caused more hardship than if the change was allowed to happen more slowly. Granted, corporations have also been guilty of this, but the real problem is with how sudden the change occurs. Society doesn't take kindly to that. Kind of like the difference between yelling fire in a crowded theater or asking people to leave calmly - surely we all agree that that second option will result in less problems all around.

Yes, I hear the chaos-mongers here screaming for someone to just flip the switch. But the fact is that they have either already purchased a digital medium or have the means to do without. If we were talking about something that would have the same result but would affect them too - something like a national day without power for example, they'd be reaching for their shotguns and raising the flag of rebellion yelling "Not on my watch!" Let's face it, very few of us are capable of turning off our TVs and stereos for a whole day. For the poor folks in South Texas, Appalachia, Indian Reservations, the inner cities, and our forgotten rural America, the TV is the stereo, the HT, and the entirety of the entertainment system; and they don't spend $150 a month on it, they get it OTA. Flipping the switch for this large underrepresented population will probably not be good for anyone.

Now, with that said, we're talking about TV, here. Mr. P brings up a good point that a day without it could be good for all of us and I would probably support such a proposal. But that ignores the wishes & fears of the broadcasters, the advertisers, and also our government. They all have their reasons for keeping people off the streets and captive to their consumerist pitches. Let's not forget that the biggest, most wasteful consumers in our society are also our poorest and least educated masses. Yes the upper crust buys up a lot or higher-priced goods, but the largest numbers of small, consumable, and low-quality goods and services are purchased by the poorer, less educated masses, and that stuff is hawked on the boob-tubes of America. It's not the "news" that the corporations and government want people to continue to receive from their programming, but the commercials in between the news. Commercials serve two purposes: they create demand for goods and services and they stupefy the viewers to keep watching in their homes.

I distinctly remember the last time we had rolling black-outs here in SoCal. I saw more people on the streets during those times than I ever saw before - it was almost surreal. Now imagine the same thing, but this time it's just the poor uneducated masses roaming the streets. Think the government wants that? Think businesses want that? No, not really. If you then also add to that the charged political climate with all the McCain supporters representing the vast majority of these folks (kind of funny how that works out, huh?). Many of these folks (Pix, this is you) having stocked up on guns and bullets in the last few months, and you throw in the unemployment numbers, the homeless, a couple of strikes, a demonstration or two (SAG, Teamsters, Pro-Israel/Pro-Palestine, whatever), and then just for good measure you toss in a controversial police shooting in SF, and you have the makings of a real problem. We can go even further, if you like: the National Guard is deployed on the other side of the globe, states can't afford to pay police officers, firefighters, and ambulance drivers, and for an extra little bit of spice we'll inaugurate the first black president in history.

Oh, trust me, there's a whole lot of people who would much rather have that old reliable opiate in place to keep people glued to their TVs. Let's admit, that all of us also would prefer that. Well maybe not Pix, but he's special.


OVERNIGHT???
They have been planning this for over a decade, and have put it off twice!
So when are they going to get around to this, finally.
And where is the logic in making 300 million wait for 7 million?
Oh, I forgot, you liberals(or progressives, or whatever) are above logic.:1:

[pixelthis]

Pix, again, an excellent display of tact. I'm sure that not everyone who uses OTA is not receiving food stamps.

Saying "liberals think they're above the law" after the actions of the outgoing administration is so hypocritical I am left without words to even fire on you with. Not to mention the Reagan years, or Nixon.


Then if they dont think they are above the law, then why are they calvileary talking about
reneging on it?


You and others DONT GET IT.
Neither does your new. clueless maximum leader.
The analog frequencies have been auctioned off.
There are NO "analog " channels to keep broadcasting on!

THOUSANDS of businesses have made plans for these channels, have paid BILLIONS
when they were auctioned off.
What are you gonna, tell em to just forget it ?
DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WILL GET IN DAMAGES?

We are talking Billions (with a capital B) here.
Contracts have beem signed, deals have been made.
The FCC has allocated these old analog channels to the new uses.
So if you decide to "hold off" on the transistion , what do you intend to broadcast the old analog channels ON?
CB radio?
And what are you going to broadcast WITH?
The stations have dismantled the analog gear, and a lot of it is heading for the third world
as we speak.
Typical delusional liberal, you want something you think you should get it by snapping
your fingers.
Well. AINT GONNA HAPPEN.
In Feb the analog stations ARE GOING DARK.
NOT DIM LIKE YOUR TYPICAL LIBERAL CONCIOUSNESS ...
DARK :1:

[bobsticks]

OVERNIGHT???
They have been planning this for over a decade, and have put it off twice!
So when are they going to get around to this, finally.
And where is the logic in making 300 million wait for 7 million?
Oh, I forgot, you liberals(or progressives, or whatever) are above logic.:1:

Pix is correct about this, as he is about the potential legal ramifications of continued delay...

...so in addition to thos sobering realities I leave this dead topic with one additional thought: it's forty freaking dollars! If one missed the many opportunities to take advantage of the government's largesse and still can't afford the measly two twenties, then maybe one could find some wiser and more productive use of their time than vegging in front of the tube.

And, if the streets fill with drooling zombies so be it...

[GMichael]

Sorry that I have not included myself in this thread until now. (or even after now) My input is this. I don't give a flying fig newton. There, I said it. I'll be out back if anyone wants to beat me up.

[bobsticks]

You'll care when the streets are full of zombies...

[BradH]

Now there's a good observation.

I just read La Maestra at HDTVMagazine.com. Check this out: the 22 million estimate of coupons was based on houses that had OTA only but the requirement to prove eligibility will only apply if Congress is asked for funds for an additional 11 million coupons. Meanwhile, the Feds got dinged by millions of cable/sat subscribers who had extra TV's in their house receiving OTA only.

I love it when a plan comes together.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!

[GMichael]

You'll care when the streets are full of zombies...

Have you been on the streets lately? Who would notice the change?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Yeah, zombies drive cars where I live.

OT: I'm with GM. Couldn't care less about OTA anymore. :nonod:

[Duds]

I'm happy Obama is concentrating on this issue...

[GMichael]

True. It is way more important than anything else on his plate.

[nightflier]

OVERNIGHT???
They have been planning this for over a decade, and have put it off twice!

Government plans for decades for all kinds of stuff, but only when it actually acts (and that is seldom) do people get their panties in a bunch.

Sticks, you're starting to side more and more with Pix. Should someone call for an intervention?

And regarding the $40, my guess is that it's not just the money. It's also the fact that they have to request the voucher, then go to the store, pick one out, and then plug it in. Most of these folks stared for years at the flashing 12:00 on their VCR's, and the only reason they bought that DVD player at Walmart is because the supermarket rental wasn't carrying tapes anymore. These people aren't exactly the ones to propel the A/V industry forward - rather they are the ones that drag it down.

BradH,

I'm not saying that government is that smart and I'm certainly not suggesting conspiracies. What I am saying is that this is a particularly unusual time with a lot of events coming together into what could certainly become the perfect storm with the right kind of spark. Swarming, drooling zombies, I doubt it, but why tempt fate? I certainly don't think that the SDZ (for lack of a better term for swarming drooling zombies) is the reason for the delay, but I don't think the bow-tie bean-counters that advise Washington are stupid enough to ignore the added effect. Let's not forget that an unusually large percentage of the SDZ will be pissed-off gun-toting Bush/McCain supporters just itching for payback. But I'll give you that the main reason is simply that Washington doesn't have the money, or that they did and used it for something else (typical).

Regarding the lawsuits, I'm sure that once the first lawyers start appearing at the white house door, Obama will go ahead and let the switch happen. Everything we've heard about him is that he respects people/corporations with deep pockets and he's no stranger to the legal process. My guess is that it will take a few weeks, maybe months and by then the factors I mentioned above will then be lessened. If anything, my guess is that he'll postpone it until after the spring sports, and I don't think the advertisers will mind so much, either. Maybe it will be a gradual switch-over. How many companies are really ready to start using the analog bandwidth they've purchased right away? Not too many, I'm guessing. Pix's fear mongering on this is overrated.

Speaking of pix,


And where is the logic in making 300 million wait for 7 million?

Seven million SDZ. That's no small number. Let's hope they stay in South Texas, or wherever Pix is from.

[Woochifer]

No clue...I know even less about Canadian broadcast regulations (other than I've developed a severe hate-on for the CRTC in the time I've been here)...Okay, I vaguely recall Canada had a later deadline to give its industry time to adjust and make sure the message got out. Prolly coulda done that by 2009 though.

The Canadian transition is supposed to happen sometime in 2011. They were smart by waiting to see what chaos ensues in the U.S. and then seeing how not to handle the DTV transition. There are several other countries due to begin their DTV transitions, but those are still years away. The U.S. is pretty much the guinea pig. The TV stations in my area have been running DTV signal tests and PSAs for months, but a lot of people won't know what it all means until the signal goes dark. And it's not just customers that watch TV with OTA antennas that are getting screwed with.

I know that the cable companies have been muddying the waters by not making it clear that people can still basic analog cable after the OTA signals get turned off. The $14 basic service in my neighborhood includes both the analog and digital signals for OTA stations, but Comcast doesn't even have information about this basic service on their website. They're trying to upsell everybody, including current customers, to digital cable, which is a lot more TV than people watching OTA signals want.


Yes, the vouchers were available upon the asking. Why would you order one if you weren't planning to use it within 90 days? I think that is enough time. They shouldn't be asking for them if they couldn't use it at the time. I wonder though if they dated them the day they went out in the mail or if a bunch was printed with a date. That would be a different story if you received a 90 day voucher and only a week was left.

Actually, I ordered one of the converter box vouchers because they were available and free, and I wasn't sure if one of our TVs would get moved into a room without a cable connection. I now got about 2 weeks left on the $40 coupon, and I'm not sure if I'll use it, give it to somebody who needs it, or just let it expire. From what I've seen, most of the converter boxes cost more than $40, and they are butt ugly so my wife will probably not want me to bring one into the house, regardless of whether or not I paid anything for it.

[Woochifer]

I just read La Maestra at HDTVMagazine.com. Check this out: the 22 million estimate of coupons was based on houses that had OTA only but the requirement to prove eligibility will only apply if Congress is asked for funds for an additional 11 million coupons. Meanwhile, the Feds got dinged by millions of cable/sat subscribers who had extra TV's in their house receiving OTA only.

I love it when a plan comes together.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!

Yep, I've got basic cable, satellite, AND a couple of $40 vouchers just in case I decide to move one of the TVs and use the OTA antenna!

[Smokey]

Yep, I've got basic cable, satellite, AND a couple of $40 vouchers just in case I decide to move one of the TVs and use the OTA antenna!

Dam it Wooch, you suppose to get the coupon if you only have OTA :shocked:

I think that is where all trouble start. Households getting coupons that have satellite or cable also. I have cable with analog TV, and thinking of getting a coupon since cable company does not carry all of local digital channels.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Did you wash your hat yet tumbleweed?:mad5:

[Mr Peabody]

I thought all the analog space left void after the switch was designated for emergency type agencies to use.

Tomorrow's front page: U.S. 2nd Civil War Sparked By No Analog TV To Watch.

Will garlic keep zombies away?

[Mr Peabody]

Remember Wooch, you only have 90 days.

[Smokey]

Did you wash your hat yet tumbleweed?:mad5:

No.

As I said before, I will lose my seniority at the water cooler :D

[Luvin Da Blues]

I'm sure they would have assigned wider bandwidths for emergency use then auctioned of the remaining.

[pixelthis]

I thought all the analog space left void after the switch was designated for emergency type agencies to use.

Tomorrow's front page: U.S. 2nd Civil War Sparked By No Analog TV To Watch.

Will garlic keep zombies away?


no BUT LCD TV will.
All of the zombies are plasma fanboys:1:

[BradH]

...but I don't think the bow-tie bean-counters that advise Washington are stupid enough to ignore the added effect. Let's not forget that an unusually large percentage of the SDZ will be pissed-off gun-toting Bush/McCain supporters just itching for payback.

The pissed-off-gun-toting Bush/McCain supporters aren't going to shoot anybody. I have to say, you have a binary, cartoon-like view of the political landscape that's as dark and extreme as pix's. The bean counters in Washington don't have that view, they just count beans. (My wife would kill me right about now, she's a CPA). I come down center-right on economics but foreign affairs is my thing. Given that, I couldn't in good conscience vote for either canditate this election, just couldn't do it. Just so you know where I stand.

Big O is asking for a 3-month extension but I don't think he cares either way. It's like his comments on the BCS poll, a little something to keep is name mentioned around the water cooler until inauguration day. There's a very important sports/performance element to politics & he's damn good at it. Meanwhile, Verizon is saying hell no, make the switch because too much planning & investment has been scheduled around it.

[Ajani]

The bean counters in Washington don't have that view, they just count beans. (My wife would kill me right about now, she's a CPA).

Hence? I'm a CPA too and I've never counted a bean in my life... hell, I don't even eat beans... they give me gas... :ciappa:


I wonder if that was the best smiley to use, considering my statement about Gas?

[BradH]

I wonder if that was the best smiley to use, considering my statement about Gas?

I was waiting for something to happen...

[Rich-n-Texas]

Hence? I'm a CPA too and I've never counted a bean in my life... hell, I don't even eat beans... they give me gas... :ciappa:


I wonder if that was the best smiley to use, considering my statement about Gas?
Want my opinion Ajani? :ihih:

[GMichael]

Want my opinion Ajani? :ihih:

Say no. Please.

