17-10-2004 10:52									#91
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

http://nationaltreasure.movies.go.com/splash.html

	17-10-2004 10:54									#92
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

i saw the preview of that at the movie theater. my girlfriend was like WE GOT TO SEE THAT! but she also said that to every other movie that was previewed.

she wants to make my all-seeing eyes disappear

	17-10-2004 11:01									#93
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc http://nationaltreasure.movies.go.com/splash.html

Interesting Trailer. I'll have to go see that one.

	17-10-2004 11:54									#94
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc http://nationaltreasure.movies.go.com/splash.html

I'm going to see it.

	17-10-2004 15:55									#95
	Increase Your PM Length

I found it mildly amusing that, in the United States of America, where everyone is equal, some are more equal than others.

	17-10-2004 15:56									#96
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn But because the Liberals did well in a few big cities in Ontario (and got a few seats in the East), the Liberals got to form the next government. How is that democratic considering the majority of the country (not people-wise) voted for a different party?

So the majority of people got to decide and not the majority of land? Wow, what a concept! In case you hadn't heard, democracy means rule of the people. If most of the people live in Californian and New York (which they don't), then those to states should have the majority of the say. That's the whole point of majority rule.

As it is, most Americans live in ten states. It is technically possible for 26% of the voters to decide the President, even against 74% voting for the other guy. If the ten states, for example, voted 100% for candidate A, and the other forty voted 51% for candidate B, despite an overwhelming majority for candidate A, B would win. That ain't right, but it's theoretically possible.

	17-10-2004 15:58									#97
	Increase Your PM Length

for some reason disenfranchising urbanites is right but making rural = urban is wrong. go figure.

	17-10-2004 16:00									#98
	Inflate your Upload Space

What's funny is that 75% of Americans live in urban areas.

	17-10-2004 18:02									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Albert Speer Kansas, Dakotas, et al have far different concerns than we do on the east coast. why should we dictate their laws just because we outnumber them? they live completely differently than we do.

Because we're one country?

	17-10-2004 18:04									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Albert Speer it's one of those balancing acts of a constitutional republic... yes you should have a democracy where the majority makes the decisions but there needs to be checks to ensure the rights of the minority.

Should blacks be given extra votes, too?

	17-10-2004 18:05									#101
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by MrFun

I see your and raise you one.

	17-10-2004 18:27									#102
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ming I think the EC has long outlived it's real purpose. This lose the state by one vote crap and get nothing for it is just stupid. It is also another way to keep third party candidates out of the way.

Ming, the winner take all rule is controlled by the State Legislators. If you don't like it in Illinois, change it. You can.

BTW, I understand that the people of Colorado are voting on an "constitutional amendment" to the Colorado state constitution to proportionally allocate their electoral votes according to the popular vote. While I think Colorado can legally do this, I think the only way it can do it is by vote of the State Legislature, as the people of Colorado have no direct say in how electors are to vote according to the US constitution.

	17-10-2004 18:30									#103
	Suffering from ads?

Personally I'd like the EC to return to its original function and not have the electors tied to the vote of the state. However I don't really see how California is disenfranchised as you people so hysterically put it compared to Mississippi as an example considering the fact that CA has a hell of a lot more electors than MS.

	17-10-2004 18:39									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara So the majority of people got to decide and not the majority of land? Wow, what a concept! In case you hadn't heard, democracy means rule of the people. If most of the people live in Californian and New York (which they don't), then those to states should have the majority of the say. That's the whole point of majority rule. As it is, most Americans live in ten states. It is technically possible for 26% of the voters to decide the President, even against 74% voting for the other guy. If the ten states, for example, voted 100% for candidate A, and the other forty voted 51% for candidate B, despite an overwhelming majority for candidate A, B would win. That ain't right, but it's theoretically possible.

Che, the distortion would be imposed primarily because the states have not apportioned their electors. The other distortion, the two extra votes for senators, is intended by our founding fathers to give small states extra votes. That was not an accident.

	17-10-2004 19:58									#105
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara So the majority of people got to decide and not the majority of land? Wow, what a concept! In case you hadn't heard, democracy means rule of the people. If most of the people live in Californian and New York (which they don't), then those to states should have the majority of the say. That's the whole point of majority rule. As it is, most Americans live in ten states. It is technically possible for 26% of the voters to decide the President, even against 74% voting for the other guy. If the ten states, for example, voted 100% for candidate A, and the other forty voted 51% for candidate B, despite an overwhelming majority for candidate A, B would win. That ain't right, but it's theoretically possible.

You keep forgetting the soveriegn nature of the States. The federal government was not set up to be a democracy but rather a representative government. The representation was not just for the individual but for the State as well. If you don't like that system then start your own country or contact your congressman and have them propose a constitutional amendment. Oh wait! 3/4 of the States must approve it! The founding fathers were correct to recognize the importance of the States in setting up the system. If the people of 40 States want candidate B in your example, then it probably is more representative of what the countries overall issues are than candidate A...and therefore, IMHO, a better selection for President.

	17-10-2004 20:20									#106
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The federal government was set up to be a federation of sovereigns, I agree with PLATO there... but you know what? It stopped being that in 1865, and by now the intent of the framers of the constitution is so alien to our current system as to be unthinkable.

	17-10-2004 20:23									#107
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

There are a few ammendments you need to repeal before going after something so trivial as this.

