Did You Hear The News?


Off-Topic Discussions

51 to 100 of 301 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Director of Sales

houstonderek wrote:
Cosmo wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Okay, I hadn't meant this to be a serious thread, but since it went that way...

Really? C'mon...

On topic:

President Obama made a stupid off-hand remark about the Special Olympics on the David Letterman Show.

Before the cascade of criticism even started, he realized the error in the remark, apologized, and invited representatives of the Special Olympics to the White House.

This is not the type of action I would have expected from the previous administration.

Yeah, the previous administration was too busy sending more money to Africa to combat malaria and HIV than any other administration.

Try again, Cosmo.

No, I don't think I will.

The Exchange

Uzzy please understand that I hold no animosity towards you at all but here are a couple of questions for you. What would you be willing to do to protect the people you love? Have you ever been deployed?
and lastly Why is it so freakin important to the rest of the world how the U.S. conducts it's bussiness?

Liberty's Edge

Didn't think you would.

Now, about this "cascade of criticism". Let's see, he made the comment on The Tonight Show, every major network news show and cable news network ran stories about the appearance from that evening on, and not one mentioned the gaffe until AFTER the internet firestorm became to large to ignore. CNN didn't say anything until 6pm the next day, MSNBC tried to act like it didn't happen, even Fox kind of glossed it over. They basically WAITED for him to apologize for it before reporting it. However, it just made them look bad as the left and right blogosphere had been running with it since the moment it happened.

If Bush had said something like that, it would have been the opening story from 11pm onward, THAT NIGHT.

Dark Archive

Uzzy wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Uzzy wrote:
Moorluck wrote:
Not to be overly rude Uzzy but I couldn't care less for the rights of someone who was tryin to kill me. I know thats not an evolved way of thinking but I wasn't called Captian Caveman fer nothing in Highschool ;)

Me neither, when they are trying to kill me. Self defence and all that.

When you've captured them though, then you should respect their rights, under international law.

Let me put it another way. If Iran captured some US Special Forces, or a US Pilot, snooping around their country, and stuck them in a legal black hole, waterboarded and 'walled' them, would you say it's torture? Of course you would. Torture is the thing the bad guys do.

Which, even Obama admits, is what is going to happen regardless of what we do.
Yes they will. So you going to lower yourself to their level? (I also note you didn't answer the question. Would it be torture or not?)

I beg your indulgence while I answer your question with a question. If waterboarding is torture, should we prosocute the protesters that waterboarded one of their own outside the Capital building?

Edit: Also by admitting that the enemy will engage in those behaviors regardless of what we do, you have removed the most common argument used by those who oppose such techniques, which is that doing so puts our servicemen in harm's way. You have just admitted that we are no less safe for having used such techniques.

Sovereign Court

houstonderek wrote:


Now, about this "cascade of criticism". Let's see, he made the comment on The Tonight Show, every major network news show and cable news network ran stories about the appearance from that evening on, and not one mentioned the gaffe until AFTER the internet firestorm became to large to ignore. CNN didn't say anything until 6pm the next day, MSNBC tried to act like it didn't happen, even Fox kind of glossed it over. They basically WAITED for him to apologize for it before reporting it. However, it just made them look bad as the left and right blogosphere had been running with it since the moment it happened.

If Bush had said something like that, it would have been the opening story from 11pm onward, THAT NIGHT.

Didn't Obama apologize for the comment before the show even aired? Has Bush ever apologized for any of his many, many gaffes? For the life of me I don't see what the big deal is. Why would this be breaking news?


The press gives Obama a free pass on lots of things.

Whatever. Eventually the press and the public in general are going to figure out that Obama is just another politician.

Dark Archive

Cosmo wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Okay, I hadn't meant this to be a serious thread, but since it went that way...

Really? C'mon...

Really. I had hoped more people would react like Seldriss did in his post. These days, jokes and smartalec remarks about politicians are much more fun than serious debate, particularly when most people have stopped discussing as part of a debate.

Sovereign Court

Dennis da Ogre wrote:

The press gives Obama a free pass on lots of things.

