Duderonomy

Yeah, and 'Merica still has problems with the KKK. A tiny minority of Nazi sympathizers in Ukraine is more a symptom of free speech than a cause to condemn the entire country. Of course, Ukraine could just kill and jail any Nazi sympathizers like Russia does. That really reflects the values that Westerners fought for in WW2 and the Cold War.

That guy can suck my shit straight from the source. It'll feed him better than the Russian pogroms. Stalin killed far more than Hitler ever did. Both are crap, but Ukraine's in a crap stew.

Also, my guess is that Montosh is getting laid. This should be a salute thread.

Filthy crustecean.

Saying we need to repair the republic is as much of a cliche as saying that CN is dying. I don't think Hilary's a lock for the nomination. Both Obama and Clinton's husband came a little out of left field. There's still a lot of governors/senators who haven't said a word.

An early declaration is usually not a good sign. It indicates that you are not confident the party will support you, and hope to gain enough grassroots support to overcome any doubts your own party might have about your candidacy. If your own party doubts you, it's usually because they don't think you'll win the general election. And they are probably correct. Note: this does not apply to "inevitable candidates" like those sitting in office already. None who have declared are inevitable, except for Rand Paul who will always run for president and will always fail.

In all honesty, guns are useless in the vast majority of self defense situations against criminals. Even the FBI admits that attackers within 20 feet cannot be stopped by a hip-holstered gun. If you've got your weapon concealed, that adds more precious seconds, that's if you don't shoot yourself by drawing incorrectly. You're much better off learning Krav Maga or another defense-oriented martial art than spending thousands of dollars on buying and training with a gun. Most U.S. officers need regular training in unarmed combat. It will make them less likely to draw the gun in the first place. However, the majority of the U.S. is rural enough that guns are extremely useful as self defense against animals. I can't tell you how many copperheads and water moccasins I've shot. And alligators are frequent enough to be a problem down here in bayou country.

Pretty much the way it is.

Grow some thicker skin, kid. If you try new things, you will always rub someone the wrong way. What you tried didn't work, so move on to something else. Maybe try implying that TBRaiders is scum every single time you play. Or include a Raiders joke with every post. Or post in haiku. Whatever. TBRaiders is just used to giving a more direct style of criticism. I can appreciate that, but you don't seem to. Most criticism online, even vulgar criticism, sounds harsher than it was intended to be. And if a person intended to be that harsh, well, fuck that guy.

Yeah, Killgor what you are talking about is a result of culture and poverty, not race. In the U.S., the "gangster culture" is not confined to African Americans or Latinos. Many poor European Americans also gravitate to the culture. The bad part is that entrenched prejudice can trap people into that culture. If you see every Gypsy as a homeless criminal, then you won't let them get training for a job that lets them escape that life. Crime is a necessity if you can't eat. As a trend, the U.S. has actually experienced a vastly declining violent crime rate in the last twenty years. There are many theories on why (since everyone wants to get credit), but I think the rise of cheap entertainment is the real culprit. Potential criminals are indoors watching Sopranos or playing GTA5 instead of outside committing real crimes. Twenty years ago, if you wanted a realistic experience flying a jet or driving a dirtbike, you would have to pay thousands for the privilege. Now, 300-400 bucks can let you experience that and thousands of other adventures.

Let's not go there. Reverend Al Sharpton, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, ect. Yes, you may be on to something. Don't forget Martin Luther King, Jr or the many white preachers that helped him. Correlation does not imply causation. Atheists tend to be more educated since they are a recent development, while Christian dogma tends to be the default for the majority. Racism is a result of ignorance, not a side effect of religion. Not unless your religion is explicitly racist.

Yeah, police need to get away from the paramilitary mindset that SWAT and the "War on Drugs" instilled in the 80s. The primary goal of officers should be public safety with enforcing the law coming a distant second. Unfortunately, certain politicians (*cough*Nixon*cough*) saw drugs as an easy way to scare and control the public. They then took away judges' discretion when it came to sentencing, resulting in non-violent offenders flooding the prison system. Now, it takes hours for officers to report to any actual crime because most of our manpower is spent on drug busts and guarding inmates. It also doesn't help that drug laws institutionalize racism, since banned drugs were a vice for minority populations, while the drugs of the majority were left alone.

