Look, it's a generational gap here. Anyone around the ages of 30-45 have played games from Pac-man who popped pills to eat ghosts to Super Mario who got big 'shrooms while saving a princess to get laid.
We get it. You don't play games for entertainment. The fact that violence went down as more people started inside to eat Cheetos and play army with the newest Call of Duty is lost on you. You had GI Joe and Barbie and you liked it. We got more violence in our games than the movies from the Pentagon can show.
We got more depth and storytelling than the latest Tom Clancy novel.
We got more connectivity on the internet than your book club meetings on the weekends.
And we like it!
Now quit picking on the nerds that are our future generation!
I'm mixed on this. First, WL might be using public information to fine to a conclusion about Aaron's involvement.
Recently, it was deciphered that Aaron's prosecution came from his FOIA requests. So it could be possible that he was a source since he is in the same camp as Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, and other whistleblowers.
Still, this is a poorly boneheaded move for the reasons laid out above. Short term gain for a long term loss.
And there are no other sites right now that are as good as WL but that doesn't mean they aren't coming soon.
Nope. Seeing as how liberalism and conservatism are pro-imperialist ideologies, they are right wing. Liberalism is about reforming the capitalist system while conservatism is mainly conserving the individual qualities inherent in the system.
The radical views are those of communists, socialists, and progressives which are center left to far left respectively.
Do you realize that conservatism and liberalism are right wing ideologies?
Do you also realize that through a strong persecution of the left wing in America, those are the people that brought forth the ideas that saved capitalism from being to imperialist?
Do you recognize that liberals are committed to the same austerity as conservatives albeit slower?
It's the system that's bad. Pointing fingers at Democrats or Republicans isn't going to help much (although, at least the Democrats have a few left of center people while the Republicans are far right)
Yes, more laws for police to have freedom than the people they protect.
It was founded by the Charles Koch foundation and the John Birch Society and alienated people based on the color of their skin.
It had a tremendous influence on the Republican party in the 70s through Nixon which allowed the libertarians to create their ideal society in Chile. And it failed.
We tried the Reagan approach which was done thought the Individual Mandate for Leadership that the Heritage Foundation puts out. Lower taxes for all, a balanced budget, and little to no government.
Meanwhile all of the jobs go overseas, and the rich get richer. Sure, libertarians want to stop the drug war, but their belief in authority rivals that of far-right conservatives.
In essence, libertarians are conservatives that want to smoke weed and get laid. That doesn't excuse their fiscal conservatism which hurts the country through austerity.
Also, I'm not a huge fan of libertarianism. Sure, we agree that the drones should stop and the military industrial complex as well as fighting copyright laws. But libertarianism is still a very dangerous ideology that promotes a police state and gunboat diplomacy. I'll argue against certain points because I have a different perspective. In my view, everyone should have a voice in government and the government bows to the people's will. In order for that, I would still advocate that everyone has a say in how government and states function and that only happens if we have third parties gain more prominence.
Right now, for the last thirty years, libertarianism had had a great impact on the Republican party and I don't see why I should support a platform advocating lower taxes on the rich (who use up more resources than those under them), a balanced budget (on the backs of the weak and elderly), and increased spending on the military (when we outspend the next 20 countries combined)
It's not the parties, it's the establishment. Neither of the two parties truly represent America. While the Republican party is now the Fascist Party, the Democratic Party is still pushing for the money of the ere in Hollywood and elsewhere.
We have a very divided US which needs more proportionality in Congress and the states. The two-party system is killing us and electoral reform is desperately needed.
Obama promotes the establishment. His entire administration is run by those that give money to the rich and leave the poor to suffer in misery.
His drones kill thousands of people in other countries and maintain a self perpetuating war on terror.
His domestic policies allow for the dismantling ofpublic education against what Thomas Jefferson envisioned.
And we, the people, are stuck with two parties controlling every aspect of our lives through monopoly rule.
There may be differences between Democrats and Republicans but there is no difference that they're pushed the country to a far more authoritarian position for the last 30 years.
We've criminalized the poor through or Drug War, our war on women's rights, and the war on the weak and defenseless over the empowerment of the rich and powerful.
We have two Americas and a lost republic. That's the hardest thing to accept and what Obama won't talk about.
It seems that when you've dug yourself into a hole, just keep digging.
This allows more scrutiny into how she prosecuted others as can be found here . Her political ambitions are becoming all the more prevalent as we watch her actions destroy the lives of others.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
I already stated my proposal. At this point, there isn't much to say. You really aren't interested in anything other than sophistry and I'm not going to stop you.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
No, I don't blame a tool. Excellent Hamiltonian way to bring about personal attacks instead of discuss ways to limit gun violence. It's obvious you don't want a true discussion that impedes on your beliefs in guns over the rights of others.
