Gromnir

typical is not arbitrary. there is usually dollar amounts which may be attributed to those prohibited activities. in any event, 'cause we love how your example closes the circle, we will observe how it is the democratic process which is resulting in those kinda prohibitions which offend gd. either direct, or by elected representative, gd's fellow citizens decide whether or not the well-documented dangers o' marijuana use by folks who are still undergoing brain development is the kinda thing which deserves the body public's attention and/or action. does Constitution preclude drug use from review by the democratic process? under certain circumstances, yes it does. can't force a person to take drugs, even if such drugs would be beneficial. different than saying it ain't up to government to decide what a person is allowed to take into their body. even beyond the legal reasons, should be obvious how such is different. what are the costs o' airplane pilots getting drunk or using lsd before a commercial flight? is airplane pilot on lsd an extreme example? sure it is, but as soon as you allow yourself to begin a cost v benefit analysis to decide which behaviors should be prohibited, then you are no longer dealing either legal or Constitutional issues. value judgements is for lawmakers who can create committees and do studies... is not fodder for judges and courts is moot in any event. the dangers o' being compromised 'cause the politician is seripticious doing that which is illegal not change in the least 'cause gd has self-contradictory love-hate relationship with democracy. HA! Good Fun!

am agreeing with these sentiments, but what about the folks for whom their religion is central to their personal identity? do we dismiss them as wrong and move on to the next issue? bruce says 5% o' uk population, and am expecting a much higher % for london. even so, is 1 in 20 uk politicians islamic? am honest not knowing. more than Gromnir, people o' islamic faith and red state christians got their personal identity inextricable intertwined with their religious beliefs. should we marginalize those folks 'cause we personal find true zealots to be, at best, difficult to deal with? in a democracy, leaders should represent their constituents. those o' islamic faith deserve to be represented, no? is easy for leaders to dismiss small minorities in a democracy. claim they is leading for benefit o' the best o' all tends to result in minorities getting the fuzzy end o' the lollipop, regardless o' whether the minority is ethnic or religious or social. regardless, while am personal uncomfortable with folks who self-identify first and foremost based on their faith, it would be arrogant and narrow-minded o' us to judge such folks as undeserving o' democratic representation. and Gromnir would be worried 'bout any prominent politician with an illegal addiction. such problems open the politician to more nefarious influences and to outright blackmail. 'cause o' the illegal nature o' the addiction, the politician is vulnerable to being compromised by those with an agenda different than the politician and possibly antagonistic towards those who voted for the politician. HA! Good Fun! ps "That's a pretty sharp sword you have there." indeed. "sharp" were the first thing which came to mind.

the sad part being the image represents the full dimensions o' a standard 2019 studio apartment in hong kong. HA! Good Fun!

ever try and get your wife to say, "we make big trouble for moose and squirrel"? am knowing we couldn't resist the temptation. ... am s'posing is another reason why is best Gromnir remains unmarried. HA! Good Fun!

perhaps even kaiju dislike working with child actors? HA! Good Fun!

vol may have the attention span o' a goldfish, but don't let him and trump distract you. yes, the mayor o' london has said mean things to trump, but that ain't what started the whole "nasty" nonsense. trump lied. he lied for no reason. not only did he lie, but he had his campaign try and refute his lie with additional lies. so trump, instead o' apologizing or distancing himself from the lie, is gonna get as much mileage as possible outta this swirling toilet o' idiocy. his followers love to watch trump fight. so trump takes his lie and transforms... is now 'bout whether or trump should need sit quiet and meek while folks is being nasty to him? don't follow trump and vol down into the sewer. if you are gonna make mistake o' jumping into the toilet in the first place, at least be the floater who refuses to be dragged down with the likes o' the potus... and vol. HA! Good Fun!

hot razor skewers is gonna get you +2 pen, +2 might and +1 power levels. is a worthy food consideration if you are worried 'bout pen. not cheap, but money should never be an issue in a game such as deadfire. an option not considered frequent is the melee ghost heart ranger/priest of berath. rangers have ridiculous high accuracy potential, and hunter's fang is gonna get you an additional accuracy boost beyond typical ranged ranger levels-- you will crit often. extreme high occurrence o' crit will also result in more than a few over-penetrations, even with a greatsword. we tend to go human for the accuracy boost when blooded (and 'cause am refusing to play any race called "godlike" *insert eye roll here*) but am not thinking race is essential to the build... oh, and summoning a dead spirit animal also works well with the priest o' berath concept, eh? "Ghost Hearts are rangers whose animal companions have died but remained in the In-Between as spirits to serve their masters. Ghost Hearts can summon the spirit of their companion in combat for a limited duration." from personal experience, shamans with a two-hander build is excellent in potd, though we went wael rather than berath for full game play. gameplay not much difference 'tween berath and wael, though at lower levels the arcane veil is a nice spell for a berserker. shaman is a multiclass we highly recommended, particular with the spirit tornado route. even so, while a summoned greatsword build might not be our ideal ghost heart/priest combo, it works extreme well and is conceptual satisfying on multiple levels. HA! Good Fun!

