 | Entrance | Mainstreet | Wiki | Register |
|
# of watchers: 21
|
Fans: 0
| D20: 10 |
| Wiki-page rating |  Stumble! |
| Informative: | 0 |
| Artistic: | 0 |
| Funny-rating: | 0 |
| Friendly: | 0 |
2005-07-10 [Maurer's conclusions]: In every country in the developed world, except the US itself, everyone laughs at a president. Guess which one, and I'll give you a hint it's not Clinton. It's Bush. His idiocy and political clumsiness bring tears of laughter to the eyes of millions.
2005-07-11 [Dil*]: exactly. Guy from Sweden I was talking to asked me why we disliked the guy, he said bush was a walking comedy.
2005-07-11 [Maurer's conclusions]: The one thing he has done for the US economy is raising the sales of comedy-books, and only because he's the subject of them
2005-07-11 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Clinton dumped the bad economy right into Bush's lap. You can't get a bad economy in that short a time unless you raise taxes to heck and back, and Bush cut them. Bush stumbles over his words and repeats himself a little too much, but he gets right to the point he wants to make. And frankly, most people here don't care about all the jokes people make of Bush, because every single president we have had except perhaps Washington has been made fun of. It's normal. When someone is well-known people always make fun of him. I mean everyone, even the most popular person. And about Bush messing up the economy, the stocks have been soaring and we have tons of new jobs.
2005-07-11 [Leelo]: Well George Washington is even made fun of, somethin about his wooden teeth, so pretty much every president has been made fun of. But yeah I agree Clinton dumped alot of crap into Bush's lap, and he's been tryin to clean it all up, and in the process he has been blamed for alot of things that clinton did.
2005-07-11 [Maurer's conclusions]: Is this a smart president who gets to his point?
2005-07-11 [Catlover]: It's embarrassing to watch.
2005-07-11 [Maurer's conclusions]: I feel sorry for him.
2005-07-11 [Dil*]: lmao! I'm adding that link to my favorites.
2005-07-11 [Llevon]: speaking of jobs, my favorite complaint was that bush didn't increase the number of jobs to the level that was predicted his first term. yet people fail to realise, that he DID increase the number of jobs. it's not really a question of how much. be happy that the economy is growing. of course, if we wanted a truly stable economy, we'd all be under the socialist system, but that would destroy the competative market. polotics sucks ass no matter who's in charge or what system you're using...you take the good with the bad and come out as clean as possible. so far, bush is doing a hell of a job considering the state the country was in when he started his term.
2005-07-11 [Maurer's conclusions]: Yeah, it was in a terrible state when he started his second term. Hasn't gotten much better though.
2005-07-12 [Llevon]: the key word there is "much". his second term just started. there's still 3 more years.
2005-07-12 [Maurer's conclusions]: Yeah, and I've got a feeling it's just going to get worse.
2005-07-12 [Llevon]: well, that's your prediction...
2005-07-12 [Alkor]: I have the same feeling as-well. I heard on the news or something that he tried killing his wife cause she was talking about the war and predicting what will happen before it started or something like that. I forgot some of it..
2005-07-12 [Leelo]: yeah right, like Mr. Bush would ever think of killin his wife *rolls eyes*
2005-07-12 [Catlover]: I don't like Bush, but somehow him trying to kill his wife sounds just a little bit unlikely...
2005-07-12 [Alkor]: I heard it on the news so don't bitch at me from what the news said.
2005-07-12 [tiragon]: yea, i hate him, but he isnt that dumb
2005-07-12 [Leelo]: I don't hate him, actually I'm all for him, but him tryin to kill his wife seems a little far-fetched to me.
2005-07-13 [Llevon]: pft...and just what news were you listening to, i have to wonder...
2005-07-13 [Maurer's conclusions]: I hate him, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't kill his wife.
2005-07-13 [Ri'hala]: Yeahhh...Bush really doesn't come across as the killer type....and for such a dumb reason...Jeez, you'd have to have some serious anger issues to kill for that
2005-07-14 [Leelo]: lol yeah
2005-07-17 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Yeah o_O I wonder if a news station was reporting from the Inquirer or something... sounds like that nutsy kinda thing o_O
2005-07-17 [Leelo]: lol
2005-08-09 [Lady Vampire]: BUSH SUCKS ASS!
2005-08-09 [Leelo]: well if you think so then kindly take your insults to the right wiki :)
2005-08-10 [Alkor]: BUSH SUCKS..Serious
2005-08-10 [Leelo]: what do they have to do wit hBush? Btw are yuo in office? Are you the president? Since your not, then you shouldn't be talking about how he sucks, because you don't know what it's like to be the president of the USA. And I know it's a hard job. And since you "personally" don't know him, then I'm guessing your saying things that you've heard from other people, or your watching too many music videos. :)
2005-08-10 [Dil*]: There are many reasons why one wouldn't like him. Sure he's your president, that just means he has the right connections being filthy rich and all. He's a halfwit.
