Guard Dog

I am very much an animal lover. In fact I generally prefer the company of animals to people. The conversation is less tedious I've found. But I've never been reluctant to hunt. But I do have my own code of ethics about it. First off I strictly follow the game and hunting laws. There is a reason we have those: the preservation of the species. Second and biggest of all, I won't do it for pleasure, I will only hunt for the table. And last I won't take a shot unless I know I'll make it and I know it will knock down instantly. For example, white-tail deer: I'd only accept a neck or backbone shot between the head and shoulders. It is the fastest (near instantaneous) and lest painful way. If I don't have it or I'm not 100% certain I'll make it, that deer walks.

I stood up and cheered over this!

I've been down at the river all night fishing for catfish. I caught 4, two of which were large enough to keep. I cleaned and filleted them and breakfast in the morning will be a cheese & tomato (from my garden) omelette with fried green onions (also from the garden) fried catfish, and biscuits with strawberry preserves (which also came from the garden). Now to take a shower and nurse a glass of fine Kentucky sour mash while playing BGEE for a little while.

Okay I hadn't read it and started now but I see it makes some serious accusations against Hilary, I need time to go through it properly but I will respond So... I'm curious to hear your opinion. Okay I read the article and yes its concerning...the guy seems to be banker so what possible reason should he on that intelligence board? So just to clarify somethings This intelligence committee he was on, what exactly is it called and what is its core purpose? This is very important How do people generally get asked to sit on these types of boards...in other words how would be selected and by who? I'll make this nice and simple. He bought a favor from her. Because that is how she is. Bill is not better. Their influence is for sale and he bought it.

Okay I hadn't read it and started now but I see it makes some serious accusations against Hilary, I need time to go through it properly but I will respond So... I'm curious to hear your opinion.

This is precisely how I felt. I played FO4 for a few hours, and it didn't have that aimless adventuring/roaming qualities with a character you've rolled yourself. If you are to have a fixed protagonist, you really need to get it all right, like Arkane Studios did with Dishonored, for instance. I thought the same thing about DA2. But it's not like I loved that lukewarm bowel of vanilla mush that was DA1.

Only 1/4th of the games you have ever played had a lot of wasted potential? Oh my, you have played a very fine selection of games in your life.

Yeah, yeah the electoral college system sucks. It's the worst system in the world except for all the others. It isn't going to change. That is just reality. That is because the Federal Government has nothing to do with elections. They are entirely run by the respective states. As for the other things you brought up, some states have cut the number of polling places and made up for it by implementing early voting. That is now commonplace in all 50 states. And it works well. The problem is too many folks don't trouble themselves to read the rules, locations, ballot samples and the plethora of other information that is available on line and is mailed to every registered voter weeks before the elections start. Then they show up to the wrong place, don't bring an ID or other mistakes on their part and the political parties, especially the goddamned Democrats who are always looking for an opportunity to agitate, or the media gets a hold of it and makes a mountain from a molehill because that is exactly the kind of story they want to print. Yes there are problems. There have been states like Illinois that have not updated their equipment in years. That is their problem. And there will be the odd malfunction and polling place mishap but those are very, very, few and usually blown out of proportion.

No love for FO4 huh? I haven't bought it yet. On games like that I wait for all the DCs to be released and a "platinum" or "game of the year" version to come out. I did that with Oblivion, Skyrim, and all the Fallouts after 2. I've been reading the reviews and it seems pretty universally acclaimed but the people I know who are really into RPGs don't like it at all or at least believed it's flawed.

I am paying more than that by a good deal. But it isn't about the 'rich' not paying their fair share, it's about the fact you cannot grow any wealth below a certain income level, while those at the top are able to grow their wealth extremely fast. The point of the post was the deficit, that little barb about who is paying what was just an aside.

I thought Skyrim was just beautiful to look at. My favorite place has to be Valthiem Towers looking over the big waterfall. Yes the characters, dialog, and story were weak. But like all ES games it was saved by mods.

So for this FY the United States collected $2,139,254,000,000 in tax revenue for an average $14,164 per tax payer. If you paid less than that in taxes and still think the "rich" are not paying their fair share kindly STFU. Everyone else is paying for you. Now $2.1 trillion dollars might seem like a lot of money but under the guidance of Barack Hussein Obama the United States has a budget deficit this year of $407,099,000,000. So the country is spending 20% more than it is taking. Well... can't imagine why anyone would be concerned about that. In other news gold is trading at $1274.40 at the close today. Just sayin'

Bruce I'd be very interested to hear your opinion of the video Shady linked in #529.

GD if you dont think Hilary Clinton cares about the well being of USA citizens do you agree Trump also doesn't care? Completely agree. I believe each may have one or two principles they believe in but at the end of the day they are all about themselves.

