Calax

*shrugs* I'm sure they don't mean this, but somebody will construe this as "if you don't have your license you will be deported as an illegal". Ironically my Sociology teacher (who loooved to preach about in-equalities) would leap on this as an example of an extension of what one of her professors families went through (apparently in like the 20's or something there was a string of mass deportations where if somebody who looked non-white didn't have their papers, they were tossed on a train and sent to mexico... I've never seen this mentioned anywhere else so I figure it's a little bit of fact, lotta bit of fiction).

We support amendment of the Americans with Disabilities Act to exclude from its definition those persons with infectious diseases, substance addiction, learning disabilities, behavior disorders, homosexual practices and mental stress, thereby reducing abuse of the Act. See, the thing is that you ask at what point does an infectious disease go from "non ADA" to ADA. Also on this point, I find it interesting that Learning and Behavior disabilities are both under the "remove" column when they both are MASSIVE strokes that run everything from basic add where you can still function very well, to something like my bipolar where you function pretty well but have to either be on meds or spend a week out of every 9 unable to work, to Tirets where you probably couldn't function very well in normal society without help. It seems almost like they're taking the Scientology approach to mental disability/disorder, "THERE IS NOTHING WRONG! YOU'RE JUST LYING!"

that is texas, the reddest of the red states. A few things do cross the line I think, obviously the homosexuals being lumped in with child molesters, felony marriage charges, the licenses thing, and the whole Endangered species act Mostly it sounds like they're just taking their parties ideals and pushing them WAYYY to the extreme (like the tea party gigglers) which will ultimately cause a massive backlash, assuming that voters aren't so dumb that they just vote for the first name on the docket in their party.

in a zombie investation I think flames would be best for massive groups, but other than that I'd probably stick with a shotgun/

I haven't yutzed with the Napoleon too much but it certainly feels a bit less... sloggy for the battles. I've had cases where I survived only because I had one cannon breaking everything that came near it with canister while my last two units kept them from being overrun. That said, Napoleon adds things like attrittion due to being in a hostile environment, the ability to fill out your ranks while in the field, a LOT more cannon, and a pile more battle maps for you to play with.

Mildly related, but the things you can do with caps

If you're willing to drop the money on it, Napoleon takes the E:TW and makes it actually pretty dang good by fixing a lot of the AI problems E:TW had and having more than just "Line infantry" and "Slightly better line infantry".

All the best viking warriors looked like they were accountants, that's why they were so feared! They'd infiltrated your settlement taking over your monetary apparatus then BAM all of a sudden there are nerds with battleaxes running riot.

They're here, but they don't exactly like to be yelled at by random disgruntled customers who prefer to use threats than anything.

The assumption being that it's costing them money for free publicity. When it'd probably cost them more money to file a takedown order with Facebook to get that site removed. One thing to note, most people on sites like that represent a (very vocal) minority of possible players in the fanbase. Similarly the WoW boards have like 1% of the population from the game actually posting on them or something like that.

It's 38c here, and it's 7:00 pm! Brits are such heat wusses! (j/k) Basically this (I think)

Except the baby levels.

HL1 for 2 bucks, Max payne (both) for five...

Monolith was once a top notch FPS company. But since they got aquired by Warner Brothers they only shipped mediocre products. Like FEAR2 and Condemned 2. I tend to think of NOLF, NOLF2, and Tron when I think Monolith.. At least, they're the shiny dvd's that are firmly staying in my collection for years to come.. I still haven't gotten around to getting hold of Fear 2 yet.. It... doesn't hold up quite as well as the original does. You don't feel scared anymore. The addon pack is another matter, that is just a fist full of awesome that recaptures the first games mystique

because it's REALLY hard to wade in and pummel him without getting throttled, where as if you went with ANY remotely long ranged weapon the difficulty drops like crazy. I think most of it stems from his coked up version where basically you either run the heck away from him or try to time your shot perfectly so that you pop him before he manages to start swinging and knock out most of your HP.

If I did pimp it out I'd have a full entertainment suite in the back.

Bought me a Car. 2004 Hyundai Sonata, GREAT condition for 5.3k some money pulled out for new tires, an alignment and we're thinking about changing the suspension but it's not an immediate thing.

Valve is slowly pushing through their library to update it for OSX, don't know about the other publishers.

Probably some of the most frustrating/hardest games i've played have been those where either you've got fake difficulty, or a section where you don't have enough checkpoints and thus end up getting through most of the area, only to collapse because that one guy/pit/obstacle before the boss pops up and bodyslams you out the window.

I did like this

Dang krook? your school not rent out an amusment park to prevent you from getting drunk, just for you to go out the next day and get completely wasted? thats what mine did

eh, you get just as many as you would before, the whole real-id thing requires that I ask and you accept a friend invitation.

*laughs at #'s man for not reading what he's linking*

Arguing from authority, am I? You have it backwards, bub. I have not made a single judgment call regarding this incident -- unlike you, I'm not happy to suggest conspiracy theories without having all the facts in, and I at least have the courtesy of extending presumption of innocence to servicemen regarding the possibility of extrajudicial killings, a very serious charge. Accusations of that caliber are, I think, not something to be thrown around as frivolously as you have. All I have done is, based on what I have been taught, show where your arguments fall apart (it's worth noting that you have not made a single rebuttal of any of the counterpoints I made). Man up and deal with it. "Oh, but I admit I'm fallible" just doesn't cut it -- of course you are fallible, you don't need to clarify that as if there was ever any doubt. That doesn't give you carte blanche to speculate wildly, and then throw a tantrum when people call you on your bull****. Countering wild speculation with wild speculation is hardly a very good idea. Although you didn't do that so much as simply say "Your wrong! NEENER NEENER NEENER!" like a 6 year old telling the richest kid in school he was wrong that his mom was extremely attractive. And what do you offer in return? You offer nothing even remotely better, expecting people to simply say "Well the number said that the superman isn't correct, so the number MUST be right!" Funny thing is that you say I never addressed anything you said, when a goodly portion of what you're raggin on me for was already mentioned: The way I was hearing it sounded more like execution style headshots that left neat little bullet wounds from a slight distance, rather than "Whups my hand slipped and blew your cheek apart... sorry dude" Which you appear to have chosen to ignore, or completely twist to say what you feel I did say. Understand, I said, right there, that I was basing most of my discussion on the subject on the fact that the things were presented as execution style, rather than something done during a riot. I don't know the gunshot wounds locations, nor do I know the level of trauma on the wound. I haven't seen the skulls, and neither have you (unless you'd like to enlighten us with your broad repertoire of horse riding genius). However, to suggest that somebody specifically shoots for a small location on the body that is easily missed because it's fairly swift moving, requires a bit of proof. for example, in 2 minutes I found this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e3CWHF9GxQ that says that they do check for shots in both the head and chest locations, but when you watch them shooting, most of the shots are in the chest area. Suggesting that they will aim first for the chest and if that's blocked they'll go for the head. It's funny how you use the English language to not outright suggest something but obviously push your own opinion into peoples heads. And I find this statement: All I have done is, show where your arguments fall apart (it's worth noting that you have not made a single rebuttal of any of the counterpoints I made) To be particularly funny given that you seem to have only made rebuttals that are so nebulous that it'd be impossible to rebut them. I suppose you aren't arguing from authority, just arguing from being an ****.