2005-08-10 [Dil*]: Someone already dropped this link, but I think it's worth a second look: http://www.loo
2005-08-10 [chasingpeace]: i seriously doubt he knows what 'sovern' means...
2005-08-10 [chasingpeace]: also, i think being president would be a easy job, basically. everyone does everything for you. everybody else writes the speeches, fights your battles for you...they even tell you what decisions to make...all you have to do is say 'yes, 'no', and put your john hancock on a few bills...people even read everything for you! probably the most phyical activity would be standing out in front of a podium...also, it may be hard for bush to come up with all his made-up words...I can imagine him scribbling out the last ones right before he turns that corner...that'
2005-08-10 [chasingpeace]: Everything else the presidents do is pretty much optional...unl
2005-08-10 [Cat0132]: yeah 'vacation' except he just signed a bill and said a few speechs...uh huh, its not a REAL vacation
2005-08-10 [Dil*]: Zansola just stated bush has taken more vacation time than any other president in history. She did not say that he was on vacation at this particular moment in time.
2005-08-10 [Dil*]: On another note, regarding the link, bush doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. He uses the word to try to define the word. If he said 'independent' nation once, he would be saved. Too bad he's ignorant.
2005-08-10 [lohawefniwubf]: w00t Pineapples
2005-08-10 [chasingpeace]: i don't like canned pineapple...
2005-08-10 [Ri'hala]: Fresh pinnapple burns and stings zee mouth @_@ *knows from experience*
2005-08-11 [lohawefniwubf]: Fine... w00t doughnuts
2005-08-11 [Ri'hala]: Lmao XD
2005-08-11 [Ylaraniala Majere]: >.< Alright guys, ENOUGH. You aren't allowed here to squawk about how bad and stupid Bush is. In fact, that's a direct violation of the rules since you guys are flaming Bush. So quit it will ya? And also, may I add something here? Every single President in the history of the United States has been under SEVERE stress. Some evidence of that fact is that ALL of them had a huge amount of grey hair when they came out of office compared to when they got in it. And far more than just four to eight years would account for. It's a really stressful job taking care of everything in the world, knowing that the decision you make now could ruin the country later. So quit it will ya?
2005-08-11 [Ylaraniala Majere]: That goes for [Lady Vampire], [Alkor], [dilandau], and [chasingpeace].
2005-08-12 [Dil*]: they have grey hair because they're old and the only reason that bush would be stressed is the fact that half the world hates him.
2005-08-12 [Ri'hala]: Lmao. For a second there I thought Ylara was talking to me about the whole food thing XD Dunno why >>;;
2005-08-12 [Ylaraniala Majere]: .....Actually I don't think he cares... I wouldn't if it were me. *shrugs* And lol, that'd be hilarious Ri'hala...
2005-08-12 [chasingpeace]: he doesn't care because he doesn't know about it...they don't let him look at the real news...they give him fake newspapers and edit the TV...
2005-08-12 [chasingpeace]: also, with the 'flaming' thing...rule #4 says that debate is allowed....
2005-08-12 [Ri'hala]: *cackles and grins at Ylara* "No food talk here! This isn't a cooking wiki! Shut up! Now!."
2005-08-12 [Lioness123]: being president is the hardest job in the world, most of you people should know that. you have to be friggin smart just to get close to that seat. And dont give me any of that sh** that bush is dumb b/c he's alot smarter than anyone here.
2005-08-13 [Catlover]: That's an interesting claim. I'm hoping someone with a tested genius-level IQ will now turn up and prove you wrong.
2005-08-13 [Dil*]: Ouch, that was cold :)
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: A truly wise leader would recognize the danger of irritating the world, regardless of that nation's military power; a truly caring leader would do what benefits the majority of his nation's citizens, not the privileged few; a truly intelligent leader would not use the word "misunderestim
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: As for the actual process of becoming the president, you need money and you need connections. Then you need a marketing scheme. Bush has money, and thanks to the will of his father, he also has a great many connections. Marketing scheme? Well, he marketted his spirituality to the Christian right, who helped him win. It had nothing to do with intelligence, though the man isn't an idiot, he's just also not intelligent.
2005-08-13 [Catlover]: Sorry, _Dilandau_, I just can't help being cold when people make that kind of assumption. Also, I dispute the idea that being President is the hardest job in the world. In Britain, the job with the highest death risk is that of a deep-sea diver, last time I checked, and I doubt it'll be much different for America. So surely the job of a deep-sea diver is harder - not harder to get into, but harder as a job itself.
