Author Topic: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome  (Read 3000 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« on: January 29, 2013, 12:31:47 PM »
When I look at a map of the US and follow the border of our state of Kansas I see a nearly perfect rendition of the heart and soul of this country.  However, good is the worst enemy great.  It's not perfect.  There's that little itty bitty portion in the northeast that's prevents us from claiming a perfect rectangular shape.  Now some of you might like that little imperfection.  "It's endearing" you say.  But you're wrong.  "Well ya Emo EMAW but the river forms a natural boundary there."  Still wrong!  It's a shot across the bow, a slap in our collective faces at the hands of the Missourah' trash to the east.  And they even rub it in our faces naming the river after their crappy state!  We won the frickin' war, and to the victors should go the spoils!

So I'd like to discuss how we go about getting that piece added to Kansas.  I'd also like to discuss how we deal with the inhabitants of the area.  Could they be integrated?  There's a good chance they welcome us with open arms, but then there's also a chance they are beyond rehabilitation and might have to be relocated.  Obviously there are a lot of socioeconomic and cultural factors at work here.  Anyway I leave it to you goEMAW, please don't fail me (us).


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline Cartierfor3

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 27692
  • I just want us all to be buds.
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2013, 12:42:24 PM »
If we're going to add stuff, it should have mountains.

Offline The1BigWillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3172
  • Known to be a horrible person... (BORN 7/4/75)
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2013, 12:46:51 PM »
We frickin' GAVE away the mountains.  We don't deserve the rectangle. 
"That's what you get when you let some dude from Los Angles/Texas with the alias Mookfu raw dog it.  Willesgirl can back me up here.  There's a lesson in this.  You only get HIV once; make it count." - Mr. Bread

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 67517
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2013, 12:52:01 PM »
Have you seen the trash on the other side of the river? Do not want.

 :nono:
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9740
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2013, 01:07:29 PM »
Could very easily make it look like a meth lab accident. We come in to clean up the mess and claim our piece of land back. Boom, perfect rectangle.
I think what my friend Mitch is trying to say is that true love is blind.

Offline ben ji

  • Senior Moderator
  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 12316
  • Alot of people dont hit on an 18
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2013, 01:07:39 PM »
We frickin' GAVE away the mountains.  We don't deserve the rectangle.

Look at BigWillie dropping KNOWLEDGE.

Offline ben ji

  • Senior Moderator
  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 12316
  • Alot of people dont hit on an 18
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2013, 01:11:09 PM »
Just took a look at the map and the only Cities Kansas would gain are the shitty NKC suburbs and St Joesph.

No thanks.

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2013, 01:15:14 PM »
Not worth it. Definitely would be subtraction by addition.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2013, 01:28:37 PM »
Guys think of the industry that would boom if this area had a friendlier "business climate."  Also, all that river bottom farm ground, uuuhh yesssss BONER!

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38024
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #9 on: January 29, 2013, 01:32:41 PM »
Owning both sides of that stretch of the river would be huge for Kansas. Missouri would never let that happen.

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 47974
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #10 on: January 29, 2013, 01:35:38 PM »
draw a line straight north/south right after exit 313, make everything west of it part of oklahoma except for MHK  :dubious: .  give lawrence back to the indians.  plow pittsburgh down into those salt mines they have down there or whatever those mines are.  boom, roasted.  perfect kansas.


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #11 on: January 29, 2013, 01:48:34 PM »
Owning both sides of that stretch of the river would be huge for Kansas. Missouri would never let that happen.

Guys we could tax the crap out of all the river barges coming down from Nebraska and the Dakotas!

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38024
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #12 on: January 29, 2013, 01:56:15 PM »
Owning both sides of that stretch of the river would be huge for Kansas. Missouri would never let that happen.

Guys we could tax the crap out of all the river barges coming down from Nebraska and the Dakotas!

Yes, we could build a retractable barrier across the river and make each barge pay the toll to float into Kansas. Then we could set up another barrier to charge barges to leave Kansas. Boom, budget crisis averted.

Offline 0.42

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7746
  • pasghetti
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2013, 02:03:54 PM »
Owning both sides of that stretch of the river would be huge for Kansas. Missouri would never let that happen.

Guys we could tax the crap out of all the river barges coming down from Nebraska and the Dakotas!

Yes, we could build a retractable barrier across the river and make each barge pay the toll to float into Kansas. Then we could set up another barrier to charge barges to leave Kansas. Boom, budget crisis averted.

Great idea, Nuts Kicked. Also, should we tax all Iowans for being Iowans? I say yes.

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19148
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #14 on: January 29, 2013, 02:05:23 PM »
draw a line straight north/south right after exit 313, make everything west of it part of oklahoma.  give lawrence back to the indians.  plow pittsburgh down into those salt mines they have down there or whatever those mines are.  boom, roasted.  perfect kansas.

