Dru Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 whats wrong with synth-based pop music? i just scored myself neil young's TRANS on vinyl last weekend! Quote
wydrav13 Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 w you said it, i get tired of that "slipper slope" that same old white, right wing christian, idea of the world. the kind that thinks death to all muslims and anyone anti-american Quote
Dru Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 quote: Originally posted by specialed: Canadian music = synth based pop Quote
W Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 Hey go easy on those canadians- they brought the world Bryan Adams Quote
AlpineK Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 I thought that whole debate back a while ago about techno music was pretty funny since that term was used for a style of music popular in the 80's. Just shows you how out of touch butt rockers are. Quote
CleeshterFeeshter Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 That "W" stands for whore. Too bad Osama was not successful and hit Cheney and Bush on the 11th. Being a good "Patriot" works both ways. To defend the constitution from enemies both alien and domestic. There is a good, albeit highly conspiritorial, article on www.enronx.com (ex enron employees website) that ties the 9/11 attack to Cheney- Unocal- Enron-The Talibans refusal to allow a Unocal pipeline from Uzbekistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan. Conspiracy theorists will love it- it does make you wonder especially with the whore that Bush is well known to be. Quote
W Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 quote: Originally posted by AlpineK: I thought that whole debate back a while ago about techno music was pretty funny since that term was used for a style of music popular in the 80's. Just shows you how out of touch butt rockers are. What, doesn't everyone listen to Bad Company and Boston? I hear there's another Aerosmith album coming out... Quote
specialed Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 I knew this Hoods in the Woods instructor who had the misfortune of supervising Jeb Bush's daughter (the one who just got arrested for illegally possesing prescription drugs) on a hoods in the woods trip. Apparantly this Bush chick was all fucked up from eating whole sheets of acid and doing coke and shit. Nearly insane from all the drugs she took. I get irate when ever I hear "W" going off about how we have to increase our efforts on the war on drugs. All the drugs the Bush family has bought and used is probably enough to support a few Columbian drug cartels alone. Kind of hyprcritical. [ 02-13-2002: Message edited by: specialed ] Quote
W Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 Look at it this way- speaking in parallels, it is about 1961 right now. Everyone is whipped up into a nationalistic war frenzy and gripped by fear, but under the surface are simmerings of dissent. As the government feeds off the fear of enemies and the fear of speaking out against the leaders, power goes unchecked and atrocities will start to occur and the world problems will correspondingly spiral out of control, and only then will people begin to stand up to be heard. THE NEW SIXTIES ARE COMIN', MAN! Quote
Dru Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 !! she's doggy humping that other girls leg !! jon, this girl is your type! Quote
allthumbs Posted February 13, 2002 Posted February 13, 2002 if you look close i think she wet herself too Quote
Zenolith Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 How dare you guys speak that way about GW!! He's our president and its not his fault that he's retarded. Remember that roadless olicy that seemed like a done deal? It got an all time record of public comments in favor and the Bush sent it back for another comment period. It still got overwhelming support so now they are watering it down to mean nothing. The latest thing is they want to give the discretion to the FS Chief about whether to allow roading and logging in roadless areas. Aren't these _public_ lands? BTW did you get your trail park pass yet? Yes, it seems like monkeywrenching might become necessary again. Quote
Peter_Puget Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 Yup guys:Bush what a fool. But what do you call those foolish enough to be ruled by him? Perhaps it's best to consider him an evil genius. Quote
Dwayner Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 Sorry, dudes. But I ain't buying most of the rant. Sell your dang gas-guzzling vehicles and set the example if you want to bitch so loudly. I'm not yet willing to do that but would if there were some reasonable alternatives. Although I started with low expectations, Bush has actually surprised me. If you heard his recent comments on energy policy, he advocated fuel cell technology as the eventual replacement for fossil-fuels. No doubt, he's got his oil-buddies inspired to make the transition but that's going to take a while. (And that is the key: getting the oil and auto companies to switch gears so they can still make money.) In the meantime, the gas has gotta come from somewhere, and as Alpine K noted, drilling ain't as destructive as it used to be. So keep on promoting alternative energy...it is the future...and even Bush knows that. And for those of you who just want to pee on Bush, because he is Bush...try injecting a little objectivity into your life. On the other hand, for many people, it's not a president we elect every four years, but a national scapegoat! Quote
