Tiptup

I'm just going to say that this thread is worthless. Blu-ray is not "overpriced" in any generalized sense I can see. If it's too expensive for some of you, then Blu-ray will lose your bussiness as a result. However, considering the historical adoption of formats and my understanding of the technology and the market, it's right where it should be. I don't see your displeasure being an indication of anything more substantial.

However, if by some mysterious happenstance, the Blu-ray critics are correct, then only the BD association stands to lose if they've priced Blu-ray wrong. I can't predict the market well enough to determine where Blu-ray will ultuimately go, but I know it's doing fine right now. Anything else seems like worthless speculation to me.

Perhaps George Lucas will eventually give customers what they want by accident? :)

Rob said:

No Politics thread. This is sooooo gay. Tiptup broke the internets.

Seriously? I haven't even reached that part of my to-do list yet. :)


If this helps Jay out, I copied and pasted text from my most recent replies from Windows notepad. Whenever I paste text into the box it retains whatever formatting it got in the program I typed it up in. Since MS Word annoyingly shifts formatting to have Times New Roman (and the new software shifts the displayed text to reflect that when copy&pasted) I used notepad to get rid of that.

Darth Chaltab said:

The sad thing is, I can't see John McCain doing much to reverse Bush's trend of heavy spending. That's the price of giving a party that once stood for fiscal conservativism over to the 'moderates' in the name of electability.

Good job, Republican electorate. You make me proud.

To be fair, one of McCain's strongest points (in recent years anyways) is the way he was apposed to wasteful spending. I am actually glad to vote for him because of that. (At the same time he was against tax cuts of course, but at least he now claims to believe he was wrong in doing that.)

To address your earlier point, I don't want that to be a reason to vote for a guy either, but nonetheless it is a reason of a sort (for me anyways). Plus, at least we can say we're voting for someone who we actually know this time. Bush claimed to be against wasteful spending, as did Republican legislators, and yet they both turned out to be nothing of the sort when they actually got in power. Perhaps McCain will surprise us and be more conservative than we know him (and if not, at least we know where to fight him from the start and won't get back stabbed like with Bush and other Republican leaders).

What? Another Star Wars game came out? Oh. ::yawn::

Pedobear with a neck tie?

sean wookie said:

So, I played Spore. It is pretty cool but it gets lame at some parts. I would of like the cell part of the game to be longer and for being a newer game it worked just fine on my Macbook.

Hah, that's what my girlfriend said as well. She also thinks the simulation aspects of the game are too easy. The best part is making your creative designs apparently. Don't even know if I'll be getting the game now (when I upgrade my computer).

skyjedi2005 said:

I mean Anakin's Already Illicitly married to Senator Padme of Naboo, why would he go out with a 13 year old.

Because he's a psychopath that does whatever his selfish feelings lead him to care about and desire at any given moment. Hell, this is the guy that heartlessly slaughtered countless little children over a little dream that might have implied that his wife's life might be in some danger and then was somehow able to turn right around and subsequently kill her as an additional result. He doesn't think like us ordinary people who regularly push past our selfishness enough to actually care about other people.

Yeah, I can put up with horrible animation for many of cartoon network's comedies, but I couldn't get past the lame humor. I had one laugh (at the duck hat not being taken off).

Napster was a great innovation in my mind. It should not have been strangled to death in the way it was. If anything, I believe it would have actually helped the music industry in the long run. Illegal smeagol. Of course the old infrastructure and establishment would have disappeared, and that's what they feared, but that's going to happen anyways. Intellectual property should not have a legal basis as strong as it is now.

Rob said:

This is one of the many reasons why  John McCain sucks shit.  Many Republicans are letting him slide in an effort to "take one for the team" without realizing that John McCain is one of the other team's star players.  I have no doubt that he would appoint liberal Supreme Court justices in an attempt to reach out to his his liberal pals as he has done for his entire carrier. THAT'S WHY WE CONSERVATIVES HATE HIM, REMEMBER!

Actually, McCain, while has been a compromising dipshit, still seems to hold to many conservative principles on some kind of a personal basis. But, his acceptance speech at the convention pissed me off when he spoke about reaching out to the other isle . . . so, while I can’t say there’s a great chance that he’ll appoint good judges, there’s still a good chance, and that definitely makes him a better choice than Obama.