'clams, that would put Kansas State University in Oklahoma, which seems like a bad idea.
:adios:

Offline j-dub

  • fattyfest dance champion '14
  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • "I wanna get hurt!"
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #15 on: January 29, 2013, 02:09:49 PM »
We frickin' GAVE away the mountains.  We don't deserve the rectangle.

pls explain further. tia.
"I started calling him John during the game, cause he was rocking it like No. 7 -- like Elway," Harper said."

Offline waks

  • this blog's dick pic expert
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3815
  • Aggieville's Original Gastropub
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #16 on: January 29, 2013, 02:17:46 PM »
We frickin' GAVE away the mountains.  We don't deserve the rectangle.

pls explain further. tia.
The Kansas Territory originally included most of Colorado.



Offline The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9740
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #17 on: January 29, 2013, 02:39:41 PM »
draw a line straight north/south right after exit 313, make everything west of it part of oklahoma.  give lawrence back to the indians.  plow pittsburgh down into those salt mines they have down there or whatever those mines are.  boom, roasted.  perfect kansas.

'clams, that would put Kansas State University in Oklahoma, which seems like a bad idea.

 :lol:
I think what my friend Mitch is trying to say is that true love is blind.

Offline puniraptor

  • Tastemaker
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21355
  • nostalgic reason
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #18 on: January 29, 2013, 02:43:46 PM »
could we give away the southeast corner to get rid of coffeyville?

Offline ChiComCat

  • Chawbacon
  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18078
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #19 on: January 29, 2013, 02:44:40 PM »
could we give away the southeast corner to get rid of coffeyville?

I would trade it for polio blankets

Offline Ghost of Stan Parrish

  • I found my password
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1823
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #20 on: January 29, 2013, 02:54:41 PM »
We frickin' GAVE away the mountains.  We don't deserve the rectangle.

pls explain further. tia.
The Kansas Territory originally included most of Colorado.



Manhattan's delegate to the Kansas Constitutional convention (1859) argued the borders of the State of Kansas should extend "to the summit of the Rocky Mountains," in part so that Kansas would be a large, self-reliant state in the event of civil war (which of course started 2 years later).  He lost that argument.  But Manhattanites have always known what's what.
"I'm thankful our MHK forefathers had the foresight to lynch white dudes so that we might be able to throw up the mob with a clear conscience."

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38024
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #21 on: January 29, 2013, 02:56:27 PM »
Owning both sides of that stretch of the river would be huge for Kansas. Missouri would never let that happen.

Guys we could tax the crap out of all the river barges coming down from Nebraska and the Dakotas!

Yes, we could build a retractable barrier across the river and make each barge pay the toll to float into Kansas. Then we could set up another barrier to charge barges to leave Kansas. Boom, budget crisis averted.

Great idea, Nuts Kicked. Also, should we tax all Iowans for being Iowans? I say yes.

I would love to, but I just can't think of a good vehicle Kansas could use to enforce that tax.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #22 on: January 29, 2013, 02:56:43 PM »
We frickin' GAVE away the mountains.  We don't deserve the rectangle.

pls explain further. tia.
The Kansas Territory originally included most of Colorado.



Manhattan's delegate to the Kansas Constitutional convention (1859) argued the borders of the State of Kansas should extend "to the summit of the Rocky Mountains," in part so that Kansas would be a large, self-reliant state in the event of civil war (which of course started 2 years later).  He lost that argument.  But Manhattanites have always known what's what.

Did you witness this first hand?  :sdeek:

Offline The1BigWillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3172
  • Known to be a horrible person... (BORN 7/4/75)
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2013, 02:58:09 PM »
Denver is named for Former Kansas Territorial Governor James W. Denver.  We really f*cked that up.
"That's what you get when you let some dude from Los Angles/Texas with the alias Mookfu raw dog it.  Willesgirl can back me up here.  There's a lesson in this.  You only get HIV once; make it count." - Mr. Bread

Offline 0.42

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7746
  • pasghetti
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas geography discussion, Jayhawkers welcome
« Reply #24 on: January 29, 2013, 02:58:23 PM »
Owning both sides of that stretch of the river would be huge for Kansas. Missouri would never let that happen.

Guys we could tax the crap out of all the river barges coming down from Nebraska and the Dakotas!

Yes, we could build a retractable barrier across the river and make each barge pay the toll to float into Kansas. Then we could set up another barrier to charge barges to leave Kansas. Boom, budget crisis averted.

Great idea, Nuts Kicked. Also, should we tax all Iowans for being Iowans? I say yes.

I would love to, but I just can't think of a good vehicle Kansas could use to enforce that tax.

Congress, of cours--eff.