1000 Reasons not to vote for GW

[fogman]

I've stayed out of the political discourses in an arcade controls forum, but I thought I would add something to this discussion.

I have a lot of Canadian friends...they are just like everyone else and if a group of Americans and Canadians are in a room, except for a few "ehs" you can't tell them apart.

As for stem cell research...it is NOT illegal in the US.  Goverment funding of new strains is.  Private investors, Universities under private grants, and anyone else can do all the research they want, just not with Government dollars.  I personnaly think this is more beneficial...see what it did to the Human Genome project.

As for the Health Care system in Canada, I only can go by what some of my friends say.  It is good...but not great and they come to the US for a lot of things due to the waiting time that they face in Canada.  Also, (and I'd have to check with the statistics) I beleive that the US spends quite a larger percentage of its tax revenues on Defense than Canada.  Canada does have an advantage in that their defensive armed forces are significantly reduced from what they would need to be (or would have needed to be) if it weren't for the US being below its border.  You can argue that we spend too much on Defense, but Canada does reap some of the reward.  (I am not trying to imply that Canada needs a body guard, only that it is a fringe benefit.)

As far as Bush being stupid...I do not understand why someone's speaking ability proves him to be stupid.  The very fact that he went to Yale and then was admitted and graduated from Harvard business school proves he is not stupid.  I know a lot of people will flame for that comment, but to say that his father's political influence got him into school, got him through it, into Harvard and through that is just silly.  Many, many, many people who go to Ivy League schools have influential families.  To say this gets them a free ride completely devalues these schools.  It is to say that everyone who got through them could have done it on influence alone.  I am sorry to tell all those who did not attend an Ivy League school (myself included) that the schools actually are better than other schools.   If you get through, you are not stupid.  Not saying that people who attend other schools aren't just as smart.  No matter how influential you father is, they do not hand out degrees.  Also, as far as his father's influence at the time (1968), his father was a junior Congressman from Texas, who lost two bids to the Senate.  His appointment as CIA director was a year after G.W. graduated from Business school.  All told, he was certainly not the most well connected person at Yale and certainly did not muster enough stroke to be handed a diploma from both Yale and Harvard.

I know half of you stopped reading a long time ago, but the fact remains, if you agree with a conservative approach to government, vote Bush.  If you agree with a liberal approach, vote Kerry.  Neither candidate or party is evil, stupid, bent on world domination, eats kitten, steps on puppies or cheats on their taxes.  OK, maybe both on the last one.

Sorry this was so long!  God bless the US and Canada (and Mexico too!)

[DrewKaree]

I have a lot of Canadian friends...they are just like everyone else and if a group of Americans and Canadians are in a room, except for a few "ehs" you can't tell them apart.

right there, everyone knows you're a flaming-pants liar.  A "few" ehs, RIIIIIIGHT!  Like, every other word is eh...the other one is "aboot", with a few "nice goal" comments thrown in there.  

What made you think that you could get that by me?

[Minwah]

My only thought is that it is terribly worrying that the world is in the hands of a few people, such as (nutcase) GW  

[fogman]

That's absolutely correct.  I'm all about undermining the way of life in America, because I believe it could be a lot better.  I think it's important to destroy core values that suck.  The inferiority of blacks compared with whites was such a core value of America that the Constitution of the United States actually defines a black man as 3/5 of a person.   I don't care about the status quo, I care about right and wrong.

The Constitution of the US does not define an African American as "3/5 of a person".  For determining how many Representatives a district has, the number of slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person.  The delegates agreed that the Constitution would state that population would be determined by counting the number of "free Persons . . . plus three-fifths of all other Persons . . ."  The Northern "free" states wanted slaves to not be counted at all!  It would have been much better for the slaves if they were not considered people at all, because this would have given the South fewer representatives in Congress, and therefore less power in the US government, which would have allowed slavery to have been abolished much earlier.

Not meaning to argue any of your points...just making sure we all get facts, not legends.

[shmokes]

The Constitution of the US does not define an African American as "3/5 of a person".  

That's absurd.  The were considered property.  You make it sound like the northern states considered them lower than the southern states.  The only reason the northern states wanted them to not be counted is because the southern states wouldn't allow them to vote.  It's a little bit ridiculous to count them for purposes of representation if they couldn't even participate in voting for the person who was suposedly going to represent them.

