PK htiw klaw eriF

That sounds bad but are the encounters good?

So how is it? Was unimpressed with the original content in EE so if its like that I'll pass on this expansion to a 16 year old game.

My argument is that despite whatever emotional reaction Batman has, he has no threat to his material situation and doesn't have to change course. He may feel very bad at consistently failing to solve the rampant crime plaguing Gotham, but unlike the citizens he is removed from immediate danger. At most he will lose some money and maybe get bloody beating someone up, but the people of Gotham are the ones being routinely terrorized, having their livelihoods destroyed, and killed. The point is that Batman has the luxury of clinging to his morals and continuing ineffective efforts because he will never be personally affected the same way a working-class guy trying to get by in Gotham would. I'm not following you, are you arguing that you can't be an idealist and a Capitalist? If so I don't think you've ever encountered an objectivist or have a romantic view of what an idealist is. He does. But it's comics so they can't have him cure AIDS or cancer to preserve the concept of a fictional universe in sync with current times. Similarly to Batman not using his massive resources to fix what appears to be a warzone of a city. Blame the nature of comic book publishers. The point of Superman is being the "man of tomorrow", a Christ-like figure on Earth to show humanity what they could and ideally should be. While Superman represents the spectacle and awe of this, Clark Kent represents the idealized normal man. I don't know where you're getting this mentor stuff from, he exists more as an ideal to strive for, not as a mentor to man, and the reason for that is he is what man ideally should be. You can argue that in reality and fictional universe reality man is not like that, and you would be right, but the point is to keep striving for the ideal and not to stop at only what we know to be possible. I can and will. Superman doesn't exist in a vacuum. If there were no Lex Luthors or Doomsdays or Sports Masters or whatever other villains and creatures exist in the fictional universe he inhabits you may be right, but he is consistently challenged in his beliefs by these obstacles in a way that has shaped him and shaped said beliefs. EDIT: I should be clear that this isn't my personal feelings about the characters, but rather what I believe they were intended to represent.

Good or bad has nothing to do with it, the point is that Batman is using his wealth to attempt to shape the world, with Gotham City functioning as his world, to fit his ideals. Batman's tactics and Bruce Wayne's charity has fundamentally failed to solve the problems facing citizens of Gotham, the problems Barman is concerned about. It's arguable that both efforts have only exacerbated the problem, with criminals being pushed into an arms race with Batman and Gotham residents being encouraged to stay in a ****ty place because the charity. The point is that he will never be directly affected material by the problems he aims and fails to address and that despite how he may feel on a personal level the people of Gotham who are being victimized by an increasingly powerful and malicious criminal element are the ones who are ****ed, not Batman and not Bruce Wayne. I would argue that is the case. My argument is that Superman ceases to be Super without the yellow sun. And Kryptonians aren't more intelligent than humans. But I believe this is ultimately a road to pedantic power lawyering. I would argue that he is the ideal humanity should strive for, both as Clark Kent and Superman. While Superman represents divinity and benevolent power, Clark Kent represents the everyman doing his best to improve the world. To the fictional characters of the DC universe Clark Kent may not represent the power and almost savior like status of Superman, but he does represent a man doing his best to help others out. In this dualistic nature, he represents the idea that we're all in this together and that everyone has an important part. Superman wouldn't be Superman without being Clark Kent. There's been more than few kryptonians who aren't superman, General Zod springs to mind, so we must assume that there is something different about Superman. Clark Kent being raised on Earth by the Kents is likely the reason for this. Batman is the same, as theoretically any extremely intelligent and extremely fit guy with a lot of money could put on a silly suit and beat up criminals, but it takes a traumatized child like Bruce Wayne to grow into the broken man that becomes Batman.