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: High risk of death doesn't equate difficulty. It equates a high risk of death. The difficulty of a job is contingent on one's ability to effectively perform its duties. Personally, I'd find operating a particle accelerator, or creating methods of cancer treatment far more difficult than deep-sea diving.
2005-08-13 [Catlover]: True. How would you judge how difficult a job is? The skills required to do it correctly? In that case, there are definitely harder jobs than President, although making comparisons is difficult.
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: That's exactly how I would gauge it. I'm pretty sure that being an effective president is quite difficult. A damn shame that I've yet to see one in my lifetime.
2005-08-13 [Catlover]: Quite difficult - definitely. The hardest job in the world - no.
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: Hardly.
2005-08-13 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Actually I've seen two very effective presidents in my lifetime... though one of their goals of effectiveness wasn't exactly what I wanted it to be. And zansola, of course you can debate, but you can't flame while debating.
2005-08-13 [Ylaraniala Majere]: One of the hardest jobs in the world then.
2005-08-13 [Catlover]: Possibly. And I think how many effective presidents you've seen depends mostly on how old you are!
2005-08-13 [Lioness123]: as bad a man as Clinton was, I think hes the best president I've seen in my time
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: Clinton was the best president I've seen, but from an economic standpoint, there's still be very little done to benefit the whole. As far as economic policies were concerned, he was still far more conservative than liberal.
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: Unless I'd been alive during the Kennedy era, I would have been hard-pressed to see an effective president.
2005-08-13 [Ri'hala]: Well, I wasn't alive during Reagan's time, but I personally think he's the best we've ever had, with Bush coming close behind him.
2005-08-13 [sophomoric]: If you can back it up, by all means do.
2005-08-14 [chasingpeace]: I don't know why everyone rags on clinton all the time...he was the first president my MOM ever saw get up and admit he wouldn't be able to do some of the things he said he would do in his campaign...als
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: Define where Bush lied, because to lie tends to be a conscious decision to mislead; if you're referencing the war, it's yet to be proved that Bush knew the intelligence information was flawed.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: replying to catlovers post to moi, uhm, that was a compliment...k
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: Bush said there were WMD without a doubt, so either he lied or he messed up BAD. Then again, why couldnt he have waited a bit??? The UN inspecters BEGGED him to let them check it out first.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: The UN inspectors had been trying to inspect various facilities where he, Hussein, repeatedly denied them entry. Yes, they didn't find WMD's, but it still stands that he was going on flawed intelligence. I don't like that guy, but that doesn't mean he's the one at fault. Peopple are failing to understand that it's the entire government, not just one person, that needs to come under scrutiny. We blame presidents because they are the head, but that's not a valid argument.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: True, but I actually dislike the whole US govt greatly, especially the neo-cons. But I think he rushed in there a bit too early, how long did they scrutinize Iraq for?? 2 months? War is a serious thing and I think they should have looked into it more.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: Iraq had been under scrutiny for an extended period of time, and while I disagree with the war itself, we do not have the evidence necessary to define their motives.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: Why do *you* disagree with the war?
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: I disagree with all war unless it's a matter of self-defence, not a matter of pre-emptive defence based on the assumption of threat.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: Oh so you dont like how they did things out of fear. Also they manipulated the population with fear.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: True, and they still do, but we as the western society, have been living in a state of comfort that was mostly constructed from the delusion that we were living in a peaceful world. The war finally touched on our doorstep with these terrorist attacks.... It might not be a horrid thing to teach the people that there is reason to be afraid.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: There are many problems in the middle east, what I find ironic is the fact that bushs father was good friends with Saddamn and sold him missiles and helped him suppress the kuwait rebels. Its all in self-interest and all this crap about the govt giving a damn about anyone outside the US are lies.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: US foreign policy has never been denied on an official level; they admit that it is purely in self-interest that they do what they do. Canada is a precious resource, so they attempt to protect us... as cheaply as possible, of course, but same thing nonetheless.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: hmmm, the US does donate to 3rd world countries, though more could be done. We are a precious resource, there is a world water crisis isnt there. Water will soon be a precious resource o.o, its freaky.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: The United States donates to specific third world nations.... they also collect some nice interest from third world nations, such as Brazil from a variety of loans. The debt is why the rainforest is being destroyed.
2005-08-14 [Dil*]: Ah yes, I actually like my schooling sometimes, our last unit was the one about the rainforests being destroyed and it also talked about he debt. Though we crammed the last like 100 pages of the text into about 3 days (so our environment unit was cut painfully short). I think it would be good to get everyone educated about world problems, then maybe we could do more about them. Or you know, start giving a shit.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: Not everyone can be bothered to care, because it only has long-term impact, not short-term, and so they fail to recognize how direct an impact it will have.
