NationStates Jolt Archive

As John Titor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titor) has been brought up on another thread, I thought this might be a good time to ask:
Where is the civil unrest that started the US civil war?

Is it now around the time for the Civil War? Or did he just played the fool when giving dates?

It got misplaced somewhere in the middle east and ukraine.

I believe he said that the civil unrest would not be immediatly evident, though it's cause was related to the election. I believe he claimed that it wouldn't be untill '06 that things really got dicey.

And wouldn't you know it...this was a hotly contested election, now wasn't it?

Many people are "restless" about bush getting elected, wouldn't you say?

Doubltess not restless enough to cause civil war, but you gotta admit that this Titor fella isn't as half-baked as some would say

Is it now around the time for the Civil War? Or did he just played the fool when giving dates?

The civil unrest sparking it was supposed to start with the 2004 election, and there was supposed to be a Waco event every month.

I believe he said that the civil unrest would not be immediatly evident, though it's cause was related to the election. I believe he claimed that it wouldn't be untill '06 that things really got dicey.

And wouldn't you know it...this was a hotly contested election, now wasn't it?

Many people are "restless" about bush getting elected, wouldn't you say?

Doubltess not restless enough to cause civil war, but you gotta admit that this Titor fella isn't as half-baked as some would say

Direct from the horses mouth:
The civil war in the United States will start in 2004. I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse. http://www.johntitor.com/Pages/CivilWar.html

John Titor is nothing more than an amusing hoax that gets stupider and stupider everytime I hear it. I haven't a person speak the man's name in perhaps a year. And I still remember the idiocity.

As John Titor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titor) has been brought up on another thread, I thought this might be a good time to ask:
Where is the civil unrest that started the US civil war?

Yes. I would be the person who brought up John Titor.

And your poll didn't really give me a choice that fit, so I picked I'm a believer.

My own personal choice would have been heard of him, open mind, not sure. But you didn't even have a choice for just plain "heard of him" so...I picked the best of all the options.

This is the police, please pull over the Wayback machine and provide license and registration

The civil unrest sparking it was supposed to start with the 2004 election, and there was supposed to be a Waco event every month.

If you remember, that was also on John Titor's "worldline." We may, in fact, be on a different "worldline" than Titor...in which case, his predictions would not mean crap to our "worldline" because, in our "worldline", they would not happen.

As I say, I'm open minded about the possibility of time-travel. And, believe or disbelieve, Titor DOES make for an interesting read...if you have never read it before.

Yes. I would be the person who brought up John Titor.

And your poll didn't really give me a choice that fit, so I picked I'm a believer.

My own personal choice would have been heard of him, open mind, not sure. But you didn't even have a choice for just plain "heard of him" so...I picked the best of all the options.

Yep, that'd be you. ;)

I believe he said that the civil unrest would not be immediatly evident, though it's cause was related to the election. I believe he claimed that it wouldn't be untill '06 that things really got dicey.

And wouldn't you know it...this was a hotly contested election, now wasn't it?

Many people are "restless" about bush getting elected, wouldn't you say?

Doubltess not restless enough to cause civil war, but you gotta admit that this Titor fella isn't as half-baked as some would say
Eh? People were more upset about the 2000 election...at least I think so anyway...

Ihatevacations']This is the police, please pull over the Wayback machine and provide license and registration

*Points finger at Lyric* :D

[QUOTE=Lyric]If you remember, that was also on John Titor's "worldline." We may, in fact, be on a different "worldline" than Titor...in which case, his predictions would not mean crap to our "worldline" because, in our "worldline", they would not happen.
QUOTE]

Do you hear what you say or see what you write sometimes? Sounds to me like he has a built in excuse for if anything doesnt happen then hes still safe because of the "worldline", and you shmoes eat it up. *hands you a tin hat*

There is a difference between being open minded and a gullible numbnuts. :)

Now, I'm planning to help start this civil war, but I can't see a bunch of isolated inbred hicks winning it! I figure the liberal cities will take over and choke out the rural threat.

