kgambit

Never play with a new toys unless you know exactly what you are doing ......

USA 4-1 at 39 minute mark .... the US scored their goals in the first 16 minutes - including a shot by Carli Lloyd from near mid-line that caught the Japanese goalie WAY off her line

Couple of small adjustments: New games for giveaway from the latest Slitherine Bundle: (Steam keys only unless otherwise noted) Conquest:Medieval Realms (Note this is a direct download only - not via steam) Frontline: Road to Moscow Battle Academy Rise of Prussia Gold Qvadriga Hell Games from the previous Paradox Bundle (Steam keys only): War of the Roses: Kingmaker Magicka (I'll bundle the entire Magicka package if someone wants it all) Magicka The Other Side of the Coin Magicka Horror Props Item Pack Magicka Wizard Wars Paradox Playtpus Robe Impire Ship Simulator Extremes Teleglitch New Addition: Hearts of Iron III is now available (Steam key only) As always please send a PM and please only request 1 game/bundle

At least quote him correctly:

That is way bigger than I expected.

Keyrock ... this is priceless ......

No to the first .... that argument has been tried numerous times and has always ended badly for the people trying it. Not only would you be subject to fines and penalties, but you could be hit with charges of tax fraud. Note: The frivolous tax arguments (as defined by the IRS) include invoking the First amendment and refusing to pay taxes on religious or moral grounds. You can try but you won't like the results. As to the Texas lawsuits. You bet - right after the first Texas judge / justice of the peace / or clerk fails to marry or issue a license for a same sex couple, you can expect a legal challenge. Given SCOTUS' ruling, it's inconceivable that a lower court would rule in favor of the discrimination. But if some whack job did, it would be swiftly overturned.

If you have qualifying insurance, either from work or personally purchased, you don't have to opt in. Otherwise if you don't opt in penalty is withheld from your tax refund, if any. There are many gotcha's in this, as the law wasn't well thought out or even went through proper legislative process. All kinds of special interest groups of course got their 2 bits in, like with any piece of major legislation. I think Meshugger is referring to the 40% excise tax for the gold level plans with yearly premiums in excess of $10,200 / $ 27,500 for individuals / families. Most plans are actually at the bronze/silver levels. But WoD is correct otherwise. If your existing plan is ACA compliant, then you don't have to opt in. And if it's not ACA compliant you still don't have to automatically opt in - as some non-compliant plans were grandfathered in. A lot of major plans that were non-ACA compliant were subsequently modified to bring them into compliance (with an increase in premiums of course).

Can you explain why this is not a good law? Please go into details if required around the failure of process Read the dissenting opinion by Chief Justice Roberts I'll really make it easy for you, here's a link to the complete court opinion including the majority opinion, the case precedents, and all three dissenting opinions from Roberts, Scalia and Thomas http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2111845-14-556-3204.html#document/p1

Vases from around 600-800 BC. Wasn't allowed to keep those Old marble gravestone with a relief of the deceased. Wasn't allowed to keep that either :/ Parts of the old aqueduct. Re-buried underneath the foundation. Wasn't allowed to take pictures either and they aren't even giving me the pictures they have to display those All I got to keep were bits of walls and a large build storage urn thingie. Constructed stuff - no artifacts. Getting a proper collector's permit is a true pain. Hard to get and comes with a lot of responsibility. Still, would have loved to keep at least a couple of little things. Maybe next time. Shame that you couldn't have keep some of those - would have made a great conversation piece for your hotel .... Would love to see more pictures of the hotel too.

I have no idea who the kid is. But I liked Garfield. Newcomer on the acting scene. Born in 1996 - played Cromwell's son Gregory in Wolf Hall and Lucas in The Impossible.

Definite (in no particular order): Deus Ex: Mankind Divided PoE: The White March (already bought the expansion) XCom 2 Mass Effect Andromeda Maybe: Fallout 4

Just write it off as kamikaze drone experience. it's as if you have never been on a crpg message board. clearly the problems gifted1 had is caused by an unintuitive ui-- obvious developer fail. HA! Good Fun! ps am gonna ignore the larger philosophical question regarding whether a drone may suicide. if properly implemented it sure isn't coming back for a repeat sortie Anyway meet the Switchblade .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdRjYkEU-N4 http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/04/17/marines-launched-a-kamikaze-drone-from-an-osprey-aircraft/

He found us, everybody run!