	17-10-2004 20:25									#108
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker The federal government was set up to be a federation of sovereigns, I agree with PLATO there... but you know what? It stopped being that in 1865, and by now the intent of the framers of the constitution is so alien to our current system as to be unthinkable.

While the Civil war did radically degrade the power of the States, I believe that it is important that it not be degraded further. I continually argue for a strict constructionsist point of view for the Constitution, but I fear that argument falls on deaf ears. The responses that I continually get are "uh...the court helld this here and the court held this there" as counters to my arguments. People simply don't realize that thes holdings are usually judicial legislation that enhances the federal governments power at the expense of the States. IMO, this was not the original intent of the founders, nor is it what's in the best interest of the Union.

	17-10-2004 20:39									#109
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by PLATO While the Civil war did radically degrade the power of the States, I believe that it is important that it not be degraded further. I continually argue for a strict constructionsist point of view for the Constitution, but I fear that argument falls on deaf ears. The responses that I continually get are "uh...the court helld this here and the court held this there" as counters to my arguments. People simply don't realize that thes holdings are usually judicial legislation that enhances the federal governments power at the expense of the States. IMO, this was not the original intent of the founders, nor is it what's in the best interest of the Union.

Plato, the major problem with States Rights is that it is closely associated with segregation. It is now being used to deny "gays" whatever rights a particular state might give them. The one thing Sharpton said during the election that I agreed with is that this gay-rights issue is not a matter that SHOULD be decided by states. In this, he broke sharply with Kerry and Edwards, and Sharpton was right and Kerry and Edwards were wrong.

	17-10-2004 20:44									#110
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Ned Plato, the major problem with States Rights is that it is closely associated with segregation. It is now being used to deny "gays" whatever rights a particular state might give them. The one thing Sharpton said during the election that I agreed with is that this gay-rights issue is not a matter that SHOULD be decided by states. In this, he broke sharply with Kerry and Edwards, and Sharpton was right and Kerry and Edwards were wrong.

The Federal government has the ability to trump any State's attempt at segregation if they wanted to. State's rights is NOT about segregation. It is about giving equal protection for regional issues to the States. For example, The Colorado river could be totally dominated by the large population of southern California and the people of Colorado and Arizona left out in the cold if it wasn't for their respective State governments standing up for their rights.

	17-10-2004 20:49									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by PLATO You keep forgetting the soveriegn nature of the States.

Guess what? Don't give a ****. The people should be sovreign, not the artificial entities we call states. Without us the states do not exist. I am not a Floridian. I am not an Illinoisian. I am an American. I am an American whether I live in Florida, Illinois, or Wyoming. Why, in the 21st Century, should I be penalized for not living in a small state because over two hundred years ago they needed to compromise to create the country? The country is created. The people who lived two hundred years ago are dead. And it is unAmerican that a Wyoman has more say in chosing the President than I do simply because no one wants to live there.

	17-10-2004 20:50									#112
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

States rights are antidemocratic. No one ever sees anyone standing up for the states' rights to protect their citizens, only to screw them.

	17-10-2004 21:00									#113
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara States rights are antidemocratic. No one ever sees anyone standing up for the states' rights to protect their citizens, only to screw them.

As the example I pointed out above so clearly disproves. Land use and water rights are two very important ways that States protect their citizens rights.

	17-10-2004 21:02									#114
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara States rights are antidemocratic. No one ever sees anyone standing up for the states' rights to protect their citizens, only to screw them.

I think Wraith just gave a good example of where States stood up for the rights of their citizens.

However, on the whole, States Rights has been used to deny people equal protection.

	17-10-2004 21:04									#115
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

In waht ways does states rights protect land use? Water rights could just as easily be solved at a Federal level, where regional powers like California can't dominate their smaller neighbors.

Anyway, why should Colorado or Arizona have more right to the water? One out of every ten Americans lives in California. It would be better used there than watering lawns in the freakin' desert.

	17-10-2004 21:04									#116
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I am not a Floridian. I am not an Illinoisian. I am an American.

che's quote from another thread:

quote: It's in the 60s here and I have all my windows wide open. Of course, as a Floridian, I'm also wearing a parka . . .

So which is it Mr. Kerry?

	17-10-2004 21:07									#117
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara In waht ways does states rights protect land use? Water rights could just as easily be solved at a Federal level, where regional powers like California can't dominate their smaller neighbors. Anyway, why should Colorado or Arizona have more right to the water? One out of every ten Americans lives in California. It would be better used there than watering lawns in the freakin' desert.

They have a right to the water because it should run by their front door.

In your post you inherently recognize the differences between California, Colorado, and Arizona.

	17-10-2004 21:07									#118
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I'm a Floridian in that I live in Florida. I do not consider my self identity to be a Floridian in the way I consider myself to be an American. It used to be people were Virginians before they were Americans. States are where we live, not who were are.

	17-10-2004 21:07									#119
	Got spare money?

--"I think Wraith just gave a good example of where States stood up for the rights of their citizens."

Have I even posted in this thread before now? ^_^

Wraith
"What kind of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter."
-- Mr. von Lipwig ("Going Postal")

	17-10-2004 21:09									#120
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by PLATO They have a right to the water because it should run by their front door.

I said more right to it. They should have an equal right to it. That water would be more use to all of us irrigating California's crops, though I'd rather see it flowing into the Sea of Cortez so the environment there doesn't get screwed up (the Colorado doesn't reach the sea anymore).