Rob said:

John McCain has decided that the government will choose what we hear and see prior to an election.  He is not only a liberal, he is the worst kind of liberal.  He has zero interest in our Constitutional rights, and intends to continue his historical expansion of our goverment's power over it's own people. Judge him by what he has done, not by the nosense that pours out of his royal mouth.

I agree that his campaign finance reform was absolutely atrocious. I could never forgive him for that. The fact that the Supreme Court didn’t strike down that entire law is very sad. McCain is definitely a danger on that issue. (Also, I blame the non-permanence of the Bush tax cuts on McCain as well [since he was apposed to tax cuts at the time].)

However, your assertion that he’ll continue the historical expansion of government power (over its people) is not necessarily true. McCain does have a record of apposing rampant government spending (in recent years anyways) and that is easily the most dangerous way that government power grows (if you ask me). I have a strong belief that he’ll fight on this end in a way that conservatives will be able to support.

Another reason I will be voting for McCain is because I feel that McCain the president will and up being a very different person from McCain the senator. So long as he was apposed to conservative initiatives, the socialist press and Democrats were as friendly to him as could be. If he becomes president, though, they’ll attack him like crazy and McCain doesn’t seem to back down when attacked. In that event, it seems very likely to me that he’ll actually start getting angry and stop compromising as a result (since his emotions seem to decide his principles more than the other way around).

My point is that real conservatives, as a movement, have to do our best to shape policy whenever we can. I do not consider myself Republican, but I do vote Republican pretty much every time I can since the party as a whole better reflects my beliefs. In fact, I don’t consider myself a conservative and yet I try to support conservatives as much as I can. (Conservatism isn’t radical enough for me and, while I support many of the same issues, I work from different principles to support many of the same policies.)

Winning elections isn’t about do or die; it’s about doing what you can. Plus, Palin seems like a tough woman who would make a great president to rally behind when McCain steps down. The more the media chooses to focus on her the happier I’ll be (it can only help McCain’s chances).

Rob said:

Even when you set aside the cost of the Iraq war, George's Bush's spending and growth of government bereaucracy is so prolific that it makes Bill Clinton look like a staunch conservative in retrospect.

Agreed. Clinton never actually spent that much on any of the ideas he promised. He was much more responsible by comparison. It's a sad state of affairs.

Though, don't forget the importance of a sound monetary policy and Bush's failure there. In that aspect, we've been screwed by pretty much every administration since FDR. (Only Reagan seemed to turn back the tide for a while.)

However, the attacking of the Iraq War is another issue. I don't remember the exact details of the statistic I heard, but compared to the general waste of earmark spending, the entire Iraq War (after its all said and done) won't even equal what our legislature spends in either a single month or a single year (I can't remember which). It's astronomical sums of money and it's all because our government is so fucking huge.

I still believe Bush was better than what Kerry would have given us (and what Obama is threatening). Bush was for lower taxes and did restrain spending somewhat in his second term. However, in retrospect, I think Gore would have been better on spending (since the Republicans might not have not let him spend as much as Bush).


What's your opinion on the Supreme Court, Rob? Bush and both of the parties have screwed up our economy to a large degree (for the moment), but for economic "conservatism" to succeed in the long run, it needs the support of good judges as well. Do you believe that the judges which would have been chosen by Gore or Kerry are a non-issue?

We're fighting a losing war. Obama says he's going to make government "cool" again. There's no stopping a visionary hope like that!

McCain, why he just wants to stop the corrupt spending initiatives of Obama, other Democrats, and even other Republicans. He wants to limit government spending and give money back to the people. That is so behind the times and uncool, man.

FanFiltration said:

Tiptup said:

FanFiltration said:

Tiptup said:

FanFiltration said:

So only un-lawfull people use such "slang"? You are a foolish person to think that.

I was making a joke, you fucking jackass. The origin of that slang comes from thieves. :)

I don't believe you. lol

 

Dictionary.com:

9.Slang. a house, shop, etc., frequented by thieves or regarded by thieves as a likely place for burglarizing.

No, I did not believe you where making a joke.

 

What?! My hoity-toity language didn't give it away? Oh no, FF believes I'm lying! On what rational basis he believes this is unknown to me. Whatever shall I do?!

