Definitely Riku. He is the one I relate to the most and he kicks ass.
Hello Kitty. It's me with the shotgun in that scenario.
Copy what bears do. Go find a good tree and rub against that.
Have you thought, and I know some people will laugh at this... of taking dance lessons? If you can't do that, try watching some music videos where there is dancing in them and try mimicking the moves. You can learn to dance if you want to. Just don't say you 'can't' because that automatically will set you to fail. Also, try listening to the beat of music which is what you will move to. If you can do something like hear the beat of the music, then try nodding your head to it..then try shrugging your shoulders, moving feet to the beat, etc, you can work out the rest of you to learn to dance because really that's the biggest thing is moving to the rhythm. What grade are you in? Sometimes kids are cruel and rotten around while others just aren't sure what to think of a person until he/she gets out there and mingles. Your height is probably more something some of them will envy in the end. A lot more people would rather be tall than short. Why don't any of your friends go to the dances you do? That would probably help you out too if you could get a couple to go with you. Can you go to their dances? I'm just poking around here to get more of your situation because yeah, that sucks. It seems you really want to get out there and be part of things and I think you can do it so hang in there. It's awkward but if you can overcome it, you will be a lot stronger for it. There are better areas in Texas that aren't so biased but yeah, some areas are very backwater with their thoughts. I still remember when Texans kicked out Bill Nye the Science Guy for saying the moon doesn't have its own light but reflects light from the sun. Prejudice in some areas is pretty bad too. I was just surprised at how old fashioned some areas of Texas were while there are others that are more current and those sorts of things aren't as frequent. I can see why you want out of your area though. I'd go nuts there too if I was stuck with that.
Sounds like your mom is just a night owl then and that's how she's going to be. Some people's internal time clocks are wired different. I know whether I stay up all day or not, I'm up till around 3 to 5 am regardless. It just works out that way. DarkAndroid, in most places in the U.S. we have to take Driver's Education which is a half school year term to take if we want a driver's license at age 16. Otherwise some states won't let kids get one until they are 17 or 18. In North Carolina they passed a law that said kids can't have a driver's license if they don't graduate or aren't in school until they are 18. It's not that easy in most states to get a driver's license. Also, our permit tests are fill in the blanks but they have several questions. The Driver's License test is the written test plus a drive with someone who scores you and both tests are graded. You cannot miss more than 6 questions I believe on the questionnaire and I'm not sure how many 'errors' you can get on the driving test but some mistakes automatically disqualify you. Having said that, I do think in some states it's a bit easier than others for whatever reason, but most stick to this guideline. So, really it's not sounding that much different from what the UK does as far as many states go.
It pretty much is. Of course, some parents may need to get acclimated to the fact some of these options exist for them, like how to set your TV so the youngin can't watch certain channels. Even DVD/BluRay players have parental controls now so that a kid can't pop in a movie if the parent has it set to not allow a movie to be watched that is above a certain rating. There's a lot of power in the hands of parents now. Just the sad thing is we can't stop interactions with those around so I'd place the blame more on that anymore than media if a parent is actually doing what he/she should be.
You aren't an idiot but you are very hostile with your words and angry. Seriously, consider how others were harmed. It's not the best way to do it. It's the absolute worst way to do it. We don't need a mess environmentally or that harms or kills others because she wants to send a message to oil companies. Do you think this message reaches them as something that needs to change? Those oil companies don't give a crap. They have done atrocities overseas that are far worse and that's the way it is. She's only harming local people and impeding on the lives of others who need the fuel to get places. Also, just because you don't like Starbucks, if you hate it so much you don't support it by buying their stuff. You don't need to go attacking it physically. That's just lame. You are going to get yourself banned and I know you are angry and don't want to hear it and will just say 'oh boo-hoo, I'm banned from a video game forum' but you are really overreacting and furious. Take a moment to calm down.
