This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Anonymous (User Deleted)
Pages: 1 ... 606162 6364 ... 212
1831
« on: October 15, 2015, 11:46:17 AM »
1832
« on: October 15, 2015, 11:31:56 AM »
No.
1833
« on: October 15, 2015, 09:13:52 AM »
Played some BF4, made some minor edits to my emblem thing, got my skill number past 200 again.
1834
« on: October 15, 2015, 08:57:51 AM »
ding dong locku
1835
« on: October 15, 2015, 08:55:51 AM »
This article sums up pretty well the media's reaction to the debate, and the perceived bias towards Hillary's debate performance that came with it.
1836
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:04:08 AM »
Twilight Princess
1837
« on: October 14, 2015, 03:59:18 PM »
CompleteFuckingFaggot jameson
Agent Jameson Locke 
1838
« on: October 14, 2015, 03:56:48 PM »
So did Colonel Sanders win or nah
non-scientific polls and twitter say yes by a huge margin
so this is either really good or really bad for bernie's future
Also remember that Sanders supporters demographic skews far younger than any other candidate in either party - more of them are on multiple social media pages. Not saying this'll change the results out it Sanders' favor, but going off a non-scientific poll is terrible.
That's exactly why I said 'non-scientific'. But reminder that Donald Trump had similar results and became the GOP front-runner.
1839
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:40:01 PM »
So did Colonel Sanders win or nah
non-scientific polls and twitter say yes by a huge margin
so this is either really good or really bad for bernie's future
...unless you're CNN who takes down their online poll after like 80% said they favored Sanders. Time Warner, CNN's parent company, is a contributor to Clinton's campaign.
*looks up* oh yeeeaaahhh THAT poll. LOL. I think someone posted it already but I'll retoast 
1840
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:37:17 PM »
Kyle Katarn is Chuck Norris
'ere you go
1841
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:32:49 PM »
So did Colonel Sanders win or nah
non-scientific polls and twitter say yes by a huge margin so this is either really good or really bad for bernie's future
1842
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:20:52 PM »
1843
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:19:54 PM »
Well, the main story mission can take an hour or two if you take your time.
Or just over two minutes if you know the objectives.
I was assuming he didn't.
1844
« on: October 14, 2015, 12:54:08 PM »
It's a stealth game first, a third-person shooter second.
Don't worry about beating Far Cry 4 first, it will only take about an hour to beat Ground Zeroes.
You serious? I was expecting like a 5 hour prologue with another 10 maybe to collect all achievements. But 1-2 hours? Damn.
Well, the main story mission can take an hour or two if you take your time. There's a few other scenarios the game describes as "pseudo-historical," with some longer than others. Any prisoners you rescue in these missions (and a few certain other NPCs) can be extracted and transferred into Phantom Pain as Mother Base staff. All in all, my GZ play time is about 10 hours IIRC, from completing most of the missions, then a few on a harder difficulty, and going back to get any extraction targets I missed. But yeah, it's more of a demo than anything.
1845
« on: October 14, 2015, 12:49:14 AM »
not a monitor ^
not fired either
<3 no homo
1846
« on: October 14, 2015, 12:14:04 AM »
not a monitor ^
not fired either
1847
« on: October 14, 2015, 12:11:31 AM »
locked for zero discussion value
1848
« on: October 13, 2015, 11:31:51 PM »
'The draft is a problem, but we should make more people sign up for it in the meantime' is absurd. It's literally contributing to the problem.
More like, "The draft is a problem, so we should take away one of the things that makes it a problem."
Not really. If mandatory sign-ups are part of the problem, the solution is fewer sign-ups, not more.
Duh. But that's not gonna happen any time soon. Making the system indiscriminate based on gender is a step up--there's no other way to look at it. Abolishing it would be an even bigger step up, but obviously, that's gonna take awhile.
Yeah, that's how I used to feel about it. But it's such a... questionable "improvement" that I'd kind of rather leave it the way it was. I wish everyone would save their energy and anger for abolishment, instead (what Meta is saying, but in plain English) And it seems particularly dubious to make something worse just to improve the argument of 'it's bad, so it needs to go.'
1849
« on: October 13, 2015, 11:00:39 PM »
'The draft is a problem, but we should make more people sign up for it in the meantime' is absurd. It's literally contributing to the problem.
More like, "The draft is a problem, so we should take away one of the things that makes it a problem."
Not really. If mandatory sign-ups are part of the problem, the solution is fewer sign-ups, not more.
1850
« on: October 13, 2015, 10:23:47 PM »
but don't worry he still has no chance, no, none at all :^)
In a general election? No, he does not.
Sure - he can win a primary by riding on minority and young voters. Once it comes time to sweep states, he's going to be in over his head - especially in Ohio, North Carolina, and Wisconsin - states with blue-collar workers who tend to lean Republican, and are not going to fall for "Change" after 08.
I still don't buy into that. You can't use the 'well it's an old poll' argument this time, either. He's a viable candidate, at least so far.
1851
« on: October 13, 2015, 10:20:00 PM »
Yeah, uh, despite my previous post, I have to agree with Meta. It seems a bit inconsistent and pointless to deliberately exacerbate a problem (if you see it as a problem) if you ultimately want to eliminate it.
'Gender equality' is missing the point.
Explain how eliminating discrimination makes it worse.
I can respect you guys saying it's not worth the federal effort, that's more or less a difference of values, what I won't accept is saying that this is not an improvement of the current state.
'The draft is a problem, but we should make more people sign up for it in the meantime' is absurd. It's literally contributing to the problem.
1852
« on: October 13, 2015, 10:15:41 PM »
lawd
holy shit
1853
« on: October 13, 2015, 10:13:19 PM »
Yeah, uh, despite my previous post, I have to agree with Meta. It seems a bit inconsistent and pointless to deliberately exacerbate a problem (if you see it as a problem) if you ultimately want to eliminate it.
'Gender equality' is missing the point.
1854
« on: October 13, 2015, 10:07:14 PM »
Cedric's death in Harry Potter got me because his dad was so endearing.
and because it led to Cedric becoming a vampire 
1855
« on: October 13, 2015, 09:50:06 PM »
Clinton brought up the great contradiction with Republicans and no big gubbermint until they want their shit. Rand Paul said the same thing but obviously Clinton will be recognized for it more.
Well, IIRC Rand Paul kind of pressured her into supporting sentencing reform way back when he was the GOP frontrunner. I wouldn't be surprised if that's a holdover from those early days. It was problematic when an issue made her look more conservative than a Republican >.>
1856
« on: October 13, 2015, 09:44:16 PM »
this is a long-ass debate holy shit
1857
« on: October 13, 2015, 09:36:52 PM »
i don't really see his appeal
he's witty? i guess
tfw qt 3.14 news host 
1858
« on: October 13, 2015, 09:27:49 PM »
reminder that snowden is a dank memer
1859
« on: October 13, 2015, 09:23:57 PM »
"Snowden put American lives at risk" [citation needed]
1860
« on: October 13, 2015, 09:23:13 PM »
'corporate Ameriker'
sanders deffo a brooklynite
Pages: 1 ... 606162 6364 ... 212
|
Show Posts