http://gamingtrend.com
April 25, 2014, 08:01:13 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3
1  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama vs. McCain - My Research PT. 1 on: June 29, 2008, 11:57:49 AM

Quote from: Canuck on June 29, 2008, 07:15:19 AM

Bloody hell, making 600k and only paying 12 bucks in taxes!?  That is ludicrous!

It's the amount their tax bill is changing, not their total tax bill.
2  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Gore endorses Obama on: June 23, 2008, 04:17:47 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 20, 2008, 11:05:46 PM

The latest Newsweek poll just came out today.

Obama has a 15-point lead over McCain, 51-36.

Party ID numbers are included.  55 percent of the country are Democrats (or lean D), and just 36 percent swing towards the Republicans.

Women prefer Obama by 21 points, 54-33, and former Clinton supporters prefer him 69/18 over McCain.  Go figure.

Good times!  Keep it up, B!

If polls in June mattered, Dukakis and Kerry would have been commanders in chief.
3  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama (already) plays the race card on: June 23, 2008, 04:10:57 PM

Quote from: McBa1n on June 23, 2008, 07:11:28 AM

He's a man, just like McCain -- and he's running for President, that's all that SHOULD matter,

Hillary was right!    eek  icon_wink

4  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama (already) plays the race card on: June 23, 2008, 04:07:54 PM

Quote from: msduncan on June 23, 2008, 03:21:37 AM

   He said Republicans (that's me)

Just how many Republicans are you?    icon_smile
5  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Bush calls for congress to open areas for drilling on: June 21, 2008, 09:46:26 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 21, 2008, 09:41:37 PM


Here is the problem, it takes years to bring new sources like that online, 5-10 at least, if you want to use it as a stratigic reserve as you want, we would have to explore to find it, and have the ability to bring it online quickly, which would require drilling in the areas that are currently banned from exploration.

Fair enough, I guess I'd probably be ok with some limited amount of exploration, if it stops at that.
6  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Bush calls for congress to open areas for drilling on: June 21, 2008, 09:40:03 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 21, 2008, 09:21:53 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080621/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush;_ylt=AtgVMlEwlFi9YrCL0aj8wg2s0NUE

Good, drilling for more of our own oil is one of many things we need to do to help with our energy problems.

I'm not convinced that it'll be a major help, and I'd rather use it like a strategic reserve (eg, use it if there were a wide embargo on the US, for example) if necessary.  Why use up our resources while others are willing to sell their resources?  It's not as if they won't be able to sell their oil to other buyers and will be stuck with the stuff.

Quote
Other things would be allowing new nuclear power plants to be built, working on sensable conservation plans and work towards more workable renewable energy sources then we currently have.

Agreed.
7  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama (already) plays the race card on: June 21, 2008, 09:08:13 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 21, 2008, 09:02:40 PM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on June 21, 2008, 08:57:07 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 21, 2008, 08:26:48 PM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on June 21, 2008, 08:22:02 PM

Jesse Jackson might disagree.

I'm happy to go refresh my memory of the 84/88 campaigns, but I don't recall any Jackson claims that other candidates were using race against him.  He certainly made general claims about institutional racism.

You think McCain's going to use race against Obama, or will it be other non-candidate Republicans?

I'm certain McCain won't say anything - it'll be oblique comments by low-level party functionaries and, of course, grassroots whisper campaigns, primarily via email and talk radio.

My earlier point was simply that, in this election, the only Democratic candidate to use racist smears towards Obama was Clinton - not Edwards, Dodd, Richardson, etc, etc.  I thought you were trying to make the point that Jackson was attacked in the same fashion by other Democratic candidates in his previous runs - maybe that's not what you were alluding to?

Nah, it was that Democrats (and Republicans) in general have used race as an issue, even if it's in a wink, wink, nod, nod way.  Neither side is clean of it, and I think it's reasonable for Obama to call it out.

Though I would imagine in many of these cases, it's just politicians using dirty tricks to be in power, rather than genuine racism.  Not that that's much better.
8  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama (already) plays the race card on: June 21, 2008, 08:57:07 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 21, 2008, 08:26:48 PM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on June 21, 2008, 08:22:02 PM

Jesse Jackson might disagree.