Direct from the horses mouth:
http://www.johntitor.com/Pages/CivilWar.html

Look a bit further down, would you?


"The year 2008 was a general date by which time everyone will realize the world they thought they were living in was over"

Clearly, we, the general populous, doesn't realize how bad things are untill then. Right now, we're having unrest, we're having the seeds of dissension, if anything.

Read the entire thing before waving it away. *shrug* I honestly don't think we're going to have a Civil War, but at least get FAMILAR with John Titor before trying to argue.

[QUOTE=Lyric]If you remember, that was also on John Titor's "worldline." We may, in fact, be on a different "worldline" than Titor...in which case, his predictions would not mean crap to our "worldline" because, in our "worldline", they would not happen.
QUOTE]

Do you hear what you say or see what you write sometimes? Sounds to me like he has a built in excuse for if anything doesnt happen then hes still safe because of the "worldline", and you shmoes eat it up. *hands you a tin hat*

There is a difference between being open minded and a gullible numbnuts. :)

I did not say I believed, or disbelieved Titor. I said it was an interesting read. And since the subject of time travel had come up in the thread, I brought up the Titor case.

I neither believe nor disbelieve, because I cannot know for sure. And I remain open on the question of time travel even being possible. It may or may not even be possible. I just think it is an interesting topic, and Titor just happens to be one case-study. I think, believe or disbelieve, Titor still makes for an interesting read.

And what about that other guy...damn, I cannot think of his name, but he made a freaking KILLING on the stock market, in about a month...and claimed to be from the future, and that was how he had known what to buy and what to sell, and when. That one was in the news a few years back.

Anyway, I personally would have a different use for a time machine, if I could ever get my hands on one.

Being as I am, by hobby, a coin-collector...I'd love to be able to go back in time, get rare coins when they weren't so rare...and still in good condition...and then bring them back with me to present-day. Man, I'd be set for life!! I would have an unlimited income potential, without ever having to work again!

Start by explaining that bent laser pointer.

Now, I'm planning to help start this civil war, but I can't see a bunch of isolated inbred hicks winning it! I figure the liberal cities will take over and choke out the rural threat.

Boy I sure hope you are right!

But ya gotta remember, it's them all rural folks that gots all the guns, dude... :P

Boy I sure hope you are right!

But ya gotta remember, it's them all rural folks that gots all the guns, dude... :P


heh, yeah, but according to Titor, the rural folks only win 'cause Russia bombs the heck out of our major cities...some win, eh?

*likes big cities better* meh

Start by explaining that bent laser pointer.

debunked (http://communities.anomalies.net/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=001138)

A quick summary of the debunking:
1) There is nowhere near enough smoke in the car for the laser pointer to be so completely visible and unbroken.
2) The laser pointer is the only light being distorted.
3) There are anomalies in the picture.

heh, yeah, but according to Titor, the rural folks only win 'cause Russia bombs the heck out of our major cities...some win, eh?

*likes big cities better* meh


I guess the states-rights people are supposed to leave, after the government that is in place right now starts to screw things up majorly.

debunked (http://communities.anomalies.net/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=001138)

A quick summary of the debunking:
1) There is nowhere near enough smoke in the car for the laser pointer to be so completely visible and unbroken.
2) The laser pointer is the only light being distorted.
3) There are anomalies in the picture.


It still could be an Uber strong laser pointer though. But otherwise, yeah, it seems pretty hoaxy.

I guess the states-rights people are supposed to leave, after the government that is in place right now starts to screw things up majorly.
Screw it, you'd be seeing all the liberals running for the hills as well, not just the state's righters. I see (hypothetically) all the libertarians, the minorities (especially the gays) and the leftists (ACLU would run) joining up with the militias and the state's righters. Though the left would lose a lot of people in the cities themselves, god help the government in the ghettos.

It still could be an Uber strong laser pointer though. But otherwise, yeah, it seems pretty hoaxy.