Just write it off as kamikaze drone experience.

New games for giveaway from the latest Slitherine Bundle: (Steam keys only unless otherwise noted) Conquest:Medieval Realms (Note this is a direct download only - not via steam) Frontline: Road to Moscow Battle Academy Rise of Prussia Gold Qvadriga Hell Games from the previous Paradox Bundle (Steam keys only): War of the Roses: Kingmaker Magicka (I'll bundle the entire Magicka package if someone wants it all) Magicka The Other Side of the Coin Magicka Horror Props Item Pack Magicka Wizard Wars Paradox Playtpus Robe Impire Ship Simulator Extremes Teleglitch As always please send a PM and please only request 1 game/bundle

Did you not read this: "I realize that Obama would have taken considerable heat here and abroad over a decision to extend a US troop presence......." SOFAs have fixed durations and are constantly being renewed. I'm not sure what you are getting on about with indefinite occupations. I was going to post a synopsis but you should just google Josh Rogin's October 2011 article at Foreign Policy for yourself and read that. @Zoraptor, You might be right about Maliki's intentions but there was a tentative SOFA in place in August 2011 iirc (troop count, duration, withdrawal dates etc.) but it hit an impasse over troop immunity. Maliki had also made an offer of a SOFA based on a "memorandum of understanding" - an executive order if you will, that was rejected by the US who insisted on Council of Representative (parliament) approval. @Calax As for the issue of surveillance, I sure as hell can blame him if he signed legislation extending the provisions of it. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/patriot-act-extension-signed-into-law-despite-bipartisan-resistance-in-congress/2011/05/27/AGbVlsCH_story.html (yeah I know I was ninja'ed by Namutree - lol) @Hurlshot - great point about hindsight. Maybe in 10 more years we'll all have a different slant on this.

How ****ing out of touch with reality are you Bruce, Jesus ****ing Christ... seemed as if bruce were making a funny... which if true makes it seem as if longknife is the one actual divorced from reality. HA! Good Fun! Or you could have gone this route ......... Yes Bruce it was well played .....

The book is fantastic. Hopefully they can capture the atmosphere of it, it will be good if they stick to the science and don't try to make it a thriller. Matt Damon is awesome. Totally. The book is outstanding.

As opposed to you saying "I agree with all of his [Obama's] decisions" or "I think this was a good decision"? Originally you asked this: "If you think Obama's foreign policy decisions have been wrong and have made people think less of the USA can you give 3 examples of things you would have done differently" And then you asked for: "give me 3 things he did that have now made the global community dislike the USA even more." Maybe if you were actually clear about what you were asking for we wouldn't have to go thru this song and dance of continual re-explanation every time a debate begins. I'm beginning to think you do this deliberately to give yourself an out later to claim, "Oh you obviously misunderstood me." or "No this is what I said." And you still haven't provided a single link to back up any of your assertions about how he is or might be viewed globally. So much for your claim that you like to debate from facts. I'm going to condense the rest of my reply as much as possible because this is simply a pointless exercise. No, if you want to debate "might have beens" fine let's open a new thread or better still let's open an astral link to the spirit of Nostradamus and ask him. I thought we were talking specifically about how world viewed the decisions that were actually made and not speculating about how they might view decisions that weren't made. It most certainly is the same thing. Try telling the Afghan civilians in Ghazi Khan that it isn't. Oh wait ..... And now you move the goal posts. I'm sorry but I didn't get the memo that the ME wasn't a part of the global community any longer. You want to dismiss the Middle East entirely because Muslim opinions generally getting worse runs counter to your argument re: world view of Obama. So you find some dodge to dismiss the area out of hand. Maybe you should have qualified "The USA has really done well under Obama to make its global image better" to read "The USA has really done well under Obama to make its global image better but only in the areas Bruce deems important". Is there anyone else you want to exclude? How about Russia? I will remind you again that Obama made the Middle East a keystone of his foreign policy and in that regard he has failed. Attempting to Ignore or dismiss that won't change the facts Bruce. You might as well rename Obama's ME policy: Operation Charlie Foxtrot. From the PEW Center, Global Opinion of Obama Foreign policy in Muslim countries dropped from 25% favorable in 2009 to 15% in 2012 (no 2008 figures available). Opinion ratings in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Pakistan, dropped from 22%, 15%, 51% and 19% in 2008 to 10%, 12%, 41% and 14% in 2014 respectively. http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/ And no not all of the opinions dropped but I never claimed that they did. It was unpopular in a lot of places not just Pakistan. I happen to agree it was the right decision but the entire point is not what you and I think personally but how the global community viewed that decision. Pakistan was severely pissed off and the Abbottabad commission called it an "act of war". Other countries, both Muslim and non-Muslim alike were incensed over the US violation of Pakistani territory. The very thing that the US accused Putin of doing in Ukraine/Crimea if you remember (albeit on a much smaller scale). Others felt that capturing Bin Laden was preferable to killing him. And still others praised Obama's tough action. And others claimed that it was all a hoax. I simply stated that Israel has threatened to take unilateral action - I never advocated bombing Iran. You can stop attempting to put words in my mouth any time now. That's beneath you. I'm tired of this BS.

