quidproquo

Always easy to find a still picture of someone that puts him in a bad light. The problem is, that's essentially how she looked the whole time she was speaking. It wasn't a gotcha picture. It was a reasonable still to take.

Never said, BruceVC. Prefer to shoot at all you people from the shadows. Suffice it to say, however, that I have never lied to you about either my beliefs or my person, although that's probably better for others to judge. However, assuming that I'm somewhere safe in the Realm, I can still observe things quite well most places in the world. Hell, I don't even get cable, satellite or antenna TV. Everything thing that I see comes from the interwebs, assuming it's not print, which is probably about half. As to the native American discussion, all of those statistics are bad, but the question is what to do. Anyone can look at a tragic situation and ask what more can be done and who should do it. It's much harder to be the one who looks at a situation and says "this must be done and I know how to do it." I'm not poking you in the eye, BruceVC. I'm pointing out the fact that, while I would give something of myself to help people in these places, I probably won't. Sure, people can castigate me for telling the truth, but it is true. I give to charity. I volunteer for charitable organizations. I've even been awarded for charitable work I've done. This isn't to say that I'm great. No one here knows me anyway, so who would care? The point is that we're limited in what we do. Now that I know the difficulties of life in these places, I could put them on a list to send money. I can't travel to them easily to volunteer. I could perhaps send goods as I get htem. We could all do with less in order to provide for someone else, but people in that situation need something that transcends my money or my time or my care, all of which I'm willing to give. They need a different situation, and railing against the system doesn't do any good. There must be some sustainable way to provide avenues to success and hope the people take them. Once again, I'm not suggesting that we blame the people. This is a practical matter. What can we do?

Simply don't understand why the Democrats would not put forward a better candidate. What does the Clinton cabal have on so many Democrats that none of the better qualified members would even throw their hats in the ring? Understand not wanting Bernie. After all, the man's not a Democrat and it makes sense that the establishment would balk at an independent running as a Democrat. Whether you lot think he should have won, you can see the problem with establishment being at odds with either Sanders or Trump. Why Clinton, though? Simply because she's a woman? She's not a good campaigner. She lacks the charisma or charm of either Obama or Mr. Clinton. Other than amassing a massive campaign fund through the Foundation, Super PACs, and other means, what adeptness has she shown in either her 2008 or 2016 runs? She has no real positive agenda. See here, this can turn into a contest of who is the bigger jerk, Trump or Clinton, but the Republicans (foolishly in my mind) picked the anti-establishment candidate. You can empathize with the feeling even if the deicision were crazy. The establishment support of Clinton doesn't make sense to me. They will probably win, but Clinton is neither the best Democrat at campaigning and has not demonstrated that she'll even be the best candidate for governing. Other than identity politics, what does she bring?

I simply didn't know those statistics. That's ugly. Yes, I was surprised.

According to that link, the headline number actually puts the per capita death rate of native Americans higher than blacks. T'hell is that?!

Played 7th sea card game many years ago, probably about 17. Fun and interesting, but didn't last long if I got it right in my head. I'd look at the finished product, but I'm kickstartered out for the time being. Will keep an eye on it and might even throw some coin at it somewhere along the line. Still waiting for the full release of Torment which I backed some time ago.

That's human nature, guard dog, but as the British Bulldog said, "sometimes imagination makes things out far worse than they are, yet without imagination not much can be done." This same imagination of dark times is what spurs the left and the right alike to attack Trump as the second coming of Hitler, but the system is here. Either the system can prevail or it cannot. Personally, I think it can. Obama could not see the completion of his every scheme and desire. He was often thwarted by judicial intervention, included more than a couple clear majority or unanimous decisions from the Supreme Bench in your land. Congress itself, even under Democratic rule, prevented his initial plan to house Guantanamo enemy combatants in the mainland United States. Even that weak and impotent body, with it's ineffective hearings, meeting, and proclamations did thwart some executive over-reach. There are people who want a national police force and many of them for the very best of reasons. After all, fascism could get the trains to run on time, and that view of efficiency is enough for some. Still, in all our lands there is balance. Not all constitutional, but a balance nonetheless because until the power is explicitly and completely taken from the people, the people can take action. When people talk about one administration or another imposing military rule, they must consider from whom the ranks of the military comes. In a country with as vast a military as the United States, telling patriotic citizen soldiers that they will now find use as oppressors of the citizenry is simply not going to be easy. The right to bear arms won't protect the citizens from the military, but luckily the military are the citizens.