Whatever. Eventually the press and the public in general are going to figure out that Obama is just another politician.

I don't disagree with that statement (as long as we're talking about the mainstream press), but Bush got a lot of free passes early on as well. The man hasn't even been president for a year yet . . . wait a while, the 24 hour news media will need to make news and invent criticism somehow :P


David Fryer wrote:
I beg your indulgence while I answer your question with a question. If waterboarding is torture, should we prosocute the protesters that waterboarded one of their own outside the Capital building?

While we're at it perhaps we should also prosecute the man who waterboarded you when you were in the service, David. ;)

The Exchange

David Fryer wrote:
Cosmo wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Okay, I hadn't meant this to be a serious thread, but since it went that way...

Really? C'mon...

Really. I had hoped more people would react like Seldriss did in his post. These days, jokes and smartalec remarks about politicians are much more fun than serious debate, particularly when most people have stopped discussing as part of a debate.

Sorry for my part in derailing your joke it was funny the way they kept refering to "un-cool".... so who is it cool to hate now?

Dark Archive

Uzzy wrote:

Secondly, it's something that causes the US to lose some of it's moral superiority. You can't win an ideological struggle by showing yourself to be just as bad as the other guys. You can bet that Gitmo and the torturing of suspects in there and other CIA Blacksites has acted as a recruiting agent for Al-queda and other terrorist groups out there.

See, this is the argument that I don't understand. If people hat Westerners enough to join Al-Quidia, then they are going to join. If they don't then they are not. Just as anti-war protesters during the Vietnam War were not motivated to join the military even though the North Vietnamese were torturing troops because they believed that the war was immoral, so it is with Muslims who disagree with the extremists. They are not going to be motivated to join a group that they believe is immoral just because the United States may or may not be mistreating a few criminals. I have discussed this with many Muslims, and they seem to be in agreement on this point.

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

Yeah, there's not much debate these days.

The left, after 8 years of bewilderment, is looking around wondering why no one will give their guy a chance. He did, after all, win an election, and elections are supposed to have consequences.

The right, new to the concept of bewilderment, are throwing tea parties and talking about Revolution and secession. Talk about blowing your wad early.

Neither "side" is going to give an inch to the other, so threads like this just give the same cast of characters another chance to parrot the same talking points, and nothing much is accomplished. There's been so much fighting in the last 8 years that it seems like nobody really wants to _talk_ about issues anymore.

Instead, we've settled for reading off lists of talking points and smears. No one is changing their mind. Everyone has already made up their minds. Bush is a criminal. Obama is a failure. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I grow increasingly certain that politics discussions on a gaming site are utterly pointless and should be banned.

I'd love you guys to prove me wrong, but this tit-for-tat BS is not doing the trick at the moment.

Dark Archive

Moorluck wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Cosmo wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Okay, I hadn't meant this to be a serious thread, but since it went that way...

Really? C'mon...

Really. I had hoped more people would react like Seldriss did in his post. These days, jokes and smartalec remarks about politicians are much more fun than serious debate, particularly when most people have stopped discussing as part of a debate.
Sorry for my part in derailing your joke it was funny the way they kept refering to "un-cool".... so who is it cool to hate now?

I think it's still okay to hate the Chinese, French, and gamers. ;p If you are French, it is okay to continue hating the rest of the world. ;p x2

Dark Archive

Just so we can all be on the same page when discuss certain things, and I really would like to discuss, here is the legal definition of torture as outlined by the United Nations.

"Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a male or female person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions."

The Exchange

I want it to be cool to hate old guys with hot girlfriends...can I pleez :)

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

You mean Sarkozy?

The Exchange

Erik Mona wrote:

Yeah, there's not much debate these days.

The left, after 8 years of bewilderment, is looking around wondering why no one will give their guy a chance. He did, after all, win an election, and elections are supposed to have consequences.

The right, new to the concept of bewilderment, are throwing tea parties and talking about Revolution and secession. Talk about blowing your wad early.