[nightflier]

The pissed-off-gun-toting Bush/McCain supporters aren't going to shoot anybody. I have to say, you have a binary, cartoon-like view of the political landscape that's as dark and extreme as pix's.

OK, I'll admit, I was being facetious; trying to insert a little light humor into it.

But I certainly don't consider myself an extremist with a "cartoon-like view of the political landscape," and absolutely nowhere near Pix's place on the spectrum.


The bean counters in Washington don't have that view, they just count beans. (My wife would kill me right about now, she's a CPA). I come down center-right on economics but foreign affairs is my thing. Given that, I couldn't in good conscience vote for either canditate this election, just couldn't do it.

Well that's odd, because if you did have foreign experience you'd realize that putting yourself center-right here, pretty much puts you on the extreme right in most other Westernized countries. Take for example your inability to vote for either candidate. Obama certainly had a more pragmatic, international, diplomacy-centered perspective than McCain's cowboy approach. Being undecided between these two choices on the foreign affairs front is not at all what I would expect someone who is knowledgeable in the field to be unclear about. If you're wondering, the foreign service corps and our military personnel, particularly the top brass, overwhelmingly voted for Obama and not McCain, according to the Economist.


Just so you know where I stand.

Well, actually, I can't quite figure that out.


Big O is asking for a 3-month extension but I don't think he cares either way. It's like his comments on the BCS poll, a little something to keep is name mentioned around the water cooler until inauguration day.

This is your speculation, and a very negative one at that. It's quite clear you don't like Obama. Well tough. Hes going to be around for the next four years at least. And so far, it sure looks like a whole lot of people are sick & tired of cowboy politics and can't wait for him to start, so he's riding pretty high right now with the mainstream American public.


There's a very important sports/performance element to politics & he's damn good at it.

Care to elaborate on that little gem?


Meanwhile, Verizon is saying hell no, make the switch because too much planning & investment has been scheduled around it.

Well of course, the one company that paid the most for their share of the spectrum is pushing for the government to go forward full bore. But that's just one corporation, and perhaps the one with the deepest pockets too. I doubt the other players are as gung-ho and ready to switch. Obviously from what others have been writing, the cable companies aren't all that ready.

[Rich-n-Texas]

OK, I'll admit, I was being facetious; trying to insert a little light humor into it...
No you weren't. You were challenged and crumbled like a house of cards! :lol:

(he he snicker snicker)

[Ajani]

Want my opinion Ajani? :ihih:

Nope :ciappa:

[GMichael]

Nope :ciappa:

Tanx:lol:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Jerks! :dita:

[BradH]

Take for example your inability to vote for either candidate. Obama certainly had a more pragmatic, international, diplomacy-centered perspective than McCain's cowboy approach. Being undecided between these two choices on the foreign affairs front is not at all what I would expect someone who is knowledgeable in the field to be unclear about.

I'm not saying I have foreign policy experience, I'm just saying that's where my interest lies. I didn't vote for Obama because I disagreed with his domestic view, although at this point it's not entirely clear what his view really is. As for foreign policy, he was pretty much an open book as far as I could tell. I didn't fault him for having very little actual experience or deep knowledge of foreign affairs, what candidate ever did who wasn't a sitting vice-president? These things always come down to who the advisors are and, unfortunately, there's no way to tell beforehand. But McCain wanted to kick Russia out of the G-8 which was the depth of stupidity. When he said, "We're all Georgians now," I thought WTF?? Really? Then he ran around like a chicken with his head cut off during the TARP vote while Obama played the cool customer. Guess which behavior the markets like? McCain suffuered from being in Congress too long. The legislative way of thinking is not very useful in an executive capacity and it was hard to tell what he thought most of the time anyway. So I just said screw it. There was no mystery who was going to win anyway. Despite the media driven polls, you could see the electoral college a mile away.

[pixelthis]

I am not "anti gun".
Doesnt anybody on this board have any reading comprehension skills?
A libertarian once was asked how far the ownership of guns should go, and he replied
"well, if everybody was packin nukes there sure wouldnt be a 40% tax rate, now would there?".
I carried a gun for fifteen years as a law officer.
I like what Robert heinlein said about guns.
"You are a pink slug made up mostly of water, if you have a gun you are a pink slug
made mostly of water with a gun.
Guns are a tool and can be quite handy.
Liberals think they are a totem of evil(most liberals are like savages with a complete
set of supersitous beleifs).
I tell you one thing, without a means to defend yourself there is no political freedom
whatsoever.
The first thing tyrants do when they take over is confiscate the weapons.
The liberal eagerness to do so betrays their real agenda more than anything else.:1:

[BradH]

This is your speculation, and a very negative one at that. It's quite clear you don't like Obama. Well tough. He's going to be around for the next four years at least.

I just realized that some of those quotes in your post with pix's name on them were actually mine so...I actually read them. I guess I should respond.

From your above quote it appears the proper speculation about everything Obama says would be the positive speculation. Got it.



There's a very important sports/performance element to politics & he's damn good at it.

Care to elaborate on that little gem?

Sure. Politics is partly a game that involves tactical and strategic performance. It's a very important part of politics too because if you suck at the game then you're not going to be successful. And Obama's damn good at that part. For example, he defeated the Clinton machine in the primaries and then co-opted them after he won so he wouldn't have to spend the next four years pushing back and triangulating around them. Once he locks in Hillary he throws on a layer of special envoys directly answerable to him so she's basically stuck with reforming the State Dept. And he knows she can do it too because they luuuuuuv them some Hillary at State. That might piss her off but she knows which side her bread is buttered on. That's strategic performance. The non-issue of the HDTV switchover is a small example. He's got bigger fish to fry but meanwhile he's letting the peeps know he feels their pain.


Obviously from what others have been writing, the cable companies aren't all that ready.

The cable companies don't have to be ready. They're cable.

[Rich-n-Texas]

I just realized that some of those quotes in your post with pix's name on them were actually mine so...I actually read them. I guess I should respond.
BradH, you have to read pixies posts carefully, he's brain dead when it comes to using the little tools that are there to help us with our posts. :lol:

[BradH]

BradH, you have to read pixies posts carefully, he's brain dead when it comes to using the little tools that are there to help us with our posts. :lol:

Well, sumpin' ain't right.

Who's on first?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Well, sumpin' ain't right.

Who's on first?
We've already had that discussion.. didn't make any difference. Some people, you just can't reach.

[Mr Peabody]

[QUOTE=pixelthis]I am not "anti gun".
Doesnt anybody on this board have any reading comprehension skills?
A libertarian once was asked how far the ownership of guns should go, and he replied
"well, if everybody was packin nukes there sure wouldnt be a 40% tax rate, now would there?".

* Huh? What's that mean?

I carried a gun for fifteen years as a law officer.

* It would seem as a law officer you'd know first hand what scum lurks in the streets and wouldn't be without your gun until death.

I like what Robert heinlein said about guns.
"You are a pink slug made up mostly of water, if you have a gun you are a pink slug
made mostly of water with a gun.

* You like that? Dr. Seuss wrote more profound words. What Heinlein wrote makes no sense at all. You need to read better philosophy. If he's a Libertarian no wonder they never gain traction as a party.

Guns are a tool and can be quite handy.

* Whatcha going to do when you need your tool, tool?

Liberals think they are a totem of evil(most liberals are like savages with a complete
set of supersitous beleifs).

* Who's "they"? Are you saying Liberals think of themselves as totems of evil? Now you say Liberals worship the devil? Isn't Supersitous an old folks disease?

Here's some philosophy for you.
" You took his land and you ate his corn.
And on his grave your land was born
You took his pride and fed him dirt
You wished him winter without a shirt
And you called this red man savage
After you crushed him, you helped him up
To let him drink from a empty cup
You gave him the navy without the fleet
You made him lick your hand and kiss your feet
You called this mad dog savage
Well I found a book one day
Looked up red and white to see what it say
One was a savage, the other unlearned
Like a look in the mirror, the tables were turned
Because history has named you savage.....
------J D Blackfoot

I tell you one thing, without a means to defend yourself there is no political freedom
whatsoever.

* Ah! I get it, Libertarians are for no political freedom, hence, no gun.

The first thing tyrants do when they take over is confiscate the weapons.

* Well you'll be a short order when they do

The liberal eagerness to do so betrays their real agenda more than anything else.:

Confinscating guns would be like sweeping sand from the beach. My take on gun control, I don't think criminals go into the local sporting goods store to buy their weapons. On the other hand, if their weren't any out here to steal.... Man, I hate when I debate myself. Let me and myself hash this out a bit and I'll tell you more later.

[Ajani]

A libertarian once was asked how far the ownership of guns should go, and he replied
"well, if everybody was packin nukes there sure wouldnt be a 40% tax rate, now would there?".

There also wouldn't be any life on the planet as the lunatic anarchists and religious extremists would have blown us all the f..k up decades ago....


Liberals think they are a totem of evil(most liberals are like savages with a complete
set of supersitous beleifs).

Another well reasoned and logical argument. :sosp:


I tell you one thing, without a means to defend yourself there is no political freedom
whatsoever.
The first thing tyrants do when they take over is confiscate the weapons.
The liberal eagerness to do so betrays their real agenda more than anything else.:1:

Guns are a tough call... being able to defend yourself with extreme violence makes it much harder for tyrants to take you over... but it also makes it much harder to have a civilized society.... Why does America have such a nasty reputation for School shootings and postal shootings and just shootings in general? because there are so many f..king guns... It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the more guns you have available, the more likely it is that lunatics and criminals will get their hands on them.... So the question is really: do you want a more civilized society (which could more easily be controlled by tyrants) or do you want a Wild West style society (where a tyrant would have little chance of making a play)?

[Rich-n-Texas]

"Guns don't kill people... people kill people"

In my mind, the REAL question is... why are there so many lunatics in this country?

(Disclaimer: This isn't a political post, it's a sociological post)

[Ajani]

"Guns don't kill people... people kill people"

In my mind, the REAL question is... why are there so many lunatics in this country?

(Disclaimer: This isn't a political post, it's a sociological post)

I can't believe I'm saying this about one of Rich's posts but: That's actually a profound question...

My suspicion is that there are just as many lunatics everywhere else... it's just about the ability of lunatics to access weapons of mass murder... In the Caribbean (and it seems parts of South America and Africa as well) we also suffer from having too many guns and ridiculously high murder rates...

As much as I understand and respect the right to bear arms.... I question whether it hurts more than it helps... one of the most ridiculous things that happened sometime back when I was living in Jamaica, was that criminals were deliberately targeting licensed firearm holders, in order to steal their weapons... Just think about how stupid that is... you buy a gun to protect yourself and deter criminals and it has just the opposite effect...

[GMichael]

Do more people really get shot in this country? Or is it that it just makes the news more often?

[Ajani]

Do more people really get shot in this country? Or is it that it just makes the news more often?

Yes... more people get shot in the US than in the UK or Canada... (even without running a Google search I'm willing to make that statement)... In some countries, it's very rare for someone to be shot & would actually get more coverage than in the US news...

[GMichael]

These are the rankings I found. The numbers are per 1000 people.