It wouldn't depend on the strength of the laser pointer at all, but on the density of the smoke. Even an uber strong laser wouldn't be visible as a continous beam except in a very desnse fog or smoke.

It wouldn't depend on the strength of the laser pointer at all, but on the density of the smoke. Even an uber strong laser wouldn't be visible as a continous beam except in a very desnse fog or smoke.


It didn't seem like a full beam to me, but yeah, that picture looks hoaxy.

Why I'm worried about if it's the truth is that a very, very naughty thing that I've kinda sorta wanted/mused about and want to do might start this civil war.

Screw it, you'd be seeing all the liberals running for the hills as well, not just the state's righters. I see (hypothetically) all the libertarians, the minorities (especially the gays) and the leftists (ACLU would run) joining up with the militias and the state's righters. Though the left would lose a lot of people in the cities themselves, god help the government in the ghettos.


Yeah, that makes more sense. I'd definitely run for the hills, or to Canada (but apparently Canada is a target as well)

It's a hoax, and a very pathetic one, IMO. There's a multiplicity of inconsistencies.

First of all the story of that civil war is clearly written in the perspective of militia survivalists from the mid-1990's, clearly pre-9/11 (which Titor didn't mention at all). Also, if he was right, the US should be in civil war since late 2004 (which didn't happen, either... or i missed something in the news? :p).

Second the nuclear war is highly inconsistent. First he says there is a nuclear war in the middle east which he says "leads to the later events" (how?). Then China starts annexing Japan, Korea, (presumably the bulk of Asia) and Australia. Then Russia nukes China and the US, Australia and also Europe (which apparently - for some weird reasons - had been preparing an invasion of Russia), but survives virtually unharmed. This just inconsistent and makes only sense if you are a militia survivalist who hates the Clinton administration, the EU and the Chinese.

There's more of course, but i won't get to it because it's too much.

Anyways, the good thing is that his predictions are falsifiable (falsified).
So.... that's prettymuch it. :D

A rudimentary knowledge of holistics will allow you to notice that, even assuming he is a time-traveler, his coming here (or "now") would have changed the future. To avoid paradox, it'd divide, as per the theory that he has that "allows" time-travelling. In short, if he were one, he'd have caused his future not to happen. If he isn't (and that's where all my chips are), it wouldn't happen anyways either. Stepping on a puddle, eating one sandwich and not the other, ANYTHING could have a major effect on the world. This guy is as much a time traveler as I am a barbarian.

Also, i forget to mention, his supposed reasons for being back in the past are just ridiculous. (and his knowledge of Y2K problem seemed to be limited as well - Y2K was from 1999 to 2000, and not from 2000 to 2001).

As John Titor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titor) has been brought up on another thread, I thought this might be a good time to ask:
Where is the civil unrest that started the US civil war?
Here on NS, of course! :D

Coming back changed everyting. The war now starts in the UK.

A rudimentary knowledge of holistics will allow you to notice that, even assuming he is a time-traveler, his coming here (or "now") would have changed the future. To avoid paradox, it'd divide, as per the theory that he has that "allows" time-travelling. In short, if he were one, he'd have caused his future not to happen. If he isn't (and that's where all my chips are), it wouldn't happen anyways either. Stepping on a puddle, eating one sandwich and not the other, ANYTHING could have a major effect on the world. This guy is as much a time traveler as I am a barbarian.It's questionable as to whether those small actions could have a noticable effect on such a near future (sure, you can cite dynamical systems theory, but the timescales we're looking at are probably too small for such affects to occur). Of course the alternative view is that every future time travel back into our past is already accounted for. In otherwords, people simply never do anything which results in a paradox, and we're all very sophisticated automatons with (essentially) a determined future.

For example (not mine, but it's a good one, so I'll reuse it), the case where you're in a room with one door and no other exits, you're tied up and the door is padlocked on the outside. Then you come back from the future and unlock the padlock from the outside and free yourself, so in the future you can go back in time and free yourself.