I'm happy to go refresh my memory of the 84/88 campaigns, but I don't recall any Jackson claims that other candidates were using race against him.  He certainly made general claims about institutional racism.

You think McCain's going to use race against Obama, or will it be other non-candidate Republicans?
9  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama (already) plays the race card on: June 21, 2008, 08:22:02 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 21, 2008, 08:12:57 PM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on June 21, 2008, 08:09:39 PM

Democrats have used the same tactics. McCain will denounce the use of it by Republicans (wink, wink, nod, nod, know what I mean?)

I think it'd be a nod to accuracy to say "the Clinton campaign" rather than "Democrats", as there's only one Democratic presidential candidate whose campaign resorted to those sorts of insinuations.

Jesse Jackson might disagree.
10  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama (already) plays the race card on: June 21, 2008, 08:09:39 PM

Quote from: Captain Caveman on June 21, 2008, 07:36:35 PM

I don't know how much of this will come directly from the McCain campaign (though already statements claiming Hamas wants Obama to win, and those questioning he and his wife's patriotism, arguably have racial undertones), but there's no denying that there are many efforts that are explicitly attacking Obama on racist grounds. Here's just one recent ugly example.

To be fair, I don't think this is relegated to just Republicans. Many felt the Clinton campaign dipped into these despicable practices as well (e.g., the "as far as I know" moment, Hillary desperately trying to tie Obama to Farakkahn during the debates, the "leak" of the turban pic, Bill's comments, etc).

What he said.  Democrats have used the same tactics. McCain will denounce the use of it by Republicans (wink, wink, nod, nod, know what I mean?)

 I see no problem with what Obama said.
11  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: California Supreme Court strikes down ban on gay marriage on: June 17, 2008, 02:05:57 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on June 17, 2008, 12:54:29 AM

So, from what I understand from the cultural Right, this means that I only had until 5:01 today until my marriage is so undermined that I have to get a divorce and go marry a toaster or my dead mother or a springer spaniel or six guys from San Francisco, right?

"Or"?  Why choose between them?
12  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Supreme Court Smacks Bushies Again... on: June 16, 2008, 04:42:20 PM
I can understand and sympathize with the arguments for both sides.  The thing that gets me is that McCain called this one of the worst decisions in Supreme Court history.  Really?  Even if one thinks the court made a mistake, does anyone really think this is on the level of, say,  the Dred Scott decision?
13  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: I'm Voting Republican on: June 15, 2008, 07:36:49 PM

Quote from: Eduardo X on June 13, 2008, 05:40:11 PM

The Democrats are so weak these days,

You're kidding, right?
14  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Jeebus, Tim Russert died on: June 13, 2008, 08:13:31 PM
Gone to that great big white board in the sky.  RIP.
15  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: "Terrorist Fist Jab" on: June 11, 2008, 06:01:39 AM

Quote from: Brendan on June 11, 2008, 02:38:03 AM

It appears that it wasn't a member of the media as she claims - it was a random internet schmuck posting to Cal Thomas' blog on Human Events; the comment was deleted, but it's referenced here in a Slate column. 

That's actually better than I would have thought, and given that the slate piece originally attributed it to a commentator before being corrected several days after the Fox broadcast, while it still shows major journalistic negligence, I'll take her apology at face value - I don't think she was intending to be malicious.
16  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Hmmm. What if: Hilary = VP? Does That Sway Your Vote to McCain? on: June 10, 2008, 10:34:17 PM
Apparently, some of the names being discussed for Obama's VP are Retired General James Jones and

Quote
Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Evan Bayh, Kathleen Sebelius, Ted Strickland, Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Jim Webb, Bill Nelson, Jack Reed, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Tom Daschle, and Sam Nunn
17  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: "Terrorist Fist Jab" on: June 10, 2008, 08:02:15 PM

Quote from: VynlSol on June 10, 2008, 07:53:08 PM

Quote from: Eduardo X on June 10, 2008, 03:18:59 PM

Who the hell calls that a terrorist fist jab?