1 Swaziland 30.70
2 Angola 24.44
3 Lesotho 22.33
4 Sierra Leone 22.26
5 Liberia 21.45
6 Zambia 21.35
7 Mozambique 20.29
8 Niger 20.26
9 Afghanistan 19.56
10 Djibouti 19.16
11 Central African Republic 18.04
12 Malawi 17.89
13 Zimbabwe 17.29
14 South Africa 16.94
15 Nigeria 16.88
16 Chad 16.39
17 Mali 16.16
18 Russia 16.06
19 Guinea-Bissau 16.05
20 Ukraine 15.93
21 Somalia 15.89
22 Rwanda 14.46
23 Bulgaria 14.30
24 Namibia 14.07
25 Botswana 14.02
26 Belarus 13.92
27 Sudan 13.64
28 Latvia 13.63
29 Burkina Faso 13.59
30 Estonia 13.35
31 Hungary 12.99
32 Monaco 12.96
33 Tanzania 12.92
34 Burundi 12.91
35 Gabon 12.59
36 Cameroon 12.41
37 Uganda 12.32
38 Republic of the Congo 12.28
39 Democratic Republic of the Congo 11.88
40 Romania 11.84
41 Ethiopia 11.83
42 Gambia 11.74
— Western Sahara 11.74
43 Croatia 11.66
44 Mauritania 11.61
45 Guinea 11.29
46 Cote d'Ivoire 11.17
47 Lithuania 11.12
— Isle of Man 11.02
48 Laos 11.02
49 Trinidad and Tobago 10.93
50 Germany 10.80
51 Moldova 10.80
52 Senegal 10.72
53 Czech Republic 10.69
54 Portugal 10.62
55 Italy 10.61
56 Slovenia 10.51
57 Greece 10.42
— European Union 10.39
58 Belgium 10.38
59 Kenya 10.30
60 Denmark 10.25
61 Sweden 10.24
62 Haiti 10.15
— Guernsey 10.09
63 United Kingdom 10.05
64 Finland 10.00
65 Poland 9.99
66 Austria 9.91
67 Spain 9.90
68 Equatorial Guinea 9.72
69 Benin 9.69
70 Georgia 9.51
71 Slovakia 9.50
72 Togo 9.48
— Gibraltar 9.46
73 Ghana 9.39
74 Kazakhstan 9.39
— Jersey 9.36
75 Norway 9.33
76 Japan 9.26
77 Burma 9.23
78 Bahamas 9.22
79 Uruguay 9.12
80 Nepal 8.97
— Montserrat 8.86
81 Macedonia 8.81
82 Netherlands 8.71
— Faroe Islands 8.67
83 Eritrea 8.63
84 Barbados 8.58
85 Bosnia and Herzegovina 8.54
86 Switzerland 8.54
87 Montenegro 8.51
88 France 8.48
89 Luxembourg 8.43
90 San Marino 8.37
91 Armenia 8.34
92 Azerbaijan 8.32
93 Madagascar 8.32
94 Dominica 8.32
95 Guyana 8.29
96 Malta 8.29
97 United States 8.27
— Greenland 8.23
— World 8.23
98 Saint Kitts and Nevis 8.19
99 Cambodia 8.16
100 Bangladesh 8.00
— Bermuda 7.98
101 Kiribati 7.97
— Puerto Rico 7.88
102 Pakistan 7.85
103 Yemen 7.83
104 Ireland 7.77
105 Comoros 7.76
106 Cyprus 7.76
— Aruba 7.65
107 Canada 7.61
108 Vanuatu 7.61
109 Bhutan 7.54
110 Argentina 7.43
111 Liechtenstein 7.42
— Mayotte 7.36
112 Bolivia 7.35
113 Korea, North 7.29
114 Cuba 7.19
115 Thailand 7.17
116 China 7.03
117 New Zealand 7.00
118 Tuvalu 6.98
119 Kyrgyzstan 6.97
120 Papua New Guinea 6.96
121 Tajikistan 6.94
122 Iceland 6.81
— Saint Pierre and Miquelon 6.81
123 Palau 6.73
124 Saint Lucia 6.71
125 Australia 6.68
— Taiwan 6.65
— Hong Kong 6.60
— Saint Helena 6.58
126 Mauritius 6.55
— U.S. Virgin Islands 6.55
127 Nauru 6.54
— Netherlands Antilles 6.43
128 India 6.40
129 Jamaica 6.37
130 Brazil 6.35
131 Grenada 6.31
132 Cape Verde 6.26
133 Indonesia 6.24
134 Seychelles 6.21
135 Vietnam 6.18
136 Mongolia 6.16
137 Peru 6.16
138 Antigua and Barbuda 6.14
139 Turkmenistan 6.11
140 Sri Lanka 6.07
141 Lebanon 6.06
142 Timor-Leste 6.02
143 Turkey 6.02
144 Sao Tome and Principe 5.98
145 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 5.96
146 Samoa 5.84
147 Belize 5.77
148 Chile 5.77
149 South Korea 5.73
150 Iran 5.69
151 Fiji 5.66
— New Caledonia 5.64
152 Andorra 5.59
153 Colombia 5.54
154 El Salvador 5.53
155 Suriname 5.51
156 Morocco 5.49
157 Albania 5.44
158 Israel 5.41
159 Honduras 5.36
160 Dominican Republic 5.30
161 Uzbekistan 5.30
162 Guatemala 5.19
163 Tunisia 5.17
164 Philippines 5.15
165 Iraq 5.14
166 Tonga 5.12
167 Venezuela 5.10
168 Egypt 5.09
169 Malaysia 5.02
— Cayman Islands 4.83
170 Mexico 4.78
171 Panama 4.71
172 Syria 4.68
— French Polynesia 4.67
— Guam 4.65
173 Algeria 4.62
174 Marshall Islands 4.57
175 Federated States of Micronesia 4.53
176 Singapore 4.53
177 Paraguay 4.49
— Anguilla 4.39
— British Virgin Islands 4.37
178 Nicaragua 4.33
179 Costa Rica 4.31
180 Bahrain 4.29
181 Ecuador 4.21
— Turks and Caicos Islands 4.16
— American Samoa 4.13
182 Solomon Islands 3.81
— West Bank 3.70
183 Oman 3.68
184 Maldives 3.66
— Gaza Strip 3.53
185 Libya 3.46
— Macau 3.43
186 Brunei 3.28
187 Jordan 2.72
188 Saudi Arabia 2.49
189 Qatar 2.47
190 Kuwait 2.37
— Northern Mariana Islands 2.31
191 United Arab Emirates 2.13

[Ajani]

The Rankings I found:

Gun Homicide (per 100,000)

Japan 0.03
Singapore 0.07
Taiwan 0.15
Kuwait 0.34
England/ Wales 0.07
Scotland 0.19
Netherlands 0.27
Spain 0.19
Ireland 0.30
Germany 0.21
Italy 1.16
Sweden 0.18
Denmark 0.23
Israel 0.72
New Zealand 0.22
Australia 0.56
Belgium 0.87
Canada 0.60
Norway 0.36
Austria 0.42
Northern Ireland 3.55
France 0.55
Switzerland 0.46
Finland 0.87
USA 6.24

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=147481

[Feanor]

These are the rankings I found. The numbers are per 1000 people.

1 Swaziland 30.70
...
97 United States 8.27
...
— Gaza Strip 3.53
...
191 United Arab Emirates 2.13

As for Gaza Strip, I suppose that only pertains to Palestinians shotting Palestinians.

[Ajani]

Seriously GM, something's wrong with those statistics you have there (you might want to double check that source)... granted my stats appear to be from a 1998 UN report, but even in 20 years the figures you have there just don't make sense... Jamaica has been in the top 5 murder rate for the last several years yet it is number 129 for shootings on your list ( I can't imagine all those murders are done with bare fists, broken glass and knives)...

Another link (updated to 2001):

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html

[GMichael]

Here's another source.

Showing latest available data. Rank Countries Amount (top to bottom)
#1 Colombia: 0.617847 per 1,000 people
#2 South Africa: 0.496008 per 1,000 people
#3 Jamaica: 0.324196 per 1,000 people
#4 Venezuela: 0.316138 per 1,000 people
#5 Russia: 0.201534 per 1,000 people
#6 Mexico: 0.130213 per 1,000 people
#7 Estonia: 0.107277 per 1,000 people
#8 Latvia: 0.10393 per 1,000 people
#9 Lithuania: 0.102863 per 1,000 people
#10 Belarus: 0.0983495 per 1,000 people
#11 Ukraine: 0.094006 per 1,000 people
#12 Papua New Guinea: 0.0838593 per 1,000 people
#13 Kyrgyzstan: 0.0802565 per 1,000 people
#14 Thailand: 0.0800798 per 1,000 people
#15 Moldova: 0.0781145 per 1,000 people
#16 Zimbabwe: 0.0749938 per 1,000 people
#17 Seychelles: 0.0739025 per 1,000 people
#18 Zambia: 0.070769 per 1,000 people
#19 Costa Rica: 0.061006 per 1,000 people
#20 Poland: 0.0562789 per 1,000 people
#21 Georgia: 0.0511011 per 1,000 people
#22 Uruguay: 0.045082 per 1,000 people
#23 Bulgaria: 0.0445638 per 1,000 people
#24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
#25 Armenia: 0.0425746 per 1,000 people
#26 India: 0.0344083 per 1,000 people
#27 Yemen: 0.0336276 per 1,000 people
#28 Dominica: 0.0289733 per 1,000 people
#29 Azerbaijan: 0.0285642 per 1,000 people
#30 Finland: 0.0283362 per 1,000 people
#31 Slovakia: 0.0263303 per 1,000 people
#32 Romania: 0.0250784 per 1,000 people
#33 Portugal: 0.0233769 per 1,000 people
#34 Malaysia: 0.0230034 per 1,000 people
#35 Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of: 0.0229829 per 1,000 people
#36 Mauritius: 0.021121 per 1,000 people
#37 Hungary: 0.0204857 per 1,000 people
#38 Korea, South: 0.0196336 per 1,000 people
#39 Slovenia: 0.0179015 per 1,000 people
#40 France: 0.0173272 per 1,000 people
#41 Czech Republic: 0.0169905 per 1,000 people
#42 Iceland: 0.0168499 per 1,000 people
#43 Australia: 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
#44 Canada: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people
#45 Chile: 0.014705 per 1,000 people
#46 United Kingdom: 0.0140633 per 1,000 people
#47 Italy: 0.0128393 per 1,000 people
#48 Spain: 0.0122456 per 1,000 people
#49 Germany: 0.0116461 per 1,000 people
#50 Tunisia: 0.0112159 per 1,000 people
#51 Netherlands: 0.0111538 per 1,000 people
#52 New Zealand: 0.0111524 per 1,000 people
#53 Denmark: 0.0106775 per 1,000 people
#54 Norway: 0.0106684 per 1,000 people
#55 Ireland: 0.00946215 per 1,000 people
#56 Switzerland: 0.00921351 per 1,000 people
#57 Indonesia: 0.00910842 per 1,000 people
#58 Greece: 0.0075928 per 1,000 people
#59 Hong Kong: 0.00550804 per 1,000 people
#60 Japan: 0.00499933 per 1,000 people
#61 Saudi Arabia: 0.00397456 per 1,000 people
#62 Qatar: 0.00115868 per 1,000 people
Weighted average: 0.1 per 1,000 people

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

[Rich-n-Texas]

I can't believe I'm saying this about one of Rich's posts but: That's actually a profound question...

:incazzato:

Pssst... GM, what did he mean by that?

[Ajani]

Here's another source.

Showing latest available data. Rank Countries Amount (top to bottom)
#1 Colombia: 0.617847 per 1,000 people
#2 South Africa: 0.496008 per 1,000 people
#3 Jamaica: 0.324196 per 1,000 people
#4 Venezuela: 0.316138 per 1,000 people
#5 Russia: 0.201534 per 1,000 people
#6 Mexico: 0.130213 per 1,000 people
#7 Estonia: 0.107277 per 1,000 people
#8 Latvia: 0.10393 per 1,000 people
#9 Lithuania: 0.102863 per 1,000 people
#10 Belarus: 0.0983495 per 1,000 people
#11 Ukraine: 0.094006 per 1,000 people
#12 Papua New Guinea: 0.0838593 per 1,000 people
#13 Kyrgyzstan: 0.0802565 per 1,000 people
#14 Thailand: 0.0800798 per 1,000 people
#15 Moldova: 0.0781145 per 1,000 people
#16 Zimbabwe: 0.0749938 per 1,000 people
#17 Seychelles: 0.0739025 per 1,000 people
#18 Zambia: 0.070769 per 1,000 people
#19 Costa Rica: 0.061006 per 1,000 people
#20 Poland: 0.0562789 per 1,000 people
#21 Georgia: 0.0511011 per 1,000 people
#22 Uruguay: 0.045082 per 1,000 people
#23 Bulgaria: 0.0445638 per 1,000 people
#24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
#25 Armenia: 0.0425746 per 1,000 people
#26 India: 0.0344083 per 1,000 people
#27 Yemen: 0.0336276 per 1,000 people
#28 Dominica: 0.0289733 per 1,000 people
#29 Azerbaijan: 0.0285642 per 1,000 people
#30 Finland: 0.0283362 per 1,000 people
#31 Slovakia: 0.0263303 per 1,000 people
#32 Romania: 0.0250784 per 1,000 people
#33 Portugal: 0.0233769 per 1,000 people
#34 Malaysia: 0.0230034 per 1,000 people
#35 Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of: 0.0229829 per 1,000 people
#36 Mauritius: 0.021121 per 1,000 people
#37 Hungary: 0.0204857 per 1,000 people
#38 Korea, South: 0.0196336 per 1,000 people
#39 Slovenia: 0.0179015 per 1,000 people
#40 France: 0.0173272 per 1,000 people
#41 Czech Republic: 0.0169905 per 1,000 people
#42 Iceland: 0.0168499 per 1,000 people
#43 Australia: 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
#44 Canada: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people
#45 Chile: 0.014705 per 1,000 people
#46 United Kingdom: 0.0140633 per 1,000 people
#47 Italy: 0.0128393 per 1,000 people
#48 Spain: 0.0122456 per 1,000 people
#49 Germany: 0.0116461 per 1,000 people
#50 Tunisia: 0.0112159 per 1,000 people
#51 Netherlands: 0.0111538 per 1,000 people
#52 New Zealand: 0.0111524 per 1,000 people
#53 Denmark: 0.0106775 per 1,000 people
#54 Norway: 0.0106684 per 1,000 people
#55 Ireland: 0.00946215 per 1,000 people
#56 Switzerland: 0.00921351 per 1,000 people
#57 Indonesia: 0.00910842 per 1,000 people
#58 Greece: 0.0075928 per 1,000 people
#59 Hong Kong: 0.00550804 per 1,000 people
#60 Japan: 0.00499933 per 1,000 people
#61 Saudi Arabia: 0.00397456 per 1,000 people
#62 Qatar: 0.00115868 per 1,000 people
Weighted average: 0.1 per 1,000 people

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

Yep.. that list looks more like it... notice that both the UK (44) and Canada (46) are well below the USA (24)... sadly Jamaica is number 3 :(

I don't believe that the US can eliminate the right to bear arms now (it's been a part of the Country for so long)... Stricter gun control can be implemented... don't take away the right, just make it harder for crazies to access and stock up on weapons...

[GMichael]

:incazzato:

Pssst... GM, what did he mean by that?

That he thinks you're a moron and is shocked that he would see an intelligent question from anyone even remotely as stupid as you.:thumbsup:


Disclaimer: This is not what I really think. Just busting on both of you. Please, don't send letters.

[Ajani]

That he thinks you're a moron and is shocked that he would see an intelligent question from anyone even remotely as stupid as you.:thumbsup:


Disclaimer: This is not what I really think. Just busting on both of you. Please, don't send letters.

Yeah, that sounds about right...