I have nothing further to comment here as this topic seems mired in ad homs similar to maximalism from AJ.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
I refuse to be taken in by a strawman argument about guns used to promote ideological differences in arguments about guns instead of other issues which I've already explained.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
What the hell? I didn't say anything about anarchy either.
I can't end all the wars. I can report about them. I can muckrake and become ensure a stronger 4th estate. That's how I fight back.
Also, I have no idea what you're responding to but it seems entirely misaimed at a strawman. I have examples of better ways to regulate guns and you ignored them. The same as Shane did with ways to ensure a free society.
I just mentioned how a loss of power in other areas leads to a belief in more guns = a free society, and my initial past was all about how the 2nd Amendment was altered to promote slavery.
And saying that guns don't kill people? Really?
I'm disappointed that you believe guns, a weapon for death, shouldn't be regulated and allows so many people to die quickly.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
I believe in Thomas Jefferson's belief that we first need to eliminate a standing army.
Btw, it's great how your Hamiltonian rhetoric expands to try to full words in my thoughts. Thanks for ignoring discussions just to prince your own circular argument.
Anyway, the idea was, instead of a standing army, for every able-bodied man in the nation to be a member of a local militia, under local control, with a gun in his house. If the nation was invaded, word would come down to the local level and every man in the country would be the army.
Switzerland has such an army. Israel takes guns away so that access to guns is harder over the weekends if you suffer from depression. And only people that have very dangerous jobs get to keep their guns. I know... "Blasphemy", right? Regulation? Not in a free state!
But by all means, loaf up your rhetoric. You sound like you're getting ready for a war with the government. Don't let me stop you.
I just think that taking back the government from the rich and powerful can be dine more effectively through protest instead of through force. But by all means. You have countless examples from history. The SOPA protest worked a helluva lot quicker than shooting Gabby Gifford.
Maybe violence can cause the government to change it's ways.
Good luck with the drones, the tanks, and the very real deaths of American soldiers you supported once. Their blood is on you if you decide to fight the government instead of working to fix the real problems it has.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Nope. You look to other societies and how they handle gun violence so that murders don't happen.
Also, you might want to look at the argument about militias and how they were used to enforce a police state.
I want a free nation, not a free state. So I would ban guns from causing so much self destructive damage in a home. We should be having an open conversation about the need for assault rifles or a loss of power.
And by all means. Explain how you plan to overthrow the government when it has tanks, drones, and the ability to lock you up for decades.
If you want prison security, be my guest. But violence to promote methods isn't going to cause the fundamental changes needed for our society. I mean, think about it. We killed SOPA without a shot being fired. We have masses of people that woke up to the fact that for 30 years, we've gotten ribbed by the rich and powerful.
Copyright is a mere symptom of the problem in our capitalist struggle.
We don't have a power struggle. We have a class struggle. By no means do I secure my liberties with force. I seek justice in my actions and look to hold theppowerful accountable to their actions. I don't need a gun. I need a pen and the ability to speak for the masses.
Maybe you think guns are the answer, but it doesn't hold the truth. A united front on the class struggle, be it copyright or civil rights, requires a lot more courage than a gun will ever provide.
Sure, maybe some people enjoy hunting or collecting but I doubt highly that new mass assault rifles are going to be used to hunt deer. Requiring background checks and a database for gun owners doesn't infringe on liberties as much as taking sometime by their GPS can do. I would rather we actually form solutions instead of harken back to a history that dies not exist.
The more I hear about this case, the more it seems to not make sense...
Aaron wasn't prosecuted for the MIT issue. He was being prosecuted for Wikileaks. The timeline for his seizure and arrest coincides with him getting too close to any information about the treatment of Manning.
He was attempting to find out how he was treated in Quantico and the Secret Service cut him off.
But it seems to be a very dangerous game that these "powerful people" have played. Aaron paid a heavy price as a whistleblower. His death sparked a very noticeable shift in tone in how the US has treated people that want to share information they don't like.
It's almost as if Aaron watched "I, robot" and decided to become the scientist. It's just an off sense of deja vu in how events have transpired in a week.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Armed slaves did nothing of the sort. They did not gain power. When there were people recognized as armed rebels, they were hanged. Blacks and whites recognized their class struggle and fought against plantation owners in the South.
They were crushed by the militias.
Nat Turner tried to rebel. He was skinned alive and made an example to all other slaves what would occur if they tried to fight for their freedom. So slaves did other things:
created songs to show a path to freedom
Formed bonds based on the color of their skin
Went north to tell their plight to others
Created the Underground Railroad, the epitome of nonviolent struggle.
