and you've got to know what you're doing when you break that emergency glass.. no way you'd find me within sight of someone unschooled in it's art.

mate, it would have your avergae urban thug convulsing on the ground and clutching at their throats within about 10 seconds.

DON'T FUCK WITH THE 'MITE

I can't beleive you fuckers are making me do a Google search for the answer.

Ohhh I see... industrial strength rat killer. That's kinda what I figured. How do you kill Kangaroos with it though? Do they rustle through your trash or something?

Mate this shit isn't just your run-of-the-mill industrial strength rat killer. It'd HIGHLY fucking toxic and is not to be joked about.

You can find more information here

He he. Is this have fun with the Yank day over in Australia? Very fuckin funny. There has to be a good reason that nasty shit hasn't made it to us.

hehehehh nup.. not at all.. :winkwink: heheh although if you ever see it somewhere.. make sure you tell someone to "put as much on as you would with peanut butter" heheheh.. it's actually not that bad... good on toast for a hangover.. it's VERY salty... but you should only put a VERY small amount on.. you should be able to see the bread through the vegemite.. i dunno.. like a grazed knee or something.. it's fucking disgusting in huge peanut butter like dollops :)

(btw most aussies would only have seen a kangaroo in a zoo :))

Mijoon--

I think you are making the common mistake of confusion social Conservativism with political Libertarianism. Roughly speaking, Conservative means sticking with the old ways of dealing with things-- old-fashioned morality. Libertarianism is the desire to minimize government, leaving yourself with only that which is necessary.

So, by that differentiation... On the topic of porn and censorship:

Conservative: That stuff is wrong. People shouldn't be allowed to see it. Censor it!
Liberal: Let people look at what they want, this isn't the 1950s.

Libertarian: We don't need another law about this. Let it go.
Federalist: The only way to control porn is more law.

The thing you are seeing is that, in America, the Conservatives (Republicans) make claims to Libertarian doctrine, which the Liberals (Democrats) have traditionally been Federalists. It does not mean that Big Government is a liberal ideal.

ok yeh whatever he said

didnt you americans have a system similar to this a while ago? think it was called slavery?

Conservative means to conserve the Constitution of the United States, and to conserve the type of government that it called for.

from dictionary.com:
con·ser·va·tism (kn-sûrv-tzm)
n.
The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
A political philosophy or attitude emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.
Conservatism The principles and policies of the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or of the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
Caution or moderation, as in behavior or outlook.
____
I agree that the republicans tend to push their moral values as well, which causes most libbers to go the other way. But if you are interested in the constitution at all I suggest you get a little more conservative in your thinking.

I am much more of a libertatrian than a republican.

There were conservatives before there was a Constitution. You can be a raging liberal, and still wish to make sure that we follow the consitution as closely as possible. The people who wrote the Constitution were very Liberal for their day-- they concentrated on freedom over tradition, and they invented whole new forms of government rather than looking to past solution.

PS. The Consitution was intentionally written by its framers to create a government that could be overthrown. They had seen what an oppressive regime could be like, and they knew eventually their rules could be subverted to create a society that was equally oppressive.

Thomas Jefferson once said he intented the Constitution to last no more than a few decades. So, if you want to uphold the ideals of the Consitution, you should do so by scrapping it and writing a document that is in line with our times. And that right there is the very heart of being Liberal-- progress versus tradition.

The Constitution wasn't written to create a government to be Overthrown. The beauty of the Constitution was that it was written to be changed, to be altered as man encountered new challenges along the way of governing it's People.

We the People. Right?

You are correct "they" had seen what an oppresive regime could be like, and that is exactly why they wrote and prepared the document the way they did.

To leave room for changing their mistakes because they looked to the future by knowing their past, as all good leaders should.

:2 cents:

Nope. Written to be overthrown. I swear. Start over from scratch. The French are on I believe their Fifth Constitution now, for instance. If you take a 250 year old document and revise it, you get a cobbled mess. If you write a new one, you get something that works for *this* era.

I don't agree with that. If you replaced the Constitution whenever it was convenient you would have anarchy. It was meant, as Fletch stated, to be revised. The process of revision was purposefully made difficult to avoid having people come in and rewrite it when they believed it would suit their needs.

I'm not familiar with the French system, but I would venture to think each of their consitutions is closer to a revision rather than a complete rewrite of the previous ones.

Not whenever it was convenient. Whenever it was necessary. I think Jefferson is quoted as saying he expected it to last no more than a few decades. Yes, it was meant to be revised-- but after a certain amount of patching, you need to re-write from the ground up or you're left with hobbled-together crap.

As for the French Consitution... I think the people killed in France's many revolutions might disagree with you a bit. They have had upheaval. Not every time, but sometimes.

You do know, for instance, that there are exactly two reasons why the second amendment exists, right?

1.) To make it clear that people could have weapons to overthrow the English.
2.) So that people could do the same thing again later.

I'm not making this stuff up. You don't have to agree with any of my opinions, but that's the history of the document people (including me) hold so dear.