Black people were completely dehumanized.  They were not considered people.  You might notice that  white women, who were also not allowed to vote, were counted as whole people.  To suggest that the consideration of blacks as inferior to whites was not a core American value in 1776 is ridiculous.  George Washington was probably the largest slaveholder in the country.  It was perfectly okay to kidnap thousands of people and enslave them.  It was not illegal to beat, rape or kill them.  The Civil War wasn't even fought until nearly a hundred years later and we still had legally segregated schools, many of the black schools having no running water, nearly two hundred years later.

It's meaningless to say, "Well, the Constitution doesn't say the ARE 3/5 of a person.  It only says we will COUNT them as 3/5 of a person."  It's the same thing.

[Dartful Dodger]

The Constitution of the US does not define an African American as "3/5 of a person".  

That's absurd.  The were considered property.  You make it sound like the northern states considered them lower than the southern states.  The only reason the northern states wanted them to not be counted is because the southern states wouldn't allow them to vote.  It's a little bit ridiculous to count them for purposes of representation if they couldn't even participate in voting for the person who was suposedly going to represent them.

Black people were completely dehumanized.  They were not considered people.  You might notice that  white women, who were also not allowed to vote, were counted as whole people.  To suggest that the consideration of blacks as inferior to whites was not a core American value in 1776 is ridiculous.  George Washington was probably the largest slaveholder in the country.  It was perfectly okay to kidnap thousands of people and enslave them.  It was not illegal to beat, rape or kill them.  The Civil War wasn't even fought until nearly a hundred years later and we still had legally segregated schools, many of the black schools having no running water, nearly two hundred years later.

It's meaningless to say, "Well, the Constitution doesn't say the ARE 3/5 of a person.  It only says we will COUNT them as 3/5 of a person."  It's the same thing.

Since the African American slavery and the North South thing was brought up....

The Confederate states went through all the proper channels to succeed from the Union, but that nutcase Lincoln decided to take the U.S. into an unjust war against the South.  Back then they killed him, today he is an American hero.  I'm just glad I'm smart enough to appreciate Bush as the hero he is now.  Don't worry, your kids' kids will learn and accept how great of man Bush was.

[fogman]

Shmokes,
  As I said, I was not arguing the point nor was I saying that at the time America was not incredulously racist.  The only point I was making is that they were defined as 3/5 of a person solely for counting representatives.  As a matter of fact, I was going to make reference to the point that the government did not consider them to be people at all, but thought my post was too long.  I was only trying to point out the historical inaccuracy that they were defined by the Constitution as 3/5 of a person.

My point with mentioning the North was exactly yours...the Northern free states did not want them to be counted, not because they were more racist than the south, but because they were less.  I thought it was clear, but sometimes what I write is clear to me but murky to others.

Believe me, I think racism was the worst example of man's inhumanity to man.  As Thomas Jefferson wrote regarding slavery, "Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just".

Peace.

[shmokes]

Since the African American slavery and the North South thing was brought up....

The Confederate states went through all the proper channels to succeed from the Union, but that nutcase Lincoln decided to take the U.S. into an unjust war against the South.  Back then they killed him, today he is an American hero.  I'm just glad I'm smart enough to appreciate Bush as the hero he is now.  Don't worry, your kids' kids will learn and accept how great of man Bush was.

The proper channels?  There weren't any proper channels.  Read the Constitution.  Seriously -- it's short.  It will take you all of half an hour to read the whole thing.  

Their rebellion against the federal government may have been justified (that's a matter of opinion), but it was certainly illegal.  While reading, pay particular attention to Article I Section 10, Article 4 Section 3, and Article 6 (6 is probably the most relevant to this discussion).  

Edit:  Here I'll help out:

Excerpt from Article 6 of the Constitution:

Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Clause 3: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

[shmokes]

Shmokes,
  As I said, I was not arguing the point nor was I saying that at the time America was not incredulously racist.  The only point I was making is that they were defined as 3/5 of a person solely for counting representatives.  

Sorry Fogman...I get pretty fired up and defensive.  Still, I think you are largely wrong.  First, if they were considered people, rather than property, they would never have been defined as 3/5 of a person for any purpose, representation or anything else (and "solely for counting representatives" undervalues representation in a democracy in my opinion -- it seems like a pretty important thing to me).  