Batman is very similar to Bill Gates, George Soros, Sheldon Adelson, and various other billionaires in that he uses his fortune to attempt to shape the world to fit his image. In a way he is just as removed as they are, as his life will be largely unaffected by the organized crime and occasional supervillain he faces while those who live in Gotham without the benefit of vast riches and security systems are the ones vulnerable to the various schemes Batman attempts to thwart. I'd go as far to argue that by applying ineffective measures to these issues he is complicit in the continuation of them and the inability of the people of Gotham to solve it themselves, similarly to how certain charity can result in underdeveloped areas becoming reliant on charity and unable to become self-sufficient. In this way Batman is very much a capitalist, unless you have an anal definition where anyone but an Objectvist is a true capitalist. Superman is better because the radiation from the yellow sun empowers him, take him out of that and he's pretty much a normal human with highly advanced technology. Not to mention a small chunk of rock is able to kill him fairly easily under this particular solar radiation. And there's also the consideration Superman exists in a universe where there are many villains physically superior to him, rendering the genetic superiority argument contextual depending on who he is matched up against. So this pedantic comic book guy brings us to what is Superman. I'd agree with the Kill Bill interpretation in that Clark Kent is what humanity is, with the caveat Superman is what humanity should be and his purpose is that of a savior figure here to show how things should be. Their existences shape the beliefs they represent. Nothing occurs in a vacuum, including belief systems symbolized primitively by fictional characters in children's entertainment. And of course depending on who is writing said belief systems can be warped to be unrecognizable, Snyder's recent cluster**** proved that pretty well.

Actually Speed Demon was a three-way between Flash, Ghost Rider, and Etrigan. Which sounds like some slashfic from a mentally disturbed person when you type it out.

There's been comics, but there's some issue in getting Disney and WB to agree to a partnership involving films.

Nope, Ambush Bug is a character created 10 years before I was born.

Ambush Bug springs to mind.

I'd argue Superman was originally a populist with some anti-business tones and the Fantastic Four was originally packed with cold war paranoia. But for the most part the current situation of superheroes is largely politically neutral, with support for status quo, and mainly about producing IP to make into media and cartoons and games. Of course non Marvel or DC comics(and their sub-publishers) are a completely different story.

Honestly, you're reading too much into it. These fictional characters are amorphous and any political leanings are going to either be projection of the reader or bias of the writer.

John Kasich dropped out and has endorsed Donald Trump.

Oh so it was confirmed?

Perhaps more on the women Cruz allegedly had sex with? I find it more believable that he paid for sex than if he had an affair.

Before Obama I couldn't drink legally, after Obama I could legally drink.

There's a dirty joke about not wanting Hillary's mouth near something but I won't make it. Use your imagination.

I have alwys suspected that is one of those things that sounds better than it really is. That depends on whether your gf is cool with it and if she isn't if she reads your posts.

Tittoos? Tit-tats.

Go on...I am interested in your proposal. If you send me your social security number and credit card information I will share my fortune from the diamond mines with you.

But if the election system is resulting in elected you have no faith in, isn't that an issue with the election system? I'd also like to point out that the election system isn't simply the primaries and caucuses and Tuesday in November, but all the media stuff as well.

3 in 10 Americans will be respond to an e-mail from an African prince with the offer of a lifetime.

I would dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He knows EXACTLY what he's doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country, to make America more like the rest of the world. That's why he passed Obamacare and the stimulus and Dodd-Frank and the deal with Iran. It is a systematic effort to change America. When I'm president of the United States, we are going to re-embrace all the things that made America the greatest nation in the world and we are going to leave our children with what they deserve: the single greatest nation in the history of the world.

Let's dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He knows EXACTLY what he's doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country, to make America more like the rest of the world. That's why he passed Obamacare and the stimulus and Dodd-Frank and the deal with Iran. It is a systematic effort to change America. When I'm president of the United States, we are going to re-embrace all the things that made America the greatest nation in the world and we are going to leave our children with what they deserve: the single greatest nation in the history of the world.

There's a large amount of voters who will vote for the Republican party no matter who the nominee is. Ditto for Democrats. Kasich would be ideal for the establishment because he wouldn't rock the boat and doesn't have Cruz's image problems.

Been there done that.