Wrath of Dagon

And your vote doesn't matter anyway, right? The delegates are uncommitted? Edit: Sorry, I think that's only the Republicans.

They come on an airplane and overstay their visas. Last year over half a million people overstayed. I'm guessing most of them weren't from first world countries.

I don't know breakdown by country, but Bruce was talking about Africa in general.

You guys are funny But it does matter, the views of your average South African will be generally echoed throughout the African continent Surly misplaced perspectives about the USA from a whole continent ....thinking how racist the USA is should concern you Patriotism Barti...patriotism Barti. It should matter if Trump is creating a very bad impression around the USA and its citizens? Do you think they'll start to think of us so negatively they'll stop coming here illegally?

Saw this brilliant post on twitter: Karen Santal ‏@KSantal · 16h16 hours ago @ThePlumLineGS Yes, they will love GOPe plans to whack SocSec and Medicare for more wars like idiot "W" started. Edit: Republican bloodsuckers -er- establishment in a huge panic, they might lose their bacon forever : http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0 Edit2 : How Rubio co-opted conservative media on amnesty : http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/marco-rubio-pushed-for-immigration-reform-with-conservative-media.html Lech Walesa turned out to be an informant for the communist government, proving once again you can't trust anyone.

WOD do you hunt in Texas? I mentioned to you how I met several Texas hunters in SA....hardcore guys, real outdoor survivalists. The type of people who could live in the wilderness if necessary No, the most I'm willing to kill is a mosquito or a fly.

Are you going to take a chance on Democrats appointing the next Supreme Court justice? And before you say Trump will appoint a liberal any way, remember when GWB tried to appoint Harriet Myers, and the whole conservative base went nuclear. Yes but the outcome will still be secretive, unless you saying the outcome will become public record later? There's no way they'll be able to keep something that important secret, trust me on this. We'll know what FBI recommends, one way or another.

He plays well to the disenfranchised party base. He hits all their buzzwords and topics and seems like he'd be WoD's personal favorite for "never ever EVER give anything away!". It's no surprise that he's winning the party where voter base considers getting 99% of what they want an utter failure. The thing is he'll either wind up against Hillary who's moderate enough she could probably catch several of the voters who feel Trump is to insane to vote for, while also getting the consistent democratic majority (in recent years/last decade) of the youth vote in a situation where many would turn up simply NOT to see Trump attain presidency. Or he'd be up against Bernie, who's activated the disenfranchised liberal base and would probably be able to get the entire party behind him because (as of right now) the democrats are significantly better organized than their opponents. You right. The sad thing is the party base is disenfranchised because the elected politicians go to Washington and become big government liberals. They are nearly indistinguishable from the Democrats except on the odd social justice issues they feel offers the opportunity to "throw the base a bone". Now in response to that disenfranchisement the base is supporting a man whose few policy admissions favor big government authoritarianism and who has been pretty left of center on almost all his public utterances over the years. This is a classic example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Republican competition isn't about liberal vs conservative any more. It's about corporatist globalists vs populist nationalists. Granted Trump has a lot of faults but he's all we got.

@Bruce It's not anti-Clinton propaganda, it's an objective article. We don't know if she's vindicated or chastised because the investigation isn't finished yet, which is also a reason no one will talk on record. That's how journalism works here, I don't know about SA. And what "campaign" are you talking about, this is about top secret documents which were improperly sent over public internet to a private non-secure server.

Why is Reuters writing an article about something that has "no substantive evidence"? Obviously they have sources which are credible. My opinion doesn't matter, it's the FBI's opinion which will matter once they finish their investigation.

Players generally like a variety of enemies, not just fish people. It's a video game, not a short story. I think they actually planned to make the game much bigger, with multiple detectives, but it was the developer's first game and they got over-ambitious, which is part of the reason they didn't survive. Also Bethsoft did so little promotion a lot of gaming websites didn't even know the game was released.

So you read that article and you got the impression she is a felon a thousand times over? "However, the agency reports found some emails included passages that closely tracked or mirrored communications marked “top secret,” according to the sources, who all requested anonymity. In some cases, additional classification markings meant access was supposed to be limited to small groups of specially cleared officials. Under the law and government rules, U.S. officials and contractors may not transmit any classified information – not only documents – outside secure, government-controlled channels. Such information should not be sent even through the government’s .gov email network." At least 22 emails had info from documents marked "top secret" or above. Over a thousand emails with some level of classification sent over the public internet. Each instance of mishandling classified info is a felony. Don't worry. I am sure that bombing Texas is quite low on the God-Emperor's list. I think GD lives in Tennessee. Definitely not in Texas.

Are Reuters liberal enough for you? http://freebeacon.com/issues/spy-agencies-say-clinton-emails-closely-matched-top-secret-documents/

I don't think he remembers the end of Call of Cthulhu story very well. I don't know if you know, but there is a game based on Shadow out of Time/Shadow over Innsmouth, it's also based on the CoC PnP and meets the requirements of the video above, it's called Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth.

That's very exciting news. Frogwares was making a Lovecraft adventure game for Focus that hasn't been heard of for a long time, I wonder if it was cancelled in favor of this game. Here are the screenshots, I couldn't see any on the above link: http://callofcthulhu-game.com/?_ga=1.268142856.766505775.1456540322 I hate to say it, but Spiders and Cyanide have kind of replaced Obsidian for me.