2005-08-14 [Catlover]: People are starting to wake up to some problems though, such as global warming. Last week, my 60-year-old neighbour said that it must be real. That amazed me. He normally denies everything he can't see in front of his own eyes - but now, you can see the effects of global warming for yourself. So people are starting realise the direct impact of that, and maybe (hopefully) that will cause them to notice other issues.
2005-08-14 [Ylaraniala Majere]: No swearwords guys, please remove them from the posts because I really don't want to delete them, that's some marvelous debate ^^ And Catlover, uh, if you go back millions of years you will find that there have been periods of global warming before. As well as global cooling. They even out.
2005-08-14 [Ylaraniala Majere]: And yes, the US is selfish in many ways, naturally. We can't exactly help everyone in the world, especially with the national debt. It's either help all the third world nations or protect Canada and other sources of important items. One country simply can't do everything, and I mean ANY country.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: That's why the United Nations was set in place, but because the United States is concerned about its sovereignty, they tend to ignore most of what the UN says. I'm just waiting to the UN's collapse, then I'll be content again.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: Well... That's not why the UN was set in place, but that's one of its goals now.
2005-08-14 [Ylaraniala Majere]: (thanks sophomoric) Actually the UN is fighting against whatever is American no matter what... I wish we'd just kick them out of our country and let someone else deal with it.
2005-08-14 [sophomoric]: I would disagree fervently with that claim; there have been a great many instances where the UN has supported the United States, but I think that this self-proclaime
2005-08-15 [Dil*]: I used to not give a s* about the environment, I used to say, whatever, Ill be long dead and buried before any bad stuff happens to me. That was back when I was 12/13, Ive grown up since then. What do you suggest the UN be replaced with??
2005-08-15 [sophomoric]: Something that actually has the power to do something. Currently the UN is structured in such a way that nations can do whatever they want, and the UN will just say "don't do that."
2005-08-16 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Well anything else is basically a single global country...
2005-08-16 [sophomoric]: That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. Defining, on a global scale what are human rights, and everyone being able to work in the favour of the cause of the majority of the citizens of this earth that we share? Doesn't sound bad to me.... and if they only meddled in affairs that they would be allowed juristiction over (ie, things that impact the whole world - the environment and war) then it could be shockingly efficient.
2005-08-16 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Effeciency isn't the key. The bigger countries get, the harder it is for their people to protest. The harder it is to protest, the worse the country can be with ease.
2005-08-16 [Dil*]: not true. It depends on the form of govt. (The US is quite big, but there are still many protests) Smallerish middle east countries suppress their protests horribly. Efficiency is the key. Whats the point of an ineffective system? Morality is a b***** to define by the way. I think it would take at least a couple of decades of debating before we can find a suitable moral code for the world. Even then there would be at least a couple of holy wars o.o
2005-08-16 [Ylaraniala Majere]: It's better just to leave it alone as far as a global country. And actually Dilandau, we have a problem here in the US as far as protesting. The federal government can do much of what they please because they're so far away. It takes a lot of money to even get there, much less protest what they're doing. It's too much of a hassle. So people protest from their home states and very rarely get anything actually DONE about it.
2005-08-16 [sophomoric]: At any rate, I wasn't suggesting a global country, but a group formed of all the national leaders to help define certain policies to help the people in the world as a whole. Corruption should never make it to the highest levels of governmnet.
2005-08-16 [Dil*]: oh, but it quite often does (corruption) that is. Especially the African countries.
2005-08-17 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Actually, agreed Dilandau... the world is ending again... >.>
2005-08-17 [sophomoric]: The world is ending because of apathy and indifference. If people could actually see fit to care about issues before they developed into problems and took responsbility for their own actions, we wouldn't have half the problems we have today, nor half the responsbilitie
2005-08-17 [Dil*]: its not exactly our generations fault entirely, I mean look at the industrial revolution...t
2005-08-17 [sophomoric]: Did I say it was our generations fault? I'm saying it's our species' fault.
2005-08-17 [Dil*]: no no, just pointing out a fact. And what the hell is with the human race? We are just so weird/destruct
2005-08-18 [sophomoric]: Gaia Hypothesis: The earth is a singular, living organism. It goes into more detail, but my hypothesis is that humanity is a cancer.
2005-08-18 [Lioness123]: *chokes on my coke* what..?
2005-08-18 [Dil*]: I have to agree, every animal/living thing on the planet adds to the ecosystem, we destroy it. You know...alot of intellectual people end up detesting humanity.
2005-08-19 [Lioness123]: thats kind of an oxymoron saying that when you guys ARE humans. And also, humans have saved alot of endangered species from extinction, not to mention all the other things we have done to preserve the planet.