Don't know if you've seen the whole series and don't want to spoiler it for you if not, but agree that it's an excellent series. There's one scene with one of the main characters that I think is one of the very best seen on a serial.

Yeah, I've read about the fact that the old greeks were more concerned with who was passive. The penetrator was okay, but the penetrated was shameful. Gross generalization, course. Kind of hard to pinpoint some of these things for cultures that were around for a while and sometimes covered wide areas. Ancient Rome, as I reckon, was probably ancient to itself after a couple hundred years. The Republic, the Empire, the East Roman Empire. Place was around a long time and there were struggles culturally and politically during that whole time. Perhaps more overtly in court and political debate during the Republic than the Empire simply because lawyers matter more when law is disputed civilly rather than dictated by the emperor. We struggle with the same things as ancient peoples, but we struggle with different aspects. For example, the Ancient Greeks, if I kith, would have been appalled at the idea of homosexual marriage, but homosexual relationships were at various times simply expected. They were simply not, as some of the people I know like to pretend, for gay marriage. How the cultures of Greece viewed sexual relations between women changed quite a bit as well during the centuries. I've never had a problem with homosexual marriage. There's no compelling reason to deny it as far as I'm concerned. However, society has the right to dictate what constitutes a civil union and call that civil union a marriage as they please. Frankly, I think the state shouldn't be involved in marriage in the first place. Have people get married in a church and if they so desire, have them create civil contracts with one another to tidy up things like taxes, inheritance, etc. Been married for a while mself. However, to the specific question of the current election, homosexual rights are simply not going to be a major factor. Something that the Democrats may rue.

How does one make differentism extinct in society? I'm actually ready to give the last word to you in this exchange, but I wanted to pop in just to ask that, and I don't do so rhetorically or facetiously. I don't believe laws change hearts. In a democracy hearts change laws. Where the laws are overreaching, even for a lofty and worthy goal, they can fail to achieve the goal or even work against it. Anyhow, I'm happy to let our arguments stand and will give you the last salvo in this exchange, my metallurgical friend.

I dunno, I'd consider the fact that homophobia has been made déclassé over the course of a few decades a fairly good indicator that systemic prejudices can be driven extinct, given time. And I would suggest, having already stated it explicitly, that the disadvantages of the minority are best mitigated and hopefully erased by examples from the community. ...But maybe laws made people more accepting of homosexuals. Maybe people are less likely to hate homosexuals in society because of government interference, but I don't believe that.

Ah, that makes sense. Remember reading that in the manual also. At any rate, I appreciate the heads up on the game. I'm a huge Lovecraft fan and I wish we had more games along these lines from which to choose. Keep givin' em hell, mel! Also, really quick, I read your other post and I had one of my people arrested with someone she was following. lol