FanFiltration said:

Tiptup said:

FanFiltration said:

So only un-lawfull people use such "slang"? You are a foolish person to think that.

I was making a joke, you fucking jackass. The origin of that slang comes from thieves. :)

I don't believe you. lol

 

Dictionary.com:

9.Slang. a house, shop, etc., frequented by thieves or regarded by thieves as a likely place for burglarizing.

Nobody ever gets my jokes on the internet. Is it because I read them differently in my head?

My God, the world would be a total hellhole without socialists! We'd all have died from dirty meat and dirty air by now if it weren't for them! We'd also be too poor to feed ourselves without their ingenious command and control of our economy!

I thank God that there are brilliant people out there who know what's best for everybody else! You have shown me the light, FF! Thank you!

FanFiltration said:

So only un-lawfull people use such "slang"? You are a foolish person to think that.

I was making a joke, you fucking jackass. The origin of that slang comes from thieves. :)

I highly dislike homes being referred to as "cribs." I am a lawful citizen and do not practice the slang terminology of thieves. Thank you.

My first format for watching the trilogy was an unedited Star Wars off the Disney channel (that was taped and then watched many, many times). After that it was edited commercial television broadcasts for ESB and RotJ (that were also taped and watched many times).

Laserschwert said:

Dude, you really need to get layed...

Are you making an offer? :)

negative1 said:

 if you're going to speculate,

prove to me you wouldn't care if the OT got restored...

would you quit this board? never complain again ?

 

no, you would find something else wrong, complain about some other

issue, the soundtracks wouldn't be right, there wouldn't be enough deleted scenes,

it would cost too much etc..

 

face it, you've gotten into the fact you've hated Lucasfilm, Lucas etc. so much..

that at this point, there is NOTHING THAT would satisfy you..

 if you're going to be an asshole,

prove to me you wouldn't rub feces all over your body if the sun didn't set each evening...

would you flush your feces down a toilet? never to see it again?


no, even in the brightness of a perpetually sunlit world, you would rub poop all over your

body, perhaps even go so far as eating it, trying to rub it on other people, talking to it like a person,

making furniture out of it, etc..


face it, you've gotten into the fact that you want fecal matter in your entire life, mind etc. so much..

that at this point, no AMOUNT OF VISIBILITY could shame you..


how sad...and ironic

later

+2

Janskeet said:

The econemy goes up and down all the time, is this really that unusual?

It depends upon what you're asking that about. If it's about how people and businesses often fail to meet expectations due to poor planning and unforseen circumstances, then no, that's not unusual. If you're asking me if a government policy of high inflation is unusual, then I would say yes (or that at least it should be). If it's about the high levels of corporate taxation and other taxes that drain our country's economic strength, then I would, again, say that our current situation is unusual (or at least it should be). Lastly, if it's about government regulations and threats mandating and encouraging poor investments in our economy, then hell yes. There's been a lot of crap going on in this area lately (from mortgages to oil prices).

Trooperman said:

Oh, I think we're going to get a depression within the next 4 years.  I don't think there's any question of that.  But I agree that if McCain knew what to do, if he surrounded himself with people that knew what to do, he could stand a chance to start digging us out of this hole we're in.

I'd say we're in a depression right now (considering elements like inflation which mask it). The government just wants everyone to suffer (and not the people who made the poor investments).

Trooperman said:

I'm conservative too.  

 

However, I think that both John McCain and Obama are completely missing the big issue. The issue nobody's talking about- the real reason why our economy is sinking.  

 

Watch this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD6MUWi-1gE

Those issues are real, but China is hurting itself in the long run too.

What's worse, if you ask me, is the out of control inflation which is motivated by the fear our politicians have of trying to avoid something like a run on the banking system. It devalues the wealth of poor people (simple dollars) and gives that money to rich people (who own stable, non-dollar investments) by negating any large debts they've taken on. Anyone who was responsible and didn't get into lots of debt, or purchase items beyond their means, is now suffering for the mistakes of rich Wallstreet investors.

McCain might be willing to do something about this mess (if he knew what to do), but most of the damage is already done (he'd simply avoid more damage). Obama, on the other hand, just wants to make everything worse by raising taxes (what a fucking fool). I don't think any politician has the smarts or the guts to do what's right and risk a DEPRESSION (oh noes!).