2005-08-20 [Dil*]: Yes, it is the cruel irony that we ARE human, and technically it is a paradox, not an oxymoron. We...as a species have destroyed a large portion of the world..and the things we do are little and feeble. The destruction of the rainforest is still going on..at an alarming rate. The kyoto accord isnt working at all, instead of reducing the pollution on the planet, the emission of fossil fuels and other gases has only increased.
2005-08-20 [sophomoric]: It's ignorant to argue that humanity is "saving animals from the brink of extinction" when we are the cause of them being led so close to the brink... and it's not oxymoronic at all to say such things while being human, it means that the species of which we are a portion is on a whole, one that exists to the detriment of all other species. Why is this? Because we assuredly believe in ourselves as a rightfully dominant species while making changes to the environment that are all to difficult to change in the short term.
2005-08-20 [Dil*]: urgh, difficult is an understatement
2005-08-20 [sophomoric]: Misanthropy is widespread amongst teens without a cause for their hatred... this is simply a definitive channel.
2005-08-20 [Dil*]: Maybe they realize this on a subconcious level, we are all aware of the destruction to a certain degree. (for all you confused readers, misanthropy means hatred/distrus
2005-08-20 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Actually I find it quite funny that you guys are talking about the human race this way, though it's been going on for a while. Have you ever considered that animals may in fact NOT be supporting or aiding the ecosystem? If humans were not here, animals would still die out. In fact, they may have done so more often. Humans save animals that are going extinct, while other creatures don't even care about it. Predators are only concerned about surviving the day and catching their dinner. Herbivores are only concerned with avoiding the predators and foraging for food. Since we ARE predators, it is natural for us to be somewhat destructive, and for the most part humans reject that part of
2005-08-20 [Ylaraniala Majere]: ourselves. Most of us still eat meat, but we cultivate it and help the animals to live to a good age with good lives, protecting them from any other predator that wants them, like snakes or foxes. No animal really CARES that we are destroying the environment, as long as they manage to live. We are the only ones concerned with it.
2005-08-20 [sophomoric]: There is no scientific evidence to back up your claims.
2005-08-20 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Actually all scientific evidence points that way. Animals aren't intelligent enough to care about the environment; some types care about each other and the good of the pack, but no scientific evidence supports the idea of them wanting to help anything else.
2005-08-21 [sophomoric]: .......who said anything about them wanting to help? I certainly never did. I'm saying that humans have devastated the environment. I said that humanity was once a part of nature, and functioning within the realm of balance, but that much like a cancer we've developed into its destroyer... so in fact, you're arguing from an entirely invalid perspective. Animals don't damage the environment; humans do. It's as simple as that. Or in the instances when animals DO damage the environment, such as goats and horses in Australia, it's due to human interference.
2005-08-21 [Lioness123]: ylar, I totally agree with you *high five!* also, what about the dinosaurs? They died off without any human interference. Some species are meant to die off. And to sophomoric, have you seen what a herd of hippo does to a landscape? They trample a deep trench to and from the rivers which cuts off the path of other animals. And what about beavers? They kill more trees than any human ever could.
2005-08-21 [Lioness123]: ***off topic breaking news** I just found out that my brother is going to Iraq in less than 1 year.
2005-08-21 [Maurer's conclusions]: I think that an army of humans with chainsaws and deforesting vehicles can take down more trees than all of the beavers in the world.
2005-08-21 [Lioness123]: yes, but for every tree they cut down, they plant 2 or 3. Here in Nebraska, its 6 for every 1 you cut down.
2005-08-21 [Dil*]: bah, alot of those small trees planted die. And the old growth forest...takes hundreds of years to grow back. Just planting trees does not save the ecosystem..the
2005-08-21 [Dil*]: Oh, and your comment about beavers is not true. If we continue the way we are with the cutting down of trees, we will lose an area of the rainforest about the size of India.
2005-08-21 [chasingpeace]: and india is a huge-ass country
2005-08-21 [sophomoric]: Dinosaurs were killed off, most likely, by a meteor, and natural changes occuring in the climate which some species of animals subsequently adapted to. Planting trees after you destoy the ecosystem doesn't rebuild the forest; people don't seem to understand that either.
2005-08-22 [Lioness123]: the point I was trying to make with dinosaurs is that extinction goes on with no help from humans. Nature in itself is constantly destroying and rebuilding, just like humanity. (forest fires being another example)
2005-08-22 [sophomoric]: Let me know when you witness the trends where the depletion of the ozone layer somehow leads to new life. I'd love to have my mind at ease.
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: Just because some natural disasters destroy life, doesnt make it okay for us to destroy the world too. How often does a significant meteor hit the earth? How often does an Ice Age occur? New life cannot occur if we kill the environment for life to thrive.
