Bufoman

Sure thing. They will find hundreds of hours of Youtube shows and music; even more time spent listening to the now banned from england radio host Michael Savage; probably close to a thousand hours playing video games, various uninteresting chats with a few people I know online, And a whole bunch of junk emails. Oh, yes, and i'm 23, so anything they find that is a little distasteful really is not any of there business anyways. That said, they are not labile to find any, because I am one cool customer 8-)

Tuneing in, as I often do to Dr. Savage's show, I learned that the British Home Secratrary Jacqui Smith has put Dr. Savage on a list banning him from access to the country. The reason given was as follows "In an interview with the BBC, Smith said Savage, the No. 3-rated radio host in the U.S., is "someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country." I take that quote from here: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97127 I am really ticked at that women right now. I have been a listener to his show for years now, and I can tell you there is no way he should be put in the same catagory as russian murderers, and members of Hamas. What are your views on this? Oh, and if you want to listen to the show, to at least hear the man they are banning, you can listen to him live on 910knew.com from 6-9PM Eastern Standard Time (-5 GMT).

I would like some more work on this, as we still haven't created what I had in mind. If any one feels up to it, I would appreciate some more help. EDIT: It has been brought to my attention that some may find the above statement a little demanding. It's not meant to sound that way, mearly a request for some additional work to help me complete the project. That's the problem with the written language, it is difficult to convey emotions properly.

While I wish we did not need to rely on PMC's, I believe they fill an important vacancy. If private company's need their assets protected, I have no problem with them using PMC's to get the job done, provided they act within the law. However, when our government needs to use them, I can't help but think we are running the risk of becoming overly dependent on their services. As for how I feel about their level of competency, I have to use Blackwater as an example. To my knowledge, Blackwater has never lost anyone in Iraq that they where contracted to protect. That's no small feat considering many of these people are on the insurgency's hit list.

1. Write a book 2. Get Published 3. Write a sequel or two 4. Start a social/ political revolution 5. Become leader of said revolution 6. Become immortalized as the founder of a movement that eventually unites the human race under one banner. I can see 1 and two potentially happening, the rest would be nice, but probably will never happen... except number 3.

Personally, I have no problems with the PMC's themselves, but the long term situation that requires their employment in such large numbers. We need to raise the pay for enlisted personnel, and compete with these contractors. The fact that our more experienced soldiers are signing up as contractors instead of reenlisting should be taken as a sign that we need reforms in military pay and benefits. How can we ask our soldiers to put their lives on the line for one sixth of what a merc gets for performing much safer work?

Yes, where as World War 1 was dragged on until an armistice was signed. Democracy does not have much to do with the outcome of a war. Wars come down to Technology, Resources, Doctrine, Will, and Manpower. I'm sure there is some other things I have forgot to add, such as objectives, and logistics. If invaded or attacked, any nation's people who feel their way of life is endangered will fight for victory. The tragedy here is when wars are pointless, or the men who fight and die in them do not share in the rewards.

Since we are talking about the Electoral College system, I would just like to point out that Al Gore did win the popular vote. I must say there is something really wrong with a system that Say's we are all equal, yet gives some people more say and control in who leads us than others. We really need to get rid of the Electoral College, it's old and outdated, and prone to abuse.

Economic Left/Right: 1.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77 I was not close to anyone listed, and as you can see, quite moderate. I don't believe this test is all that accurate. Considering that I favor Monarchy's and strong, decisive leadership, I should be more authoritarian, but they did not ask me certain questions that I think could have helped rate me better. Oh well, I guess I can be lonely then- no famous despot to keep me company :(

Ahh, so congress not agreeing on everything is bad? I believe the slower the legislative process is, the slower the noose of tyranny is tightened around our collective necks. Eventually, we are liable to end up with little to no freedom. We already have Thought Crime if you can believe it- it's called Intent. A guy thinks about robbing a bank, decides not too, and tells his psychiatrist. Next thing he knows, he's sitting in prison for intent to rob a bank. And no, I am not making this up, it actually happened, in this country no less. EDIT: Well, I can't seem to find the article, so I won't be making this claim so strongly, as I will undoubtedly be asked to provide a link. I do remember hearing about it though.