I agree. Obama got a free popularity boost after the 2008 election simply because (a) he was a "novelty" and (b) he wasn't Bush. Had Hillary been elected there would have been a similar (not identical but similar) increase in US popularity - "WOW the US elected it's first woman president And she's not George Bush!" In fact, it's likely that an increase in popularity would have occurred to one degree or another no matter who was elected as long as it wasn't Bush or "Bush 2.1". So imo the 2009 boost in US popularity is a function of Obama being in the right place at the right time in 2008/09. But look what happened once he took office. From that point, opinion of US policy steadily declined and in the ME it has actually dropped below Bush's level. Just a couple of quick notes: Libya - I agreed that Libya was not solely of Obama's making but for better or worse, Libya was seen in many circles as a US driven operation. Obama's call for Qaddafi to step down only reinforced that view. My focus was how he acted outside the UN mandate and how that was viewed by several countries. Benghazi - Agreed - That was mostly a personal opinion - I should have left that one out. Iraq - Maliki and the US and Iraqi commanders all agreed that the Iraqi army was undertrained (it was basically being rebuilt from scratch) and needed a US backstop. Subsequent events with ISIS confirmed that analysis. The Iraqi army crumpling like origami in a hurricane when ISIS made it's initial push is ample proof. Obama's blind insistence on withdrawing US troops and his lack of effort in negotiating a SOFA extension despite the Iraqi government's repeated requests for a sizeable stay behind force was a mistake. I realize that Obama would have taken considerable heat here and abroad over a decision to extend a US troop presence but sometimes the right decision isn't necessarily the popular one. Calling it an occupation is a stretch but I can see how it would be viewed that way by some. SOFAs are SOP. Surveillance - True. The NSA programs didn't originate under Obama's watch but they did continue and the leaks occurred under his watch. He's responsible for the fallout.