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: And also another thing, have you ever heard of the ill-treatment of animals bred for consumption?? They are put in cramped little pens and never let out. Chickens are just put in cages all day, and they make the chickens grow so fast that their legs cannot support the weight and after a while they have to slaughter them because if they dont, their own weight will snap their legs. The animals live in such cruel environments that I would claim it as un-life. A cheap/shoddy life. (this is to ylars comment about 'cultivating' animals)
2005-08-22 [sophomoric]: One day I'll breed humans for consumption... We're getting enough meat on us that it's the smartest thing to do.
2005-08-22 [Lioness123]: Farm animals are worth based on their health and size. Believe me, farmers take good care of their animals. Its their livelyhood. And have you ever been to one of those chicken factories? My boyfriends uncle worked for one of them for about 10 years. I'll ask him what really goes on there, but I doubt its as bad as u think. And Sophomoric, you are one sick demented psycho if you really believe that last comment you made.
2005-08-22 [sophomoric]: How on earth am I a sick demented psycho? By psycho, are you referencing psychopathic, or psychotic? ...because the definitions have quite the distinction. On that note, who are you to criticize my perspective if you're not willing to accept the criticism of your own methods of sustaining the meat industry's food supply? Because one is against your morals and the other isn't?
2005-08-22 [sophomoric]: Also:
1. NO FLAMING. Which means of the members, of the owners, of the opposers, of anyone of the Republican Party, of anyone from the Democratic Party, of anyone from ANYWHERE. No flaming. And provocation is NOT an excuse.
2005-08-22 [Lioness123]: I am against canabalism! I don't think there's a person here who would agree that its ok to "breed humans for consumption". And the above was only flaming "if" you believe that, as I said.
2005-08-22 [sophomoric]: Therefore, it was flaming. Sophomoric insane?
2005-08-22 [Catlover]: http://www.ani
2005-08-22 [Ylaraniala Majere]: What SOME factory conditions are like. Honestly, do you think that someone with that name would be fair? "Animal Activism" isn't going to be fair to those who are actually being nice to animals, they are stating either only or mostly negatives. Off that though, normal factories that are kept to a good standard. Perhaps we should put pressure on all countries to take care of them gentler and let them live good lives.
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: I wouldn't define 'nice' as breeding animals to kill them for food. And soph, I support you on many counts, but I don't believe cannibalism. You may have logical justifications for this, but I just cannot ever see that as correct. Even if I am a godforsaken atheist. Oh, and that thing about catholicism was just damn funny.
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: And milk is gross too. They pump the cows full of growth hormones and antibiotics. I actually stopped drinking milk for about a year or so, until I realized I was allergic to soy milk...err, skin problems. Now I just drink milk with cereal (either than that, I aviod at all costs). Cows in the milk industry only live for approx. 2 years, while a cow in the wild can live 10 years.
2005-08-22 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Well think about it, they'd already be eaten and probably when they were younger, and they'd be constantly afraid. This way, they live very happy lives with other livestock of their kind and eat better too.
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: cows have tubes attached to their udders to suck out milk day and night. This process gets more milk, but it also causes cows to form tumors (in their udders), hence the heavy antibiotics. So technically, there is a fair amount of antibiotics and pus (from the tumors) in our milk.
2005-08-22 [Ylaraniala Majere]: I don't know about that one, at least not here. I can't say for other countries because I haven't been there, but it's pretty usual for cows to live a long time. Even dairy cows. And I sure as heck know that cows do NOT have tubes attached to them here. They are milked normally.
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: I'm describing american dairy cow industry, actually. Ever wonder why girls are maturing faster? One of the possible reasons is the growth hormones they pump into the cows and this goes into the milk of course. Got Milk? *smiles twistedly*
2005-08-22 [Ylaraniala Majere]: *laughs* Ha! Hilarious. I really doubt that Americans are doing that. If they were they'd be sued by all those environmentali
2005-08-22 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Also, er, could we sorta postpone this discussion till tomorrow?... I had a really good thing happen and I'm trying to enjoy it ^^
2005-08-22 [Dil*]: well, I'll link you, once I find it...*looks at the millions of bookmarks*
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: actually, here in iowa/midwest, the cows aren't on the milking pumps 24/7...that'd just make the cows dry up faster and if you didn't take em off once in a while, no milk would build up. Also, dairy cows who eventually get older and start giving less or 'sour' milk are sold to be put out to pasture, if the farm they were on at the time is primarily dairy and has no pasture. My friends who live on farms only milk their cows for a few hours in the morning, then let them out to pasture, then bring them back in at night to be milked.
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: also, why would you need growth horomones for milk? it wouldn't make their udders bigger, it'd just make them age and give less milk faster...also they clean milk before they ship it, and all farms are under huge scrutiny to keep food safe.