:dita:

Just Kidding... but ripping on Rich is just so much fun

[GMichael]

Poor Rich.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Jerks!!!

:dita: :dita:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Don't feel sorry for me GM, FA's blown me more kisses than she's blown you. :yesnod:

[GMichael]

Don't feel sorry for me GM, FA's blown me more kisses than she's blown you. :yesnod:

I'm not gonna touch that one.:eek6:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Well THAT'S a surprise. :lol:

[GMichael]

Well THAT'S a surprise. :lol:

Too easy.

(the set-up, not FA)

[nightflier]

What's interesting about those lists is that the countries at the top are mostly lawless (i.e. high-freedom?) countries, and the ones near the bottom are the most controlled and repressive ones, generally speaking. If I had my choice I'd probably want to be somewhere in the middle too. Of course, ya'll are just talking about murder. What about suicide by guns? I bet the list would be very different. Or here's another list I'd like to see: just handguns.

It's always been my hunch that our forefathers wanted everyone to own a riffle to shoot a bear, Indian, or possibly to join a militia, should a general uprising against a King George-like tyrant be necessary. But I doubt they intended for the citizens to own weapons they could conceal like handguns. I think the crucial difference is that a rifle would typically be used by a group of people under the command of a sergeant or other leadership-type figure, whereas the handgun is more for use by an individual. This individual is much more likely to be someone who is singularly out of step with the rest of the people around him/her, ie, he is probably one of your crazies.

I have children, and the one thing that scares the be-jeezus out of me is the thought that one of their class-mates brings a handgun to school and starts fantasizing about breaking his high-score on Gears of War. From what I've read, these kids typically are a bit unstable to begin with, sometimes because of bad parenting. But whatever the reason, it would be a whole lot harder from them to smuggle an AK47 into the classroom without arousing suspicion and hopefully quick response by the authorities.

Now I know that some of you gun-toting folks love the fact that you can conceal your handgun of choice until you are close enough in range to do some real damage to the "perp." But aren't you then also inviting the guy/gal to get close in the first place? To me this sounds a lot more like macho-Rambo kind of talk from people who really have never used a weapon in actual combat. I can assure you that in a dark alley, a few years of Aikido or Brazillian Jujitsu training would go much further than the extensive amount of time it would take you to pull out, point, aim, and fire that gun without shooting yourself.

I've been in a few such situations, and I can tell you that a short pipe or knife is far more effective. I know I'll probably get blasted for saying this but maybe Pix knows this from his years on the force and realizes there are smarter ways to defend himself. Suffice it to say that even if you had been carrying a rifle on your shoulder, in clear view, I think that would be a much more visible deterrent and you would be less likely to be assaulted in the first place. And I say this also because an experienced attacker will know that you can use that rifle as a blunt tool much faster than you can fire it.

My vote: get rid of handguns, especially Uzis and similarly fast-firing small weapons. Leave the rifles alone. We would quickly drop down on those lists if that came to pass. If you have kids, you can't possibly think they are safer now.

[GMichael]

What's interesting about those lists is that the countries at the top are mostly lawless (i.e. high-freedom?) countries, and the ones near the bottom are the most controlled and repressive ones, generally speaking. If I had my choice I'd probably want to be somewhere in the middle too. Of course, ya'll are just talking about murder. What about suicide by guns? I bet the list would be very different. Or here's another list I'd like to see: just handguns.

It's always been my hunch that our forefathers wanted everyone to own a riffle to shoot a bear, Indian, or possibly to join a militia, should a general uprising against a King George-like tyrant be necessary. But I doubt they intended for the citizens to own weapons they could conceal like handguns. I think the crucial difference is that a rifle would typically be used by a group of people under the command of a sergeant or other leadership-type figure, whereas the handgun is more for use by an individual. This individual is much more likely to be someone who is singularly out of step with the rest of the people around him/her, ie, he is probably one of your crazies.

I have children, and the one thing that scares the be-jeezus out of me is the thought that one of their class-mates brings a handgun to school and starts fantasizing about breaking his high-score on Gears of War. From what I've read, these kids typically are a bit unstable to begin with, sometimes because of bad parenting. But whatever the reason, it would be a whole lot harder from them to smuggle an AK47 into the classroom.

Now I know that some of you gun-toting folks love the fact that you can conceal your handgun of choice until you are close enough in range to do some real damage to the "perp," but aren't you then also inviting the guy/gal to get close in the first place? To me this sounds a lot more like macho-Rambo kind of talk from people who really have never used a weapon in actual combat. I can assure you that in a dark alley, a few years of Aikido or Brazillian Jujitsu training would go much further than the extensive amount of time it would take you to point and aim that gun. I've been in a few such situations, and I can tell you that a short pipe or knife is far more effective. I know I'll probably get blasted for saying this but maybe Pix knows this from his years on the force and realizes there are smarter ways to defend himself. Suffice it to say that even if you had been carrying a rifle on your shoulder, in clear view, I think that would be a much more visible deterrent and you would be less likely to be assaulted in the first place. And I say this also because an experienced attacker will know that you can use that rifle as a blunt tool much faster than you can fire it.

I agree with this. Hand guns should be illegal for anyone who isn't in the police or armed forces. At least, that's how I feel about it.
You want to hunt? A rifle is perfect. You want to shoot people? That's what hand guns are for. Denied.

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=pixelthis]I am not "anti gun".
Doesnt anybody on this board have any reading comprehension skills?
A libertarian once was asked how far the ownership of guns should go, and he replied
"well, if everybody was packin nukes there sure wouldnt be a 40% tax rate, now would there?".

[QUOTE]* Huh? What's that mean?


That means that our govt no longer fears the people.
Fear a govt that doesnt fear the people


I carried a gun for fifteen years as a law officer.


* It would seem as a law officer you'd know first hand what scum lurks in the streets and wouldn't be without your gun until death.

I know better than you.
Study after study has shown that the average joe tends to think there is more crime than there actually is, and I HAVE FOUND THIS TO BE THE CASE.
Add to the fact that training and experience tend to lead me not to worry as much over a
"gun totin maniac".
When they start lootin grocery stores then I will get a gun.
Until then you have a bigger threat from the govt than street thugs.
Street thugs arent nearly as well armed and tend to rob you only once.
The govt does it every year

I like what Robert heinlein said about guns.
"You are a pink slug made up mostly of water, if you have a gun you are a pink slug
made mostly of water with a gun.


* You like that? Dr. Seuss wrote more profound words. What Heinlein wrote makes no sense at all. You need to read better philosophy. If he's a Libertarian no wonder they never gain traction as a party.

Robert Heinlein was a SCI-FI writer, some think one of the greatest, and also an ex
NAVY PILOT with seal training.
The fact that you dont understand this means that when (not if BUT WHEN) hungry
mobs start roaming the streets you should basically hope for a quick death.
Handguns (the favorite target of liberals) is for short range work only.
And training needs to be constant as does maintenence, as with long guns.
As for the statement it is NOT philosopical, nor is it intended to be.
Basically it is saying that a human being is on average not that good in a fight,
and without training a gun doesnt improve his odds.
It depends more on teh fight in the dog than the dog in the fight


Guns are a tool and can be quite handy.


* Whatcha going to do when you need your tool, tool?

Theres plenty around, trust me I can get to one reletively easy

Liberals think they are a totem of evil(most liberals are like savages with a complete
set of supersitous beleifs).


* Who's "they"? Are you saying Liberals think of themselves as totems of evil? Now you say Liberals worship the devil? Isn't Supersitous an old folks disease?

Read what I said,(or lay off of the sauce).
Liberals think GUNS are a totem of evil, and if you get rid of them you will have a "better" society, despite all evidence to the contrary.
They ignore what happened in England and Austrailia when guns were banned


Here's some philosophy for you.
" You took his land and you ate his corn.
And on his grave your land was born
You took his pride and fed him dirt
You wished him winter without a shirt
And you called this red man savage
After you crushed him, you helped him up
To let him drink from a empty cup
You gave him the navy without the fleet
You made him lick your hand and kiss your feet
You called this mad dog savage
Well I found a book one day
Looked up red and white to see what it say
One was a savage, the other unlearned
Like a look in the mirror, the tables were turned
Because history has named you savage.....
------J D Blackfoot

Has nothing to do with anything
I am 25% indian BTW.
AMERICA NO LONGER BELONGED to the indians anymore than anybody else,
in fact they killed the original inhabitants when they first came here.
America is a vast land full of untold wealth, to expect it to be left alone so that
a bunch of savages can roam free on it(despoiling the land as much as any white man did)
would be naive, even for you. Somebody was going to move here.
And considering that the Chinese were here first and their colonies failed , the indian should consider themselves lucky.
If the Chinese (or vikings) had taken this land there would be few if any indians left



I tell you one thing, without a means to defend yourself there is no political freedom
whatsoever.


* Ah! I get it, Libertarians are for no political freedom, hence, no gun.

I HAVE NO GUN BECAUSE I HAVE NO NEED FOR ONE AT THIS TIME.
I have no problem with anyone owning a gun or anything else as long as they dont use it to practice aggression.
I dont have a motorcycle either or sailboat for that matter, does that mean that I am against those too?
The world will have to get a lot worse (which it is currently doing ) before I GET A GUN.
I can tell you one day, the day the govt bans guns IS THE DAY I WILL GET ONE.
And liberals arent for "political" freedom in paticular, that are for FREEDOM
IN GENERAL.



The first thing tyrants do when they take over is confiscate the weapons.


* Well you'll be a short order when they do

???
The liberal eagerness to do so betrays their real agenda more than anything else.:


Confinscating guns would be like sweeping sand from the beach. My take on gun control, I don't think criminals go into the local sporting goods store to buy their weapons. On the other hand, if their weren't any out here to steal.... Man, I hate when I debate myself. Let me and myself hash this out a bit and I'll tell you more later.

Yeah, like, why dont you go off into a corner and figure things out, because you obviously
have NO CLUE as to what you are talking about.
I will give you a clue, banning guns has NOTHING to do with criminal behaivor,
that is just a pretext for taking guns from the people they fear the most...
A WELL ARMED POPULACE.
And no banning would be impossible, but they can make it very difficult on those who insist on their right to bear arms.:1:

[pixelthis]

:incazzato:

Pssst... GM, what did he mean by that?

BASICALLY HE IS SAYING what we all know, basically that you are the "blond"
on this site.
Sorry to have to break it to ya(not really).:1:

[BradH]

...in fact they killed the original inhabitants when they first came here....
And considering that the Chinese were here first and their colonies failed , the indian should consider themselves lucky. If the Chinese (or vikings) had taken this land there would be few if any indians left

By original inhabitants do you mean the wooly mammoths and running bears? Or is it the Chinese who were here first? Oh wait, the Chinese colonies failed. But was that because they were killed by invading Indians? Is that why the Indians should consider themselves lucky? Because they killed the Chinese? Oh wait, if the Chinese or Vikings had taken the land there would be few Indians left. Hold on, are the Chinese supposed to be lucky or the Indians? Because if the Chinese are lucky then shouldn't the Vikings be lucky too? Oh wait, their colony failed. Was that because the Indians killed the Vikings? Is that why they were lucky? Because if the Chinese colonies failed and the Indians weren't here yet does that mean the Vikings killed the Chinese? But wait, the Vikings and Chinese would've killed the Indians so the Indians are lucky that didn't happen because there would've been too many Vikings left compared to the Chinese after the Chinese got killed by the Vikings. Maybe the Indians are the lucky ones because the Vikings and Chinese killed each other before the Indians invaded.

[Feanor]

I agree with this. Hand guns should be illegal for anyone who isn't in the police or armed forces. At least, that's how I feel about it.
You want to hunt? A rifle is perfect. You want to shoot people? That's what hand guns are for. Denied.

Some hardware of mine. (BTW, I've never shot anybody.)
...

[Rich-n-Texas]

BASICALLY HE IS SAYING what we all know, basically that you are the "blond"
on this site.
Sorry to have to break it to ya(not really).:1:
Are you basically calling me a girl retart? :dita:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Watchya got there Bill Bailey? Sweet pieces!

[Ajani]

I agree with this. Hand guns should be illegal for anyone who isn't in the police or armed forces. At least, that's how I feel about it.
You want to hunt? A rifle is perfect. You want to shoot people? That's what hand guns are for. Denied.

:thumbsup: I'm with you and Nightflier on this one: hunting rifles are fine... but personal murder tools are a definite no...

NF dealt with the right to bear arms really well: people always forget that those were very different times - England might come back at anytime to reclaim you, the Indians you stole the land from might get violent, and the slaves might rebel.... you needed a gun back then... in 2009 are you really worried that the Brits are gonna return?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Not in the slightest Ajani. I enjoy going to the range with my buddies and popping off a few rounds at that target 50' or so away. I enjoy competition. Is that so wrong?

[Luvin Da Blues]

I enjoy competition.

I hope that competitive spirit wanes when your using your other gun.

[Rich-n-Texas]

What other gun? The only other gun I have shoots blanks. :cryin:

[bobsticks]

TMI alert!!

[Mr Peabody]

[QUOTE=pixelthis][QUOTE=Mr Peabody][QUOTE=pixelthis]I am not "anti gun".
Doesnt anybody on this board have any reading comprehension skills?

* Yeah, everybody but you.

A libertarian once was asked how far the ownership of guns should go, and he replied
"well, if everybody was packin nukes there sure wouldnt be a 40% tax rate, now would there?".
That means that our govt no longer fears the people.
Fear a govt that doesnt fear the people

* A reason the people should bare arms. Heard of the minutemen?

