Wrath of Dagon

The Witness is on sale on Steam so I bought it. Looks like all puzzles are a variation of a maze puzzle. The only difficulty so far is figuring out what he wants you to do. You have to find the simple puzzles to understand what the more complex puzzles require. Braid was absolutely brilliant, this doesn't seem nowhere near as brilliant so far. Seems like a good game to play when you don't feel like playing anything else though.

@Hurlshot Fixed it for you.

OK, let's say your dream comes true and LP becomes a major party. All it would do is make whichever party it's more ideologically close to lose every election, unless it somehow positions itself exactly in the middle between the Reps and the Dems. The only way it stays a major party under those circumstances is replace one of the other major parties, and we're back to the two party system. And if you believe LP can actually replace either major party you're smoking the same stuff as Johnson.

You were the one telling me I'm wasting my vote by voting for Gary Johnson! Don't tell me you're changing your mind. You probably should though. Aside from immigration there is more than a little libertarian in you. By the way, you are wrong about the election challenge. The chairman of the RNC Thurston Morton did proceed with a few challenges but this was done without Nixon's sanction. I read a great book about this a few years ago: A New World to be Won: John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, and the Tumultuous Year of 1960 by G Scott Thomas I also said a lot of other things you apparently paid no attention to or forgot. You can't change the two party system just by voting for a third candidate, all you're doing is defeating whatever major party you're closest to. The election laws (actually the Constitution) needs to be changed to allow for a greater number of viable parties. This is unlikely, but in theory can be achieved if enough people realize the trouble we're in and start a mass movement to change the election system. Of course with my new position that neither candidate is acceptable, it doesn't matter who you vote for or vote at all. As far as Nixon, it's your book vs the article I linked, I don't know enough to argue.

Americans losing faith in democracy: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americans-are-losing-faith-in-democracy--and-in-each-other/2016/10/14/b35234ea-90c6-11e6-9c52-0b10449e33c4_story.html?utm_term=.18c0fd66fc2f The problem isn't democracy, it's the corrupt two party system. Hopefully people will catch on one day.

Nixon declining to contest the election is a myth, perpetuated by - Nixon! http://articles.latimes.com/2000/nov/10/local/me-49741 Edit: When you open your borders to third world countries, you become a third world country yourself: https://ricochet.com/380616/murder-in-brentwood/ Edit2: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/10/the_little_act_that_is_destroying_the_country.html

Is the British military justice system so broken they can't punish a murder?

More like terrorism.

Having borders is racist, because everyone in the world has the same right to your country as you do.

That's very big of you, WoD. I know we have a lot of disagreements on policies, but I admire that you are sticking to certain principals regardless of party lines. I concur with Hurlshot on this one Its interesting if you consider WOD position. For the last 12 months I have often posted " bombshells " around Trumps comments and controversial views. I use to assume in the beginning some of the articles I posted would immediately cause people to not support Trump As time went on I found people like WOD disputing some accusations or basically ignoring my concern which is not unexpected in a political debate because most of us become selective in our criticism of our own candidate I then just assumed WOD would vote Trump and nothing would change that. These latest sex assult accusations I never even bothered posting because I assumed any Trump supporter would see this as propaganda ...yet this is what seems to have had the greatest impact on WOD view....and I never thought it would matter There is a big difference between words and actions. It's what Gromnir said, it would be easy to dismiss the accusations as he said/she said political ploy, but Trump's own words condemn him. The burden of proof is now on him to prove he didn't do what he said he did. If it's illegal for the citizens, it's illegal for the media, there are no special laws for them. Cuomo has always been a tool in more ways than one. Also I agree with what GD said, you don't have to vote for the national candidates and still vote for the local candidates, who also affect you more directly.

To me Trump's alleged sexual assaults are the only issue right now. It's simply not acceptable to have someone who did that as president. I can overlook a lot of things, but that's a bridge too far. As I recall, even with Bill Clinton, the assault allegations did not come out until after he was re-elected.

Considering his own history of groping women, perhaps it would be more appropriate just to keep quiet?

Obama is a half-witted fool. We do not want Russia as an enemy right now. This shows how reckless and idiotic the democrats are behaving. He's going after Russia because they tried to help Republicans. Republicans are his one true enemy in the world. Also being in the know. As Nasser once said, - we're never sure if your foreign policy is really stupid, or so brilliantly complex that it only appears stupid to us; - or something to that effect. Considering Kaspersky anti-virus is on every other machine, and is being run out of Moscow, I'd say that's highly likely. The only reason the media ever builds someone up is so they can tear him down later.