Neither "side" is going to give an inch to the other, so threads like this just give the same cast of characters another chance to parrot the same talking points, and nothing much is accomplished. There's been so much fighting in the last 8 years that it seems like nobody really wants to _talk_ about issues anymore.

Instead, we've settled for reading off lists of talking points and smears. No one is changing their mind. Everyone has already made up their minds. Bush is a criminal. Obama is a failure. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I grow increasingly certain that politics discussions on a gaming site are utterly pointless and should be banned.

I'd love you guys to prove me wrong, but this tit-for-tat BS is not doing the trick at the moment.

Uh-oh guys I think we made Daddy mad :S (just kidding)

Liberty's Edge

Moorluck wrote:
Sorry for my part in derailing your joke it was funny the way they kept refering to "un-cool".... so who is it cool to hate now?

People who get upset about "teabagging" jokes, and the people said jokes are made about.

Dark Archive

Erik Mona wrote:
You mean Sarkozy?

I hear that Sarkozy hates Obama, because Obama is too much of a rock star. Sarkozy would know all about that to.

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

I suspect some jealousy is involved. Also the French cultural disposition toward cretinism.

He's got a smokin' hot wife, though, that's for sure.

The Exchange

Samuel Weiss wrote:
Moorluck wrote:
Sorry for my part in derailing your joke it was funny the way they kept refering to "un-cool".... so who is it cool to hate now?
People who get upset about "teabagging" jokes, and the people said jokes are made about.

Nah... to easy... I say we start ripping on the guys that manage fast food joints and think their Kooooool :)

Dark Archive

Erik Mona wrote:
You mean Sarkozy?

He could be talking about Donald Trump or Hugh Hefner as well.

The Exchange

Erik Mona wrote:

I suspect some jealousy is involved. Also the French cultural disposition toward cretinism.

He's got a smokin' hot wife, though, that's for sure.

Then I hate him!!


David Fryer wrote:
Uzzy wrote:
Both. He is smarter, and his image is better portrayed.
Okay, what has he done to prove he is smarter?

Graduated magna cum laud from Harvard Law School, was an editor and president of one of the most prestigious and widely cited legal journals in America. Serve as Lecturer and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School teaching constitutional law.

Bush was, based on frequent self report, at best an average student. He did get an MBA from Harvard, however.

Now I have not progressed further than a BA myself, but magna cum laud is no small feat, especially when one considers how insanely competitive nature that is attributed to law school (of course, it could also just be hype, can any lawyers weigh in?)

Academic achievement is, of course, only one small facet of overall intelligence.

The Exchange

Oh well I tried o~o


Erik Mona wrote:


I grow increasingly certain that politics discussions on a gaming site are utterly pointless and should be banned.

I'd love you guys to prove me wrong, but this tit-for-tat BS is not doing the trick at the moment.

Actually Erik, I think you are doing the community a disservice. I find a lot of the discussion here remarkably civil and informative. This is actually one of the few sites I have ever seen where there is a good mix of either side as well as people who are a bit of both (like myself). For the most part, actual name calling and polemic screeds are not evident. There are few 'political' websites that can claim the same thing.

There will always be two hardcore sides to any issue, and no matter who is sitting in the White House, people are gonna be a-hatin' on them. That's politics. At least most contributers here are willing to back up their stands with reasoned debate and links.

I find there are a lot of well informed people who play RPGs, and we all like to discuss the news of the day. I don't think it does any harm.

EDIT: And by the way ... Happy Birthday! :)

Dark Archive

Moorluck wrote:
I want it to be cool to hate old guys with hot girlfriends...can I pleez :)

Only if I can hate snobby British hosts of American reality shows.


I hate lamp.

Sovereign Court

Moorluck wrote:

Uzzy please understand that I hold no animosity towards you at all but here are a couple of questions for you. What would you be willing to do to protect the people you love? Have you ever been deployed?

and lastly Why is it so freakin important to the rest of the world how the U.S. conducts it's bussiness?

I'd fight for them, within the rules of war, set down in the Geneva Convention. That means no torturing. Something that gets drilled into every real soldier.