I'd like to know that too. If, "terrorist fist jab," was was made up by the commentator, or by someone at the news organization, I can see this as another opportunity to lambast Fox. Given that the phrase was presented in the first few seconds of the clip, as but one of a collection of phrases that I assume other (widely read, seen, heard) people have used to describe Obama's action, with no attribution, I'm unsure of its origin.



Hill Apologizes For "Terrorist" Tease

She says it wasn't the way she characterized the bump, but rather how it "had been characterized by the media".  Looking through googlenews, I couldn't find any references prior to June 7th (and those were articles about Fox)



18  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Can someone please tell this senile moron to shut up? on: June 09, 2008, 11:52:18 PM

Quote from: unbreakable on April 13, 2008, 10:30:51 PM

They aren't a terrorist group now... they are a legitimate government.

Interestingly, a majority of Palestinians don't consider Hamas their legitimate government

Quote
Fifty-nine percent recognise Prime Minister Salam Fayyad government as the legitimate one while 24 percent see Haneya's government as the true one.
19  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Ironrod: McCain supports manned exploration of Mars on: June 09, 2008, 09:24:08 PM

Quote from: msduncan on June 09, 2008, 11:26:53 AM

  What you are saying is a perfect example of the science inquisition.   

I didn't expect a kind of science inquisition.
20  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Hmmm. What if: Hilary = VP? Does That Sway Your Vote to McCain? on: June 09, 2008, 03:19:58 AM

Quote from: YellowKing on June 08, 2008, 02:26:32 PM

The decision I'll have to make in the fall is whether character trumps experience.

If character trumps experience, Carter would have been one of the best presidents evar.
If experience trumps character, Buchanan would have been one of the best president evar.

Clearly, you should consider more relevent criterea, like the height of the candidates.
21  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Ironrod: McCain supports manned exploration of Mars on: June 08, 2008, 09:51:22 PM

Quote from: msduncan on June 08, 2008, 08:32:01 PM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on June 07, 2008, 11:14:35 PM

Quote from: msduncan on June 07, 2008, 10:56:55 PM


I am in the bible belt, and I'm a conservative Republican.   I can tell you that it's inaccurate to say that these people are anti-science.    They are anti-abortion and they don't buy into global warming, but they aren't anti-science.     

What about people who oppose evolution?

Quote
Politically, a majority of conservative Republicans favor replacing evolution with creationism in the classroom, but support for this proposal falls below 40% for all other political groups, including moderate and liberal Republicans.

Believing that there is a divine spark to life != anti-science.     They simply believe that there is more to the beginning of everything than a singlularity about which scientists can't explain how it got there, why it was there, what was there before it, etc.    Science about the beginning of the universe is as unprovable, unexplainable, and fantasmical as anything religion has conjured up.


Believing that there is a divine spark to life != opposing evolution.  One can believe in a divine spark to life and evolution(see Theistic evolution).   That's not the case with people who oppose evolution.
22  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Ironrod: McCain supports manned exploration of Mars on: June 07, 2008, 11:14:35 PM

Quote from: msduncan on June 07, 2008, 10:56:55 PM


I am in the bible belt, and I'm a conservative Republican.   I can tell you that it's inaccurate to say that these people are anti-science.    They are anti-abortion and they don't buy into global warming, but they aren't anti-science.     

What about people who oppose evolution?

Quote
Politically, a majority of conservative Republicans favor replacing evolution with creationism in the classroom, but support for this proposal falls below 40% for all other political groups, including moderate and liberal Republicans.
23  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Ironrod: McCain supports manned exploration of Mars on: June 07, 2008, 11:11:18 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 07, 2008, 03:12:36 AM

Or will he raise taxes?


McCain opposed Bush's tax cuts before he supported them, revealing his true opinion as someone who favors taxes.  slywink
24  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Vive la france! (can I say that?) on: June 04, 2008, 03:55:20 PM

Quote
Ms. Bardot, the film star turned animal rights campaigner, was also fined $23,325 and ordered to pay $1,555 to the French group Movement Against Racism and for Friendship of People.

I finally realized the real reason they call it free speech.  icon_idea
25  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Clinton's screwed on: June 03, 2008, 03:24:21 PM

Quote from: PR_GMR on June 03, 2008, 03:18:32 PM

Quote from: kathode on June 03, 2008, 03:02:08 PM

Just popped up on CNN.com that Clinton will be conceding tonight.