I carried a gun for fifteen years as a law officer.
I know better than you.
Study after study has shown that the average joe tends to think there is more crime than there actually is, and I HAVE FOUND THIS TO BE THE CASE.
Add to the fact that training and experience tend to lead me not to worry as much over a
"gun totin maniac".
When they start lootin grocery stores then I will get a gun.
Until then you have a bigger threat from the govt than street thugs.
Street thugs arent nearly as well armed and tend to rob you only once.
The govt does it every year

* You have clearly lost touch with reality.

I like what Robert heinlein said about guns.
"You are a pink slug made up mostly of water, if you have a gun you are a pink slug
made mostly of water with a gun.
Robert Heinlein was a SCI-FI writer, some think one of the greatest, and also an ex
NAVY PILOT with seal training.

* Robert Heinlein did tricks for fish?

The fact that you dont understand this means that when (not if BUT WHEN) hungry
mobs start roaming the streets you should basically hope for a quick death.

* Why? my neighbor is fatter than me.

Handguns (the favorite target of liberals) is for short range work only.
And training needs to be constant as does maintenence, as with long guns.
As for the statement it is NOT philosopical, nor is it intended to be.
Basically it is saying that a human being is on average not that good in a fight,
and without training a gun doesnt improve his odds.
It depends more on teh fight in the dog than the dog in the fight

* Humans aren't good in a fight? What are you talking about? Against what? Other humans that aren't any good either? And, if said humans are fighting and only one had a gun my money is on that one.

Guns are a tool and can be quite handy.

* I'd say, especially against roming hungry mobs wanting to eat me.

Liberals think they are a totem of evil(most liberals are like savages with a complete
set of supersitous beleifs).
Read what I said,(or lay off of the sauce).
Liberals think GUNS are a totem of evil, and if you get rid of them you will have a "better" society, despite all evidence to the contrary.
They ignore what happened in England and Austrailia when guns were banned

* What did men do before guns? All of you answer this. They still killed each other with whatever they could get their hands on, arrows, spears, clubs etc. Getting rid of guns isn't going to make this a garden of Eden, men have to change their nature. You think that will happen? How do prisoners in jail kill each other? If some one is intent on killing they will find a way.

Here's some philosophy for you.
" You took his land and you ate his corn.
And on his grave your land was born
You took his pride and fed him dirt
You wished him winter without a shirt
And you called this red man savage
After you crushed him, you helped him up
To let him drink from a empty cup
You gave him the navy without the fleet
You made him lick your hand and kiss your feet
You called this mad dog savage
Well I found a book one day
Looked up red and white to see what it say
One was a savage, the other unlearned
Like a look in the mirror, the tables were turned
Because history has named you savage.....
------J D Blackfoot

Has nothing to do with anything

* Has to do with everything. They nature of man.

I am 25% indian BTW.

* I doubt that as I doubt you were every in law enforcement.
AMERICA NO LONGER BELONGED to the indians anymore than anybody else,
in fact they killed the original inhabitants when they first came here.
America is a vast land full of untold wealth, to expect it to be left alone so that
a bunch of savages can roam free on it(despoiling the land as much as any white man did)
would be naive, even for you. Somebody was going to move here.
And considering that the Chinese were here first and their colonies failed , the indian should consider themselves lucky.
If the Chinese (or vikings) had taken this land there would be few if any indians left

* Pure lunacy. What are you going to do when I walk my butt up in your house and make my self to home? Somebody was going to live there might as well be me. Oh, some one already does you say..... POW!! So now they don't. Honey tell the kids to get this blob off the floor and let's fire up this Vizio. Remind me next time to take over a house with a better TV.

I tell you one thing, without a means to defend yourself there is no political freedom
whatsoever.

* I tell, you, one thing, as long as our government is bought, and paid to think and act a certain way, THERE'S NO POLITICAL FREEDOM!!

Yeah, like, why would you go off into a corner and figure things out, because you obviously know everything about what you are talking about.
I will give you a clue, banning guns has NOTHING to do with criminal behaivor,
that is just a pretext for taking guns from the people they fear the most...
A WELL ARMED POPULACE.

* See, you are talking one thing and living another. You want to wait to get the flu before you take the shot. Here's a clue, at that point, it's too late.

[Ajani]

TMI alert!!

Seconded

[Ajani]

Not in the slightest Ajani. I enjoy going to the range with my buddies and popping off a few rounds at that target 50' or so away. I enjoy competition. Is that so wrong?

No there is nothing wrong with that... BUT, I still wonder if you actually need to own a gun to do that... why can't people just 'rent' guns at target practice? I'm sure the shooting range either does (or can) stock up on handguns.... My issue is more with people walking around daily with a handgun under their shirt or in their bag etc.... When I lived in Toronto, I had a friend who kept some sweet weaponry locked up (like Feanor)... and I was never worried about him shooting me... but on the other hand, the thought of some other people having access to handguns would certainly keep me up at night....

Simple example: Would you be afraid of accidentally running into Feanor (with his two guns) in an alley at night? Now would you feel the same way if that was Pix instead of Feanor?

[Ajani]

What did men do before guns? All of you answer this. They still killed each other with whatever they could get their hands on, arrows, spears, clubs etc. Getting rid of guns isn't going to make this a garden of Eden, men have to change their nature. You think that will happen? How do prisoners in jail kill each other? If some one is intent on killing they will find a way.

True, but let's be honest, who do you think you'd have a better chance of defending yourself against: a punk with an M16 pointed at your chest or a man carrying a stick? I don't know about you, but I'm more concerned about the M16 than the stickman...

As the statistics we pulled up earlier in this thread shows: murder rates are generally lower in countries with less access to guns... A gun is an easy and impersonal way to kill somebody (any coward can close their eyes and pull a trigger from a distance), but to get up close and personal and either stab or beat someone to death takes a really cold hearted bastard....

[Mr Peabody]

I think I'd be more afraid of Feanor, he'd actually be able to do something with his gun if he wanted to. Pix gives me visions of Barney Fife and that would give me time to run or shoot first. But, of course, Pix don't own a gun, so we'd be alright.

That's a good point too Ajani. You'd have to wonder if some of these kids would have the nerve to do some of this killing by hand. But too many don't think for themselves and don't have much choice when they're in a gang.

[Ajani]

I think I'd be more afraid of Feanor, he'd actually be able to do something with his gun if he wanted to. Pix gives me visions of Barney Fife and that would give me time to run or shoot first. But, of course, Pix don't own a gun, so we'd be alright.

lol.... valid point, but I was thinking more in terms of who is more psychologically balanced... I don't worry that Feanor (or even Rich) might go crazy on me, but Pix is a whole different story....

[Rich-n-Texas]

Just a quick sidebar...

This thread WAS about the DTV switch. :sosp:

:lol:

[Rich-n-Texas]

STOP USING WHITE TEXT! I can't see it! :incazzato:

[Mr Peabody]

What DTV switch? What's DTV?

[chadjay]

This has to be the funniest thread I have ever read. We go from "Nobama to delay DTV switch" to "Guns". Interesting. Especially on an audio review forum site. Can't you all just get along? I didn't vote for Nobama because he has no agenda. I mean come on, with everything the prez has to put up with is 200,000 a year and a big white house for 4 years worth it. It is if you have no plan to do anything but suck off the sweet tit of the mindless poeple who vote for you. Obama reminds me of Clinton, all show (hey look I can play the saxaphone) and no go (Its ok to try to blow up the WTC, just dont do i again). Come on people. This guy is just going to sit in his new crib, throw lavish parties, have some "non-sexual relations with an intern". Even one better - (Dems) lets pick a guy from congress that hasn't done **** and make him prez. The stupid payed-off media made this guy look like Ghandi and he hasn't done ****. All you people that voted for him should be ashamed of yourselves for not doing your homework (at least use the small part of your brain the media hasn't washed yet) and mindlessly voting. This guy will be no Reagan and create millions of jobs, because his govt has messed things up to far for him to fix. I might as well stop now. That should be enough to stir the pot.

[Mr Peabody]

Chad you were obviously out doing something else while others were listening to the candidates. Obama had a fairly thorough agenda. So much so that McCain had to make his up as he went because he got caught empty handed so many times when Obama had a plan for a certain issue. That's how McCain ended up pushing stupid ideas like a $5k credit for health insurance going into the pocket of the insurance company. Any moron who is lucky enough to have a health insurance can look at his check stub and the portion the employer pays, do the math and tell $5k isn't jack! There's a reason Obama had all the college grads and "educated" people voting for him. The only people to vote for McCain were to stupid to follow what was going on. Well, them and the rich who didn't want to stop raping the country for everything they could get. Bush practically destroys this country, him and his friends sucking it dry like a leach.

[pixelthis]

By original inhabitants do you mean the wooly mammoths and running bears? Or is it the Chinese who were here first? Oh wait, the Chinese colonies failed. But was that because they were killed by invading Indians? Is that why the Indians should consider themselves lucky? Because they killed the Chinese? Oh wait, if the Chinese or Vikings had taken the land there would be few Indians left. Hold on, are the Chinese supposed to be lucky or the Indians? Because if the Chinese are lucky then shouldn't the Vikings be lucky too? Oh wait, their colony failed. Was that because the Indians killed the Vikings? Is that why they were lucky? Because if the Chinese colonies failed and the Indians weren't here yet does that mean the Vikings killed the Chinese? But wait, the Vikings and Chinese would've killed the Indians so the Indians are lucky that didn't happen because there would've been too many Vikings left compared to the Chinese after the Chinese got killed by the Vikings. Maybe the Indians are the lucky ones because the Vikings and Chinese killed each other before the Indians invaded.

YOU MUST HAVE gone through school(if you did) AFTER they stopped teaching history.
Either that or you are an ignorant fool.
The CHINESE had several expeditions to the new world, and basically gave up on
any effort to colonize. EVIDENCE of this has been found on the shore in California,
Thats across from the pacific ocean from China just in case you're as ignorant of geography as history.
And the first five european colonies to the LA basin failed, modern los angeles
couldnt exist without modern irrigation techniques.
And ask any Tibetian as to just how nicely Chinese treat countries they subjugate.
And then you might want to go to nightschool, see about getting that old GED.:1:

[pixelthis]

I think I'd be more afraid of Feanor, he'd actually be able to do something with his gun if he wanted to. Pix gives me visions of Barney Fife and that would give me time to run or shoot first. But, of course, Pix don't own a gun, so we'd be alright.

That's a good point too Ajani. You'd have to wonder if some of these kids would have the nerve to do some of this killing by hand. But too many don't think for themselves and don't have much choice when they're in a gang.

I OWNED A GUN for FIFTEEN YEARS, and had to shoot 80% or better every year to keep my job, and go to the range every month.
I consistently shot in the high 90%, think thats easy , TRY IT SOMETIME
BIGMOUTH.
Sure that I could plink that fat ass of yours from fifty yards with NO problem, even blindfolded.
Just follow the stench.:1:

[pixelthis]

No there is nothing wrong with that... BUT, I still wonder if you actually need to own a gun to do that... why can't people just 'rent' guns at target practice? I'm sure the shooting range either does (or can) stock up on handguns.... My issue is more with people walking around daily with a handgun under their shirt or in their bag etc.... When I lived in Toronto, I had a friend who kept some sweet weaponry locked up (like Feanor)... and I was never worried about him shooting me... but on the other hand, the thought of some other people having access to handguns would certainly keep me up at night....

Simple example: Would you be afraid of accidentally running into Feanor (with his two guns) in an alley at night? Now would you feel the same way if that was Pix instead of Feanor?


Oh so mr high and mighty Ajani is going to decide who has a gun and who doesnt.
Feanor would probably shoot his foot off, I didnt spend a MONTH during my fifteen
years with teh police without some kind of training.
Have you ever been in a shoot/no shoot situation smartass?
I have, and its not like those movies and TV shows you rot your brains on.
As for gun ownership, when it disapears freedom will be right BEHIND IT.:1:

[pixelthis]

jUST FOR THE RECORD , I am the most qualified to own a gun , have had all of the training , over and over and over.
Not just guns, but flashlights (considered a deadly weapon) kubatons(any of the clueless
here know what that is) pepper spray, pump shotguns, combat firing techniques ,
gun grabbing techniques.
And a ton of psychological testing.
HERES proof, mainly that none of you have considered the possibility of actually
using a gun on another human being.
Even when that person is trying to kill you its not an easy thing.
To all of you A-holes its just an intellectual excercise, you
have NO CLUE as to what you are talking about.
You know about as much about guns as you do about electronics,
WHICH IS NEAR ZERO.
Thing about guns, use one the wrong way and you just wont blow a fusebox,
you could wind up dead or in prison
The thought of aany of you weenies actually carrying a deadly weapon scares
the S**T outta me.
But that is not the POINT, the point is that its not up to ME to decide, anymore than its up to Pelosi or obamanation, or any of the other looters that now infest oour once great government.
You have a right to own a gun no matter if someone is going to take it away from you and
shoot you with it(after killing your family and making you watch, probably)
Thats freedom, the most important freedom of all.
The freedom to be a blitering IDIOT, a freedom most on this site abuse way too much.:1:

[BradH]

EVIDENCE of this has been found on the shore in California,

Yep, they just scooted right across the Pacific in their prehistoric junks. Hey, what happened to the tribes from Manchuria and their migration down the coast of North America? Is that who you're talking about? Good thing the Indians didn't run into those guys.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Mr Peabody]

[QUOTE=pixelthis]jUST FOR THE RECORD , I am the most qualified to own a gun , have had all of the training , over and over and over.