The right probably has more white bigots. However, in a truth-loving society, the classification would not be confined to one group based on tired assertions of inherent racism or group privilege. Those are failing arguments. How do we know? They've failed. There are ebbs and flows, but racism still exists and, contrary to the mental gymnastics of grief mongers, racism is not confined to whites against non-whites. In fact, having lived around a bit, I've witnessed outright and openly stated racism between minority groups just as often as between blacks and whites. Also, idea that whites can be racist against blacks and black cannot be racist against whites isn't merely ridiculous, it's certain to engender resentment. To be sure, systemic racism has, in the west, been white vs non-white. Name a country in which the majority population, assuming that the minority wasn't keeping bloody fisted control, did not have an advantage. Yet, in some cases, the minority has advantages based on the sympathies of the majority. This includes ticketed traffic violations in some states of the US in which illegal aliens are not ticketed for violations because of the situation surrounding their status of residence while citizens are ticketed. If it sounds crazy, it is. Clearly, it is an advantage to be a citizen rather than an illegal alien, but the myth of systemic mistreatment falls apart. It's an advantage in the US to be a white male. It is. It's also an advantage in the US to be taller, better looking, healthier, and born into affluence. There is no leveling the playing field in life and the government shouldn't try to level it for everyone. The government should have laws and enforce them without regard to skin color or other incidental factors. Even that's impossible, but at least it's a goal that human beings can reasonably reach from time to time, even if temporarily. Fact is, I've been released without ticketing where I live based I'm sure on the fact that I'm an affable and friendly person who smiles and speaks politely. Do I have an unfair advantage because of my skin color? Probably. Do I have an advantage over someone who is surly? Undoubtedly. Do I have an advantage over someone who is unkempt and smells? Course. So a couple of times got stopped, followed all laws, and was released with a warning. The point shouldn't be to take away an advantage I have that can only partially be attributed to my skin color. It should be to mitigate the disadvantage of the minority, and that occurs best by examples from within the community and never lastingly by law. If laws changed hearts, racism would not exist in many countries at all. The smartest thing MothTrumpra did in his erratic and unhinged campaign was to go to Black neighborhoods and ask, "what do you have to lose?" The left can sneer and the more stridently and clever forum members here can do the same, but the point remains that if the goal is to remove racism from society (good luck with that no matter what) then the policies on the left have failed, even where the left has had virtually universal and unbridled rule. At any rate, if you want to cleverly or stridently sneer at me, fair nough. Probably lose internet privileges soon here at the asylum anyway.

No, yeah, good people, great gameplay and stories. Read that three times, mate. Still don't understand it, but now I have this urge to play Tomb Raider for the first time. Any Tomb Raider. Each would be first time.

Finally had whiskey come in handy in the game. Whiskey has always been extremely usefull in real life.

Well, melkathi, the whiskey has yet to be cited as a reason I succeeded, but I often bring it anyway in the hopes that it will. In the short time I've had it, spent a lot of that time on it. Tip my hat. Oh, I never mention Pathfinder adventures from the Obsidian app, but I play that regularly every day. Guilty admission to disgust the lot of you, I play it whenever I visit the loo. phone goes in there with me. Why not multitask? Oh my Lord, just had whiskey come in handy against.... a wall?!?!! I'll post a screenie of it in the screenshot thread.

Don't think Cruela de Hil is more criminal than JeckylnTrump, only better at it. The man literally says something on tape and then denies it. It defies logic that someone would not see that. However, whilst the retort that the Trump defenders would cite is that she's done the same, which is true but not to the same degree, the real issue with Clinton is the lie you don't know. The woman has done herself immeasurable harm by making definitive statements that ended up not being true after some event did the truth of the whole thing. Simple, really, Trump is an erratic liar who lies so inartfully and ineptly that the common man can't help but see it. Clinton has lies so effectively and so artfully that the common man cannot help but distrust her. Agree with Volourn that if the government could prove Trump broke tax laws they would have set him to the gaol already. Disagree that it should matter whether it's a prosecutable case or not. For voters, what matters is their judgement. The gut of the common man is more important than the skill of the prosecutor for the health of the realm. Whom do you trust relies just as much on what your gut tells you as to your mind. Nonthless, the mind must reign in irrationality from the gut whilst the gut must force the mind to make a decision. Saw that on the wall whilst visiting the toilet. Believe it anyway.