But that must have been lost on you because they just needed a gun for freedom, right?
Please learn your history. A gun won't solve your problems anymore than they convince others of the validity of your argument. The single greatest weapon is the human mind and you're are wasting so much energy in exposing your ignorance of gun rights in America.
On the post: Ralph Nader Makes First Serious Bid For 'Crazy Old Man' Position; Refers To Video Games As 'Electronic Child Molestors'
FFS
We get it. You don't play games for entertainment. The fact that violence went down as more people started inside to eat Cheetos and play army with the newest Call of Duty is lost on you. You had GI Joe and Barbie and you liked it. We got more violence in our games than the movies from the Pentagon can show.
We got more depth and storytelling than the latest Tom Clancy novel.
We got more connectivity on the internet than your book club meetings on the weekends.
And we like it!
Now quit picking on the nerds that are our future generation!
On the post: WikiLeaks Reveals Aaron Swartz May Have Been A Source: Wise Move?
Re: Re: Re:
Recently, it was deciphered that Aaron's prosecution came from his FOIA requests. So it could be possible that he was a source since he is in the same camp as Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, and other whistleblowers.
Still, this is a poorly boneheaded move for the reasons laid out above. Short term gain for a long term loss.
And there are no other sites right now that are as good as WL but that doesn't mean they aren't coming soon.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Background
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Background
The radical views are those of communists, socialists, and progressives which are center left to far left respectively.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Re: Background
Do you also realize that through a strong persecution of the left wing in America, those are the people that brought forth the ideas that saved capitalism from being to imperialist?
Do you recognize that liberals are committed to the same austerity as conservatives albeit slower?
It's the system that's bad. Pointing fingers at Democrats or Republicans isn't going to help much (although, at least the Democrats have a few left of center people while the Republicans are far right)
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Background
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Background
It was founded by the Charles Koch foundation and the John Birch Society and alienated people based on the color of their skin.
It had a tremendous influence on the Republican party in the 70s through Nixon which allowed the libertarians to create their ideal society in Chile. And it failed.
We tried the Reagan approach which was done thought the Individual Mandate for Leadership that the Heritage Foundation puts out. Lower taxes for all, a balanced budget, and little to no government.
Meanwhile all of the jobs go overseas, and the rich get richer. Sure, libertarians want to stop the drug war, but their belief in authority rivals that of far-right conservatives.
In essence, libertarians are conservatives that want to smoke weed and get laid. That doesn't excuse their fiscal conservatism which hurts the country through austerity.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Background
Further evidence can be gained from this recent article:
http://nutsandolts.com/2013/01/20/time-call-gops-ideology-proper-name-fascism/
Also, I'm not a huge fan of libertarianism. Sure, we agree that the drones should stop and the military industrial complex as well as fighting copyright laws. But libertarianism is still a very dangerous ideology that promotes a police state and gunboat diplomacy. I'll argue against certain points because I have a different perspective. In my view, everyone should have a voice in government and the government bows to the people's will. In order for that, I would still advocate that everyone has a say in how government and states function and that only happens if we have third parties gain more prominence.
Right now, for the last thirty years, libertarianism had had a great impact on the Republican party and I don't see why I should support a platform advocating lower taxes on the rich (who use up more resources than those under them), a balanced budget (on the backs of the weak and elderly), and increased spending on the military (when we outspend the next 20 countries combined)
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Re: Background
It's not the parties, it's the establishment. Neither of the two parties truly represent America. While the Republican party is now the Fascist Party, the Democratic Party is still pushing for the money of the ere in Hollywood and elsewhere.
We have a very divided US which needs more proportionality in Congress and the states. The two-party system is killing us and electoral reform is desperately needed.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Re: Re: Background
Obama promotes the establishment. His entire administration is run by those that give money to the rich and leave the poor to suffer in misery.
His drones kill thousands of people in other countries and maintain a self perpetuating war on terror.
His domestic policies allow for the dismantling ofpublic education against what Thomas Jefferson envisioned.
And we, the people, are stuck with two parties controlling every aspect of our lives through monopoly rule.
There may be differences between Democrats and Republicans but there is no difference that they're pushed the country to a far more authoritarian position for the last 30 years.
We've criminalized the poor through or Drug War, our war on women's rights, and the war on the weak and defenseless over the empowerment of the rich and powerful.
We have two Americas and a lost republic. That's the hardest thing to accept and what Obama won't talk about.