* You don't know that. I have had extensive training and have had to participate in covert operations. I have been so under cover before I hit my head on the footboard. I have been trained to kill in so many ways I've forgotten some. I can shoot the hemroid off a nats butt at 100 yards with a variety of firearms and come pretty close with a sling shot. My bodies a weapon. I've gone so far in Kwan-jito that I surpassed the belts and earned suspenders. You won't like me when I'm mad Mr. Pix, so back off. When you were writing parking tickets and playing like policeman, I was in a tux pinching rich ladies behinds and keeping one eye on the perp while the other was on my drink and other sorted actions to keep this country safe.

Not just guns, but flashlights (considered handy in the dark ) kubatons(any of the clueless
here know what that is) Dr. pepper spray, penis pump shotguns, nose picking techniques ,
ass grabbing techniques.
And a ton of psychological testing.

* You said it not us. I can certainly believe you had a ton of psycological testing, some of which I'm sure you are under going and on medication for at this time.

HERES proof, mainly that none of you have considered the possibility of actually
using a gun on another human being.

* No, just the bullet

Even when that person is trying to kill you its not an easy thing.
To all of you A-holes its just an intellectual excercise, you
have NO CLUE as to what you are talking about.
You know about as much about guns as you do about electronics,
WHICH IS NEAR ZERO.
Thing about guns, use one the wrong way and you just wont blow a fusebox,
you could wind up dead or in prison
The thought of aany of you weenies actually carrying a deadly weapon scares
the S**T outta me.

* You should thank us the next time you need relief from constipation.

But that is not the POINT, the point is that its not up to ME to decide, anymore than its up to Pelosi or obamanation, or any of the other looters that now infest oour once great government.
You have a right to own a gun no matter if someone is going to take it away from you and
shoot you with it(after killing your family and making you watch, probably)
Thats freedom, the most important freedom of all.
The freedom to be a blitering IDIOT, a freedom most on this site abuse way too much.:1

* That's alright if you want to be a blathering idiot, we're used to you and wouldn't have it any other way.

[Feanor]

I'd be just as happy if got away from the guns.

Links to the Front Sight Firearms Training Institute (http://www.frontsight.com/) are turning up when I come to this thread. :arf:

For the record, I'm a careful gun handler, but a mediocre shoot. I have had no combat training whatsoever and have done only target shooting. I don't hunt either.

[Ajani]

Just a quick sidebar...

This thread WAS about the DTV switch. :sosp:

:lol:

What you talkin bout Willis?

Even Pix can see this a Gun thread...

(blondie)

[Ajani]

Oh so mr high and mighty Ajani is going to decide who has a gun and who doesnt.

Nope.... the same rights should apply to all people (as long as they pass the requisite firearm safety training, target practice and psychological evaluations) & they are limited to owning hunting rifles... They can use as many handguns and M16s as they want at the shooting range, but there's no reason why they should walk around town with them....

I don't believe in removing the right to bear arms.... just that it needs to be more tightly controlled...


Feanor would probably shoot his foot off, I didnt spend a MONTH during my fifteen
years with teh police without some kind of training.
Have you ever been in a shoot/no shoot situation smartass?
I have, and its not like those movies and TV shows you rot your brains on.
As for gun ownership, when it disapears freedom will be right BEHIND IT.

I don't use Guns, but I'd take my chances with my trusty cutlass against you and your guns.... Do you want to know why I use a knife? Guns are too quick. You can't savor all the... little emotions. In... you see, in their last moments, people show you who they really are. :dita:

[Rich-n-Texas]

(blondie)
Pirate harboror
:p

[Mr Peabody]

Ajani is quite the joker, wink

[Ajani]

Ajani is quite the joker, wink

lol :thumbsup:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Not really.

:rolleyes:

[pixelthis]

Yep, they just scooted right across the Pacific in their prehistoric junks. Hey, what happened to the tribes from Manchuria and their migration down the coast of North America? Is that who you're talking about? Good thing the Indians didn't run into those guys.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

The ancient Chinese had what was called the treasure fleet that went all over the world,
and quite often bought back loot, or "treasure".
Then the ancient version of Walter Mondale had it dismantled.
Too expensive.
MEANT the end of the Chinese as a major power.
Some of these were what was found in California.
Any of the other vast gaps in knowledge that you possess that need filling, dumbass.:1:

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=pixelthis]jUST FOR THE RECORD , I am the most qualified to own a gun , have had all of the training , over and over and over.

[QUOTE]* You don't know that. I have had extensive training and have had to participate in covert operations. I have been so under cover before I hit my head on the footboard. I have been trained to kill in so many ways I've forgotten some. I can shoot the hemroid off a nats butt at 100 yards with a variety of firearms and come pretty close with a sling shot. My bodies a weapon. I've gone so far in Kwan-jito that I surpassed the belts and earned suspenders. You won't like me when I'm mad Mr. Pix, so back off. When you were writing parking tickets and playing like policeman, I was in a tux pinching rich ladies behinds and keeping one eye on the perp while the other was on my drink and other sorted actions to keep this country safe.

Let me guess, been watching true lies again.
The only "cover" you have been under is your blanky

Not just guns, but flashlights (considered handy in the dark ) kubatons(any of the clueless
here know what that is) Dr. pepper spray, penis pump shotguns, nose picking techniques ,
ass grabbing techniques.
And a ton of psychological testing.


* You said it not us. I can certainly believe you had a ton of psycological testing, some of which I'm sure you are under going and on medication for at this time.

You must have missed your meds, which is why the secret agent fantasy kicked in


HERES proof, mainly that none of you have considered the possibility of actually
using a gun on another human being.


* No, just the bullet

let me guess, couldnt figure out which end went in the gun first so you threw it at the guy boosting your TV


Even when that person is trying to kill you its not an easy thing.
To all of you A-holes its just an intellectual excercise, you
have NO CLUE as to what you are talking about.
You know about as much about guns as you do about electronics,
WHICH IS NEAR ZERO.
Thing about guns, use one the wrong way and you just wont blow a fusebox,
you could wind up dead or in prison
The thought of aany of you weenies actually carrying a deadly weapon scares
the S**T outta me.

* You should thank us the next time you need relief from constipation.

But that is not the POINT, the point is that its not up to ME to decide, anymore than its up to Pelosi or obamanation, or any of the other looters that now infest oour once great government.
You have a right to own a gun no matter if someone is going to take it away from you and
shoot you with it(after killing your family and making you watch, probably)
Thats freedom, the most important freedom of all.
The freedom to be a blitering IDIOT, a freedom most on this site abuse way too much.:1


* That's alright if you want to be a blathering idiot, we're used to you and wouldn't have it any other way.

Still leaves me about 15 points above YOU, mr PEE-PEE.:1:

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=Rich-n-Texas]Just a quick sidebar...

This thread WAS about the DTV switch. :sosp:

:1: :1: :1:

[Mr Peabody]

Pix seems to be drawn toward stories that contradict the norm. The Chinese thing is a theory composed by this guy Menzie who claims this Chinese guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He not only made it to California but several other places in the world. It does, have it's intrigue factor.

[nightflier]

The only evidence that is widely accepted in academic circles is that the Vikings arrived in the Americas before Columbus. There have been theories that the Carthaginians (before Hannibal's elephant trip), sailors from pre-slavery Kingdoms of Western Africa, the Chinese, and even Pacific Islanders had come to the Americas but there is no archeaological/physical evidence of this, or at least it has not yet been found.

The theory that the Chinese came here is based on written records of their extensive other maritime voyages (e.g. to the Persian Gulf and maybe even the East Coast of Africa), archaeological evidence that they had built ships capable of making the trip, and some cryptic writings about such a trip or plans to take that trip. However, there is still no physical evidence found either in the Americas or in the Far East to corroborate the theory that they actually reached American land. Another problem with this theory is that the cryptic writings that supposedly describe the trip are most likely from the period after the Chinese emperor made it illegal for his admiral to make the voyage and that it would be highly unlikely to have occured then. It does make for a very compelling read, though.

Pix, there was no Walter Mondale type fella back then who made that decision. It was made by the pig headed bully at the top. This kind of executive abuse is quite reminiscent of the past 8 years here in our country, dontcha think? Thank god it's over in 2 days. 'Hope you got your party hat ready!

[pixelthis]

The only evidence that is widely accepted in academic circles is that the Vikings arrived in the Americas before Columbus. There have been theories that the Carthaginians (before Hannibal's elephant trip), sailors from pre-slavery Kingdoms of Western Africa, the Chinese, and even Pacific Islanders had come to the Americas but there is no archeaological/physical evidence of this, or at least it has not yet been found.

The theory that the Chinese came here is based on written records of their extensive other maritime voyages (e.g. to the Persian Gulf and maybe even the East Coast of Africa), archaeological evidence that they had built ships capable of making the trip, and some cryptic writings about such a trip or plans to take that trip. However, there is still no physical evidence found either in the Americas or in the Far East to corroborate the theory that they actually reached American land. Another problem with this theory is that the cryptic writings that supposedly describe the trip are most likely from the period after the Chinese emperor made it illegal for his admiral to make the voyage and that it would be highly unlikely to have occured then. It does make for a very compelling read, though.

Pix, there was no Walter Mondale type fella back then who made that decision. It was made by the pig headed bully at the top. This kind of executive abuse is quite reminiscent of the past 8 years here in our country, dontcha think? Thank god it's over in 2 days. 'Hope you got your party hat ready!

WALTER MONDALE WANTED TO KILL THE SPACE PROGRAM,
pretty much thinking like the short sighted idiot who killed the treasure fleet
And they have found ancient boats on the pacific coast that were too advanced to be built by anyone else at the time they were made.
Its just a theory sure, but a good one.
And no I dont have my "party" hat on, the demise of a once great country that has forgotten what freedom is all about and has lost its way is
NOTHING TO PARTY ABOUT.
You see a "saviour" that will get your nonsensical left wing policies to work.
Good luch on that, as they have never worked, and never will.
One of the keynote speakers is a member of HAMAS, in his college days the
obamanation hung out with ANGELA DAVIS, the leader of the weather underground
(who targeted police officers and actually killed a few, which I take personally) and just about any other radical you can name.
Not to mention that he is not a US citizen by even the furtherest streach.
His farther was KENYAN, which makes him a citzen of the UK.
So I REFUSE TO AKNOWLEDGE him as president, as his election violates the clause
of the constitution that doesnt allow foriegn citizens to hold this office.
When are you liberals going to learn the FIRST LAW of the universe?
Mainly that there is NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH
People are going to look back on the days of Bush with nostalgia.
Bush was bad, but CARTER was the second worst, leading to the ALL TIME WORST..
ROOSEVELT.
But I am sure Obamanation will do his best to be even worse than all of teh other previous looters combined.
Enjoy the party, its the last one you will be able to afford..
for a long time

:1:

[Feanor]

....
One of the keynote speakers is a member of HAMAS, in his college days the
obamanation hung out with ANGELA DAVIS, the leader of the weather underground
(who targeted police officers and actually killed a few, which I take personally) and just about any other radical you can name.
Not to mention that he is not a US citizen by even the furtherest streach.
His farther was KENYAN, which makes him a citzen of the UK.
So I REFUSE TO AKNOWLEDGE him as president, as his election violates the clause of the constitution that doesnt allow foriegn citizens to hold this office.
...

You are a delusional IDIOT. :prrr:

[Mr Peabody]

Pix, sometimes you should re-read what you wrote, "they found boats on the shore that were too advanced to be made at the time". So, this thoroughly blows you and Menzie's theory out unless you think the Chinese can time travel. So, new theory, the boats and artifacts were left by aliens here on vacation. They probably took a break from helping the Incas

[02audionoob]

This thread WAS about the DTV switch. :sosp:

:1: :1: :1:

I do love Pixel's pix, regardless of accuracy. Never fail to entertain.:thumbsup:

[nightflier]

WALTER MONDALE WANTED TO KILL THE SPACE PROGRAM,
pretty much thinking like the short sighted idiot who killed the treasure fleet

Not only are you distorting the facts, but Mondale was never the guy in charge. The emperor was.


And they have found ancient boats on the pacific coast that were too advanced to be built by anyone else at the time they were made.

See Mr. P's comments.


Its just a theory sure, but a good one.

Kind of like Plasmas being dead technology?


And no I dont have my "party" hat on, the demise of a once great country that has forgotten what freedom is all about and has lost its way is
NOTHING TO PARTY ABOUT.

Suit yourself. The majority of the folks in this country, and the vast, vast majority of the folks around the world will be partying it up. You can sit and sulk for 4 years if you want, it isn't going to change the fact that we all have reason to party, improve our lives, and work for a better tomorrow. I guess you'll be that old geezer sitting on his porch wondering how everything just passed him by. Heck I'm pretty sure that even Tex wouldn't miss an opportunity to party, even if it's for the guy he didn't vote for. After all, if you get a chance to go to a post superbowl party, you don't really care if your team didn't win, right? Well you would probably just stay home and watch reruns, but most folks wouldn't.


You see a "saviour" that will get your nonsensical left wing policies to work. Good luch on that, as they have never worked, and never will.

Too many things to say. I'll just add that Obama isn't all that much of a leftie as you think. Looking at his cabinet, it's just plain ignorant to call them left at all. He sure as hell reached further across the isle than Bush ever did, and Bush promissed to do that a whole lot more.