alien, jaws, king kong, creature from the black lagoon, frankenstein, the thing, etc. but yeah, japanese kaiju films are... different. HA! Good Fun!

swedish film. there is an imdb listing for a movie called swedish meatballs, but is a swedish documentary 'bout rock climbing in sweden? HA! Good Fun!

one assumes bleak walker... and good thing the critter cleaver exists 'cause otherwise you got pet choices limited to only cats, no? one hopes your tragedy is complete in the metaphorical rear view mirror. good luck on current and future endeavours. HA! Good Fun! ps create a bunch o' so cal game developer deadfire analogs? for sake o' accuracy, we would likely limit class options to nalpazca monks as well as a variety o' chanter and druid subclasses.

fyi, have had this issue multiple times. however, if we shift inventory, the incinerator becomes capable o' interaction. may need to play around a bit as quest items cannot be moved per se, but am knowing we managed twice and it were 'cause o' inventory manipulation. good luck. HA! Good Fun!

trump claims he never called meghan markle "nasty" why lie? honest, who cares if he called her nasty, but why lie when there is video and audio recording proof? more mind boggling, trump's own people posted a link to the video in which potus says he didn't realize meghan markle were nasty... were some kinda bizarre attempt to refute media claims. now trump is demanding another apology from fake media. what? meanwhile, 30% o' the US population likely agree that trump is owed an apology. a few o' you know who you are. ... we are living a freaking twilight zone episode. at least during the first couple years in office, trump had folks around him who refused to lie for the President. those folks is gone. again, this were nothing, but why lie 'bout it? HA! Good Fun!

then rejoice and prepare self to be well and fully charmed "series director Louis Leterrier has insisted the only digital effects work done on the show was using green screen to remove the puppeteers." https://news.avclub.com/the-dark-crystal-age-of-resistance-trailer-is-blockbus-1835121918 HA! Good Fun!

have had similar conversations, but it were admitted metaphorical for when we gotta go home and visit family. HA! Good Fun!

may indeed be a bargain. garter snake bite v. arizona bark scorpion? snake is the bargain choice. converse, pretty much any other usa indigenous scorpion v. a diamondback rattler is gonna be a similar ez choice and would be representing a potential life saving bargain. make a choice between bad options is representing most o' the hard decisions we has had to face over the years. choices is typical tough precise 'cause there is no good option. hardly ideal, but one needs look at situation from a realistic pov and make the tough choice 'tween those bad options. not every scenario with all bad options is kobayashi maru. write off situation as no-win is foolish if there is a way to minimize losses. good losses is indeed possible when looking long-term and such is sometimes better option than a pyrrhic victory. HA! Good Fun!