Now, I'm planning to help start this civil war, but I can't see a bunch of isolated inbred hicks winning it! I figure the liberal cities will take over and choke out the rural threat.
You misunderestimate us. :D

Now, I'm planning to help start this civil war, but I can't see a bunch of isolated inbred hicks winning it! I figure the liberal cities will take over and choke out the rural threat.
The "isolated inbred hicks" own alot of guns, shoot often (and therefore have good aim) and are self sufficient.

The liberal cities have fewer rifles, which you need in a war, and depend on the "hicks" to grow their food, but they outnumber the "hicks".

If it were to happen it would be a total disaster. Luckily it won't. Americans may have their differences, but they're united when it counts.

Now, I'm planning to help start this civil war, but I can't see a bunch of isolated inbred hicks winning it! I figure the liberal cities will take over and choke out the rural threat.

Actually I doubt this. Why? Those "hicks" have the guns and the city slickers don't.

BTW: should I report this to the FBI since you are now advocating a civil war which is a federal offense and punishable by law?

Coming back changed everyting. The war now starts in the UK.

LOL

Actually I doubt this. Why? Those "hicks" have the guns and the city slickers don't.

BTW: should I report this to the FBI since you are now advocating a civil war which is a federal offense and punishable by law?
The city slickers have guns too. And do you really think the pawn shop owners and gun store owners would hesitate to hand them out to their fellow citizens if it came to defending their hometown?

Actually I doubt this. Why? Those "hicks" have the guns and the city slickers don't.

BTW: should I report this to the FBI since you are now advocating a civil war which is a federal offense and punishable by law?
everyone has guns, this is the united states damnit

The city slickers have guns too. And do you really think the pawn shop owners and gun store owners would hesitate to hand them out to their fellow citizens if it came to defending their hometown?

However, it is a rather known fact that the rural areas have more guns and ammo. If a civil war is started, I would place bets that most cities will starve since most of the food we have come from those same rural areas and if a shooting war starts, I'll place bets that the rural citizens will win it due to shear fire power and terrific aim.

Ihatevacations']everyone has guns, this is the united states damnit

Question is, who has more guns, more ammo and better aim? The rural areas do.

Yeah but all the Republican/conservative voters and areas are filled with inbred rednecks and hicks. The cities on the other hand have people who can actually fight and not get their ass kicked, I mean seriously, the Chicago mob, the crips, NWA (lol), angry white bois etc etc. All I see is redneck swiss cheese :D

Yeah but all the Republican/conservative voters and areas are filled with inbred rednecks and hicks.
Your bigotry is noted.

Freistaat... if your posts actually represent how you think, and more importantly how you perceive the world around you, then I feel perfectly safe and secure in making the statement that you are, in fact, a moron.

As for Titor, it has been a while since I heard the name. He didn't do a bad job of pulling the whole thing off and more over, he had the perfect fall back. Two percent variance between each iteration of the multiverse. Two percent of the sum of our existence accounts for a HELL of a lot. Fact is, by his own story he could be wrong on something and have an excuse each and every time.

As for the rural vs. urban "debate" I seem to remember that the cities turn into a paranoid police state type affair. Confiscation of guns, midnight arrests, transportation lockdown, that sort of thing. The city-slickers would be disarmed and generally fucked up the ass.

Your bigotry is noted.

Good, the bigotry recieved from Republicans for the past 5 years has also been noted, the problem is too many "liberals" are nice people ... I'm not

Freistaat... if your posts actually represent how you think, and more importantly how you perceive the world around you, then I feel perfectly safe and secure in making the statement that you are, in fact, a moron.

The cities could destroy the republican/conservative areas with ease. They have the brains, the brawn, the gangsters and the firepower.

Good, the bigotry recieved from Republicans for the past 5 years has also been noted, the problem is too many "liberals" are nice people ... I'm not

Oh, you noticed that, too?

Hey, nice comeback!!