As I said I support his foreign policy decisions, all of them. And if people don't like the USA because of them thats there issue, the decisions were correct So pulling out of Iraq, not attacking Iran and Syria, the ISIS bombing campaign and the killing of Bin Laden to name a few Killing Bin Laden was a covert military action. Doing so without consulting the Pakistani government first and violating Pakistani territory was a policy decision. Before I begin remember that you asked this: "give me 3 things he did that have now made the global community dislike the USA even more " Just remember that this is about what the global community believes and not necessarily my personal opinions, lord knows there are enough things in the US I can take shots at Obama about. You asked for three? Here's more than a dozen .... (apologies for the wall of text) 1. Ignored the UNSC resolutions in Libya that justified NATO military intervention by repeatedly calling for Qaddafi's overthrow when the resolutions provided for no such thing. The unintended consequences was that China and Russia as well as the emerging powers on the Security Council (Brazil, India, and South Africa), are no longer willing to countenance UN Security Council resolutions that could lead to military interventions to overthrow regimes elsewhere in the Arab world. At the very least that made it more difficult for Obama to isolate the Assad regime. 2. Ignored calls for increased security at the Benghazi embassy leading to the death of Stevens et al and then tried to cover it up. (Okay this is really an internal US reaction but the US is part of the global community.) 3. Promised a secure and stable Iraq after the troop withdrawals. How did that work out? Obama didn't even make an effort to negotiate a SOFA extension. By reducing the proposed troop contingent from the 20,000 man force recommended by the US military to 3,000 he virtually guaranteed that there would be no SOFA. This despite the fact that Maliki was willing to agree to a smaller 8000 man commitment. Obama seriously overestimate the combat readiness of Iraq's military. And he's about to repeat the same mistake in Afghanistan. The current bombing of ISIS a direct result of Obama's overconfidence in the Iraqi military; it is simply an attempt to correct a massive ****-up of Obama's creation. 4. Yemen's government collapsed despite massive US support and the US is now directly involved in the Yemen-Saudi War. The US is providing targetting information, intelligence and aerial refueling of Saudi airstrikes. “American military planners are using live intelligence feeds from surveillance flights over Yemen to help Saudi Arabia decide what and where to bomb, U.S. officials said.” These video feeds are being provided via U.S. drones, because American manned aircraft are reportedly not presently flying over Yemeni airspace. In 2011, Hillary Clinton said Washington had "rebalanced" its spending priorities to help create a "unified, stable, democratic and prosperous Yemen where civil society has room to operate but al-Qaeda does not." Really? Tell that to the Houthi. Source: ForeignPolicy 5. Obama already-gasping Middle East peace process went from simply being on life support to being declared DOA for the remainder of Obama’s presidency. Obama pressured Israel for a settlement freeze as a necessary concession for peace and downplayed Palestinian terror, anti-Israel incitement and the terror group Hamas’ role in Palestinian government as impediments to it. The increasing frustration between the two countries has resulted in US/Israel relations being at an all time low. So bad in fact, that the US has threatened to abandon Israel at the UN and Israel has threatened unilateral action against Iran if the nuclear talks break down. 6. Obama's claims of no boots on the ground are BS. Obama and JSOC have run thousands of covert operations using Seal Team 6 or CIA/Seal Team 6 joint ops in foreign countries, often without the permission of the host countries. They are now the go-to force whenever Obama wants to flex his military muscle. He overuses the force to the extent that the unit had to be tripled in size to accommodate all of the requests for its use. (Source: NYTimes) 7. Ran a world wide program that eavesdropped on the governments of Brazil and Germany (among others) with almost universal condemnation from those leaders. Then he compounded the issue by failing to adequately secure the information to prevent it from being leaked. 8. Issued a red line in the sand ultimatum to Syria with no clear plan to follow it up. Although he managed to secure destruction of the Syria WMD with Russian help, oh wait he didn't since Assad has used chlorine gas against the Syrian civilian population. The civil war is still raging and please ask the Jordanians how they are doing coping with the massive refugee influx. 9. Obama’s plan to pull out all U.S. combat forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2016 after the massive troop surge makes little sense. Afghanistan has just navigated a difficult democratic transition of power (Iraq spring to mind here at all?) . But it also deprives the United States of operational bases from which to carry out possible strikes against future Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other extremist targets in South Asia. There is no viable alternative location from which to monitor and if necessary attack America’s enemies throughout the Afghan-Pakistani Pashtun belt. 10. Obama has failed to establish a consistent strategy for Pakistan, alternating between embrace and embarrassment in ways that often make our policy as inconsistent and frustrating as the Pakistanis are themselves. It’s hard to figure out even what our stated policy is, much less to implement it. China is now viewed as Pakistan's greatest ally and not the US. 11. Obama's wavering between the Muslim Brotherhood and General Sisi's government have left both feeling betrayed. Egypt's most powerful man, Gen. Abdel Fatah al-Sissi, has said, "You [the U.S.] left the Egyptians; you turned your back on the Egyptians, and they won't forget that." 12. One of Obama's stated goals was resetting the U.S. relationship with the Muslim communities around the world. Given the failures in Palestine, Syria, Libya, Egypt and Yemen, how do you think that's working out? The entire middle east is a complete mess. 13. For all of Obama’s success using drones, and he has massively ramped up their use, they are not viewed favorably around the world. Many feel that the precedents the United States is setting with drone attacks will come back to haunt us. Now is the time to begin to develop an international consensus around rules governing drones and other means of individualized 21st-century warfare. Opposition to Obama's use of drone strikes appears to be the most significant driver of his drop in worldwide popularity. The United States is the only nation among the 22 surveyed that showed majority support (62 percent) for the use of drone aircraft to strike at targets in the war on terrorism. http://www.christianpost.com/news/global-opinion-of-obama-falls-due-to-use-of-drone-strikes-76610/ 14. The IRAN nuclear deal has not yet been finalized and may never be. As part of the tentative agreement reached in April in Switzerland, Iran was to implement a so-called Additional Protocol giving the IAEA more intrusive access to facilities in Iran. Iranian officials have been giving conflicting messages about what kind of access would be granted to crucial military sites. Iran is stalling. Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear capability will lead to reciprocal action by the Saudi government. After all, Saudi Arabia’s long-term financial support for Pakistan’s nuclear program has never been just about Islamic beneficence. Instead, that funding was a down payment for future opportunity. Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/418410/obamas-ludicrous-middle-east-policy-tom-rogan 15. Only 19% of Turks and 12% of Jordanians offer a favorable opinion of the U.S., and at 10% Egypt gives the U.S. its lowest rating in the survey. http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/07/14/global-opposition-to-u-s-surveillance-and-drones-but-limited-harm-to-americas-image/ Obama's foreign policy is one of soaring rhetoric and undelivered results. It's a total failure. http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/05/06/obamas-foreign-policy-realism-has-left-the-middle-east-an-unstable-mess