no. we woulda' agreed with you at the time o' the election, but the past two years has proven us wrong. the mueller report is far worse than gd believes. am recalling your but for kinda statements regarding those in trump's orbit protecting him from obstruction, but that ain't the law. trump attempts to obstruct justice were crimes and failure o' subordinates to carry out orders only impacted evidentiary strength rather than existence o' criminal activity. mueller also described a systematic pattern o' lies and misrepresentation which we is surprised the media outlets never bothered to compare direct to Nixon, 'cause trump administration lies were far more numerous and arguable worse. trump has attempted to politicize the military and he has used pardon power to help more than one bad actor. numerous senior cabinet member has described trump as stoopid, and a few has pointed out how they necessarily had to step in to prevent him from doing overt illegal. mattis and kelly… why did they leave the administration? knowing what you know o' these military men, do you see such persons leaving the administration over disagreement on issues? is hard to imagine these folks leaving over differences in policy. conscience. similar, mcmaster were effective fired 'cause he insisted on doing his job and advising the President honest. short after all three men left, honorable men who served best possible in jobs trump made difficult, the President criticized all three for either lack o' intelligence or character. admiral mcraven said trump's attacks on the press is the greatest threat to democracy in his lifetime. no President has so active attacked the legitimacy o' the press. why? 'cause the press has been mean to him. clinton, who no doubt woulda' received bad press, mighta' attacked individual reporters and stories, but am not able to imagine her using "enemy of the people" language. evar. is the kinda stuff we previous thought were reserverved for autocrats and internet hoaxers. alternative facts and outright lies. claim sound from windmills cause cancer and when confronted with abject stoopidity o' such statements he doubles-down on such. crowd size. mit global warming studies. payoffs to porn stars. authorship o' press releases. could spend tens o' pages discussing trump admin lies... and when he is caught in an obvious lie, he tends to make lie bigger rather than retracting. ignores the unanimous advice o' intelligence chiefs in favor o' tucker carlson and sean hannity? why? 'cause the fox guys says what trump wants to hear. attacks on McCain even after the senator's death, and why? 'cause mccain, who were in favor o' obamacare repeal, were having too much integrity to go along with the slapped together replacement plan which were forced through committee w/o debate. (can ff to ~7:00-9:45ish if just wanna hear reasons for voting 'gainst obamacare repeal.) faked medical condition to avoid military service while ridiculing mccain's efforts in service to his country. lies. pettiness. willful stoopidity. oh, and as bad as were hillary emails and the potential damage such coulda' done to US intelligence and diplomatic efforts, within month o' being in office trump spilled israeli secrets to the russians in the oval office and he forced security clearances to be given to family members he were told were in danger o' being compromised. clinton woulda' been bad, but trump daily lies and character breaches has made gd and others numb to how terrible he is. we honest could not imagine how terrible trump character as President has been. had assumed pu$$y grab before being elected woulda' been low water mark, but have been proven wrong almost daily. your gas station guy is perpetual safe from making good on offer, eh? oh, and mexico tariffs? HA! Good Fun!

says somebody who has clear never watched or read time-travel science fiction. besides which, obvious answer is to stop ww1, which would necessarily avoid hitler's rise to power and would similar prevent a ww2. please note am joking Barr says Mueller "could've reached a decision" on whether Trump obstructed justice "The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity," Barr added. "But he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained and I am not going to, you know, argue about those reasons." ... barr is being disingenuous not to mention unintentional supporting the argument mueller woulda' found obstruction but for doj policy. IF mueller found criminal behavior by trump, then publishing such findings by a doj prosecutor such as the special counsel would necessarily deprive trump of the opportunity for a fair criminal trial. this were the one point 'bout which mueller were perfect clear in his presser. so unless you believe mueller is being willful obtuse or some other conspiracy theory, the reason for NOT exonerating and simultaneous NOT indicting becomes disturbingly obvious: but for doj policy, mueller woulda' announced existence o' criminal behaviour sufficient for indictment. again, barr is correct that mueller coulda' found criminal activity but he is again misleading. revealing such findings would only be problematic if mueller announced he found criminal activity worthy o' indictment as such would invoke doj policy against charging a President while he/she is in office. accuse trump o' crime but not allow for a trial would deny trump speedy and fair trial. recognizing mueller could find criminal activity but has refused to exonerate the President is actual a damning condemnation o' those who claim mueller didn't find legal sufficient evidence o' obstruction. is no other compelling argument for mueller to be taciturn than his desire to avoid the doj policy he specific identified in his presser... and virtual every lawyer in Congress knows this. fact so many is pretending to be ignorant and to see mueller's report as some kinda exoneration makes most o' the republicans on the hill complicit in this affront to the rule o' law. 'course we also got a whole lotta venom for the democrats in Congress, more than a few who were clear looking for an excuse to find trump guilty o' crimes regardless o' evidence. is also more than a few democrat hypocrites who defended clinton's perjury who is getting a measure o' comeuppance which they is owed. even so, am kinda disgusted by the whole circus, which is wrong as well. am so tried o' it all that am becoming numb to the daily excesses o' this administration. our fatigue is another victory for an administration gone wrong.

is not at all surprising though, is it? that folks in the wh, at highest levels, would demand such stuff to protect the President's ego? doesn't shock. complete lack o' surprise should be a wakeup call for the folks who see story as a nothingburger or falsely lachrymose. sadly, it would be surprising if any trump loyalist were offended by efforts taken. nevertheless, am thinking the navy should review. currently, the only persons capable o' ordering the navy to take such efforts as described in the story would be the President and the Secretary of Defense (is actual kinda ambiguous if secretary o' navy could do so.) there is no current secretary o' defense, so Trump is only civilian with legal authority to order navy. am thinking navy needs make real clear how such petty and dishonorable demands would need be accompanied by actual orders and folks who followed requests in the absence o' orders should be public censured. ... kinda brings up yet another elephant in the room. patrick shanahan is acting secretary. bill clinton signed into law the fed vacancies reform act o' 1998, but no such law has the effect o' superseding the Constitution's appointments clause. the secretary and senior cabinet positions has authority under the Constitution only after they get senate approval. as such, this acting end-around is not legit. 'course until somebody specific refuses to follow orders and direction o' an acting secretary, this blatant unconstitutional behavior is gonna continue. having this need be resolved by the Courts is asinine, but am not seeing a solution with divided Congress and multiple chief executives who has knowing exploited a not-loophole. HA! Good Fun!