Good, the bigotry recieved from Republicans for the past 5 years has also been noted, the problem is too many "liberals" are nice people ... I'm not

I've seen more bigotry from the Democrats than I have from the Republicans.

I've seen more bigotry from the Democrats than I have from the Republicans.
Agreed.
The nanny-state authoritarians really love to hate the corporatist authoritarians a lot more than vice versa.

The cities could destroy the republican/conservative areas with ease. They have the brains, the brawn, the gangsters and the firepower.

Ya the metrosexuals and the gangstas who literally don't (not can't, don't) shoot straight are really intimidation.

Now, I'm planning to help start this civil war, but I can't see a bunch of isolated inbred hicks winning it! I figure the liberal cities will take over and choke out the rural threat.
Um... the isolated, inbred hicks are the ones with all the guns and the knowhow to use them. I'd put a "militia" group up against a bunch of "gangstas" any day.

BTW: should I report this to the FBI since you are now advocating a civil war which is a federal offense and punishable by law?

Isn't there that clause somewhere in the constitution which demands people overthrow the government if it is failing in its duties?

Isn't there that clause somewhere in the constitution which demands people overthrow the government if it is failing in its duties?

But the government isn't failing in its duties so why advocate the overthrow of the government. Besides, wasn't this settled in 1865 with the end of the Civil War?

I've seen more bigotry from the Democrats than I have from the Republicans.

Yeah becuase god forbid the single minded zombie-republicans actually discuss and disagree amongst one another ...

Yeah becuase god forbid the single minded zombie-republicans actually discuss and disagree amongst one another ...

We have. I've disagreed with the President and other republicans over an assortment of issues.

To bad I can't say the same for democrats.

Um... the isolated, inbred hicks are the ones with all the guns and the knowhow to use them. I'd put a "militia" group up against a bunch of "gangstas" any day.
If they came into the cities, they'd be shot dead. Urban warfare is a 'gangsta' speciality. Outside the cities, perhaps.

However, this is stupid. Lay off the insults everyone.

If they came into the cities, they'd be shot dead. Urban warfare is a 'gangsta' speciality. Outside the cities, perhaps.

However, this is stupid. Lay off the insults everyone.

If it came down to a fight between a working man that does El Presidentes on his lunch hour and a gangsta that shoots a pistol sideways, raised over eyelevel, and slanted then "Urban warfare" is utterly meaningless.

Agreed.
The nanny-state authoritarians really love to hate the corporatist authoritarians a lot more than vice versa.

Well, if you had to choose who would have control over your life, would you rather it be the American Government...or American Express?

I think I'd rather the American government, than be a slave to American Express, thank you.

At least the American Government would feed you well enough. American Express would feed you just well enough to make sure you were still able to work, and be their little slave. And if you die, so what, there's always more slaves.

Corporate America gives a shit care less about the American people. In fact, corporate America, for years now, has been working AGAINST the interests of the average American. How, you ask??

1. Taking HQ's overseas to tax-shelters to avoid paying their fair share of taxes...thus increasing the burden on the average American.

2. Taking jobs overseas to avoid regulations concerning worker safety and wage requirements, and child-labor laws, thus undermining the ability of americans to demand an adequate wage. When we have to compete for our jobs against people willing to work in sweat-shop conditions, in unsafe environs, and working for 50 cents a day...we lose.

And the corporations can't see the forest for the trees...if all corporations do this, no Americans will have jobs, and then they won't be able to afford the goods being produced, and there go your stupid corporate profits, you dumb-ass greedy, selfish corporate monsters!

If a civil war in the USA could be contained and NOT spill over to Canada and Mejico (let alone anywhere else), I don't think that there are more than 50 non-Yank people in the world who would have any objection to it staring tonight.

Never heard of him til now.

Reading about him atm. Interesting.

Cool! Let me get some extra batteries for my 'phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.' Oh, they aren't out yet. Well, I guess a case of South African surplus 7.62 NATO ammo for the Ishapore will have to do.