And how the US conducts its business is seriously important. You're the worlds only Superpower. You go stomping around, and everyone suffers. You act with restraint and humility, and everyone wins.

The Exchange

David Fryer wrote:
Moorluck wrote:
I want it to be cool to hate old guys with hot girlfriends...can I pleez :)
Only if I can hate snobby British hosts of American reality shows.

Absolutly yes!! and I'll go you one better... I hate reality shows! :)

Sovereign Court

Uzzy wrote:
You're the worlds only Superpower...

I don't know about that... There are other nations beginning to challenge for that title, not least of which is China.

The Exchange

Atomic Bombadil wrote:
I hate lamp.

You should the lamp was sayin some pretty nasty things about your moma ealier... go kick its @$$

Dark Archive

Moorluck wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Moorluck wrote:
I want it to be cool to hate old guys with hot girlfriends...can I pleez :)
Only if I can hate snobby British hosts of American reality shows.
Absolutly yes!! and I'll go you one better... I hate reality shows! :)

I really like the Amazing Race, so I can't go that far. It was really fun when one of the pit stops this installment was Phil's family farm in New Zealand.

The Exchange

Uzzy wrote:
Moorluck wrote:

Uzzy please understand that I hold no animosity towards you at all but here are a couple of questions for you. What would you be willing to do to protect the people you love? Have you ever been deployed?

and lastly Why is it so freakin important to the rest of the world how the U.S. conducts it's bussiness?

I'd fight for them, within the rules of war, set down in the Geneva Convention. That means no torturing. Something that gets drilled into every real soldier.

And how the US conducts its business is seriously important. You're the worlds only Superpower. You go stomping around, and everyone suffers. You act with restraint and humility, and everyone wins.

"Real" soldier? the rules of war as set down by the Geneva Convention tend to (unfortanatly) fall apart when somebody's trying to blow your head off with an AK or when an RPG comes so close to you that it scorches the side of your face... I wasn't condoning torture just trying to make you understand how things work in desperate situations.

Now back to the JOKES!

The Exchange

David Fryer wrote:
Moorluck wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
Moorluck wrote:
I want it to be cool to hate old guys with hot girlfriends...can I pleez :)
Only if I can hate snobby British hosts of American reality shows.
Absolutly yes!! and I'll go you one better... I hate reality shows! :)
I really like the Amazing Race, so I can't go that far. It was really fun when one of the pit stops this installment was Phil's family farm in New Zealand.

Yeah that one is Ok... the one that really cranks my nuggets is Survivor... I hate that one more than the jocks back in high school

Liberty's Edge

houstonderek wrote:
Uzzy wrote:
Bush left dangerous men in there, in a legal black hole.

No, they left themselves in a "legal black hole" as the Geneva Conventions specifically exclude them from the rights afforded to soldiers and civilians.

They also aren't covered by the Constitution of the U.S. as they a) are not U.S. citizens (the courts correctly ruled that both Padilla and John Walker Linhd were to be given their rights as citizens back, and that they had to be tried in Federal Court, with right to counsel, as they were citizens), b) were not legal U.S. residents, and c) were not in the U.S. when they committed their crime.

Our Constitution doesn't cover everyone in the world, it is an internal document for the orderly running of OUR nation, period. Napoleonic Code doesn't apply to U.S. citizens unless we happen to be in France when we commit a crime, and the French aren't going to take our Constitution under advisement in the handling of American citizens who commit a crime there. And they shouldn't. So, the rest of the world needs to stop demanding WE take our Constitution and the Geneva Conventions into account for people who are covered by neither.

Just reposting this for Uzzy's sake :)

Apparently, he/she missed it...

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

Closing the thread would be a disservice.

Pointing out that we are all capable of moving past talking points and getting into actual discussion is a dis-disservice, making it, in my view, a service.

And since it's my birthday, I get to make the rules today. :)

Dark Archive

Mr. Mona... could you, by any chance, calculate Mr. Bush's AC? When the boot incident happened, we all know he dodged two attacks from an improvised weapon, so: the guy has 2weapon fighting, or +6/+1 on attacks. Any chance of wild guess of what's his AC??

