Wrath of Dagon

In the future, robots will fight for us anyway.

I find it surprising that no contingency plan appears to have been developed for such an accident ahead of time.

A lot of people in Eastern Europe have had a rough transition from socialism to whatever embryonic form of capitalism they now have. That has nothing to do with the normally developed capitalism of the West.

That chart is actually much more knowledgeable about Europe than an average American.

Taken from the article you says didn't say that, try again. This was mentioned in two places in the article, in different contexts. No, sentencing someone for life of hard labor is not working someone to death, that refers to overworking someone so much they drop dead. Yes, because it's totally humane to force somebody into "Painful multi-decade banishment" for committing a crime, and leaving them there to be abused ( you don't think they'd be abused? look at the stanford prison experiment) for the rest of their lives. At least the current system acts like they're human, they may be "evil" humans but human nonetheless Why wouldn't they be abused in the current system? Do you have something against life sentences or hard labor? Edit: And how's working 8 hour days working someone to death? That's less than most game developers work.

Your Wikipedia link said it was because of the Boy Scouts. Yes, he used that word, but then he describes what he meant, and it's not working people to death. At worst he probably doesn't know much about Soviet GULAGs. Anyway, anyone against the death penalty is a pinko leftist, not far right. The point is he didn't say what you claimed he said. Read the entire section on the Iraq war in the wiki article, I think it makes it quite clear that my interpretation of what he said is correct.

He called ACLU fascist in the context of them constantly going after the Boy Scouts. He doesn't advocate Soviet style Gulags but prison camps as an alternative to the death penalty, there's no quote of him in the Wiki article saying evolution is imaginary. You have to read that in context, he's saying we should never again invade a Muslim country, and instead if attacked we should retaliate by bombing those who attacked us. He's not saying we should bomb all Muslims indiscriminately. And if you're going to try to debate, you should provide quotes backing up your views, instead of me trying to guess what you consider far right, especially as some statements are subject to interpretation. You also conveniently ignore statements like this from the Wiki article " O'Reilly generally leans to the right on most issues, most notably the Bush administration's War on Terror, but breaks from conservative and Republican Party orthodoxy on such issues as the global warming controversy, the death penalty, and civil unions for same sex couples." Edit: He also says things like that: "Liberal thought, however, can be a good thing. Progressive programs to help the poor, fight injustice and give working people a fair shake are all positive. But libertine actions damage a just society because actions have consequences. Kids who drink and take drugs are likely to hurt themselves and others. But obviously, the SPs do not make judgments like that."[16]

It's not but it is. The daily show is probably one of the best sources for discussions on bias reporting. Fox news is their favorite but they've gone after MSNBC, CNN and CNBC. also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_O%27Reil...political_views that too I said he's not far right, I didn't claim Fox wasn't biased. Where in the video does he say something far right? I don't feel like watching the whole thing. Also with the wiki article, why don't you quote the relevant parts instead of just linking it?

Some girl from Russia.

Yah, OK, that has nothing to do with being far right though. Also I'd suggest to you the Daily show is not the most objective source of information.

I think it's mostly that they didn't want to release it at that time, kind of like AP.

Shocking news, Aliens RPG almost finished before cancelled: http://www.joystiq.com/2010/04/28/obsidian...-finished-game/

Not to rub salt into the wound, but here's an interesting article: http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm...rope-in-crisis/

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.