Australian [chat] Party
The best argument for a multi-party system: The Australian Sex Party
I would vote for them
Saturday, August 15, 2009
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm is the next expansion for World of Warcraft. Dark and forgotten threats that have long stayed out of sight have finally arrived on our shores, unleashing a cataclysmic event upon Azeroth and now preparing more nefarius plans to take it back...
Some things addressed in the post:
Level Cap: 85
New Classes:
Cataclysm doesn't introduce any new classes to the game. Instead, Blizzard have offered more race and classes combinations to players.
New Races: Goblin / Worgen
New Content:
Cataclysm will be the first expansion not to introduce a new continent, instead making use of previously unreleased zones and revamping existing ones.
- Flying in Azeroth
- Classic Dungeon Revamp
- Unreleased Zones & Dungeons
Disclaimer from mmo-champions: "None of the information below has been officialy announced by Blizzard, this is only a compilation of information gathered from reliable sources. Just keep in mind that it takes a LOT to make me post something on the front page and I'm definitely not speculating here."
Julia Hall: Planted Question
The problem with politics is that sometimes Michelle Malkin is right. Apparently the little girl, Julia Hall, who asked Obama the "what's wrong with the fuckheads?" question at the New Hampshire town hall was the daughter of an Obama campaign contributor, according to this Boston Globe story.
So now I have to figure out what to do with this. If W had taken a softball question from a planted little girl a ruckus would be raised. When Obama does it...I'm fine with it. Which seems to indicate that I do not have a problem with "took a planted question" but rather my opinions of various political happenings are skewed to my own political stance. I like Obama; I do not like W. So when W does X I am irritated, when Obama does X I am ok with it.
The problem, though, is in discerning the constancy of that X, whether "Bush takes a planted question" is, in fact, the same as "Obama takes a planted question". What are the questions? What are the contexts of the questions? I think this plays into the larger Health Care debate issue. Are Health Care protestors the same as War protestors? Is yelling at a congress person about Health Care the same as yelling at a congress person about W's war?
For myself, though, the question is this: Does asking these questions make me an apologist? Am I attempting to have my cake and eat it too? Did I fault W for doing that which Obama now does?
Perhaps there is a nuance to be understood whereby the context of the debate matters. If I yell facts at a congress person is this different from yelling fabricated lies? I would think so. Are there situations where answering planted questions serves the greater good while other situations in which anwering planted questions merely serves one political party? Perhaps.
If one assumes an external world one might sensibly assume that the external world is a complicated place. So Obama took a planted question in order to discuss the folly of the current Health Care debate. Ok. Maybe that is a bit underhanded. Or maybe it was a necessity so that Obama could address the larger attitude of the current political zeitgeist. I do not know which it is.
But Michella Malkin is still a stupid fucking cunt.
FNC goes up as GOP goes down
I like the oral sex euphemism of this story. Here is the graph:
FNC goes up as the GOP goes down
Rachel Maddow is a Badass Motherfucker
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Friday, August 14, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