I think Christy was promised VP. Trump had even hinted he was considering one of his former primary rivals. May be he'll take him to the next debate. You realize that Clinton is still the heavy odds on favorite right? Clinton 8/11 Trump 5/2 Rubio 13/2 Sanders 12/1 The more I hear about her e-mail scandal, the more I'm convinced she's a felon thousands times over. There was another very damaging story just today. And that's not even considering all her other crimes. If she ever gets to the nomination, Trump and Christy will absolutely dismantle her. It only took Trump like a day to do that to Bill.

A male, far less corrupt, far less lying version of Hilzilla. Edit: Forgot to say far more competent too.

Technomancer trailer: http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/116833-the-technomancer-life-and-death-on-mars-trailer-coming-in-summer.html Coming this summer. Edit: A new Styx game as well : http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/116835-styx-shards-of-darkness-screenshots.html Looks like they're going to open it up, which is a welcome change.

Depending how you feel about American borders being erased. Edit: Personally I dislike Cruz more, but ideologically Rubio by a mile.

OK, if the facts are as you state them, then you're right, they have a right to protest in a "free speech" zone, or on public streets. I was under the impression they walked through the festival, screaming and carrying a pig's head, and then were asked to leave. I was actually reacting to this article I read a while back https://popehat.com/?s=dearborn but couldn't remember where I read it, so found another article on the same incident.

Well no, it's not, because I'd have to leave the festival I came out to participate in. I agree that parks are public forum, but if a piece is given over to a festival with a permit (I've never heard of not having a permit for a festival) that piece should not be considered public forum for the duration. The SC decisions may be as you say, but I'll note not every judge on that court agreed (may be for different reason though). Marco Rubio a whimpering mamma's boy : http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/the-anxiety-of-marco-rubio#.ujLX5kKq9X "Ten valor, Marquito!"

Recall people saying similar about GWB Consider that if Bush picked someone other than Cheney as VP and had Robert Gates for defense secretary from the start instead of Rumsfeld, he'd probably have a much more successful presidency. Believe it or not, I also think Trump understands foreign policy much better than GWB did.

If they're disturbing my festival, they're violating my right of free speech, no? How come you can't have a protest in the Supreme Court? That's also public property, but obviously they won't allow you to disrupt the proceedings. Nor can you protest inside any government building. You can protest outside all you want. The festival wasn't held on a side walk, they got a permit for the public space they used, so as long as they follow the laws, they can control that space for the duration of the permit. The protestors could also get a permit for the same space at a different time, and protest themselves silly, or they could protest outside. The Constitution isn't a suicide pact, as absolutists would like us to believe. Someone's right of free speech doesn't mean I'm obligated to also listen to them while I'm going about my business.

is more chaplinsky than brandenburg. brandenburg's incitement to violence exception is most typical used in cases where an individual is encouraging folks to perform acts o' violence. is a three part test requiring intent, imminence and likelihood. facts: a kkk guy gets on tv and says, “if our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court, continues to suppress the white, Caucasian race, it’s possible that there might have to be some revengeance taken," and “the **** should be returned to Africa, the Jew returned to Israel.” Court strikes down the ohio conviction o' the d-bag kkk member. as reprehensible as were the words, the speaking were not likely to result in an IMMINENT and violent response from other d-bag kkk members. fighting words, as 'posed to incitement, is those utterances that the listener is likely to respond to with violence, but chaplinsky is... problematic. fighting words is Not protected speech, but the SCOTUS has refused to uphold a challenge based on chaplinsky since... well, ever. chaplinsky were the first, and last, successful fighting words case. fighting words is "those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace." unfortunate, lower state and fed courts has been kinda all over the place and the closest we got from SCOTUS is dicta that cross burning is likely verboten when is intended as a threat o' harm, so providing you with the rule is less than illuminating, eh? if it makes you feel better, angry muslims could march outside fenway park, set fire to the stars and stripes while spouting... well, pretty much every third qistina post. stuff 'bout american antichrist and how the west will burn. wouldn't offend the Constitution even if it angered almost every drunken southie sox fan. HA! Good Fun! Yeah, sorry, now I realize it sounded like my first and second sentences were linked. Actually I was making two unrelated comments on stuff said before in the thread. My problem with the court decision in the link has nothing to do with incitement of violence and instead with court saying the protestors had the right to disrupt someone else's festival. He said it about something utterly unrelated though. Yeah, I also don't like his general mannerisms....its something I can't quite put my finger on ? I think it was Psychology Today that did an article that something in his face makes people dislike him. Also if you look-up "Grandpa Munster" Cruz is the spitting image. Although I have to admit judging people by their looks is a form of fascism. Edit: Btw, this isn't directly election related, but since we've discussed US and Russian foreign policy earlier, here's an article that agrees with me: http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/moscow-tigris

Gromnir can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe incitement to violence is not protected speech. Also I think here the court was wrong to rule in favor of "free speech", I think the protestors' actions went way beyond just speech: http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2016/01/06/first-amendment-ruling-christian-evangelists-arab-festival/78376188/