(A crowd of angelic little children sing:)


That's not a "crowd", that's just one lady.   icon_razz
26  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Scott Mclellan turns snitch on: June 02, 2008, 11:30:32 PM

Quote
"There is a series of moments and this is one of them. Our will is being tested, but we are resolute. We have a better way. Stay strong! Stay the course! Kill them! Be confident! Prevail! We are going to wipe them out! We are not blinking!"


I guess if loose lips can sink ships, eyelids can aid terrorists...
27  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Clinton's screwed on: June 02, 2008, 08:06:31 PM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on June 02, 2008, 03:52:45 AM


Also, Hillary's "polls" against McCain are a chimera. Right now, NO ONE is taking pot shots at Hillary Clinton, she's getting a complete free ride. Obama switched to general election mode (and isn't even really pouring money into the present primaries) after Indiana and is focused on McCain, and McCain is focused on Obama. With no concerted effort to drag her down being executed, Clinton is, of course, benefiting in the polls.


To a large degree I think you're right but I do think there are some bases Clinton has (women, elderly, working class, etc) and other advantages that give her a much better chance at winning states like Arkansas and Florida that does put her in a better position (just not as much as the polls suggest)
28  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Clinton's screwed on: June 02, 2008, 12:46:58 AM

Quote from: msduncan on June 02, 2008, 12:34:53 AM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on June 02, 2008, 12:26:44 AM

I think whatever schism is there is repairable (Polls show Obama able to beat McCain before he's even had a chance to heal whatever wounds have been made), and on the flip side, the long primary season may have increased identification with democrats:





Quote
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll.

/chuckle


Fine Choose your own poll  or electoral map

The two are pretty much neck and neck with a long way to goes.

(WTF is up with SC and Indiana?)
29  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Clinton's screwed on: June 02, 2008, 12:26:44 AM
I think whatever schism is there is repairable (Polls show Obama able to beat McCain before he's even had a chance to heal whatever wounds have been made), and on the flip side, the long primary season may have increased identification with democrats:

30  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Indy IV: Who's in for Midnight??? on: May 25, 2008, 08:22:17 PM
In case anyone's interested in some of the movies referenced in Indy 4 (apart from other Lucasarts movies), here's a list of some of them. 

Spoiler for Hiden:
Even escaping a nuclear blast in a fridge is in there...
31  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Indy IV: Who's in for Midnight??? on: May 25, 2008, 07:24:26 PM

Quote from: YellowKing on May 25, 2008, 06:39:59 PM


Spoiler for Hiden:
He's explained away the religious mysticism of the previous movies with freaking Roswell aliens.

Spoiler for Hiden:
Eh?

I don't think the existance of Aliens was the problem (note the existance of Indian gods in Indyverse.)  Just the poor way it was handled.
32  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Epitaph to Hillary's campaign is being written on: May 25, 2008, 07:00:15 PM

Quote from: helot2000 on May 22, 2008, 02:45:44 AM

Quote from: Ironrod on May 22, 2008, 02:36:33 AM

I've got to buy one of those new election PC games when my stimulus check gets here. Bill Clinton vs Obama in a primary simulation would be fun.
One word...AAR.

I played President Forever in the '92 campaign, creating Obama with the values they had set (mainstream liberal, average personal variables except for the highest charisma) except that I gave him starting support of 16% in every state (I wasn't going to input every state).  I played a minor candidate and did nothing so I could watch the two battle it out (I would have probably won in a landslide if I played either of them because I know the game well).

The winner was...
Spoiler for Hiden:
Tsongas

Bill started in the lead with about half the projected delegates and about 20% support.  Obama had about 10% of the projected delegates, even though he had significant support (shades of Jesse Jackson), and ended up dropping in early April, along with others who dropped in April and May and backed Tsongas, giving him enough support to win.  Clinton won most of the south and some scattered states in the midwest.
33  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: California Supreme Court strikes down ban on gay marriage on: May 25, 2008, 06:19:22 AM

Quote from: Ironrod on May 25, 2008, 04:37:49 AM

Quote from: Electronic Dan on May 25, 2008, 02:34:17 AM

Given that California's domestic partnerships already gave gay couples the same rights and responsibilities as marriage from the standpoint of state law,  what does this change, other than having it called "marriage" instead of "domestic partnerships"?