There's no way he can have exculpatory evidence though. That's the nature of historical accusations- they may be true or they may be false, but they're near impossible to prove false. Proving that you, say, weren't on a particular flight 30 days ago is a whole lot easier than proving you weren't on a flight 30 years ago, and any witnesses are almost certain to have forgotten. At that point it's just he said/ she said. And while there's an outside chance you might get proof for one accusation you aren't going to get it for multiple ones. I'm just repeating what the campaign has claimed. And they wouldn't have to discredit them all, just a couple to cast doubt on all the rest. Not that I'm expecting them to. Edit: And this is what they meant: http://nypost.com/2016/10/14/trump-camp-puts-forward-witness-to-refute-sex-assault-claim/ Don't know if that guy is really credible, but her particular story did seem a little dubious to me from the beginning.

May be Bruce gets it now, but Obola still doesn't: http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/14/obama-change-wild-west-media/

So the presidential candidate can be replaced if he withdraws: http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/20431 Perhaps they can convince Trump if he fails to present the exculpatory evidence his campaign claims to have.

Trump, Hilzilla, and her husband are all horrible examples for children, that's not the issue. Forget a president we can be proud of, I'd settle for one who's not a criminal.

Doesn't matter, they can simply rule that states can do whatever they want because second amendment is a collective right, not an individual one, which is the liberal judicial position.

Oh no.. they say she's got to go. Go go Hilzilla. Wooo ooo hoo ooo. I can do this all day! You guys wont believe this but I think I have just had an epiphany around how most of you Americans feel about free speech I was about to say that Breitbart should be closed because it is so divisive and basically encourages bigotry, I was then going to say i have no problem with reasonable right wing websites but they need to take some responsibility for what they say But then I thought, if you close down Breitbart now what is next? Who decides what is acceptable ? So you cannot close anything down...am I right about understanding the US idea of free speech in this case? Congratulations Bruce, you're starting to get it. May be you'll become a conservative in a year or two. Edit: Btw, GD, there's plenty of second amendment cases already heading to the Supreme Court, Hilzilla's court will have plenty of chance to throw out the whole thing in any one of them: https://www.thetrace.org/2016/03/important-gun-rights-questions-supreme-court-might-answer/ Edit2: Speaking of doom: http://www.hoover.org/research/americas-civilizational-paralysis

Don't buy the bull that the illegal immigrant population hasn't grown in over a decade. With all the legal immigration quotas maxed out and at least half a million people overstaying their visas last year, how can that be?

Hilzilla and her fellow globalist Ryan (or Pelosi, since Republicans voters may stay home this time), are going to legalize 30 million illegals, assuring that Democrats will never again be out of power. Not that they need it anymore, because of all the US citizen children of illegals and also legal immigrants, and illegals themselves breaking the law by voting. The open borders she wants with a bunch of third world Latin American countries assures we're heading toward third world status ourselves. Add to that a Supreme Court which won't enforce any law or protect anyone's rights, unless you're in a designated victim group, and the future looks very bleak to me. Look at any Democrat run entity, Illinois, Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore to see what's in store for the country. In other news, Hilzilla's campaign already threatening to shut down Breitbart: http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/18/hillary-campaign-vows-to-destroy-opposition-website/

WOD can I ask you something, would you say you feel depressed about the state of this election or more irritated? Pence would be a much better choice, I was watching him in the Kain debate and as much as I like Kain I have to admit Pence simply had more composure and insights than him. He is a much more balanced and reasonable person than Trump Depressed is about right. I've thought we're doomed for quite some time, and now I'm almost certain. Pence didn't run in the primary, and if he did he'd still be the establishment candidate, thus would likely lose. That's what I meant when I said a corrupt system produces corrupt results.

A corrupt system can only produce a corrupt result.

Not a person of the law, but lying to the people isn't illegal. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-post-publishes-fact-check-on-rape-victims-story/article/2604360 As I understand it, Clinton gave this affidavit of information provided to her as part of a motion for the court to require a psychiatric evaluation be done for the girl. Which, obviously, would be something you'd want to have happen if you'd been told things that might put into question the truthfulness of the accuser's story. As to it not "being allowed" in court, as near as I can tell, the defendant took a plea deal with the prosecution before the request ever got considered by the judge (at least the documents that are being used pro- and con- this issue online don't seem to have a ruling from the judge one way or the other on the motion that I, non-lawyer, can tell). Again nothing I've seen here seems out of step with the idea of trying to give the client the best defense possible Well, OK, assuming she was actually told this by a credible person and didn't just make it up.

@amentep It wasn't allowed in court, it was part of an affidavit Hilzilla submitted without proof: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-post-publishes-fact-check-on-rape-victims-story/article/2604360