Gordie Howe passed away. RIP Mr. Hockey. http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/16096859/hockey-legend-gordie-howe-dies-88

For the last two elections I've voted for the lesser of two evils. I'm done with that for good. The lesser of two evils is still evil. I hear the expression "wasted vote" thrown around. But nothing done on principle could ever be a wasted act.

I just ordered this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1455568872/ref=s9_acsd_simh_bw_c_x_1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-3&pf_rd_r=PKMT6ESWR6J5KHFP49QW&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=2394961222&pf_rd_i=283155 Now reading this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1455568872/ref=s9_acsd_simh_bw_c_x_1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-3&pf_rd_r=PKMT6ESWR6J5KHFP49QW&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=2394961222&pf_rd_i=283155 Someone once asked me how smart I though my dogs were. I told them they know everything there is to know... about being a dog. That means they are smarter than me on that point. This book takes that notion and expands on it. Very well researched and written.

The snowball has better odds. However, in 2000 Harry Browne got 380,000 votes for President give or take. In 2004 Mike Badnarik got around 400,000 (including one from me). In 2008 Bob Barr got over half a million. In 2012 Gary Johnson got 1.2 Million. There are two goals here: 1) Do well enough in the early polling to get on the debate stage. 15% is the magic number. Right now he's between 6% & 10%. That at least will get the message out and show voters there is a 3rd option. 2) Get more votes than last time. The number of total votes the LP candidates are getting is growing faster than the rate of new voter registration. So that is a positive. in 2000 there were 1100 give or take LP members in elected office around the country. Now it's close to 3500. The Libertarian Party is the only other political entity that exists in and is on the ballot in all 50 states and all 5 territories. A lot of folks have wanted a 3rd choice... this is it.

Gary Johnson would pardon Snowden: http://reason.com/blog/2016/06/03/as-president-gary-johnson-would-consider

I had never heard of him, and barely the Libertarian party neither. But, if I would face the choice of either Trump or Clinton, I'd definitely pick this guy. He seems level-headed, smart and fit for all sorts of endeavours. He seems to have the capacity for a safe and sound presidency, and that's just my getting taken in by a first impression. If you want to learn more click the link in my sig.

Bruce Hillary Clinton cares about furthering the political ambitions of Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton cares about having as much control over the apparatus of government in the furtherance of that goal. Hillary Clinton does not give a rats bitten a-s about the people of the United States who want nothing more than to just live their lives in peace and just be left alone.

He didn't say a lot but by God this man has my vote: http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/09/opinions/why-running-for-president-johnson/index.html

Well for my part I've made it clear I despise both of them and would not and will not vote for either.

The Signal and the Noise... Talking about creative interpretation of data. But hey, the Golden State Warriors broke the all time wins record at 73 this past season. But you know what, they won 22 games where they didn't blow out their opponent by 10 points. Let's move those victories into the tie column since they were so close. So in essence, the Warriors only won 51 games this year... Here are the facts and my noteworthy interpretation of the data. Hillary Clinton currently has 2,203 pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders's 1,828. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 400. Clinton won 33 contests. Sanders won 23. It's worth noting that this is a double digit victory. Clinton received 16,015,681 votes. Sanders 12,287,030 votes. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 4 million votes. Clinton won 55.6% of the vote. Sanders won 42.7%. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 13%. Guys these are the facts, can we focus on the Clinton victory and at least try to recognize the historical victory? Very few people on this forum have celebrated the fact the Clinton nomination has set a historical precedent. This is the first time a women has been nominated for a major US political party, I may need to repeat this for maximum emphasis " This is the first time a women has been nominated for the US president " ..... This is a huge and visible step for gender equality amongst other things, I can't speak for other white males but I have to say when I look at who represents us in the current US system and I see Trump I get embarrassed that Trump somehow has become the person who is " going to make the US great again " .. Anyway I would be supporting Hilary anyway even if I was a US citizen and I look forward to her 4 years as president But guys back to the original point...can we show a little enthusiasm for the Clinton nomination and what its represents for the positive social changes we are seeing throughout the USA? Being female does not qualify her for President. I'm not going to vote for her because of her gender. I didn't vote against Barack Obama because of his skin color. I voted against him because he is an ideologue and he scared the bejesus out of me. No he has not turned out to the the tyrannical horror I was afraid of him being but he has definitely harmed the cause of federalism, individual liberty and personal freedom in the country. He has changed the relationship of the federal government and the citizens in a way that will last long after he has left office. That is not a good thing. Now a power hungry self confessed "government junkie" (her own words) is promising more of the same, more war, more government, less freedom and all you can think about is the fact it's a woman? No thank you. There are plenty of women how would make outstanding Presidents. Nikki Haley and Susanne Martinez would get my vote today over Trump. Joni Earnst & Mia Love would be excellent choices once they get a little more experience. Bruce you need to get past this whole "identity politics" b------t.