As it was explained to me, "separate but equal isn't equal."

Any examples of any couple who are now treated significantly differently by the state as a result of this ruling?  Or is it just standing on principle?

On the other hand, what this may end up doing is result in a backlash in California or other states that may be harder to undo.
34  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: California Supreme Court strikes down ban on gay marriage on: May 25, 2008, 02:34:17 AM
 Given that California's domestic partnerships already gave gay couples the same rights and responsibilities as marriage from the standpoint of state law,  what does this change, other than having it called "marriage" instead of "domestic partnerships"?

Seems like much ado about very little, IMO.  I'll get more excited when rights and responsibilities are given in other states or at the federal level. *shrug*
35  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Big Brother - Google Street View on: May 24, 2008, 06:09:59 AM

Quote from: gellar on May 23, 2008, 07:26:05 PM


If you are plainly visible from any public place, you have given up your right to privacy.


I would hope it's not that simple.  What about stalking?  Or how about filming everyone entering an abortion clinic, a sex shop, a gay bar, a psychologists office?  Looking over the shoulder of someone typing their pin into an ATM?

I don't think Google's crossed the line yet (especially if they're willing to blur people's faces ) but there's definitely a line somewhere.
36  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Indy IV: Who's in for Midnight??? on: May 23, 2008, 07:04:27 PM

Quote from: rickfc on May 23, 2008, 07:00:06 PM


Hey Dan, there is a spoiler tag
Code:
[spoiler]type your message here[/spoiler]

Just thought you'd like to know.

Done, thanks.
37  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Indy IV: Who's in for Midnight??? on: May 23, 2008, 06:54:56 PM
Spoilers!
Spoiler for Hiden:
There were several things that were annoying, like: The cute/funny animals, the Tarzan scene, that indy is surprised that when you send a crazy man to get help to save you from death he'll go to probably the only people in a hundred miles to get help (ok, actually, it's kind of surprising that he'd do something so rational)

I don't think it's the aliens, per say, that was a bad idea, but that they were an overly complicated/convoluted plot point, that was never fully explained (bring back the skull to resurrect the aliens into one alien from a different dimension so they can give you the gift/power OF DEATH!)  That seems like a plot point from a bad sci fi movie from the 90s, condensed into 5 minutes, removing most of the explanations and put into a serial from the 50s.  Science Fiction from the 50s was never that deep.  (Actually, to be fair, Quatermass and the Pit, a television serial from the 50s, deals with aliens crashing on earth in the distant past and influencing human evolution and covers some of the same topics this movie does.  But that's a different kind of serial than the one Indy tries to give homage to, and that was covered over like 4 hours, not 10 minutes.)
38  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Indy IV: Who's in for Midnight??? on: May 22, 2008, 09:11:41 PM
I saw it at midnight with a bunch of friends.  Minor spoilers:

Overall I liked it.  Not as much as Raiders and Last Crusade, though.  I thought the beginning and ending were weak, but the middle was lots of fun.  There was even less realism than the previous movies (survivng a nuclear blast in a fridge?), but I didn't mind too much, since that was a staple of cliffhangers back in the day.   Good humor.
39  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: "W" on: May 12, 2008, 08:19:07 PM

Quote from: Geezer on May 12, 2008, 07:46:16 PM



In my opinion it's fine.  How is a film meant to impact an election any different than a radio show, a news article or a campaign poster?  Where would YOU draw the line on the first amendment?

About 100 feet from a polling place?  icon_wink
40  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Hmmm. What if: Hilary = VP? Does That Sway Your Vote to McCain? on: May 12, 2008, 03:07:38 PM
Hillary on the VP slot wouldn't change my vote.  Richardson on the VP slot would probably cause me to fall asleep during the VP debate.  How has support of Obama among hispanic been since Richardson's endorsement?

I would think Warner would be a good choice for VP.
Pages: [1] 2 3
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.659 seconds with 20 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.456s, 1q)