I think we agree that considering blacks inferior to whites was a core American value, shared by most at the time.   We are only quibbling about how explicit the Constitution was about it.  I bring up the constitution because if it weren't for the racist core value, the three-fifths clause would never have made it into the constitution at all.  And to define them as 3/5 of a person is to define them as 3/5 of a person, whether it's for counting representatives or because you're going to eat them for dinner.  Either way they are marginalized by the constitution.

[Dartful Dodger]

You are wrong, any state can succeed from the union at any time as long as they do it by the book, which they did back then, and Arizona threatened to do a few years ago when Clinton started getting gun grab happy.

...and also I'd like to add...

France was against the American Army from attacking the South, they even helped the confederate army.

Long Live Bush and GOD bless America!

[shmokes]

You are wrong, any state can succeed from the union at any time as long as they do it by the book, which they did back then, and Arizona threatened to do a few years ago when Clinton started getting gun grab happy.

...and also I'd like to add...

France was against the American Army from attacking the South, they even helped the confederate army.

Long Live Bush and GOD bless America!

Oh....I am wrong.  Well, why didn't you say so?  When you put it like that I must admit you make a pretty strong argument.  What was I thinking pointing to the Constitution.  Who needs legal documents when you can just claim something and it becomes so?  

The closest you can possibly come to a document legitimizing secession from a legal standpoint would be the Declaration of Independence, where we seceded from Great Britain.  Of course, at best, the Declaration of Independence suggests that we fundamentally believe in secession from a repressive government, but it certainly isn't law.  And even if it were law at the time, which it wasn't, it would have been succeeded and nullified by the Constitution, as the Articles of Confederation were.  And we did fight a little war to go along with the Declaration of Independence in case you're unclear on how easy that secession was.  

Jefferson may have believed in the state's right to secede, but that viewpoint never made it into the Constitution (many ideas were discussed at the Constitutional convention that were abandoned in favor of coming up with a document that could be ratified).

And I guess, if you want to add the secession of Arizona to the debate, I have to add the 14th Amendment to your reading material, since it also makes clear that secession is illegal (but, of course, it didn't exist at the time of the Civil War).

edit: Long live Clinton and SATAN bless America!  

[Mameotron]

 Shortly after our country recieved the most devastating attack in its history our leader decided to virtually ignore the attackers to bring war on a harmless country who's leader he held a grudge with.  

Shmokes,
Since the discussion has now turned to slavery, racism, 2/3 of a person, etc.  I couldn't help notice your previous post.

Iraq is a harmless country with a leader whose only problem is that GW has a grudge against him??  I suppose that's true if you consider a woman to be nothing more than a piece of property.  If it's OK to slaughter your own countrymen for having a different religious belief.  If you think it is a fitting punishment to chop off the hand of a convicted thief.  I don't call that harmless.

It all comes down to morals.  Ideally, we should let other countries do whatever they feel is ok, since we don't have to live by their laws.  But it just doesn't work that way.  When a leader like that tramples all over moral standards that we expect all humans to adhere to, it's time to step in.

Ok, I'll stop now so my bleeding heart doesn't ruin my nice Russian flag t-shirt and interrrupt me sipping my latte (thanks Mr. Curmudgeon, that's one of my favorites now!!).

BTW, I support your argument that is is actually ENJOYABLE to debate politics, and I look forward to hearing your replies.

[danny_galaga]

Iraq is a harmless country with a leader whose only problem is that GW has a grudge against him??  I suppose that's true if you consider a woman to be nothing more than a piece of property.  If it's OK to slaughter your own countrymen for having a different religious belief.  If you think it is a fitting punishment to chop off the hand of a convicted thief.  

actually under Saddam women enjoyed much more freedom than those in say, Iran. Saddam wasn't big on the religeous side of things. his foreign minister- Teriq Aziz for instance, was a christian!! . Iraqi women could go to uni, didnt have to cover up and even were allowed to drive cars    Not including the happless Kurds of course. Those poor ---daisies--- have been bombed and attacked by the British, the Turks AND Saddam.

As for corporal and capital punishment, don't they also chop off hands, heads etc in many other middle east countries too? like Dubyas pals in saudi arabia?

