Wrath of Dagon

Apparently it's a larger game than appears from the demo. May be it's worth $20 after all. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/10/16...ium/#more-19738

I thought Knights of the Nine was some of the best content in Oblivion, but Shivering Isles had too many repetitive dungeons, though some of the story was kind of neat.

Well, the closest and easiest way of seeing a restriction in the "press" is to type **** or **** or **** on this very board and see what comes up. We have no such restrictions on any media channel in Sweden, for example. USA has lots of those, hypocrites as you are. We don't have any restrictions, except on public airways. Obsidian is free to restrict whatever it wants on its private boards, that has nothing to do with freedom of the press, you obviously don't even understand the concept. I was actually born outside the US. And I've been in about 6 other countries. Mexico couldn't be more different from the US btw.

The report is based on a questionnaire sent to partner organizations of Reporters Without Borders (14 freedom of expression groups in five continents) and its 130 correspondents around the world, as well as to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists. Just to be clear they are professionals with an interest in freedom of speech, not some random group of people with an axe to grind. I imagine the main problems in the US have to do with national security issues, I recall several high profile cases where journalists were forced to reveal sources, and a general fear of lawsuits among the big publishing houses, although this is hardly unique to the US. Controversial investigative journalism has had a hard time this last decade as news outlets are pretty much only about making money and not so much any more about fulfilling their part in the system of checks and balances. I meant what specifically they found that caused them to give US a low ranking. Journalists are only forced to reveal sources if they're called as witnesses in a trial, reporters are not above the law and have no special protection as witnesses. Controversial investigative journalists can investigate and print whatever they like, if they're too lazy to do that or if there's not enough money in it for them to bother that's hardly an indictment of our freedom of the press. That organization itself said they only measure the freedom of the reporters, not the quality of the reporting. I challenge anyone to find a single case where the freedom of the press has been legally restricted in the US. This ranking is clearly a lie and propaganda.

I said for whoever's interested, since we're talking about different economies. I already posted a GDP growth chart for different countries. Edit: What a surprise, a group of leftist loons doesn't think US has enough press freedom. I'd like to know what they're basing that assessment on.

I get 400 billion zillion channels on my cable, of course I have to pay $80 a month. I can see Finland is very advanced. Here's the Economic Freedom Index for whoever's interested http://www.heritage.org/Index/Default.aspx

Here's an even more amazing tale of Communist espionage: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28317.html

lolz

How do taxes help with the cost of living increases exactly?

No, social security surplus is an actual surplus, not debt. The debt is the sum of all deficits, the CBO public debt column is the true national debt, not what your chart shows, although that's a common mistake, it get misreported all the time.

Isn't Obama British anyway since he was born in Kenya when it was still a British colony? Btw, the Boers won the Boer War, the Spartans won at Thermopylae, and the Texans won at the Alamo!

Krezack, you chart is incorrect, it does not match my CBO numbers. This is probably because your chart is ignoring the Social Security surplus.

I don't think I actually said it's OK, I was just explaining the historical background. And what do you mean "queer"? Debt is the accumulation of deficits, or do you mean something else? Edit: Democrat financial prudence? It usually begins and ends with "We better raise taxes", but right now they're not even showing that much prudence.

Adjusting for inflation makes the chart have actual meaning in present day dollars. Otherwise it's just arbitrary numbers. But if you insist... Sure, here's public debt without adjusting for inflation. This is even worse for the Republicans mate. The link I posted has a second chart which shows debt as % of GDP. It actually peaked in Clinton's first term. Can't see you chart right now, will comment later. Edit: So, a republican congress (who you've said has been fairly constant about spending more money) SAVED money, and then clinton did nothing because he was on a bubble from the internet stocks.... And yet GW had the same bubble from the stock market but found that his deficit skyrocketed under his control, with a republican congress. Probably the only thing that will save us quickly (note quckly!) would be a good honest to god, going to the mattresses war between superpowers. Not saying that's a good thing, but it'd probably be the only thing that'd refocus our industry and force us to create new jobs and factories here instead of in a foreign country. I didn't say Clinton did nothing, but it certainly helped that he was restrained by the Republican congress. The stock market bubble started bursting at the very end of Clinton's term, and then there was 9/11, so you can see the deficit peaked in 2004 and then went down until 2008 when the current recession started.

That's why I said developed countries, obviously developing ones will have a much higher growth rates in % terms, since they're starting with very little. Here, you can play around with this: http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeye...th-by-country-3 Actually Australia has a higher growth rate, but then you're higher on the free market index too somehow. This also helps put things in perspective: http://www.data360.org/graph_group.aspx?Graph_Group_Id=348 I wasn't bragging, I'm just saying it's one indication of the standard of living.

Uh, so? That's a macroeconomic indicator. It says nothing about living standards. No. We aren't accepting invented or imaginary statistics as evidence, m'kay? Oh, wait. Those that have greater growth rates than the US aren't "developed", right? How shrewd. So? That's for 2008, the year of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. You need to look over a longer period of time. Most of the growth in US took place from between about 1983 and 2007. Another indicator, I'm pretty sure we consume more resources per capita than any other country by far.

Huh? Ronaldo? The Finns sued for peace and lost territory, of course they weren't satisfied with the outcome. Read the link Purkake posted.

US has the largest economy and the fastest growth rate in the developed world. That's all the numbers I need. The Soviet leader didn't say it was a defeat, he said it's a moral defeat, which isn't the same thing. But it's useless to discuss anything with people who can't even understand a simple fact.

He considered the victory to be a moral defeat. All of the terms of battle heavily favoured the Soviet Union, but they couldn't force this pesky little state to submit. Sure the Soviet Union gained some territory out of the deal, but any respected historian isn't going to look back on the Winter War in a positive light for the Soviet Union, despite their territorial gains. All I said is SU won, and they did. It's a historical fact and there's no way getting around it. As far as US being the best, I don't know what kind of number you'd expect to prove that.

Phony statistics don't prove me wrong.

Not that I don't admire Finnish heroism against overwhelming odds, but that's just not the case. Finns asked the Soviets for terms, and agreed to give up Finnish territory. By any definition that's not a victory. At best the loss wasn't as bad as it could've been.

Btw, that chart corrected for inflation is misleading. If you look at my link, there were significant budget deficits under Carter, but perhaps because inflation was even higher, it doesn't show up as a debt increase on Krezack's chart. If corrected numbers are shown, it would probably make more sense to show them as a percentage of GDP.

I said Britain, they were all part of the British Empire, except for Poland, which was over so quickly I didn't bother to include it, unless you want to pick nits.

I didn't cast any aspersions on Finland.

The war was between Germany, France and Britain at that point. SU was not yet participating, but if you insist, I'll admit it's also correct to say "during the war".