Soleq

Vanilla Coke is the drink of gods.I just had to laugh at Pepsi's blunder called Pepsi Blue. That stuff tasted horrible. Then, they ditch that and come out with Pepsi Vanilla. Even still, VC far out-tastes PV anyday.

Been running Macs for the last decade. Currently running systems on System 7.5, 8.1, 8.6, 9.1, 10.2.8, and 10.3.5.

Since my browser wasn't listed, I just chose Mozilla, as it's based on the code, sorta. And no, Safari does not come in the windows variety. The closest cousin is Firefox actually, since they both use the same layout engine I believe. Either try that, or Mozilla is pretty close as well. I use Camino over Safari, and Camino is almost identical to Firefox, sans Gecko layout engine.

This one's pretty easy: PC.The benefits of the PC lie directly in the shortcomings of the console, namely lack of ability to do anything other than play a game or watch a movie. I used to be a pretty hardcore gamer, but now I reside myself to mainly using my computer for everything besides gaming. However, the single most important feature that the PC holds over the console in my opinion is the mouse. FPS games were revolutionized with the inclusion of the mouse-look. No longer was I bound to hitting keys at just the right time to make sure I shot in the right direction. I have yet to see a console FPS that matches the targeting ease of a PC with a mouse. Pure and simple.There are some games thought that benefit most from consoles. I prefer to play most RPG games (FF series) on consoles, even if they were available on the PC. I dunno, I just like them better on the TV with a bunch of friends around rather than sitting alone at my screen. Same goes with sports games, with Madden at the top of the list.In the perfect world I'd own both, but I'm quite happy realistically with my PC.

This has to be the best comment thus far on this thread. Socialism illegal? What time period are you living in, 1950? Seriously, unless your last name is McCarthy, I think you're truly misguided.

Hmmm...on the humorous side, I can see us attacking England as soon as they start disagreeing with US plans. "You believed us before, now believe this!"On a slightly more serious side, we won't touch N.Korea for a while. It's true they have nuclear capabilities, and it would only provoke them if we launched an attack. I would assume that Iran is next on the chopping block. It's situated right next to Iraq, so very little further deployment is needed (troops, not weaponry). Plus, while they claim to have nuclear powers, their development center is so slow that progress is basically at a stand-still. Furthermore, Iran has already been labled as an Axis of Evil (talk about a propaganda name). Bush will save the next invasion for the right time though, planned accordance so that any legislation he wants to pass will stay underneigth the cover.

Well, he did say that Saddam was the "man that tried to kill my daddy," or something similar to that.War in Iraq had several things going for it. It's common political knowledge that a war abroad distracts the citizens at home. Away goes the economic woes and the dismal approval ratings. Hello Bicameral and non-partisan support! Hello high approval ratings! Hello dupped countrymen!The facts about WMD were overplayed and in the end, it came to bite them in the booty. Not severly, just a tisk tisk don't do that anymore. Unfortunately, by that time we'd already set things into motion. "Shock and awe?" More like "Make big impressive initial stance so no one can say 'you didn't try hard enough.'" Now we're stuck in a country we don't belong, our troops are being killed daily, and the world community views us as the elementary bully in the world school yard. I'm frankly sick of Bush, but the part that scares me the most is that more people voted for him this election than last election, by a substantial amount. O countrymen, where have you been for these past four years!?

I disagree. Many candidates ran against Bush this past election, and none of them came within a shred of Kerry's potential. If you limit yourself to just Democrats, the Kerry/Edwards ticket was by far the most sound and politically feasible. America is in a conservative period right now, and to even have a hope of winning, Democrats have to at least appear "moderate" on some issues to woo borderline conservatives. This is where Kerry was strong, as he favored a more conservative economic agenda, publicly vowed to not raise taxes, and admitted that he didn't favor gay marriage. On the opposite side sat Howard Dean, and we all saw how he got trampled during the primaries.Kerry was the cement pillar to raise our nation up from the swamp laid down by Bush. Edwards was the light afixed to the top to serve as a beacon to new voters. Unfortunately, the pillar was labelled a Communist and the light never shown bright.