I agree, we could certainly use some more "Make up your own mind" philosophy in education. Now, as stated, I believe executive power should either be held by a monarch who was trained from a young age to wield it, or by an elected council. I do not think we are doing too well here in America with the executive being a president; it's too much responsibility for one politician- too much power, and too many chances for one man to damn us all. For that matter, I don't believe political parties are in the best interests of my nation either, and I would like to see them abolished. But at least with a rule by council system, it would be more difficult to have both the legislative and executive branch controlled by one political party, as we have now. I doubt the government will ever consider changing the executive branch from one man to many, but it seems like the best thing for us to do, or at least to me. Every presidential election, there is a huge divide in my country between people who voted for the Republican, or the Democratic candidate. When one wins, half the population is happy, and the other quite upset. Wouldn't it be better to have yearly elections, and a large body of people sharing the power now invested in the office of the President?

Well, perhaps some sort of meritocracy would work. I would suggest an executive branch consisting of 12 or so leaders equal in power. Each year, the senior most member's term ends, and he cannot be re-elected. This way, he is determined to leave his legacy before his term ends, and do right by the nation. Elections are held yearly for a new member of this council, so that fresh blood is always flowing in. You would always have senior leadership in such a system, 11 years worth if you went with a 12 person council, and reducing one year per less senior council member. So, the new guy wouldn't be alone in leading the nation, and the responsibility's and privileged of executive power is divided between 12 competent people who are respected for their previous deeds that led to this climatic point in their political career. I believe such a system could work, if properly created, and governed by a constitution that protected the rights of that nations citizens, as well as clearly defined the powers of this council. That said, I also favor a constitutional monarch as an executive leader, with some sort of elected senate or Parliament. Not like in england though, in this set up, the Sovereign really would be in charge, and take an active day to day role as leader of his/her nation- a duty that they had prepared for since the coming of age within the Royal Family. Such a monarch would only have one legal source of income- a 3 percent income tax placed upon all citizens in return for the Sovereign's just, and wise leadership. As a result, this monarch would naturally seek to make his/her people prosperous, as it increases their own revenue. Now, this income tax idea could also be used with the before mentioned council, as a strong incentive to rule well, with the interests of the people foremost in their minds.

Congratulations and Good Luck Lady.

