bunny: spider bitten

Only reason I'd support Ashe in Dissidia is to add more females to the cast - And even that's not nearly as big an issue as you'd think.

Overly flamboyant gentlemen don't unnerve me or bother me. But I do think they upset the gentle indifference. If I went out in a clown suit, I wouldn't just be accepted by people on the street. They'll think I must want to molest small children. Because that's what clowns do. But if you comment on the wrong person's overly colorful outfit and heavy makeup, you're a gay basher. Even if the clothes are just ugly.

Doesn't hurt that he's done nothing note-worthy. There was a recession in the early ninties and no one remembers that. So Bush has a war against a nameless enemy and the loss of two tall buildings. And dodging a shoe. And FDR wasn't really that unpopular. It was more how he planned on getting things done that bothered politicians and Supreme Court members. Basically by stacking the vote in his favor. Had he not been dying, he'd have probably been president for another term or two. And Hiroshima would have lower radiation levels.

Gabranth isn't really a hero or a villain.

Yeah, I saw that last night. And Habiel's cleavage revealing her number.

The difference is in what I meant. His point may be valid, but it's not proving anything or telling me something I didn't know. Misappropriation of man power was more along the lines of what I was claiming had happened. He could just as easily left them alive for the war but he would have killed them afterwards either way. But considering historically the odds weren't exactly in his favor for his dreams to be fulfilled, he got closer his way.

Considering they didn't win the war in Germany, he didn't use them to win the war.

NO WAI?! IT WAS HITLER? HOW COULD I MISS THAT? Are you seriously whining about it? Just because he killed people in an organized fashion doesn't make him any worse than all the other dictators that also killed people. Was it a good thing? No. But it's not the first time under a dictatorship where the aim was genocide. At least he didn't use them to win the war before killing them.

Happened all the time in old school dictatorships. And he was hung later on a meat hook and stoned by Italians. Forgetting that he was shot first is my mistake.

Losing your country to revolt is losing your country to revolt. None of the other Dictators were hung, so they were doing something right that he didn't at the end of the day. Now, obviously Hitler wasn't a great person and wasn't a God of War, and Stalin couldn't establish a government that lasted forever in his country, but say 'X number people of died' during their reign isn't an important figure. If anything, the number of people that died in the country without a change in leadership could be seen as a 'respectable' sum depending on how the lives were taken and why. It'd be nice if they could rule over the world with an iron fist and leave everyone alive, but that's not remotely possible. And Hitler killed the Jews to remove a minority. It sounds bad, but it wasn't as stupid a move as it would seem. There is a reason Canada would never go to War with the United States or even vice versa.

The correct answer is Mussolini. As a dictator, he is indeed the worst. The only one that couldn't control his country.

But it wasn't irrelevant, as it was the reason a zombie can't run. Because dead bodies can't take that pressure.

I said if they tried to run, their ligaments and flesh would tear. But I never said they could or couldn't run. Also, lol shortening the statement because the important part was in your way.

I never said a dead body could or couldn't run, so obvious post is pointless.

Zombies can't run. A dead body can't take that kind of pressure, and knees and legs would tear up if they tried to run.

If the Zombie hurts you, and you die, you become a Zombie. Unless you take your own head. . .

lol Satellites. If it exists, there'd be pictures. There aren't. And 'on that mountain' and 'heavily armed' sound almost as vague as 'Giant Ark' and 'two of every animal'. And yes, to an extent, the whole world must be punished to prove that point. I mean, lets say it does happen again. God decided to give all those who have never claimed to be christian the ability to breathe under water and all the other sinners will die because only true christians are allowed on the Ark2. Really, what would that prove? Or even if the heavens just wiped out Southern Asia. And all the sinners in America And Europe go unharmed. Sure he saved the 4 Christian Asians and the Asian Elephants and Pandas. And the rest of the world is. . . fine? What the hell kind of lesson is that? That God has bias? Granted, I'm giving the story a bit less credit it deserves. It also said along the line that Noah needed to have faith in God. But really, what do people have faith that God will do now? He told Noah all the shit he needed to know. The last person to talk to God in the past 5 years has the credibility of Bush, and he'd be locked up if he said he needed tons of lumber to build a massive arc on land. Also, after some consideration, if the 'world' flooding was truly frequent, then the idea that one man built a boat over such a stretch of time is even more stupid. The uncompleted ship would have been lost at sea a number of times. And of course, 2 times the average lifeline still isn't the 150+ years described in the bible. The food situation is also still questionable. He forced some animals into extinction just to get a fix? And how did the lions sit next to the zebras for more than 10 seconds? I mean, provided that these Lions are from Detroit, there is no way Zebras could outrun them for 40 days. You provide concepts that I wouldn't have considered or brought up, but the story is out there.

No, because what the story is meant to prove can only be proved if everyone dies. And 4 people built a ship the size of Rhode Island. That no longer exists.

Noah's Ark is the story of 1 man, his three sons, and their wives and how they all lived to be 150+, build an ark the size of Rhode Island, survive on the ocean with no food for 40 days and nights and then all became fertile enough and genetically different to repopulate the world. That's before you get into all the animals that were buddy buddy and didn't eat each other. I can respect the religion and I do believe that there is a large chance that something controlled the odds millions/billions of years ago, but the Ark story is one of three fundamentally flawed stories of the book that can't be explained as a metaphor or a confused ideology. The story was written to show that the wrath of god exists, and it's the common choice for the story to back up the end of days concept, which is why I brought it up, but it, Genesis, and White Jesus are my personal three tests of fanatical level. If you can't understand that Jesus would have to be an Arab Jew, then you aren't even trying to get the facts.

Noah's Ark is another amazing story in the bible. Gotta love how impossible that one is.

No, but it doesn't say that evolution is possible either, and it gives one of the lamest ducks of an explanation to what really did happen.

It has Tekkaman in it. That's made of win and X-treme.

lol school. Didn't know their were so many kiddies around. Looks like I'll have to hold back all my graphic material and borderline porn.

Um. . . No. Statistically, they're actually more along the lines of the worst. All good in theory, but each easily replaceable, if only because there are more water pokemon than there is water in some regions. Unless you're Swampert, then it's just gg. The issue is that fire is a crap type. Otherwise they'd be pretty dominant. I mean, what type isn't super effective against Charizard? Grass? lol. But lolmetagame.