One of the keynote speakers is a member of HAMAS

Huh, who is that?


in his college days the obamanation hung out with ANGELA DAVIS, the leader of the weather underground (who targeted police officers and actually killed a few, which I take personally) and just about any other radical you can name.


Haven't heard that one before. Angela Davis was a role model for many African American people, back when the system was a lot more stacked against them, but I seriously doubt she was a member of the Weather Underground, which was a bunch of white folks, if I remember right. If anything, she most certainly was never a leader of this organization. Of course, Angela Davis is now a respected professor too, with a very impressive CV.

Are you making stuff up as you go along just for effect?


Not to mention that he is not a US citizen by even the furtherest streach.

You keep saying this, almost as if you believe that repeating it will make it come true. This issue has been debated and put to rest. He's going to be our president and you just can't deal with it. Are you sure you don't really have a beef with him because he's black? I mean, you aren't making any other valid arguments, so I'm just wondering.


His farther was KENYAN, which makes him a citzen of the UK.

OK, yeah that one makes perfect sense.:shocked:


So I REFUSE TO AKNOWLEDGE him as president, as his election violates the clause of the constitution that doesnt allow foriegn citizens to hold this office.

Really? He's going to be your boss anyhow. Deal with it.


When are you liberals going to learn the FIRST LAW of the universe?
Mainly that there is NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH

That's the first law of the universe? OK, whatever.:shocked: :shocked:


People are going to look back on the days of Bush with nostalgia.

What people. The confederacy of dunces that is finally leaving? You? Cheney? Rummy? Fine company, Pix. Who else, Perino, Scalia, Roberts? Bush? Hmmm.... Besides thinking he did a good job, I doubt Bush even understands that at 12 midnight, he's no longer "the decider." :out:


Bush was bad, but CARTER was the second worst

Oh, so now you admit it that Bush was a disaster? After all, he's just above Carter. So much for that legacy of nostalgia, LOL.:biggrin5:


leading to the ALL TIME WORST..ROOSEVELT.

I know Roosevelt has his detractors, but I doubt many people would put him dead last. I think the lunatic fringe that would is pretty small. Very small. Maybe it's just you, LOL.


But I am sure Obamanation will do his best to be even worse than all of teh other previous looters combined.

Well I hate to break it to you, but all indications are pointing to the opposite. Won't that chap your hide?


Enjoy the party, its the last one you will be able to afford..

I seriously doubt that. Many economic indicators are starting to look up. Let's check back on this in a year. I would love to hear what you say then.

OK, I have to go set up for our party. And just in case you're wondering, there will be more Republicans there than democrats; this is the OC, after all. But they will all be partying it up, isn't that a kick in the jewels for ya?

:3: :3: :3:

[bobsticks]

Pix, don't assume to know anything about all of us. This is a board comprised of a group of individuals with very diverse backrounds, including not a few veterans. You do them...and your argument a disservice. It pains me to a degree beyond expression that you and I agree on the issue of gun control.

All this talk of hummus is making me hungry...

[Rich-n-Texas]

I think I've had hummus once. I work with a very diverse group and enjoy the holiday parties and such where people bring food.

Nevertheless,

There is soooo much quotable text in 'fliers latest response, but right now I'm happy with my sig. This one stands out the most:

Are you making stuff up as you go along just for effect?
:lol: Classic! Reminds me of that TV show: "Lost"

Heck I'm pretty sure that even Tex wouldn't miss an opportunity to party, even if it's for the guy he didn't vote for.
Hey! Party at nightflier's house!!! Let's go! :thumbsup:

However,

Things need to change in this country (and I'm embarrased to be a conservative when I read pixies radical views of the left), so let's get on with it. Being bitter about the election serves no purpose and changes nothing (okay, just a little bit of political talk here... I blame pixie)

Moreover,

If the incoming admin and/or congress can find a way to nail Cheney, Rumsfeld and the little slimeball Wolfowitz to the wall for what they did to this country, you'll have me at... "GUILTY!!!"

[Ajani]

Not to mention that he is not a US citizen by even the furtherest streach.
His farther was KENYAN, which makes him a citzen of the UK.
So I REFUSE TO AKNOWLEDGE him as president, as his election violates the clause
of the constitution that doesnt allow foriegn citizens to hold this office.

I think everyone else has dealt with your other ...ummm... points (for lack of a better word), so I'll address this one.

His father was Kenyan and Kenya was under British rule at the time. This would have entitled him to British citizenship at the time - Fine... sounds reasonable...

One Question:

What was his mother? ummm... American... Where was he born? ummm... America...

So why is he not 'American'? Because British citizenship overrules American? (I didn't realize American citizenship was that 'weak')... Because his Father was the foreigner? (I didn't realize that sexism still held precedence in citizenship laws)....

Persons with far better legal knowledge than any of us have debated these issues and determined that Obama is eligible to be & will be President... so let it go and accept reality...

To make it easier for you, we'll even allow you to continue pretending that Plasma TVs are shipped in large metal coffins, so that consumers can bury them in the backyard when they are found DOA....

[Mr Peabody]

I for one do not care for hummus. I'll have the crab salad.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Don't tell me that. It's flyboy's party.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Fixed my earlier post. I don't "align" my political views in any way with pix...

[Mr Peabody]

Fixed my earlier post. I don't "align" my political views in any way with pix...

HomeLand Security will be glad to know that. Now if they buy it. You'd better post some liberal smoozing

[GMichael]

Pix does not speak for the rest of us conservatives.
Just thought you should know.

We have a new king. LONG LIVE THE KING! And may he be as good as the media thinks he is. If he is, I'll vote for him next time. Twice if they'll let me.

[Ajani]

We have a new king. LONG LIVE THE KING!

Ummm... What? Did Price Charles finally get the throne? :idea: I thought we were talking about the US.... I'm so confused

[GMichael]

Sorry. I got swept away in the moment.

[nightflier]

Point of clarification: Obama was born in Honolulu, in 1961. Honolulu being a state, that makes him illegible for the presidency. His father was born in Kenya, but lived in Honolulu and married to Ann Dunham, an American Citizen, at the time of Obama's birth. I really don't think his eligibility on account of his birth, is in question.

Furthermore, even if Obama would have wanted to return to Kenya with his father in 1964, he would have had to renounce his American citizenship in order to claim Kenyan citizenship. More specifically, his father would have had to file papers for his 3-year old son to accomplish this. Needless to say, nothing of the sort ever happened. Moreover, even if he would have returned to Kenya, he still would not have been able to claim British citizenship, as Kenyans were not automatically entitled to this under British colonial law. Acquiring British citizenship involved an extensive process, paperwork, and most likely service in the British military.

For anyone, even someone as nutty as Pix, to claim that Obama is more of a Brit (not that there's anything wrong with that), than an American, is absolutely laughable. So stop beating that dead horse. It's over with!

Oh, and to point out another silly untruth mentioned before, Obama did put his hand on a Christian Bible and saluted the American flag. I guess the theory that he would do neither is also out the window, huh? How many other pix-predictions will come crashing down?

OK, back to setting up for tonight....

[pixelthis]

Pix, sometimes you should re-read what you wrote, "they found boats on the shore that were too advanced to be made at the time". So, this thoroughly blows you and Menzie's theory out unless you think the Chinese can time travel. So, new theory, the boats and artifacts were left by aliens here on vacation. They probably took a break from helping the Incas


mY BAD, i MEANT TOO ADVANCED for any other civilization except the most advanced one on the planet... THE CHINESE.:1:

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=02audionoob]I do love Pixel's pix, regardless of accuracy. Never fail to entertain.:thumbsup:

yOU LIKE MY PIX?
HERE YOU GO:1:

[pixelthis]

Point of clarification: Obama was born in Honolulu, in 1961. Honolulu being a state, that makes him illegible for the presidency. His father was born in Kenya, but lived in Honolulu and married to Ann Dunham, an American Citizen, at the time of Obama's birth. I really don't think his eligibility on account of his birth, is in question.

Furthermore, even if Obama would have wanted to return to Kenya with his father in 1964, he would have had to renounce his American citizenship in order to claim Kenyan citizenship. More specifically, his father would have had to file papers for his 3-year old son to accomplish this. Needless to say, nothing of the sort ever happened. Moreover, even if he would have returned to Kenya, he still would not have been able to claim British citizenship, as Kenyans were not automatically entitled to this under British colonial law. Acquiring British citizenship involved an extensive process, paperwork, and most likely service in the British military.

For anyone, even someone as nutty as Pix, to claim that Obama is more of a Brit (not that there's anything wrong with that), than an American, is absolutely laughable. So stop beating that dead horse. It's over with!

Oh, and to point out another silly untruth mentioned before, Obama did put his hand on a Christian Bible and saluted the American flag. I guess the theory that he would do neither is also out the window, huh? How many other pix-predictions will come crashing down?

OK, back to setting up for tonight....

obama was born in HONOLULU.
According to international law he was a citzen of the UK, not britian.
He had dual citizenship , which is also a disqualification.
His mother was too young to choose.
And there is a youtube vid of a campaing stop, hillary and others have their hands over their hearts as the American anthem is playing, and there stands obama over at the side holding his hands in front of himself, instead of putting one over his chest.
This video says vollumes more about the man than anything else could.:1:

[pixelthis]

I think everyone else has dealt with your other ...ummm... points (for lack of a better word), so I'll address this one.

His father was Kenyan and Kenya was under British rule at the time. This would have entitled him to British citizenship at the time - Fine... sounds reasonable...

One Question:

What was his mother? ummm... American... Where was he born? ummm... America...

So why is he not 'American'? Because British citizenship overrules American? (I didn't realize American citizenship was that 'weak')... Because his Father was the foreigner? (I didn't realize that sexism still held precedence in citizenship laws)....

Persons with far better legal knowledge than any of us have debated these issues and determined that Obama is eligible to be & will be President... so let it go and accept reality...

To make it easier for you, we'll even allow you to continue pretending that Plasma TVs are shipped in large metal coffins, so that consumers can bury them in the backyard when they are found DOA....


He has dual citizenship, a disqualification.
AND THE EARLY PLASMAS WERE SHIPPED IN STEEL CASES,
they HAD to be, do some research, ass.:1:

[pixelthis]

Not only are you distorting the facts, but Mondale was never the guy in charge. The emperor was.



See Mr. P's comments.



Kind of like Plasmas being dead technology?



Suit yourself. The majority of the folks in this country, and the vast, vast majority of the folks around the world will be partying it up. You can sit and sulk for 4 years if you want, it isn't going to change the fact that we all have reason to party, improve our lives, and work for a better tomorrow. I guess you'll be that old geezer sitting on his porch wondering how everything just passed him by. Heck I'm pretty sure that even Tex wouldn't miss an opportunity to party, even if it's for the guy he didn't vote for. After all, if you get a chance to go to a post superbowl party, you don't really care if your team didn't win, right? Well you would probably just stay home and watch reruns, but most folks wouldn't.



Too many things to say. I'll just add that Obama isn't all that much of a leftie as you think. Looking at his cabinet, it's just plain ignorant to call them left at all. He sure as hell reached further across the isle than Bush ever did, and Bush promissed to do that a whole lot more.



Huh, who is that?



Haven't heard that one before. Angela Davis was a role model for many African American people, back when the system was a lot more stacked against them, but I seriously doubt she was a member of the Weather Underground, which was a bunch of white folks, if I remember right. If anything, she most certainly was never a leader of this organization. Of course, Angela Davis is now a respected professor too, with a very impressive CV.

Are you making stuff up as you go along just for effect?



You keep saying this, almost as if you believe that repeating it will make it come true. This issue has been debated and put to rest. He's going to be our president and you just can't deal with it. Are you sure you don't really have a beef with him because he's black? I mean, you aren't making any other valid arguments, so I'm just wondering.



OK, yeah that one makes perfect sense.:shocked:



Really? He's going to be your boss anyhow. Deal with it.



That's the first law of the universe? OK, whatever.:shocked: :shocked:



What people. The confederacy of dunces that is finally leaving? You? Cheney? Rummy? Fine company, Pix. Who else, Perino, Scalia, Roberts? Bush? Hmmm.... Besides thinking he did a good job, I doubt Bush even understands that at 12 midnight, he's no longer "the decider." :out:



Oh, so now you admit it that Bush was a disaster? After all, he's just above Carter. So much for that legacy of nostalgia, LOL.:biggrin5:



I know Roosevelt has his detractors, but I doubt many people would put him dead last. I think the lunatic fringe that would is pretty small. Very small. Maybe it's just you, LOL.



Well I hate to break it to you, but all indications are pointing to the opposite. Won't that chap your hide?



I seriously doubt that. Many economic indicators are starting to look up. Let's check back on this in a year. I would love to hear what you say then.

OK, I have to go set up for our party. And just in case you're wondering, there will be more Republicans there than democrats; this is the OC, after all. But they will all be partying it up, isn't that a kick in the jewels for ya?