There seems to be allot of off-topic posts in this particular post. I have read them all to date, and think some of you have some good points, but allot of bad one's. Housepig's one child per family has a obvious flaw- it takes two parents to make a family, hence each new generation's size is one half that of the previous one. What this means in the long run is extinction. Even in the short run of say 20 years, it could prove disastrous to have a significantly larger old and retiring population than the young working one. I believe each new generation must be equal too or larger than the previous one, or we need a race of robot slaves to do our work. Now, that aside, here is what I would do as leader of my own country: Well, first of all, lets say there was a popular revolution right here in the states that brought me to power- now this is entirely hypothetical, but let's just suppose this had happened. Out of respect for the Constitution I would swear to uphold it for one final year, and then implement a new constitution based largely on the old one. I would then declare the experiment of representative American democracy to be over, and a new order to be in the making. There would be considerable reforms under way from the moment I took power. For starters, the Senate and Congress would be purged of lobbyists, and political parties abolished. The pay for all servicemen would triple effective immediately, and we would fight to win- not as peacekeepers or liberators, but as conquerers. A new social hierarchy would be established. At it's head myself as a constitutional monarch, with an entirely different government structure. Instead of the congress we would have the Senate. All Senators would be former servicemen who served with distinction. I would give the Senate all the powers of the old Congress, in addition to it's new ones. Our people would be led by those who actually care- those who put their lives on the line time and again in the defense of our country. We would not however be a military dictatorship. True power would ultimately rest in the people, as it should, but with a guiding hand. Civil and Provincial (yes, no more states) governments would be elected by the people from any law biding citizenry. As for the Senate, as before mentioned, the requirement would be a minimum number of years in the service. Senators would be elected by the people. Our country would be well governed by difficult to corrupt men. Our laws would be standardized, a system of common law would apply to all provinces. The Senate would make those laws, and the Sovereign would pass them, or veto at his pleasure. Taxes would be low, and determined within the constitution how high they could go. At the national level, a 3 percent income tax would be implemented, revenues received and controlled by the Sovereign. Property tax would be abolished, and no citizen could be charged more than 30 percent of total income in taxation, no matter the form. Government spending would be limited by it's mandate- providing a stable society, and protecting said society. I could go on and on if you would like, I have given this much thought over the years. EDIT: Naturally this will never happen, and even if I where thrust into a position of power, I would have to take into consideration the many people who still believe in our democracy and would likely become partisans against my new regime. Therefor, I would consider just implementing a series of reforms over the term of my presidency. Now, if I was starting a country from scratch, then I would like to implement a similar government as the one described above. I would also like to set the requirements for citizenship, and pre-select who exactly would be my people- ideally devoted followers who come with me to start a new nation in uninhabited lands that are legally gotten with my claim to them respected by international law. Coming to power via armed revolution is not the ideal set up, and i may lack the cruelty necessary to maintain my control over a nation in a state of civil war, as would probably happen in the above setup. However, if everyone- man woman and child where to lift me to such heights and believed in my cause, then these problems would not exist. Of course, that is in a fantasy world only.

Well, about the shadow and the statue statement: I think they are operatives of some kind. They could be CIA, Others, more of Charles Whitmore's people, who knows. Perhaps they are a new faction we will have introduced in the upcoming episodes. Wouldn't surprise me one bit if they are Richard's people, at last coming together for some important moment in the history of their secret organization. And I too look forward to seeing the Richard flashbacks- they will probably be the best we have seen to date, possibly involving ancient times. I am quite convinced that the man is an immortal who has been around for thousands of years. Now, my favorite scene would have to be when Ben was judged. That part was a real tear jerker- and it showed he had some redeeming quality's. Until that episode, I was still trying to make up my mind whether bin was good or evil. Now I think his purpose is good, despite the sociopath like personality.

Well, for under 40 million pounds you get an entire family serving as the Representatives of England. You also get a well trained diplomatic core, and a figurehead to lead the commonwealth of nations. I do believe I heard the Royal Family costs each English subject approximately 40 pounds per year in taxes... That seems like very little to pay to keep tradition alive. Besides, if worse comes to worse and the country needs a strong leader, I think it's a good idea to have a few Princes working together to get things back to normal. Although I am an American, I do like the British monarchy as a whole. I just wish they would take a more active role in their government. When you have a monarch that leads for so long, you should get consistency of policy that affects generations. Here it seems like every 8 years things are flipped upside down. But more and more I think our two party system is really a one party system with two slightly different flavors. At lest a monarchy is honest.

I am looking forward to tonights episode; and I have only missed one episode to date. Unfortunate that I missed any, but I still follow the plot well enough.

Well, I must be Insane. That had to have been one of the funniest things I have experienced all day.

Congratulations Gamerr.

Welcome back guys.

Well, tell us what your new clan will stand for. Knowing what you are about may help in choosing a name.

Welcome to Tipit Ancient Skillerz. Good luck becoming a successful clan.

Happy belated birthday. Congratulations on surviving for 5 years in a game where most clans don't make it 5 weeks.

Welcome to TipIt.

I do apologize if I caused offense. I did not mean to do so. It just seemed that my request wasn't getting anywheres near as much attention as others. Just look at the times of the posts here, and compare them to some other topics. In particular, see how long it took for some one to reply. Now, about your new version: It looks better. I think both sides need some shading though. Mostly, I think the left is too shaded. I want it to look like there are three sides, but I don't want either of the two showing sides to look so dark.