Yeah, this is pretty much a bad cop. You'll find them everywhere, but you're better off in a big city, since there's a media. Some of the stories of small town cops are really hair-raising, and there's not much you can do about them besides try to call in the FBI. I've heard of deputies sitting suspects down in an ant bed on rural country roads, and sheriffs refusing to accept prisoners from state law enforcement, forcing them to drive hours to find a lockup. Always be polite and never run from the cops. It's like a dog chasing a cat. Of course, the cop in your article probably would have shot the guy, anyway. http://www.cracked.com/article_22208_6-things-i-learned-broke-police-force-in-lawless-town.html It is worth noting that these are a minority of law enforcement. Most officers are decent guys who just want to keep the peace and go home.

No problem with this. Hopefully, it also prevents banks from sending money to known phishing accounts.

http://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/swivel.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/nongrata.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/spurdo.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/dance.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/dogspin.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/parrot.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/penguin.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/elvis.gifhttp://cybernations.nordreich.eu/images/smilies/dogpop.gif

I do a mean cha cha, but it has never set the dance floor on fire. Is there a victory at the end of the road?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Vietnampropaganda.png

This is what happens when you don't use the lo6ster.

If that guy was gonna go, he could at least have the decency to zip himself into a bodybag and slit his wrists. Taking a whole plane with him voids any usual sympathy I have for suicides. Hope the families can deal with their loss.

Hows a guy leaving a band getting all the attention? When evidently 150 people died on a plane crash on with the co-pilot delibaretely descending the plane down. I agree with Lanyaie's point. If you refuse to start the conversation, you have no right to complain about where it leads. CC isn't the only person that can post, and he was being sarcastic. Would you like sarcasm about the plane crash? I can do it! I've been in Non Grata for almost 2 years now!

What is a One Direction and how does it affect my penis?

Fun fact: My post count in IRON is higher than my post count in NG.

It's generally better to have more, smaller vassals. If a small vassal revolts, he's easier to deal with because he has fewer resources. Even better, you can usually replace him with a blood relative because of his treason, so that territory is more stable in the future. A larger vassal takes a lot of troops and time to put down. More vassals can be more difficult to individually manage, but you get bonuses for blood kinship and the like that you can leverage for a permanent bonus. I generally have Duke vassals that only own one county. This makes them much weaker. If they manage to obtain another through marriage, I scheme to take it away. I try to rule at least two duchies, or even three if possible, with a single county in all of them. It's easier to control counts that are directly under my control than dukes, since the counts don't get much tribute. Remember, gold is the big resource you need, since it can easily turn into most of the other game resources (like troops). If you want to inherit through marriage, you either need to snipe weak lineages or be willing to murder all rivals to the throne. Otherwise, it's just chance and the fecundity of your ruling family. You're better off going after counts & dukes than kings. Once you obtain 50% of a kingdom's de jure territories, you can usurp the crown. I find that it was more fun to play Crusader Kings 2 as a business simulator, rather than a battle simulator. This is actually a pretty historically accurate way to play, since kingdoms of that time thrived or sank on their King's ability to raise funds. Always think about the costs and benefits of acquiring land, rather than blindly expanding. A single territory can kill you if you aren't prepared for the consequences of ownership (de jure enemies, inability to govern properly, etc.). Time Warner should never have bought AOL. You may not need that county in Norway when you rule Ireland. Unless you think you can take down Norway, of course. Always improve fiefdoms you directly control first. Monetary improvements, navy improvements, and then army improvements. Only help those vassals who will remain loyal. Only raise vassal levies in dire emergencies or for Crusades. The bump in sharing the Crusader trait offsets the negative effect of raising the levies. In fact, I think that most people's problems with CK2 is figuring out the concept of indirect control. So many games just straight up give you control of every aspect of a kingdom, that it is kinda jarring to head straight into the chaotic web of relationships and resource sharing, even if that is a more accurate model of the real world. Try to picture your capabilities as a continuum, rather than an on/off switch, that ranges from a province on the other side of the world with zero ties to you, to troops that belong to an allied kingdom, to a direct holding. Just because you can raise vassal levies, does not make them yours. Just because your color covers a province, doesn't mean it will always support you.

Mercs almost always fix rebellions. Use them to soak up damage from large armies while using personal forces for sieges. If your enemy has no more army, disband the mercenaries. Never raise troops from vassals unless they are kin. On that note, always be scheming to replace vassals with your relatives, either by marriage or by force. So always make sure you have a WC in CK2.

Do the stars represent the tails of Foxburo?