Wrath of Dagon

Yes, that was voluntary sharing, socialism is coercive sharing.

I'm playing Halo 3 right now, seems pretty fun although the level design is really stupid. Edit: A great shooter no one has heard of is Project Snowblind, people complain it's pretty short. Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath is a really fun shooter that's different. Those are both Xbox titles though. The best tactical shooter I ever played is the original Brothers in Arms.

McCain definitely did not win because he was the most moderate, you only have to look at his contest with George Bush to see that. It is well known that Republicans tend to go for the most conservative credible candidate. Another thing to keep in mind is that there were no true conservatives in the Republican race. Romney was a recent convert, most likely for purely political reasons, and Huckabee was a conservative only on social issues, and otherwise more of a populist. McCain is a solid conservative on about half the issues, but also tends to take positions on other issues which really piss off most Republicans. Also as I mentioned McCain was instumental in getting the surge in Iraq done, which gave a lot of conservatives a reason to vote for him which they wouldn't have otherwise.

@Krezack My point exactly, by Super Tuesday McCain had build up too much momentum to be beaten. Take a look at the Florida results http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide.../states/FL.html McCain barely defeated Romney, and without Huckabee Romney is likely to have won, which would've completely changed the dynamics. Also the Republican system is vastly preferable to the slow death of a thousand cuts of the Democrats.

Yeah, I'm sure you have an intricate understanding of American politics from Australia. Well, your understanding of socialism is confused and you misunderstand the way in which the Primary Elections are demographically unbalanced (they are, but because of state sizes and scheduling issues, not "radical activists"). For instance, your claim that McCain won because Romney and Huckabee split the extremist demographic is false. McCain won 32 states and 47% of the popular vote. Huckabee and Romney combined won only 19 states and 42% of the popular vote. McCain won about 1,300 delegates while Mitt and Mike combined won only about 550 delegates. That's because Romney withdrew once it became obvious the he couldn't win. You obviously don't understand how American primaries work, once a candidate wins a few early states his momentum becomes insurmountable. Had Hillary not won New Hampshire, she would be finished right there. Please don't argue about things you know nothing about. Lieberman wasn't a Republican, but was McCain's first choice for VP. He would've done better with Democrats and independents (but probably still lost: low base enthusiasm -> low base turnout). You can't have a pro-abortion candidate as a Republican nominee, plus Lieberman is quite liberal on most other social issues. Whatever independent votes McCain would've picked up wouldn't offset all the conservatives that would simply stay home. The obvious and probably the best VP choice was Romney, but he also had a problem of some far-right Christians unwilling to vote for a Mormon, plus McCain doesn't like him.

Yeah, I'm sure you have an intricate understanding of American politics from Australia. As far as Palin, that was a horrible decision, I was shocked when I heard it. She obviously wasn't ready to be president, even before all the evidence of her utter ignorance came out. One of McCain's problems was his age, and one of his advantages was experience, and he screwed himself on both fronts with that selection. McCain has a reputation of being somewhat erratic and taking strange positions, and that certainly came out during the campaign. Still, with the financial crisis and all the hatred for Bush, I doubt any Republican would've done much better.

The left wing of the Democratic party, which is to say most of them is trying to take us to European style "socialism", such as socialized medicine. It's not true that the centrist candidate usually wins the parties' nomination, it is party activists who are the most influential, and they're the more radical ones in both parties. This is a big part of the reason Obama won over Hillary, and this is why he won almost all caucuses, since those are the most dominated by party activists. McCain won because Romney and Huckaby split the conservative vote amonst them, leaving McCain a plurality. The fact that he was the only one pushing for the surge in Iraq also helped him in the Republican primary. As far as Obama himself, it's hard to predict what he'll actually do as president, as he seems to be more of an opportunist than an idealogue. He's already managed to take both sides of almost every issue.

Supposed to be more precise, since they'll explain what you will say or do, so you won't pull a gun when you don't expect to.

@Enoch It's a question of whether the redistribution of wealth is an end in itself. Of course any social program will involve redistribution of wealth, but that's not necessarily the ultimate goal. In other words you can try to help those in need, or you can try to make incomes more equal, which isn't quite the same thing. Edit: Let's not forget that Republicans apparently still have enough votes to filibuster in the Senate, which will probably at least prevent such anti-democratic, anti- free speech laws as card check, fairness doctrine, and socialistic stuff like a 15% income tax surcharge.

Serial killers are not the only ones who kill adults, child killers are the only ones who kill children intentionally though.

Ah, well. It was worth a shot - you'll have to live not understanding, then... I don't think I can help you if you fail to realize that people are free to think whatever they wish, regardless of how sick and perverted you deem it to be. They may be free to think whatever, but there's certainly no reason to pander to them.

I was born in Europe (in a true socialist country, too), so may be I qualify. He's a socialist in the sense that he wants to redistribute wealth, which is a socialist idea, not in the sense that he wants to nationalize means of production, which is true socialism.

Most likely, yes. But that doesn't give you or anyone else the right to tell people what they can or cannot think. Do you get it yet? No, I don't.

I think maybe you're reading too much into the long-term consequences of the marine situation. There are a bunch of marines guarding the embassy. If you shoot at them, they'll shoot at you. From what I understand, you have a reputation with each faction. If you kill the marine guarding the embassy, you'll be on the marines' crap list from then on.

And anyone who thinks about killing children in his mind is one sick pervert.

As I recall, they didn't even announce when the game became available in stores.

Yes please, I'd love to be put on trial for disobeying orders and committing atrocities. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092783/quotes See second quote (bad language)

Well I agree the first 1/3 of Cthulhu where you just sneak around and run away was the best and most inventive part, but I think that would've gotten tedious if extended to the entire game. The rest of the game was excellent also, and still quite inventive.

What's Indigo Prophecy syndrome?

Do you even know what you're talking about, or do you just make random statements out of your ass? As far as Cthulhu development, I think the game was supposed to be much bigger initially, with several detectives available as playable characters, so it was just a case of an inexperienced developer biting off too much. Still a work of art though, too bad it sold so poorly.

First, Cthulhu is a fantastic game. Second, Bethesda had nothing to do with developing it, it was all Headfirst, and all the delays were their fault as well. Bethesda did do a really crummy job of marketing the game, as in no marketing at all. Probably just a sexier box cover would've doubled the sales.

I think it's quite obvious LA and Bioware want to force KOTOR fans into paying monthly subscriptions for the MMO, so no K3. They said themselves the MMO replaces K3.

Isn't that what King's Bounty is supposed to be?

Well, I certainly hope there are William Kristol choices in the game, not just **** ones.

When you blow up a town, that's abstracted violence, quite different in depiction from immediate violence.