2005-08-23 [Lioness123]: Just a note-- that above pic is taken from below the cages (the chickens are not lying down or stacked on top of each other). I've lived in Nebraska my entire life, in and around farming communities so I know a little about how the animals are treated. The cows ARE NOT milked around the clock. They get milked at the same times, twice a day. If they aren't milked, then their udders get swollen with milk and very painful (While being milked, they have a dish with flowing fresh water). In the meantime, they roam hundreds of acres of grassland and munch on grass and feed...not growth hormones. (And what was that part about girls maturing faster? where's the proof for that?)
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: supposedly girls are getting their periods earlier...they started showing 'the video' in 4th grade because of it...
2005-08-23 [Doormat]: American corporations are out there to make money. Money comes from their products that they sell. Products can be made to be produced faster. The increase in speed of production causes problems. The problems in any way possible (legal or illegal [what they don't know won't hurt them]). They find more dangerous, but more effective means to solve the problems. They make money...Everyo
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: yes, but the frmers have the ultimate say in how they get their products out there. A corporation can't force a farmer do do things that will make their products harmful in any way. they won't buy from them anymore? who cares? they can sell elsewhere, and if times get tough, they can sell some cattle or land to make things easier, and possibly buy it back later. Pressure to make more machinery faster may make machines less safe, but a farmer can sell or stop selling to anyone he or she wants to. they know that they'll make a profit somehow, no matter how fast their cow gives milk.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: http://www.veg
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: 
2005-08-23 [Lioness123]: The top picture looks like it was taken from a transporting truck. Stressed cattle won't produce milk, just as stressed chickens won't produce eggs. Thats why farmers freak out in the summer time and spend so much money for air conditioners for the buildings and spray water on the cows to keep them cool. I think the people who think farm animals are mistreated have never visited a real farm and have no idea what their talking about.
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: I notice that all the links were from sites promoting veganism...als
2005-08-23 [Doormat]: If you were a farmer, Lioness, would you not care for profits? Let your cows give milk whenever they want, and spend money on air conditioning for them? Of course not, don't lie. Farmers are out to make money...Even if that means abusing their animals. We humans automatically put ourselves about our animal counterparts. If farmers worried and cared for animals that much, they wouldn't make money. Money making is hard work...If you make it that way. The quick and easy way is better. Milk the hell out of the cows, inject them with antibiotics to stop the swelling. Cage the chickens. Mass breed the pigs. Gone are the days of "Old Macdonald had a farm", children...
2005-08-23 [Ylaraniala Majere]: Actually if you cage the chickens to where they aren't comfortable, they won't lay eggs. Cows have to be young and undamaged enough to have calves, since that is where they get their milk. And cows always produce milk at a pretty steady and fast rate, so there really isn't any reason to mistreat them. As for the photos... all of them could be pretty easily reproduced... there isn't really any evidence they came from a real farm. It's possible someone crammed them places just to get the pictures. And please guys, don't say we are searching for ways out of the truth, because you nitpick at our evidence just as much.
2005-08-23 [Lioness123]: I'm just telling you how they run the farms around here in Nebraska, DiabloJr. You can believe me or not, I don't care. But where are you from? I'll bet you've never been to a farm before. My boyfriends mother works at a cattle auctioning barn, and believe me, if those animals show any signs of mistreatment, they don't sell. Think about it, why would any farmer damage their own property by not taking care of it???
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: What works for one location doesn't mean it's a universal standard. Factory farming has been on the rise due to the fact that they see greater profits from such industries as fast food. The end result is that animals are mistreated in conditions we shudder to think ourselves in.
2005-08-23 [Lioness123]: whatever dude, listen to what I say. I only said how things are done around here. Don't make claims unless you yourself have witnessed it or have proof of it. Don't base arguments on rumors and what everyone's heard from activists, etc.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: Why don't you provide a single link for a counter-arguem
2005-08-23 [Lioness123]: geez, no need to get all defensive. I'm not criticizing when all I say is that I want to see proof for extreme claims. Also, I never said I knew alot about the environment. I just gave you the facts that disprove alot of what you guys are talking about.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: could you attach facts to your dissapproval? I understand if you are skeptical, but why?
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: this is to [chasingpeace]'s comment about a vegetarian world, livestock actually take up more farming area and pollute the earth more than plant agriculture, read: http://www.ani
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: Not to mention how much grain is necessary just to feed the cattle; it's a conversion of nine pounds of grain for every pound of beef.
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: It's not something that needs to be proven; do a little research. These aren't extremes of accusations, it's a basic fact that the meat industry is making changes towards a format that is more fitting of the word industry than it is farming.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: It makes sense, the world population is still growing rapidly (and we need more efficient ways of making food). I disagree with soph's claim of using people as meat, but there are other ways of controlling the population. In China, imposing a law on how many children a family had worked quite well (and I know the downfalls of it, ie, murdering the girl babies) But in western society, both sexes are valueable. So the main problem associated with Chinese population control doesn't effect western society.