[EDIT]

After thinking for a minute, I considered that
A) The former President had a certain degree of cover.
B) We don't know if he has uncanny dodge or the Dodge feat.
C) If the attacker didn't have enough BAB or 2WF (at least, I'm positive he had quick draw!)

So... I'm hopeful for a guess anyway.


This caption from a Flying Circus episode sums up my own feelings regarding politicians nicely:


'WE WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE WAY IN WHICH POLITICIANS ARE REPRESENTED IN THIS PROGRAMME. IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION TO IMPLY THAT POLITICIANS ARE WEAK-KNEED, POLITICAL TIME-SERVERS WHO ARE CONCERNED MORE WITH THEIR PERSONAL VENDETTAS AND PRIVATE POWER STRUGGLES THAN THE PROBLEMS OF GOVERNMENT, NOR TO SUGGEST AT ANY POINT THAT THEY SACRIFICE THEIR CREDIBILITY BY DENYING FREE DEBATE ON VITAL MATTERS IN THE MISTAKEN IMPRESSION THAT PARTY UNITY COMES BEFORE THE WELL-BEING OF THE PEOPLE THEY SUPPOSEDLY REPRESENT NOR TO IMPLY AT ANY STAGE THAT THEY ARE SQUABBLING LITTLE TOADIES WITHOUT AN OUNCE OF CONCERN FOR THE VITAL SOCIAL PROBLEMS OF TODAY. NOR INDEED DO WE INTEND THAT VIEWERS SHOULD CONSIDER THEM AS CRABBY ULCEROUS LITTLE SELF-SEEKING VERMIN WITH FURRY LEGS AND AN EXCESSIVE ADDICTION TO ALCOHOL AND CERTAIN EXPLICIT SEXUAL PRACTICES WHICH SOME PEOPLE MIGHT FIND OFFENSIVE.


WE ARE SORRY IF THIS IMPRESSION HAS COME ACROSS.

And the last sentence could be applied to todays media.....

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Moorluck wrote:


"Real" soldier? the rules of war as set down by the Geneva Convention tend to (unfortanatly) fall apart when somebody's trying to blow your head off with an AK or when an RPG comes so close to you that it scorches the side of your face... I wasn't condoning torture just trying to make you understand how things work in desperate situations.

Now back to the JOKES!

Moorluck.,...just so you know... a Soldier is expected to still follow the Laws of armed conflict even under the stress of combat..A soldier that does not would be brought under charges of the Uniform Code of Military Justice... Being under direct fire does not excuse a soldier for not following these laws..

The Vast Majority of US Soldiers know this and keep this to heart. They/we are very proud knowing that even if our enemies do not follow these laws, we do.


David Fryer wrote:
There are plenty of examples of "Bushism" uttered by Obama during the campaign that just got written off because of who said them. Since Obama hasn't even been president for 100 days yet, how can you be certain that he is a better president then Bush was? Or is it just the effects of a slick and admittedly brilliant campaign of marketing Barack Obama?

I go for the later. Obama is turning into a real inexperienced president, often so now that the American media has to "spin" the mistakes he has made in the last four months.

Persoanlly, I don't think he'll make another four years if the economy keeps going the way it is.

Dark Archive

BluePigeon wrote:
Personally, I don't think he'll make another four years if the economy keeps going the way it is.

FWIW, the economy of a whole country is not a thing you fix in a month. It takes years for a crisis like this to build. I'm not blaming Bush directly, maybe been the problem has rolling around since even before that, albeit, it is right now that we feel the avalanche.

And speaking of american things, yet taking a complete turn on the subject I crave for... whatever they do at Taco Bell, it can NEVER be considered mexican food (a mexican can tell you that, take me for an example, and living in my country), yet I crave for it. It tastes... nice, whatever that is* O_o

Yes, no taco bell franchises exist here.