[shmokes]

actually under Saddam women enjoyed much more freedom than those in say, Iran. Saddam wasn't big on the religeous side of things. his foreign minister- Teriq Aziz for instance, was a christian!! . Iraqi women could go to uni, didnt have to cover up and even were allowed to drive cars    Not including the happless Kurds of course. Those poor ---daisies--- have been bombed and attacked by the British, the Turks AND Saddam.

As for corporal and capital punishment, don't they also chop off hands, heads etc in many other middle east countries too? like Dubyas pals in saudi arabia?

  I'm so disappointed you beat me to that Danny.

Mameotron, I don't think Saddam was a nice guy.  When I referred to him as harmless I meant that he was harmless to us, and to his neighbors, for that matter.

But when it comes to his own people Saddam was a damn good leader as middle eastern leaders go.  Already women in Iraq are resigned to the fact that they will no longer be able to attend Universities.  What in god's name were we thinking to turn Iraq over to be run as a religeous state?  In five years Iraq will be another Iran.   Before Saddam Iraq was in turmoil.  He kept things relatively calm.  He ran a secular state and was extremely progressive on civil rights (including women's rights), as middle-eastern countries go.

If you want to talk about going to war with a country over poor civil rights, where are we with our friends in Saudi Arabia (considering all your examples -- women's rights, chop off hands, etc.) seem to have come from there?  

Where have we been in Sudan, where our politicians refuse to use the word genocide since that would essentially commit us to sending over forces and correct the problem.  The attrocities going on in Darfur are seriously discusting.  Check it out.  Iraq was nothing -- a shell of a nation.  They were a threat to nobody.  Saddam had incorporated more western ideas, secularism, relatively equal rights, etc. than the vast majority of middle eastern countries.  We are there for a grudge and oil.

[DrewKaree]

Where have we been in Sudan, where our politicians refuse to use the word genocide since that would essentially commit us to sending over forces and correct the problem.  The attrocities going on in Darfur are seriously discusting.  Check it out.

we're waiting for France to lead the charge, or at least a coalition of the willing.

Countries other than Britain, Spain, Poland, Ackmanistan, Turdsbeckistan, and Whowantstolivethere-stan.

[shmokes]

we're waiting for France to lead the charge, or at least a coalition of the willing.

Really, when did we develop an aversion to acting unilaterally?

[DrewKaree]

Really, when did we develop an aversion to acting unilaterally?

a few years ago, I heard.  Something about "Save a horse, ride a cowboy" and all.

poke pokety poke poke poke  

[Mameotron]

actually under Saddam women enjoyed much more freedom than those in say, Iran. Saddam wasn't big on the religeous side of things. his foreign minister- Teriq Aziz for instance, was a christian!! . Iraqi women could go to uni, didnt have to cover up and even were allowed to drive cars    Not including the happless Kurds of course. Those poor ---daisies--- have been bombed and attacked by the British, the Turks AND Saddam.

As for corporal and capital punishment, don't they also chop off hands, heads etc in many other middle east countries too? like Dubyas pals in saudi arabia?

  I'm so disappointed you beat me to that Danny.

Mameotron, I don't think Saddam was a nice guy.  When I referred to him as harmless I meant that he was harmless to us, and to his neighbors, for that matter.

But when it comes to his own people Saddam was a damn good leader as middle eastern leaders go.  Already women in Iraq are resigned to the fact that they will no longer be able to attend Universities.  What in god's name were we thinking to turn Iraq over to be run as a religeous state?  In five years Iraq will be another Iran.   Before Saddam Iraq was in turmoil.  He kept things relatively calm.  He ran a secular state and was extremely progressive on civil rights (including women's rights), as middle-eastern countries go.

If you want to talk about going to war with a country over poor civil rights, where are we with our friends in Saudi Arabia (considering all your examples -- women's rights, chop off hands, etc.) seem to have come from there?  

Where have we been in Sudan, where our politicians refuse to use the word genocide since that would essentially commit us to sending over forces and correct the problem.  The attrocities going on in Darfur are seriously discusting.  Check it out.  Iraq was nothing -- a shell of a nation.  They were a threat to nobody.  Saddam had incorporated more western ideas, secularism, relatively equal rights, etc. than the vast majority of middle eastern countries.  We are there for a grudge and oil.