You & I are definitely reading different news sources Bruce. So I am referring to foreign policy decisions that influence global sentiment If you think Obama's foreign policy decisions have been wrong and have made people think less of the USA can you give 3 examples of things you would have done differently For example would you have ignored the UNSC and bombed Syria, attacked Iran despite the sanctions bringing Iran back to the negotiation process, not gone to Africa to help combat Ebola ? Just 3 examples I'm leaving for work in 10 min. Check back tonight. I can come up with 4 off the top of my head. Later While we wait for GD, why don't you list the examples of things that you think he did right? I'll give you Ebola as a free drop but in honesty any US president would have done the same thing. You rather give me 3 things he did that have now made the global community dislike the USA even more. I support his foreign policy decisions, you guys don't. The onus is on you to produce examples You claimed "The USA has really done well under Obama to make its global image better." I'm asking you to provide examples to back up that claim. The onus is on YOU to back up your assertion. I mean didn't you claim some time ago that you liked to debate on facts? So provide some.

You & I are definitely reading different news sources Bruce. So I am referring to foreign policy decisions that influence global sentiment If you think Obama's foreign policy decisions have been wrong and have made people think less of the USA can you give 3 examples of things you would have done differently For example would you have ignored the UNSC and bombed Syria, attacked Iran despite the sanctions bringing Iran back to the negotiation process, not gone to Africa to help combat Ebola ? Just 3 examples I'm leaving for work in 10 min. Check back tonight. I can come up with 4 off the top of my head. Later While we wait for GD, why don't you list the examples of things that you think he did right? I'll give you Ebola as a free drop but in honesty any US president would have done the same thing.

Sorry but NO. There is no such mandate in US corporate law. The author's reference to section 716 in section A of the Maine Corporate Law is false. The entirety of Section A of the Maine Corporate Law statutes was repealed in 2001 and replaced by section C. The clause the author refers to DOES NOT EXIST any longer (and in point of fact, it did not exist when he wrote that article). And there is no similar clause in section C. Although the duties of the director's section in section C now reads as follows: Title 13-C; §831. Standards of conduct for directors 6. Interests of other constituencies. In discharging their duties, the directors and officers of the corporation may, in considering the best interests of the corporation and of its shareholders, consider the effects of any action upon employees, suppliers and customers of the corporation, communities in which offices or other establishments of the corporation are located and all other pertinent factors. That's hardly a profits over people clause now is it? http://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/13-A/title13-Ach7sec0.html http://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/13-B/title13-Bch0sec0.html http://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/13-C/title13-Cch0sec0.html Now I'm not about to check all corporate statutes for all 50 states but I did check NC and there is no such clause that mandates "profits before people" in the North Carolina Corporate statues either. http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_55.html In fact, there is no requirement in the Maine or NC statutes that obligates corporations to pay dividends to share holders. In NC, the statute says this: § 55-6-40. Distributions to shareholders. (a) A board of directors may authorize and the corporation may make distributions to its shareholders There is no compulsory distribution required, and no legal requirement that "profits come first". PS: And just so there is no confusion, I don't agree with what Disney did at all.