Jump to content

MedicineDan

Members
  • Content Count

    114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

MedicineDan last won the day on November 28 2019

MedicineDan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

89 Excellent

About MedicineDan

  • Rank
    (3) Conjurer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I've been revisiting Don't Starve. I think I have age of giants or some such. I love the game, but it's just too harsh. I've managed to live up to... 90 days? 100? Something like that. I stopped playing a few years ago when eyeplants took over my rather expansive camp after I'd gone hunting for resources elsewhere. Maybe I'll get a really good map and 'retry' if I die for once. I do appreciate the bleak aspect of the game, but the fact that it's *so* desperate I depressing.
  2. The kingdom management started out fun in Kingmaker and then it just got to be a terrible chore. It's the reason I never finished the game. I hope, whatever they do, they tidy it up and streamline that aspect if it's included at all.
  3. I love the Athenian democracy. Truly a standout time for literature and art. The speech that Thucydides attributes (made up, really) to Perikles is an annual read for me. It's beautiful either in translation or in Greek. However, you're entirely right. Athens proved how terrible democracy can be. The creative destruction of freedom is brilliant, but it throws out as much heat as it does light, and that heat typically ends up burning down the Democracy itself. The founders were extremely distrustful of unbridled direct democracy. So far, over our history, we've managed to put that creative destruction to great use. As an aside, it's always good to steal Marxist terms and put them to pro-capitalist use. HA! If I were not Catholic, democracy would be my religion and the Republic would be my church. I assume it will eat itself someday, but what a glorious thing until then!
  4. I don't want to bogart a beautiful drinking thread with recipes and whatnot, but it does take some tweaking. I would start with beer before moving to mead. Beer is a lot harder to completely botch than mead. Also, try a kit. I've never used one for mead. I've just tinkered around the edges. But I've used them for beer and it really helps get a feel for how the process works. Anyhow, right now it's tea. Not Long Island Iced Tea. Just regular ol' English Breakfast. I have Advanced Pharmacology in a few hours. Brutal class. No getting sauced beforehand.
  5. I typically drink my whiskey on ice. Sometimes straight up or with water. I really don't like mixed drinks all that much. Anyhow, I moved mead to secondary a couple nights ago. I typically drink the lees. Even after five weeks of fermenting, the stuff is still throwing out CO2. It needs to age, so it's raw, but the blueberry stuff was actually pretty good already. The stuff will just hammer you. I changed up my brew method with the fresh blueberries and it worked better for the end product, but it means I get less usable product, which means I end up with a lot more in the lees.
  6. Whatever the vote is, Bernie lost Iowa. Seriously, even if Bernie wins the votes, he lost Iowa, which might end up fueling his base. They see he got screwed and they're going to make sure other people see it also. So, I guess I'm wrong. Maybe, at this point, Bernie wins Iowa no matter the final vote. The Democratic party is simply shooting itself in the foot. I think it was Carville who came out publicly saying he didn't want the Democrats to become the Labour Party of the United States. I'm genuinely surprised that so many Democrats think the impeachment was dandy. ImPEACHY Keen, to make a pun. It was a loser of an idea in the first place, but the House made a royal hash of it. I've always played it above board in my assessments. It's not about rooting for one side or the other. If the Republicans had done something so monumentally stupid, I would have said the same thing. The thing is, while it was a loser, the Dems certainly could have played it better. The cynical view is that the Democrats were trying to orchestrate something to hurt Republican senators or some such. The reality is that a large credulous segment of the Democrat base honestly thought they had a chance at removing the president. In either case, they failed. Look, the election is a ways out, and you can kill the messenger if you want, but the Democrats need to get some discipline and start doing something other than trying to smear mud on Trump. How the hell would you be able to tell if any of it stuck anyway? Finally, I pride myself on staying cool headed and I should not have made intemperate statements about Romney. He might or might not survive his vote, but, in a lot of ways, I feel sorry for the guy. He has a lot of personal animosity for Trump, and Trump has certainly earned it, but I take Romney at his word that his faith guided his decision. Hopefully, cooler tempers prevail today and we Republicans don't bring out the pitchforks and fiery brands. Heat of the moment decisions are almost always terrible.
