Wrath of Dagon

This is not really news, just a new example. It's well established that the rating agencies were a large part of the reason for the financial crisis. Conflicts of interest were involved, as may be expected. The individual example doesn't really work though, the credit rating is based on past history. Anything is possible of course, but it's all about probabilities.

I'm not aware of that and would like to see your sources if available.

And conservative stations get rock and roll, while liberal get jazz. I said far right, not right wing. There's a difference. I can name three off the top of my head, O'Rielly, Beck, and Hannity. All three are so far right that it's silly. That's a matter of perspective, I don't consider O'Reilly or Hannity far right, although Hannity is to the right of O'Reilly.

I said far right, not right wing. There's a difference.

Did you hear about the Swede who loved his wife so much he told her so?

Ha, ha, LoF's sig is about the thousand year Reich.

Same reason Rupert Murdoch's tabloids have topless chicks.

Lou Dobbs just seemed the most unhinged on that issue and on many others. The outrage over illegal immigration and the governments feckless and hypocritical response to it has been endemic to the Republican party and many independents as well for a long, long time. One also has to remember the bill of goods we were sold about the last amnesty er immigration reform. We were promised in return for amnesty, the government would get serious about enforcing the law. Sure enough, the amnesty happened but the enforcement only got more lax if that's even possible. Now we're being promised the same thing as before, talk about trying to fool all the people all the time.

I think your history is a bit selective. For example Fred Barnes when he was on Fox always supported immigration reform, and I'd be very surprised if O'Reilly ever did. Edit: And the assertion that opposition to immigration reform started with Lou Dobbs is just silly.

They get a lot of their guns from the US because it's the easiest path thanks to our open borders. Surely if they can smuggle tons of narcotics they would have no trouble obtaining guns from elsewhere if necessary. As far as Afghanistan, that's a civil war, quite different from law abiding citizens being defenseless and at the complete mercy of criminal gangs as in Mexico. So you're saying that you want Mexicans to all be armed so that there actually IS a civil war, like in Afghanistan? Because so far as I can tell, that's what you are advocating. Armed groups of citizens duking it out with the drug cartels? It's a fantasy! It takes more to create an effective fighting man than just giving him a rifle. The Mexican army and police struggle to engage with the cartels! Mexican army and police are outnumbered. Certainly armed citizens would be able to protect themselves far better than they can now. Sign up for what? Happens all the time here, some criminals try to rob a convenience store, and an armed clerk blows them away. But he risks being killed far more if he knows the citizen is an unarmed sheep.

You're right, the communist countries did not have to resort to mass murder in the later stages, as their terrorized and communist bred populations became sheep by then. Plus when you can only work for the government, you soon figure out resisting the government is not a good idea. Still you had events like Tiannamin square, and a lot of this stuff was only avoided in the Soviet Union because Gorbachev turned out to be a decent person.

He's assuming people watching are idiots who can't figure out bias for themselves. And the only far right guy on Fox is Beck, who came from CNN btw, and he's there because he gets huge ratings, not because Fox is trying to maintain their distance. The mainstream media has not moved to the center, they're as sycophantic to Obama as ever, at least Fox provides some balance.

No, legitimate is not the same thing as legal. Something may be legal under the laws of the Soviet Union, but that doesn't make it legitimate.

They get a lot of their guns from the US because it's the easiest path thanks to our open borders. Surely if they can smuggle tons of narcotics they would have no trouble obtaining guns from elsewhere if necessary. As far as Afghanistan, that's a civil war, quite different from law abiding citizens being defenseless and at the complete mercy of criminal gangs as in Mexico. Indeed. The US military has an excellent record of obeying orders. It is disciplined and with an aggressive, warrior ethos. It will do as it is ordered by it's CiC. My counter-factual has some real world precedent. The US government had no problems using it's military to quell civil unrest in New Orleans post Katrina. Furthermore, when that wasn't enough, your pioneering PMCs provided extra muscle too. I'm sure plenty of 'security contractors' hail from the 'Flyover' states. Surely I don't need to explain the difference between legitimate law enforcement and suppression of liberty? Btw, I don't think any federal troops were used for law enforcement in NO, as that's illegal. You're probably thinking about the National Guard.

You realize the US military is almost entirely recruited from the conservative fly-over states, and the Coast Elites don't know which end of a gun is which, don't you?

I don't see it, militias have a tiny amount of support, and not all of them are that radical. Something like this is a more likely scenario: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100422/wl_time/08599198386500 You'll notice the military isn't involved at all.

US armed forces aren't about to fight their own citizens on behest of some leftist, the opposite is likely true. Absolutely possession of arms guarantees freedom, the leftists don't believe in costitutional rights and believe in free speech only for themselves. For an example for how wonderfully peaceful a country is where guns are banned, one needs to look no further than Mexico.

Agreed. Don't tell me you've also forgotten how third order dynamics work, WoD? Huh?

Trillion isn't that much. The U.S. has had that for a long time. What universe are you from? Bribery might be OK if it benefitted the US in some way. But we're bribing people so we can screw ourselves over, that's got to be a new low.

Yes, they can't be bothered to amend the old subsidy law before its expiration, but it's never too much bother to add a new subsidy, no matter who it's for.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100412/us_time/08599197896300 If that doesn't make your blood boil.

Nothing can beat Baa Baa Black Sheep.

I'm impressed, Putin is doing a better job of brainwashing the young than the communists ever did. At least back then everyone assumed whatever the government told them was a lie.

Everyone's out to get us, we better turn up the repression! Old Soviet methods still work beautifully.

Here you go: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-12...il-police_N.htm Of course it is from HRW, but still.