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: People fail to address the cause of over-populatio
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: Also, western populations have stabilized on a fairly widescale (United States being an exception to this rule, though its growth rate has slowed). Canada, as an example, actually has a population in decline. The only way to maintain our population is to have more immigrants coming in. After pressure from the United States to tighten our borders, our standards for immgrants have been increased to levels that few people are capable of meeting, and most experts believe it to be a horrible choice.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: Ah yes, the famous: "Poverty causes overpopulation
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: China has 1/5 of the world's overall population, but only 7% of its arable land.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: Urgh, I wish our govt wasn't so bloody spineless. Everyone's an immigrant in Canada! (hehe..I was born here, but I'm fully chinese).
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: china had to under-go serious population control.
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: It's funny. Right after September 11th happened, people (I was living in Texas at the time) were getting on my case because the rumour was that the terrorists got into the United States from Canada. It was later proven that it was a flaw in the American immigration system... but still.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: I'll just...say nothing. Because anything I say will probably involve a bit of swearing and or flaming. And I'll go on this huge rant about racial profiling and finding scapegoats.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: But these bush supporters might have something on us, most of my links involve supporting vegetarians, the information could have a large bias.
2005-08-23 [Lioness123]: we Americans have things so good here that even our homeless and poor are so much richer than the poor in places like India and Africa.
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: I'm basing my knowledge off of matters that I was taught in school. You should realize that people in support of the meat industry wouldn't exactly decide to say "Oh yeah, and we have unethical methods with which we harvest the meat that you buy at your local grocer's."
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: Personally, I'm not in any mood to debate, and I don't really want to have to debate. I know that we likely all want what's best for everyone in the world, we just have different ideas on how to get there, right?
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: I was taught most of the stuff about the environment in school, but I learned meat industry stuff myself and off my parents.
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: I learned the environment/me
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: just do you know, the link wasn't really relevant to what I was saying. The whole world cannot survive on a vegan/vegetari
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: can we talk about AIDS now? i wanna talk about AIDS. the only way to get rid of it quickly would be to seperate everyone in the world who has AIDS, from everybody else. Nobody wants to hear it, but it's true. The only thing that keeps AIDS going is the people that have it.
2005-08-23 [Catlover]: Which is the same as a lot of other diseases.
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: yeah, but AIDS is the biggest problem. Also, i would never go to that animal awareness site again. most of that information is a load of crap. for almost everything they say that's bad about farming, i can contradict it. again...AIDS is the biggest problem.
2005-08-23 [sophomoric]: Actually, Zansola, it's not impossible. Given the ratio of produce required for meat production, the protein that could be gained from a variety of nuts and beans, the iron and the like that could be obtained is more than enough to sustain the world population several times over.
2005-08-23 [Dil*]: How much water does cattle drink? Cattle takes more resources than crops, for sure. There are other ways of obtaining protein/iron. Calcium from tofu, iron from spinach, and protein from nuts. God, it is not hard. (top of my head). I have decided that, though it maybe a biased site, one must consider the source of information they use. The sources look valid to me.
2005-08-23 [chasingpeace]: yes it is, there are vitamins that you can only get from meat, the entire world would be on a vitamin supplemnt, and it's hard enough to get medicines to countries as it is
2005-08-24 [sophomoric]: Funny... I'm perfectly healthy and I don't eat any meat.
2005-08-24 [Dil*]: there are those who argue that a purely vegetarian diet is actually healthier than a meat/ect diet. If you think very hard, it makes sense. Early humans could not get their hands on that much meat and ate mostly fruits/vegetab
2005-08-24 [Lioness123]: As a nurse in training, I've taken a Nutrition class and were taught that one can live a healthy life without meat, BUT you gotta know what to eat and how much. Its hard to do, you can die from anemia if you don't get enough Vitamin B12 (I think thats the one). And yes, Americans eat WAY too much meat, which is one of the reasons why we're a fat nation. As for the environment and the like, I suggest you all visit my wiki in Elfpack called Greenpeace criticizers, I have alot of links there.
2005-08-24 [sophomoric]: I don't agree with a lot that people say, in fact, I can tend towards being conservative from time to time... but when it comes to things that could potentially hold an impact for the world as a whole, I'd sooner take precautions and be wrong than to assume it could be wrong, and do more harm to the issue until it becomes a problem, much like the ozone layer.
2005-08-24 [Lioness123]: actually I just read an article that the Ozone layer is getting better every year.--> http://www.csm
Number of comments: 3316
| Show these comments on your site |
|
Elftown - Wiki, forums, community and friendship.
|