Isn't there that clause somewhere in the constitution which demands people overthrow the government if it is failing in its duties?
No, there isn’t. You are thinking of the Declaration of Independence, which is not law.
[/QUOTE=Lyric]Well, if you had to choose who would have control over your life, would you rather it be the American Government...or American Express?
That is entirely dependant on what you feel the responsibility of the government is. For instance,
[QUOTE]At least the American Government would feed you well enough.
I don’t believe it is the place of the government to supply food to people, thus the nanny-state authoritarians. If I rely on them for food, what will they ask me to give up? My freedom of speech, my freedom of worship, my right to bare arms? The answer is whatever they feel like.
Corporate America gives a shit care less about the American people. In fact, corporate America, for years now, has been working AGAINST the interests of the average American. How, you ask??
As long as you recognize that corporatism is not the same as capitalism.

If a civil war in the USA could be contained and NOT spill over to Canada and Mejico (let alone anywhere else), I don't think that there are more than 50 non-Yank people in the world who would have any objection to it staring tonight.

Believe me, there's a lot of Americans who feel the same way...except that they wouldn't give a shit if it spread into Canada or Mexico. Most Americans don't consider them to be real countries, anyway.

Sorry, folks, just telling it like it is. Take it from a Yank who knows her fellow citizens.

Personally, me...I'd rather they just divide up the country right now, down the middle, and no war needed, the conservo-creeps can go their own way, and take the corporatist assholes with 'em, too...since they are such in bed together now. Let them make their own country, we won't fight to bring 'em back. Just give us our half and good riddance to dirty filth.

Then we will join with Canada as the civilized people....and the conservo-creeps can have theri little fascist Jesusland in the South and Plains States. Who needs the damn Red States, anyway?

Believe me, there's a lot of Americans who feel the same way...except that they wouldn't give a shit if it spread into Canada or Mexico. Most Americans don't consider them to be real countries, anyway.

Sorry, folks, just telling it like it is. Take it from a Yank who knows her fellow citizens.

Personally, me...I'd rather they just divide up the country right now, down the middle, and no war needed, the conservo-creeps can go their own way, and take the corporatist assholes with 'em, too...since they are such in bed together now. Let them make their own country, we won't fight to bring 'em back. Just give us our half and good riddance to dirty filth.

Then we will join with Canada as the civilized people....and the conservo-creeps can have theri little fascist Jesusland in the South and Plains States. Who needs the damn Red States, anyway?

Well, having that breadbasket would be nice. Why don't we just build death ca- did I say death camps? I meant Happy Camps- in the desert and then let them rot.
P.S. Since NSers seem to have trouble with sarcasm- I don't really condone anyone being put into any camps- except fat camps.

Believe me, there's a lot of Americans who feel the same way...except that they wouldn't give a shit if it spread into Canada or Mexico. Most Americans don't consider them to be real countries, anyway.

Sorry, folks, just telling it like it is. Take it from a Yank who knows her fellow citizens.

Personally, me...I'd rather they just divide up the country right now, down the middle, and no war needed, the conservo-creeps can go their own way, and take the corporatist assholes with 'em, too...since they are such in bed together now. Let them make their own country, we won't fight to bring 'em back. Just give us our half and good riddance to dirty filth.

Then we will join with Canada as the civilized people....and the conservo-creeps can have theri little fascist Jesusland in the South and Plains States. Who needs the damn Red States, anyway?

Won't fight to bring 'em back? If there was a civil conflict of that magnitude the Red States would crush the Blue States, you'd have to fight to leave. Remember, most "Blue" is focused in cities IN the Blue States, and cities are not self-sufficient. And supposing there was a instant division of those states like you said...the Red States would take over in a matter of weeks.