It's not like the government hasn't done -more- than enough already. Music, video games, television shows etc have been canceled or banned because of safety for kids. I really disagree they should do more. The music, video games etc that is distributed now, and TV shows now have ratings. There are also parental blocks for TV stations that parents can do to prevent their kids from getting some HBO exclusives, if you get what I mean. Shows and violent or sexual material is often forced to be shown at hours when kids are not around to see it on regular TV stations. Also, words are bleeped out, even on adult night time entertainment. Also, we can't go about telling people that kids can't have cell phones. That's too invasive as well. If a parent wants to set up a kid for failure, that's on them. I think it's dumb, but ah well. So really, the power already is in parents' hands to control what their child hears and sees if they aren't selfish and actually care. Kids are more likely to hear things now from older kids and adults around them than they are just from the media. No, a parent can't stop interactions such as the one Anniexio described happen often. Some teens and adults in the family think it's fun to get a little kid to cuss. The parent may be well unaware of it for a while till it is pointed out to them. However, when it is, that parent should sit and talk with the kid. I don't see how the government is going to do anything more without being totally invasive on the rights of many people because some people want to raise their kids to have fresh mouths even as they have no idea what the heck they are saying. There is more than enough ways for the caring parent to be explaining inflammatory words are inappropriate with all the regulations there are. It's truly up to them to decide and those kids that do the cussing etc, they aren't going to have that bright of a future. I've had kids cuss me out too and it is frustrating but it really -is- on the parents to do something and stop thinking their kids are little angels and can't do wrong too. No, a parent is not always responsible if a kid picks up the words, but they sure are responsible if they don't have their eyes on a 5 year old or just let some kid call someone names and they are in ear shot.
McPie, you seem to be rather hostile in your opinions. I read the other before it was deleted too, and just want to say that you have some points but are very militant aggressive with them. Let's seriously take a look at the scene here and what she did. She's going after 3 gas stations (and a Starbucks because she must hate coffee or corporations that she feels are overcharging), and this has effects that are only negative. Those people that own the gas stations are just sellers of it. They aren't making a killing on getting the gas sold. They get a small percentage off the top and must pay to have it available for consumers. Most only earn a few pennies per gallon of gas pumped and depend on their convenience stores with food etc to bring them up. They have no choice but to sell gas at the prices they are. It is out of their hands. So she's going to take 3 gas stations, light them on fire and let it blow to make them unemployed? Or even worse, they could be working and she could have killed them and others trying to pump gas. How is this logical? So, she's going to take this away from them and also pollute the air with all of that burning gas that now no one can use and it scorches things and potentially harms people. Yay? We don't take gas from Iraq for a reason. It is -theirs-. We went to depose of a leader that was a threat and let them design a new government that would be less harmful to others and well, to the Iraqi people themselves. If we took their oil, we might as well totally take over their country, which isn't what was intended, despite the words of some. Whether people agree with the war or not isn't up for debate. Stealing their oil for ourselves would be even more wrong and it conveys an awful message. There is nothing wrong with a peaceful protest. I expect a lot of people will be doing so in the future because other vehicles that could be used such as hydrogen ones and hybrids aren't so readily available in the types of vehicles people want. If oil companies hadn't messed around and bought out car companies early on, I am sure by now we'd have had more options so that we could trade in gas guzzlers for something more environment friendly and also we wouldn't have to skimp on comfort and room in vehicles. However, attacking gas stations is not right. We've been screwed by the oil companies themselves; not gas stations who are just distributors. So her reasons are lost in a frenzy of rage. We shouldn't be cheering this woman but think instead she needs some mental help and is taking her fight against the wrong people. She could lobby and do peaceful protests that harm no one. If enough people get together and demand that we get treated better, have vehicles of quality to switch over to and force a stop on being dependent on oil we'd do a lot better for ourselves than seeing some woman make people look stupid because she goes after the wrong thing. I'm reaching out here, man. You've got to see that this is wrong and it's not a great thing. I really hope you do because rage against the wrong things and acts that harm others and property isn't going to solve anything at this point. Take a moment to chill and look at the facts.
All these bleeding people. Where's the Red Cross when they could get easy donors?
It's understandable. I have friends who insisted the PS3 was going to die and all games would go to XBox etc and Sony wasn't going to make consoles anymore etc which I just ignored. I sit on the other side of the fence, preferring PS3 to XBox for the games on it, but at the same time, XBox is fine and I really don't go dissing consoles because it's rather petty to do. People like different games and that to me is more the reason to buy a console than it is to just get a console because you think it's superior or not. However, we don't spend people's money for them either so let them think whatever. It doesn't matter in the end. XBox is obviously doing well enough to stick around as is the PS3 so we have more options for gaming anyway.
pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis is the longest word as said above. You win! And sad to say, I'd probably either wait till a bit later in the day depending on what time it is where you are at so that if it's at night, every little sound doesn't bug someone. Otherwise, if it's in a good time of day, I'd probably just do what you are and do it quietly to get it over with.
