The article directly references it:

Can we please stop talking about the Sonic Cycle already? Sonic Generations and Sonic Colors both earned good to great reviews. They sold well. Fans liked them.

That's an entirely reasonable question to ask. My guess is that it goes both ways, with the oppression of minorities by majorities taking a bigger share of the blame but generalized cultural friction also being partially responsible.

We're looking at demographics. Race (and sex) are demographics. It's no more racist to point out the GOP has an advantage among white men than to say Democrats have an advantage with Hispanics and African-Americans. Sorry if that bothers you.

I actually think I know the source you're talking about (O'Reilly's statement immediately after the election). I was just merely noting that their own terminology isn't very clear: they say the "white majority" but don't really say who they count as white. For instance, do White Hispanics (a majority of Hispanics)…

I hope this is true as well. I'm a proud Democrat but it is my hope that we use our victory this election to shore up our majority by welcoming moderates and reaching across the aisle with Republicans.

To be fair, there is some evidence that ethnic diversity leads to unrest and internal conflict within a state. The problem with that though is that most of the countries where this has been true also happen to be very weak states to begin with.

Technically, if by "white majority" they mean "White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant Men" then, yes, they are no longer the majority. Nor have they been for awhile: Catholics have outnumbered non-Evangelical Protestants for awhile now and among whites, Anglo-Saxon ancestry is actually lower in frequency than German, Irish,…

Didn't see this comment before I posted. But yes, that was more or less what I was going to say.

While this is fun and all it's actually quite disingenuous. If the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 19th Amendment of 1920 had never been passed than it is extremely likely our political geography would be very different. Let's not forget that before the 1960s, Democrats predominantly won the South. Or that women used to…

Not really the actors' fault. Most of the actors in the prequels are actually pretty acclaimed so Lucas can spot talent. He's just not very good at utilizing it.

That's never struck me as every environmentalist's goal. Some, sure. But as other have pointed out the Green movement isn't monolithic and there have been geo-engineering advocates of environmentalism from the very beginning.

"Why the hell would he want to become, in effect, a director for hire with far from the level of ground-up creative input he's been used to for a very long time?"

"But realistically they can at least go Pirates dark, theres a disney standard. "

I like dark stories.

Ridley Scott and Christopher Nolan are too dark (and I like them better than Spielberg so that's not a mark against them). Guillermo del Toro might work, but his style doesn't have a lot of broad appeal. Of the directors you mention, only Jackson seems palatable to me and a lot of that depends on whether he can…

It's hard for me to make a judgment on that. I haven't seen War Horse, Lincoln, A.I., or Munich so it's possible his quality as a director has declined. I don't know. I do think people were overly harsh towards Crystal Skull but I also think it was one of the weaker Indy films (but I still think Temple of Doom was…

I'm not sure I'd actually want him to.

It's the same reason that Democrats and Republicans demonizing one another in Congress is unhealthy: it creates an attitude that abhors negotiation and compromise.

And you make it sound like him changing Link's sex is somehow a travesty.