*the author does not speak, however, about the possible side effects of Taco Bell

The Exchange

Dragnmoon wrote:
Moorluck wrote:


"Real" soldier? the rules of war as set down by the Geneva Convention tend to (unfortanatly) fall apart when somebody's trying to blow your head off with an AK or when an RPG comes so close to you that it scorches the side of your face... I wasn't condoning torture just trying to make you understand how things work in desperate situations.

Now back to the JOKES!

Moorluck.,...just so you know... a Soldier is expected to still follow the Laws of armed conflict even under the stress of combat..A soldier that does not would be brought under charges of the Uniform Code of Military Justice... Being under direct fire does not excuse a soldier for not following these laws..

The Vast Majority of US Soldiers know this and keep this to heart. They/we are very proud knowing that even if our enemies do not follow these laws, we do.

I know, looking back my post doesn't read in any way shape or form the thoughts that are in my head,chalk it up to lack of sleep and a knee-jerk reaction to an imagined insult. Having served as well I am familiar with this matter and I am proud that we have not lost the integrety and honor that sets us apart. I think what I was trying to say was unfortunatly sometimes people feel the need (rightly or wrongly) to resort extreme measures in attempts to gather intel that may lead to protecting this country... thank you for chastising me I sometimes lose it and need a good slap to straighten my rear out. :)

Liberty's Edge

Erik Mona wrote:

Closing the thread would be a disservice.

Pointing out that we are all capable of moving past talking points and getting into actual discussion is a dis-disservice, making it, in my view, a service.

And since it's my birthday, I get to make the rules today. :)

For your birthday, I'll stay outta it.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Moorluck wrote:


Moorluck.,...just so you know... a Soldier is expected to still follow the Laws of armed conflict even under the stress of combat..A soldier that does not would be brought under charges of the Uniform Code of Military Justice... Being under direct fire does not excuse a soldier for not following these laws..

The Vast Majority of US Soldiers know this and keep this to heart. They/we are very proud knowing that even if our enemies do not follow these laws, we do.

I know, looking back my post doesn't read in any way shape or form the thoughts that are in my head,chalk it up to lack of sleep and a knee-jerk reaction to an imagined insult. Having served as well I am familiar with this matter and I am proud that we have not lost the integrety and honor that sets us apart. I think what I was trying to say was unfortunatly sometimes people feel the need (rightly or wrongly) to resort extreme measures in attempts to gather intel that may lead to protecting this country... thank you for chastising me I sometimes lose it and need a good slap to straighten my rear out. :)

No Problem.. :-)

The Exchange

Tnemeh wrote:
BluePigeon wrote:
Personally, I don't think he'll make another four years if the economy keeps going the way it is.

And speaking of american things, yet taking a complete turn on the subject I crave for... whatever they do at Taco Bell, it can NEVER be considered mexican food (a mexican can tell you that, take me for an example, and living in my country), yet I crave for it. It tastes... nice, whatever that is* O_o

Yes, no taco bell franchises exist here.

*the author does not speak, however, about the possible side effects of Taco Bell

Life without Taco Bell!! Come my friend you can sleep on the couch and we will feast upon...uhm does anybody know what kinda (meat?) they use?

anyway it doesn't matter it's so goooooood :)

Paizo Employee Director of Brand Strategy

houstonderek wrote:

Yeah, the previous administration was too busy sending more money to Africa to combat malaria and HIV than any other administration.

Try again, Cosmo.

They also banned aid to any international organization which promoted or even allowed abortions or other forms of family planning. Keep watching that left hand giving out money, cause the right one is trying really hard to keep you from seeing it take it away.


Obama is much better than Bush, morally. I have proof!

Dark Archive

Moorluck wrote:

Life without Taco Bell!! Come my friend you can sleep on the couch and we will feast upon...uhm does anybody know what kinda (meat?) they use?

anyway it doesn't matter it's so goooooood :)

Yay for couch! I'd say "Feast upon colorants and artificial flavors, and unknown-origin 'meat'" but it matters not! It is TEH Taco Bell. And, dammit, the special edition mountain dew! It should be illegal to reserve such delicious things from going to other countries, I say.

51 to 100 of 301 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Did You Hear The News? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.