Fairweather Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 Right on Dwayner!! Hey Cleesterfleshester; your "Osama should have hit Bush and Cheyney on Sept 11" comment demonstrates why your position is bankrupt. As much as I disliked Clinton, I never wished any harm to come to him. You're a real winner. Quote
pope Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 quote: Originally posted by pope: Here's a conspiracy theory I thought about the other day..I'm certain it's wrong, but it makes a certain amount of evil sense (when you consider other examples of just how corrupt powerful people can be, as in the Enron collapse, BJ's in the Oval Office, etc.). Imagine what it would take to unite the American people in such a way that anybody questioning the leadership would popularly be considered unpatriotic. Imagine what event would justify an enormous expansion of our military budget in these post-cold-war days. Imagine what event could convince Americans that we need to drastically reduce our dependence on Middle East oil, regardless of the impact on environmentally sensitive areas. Imagine what event would distract Americans to the point that environmental policy advanced by the previous, liberal administration could be reversed without notice. What enemy act against the US could be recognized as so terrible that we could deploy full-scale retaliation missions while economically powerful adversaries tacitly approve without losing face? What single event could accomplsih these objectives? What price would our leadership be willing to pay?Am I onto something here? If I disappear in the middle of the night.....wait, somebody's at the door.....Oh shit, the guys...the guys in black are.....must.....hit.....RETURN!.... Quote
W Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 pope?.....POPE?!?! OH MY GOD!!!!! THEY GOT HIM!!!I...wait. Who are YOU people? I...NOOO! <rat-at-a-tat-tat-tat-tat->ACCCCCCGHGGHGHGHHGHGHHGHHHHH!!!!! ....... (dirtnap) Quote
AlpineK Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 I think you missed my point dwayner. Just cause we can drill doesn't mean we should. Also just because we can drill with less damage doesn't mean pipelines and tankers are any safer. The way I see it we should just keep using all the oil we've already been drilling and instead of subsidizing new oil drilling and trying to build some Star Wars crap, we should be pumping all that money into new energy technology. George and his buddies may be paying lip service to fuel cells ect, but I don't see him putting very much of his money where his mouth is. It's pretty well documented that the space race and all the government money that went with it was one of the main factors in the high tech boom. Believe me I know a thing or two about burning fossile fuels, but given a reasonable alternative I would jump at the chance to buy a new fleet of eco chain saws ect. I've already switched from traditional bar oil to a vegetable based substitute. Other than that the only power I can weild is my vote and my ability to bitch. Anyway lets not turn this into another year of the mountain long winded debate. I would much rather talk about what a morron George W is and what a bunch of loadies his daughters are. Come on Fairweather you must be able to admit George isn't the sharpest pencil in the pack and it's pretty funny that such an antidrug guy could have such fuck ups for kids. Quote
willstrickland Posted February 14, 2002 Author Posted February 14, 2002 Here ya go, read it and weep. There's a more comprehensive article in the NY times,check their website for more info. Thanks President Bush, guess that "w" stands for "worthless". Maybe "p" for puppet would be more appropriate, or "o" for "old oil money". Shithead. February 12, 2002 The Bush administration is opening the area between Canyonlands National Park and Arches National Park to oil and gas drilling, sparking a bitter disagreement over land use near Moab, Utah. The area pegged for exploration is a side canyon of Indian Creek, and the inevitable trucks, drilling equipment and newly constructed roads would come alarmingly close to some of the most popular desert climbs. According to a New York Times report, administration officials claim that visitors to the two parks will hardly notice the new activity, but national park scientists worry about the long-term effects of the industrial commotion on the fragile desert landscape. Oil derricks are not new to US federal public lands -- about 25 million acres are being leased. Though the Clinton administration had increased oil and gas leasing over previous administrations, the administration usually steered clear of areas near national parks and wilderness areas. The Bush administration, however, is reportedly pushing the boundaries to allow development within two miles of national parks. Next month, the San Rafael Swell, another climbing destination just south of Capitol Reef National Park, will also be considered for oil exploration. Those who object to the development should write to their congressional representatives. -- Pamela Emanoil Quote
Dru Posted February 14, 2002 Posted February 14, 2002 weren't the roads for oil and gas/uranium exploration what motivated the Monkeywrench Gang?? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.