OK, let me fan the flames a little more.  I happen to think this article sums it up nicely.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40159

EDIT - heehee, I just read the article (link on right top) about Allah and his spiders.

[Mameotron]

Dammit, DrewKaree, the more I read your posts the more I realize I actually agree with you on a lot of things...

[danny_galaga]

Dammit, DrewKaree, the more I read your posts the more I realize I actually agree with you on a lot of things...

be careful. he's trying to draw you into the 'dark side'  

and besides, drew runs like a girl...

[shmokes]

He does run like a girl.  I've seen it.  It's revolting.

[Yander]

I agree with hulkster about Triumph the insult Dog.
As far as hockey goes I am a big fan and if it weren't for hockey night in canada there would be nowhere good to watch the red wings. I have nothing against canada accept you have free health care but because of it your health care system is just as jacked up as ours. I know a man who lived in canda who broke his neck and was losing the feeling in his right hand. He was going to have to wait 2-3 weeks just to get x-rays in canada. Luckily his wife worked at a hospital in detroit and kept her health insurance.

[GGKoul]

I know a man who lived in canda who broke his neck and was losing the feeling in his right hand. He was going to have to wait 2-3 weeks just to get x-rays in canada. Luckily his wife worked at a hospital in detroit and kept her health insurance.

Are you sure about that?  If he went to the hospital, they would have x-rayed him at the hospital.  If he went to his family doctor, then the family doctor would have told him of a x-ray clinic to go for his x-rays and come back to the family doctor.

[Yander]

Yeah I'm sure he went to the hospital. I'm sure this isn't the usual treatment someone with a broken neck gets I'm just saying canadas health care system does have problems of its own.

[DrewKaree]

Dammit, DrewKaree, the more I read your posts the more I realize I actually agree with you on a lot of things...

just you wait, I'll have you wearing a sealskin coat while driving your SUV and spraying hairspray out the window, running over trees, splashing water on homeless as you drive by, and stopping your SUV only to take food from children and old people.

Oh, and I'll also teach you how to run like a girl  

Check out my "Real America" sig.  That's the guy I usually take my marching orders from.  I haven't found the Goose Step tutorial on the site yet, but I've been told it HAS to be on there somewhere.  If he's on a station in your area, give him a listen.  The only thing required is to bring your sense of humor; humorless people need not apply, you'll only require yards and yards of duct tape (you'll get that joke after listening to him for a while).

...and besides, drew runs like a girl...

He does run like a girl.  I've seen it.  It's revolting.

ya know, when you're caught with the video on your pc and various lotions and "paraphenelia" strewn about, you lose all credibility and the ability to try to spin my girl-like running ability as a BAD thing.  

Preverts

[Goz]

Glenn Beck Rocks!

Love the funny voices.. especially the retarded one.

sarcasm and common sense


-Goz

[Mameotron]

be careful. he's trying to draw you into the 'dark side'  

and besides, drew runs like a girl...

Yes, I've just traded in my VW microbus and bought a new hybrid SUV.  It runs on gas... and more gas!! (Dennis Miller joke)

I don't know about running like a girl, my arms are still frozen in the tree-hugging position.  Mmmm, the sealskin coat looks inviting...

[Zakk]

I agree with hulkster about Triumph the insult Dog.
As far as hockey goes I am a big fan and if it weren't for hockey night in canada there would be nowhere good to watch the red wings. I have nothing against canada accept you have free health care but because of it your health care system is just as jacked up as ours. I know a man who lived in canda who broke his neck and was losing the feeling in his right hand. He was going to have to wait 2-3 weeks just to get x-rays in canada. Luckily his wife worked at a hospital in detroit and kept her health insurance.

Dude, no offense, but that is absolute rubbish.  I worked in a hospital for 10 years here, my wife was an emergency room nurse for 14 years, and some of our best friends are doctors and lawyers.  If someone broke his neck they would have him in that x-ray room so fast it would make his neck snap (ha ha).  

 Remember we DO have lawyers here, and I can assure you that if someone had to wait weeks to get an xray on a broken neck he would sue the living hell out the emergency room, the staff, the doctors and the CEO of the corporation.  I think your "source" on this story is pulling your leg.  Did he tell you we live in igloos and drive around snow dogs?  Or maybe told you we all say eh every other word and talk about nothing but the playoffs?  I mean, really, that's the kind of nonsense I hear on vacation: "I hear you guys just got color tv's up there in Canada!"

