Wrath of Dagon

Bruce I just don't understand where you get the notion this is what Barack Obama is all about. How is a society where an agency of the government is used to undermine political participation of opposing viewpoints fair and equitable? How is a society where veterans are subject to addtional police scrutiny because of political opinions the administration THINKS they MIGHT have fair and equitable? How is a government that asserts it would be perfectly ok to kill it's own citizens with no due process if the leader of that government believes they are participating in terrorisim? How is is fair and equitable for an administration to use executive orders to make changes to laws passed by the legislature and signed by the executive years after the fact? How is is fair and equitable when every shred of electronic communication is being monitored by the NSA? How is it fair of equitable if the government can use the force of law to complel a citizen, as a condition of citizenship, to enter into a private contract with a 3rd party of the governments choosing? There is nothing fair or equitable about that has been going on in the United States the past fifteen years. He means it's more fair and equitable than a burning tire around your neck. Edit: Questions not asked at the Democrat debate: http://www.investors.com/politics/andrew-malcolm/democratic-debate-clinton-sanders-obama/

He supports Trump if I recall correctly. That is correct. Trump is the only nationalist in the race.

But Christie should have the nation's gratitude for disemboweling the sniveling liar Rubio.

Once again proving your total lack of judgment. Sanders at a Stalinist kibbutz: https://pjmedia.com/ronradosh/2016/02/06/bernies-adventures-on-a-stalinist-kibbutz/ Yes, there was such a thing.

Ultimate General. Fast moving and fun. The key seems to be watching your units' morale and making them fall back if it's too low, and turning on the topographic map and moving your artillery up to the front line preferably on a hill.

Meh, as usual he's lying about most of his positions for the primary. The comparison to GWB is a good one.

Obligatory Unlike the kulaks I've got assault rifles. Edit: A long profile of Rubio: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/marco-rubio-profile-213275 The good stuff starts in the middle of page 5. Even an incident portrayed in "Scarface".

If you want them to consider your suggestions, I suggest you post on their forum at the link in the OP. The game is inspired by Heinlein's "Orphans of the Sky" generation ship novel.

No one likes her, nurse Ratched has a warmer and more genuine personality. Interesting and accurate analysis of Cruz: http://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-top-10-things-you-need-to-know-about-ted-cruz/ America under Sanders: http://www.hoover.org/research/enemy-state Down with the kulaks -er- billionaires!

If you somewhere in the foreign frozen north get it, how come so many American "conservatives" don't? I know, it's our wonderful brainwashing -er- I mean educational system. Btw, Cruz is an even heavier supporter of H1-B, he wants to quintuple them when Rubio only wants to triple them. Edit: Also, for everyone who thinks that Rubio is somehow moderate, both Cruz and Rubio think that a woman should be forced to carry her rapist's child for 9 months. Edit2: How Cruz won Iowa: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-02-02/how-ted-cruz-engineered-his-iowa-triumph (by pandering) I'm too bored to read it all, but looks like a lot of good information for those interested.

As usual Zakaria doesn't know what he's talking about, or know anything about American politics. His theories don't take into account the huge Republican victories in 2014, and he doesn't seem to know the Republicans (with Clinton) did welfare reform and reduce the welfare rolls by half. What's really going on is a fight between nationalists vs globalists, establishment vs populists, business interests vs working people interests. Republican establishment does lie to their base, but what they lie about is being the extension of the Chamber of Commerce. Edit: Not really. The most applicable analogy would be like criticising someone who praised the early US, particularly the South, who did not want to implement slavery. Which as someone who lives in Texas you should know is a good portion of the population and Republican base. Are you triggered everytime someone with a confederate flag or with a hardon for 1776 doesn't also want to put a few people in chains? If someone said the Confederate society or the 1776 society was superior to ours, you would indeed have to wonder about such a person. Sanders didn't praise Soviet space achievements, he praised Soviet society, quite a big difference. Supporting privacy isn't foolish, but admiring Soviet society, thinking that Socialism can work, or opposing surveillance when it's used for national security is indeed foolish.

I am skeptical of both right and left wing sources. Because they are typically more interested in slinging mud at the other side than actually being an unbiased source of information. Which is basically what Rostere said. I mean, you don't ever have doubts about the party line you are buying into? I don't buy into any party line, I am skeptical about all sources (as far as facts, as far as opinions I form my own). The reason I frequently post Breitbart links is that they cover stories main stream media (which I also read) likes to ignore, as Rostere pointed out. Even on Breitbart some people are more credible, and others are more in the knee jerk propaganda mode. Unfortunately I don't know any truly objective news sources, nor do I believe any exist. Edit: Ending Spending Action Fund is an independent organization that proudly supports candidates regardless of party affiliation who favor enhancing free enterprise and balancing our nation's budget. Learn more at EndingSpendingFund.com. So is this video made to support Sanders or to support other candidates (aka Clinton)? Seems to be a viral commercial for Sanders.

Being against surveillance of citizens is idiotic now? I guess totalitarian measures are only bad when those dirty commies do it. Clearly the US government will never do anything wrong. I take it when anyone admires Thomas Jefferson and they don't want to enslave their biological children you're going to get triggered and call them hypocrites? Because clearly it's impossible to admire specific qualities or opinions without emulating something completely. The correct analogy here would be castigating Thomas Jefferson for holding slaves while expressing admiration for slave holding societies. What does that matter? The analyst could be a Nazi for all I care. I agree with his analysis, not his worldview nor his solutions. Would you disregard all theories behind why people are attracted to communism from socialist authors? Opinions do not factor in when making a factual analysis of the situation. That was directed specifically at Hurlshot, who normally refuses to believe anything from right wing sources. Note that I was talking about my own link, so I certainly wasn't trying to discredit it.