:3: :3: :3:


Enjoy your "party".
Like every other left wing event, all glitz and no guts.
Obamanation is going to be teh worst president since peanut carter,
AND THAT IS SAYING A LOT.
You leftists dont get it, you can rearrange things, try your failed policies a different way...
they will FAIL

They will ALWAYS fail, that always HAVE failed, always WILL.
WHAT ARE YOU IDIOTS partying FOR?
aNOTHER BRAIN DEAD LIBERAL WHO IS GOING TO TRY yet again to put square wheels on the car in hopes that it will work , ONE MORE EFFORT to try failed
liberal policies , after Bushie trying eight years of failed conservative policies.
Obamanation is ALREADY talking about two TRILLION in federal spending.
Thats all you leftists know, throw money (somebody elses) at the problem.
What matters is your FEELINGS, your INTENTIONS.
Doesnt matter if you use tarot cards or read tea leaves ,
YOUR HEART IS IN THE "RIGHT" PLACE ,
so in some form of sympathetic magic things will magically fix themselves!
and we can all sing kum-by-yah on the white house lawn!
HOW WONDERFUL.
No consequences for your actions! No unseen consequences AT ALL.
Our heart is PURE so the UNIVERSE is going to be NICE to us!!!
In reality the UNIVERSE IS GOING TO DO exactly what it does to those who
ignores its harsh laws...
CRAP ALL OVER YOU
Which is fine except that I might be in the line of fire.
So enjoy your "party" (at somebody elses expense, probably).
HERES SOMETHING TO PLAY AT IT:1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU9iCANi02o

[Feanor]

Enjoy your "party".
Like every other left wing event, all glitz and no guts.
Obamanation is going to be teh worst president since peanut carter,
AND THAT IS SAYING A LOT.
You leftists dont get it, you can rearrange things, try your failed policies a different way...
they will FAIL

They will ALWAYS fail, that always HAVE failed, always WILL.
WHAT ARE YOU IDIOTS partying FOR?
aNOTHER BRAIN DEAD LIBERAL WHO IS GOING TO TRY yet again to put square wheels on the car in hopes that it will work , ONE MORE EFFORT to try failed
liberal policies , after Bushie trying eight years of failed conservative policies.
Obamanation is ALREADY talking about two TRILLION in federal spending.
Thats all you leftists know, throw money (somebody elses) at the problem.
What matters is your FEELINGS, your INTENTIONS.
Doesnt matter if you use tarot cards or read tea leaves ,
YOUR HEART IS IN THE "RIGHT" PLACE ,
so in some form of sympathetic magic things will magically fix themselves!
and we can all sing kum-by-yah on the white house lawn!
HOW WONDERFUL.
No consequences for your actions! No unseen consequences AT ALL.
Our heart is PURE so the UNIVERSE is going to be NICE to us!!!
In reality the UNIVERSE IS GOING TO DO exactly what it does to those who
ignores its harsh laws...
CRAP ALL OVER YOU
Which is fine except that I might be in the line of fire.
So enjoy your "party" (at somebody elses expense, probably).
...

The Chief said in his inaugural address ...

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward.
Pix, the "stale political arguments" are yours, and the cynics are round hear are you, JSE, trollgirl, and maybe a coupled of others I won't single out. Guys like you believe as a matter of dogma that governments can't and shouldn't do anything: it isn't true and most people realize that to a greater or lessor extent.

[nightflier]

Pix,

Your post is littered with insults and generalizations but presents nothing new. It seems to me that you are the guy with his head in the sand, and I think there's an ostrich somewhere who's insulted by the association.

[Woochifer]

Point of clarification: Obama was born in Honolulu, in 1961. Honolulu being a state, that makes him illegible for the presidency. His father was born in Kenya, but lived in Honolulu and married to Ann Dunham, an American Citizen, at the time of Obama's birth. I really don't think his eligibility on account of his birth, is in question.

It was actually one of Hillary's opposition researchers that found Obama's 1961 birth announcement in the Honolulu newspaper, which definitively proves that he was born in Hawaii. Factcheck.org confirmed Obama's citizenship by examining the actual birth certificate, and contacting Hawaii public health officials who also confirmed the document's legitimacy.


For anyone, even someone as nutty as Pix, to claim that Obama is more of a Brit (not that there's anything wrong with that), than an American, is absolutely laughable. So stop beating that dead horse. It's over with!

Obviously, the U.S. Constitution and the 14th Amendment in particular aren't high on pixie's reading list. Maybe he should put down some of those old plasma TV reviews, and read something grounded in reality for a change.


Oh, and to point out another silly untruth mentioned before, Obama did put his hand on a Christian Bible and saluted the American flag. I guess the theory that he would do neither is also out the window, huh? How many other pix-predictions will come crashing down?

Oh, don't worry. Today, he'll be regurgitating Fox News' story that Obama wasn't "officially" sworn in because Justice Roberts flubbed the wording on the oath of office (I'm sure Rush, Hannity, et al will be echoing the same story). OMG, we're "officially" in a state of anarchy! Time to stock up on ammo, and start by shooting the mailman since they represent an illegitimate goverment!!!! :out:

[Ajani]

Pix,

Your post is littered with insults and generalizations but presents nothing new.

How is that any different from his usual posts?

[bobsticks]

How is that any different from his usual posts?

It's not. The problem is that within his delusional rantings there's at least one kernel of truth: "As for gun ownership, when it disapears freedom will be right BEHIND IT."

Governments should be afraid of their people.

But, that's theory and there's a even more compelling argument to be made based on reality. The FBI estimates that there are already over two hubdred million guns in the hands of private citizens in this country. Gun prohibitionists thin and act in a vacuum. If you eliminated the legal sale of all firearms this minute there would still be two hundred million of them on the streets.

My personal pledge to gun control activists: show me the stockpile of the two hundred million guns that you've confiscated and I'll sign over my rights and we'll all live happily ever after...or just fistfight, which is how it should be anyway.

Lest you think that I'm some type of redneck neanderthal, that same FBI rates my township's crime rate as more excessive than that of Compton, California and I don't own a firearm...but I like the knowledge that should my situation change I could acquire one for personal protection in a legal manner.

[pixelthis]

The Chief said in his inaugural address ...

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward.
Pix, the "stale political arguments" are yours, and the cynics are round hear are you, JSE, trollgirl, and maybe a coupled of others I won't single out. Guys like you believe as a matter of dogma that governments can't and shouldn't do anything: it isn't true and most people realize that to a greater or lessor extent.


Government should do as little as possible.
I will not "hope" for Barrack obamanation to succeed anymore than I WOULD "ROOT"
for anybody else doing something WRONG.
Should I root for a guy about to try to fly a plane he made using astrology?
Should I "root" for a guy about to go swimming in lead underwear?.
So why should I "root" for a guy who is going to use the same socialist policies that
have FAILED everytime they have been tried?
I dont root for IDIOTS who are doing things wrong,
or the IDIOTS WHO FOLLOW THEM INTO THE ABYSS.:1:

[nightflier]

Government should do as little as possible.
I will not "hope" for Barrack obamanation to succeed anymore than I WOULD "ROOT"
for anybody else doing something WRONG.
Should I root for a guy about to try to fly a plane he made using astrology?
Should I "root" for a guy about to go swimming in lead underwear?.
So why should I "root" for a guy who is going to use the same socialist policies that
have FAILED everytime they have been tried?
I dont root for IDIOTS who are doing things wrong,
or the IDIOTS WHO FOLLOW THEM INTO THE ABYSS.:1:

Do you realize how silly this sounds. Imagine that you had said this about Bush in 2000:


Government should do as little as possible.
I will not "hope" for Bush to succeed anymore than I WOULD "ROOT"
for anybody else doing something WRONG.
Should I root for a guy about to try to build an economy using cold-war ideas?
Should I "root" for a guy about to go fighting a war because of greed?.
So why should I "root" for a guy who is going to use the same Republican policies that
have FAILED everytime they have been tried?
I dont root for IDIOTS who are doing things wrong,
or the IDIOTS WHO FOLLOW THEM INTO THE ABYSS.:1:

In hindsight, you would probably have been a lot more right compared to the nonsense you are blurting out now.

Wooch,

Today Obama & Roberts repeated the oath correctly, just to silence people like Pix. Of course, I expect Pix will come back with a claim that then everything Obama has done already is null and void or some nonsense about Obama thus confirming that he was not president yet by acknowledging that the Oath had not been taken properly. Whatever, it's a dead horse, just like the question about his illegibility based on birth.

Pix, don't waste my time with this. It's dead & buried.

[Woochifer]

Today Obama & Roberts repeated the oath correctly, just to silence people like Pix. Of course, I expect Pix will come back with a claim that then everything Obama has done already is null and void or some nonsense about Obama thus confirming that he was not president yet by acknowledging that the Oath had not been taken properly. Whatever, it's a dead horse, just like the question about his illegibility based on birth

All this illegitimacy nonsense is just right-wing background noise so that they don't have to answer for their prior screeds about how criticizing (or even questioning) the President during time of war was tantamount to treason. Well, they are now criticizing and questioning Obama during a time of war, so if we accept what passed for their version of logic during the Bush tenure, they are now committing treason. But, rather than answer for their shifting positions and hypocritical excuse for patriotism, these end-timers would rather just keep making up and repeating outright lies about Obama's legitimacy. Interesting to see Obama calling their bluff by summoning Justice Roberts to the White House last night to readminister the oath, even though Constitutional scholars deemed Roberts' initial flubbing of the oath a nonissue.

[Mr Peabody]

Obama has made one move I strongly disagree with and that is his choice of Treasury Secretary. This guy will be the top person in charge of IRS and has a past of not paying taxes..... If he is the only guy to help us through the economic bad turn then we are in trouble, I mean there has to be more qualified persons to choose from, or we are in trouble. You know, it's like the ship is going down but, ooops, there's only one life jacket. What kind of message does this send when the Treasury Secretary hasn't paid taxes, timely. He was audited for two other years but I haven't heard the out come.

He is determined to close Gwontonamo Bay. At first, way back when I was indifferent, 9-11 still fresh in my mind but after all these years if the government hasn't found anything to charge these guys with then let them go. I guess they were slowing but surely putting them on trial if you want to call it that. I'd sure like to know the outcome of some of these proceedings.

[pixelthis]

Do you realize how silly this sounds. Imagine that you had said this about Bush in 2000:


IT WOULD HAVE BEEN JUST AS CORRECT.
You need to get it through your HEAD that I am NOT a "conservative" or a "liberal",
I am a LIBERTARIAN.
And Bush and CO trashed the constitution, trampled basic freedoms, locked people up without due cause, I COULD GO ON AND ON.
There is no thing as a "two" party country, with two parties they both get together
and share power, not letting anybody else in, effectively becoming ONE party.
So you have your choice, an incompetent liberal boob on teh left, or an incompetent
conservative boob on the right.
Doesnt matter, just window dressing, the true power in this country is going to carry out their agenda regardless


In hindsight, you would probably have been a lot more right compared to the nonsense you are blurting out now.

I am right , my ideology is based on centuries of experience , yours is based on
a hundred years of socialism and collectivism that has
NEVER worked, never will





Pix, don't waste my time with this. It's dead & buried.

Like this once great country:1:

[chiefwalk3]

It is amazing how a 20 year plan with a 3 year warning window can go down the tubes because of those who think they are intitled. And shouldn't have to think or contribute to their own well being. Amazing!

[nightflier]

The pictures are always entertaining, but if that's all ya got, then eventually it gets pretty shallow.


Like this once great country:1:

Still looking backwards, aren't you? Kind of like that bulldog walking backwards, pretty soon people presume that's just the way he looks when he walks around...

[pixelthis]

The pictures are always entertaining, but if that's all ya got, then eventually it gets pretty shallow.



Still looking backwards, aren't you? Kind of like that bulldog walking backwards, pretty soon people presume that's just the way he looks when he walks around...

BACKWARDS???
The founding fathers who created this country were living in the 18th century,
and they knew more about economics and human nature than a 1,000
obamanations will ever know.
When this country is impoverished , whats left of the constitution trashed,
people starving and rioting in the streets , and all of the nice toys we talk about on this board gone, your main worry feeding your family...
YOU will be "looking backwards" quite a bit yourself.
Wondering where your head was when you were buying into all of the lies and
propaganda.
I KNOW WHERE YOUR HEAD IS.
Sad thing is Mccain wouldnt have been any better.:1:

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=pixelthis]BACKWARDS???
The founding fathers who created this country were living in the 18th century,
and they knew more about economics and human nature than a 1,000
obamanations will ever know.
When this country is impoverished , whats left of the constitution trashed,
people starving and rioting in the streets , and all of the nice toys we talk about on this board gone, your main worry feeding your family...
YOU will be "looking backwards" quite a bit yourself.
Wondering where your head was when you were buying into all of the lies and
propaganda.
I KNOW WHERE YOUR HEAD IS.
Sad thing is Mccain wouldnt have been any better.:1:

[GMichael]

[QUOTE=pixelthis]BACKWARDS???
The founding fathers who created this country were living in the 18th century,
and they knew more about economics and human nature than a 1,000
obamanations will ever know.
When this country is impoverished , whats left of the constitution trashed,
people starving and rioting in the streets , and all of the nice toys we talk about on this board gone, your main worry feeding your family...
YOU will be "looking backwards" quite a bit yourself.
Wondering where your head was when you were buying into all of the lies and
propaganda.
I KNOW WHERE YOUR HEAD IS.
Sad thing is Mccain wouldnt have been any better.:1:

You must have some pretty funky @ss breath! :shocked:

[nightflier]

When this country is impoverished , whats left of the constitution trashed,
people starving and rioting in the streets , and all of the nice toys we talk about on this board gone...

Is this another prediction? If so, let's put a bookmark on that one for later.

[Mr Peabody]

Since when was a "boob on the left and a boob on the right" a bad thing??? That's usually my kind of "dressing things up". Know what I mean?

[pixelthis]

Since when was a "boob on the left and a boob on the right" a bad thing??? That's usually my kind of "dressing things up". Know what I mean?

Not when they will be running the country(in this case into the ground).
Although in some cases they arent that bad.
God made boobs so that men would never run the world.:1: