I don't know who Captain Planet is.

Draugnar should be banned for not knowing who captain planet is. and I win

who ?

He's a hero.

So a 5 year old show (two actually) from the early 90s when I was married and getting a good start on my career. Sorry, but kidtoons didn't float my boat at 24. And Ted Turner cashing in on the environmentalist movement... Laughable.

Clever attempt to get the last post, Draug. Very clever.

so what? your a give a hoot dont pollute guy? I should've known! Ban him!
I win

I say we ban anyone young enough to have watched and enjoyed Captain Planet as a kid.

I say we ban everyone but me, then I win.

I'd say we ban Draugnar, but we already did that for a day....

Um, no *you* didn't. I asked to haved the account banned for my own sanity. The mods were nice enough to do that. But that is different from actually being banned in the intent of the mods was to grant my request, not to bad me for some malfeasance.

Draugnar: The things I learn about you . . .

Well, I drink socially on occasion and even non-socially to relax with a cigar and a scotch when the weather is right. As I just mentioned, I enjoy a fine cigar now and then (and I nice pipe as well). And I've never hidden the fact that I'm a gambler, particularly poker.

What else... I appreciate the female form in many shapes and sizes but not a big fan of wrinkled grannies and there must have been grass on the green at some point for me to enjoy the view of the course. I am faithful to one and only one course and, at the owner's request, I only play one hole, but from many angles.

Oh, and I'm a firm believer that 15% is sufficient for taxing capital gains and don't see the inequity there as the person who made the capital gains did so by risking their own money in the investment where as the employee just showed up for work. I do, however, believe that stocks given to employees should be taxed the same as any other compensation because, although they have risk, the original money is not the employees' to begin with and therefore any shares cashed up to the original shares (taking into account splits and 3:2s and what not) should be taxed at the individual's tax rate for that year.

Keep government out of my life and let *me* chose what charities my money should go to, but provide a certain minimum "needs met" to all people and I'll be happy. And know, a TV is not a need. Transportation is, but not a car (therefore public transit should be provided via bus/rail passes and, if necessary, a voucher system for cabs). And a clean, safe, heated/air-conditioned place to live (but not necessarily a private apartment with all the amenities) is also a must as is basic medical care (preventive and elsewise, but some things are medical conveniences and not actually preventative care). And of course, food and clothing, but again, clothing from major labels is not a must nor is filet mignon or pate or alcohol. I'm not saying gruel, but there is plenty of variety and sustenance to be found in vegetables and more basic and affordable cuts of meat as well as chicken and fish like cod or white fish or tuna. And plenty to drink that isn't carbonated beverages or alcohol (like milk and tea and coffee and juices of all sorts).

So now you know a lot about me.

Oh, and FTW!

*And no, not and know.

You have my second "like" with your last paragraph, Draugnar. Tthat second one was still really weird.

LOL! Just a golf analogy, although I don't actually play golf. I prefer riding around in the cart, drinking beer, and smoking cigars while my buddies actually hit those damned balls with those confounded clubs. :-)

Draugnar, I'm sorry if I offended your sensibilities. I was thinking of the Draugnar's ghost screen name you created during a ban period and presumed it was due to a mod ban that you had *not* requested. I apologize that I misunderstood the situation.

You didn't offend. I was just poking fun at your "we" when, even if ther mods had banned me for a day, you aren't a mod and had nothing to do with it. It's like the old joke: What do you mean "we"?

I guess I missed the joke, since you used "we" in the same way.

Yep, I did. But you just gave me an excuse to still be WINNING!

Oh and one big difference. I said "we should." "We" don't have th power, but that doesn't mean "we" shouldn't strive to tget that power then fulfill what "we" desire.

You said "we already did". Past tense as in historical record, not desire. "We" may wish something to happen and say "we" shoudl do such and such, but "we" had nothing to do with the events referenced therefore "we" didn't do it.

I said I was pedantic.

Ah, you have caught me on grammatical case. But like you, I am simply posting for the win

th tget shoudl ,

Hey, I had less than one typo per line! 3 typos in 5 full lines. Woot!

A round of applause for Monsieur, here... ;)P

oandgoandgoqnadeohgaqnh

qwertyuiopoiuytrewqasdfghjklkjhgfdsazxcvbnmnbvcxzasdfghjklkjhgfdsaqwertyuiopoiuytrewq

Dvorak!

This is bolshoi.