[DrewKaree]

You tell 'em eh!  Go Leafs!  Next playoffs I get to see what color their uniforms really are, eh!  I heard they are blue, but all I ever see is those dark grey and white ones eh.  

I'm from Wisonsin, aina, and we're just a few miles from Da Great White Nort, der, an' I don't mind all the igloos and snowshoes (in the summer they're cumbersome, though).  I betcha youse got great ice fishin' year round up dere, though.

 

*Tribute to Floyd10*
I like pants.

[GGKoul]

My dog sled is in the shop.

[Yander]

I agree with hulkster about Triumph the insult Dog.
As far as hockey goes I am a big fan and if it weren't for hockey night in canada there would be nowhere good to watch the red wings. I have nothing against canada accept you have free health care but because of it your health care system is just as jacked up as ours. I know a man who lived in canda who broke his neck and was losing the feeling in his right hand. He was going to have to wait 2-3 weeks just to get x-rays in canada. Luckily his wife worked at a hospital in detroit and kept her health insurance.

Dude, no offense, but that is absolute rubbish.  I worked in a hospital for 10 years here, my wife was an emergency room nurse for 14 years, and some of our best friends are doctors and lawyers.  If someone broke his neck they would have him in that x-ray room so fast it would make his neck snap (ha ha).  

 Remember we DO have lawyers here, and I can assure you that if someone had to wait weeks to get an xray on a broken neck he would sue the living hell out the emergency room, the staff, the doctors and the CEO of the corporation.  I think your "source" on this story is pulling your leg.  Did he tell you we live in igloos and drive around snow dogs?  Or maybe told you we all say eh every other word and talk about nothing but the playoffs?  I mean, really, that's the kind of nonsense I hear on vacation: "I hear you guys just got color tv's up there in Canada!"

Yeah my post was worded wrong. They didn't know he had a broken neck it just hurt and he was losing the felling in his hand. The hospital told him it was going to take 2-3 weeks to see a radiologist.

I live in Michigan, I go to canada often I know you don't live in igloos drinking molsen while watching hockey and saying eh. I was just pointing your health care system isn't as perfect as it is made out to be.

[Zakk]

Ah, that makes more sense.  Yeah our waiting periods for non life-threatening injuries are quite silly.  Pinched nerves and things like that are sometimes fluffed off.  My intention wasn't to defend our health care system (hell I make money, I'd pay for better/faster service), but to dispell the illusion that we would let a guy walk around with a broken neck for weeks.  If you'd even seen our guys in action on a trauma case, you would be impressed.  It's the customer service that sucks.  They'll patch you back together just fine, just don't expect a "thank you, come again!"

(You're more likely to get a "now don't be so stupid next time you idiot, you almost killed yourself, and even worse, you ruined my coffee break!!")

[DrewKaree]

I see both sides of the issue commented on here, so mebbe this may prove interesting to some...click it.

Oh, and it has nothing to do with Canadian health care, eh.

[Goz]

Drew,

 Thanks for the link and I am glad its not aboot the Canadians


 

-Goz

[GGKoul]

Take Off You Hoser!  

[Goz]

You forgot the Eh

haha

No hard feelings after all you did give us hockey, Panela Anderson,  and Bob and Dave McKenzie eh.

[shmokes]

Heh...what do you mean "no hard feelings"?  If it weren't for Pamela Anderson I would support going to WAR with Canada for giving us Celine Dion.  Nothing Canada has ever produced makes up for Celine Dion, with the single exception of Pamela Anderson.

You owe a great deal to her and should be supremely saddened by her recent American citizenship.  What a loss.

It's a helluva gain for us, though!  

[Goz]

I forgot Celine. Damn why did you have to bring that up?

Maybe we should anex Cannadia and make it a state. We could use another Southern state. (obviously joking)

[Zakk]

Ahem, that's Bob and DOUG McKenzie.

Celine is from Quebec, and they don't consider themselves Canadians, so don't blame us for that!!

[DrewKaree]

...no hard feelings after all you did give us hockey, Panela Anderson,  and Bob and Dave McKenzie eh.

sorry to go all 5th grade and all but...


I have "hard feelings" about Pamela Anderson

*snicker*

Go 'Canes!  Leafs suck!