is so difficult to have a meaningful mueller investigation discussion. polarization o' opinion, mostly along party lines, is extreme. few folks has read the report and mueller left enough opaqueness such that those pundits with an agenda may point to out-of-context quotes to support whatever conclusions they wish to advance. regardless, and most immediate relevant, mueller made clear he were hamstrung. am disagreeing with the law, but doj says can't prosecute a sitting President. by the same token, accuse President o' a crime at this time would deny him right to a speedy trial. as such, barr's summary were, at the very least, intentional misleading. am not seeing any way to give barr a pass on his summarization efforts or his characterization o' mueller concerns via his snitty letter. HA! Good Fun!

well, it is easy to confuse clarence thomas with clint eastwood's gran torino character pretty much every clarence thomas opinion could be summarized thusly: "get off my lawn." clint is 88. HA! Good Fun!

curious aside, gorsuch writing has dropped off a bit since he got on the Court. typical takes a year or two for a Justice to find a comfort zone. perhaps following in footsteps o' scalia added unnecessary pressure. regardless, am hopeful gorsuch regains his pre-appointment groove, 'cause as it now stands, he ain't anywhere near kagan or roberts... and we would say such is correct order: 1)kagan and 2)roberts. as to rare earth metals... has the last nine years been a dream, 'cause ktchong appears to think it is 2010. china's rare earth weapon went from boom to bust. the thing is, rare earth ain't all that rare and the US is gonna have a refinery up and running within a year... but admitted only a single one. regardless, five and fifteen year estimates look a bit hyperbolic. HA! Good Fun!

fyi, the vast majority o' Court decisions is actual unanimous or near unanimous; but those cases get little press. am suspecting in terms o' raw numbers, we agree with all Justices at least 75% o' the time. even so, while we might quibble on the percentage a bit, it is true there ain't any Justice with whom we is complete aligning. such a recognition is precise why we says it is more important to be getting competent Justices who have requisite character to sit on the bench. scalia got unanimous senate approval. unanimous. can you imagine such happening today? am perhaps too old, but am from an era when ability and character were bipartisan requisites for a Court appointee. HA! Good Fun!

am pretty sure we can find issues you are not in agreement with gorsuch; is an almost certainty given your libertarian pov. assisted suicide. ability to choose when and how to die? gorsuch literal wrote book on why prohibitions on assisted suicide should be maintained. just one example. HA! Good Fun! ps and while there is no way to be certain o' knowing how garland would decide a first amendment or fourth amendment case, he gots a long record o' such decisions. dismiss such i favor o' reflexive categorization? weak.

am not sure if gd read the whole article. ginsburg and sotomayor also dissented. kavanaugh did not. trump got you a net zero insofar as cop deference. merrick garland, the guy who woulda' been appointed if not for mitch's efforts in the senate to delay 'til after elections, is having a first and fourth amendment record similar to scalia and gorsuch, with the exception o' campaign finance issues. citizens united woulda' been a dead man walking if garland had been appointed. have stated previous how while am ambivalent 'bout the law in citizens united, the death o' campaign finance limits were a loss for all americans. regardless, with garland and some other clinton appointee, you woulda' been far more likely to have gotten at least a split decision on the retaliatory arrest case. you are actual making an argument for clinton election w/o realizing. however, in spirit o' full disclosure, garland might qualify as gd's personal gun control antichrist. is few appellate judges who has a record less appealing to nra. heck, were his court ruling which resulted in heller going to the Court in the first place. the biggest problem for nra regarding garland is he actual knows his history and has been more textual than the so-called textualists on the Court. in garland's hands, the second amendment protects state militias and is more likely to apply to weapons such as the ar-15 than handguns, seeing as a militia member would be more likely to reasonable arm himself with the ar-15 than a saturday night special. regardless, looks like a win one and lose one scenario for gd. trump win were not resulting in a gain for gd on the issue o' retaliatory prosecutions stemming from free speech claims. HA! Good Fun!

we got the memo. penned by thaos, the missive were delivered on woedica's personal letterhead. props on the quality paper stock, although the memo had a faint but distinct odor... burnt flesh and cumin? regardless, we tend to be dubious 'bout the conclusions o' self-serving executive memos. HA! Good Fun!