Well, it's a blog. Is it unreadable because it disagrees with everything you believe?

Congrats, a decent article from a decent site. But by a very conservative commentator, oh no! The difference between the Soviet mentality, and the American one is that ultimately, "IN Soviet Russia!" the ideal was that you're making something awesome to make the entire nation benefit. In America, you make something awesome to shove extra money in your pocket. Admittedly I haven't done much research on the mentalities of the soviet population at the time, but it seems like it would have been an easy thing to convince the average population that they are just pieces of the machine working towards a better future, even if they sacrifice the self for it. Yes, you shove extra money in your pocket and benefit the whole country, because no one will buy your stuff if they don't want it. And the Soviet mentality was can be summarized by an old joke "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us" of course that was the mentality after Stalin's terror ended, no one would dare to tell a joke back then, people were shot for less.

And they never could land on the moon, because they were technologically backwards. Being first in space isn't worth living in an oppressive, dreary and hopeless society. Nothing in that article contradicts what I said. While admiring murderous totalitarian regimes, which makes him both an idiot and a hypocrite. Edit: Here's another good one : http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572 “It’s true you have better hair than I do,” Trump said matter-of-factly. “But I get more **** than you do.”

http://www.bookwormroom.com/2016/01/28/muslim-migrants-not-as-stupid-and-simple-as-politically-correct-europeans-seem-to-believe/

Russian economy was the fastest growing in Europe before the revolution. They really didn't accomplish anything the other European countries didn't accomplish except starve their own people repeatedly. The standard of living was always way behind the West, and any so called technological or scientific accomplishments came about because huge resources were dedicated to that instead of improving people's lives, very much like North Korea developing nuclear bombs and ballistic missiles while their people are starving. And I'm pretty sure you'd get better healthcare in any public clinic in the US than in Cuba, certainly they don't have any modern drugs or equipment.

Isn't it too late for Biden to get on the ballot if Hilzilla is forced to withdraw? I thought the deadlines passed last fall.

Yes, and in the case of the Soviet Union and China also brought around an industrialization that benefited millions while ushering in scientific progress that outpaced the US for a time and Cuba has a medical system that outperforms the US(unless you happen to be well-off) to this day. Butclearly old comrade Bernie was excited at the thought of the gulags and not any of that. Oh, OK, I guess mass murder is OK so long as it brings industrialization. (Also many famines, also Soviet industrialization was for military purposes and way behind US, and Chinese under Mao was almost non-existent). Are you sure you're not LoF? Edit: No wonder Sanders wants Socialism, he can't do anything except run for office: http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/bernie-sanders-the-bum-who-wants-your-money/ Edit 2: Btw, on the subject of drugs, the only reason that wasn't a problem in communist countries was because they were police states, with lots of surveillance. As an alternative, in the Soviet Union people drunk themselves to death.

He didn't seem to be concerned about surveillance when he expressed admiration for brutal totalitarian regimes like the Soviet Union, China and Cuba. And yet he has consistently voted against surveillance of American Citizens throughout his legislative career. Funny, it's almost like one can admire specific qualities or actions without wanting to emulate something wholesale. That's like saying you can admire hitler without wanting to emulate death camps. The regimes he expressed admiration for (in general, not their specific actions) were responsible for deaths of tens of millions of innocent people. Edit: Actually this is incredible. This is what I posted here: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/82691-democrat-presidential-debate/page-11 “Contrast what the young people in China and Cuba are doing for themselves and for their country as compared to the young people in America,” he said. “It’s quite obvious why kids are going to turn to drugs to get the hell out of a disgusting system or sit in front of a TV set for 60 hours a week.” https://newrepublic.com/article/122309/bernie-sanders-archive-bustling-mysterious-young-men So Chinese and Cuban systems are wonderful, and ours is "disgusting". He said that in 1976, but Mao, the greatest mass murderer in history only died in 1976!

He didn't seem to be concerned about surveillance when he expressed admiration for brutal totalitarian regimes like the Soviet Union, China and Cuba.

Yes, I'd say it's bad if you're desensitized to murder. But remember, in SA the natives kill the migrants, in US the migrants kill the natives. Edit: So SA murder rate is 10 times the US one, and some claim it's actually underreported. Also a lot of US murders are gang violence between criminals.

Volo there are 250 million white people in the USA ....we are just talking about one of them being killed. Stop trying to scare WOD and the other USA members. The Muslim extremist won't kill all the white people in the USA !!! They'll just kill some of us. Bruce, once in a while you say something truly idiotic. This kind of thing happens every day. I personally knew someone randomly murdered by an illegal alien who had previously been deported many times. May be in SA you don't care when someone is murdered, but in the USA we still do. In other news, nothing to see here, move along: http://nypost.com/2016/01/24/hillarys-team-copied-intel-off-top-secret-server-to-email/ Edit: Funny how a crazy old Socialist becoming a nominee of a major political party doesn't seem to worry you.

No need to worry about illegal alien criminals, the government is here to protect us: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/22/ice-investigated-for-failing-to-deport-illegal-before-he-killed-woman/