  7. I know it's a popular idea in these parts, but I seriously doubt history looks kindly on the impeachment. First of all, history judges failed attempts harshly. Second, impeachment is truly dire and history will likely think this attempt was unfortunate. More likely, we'll have other partisan impeachments and this impeachment (and to an even greater extent, the Clinton impeachment) will be cited as paving the road for trivial impeachments that will almost always impact the country negatively. Third, while people will have their views colored by their dislike of Trump, the attempt was simply shoddy. Regardless of the vote in the Senate, the case was just bad. It was not just bitterly partisan, it was incompetent. Hey, we can argue about what history will say, but there's probably no point. However, from a historical perspective, there's nothing good about this. Put it this way, if you hate Trump, you should resent the Democrats attempting it in the first place. If you really wanted to see any chance of removing Trump, you should resent the way in which they did it. I'm sure my view will be unpopular, but I'd wager my take on how this will play out in the books is spot on. I'll have to concede the floor at this point. I've been worrying about all this political crap today and I have a ton of stuff to finish before bed. However, if you give me a good thumping, which I *always* appreciate, I'll check in on it tomorrow. :rueful grin:
  8. Well, I will own that you're right, Gromnir. Not about the basic assumption. My views of Romney started shifting prior to Trump announcing his run. In fact, I think Romney might have been one of the reasons we ended up with Trump. However, where I think you're right is that I need to take a step back. My post was out of anger, and I will not commit to anything in the heat of the moment. Here's the real hypocrisy on my part, though. I'm mad at Romney because I believe his motives were bad. If his motives weren't bad, then I can't 'convict' him. It goes back to the mixed motive idea where there might be more than one reason for an action and we should accept (even if we don't assume) any reasonable motive that would exonerate the other guy. In this case, although I'm still mad as hell at Romney, I have to concede that I shouldn't assume his motives. My personal views of Romney have been pinging around a lot from the time he ran for president until now, and those views don't give license to thoughtless action on anyone's part. That's about as fair an answer as I can give at the moment. I disagree with the idea that my views need to be straightjacketed. No one's should be. In fact, I'm quite forgiving when other people have an evolution of thought process. Typically, I care more about assessing these things than arguing them, but I'm just as prone to the heat of the moment as the next guy.
  9. Romney will undoubtedly be celebrated by the same people who reviled him in 2012. I concede that he believes he did the difficult and right thing, but that's because he fooled himself. I firmly believe his decision was driven by personal animus and (somewhat rightful) resentment of Trump. After all, Trump has ill-treated Romney for years now. I'm not much of a bomb thrower, but I will join with a lot of Republicans to destroy Romney's political career. I don't know if that simply means contributing to a recall effort (which I don't think they even have in Utah) or his primary opponents. If he lived in my state, I would actively campaign, and that's saying something since going door to door is time consuming and I don't have that kind of time. The president is an awful braggart and bully, but this impeachment was absolute folly and I do not believe a right-minded person would have voted to convict. The impeachment did far more lasting harm to the country than anything Trump has done hitherto. ...And I was against the Clinton impeachment also, so my voice came out of the same side of my mouth twenty years ago. Some have suggested that Romney did this for the adoration of the press, which he'll undoubtedly get because everything is good as long as it's against the president right now. I don't think he did it for that reason. I believe he did it to look good in the eyes of history. People who look at the demographics of the past several decades and think that it shows the so called arc of history haven't paid any attention to the last few millennia. To people who believe this will be a fatal wound to Trump... I'm not going to argue. I'll let time make my argument for me.
  10. Ah, yeah, that's really too bad, ShadySands. I'll pray for your Mother-in-law and the rest of your family. healthcare issues are scary enough for their effects on your body, let alone fearing for your finances. Also, good luck on your business venture, GD.
  11. I laughed out loud. My wife has been a teacher for 32 years. I try not to get her started. :sly smile while polishing my halo:
  12. The funny thing about all this fixation on the Democratic caucuses in Iowa is that it inevitably helps Trump. He's got a lock on the state. If he doesn't win Iowa, it will be a very early night. It could have helped candidates, but it wasn't really going to help Democrats. This probably helped Biden, since the numbers I've seen so far are surprisingly bad for the old codger. I swear, this cycle is going to be insane.
  13. Gotta own that I'm a Gorth fan, so that might be why I'm defending him even though I think he's ultimately wrong. He's right in that Donald Trump is remarkably predictable in terms of his personality quirks. He's got a pathological need to defend and his only defense is to attack. It's one of the things that gets under my skin. However, he's really tricky about that. It doesn't mean he'll always attack the way you think or the cascade of events will favor the side that goads him. If it were that easy, President Clinton would be irritating Speaker... Ryan? at the SotU tonight. Some Republican Speaker, at any rate. Nancy Pelosi would be hailed for bringing down Trump. Schumer would be toasting his fellow Democrats at the dawn of a successful Senate conviction. I'm actually somewhat convinced that Trump is a god of chaos. We're all going to wake up in a Warhammer universe fighting for our lives against the minions of Khorne.
×
×
  • Create New...