Really, the console wars are stupid. I don't see a reason for suicide over it. People have their opinions and they are entitled to them whether or not someone is a fanboy/girl of one type of console or not. If you don't like what they say, ignore it, because that's all it is in the end is an opinion of preference. Just some people are more adamant about it than others.
I think that sheltering a kid is not the wisest thing either and even in such an atmosphere, kids can learn bad stuff but this is where 'discipline' and structure come in. When very young, yes, I agree it should be done that the kid is monitored often and parents don't expose them to too much adult 'language' and demeanor. However, as they age they are going to run into it no matter what, and my thought would be that instilling in the child lessons to know that 'yes' the word exists, but should the child use it? Also, if the child is going to use it, well, you better tell them where they can and cannot. Also, parents should tell the kid 'why' so it goes in that kid's moral core beliefs. It could get the child hurt, the child looks like a bad kid and it just makes people not respect the kid. Those are just some reasons. Parents have to learn that raising a kid is like a psychological warfare game. Teaching the kid young when it actually is young is the key. It makes total logical sense because kids absorb the most information and start remembering things clearly at around age 3. If kids don't know how to have an internal set of life's lessons for self stability, well, the cops will be knocking on the parents' doors and the parents can have that dumb look of 'how did this happen?'. Censorship from beyond the parents' control by the government etc is just not needed. If parents can't do their jobs, they don't need the kids. I'd rather those kids be in better homes than forcing everyone else to constantly lose privileges because they don't have kids or they raise their kids better.
This is why saying people, beyond rights and privileges entailed to people, are equal turns out to be rather false. We can tell just by thinking of our own lives that we are not equal in all things as anyone else is when it comes to physical performance or mental aptitude. This doesn't mean though we should not help one another, allow people to find what they are good at etc and aid those who are ill. When we think of 'equality' it should be that if a man, woman, child is injured or handicapped in some way, that person should get the same entitled care as the next person whether the person is black, white, purple, etc and have opportunities and obtain things not based on standards other than their ailment itself. This kind of equality for care and social standings, we can have. Just the same as in court, even if you can't afford an attorney, you can be granted one so there is help for those who are poor and not able to present their own cases. This is paid by taxes and such to allow a giving nature to keep a sense of fairness. If someone is handicapped, regardless of who he/she is, we'd expect that the person be given proper care. This is the equality we can fight for. However, of course we realize that people are born with differences or accidents happen etc. This is where we are not equal, which comes down to physical and mental prowess, as stated prior.
Well, in the game, those characters did certain things that impacted the story. Xaldin did try to corrupt Beast and get him to give up his Heart. Saix did do a lot of mind games and messed with people badly, Demyx was kind of a goof ball that was given missions he just didn't care about, Axel had his role as being outside of the Organization on the run and his plot to get back Roxas which was rather important, Xigbar had to do his thing in Mulan's world and also had a quirky personality and apparently was one of the people that found members for the order, and Luxord had to be his gambler self, playing odds and gambling for the Heart of a heartless he unleashed. In a way, it made it more interesting to have more people to contend with and also to see their personalities. Xemnas, despite looking cool, really is kind of bland in personality so other Org members kind of made up for that. Roxas had to be in the story too in order to progress it and get Sora to return and also set the mood of the game early on. However, just having Roxas, because he was an unusual Nobody that was also somehow emo at the same time, wouldn't have shown the Nobody plight well. Axel and Demyx did show that not all members of the Organization were so keen on the ideas going on, as well as Namine. Saix showed a devotion to Xemnas and was a real thorn in everyone's side and seemed more sadistic in nature than Xemnas did. Xemnas had a more disicplined aura around him and demanded order and respect. We never would have seen that aura about him had we missed out on seeing the other Org members and how they were like. So the game might have been kind of more boring because though Xemnas was enigmatic in his way, we had already dealt with Ansem (Xehanort's Heartless) and having to just go against Xemnas would have more mirrored the former games. Two games with Ansem (Xeh's Heartless) was enough without needing to face his Nobody who was different in some ways but not enough for us to not think it was just a repeat game. Whether people disliked some members of the Org or not, having all those people and their differences added flavor to the game overall.