Won't fight to bring 'em back? If there was a civil conflict of that magnitude the Red States would crush the Blue States, you'd have to fight to leave. Remember, most "Blue" is focused in cities IN the Blue States, and cities are not self-sufficient. And supposing there was a instant division of those states like you said...the Red States would take over in a matter of weeks.
The red states would soon collapse thereafter without the pesticides, health care, farm equipment, and just about every manufactored item made in the city. Hell, cities can buy grain, you know, it isn't as if we don't do it anyway. The cities have enough power to hold open corridors to the sea and buy grain on the open market. Granted, we might not get fresh veggies, but eh.

Heh. This is classic entertainment, right here. You guys are talking about such a war as if it was actually going to happen.

I think everyone on the internet has a serious mental defect ;)

Heh. This is classic entertainment, right here. You guys are talking about such a war as if it was actually going to happen.

I think everyone on the internet has a serious mental defect ;)

I have to agree. Funny how this moved from a question of the
details of a hoaxters prediction of a civil war to a silly argument over who's going to win said civil war.

I have to agree. Funny how this moved from a question of the
details of a hoaxters prediction of a civil war to a silly argument over who's going to win said civil war.
Which is irrelevent if there really is a civil war because we already know who wins :D.

See, the thing is, the U.S. Civil War was fought between Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans. Needless to say, the Republicans kicked ass. Case closed.

See, the thing is, the U.S. Civil War was fought between Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans. Needless to say, the Republicans kicked ass. Case closed.

This is, in reality, somewhat of an accurate statement. :D

And as to who will win, the answer is those that have the most guns and that means the South :D

See, the thing is, the U.S. Civil War was fought between Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans. Needless to say, the Republicans kicked ass. Case closed.

Except now, the Republicans are all down south, and the Democrats are up North. And the dynamics that won the Civil War wouldn't work in this modern era, so you couldn't know who would win such a war, really.

I just wish you all Republicans would just finally leave our country, secede, and form your own country, and leave the rest of us alone. We don't need you, we don't want you. And take Bush with you, too.

Except now, the Republicans are all down south, and the Democrats are up North. And the dynamics that won the Civil War wouldn't work in this modern era, so you couldn't know who would win such a war, really.

Actually we do know who would win. The republicans. They're the ones with the guns and the majority of the military is also republican so we have the bulk of the Armed Forces. :D

I just wish you all Republicans would just finally leave our country, secede, and form your own country, and leave the rest of us alone. We don't need you, we don't want you. And take Bush with you, too.

YAHOO!! We'll starve the blues and see how long it takes before they come crawling back :D

Except now, the Republicans are all down south, and the Democrats are up North. And the dynamics that won the Civil War wouldn't work in this modern era, so you couldn't know who would win such a war, really.

I just wish you all Republicans would just finally leave our country, secede, and form your own country, and leave the rest of us alone. We don't need you, we don't want you. And take Bush with you, too.

Hah. Too bad there really wouldn't be a United States left anymore. Most Middle Class Americans just happen to be republicans.

So, you're basically left with the rich, liberal, elite, and those on welfare. And you'd be damned if the elite will give up their wealth. :D

Have fun having your lives and incomes dictated by the democrats ;)

Except now, the Republicans are all down south, and the Democrats are up North. And the dynamics that won the Civil War wouldn't work in this modern era, so you couldn't know who would win such a war, really.

I just wish you all Republicans would just finally leave our country, secede, and form your own country, and leave the rest of us alone. We don't need you, we don't want you. And take Bush with you, too.

Your country? HA!

Except now, the Republicans are all down south, and the Democrats are up North. And the dynamics that won the Civil War wouldn't work in this modern era, so you couldn't know who would win such a war, really.

I just wish you all Republicans would just finally leave our country, secede, and form your own country, and leave the rest of us alone. We don't need you, we don't want you. And take Bush with you, too.

:confused:

Nice to know that New England (the Bushes) is down South and Arkansas (Clinton) is up North. Because otherwise your statement may seem silly.

And I must say that claiming the entire US as your own, to the exclusion of roughly 50% of the voting population who disagrees with you, shows alarming anti-democratic ideals.