On the post: Obama Tasks CDC With Study Of Video Games And 'Violent Media'
Re: Re: Re: Newsflash
The drive of the rich to throw them back in and bankrupt them with austerity is another deal entirely.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Refuses To Reflect; Insists Her Office Will Do Everything The Same As Before
Background
This allows more scrutiny into how she prosecuted others as can be found here . Her political ambitions are becoming all the more prevalent as we watch her actions destroy the lives of others.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
I have nothing further to comment here as this topic seems mired in ad homs similar to maximalism from AJ.
That's what's most disappointing.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
I can't end all the wars. I can report about them. I can muckrake and become ensure a stronger 4th estate. That's how I fight back.
Also, I have no idea what you're responding to but it seems entirely misaimed at a strawman. I have examples of better ways to regulate guns and you ignored them. The same as Shane did with ways to ensure a free society.
I just mentioned how a loss of power in other areas leads to a belief in more guns = a free society, and my initial past was all about how the 2nd Amendment was altered to promote slavery.
And saying that guns don't kill people? Really?
I'm disappointed that you believe guns, a weapon for death, shouldn't be regulated and allows so many people to die quickly.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Btw, it's great how your Hamiltonian rhetoric expands to try to full words in my thoughts. Thanks for ignoring discussions just to prince your own circular argument.
Anyway, the idea was, instead of a standing army, for every able-bodied man in the nation to be a member of a local militia, under local control, with a gun in his house. If the nation was invaded, word would come down to the local level and every man in the country would be the army.
Switzerland has such an army. Israel takes guns away so that access to guns is harder over the weekends if you suffer from depression. And only people that have very dangerous jobs get to keep their guns. I know... "Blasphemy", right? Regulation? Not in a free state!
But by all means, loaf up your rhetoric. You sound like you're getting ready for a war with the government. Don't let me stop you.
I just think that taking back the government from the rich and powerful can be dine more effectively through protest instead of through force. But by all means. You have countless examples from history. The SOPA protest worked a helluva lot quicker than shooting Gabby Gifford.
Maybe violence can cause the government to change it's ways.
Good luck with the drones, the tanks, and the very real deaths of American soldiers you supported once. Their blood is on you if you decide to fight the government instead of working to fix the real problems it has.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Also, you might want to look at the argument about militias and how they were used to enforce a police state.
I want a free nation, not a free state. So I would ban guns from causing so much self destructive damage in a home. We should be having an open conversation about the need for assault rifles or a loss of power.
And by all means. Explain how you plan to overthrow the government when it has tanks, drones, and the ability to lock you up for decades.
If you want prison security, be my guest. But violence to promote methods isn't going to cause the fundamental changes needed for our society. I mean, think about it. We killed SOPA without a shot being fired. We have masses of people that woke up to the fact that for 30 years, we've gotten ribbed by the rich and powerful.
Copyright is a mere symptom of the problem in our capitalist struggle.
We don't have a power struggle. We have a class struggle. By no means do I secure my liberties with force. I seek justice in my actions and look to hold theppowerful accountable to their actions. I don't need a gun. I need a pen and the ability to speak for the masses.
Maybe you think guns are the answer, but it doesn't hold the truth. A united front on the class struggle, be it copyright or civil rights, requires a lot more courage than a gun will ever provide.
Sure, maybe some people enjoy hunting or collecting but I doubt highly that new mass assault rifles are going to be used to hunt deer. Requiring background checks and a database for gun owners doesn't infringe on liberties as much as taking sometime by their GPS can do. I would rather we actually form solutions instead of harken back to a history that dies not exist.
On the post: A Week Later: Reflecting On Aaron Swartz
I, robot
Aaron wasn't prosecuted for the MIT issue. He was being prosecuted for Wikileaks. The timeline for his seizure and arrest coincides with him getting too close to any information about the treatment of Manning.
He was attempting to find out how he was treated in Quantico and the Secret Service cut him off.
But it seems to be a very dangerous game that these "powerful people" have played. Aaron paid a heavy price as a whistleblower. His death sparked a very noticeable shift in tone in how the US has treated people that want to share information they don't like.
It's almost as if Aaron watched "I, robot" and decided to become the scientist. It's just an off sense of deja vu in how events have transpired in a week.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
They were crushed by the militias.
Nat Turner tried to rebel. He was skinned alive and made an example to all other slaves what would occur if they tried to fight for their freedom. So slaves did other things:
created songs to show a path to freedom
Formed bonds based on the color of their skin
Went north to tell their plight to others
Created the Underground Railroad, the epitome of nonviolent struggle.
But that must have been lost on you because they just needed a gun for freedom, right?
Please learn your history. A gun won't solve your problems anymore than they convince others of the validity of your argument. The single greatest weapon is the human mind and you're are wasting so much energy in exposing your ignorance of gun rights in America.
Next >>