More of the Daily Chthonicle. Definitely like the psychiatric facet. Classic Lovecraftian angle. Interface is clunky and graphics are... medieval, but the gameplay is surprisingly addictive. Very simple concept. Experimenting with different items is good, but even having read the whole manual, I suspect that some things are still opaque. Finished enough stories to close and print an extra or whatever it's called. Like to be methodical, so tried tutorial first and now easy. Going to do the medium next and if I still like the game it'll be hard, baby!

Do a thread about the pipeline then, mate. As for relevance, everything is relevant to someone. Personally don't care, but this was headline news in some of the online outlets I read. Yeah, always surprised that celebrity gossip and personal lives achieve such attention, but such is humanity spose.

we would be mighty amused if trump suggested such a thing. HA! Good Fun! ps tax returns. still no tax returns? Probably already has. If not, CNN will quote him as such. I can't quite get my mind around why the press feel the need to doctor his statements when the statements he makes are usually worse than what they concoct.

Got in a little time just now. I can observe that it's a little unpolished, but that in't a problem for me. It's early access. Going to play a bit. like the journalistic aspect. Not all about leaving a trail of dead monster bodies. Want to get into the game substance before I comment more, but I'm guarded optimistic. Only real downside is the howling wind is truly and bogglingly loud. Just a tweak for the developers and that's what early access is meant to do, identify such things while the game is in development. Finished reading the manual. Long and many misspellings. Impressive anyway. Shows a lot of care. Laughed when I read about how the author does not condone cruelty to animals and then gave glowing praise to the use of dogs in the game. Interesting and simple concept. So tired right now hard to concentrate, but I will say that I don't think the learning curve is as high as the detractors were claiming. Getting used to the interface is odd, but it works for what it's meant to do.

Feel that way a lot mself. Don't mind supporting with early access. Just don't want to spoil the experience. Depending on the game, I'll early access and then wait to download.

"Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump were split in their reactions to the attack in Manhattan on Saturday, which injured dozens. Both shifted into the mode of combat, with Mrs. Clinton stressing her national security credentials and measuring her words, and Mr. Trump sounding a note of furious alarm." That's a news article for you. Least it was "fit to print." More from the New York Times: Headline: "White Voters Keep Trump’s Hopes Alive in Must-Win Florida" In the article: "White voters Clinton Trump 30% 51% Mrs. Clinton is competitive among white voters in southeast Florida. Black voters Clinton Trump 82% 4% Black voters are nearly unanimous in not supporting Mr. Trump. Hispanic voters Clinton Trump 61% 21%" Would observe that Clinton should be worried about the level of black support she's getting. Seems low to me. Main thing, however, is that the article talks about Trump's hopes raised by white voters. Muppet could have written that Clinton's hopes are alive because of minority voters. See here, headline could've been something more like "White voters favor Trump and minority voters favor Clinton." Personally, I think Clinton's going to win this in the end, but she should be worried by polls showing this tight of a race. Meanwhile, the Germans have their own worries. Wonder what will happen when they do national elections.

That's not entirely true, Pidesco. Don't think the majority of people who support Trump think he cares about them. A lot of them maybe, but a lot of them are just giving a gigantic "**** off" to the system. It's not about loving Trump. It's not even about Hating Clinton. It's about the way the political wankers have made a mess of their situation and now no one trusts the politicians or the media. In other news, Tapper, in his exuberance to go after Christie regarding Trump, edited out Clinton's use of the word "bombings" in her remarks about the... what's that... Press are attacking Trump for saying bomb about what were actually bombings? Clinton's response was much more subdued, but the media are just looking idiotic about the man now. Complaining bout tone in a matter where technically the woman said the same thing is beyond the pale.

for such a paltry sum? Already purchased. I looked at it and it seems that blokes are irritated at the learning curve. I was hoping that it was a Lovecraftian game and, from what I've seen. it must be. No way to win? Always facing imminent doom or insanity at every step? I have high hopes. Just to be clear, even if it's not my cuppa, can't take away my excitement at the prospect, so it's all good!