Jump to content

Gromnir

Members
  • Posts

    8528
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    109

Everything posted by Gromnir

  1. generic alternitive to epipen gets fda approval https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2018/08/16/fda-approves-first-generic-version-of-epipen/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6617f9cbdf82 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/fda-has-approved-first-generic-epipen-alternative-180970064/ HA! Good Fun!
  2. yes, the US press does need be a bit more serious 'bout fact checking. HA! Good Fun!
  3. as a related aside, is a nice article 'bout excessive reliance on anonymous sources. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-16/trump-s-speeches-feature-mystery-men-the-white-house-won-t-name oh, and for those who think we can't say anything nice 'bout trump https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trump-calls-on-regulators-to-consider-changing-how-often-companies-report-earnings/ar-BBM2OKN?ocid=spartanntp we kinda like the idea, though am not certain if six months is an arbitrary starting point number or an actual goal. regardless, have never been a fan o' quarterly report culture, so am in favor of exploring alternatives. HA! Good Fun!
  4. Impartial reporters is, has always been and will always be an oxymoron and expecting or demanding anything else is the mark of only the last part of that word. the fake news folks like to spout off 'bout impartial reporting when such has never been a thing... has never been a goal. surely the founding fathers were not advocating impartial press. the American revolution were never overwhelming popular, and the revolutionaries made considerable use o' newspapers and pamphlets to stoke the flames o' rebellion. the framers o' the bill o' rights didn't call for the freedom o' an unbiased and impartial press. when discussing the tea tax eventual made famous by a group o' boston vandals, colonial press were not compelled by journalistic integrity to reveal how john han****'s revolutionary verve were much motivated by how his lucrative smuggling operations had been largely destroyed by implementation o' the tea tax, or how the price o' tea had decreased with the imposition o' the tax. the revolutionaries knew exactly how biased the press could be, and they approved o' such in spite o' recognition o' how the press could and would eventual be used by Americans against Americans. there were a firm held belief that as annoying as were those speech and press freedoms to the establishment, only tyrants had reason to fear such freedoms. the press has always been biased. good. we do not want impartial reporters. we want invested reporters who believe their efforts will change hearts and minds. biased reporting however, is not same thing as fake news. somehow what woulda' seemed like a simple thing to define a few years ago has become elastic thanks to the new administration. factual incorrect news woulda' been what we thought o' as fake news even a couple years ago, but such is no longer sufficient broad for many folks at both edges o' the pollical spectrum. fake news now encompasses a general, and highly fluid notion o' fairness and impartiality? the fake news people invented a goal for the press which were never real save as to show how the press were failing to meet the goal. the civil war were different. is the one time we can identify in history o' the US when media were routine seen as enemies by the government and by the people o' the US. Lincoln arrested and jailed at least 14,000 journalists during a relative brief period o' time, and considering the population o' the US at the time, 14k is a big number. sure, some o' those jailed journalists were in fact seditious. knowingly print forged documents purporting to reveal evils o' the federal government during a time o' war? it is a far different thing than bias to purposeful print a draft o' an executive order knowing such copy were complete fabricated. that is fake news. on the other hand, to claim in print that Lincoln were tyrannical and abusing Constitutional powers were opinion and would not have been considered fake news in the US 'tween 1776 and 2015... save for perhaps from approx. 1861-1865. now personally am thinking the polarization o' the press, much as the polarization o' elected officials and Americans, has become excessive. the comical hypocrisy o' trump decrying fake news given his tenuous familiarity with the truth does not necessarily personal justify the often rabid preoccupation the press has with every trump foible. however, the press has become more biased since 2000, but apparent the shift towards more bias were conscious and willful rather than simple a mirroring o' cultural changes. https://web.stanford.edu/~ayurukog/cable_news.pdf is worth a full read. have posted the link before and am knowing it ain't gonna get more than a couple cursory glances this time, but the financial success o' fox moving towards more overt bias actual resulted in an industry wide shift towards increased polarization. is worth noting how MSNBC actual initial attempted to out-conservative fox 'fore they did a near 180 and decided to fill the more liberal niche. bloggers and internet news sources is even more likely to produce news meant to appeal to a particular viewpoint. as such, am willing to agree that the press helped bring forth this plague o' polarization. unfortunate, fox news appears to be patient x as it were and regardless, as much as we do not like the growing extremism o' American culture (including the press) we must yet again observe how 2018 is hardly the moment in history when the US press were most willful aggressive and unabashed critical o' the establishment. why is 2018 different from far more significant economic and social upheavals o' the past when the press were equal rabid? nixon had a private list o' enemies o' which more than a few luminaries were members o' the media, but even he didn't identify the press as a whole as an enemy o' the people. regardless, complain 'bout lack o' impartial reporting is easily ignored. has never been something to which media has aspired and has never been a limit on the press imposed by law or culture. one might go so far as to suggest that the criticism o' journalists who fail to be impartial is, in point o' fact, fake news. HA! Good Fun!
  5. 48% of republicans agree, "the news media is the enemy of the American people." https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2018/08/15/editorial/Kt0NFFonrxqBI6NqqennvL/story.html am not certain there has been such naked hostility directed at the press since the civil war, and whereas there were legit (though inflated) fears o' seditious and treasonous intent 'mongst some northern journalists and publishers o' the day, we do not current have a particular bloody and destructive conflict 'pon which to blame growing suspicion and contempt for the press. HA! Good Fun!
  6. according to a unanimous US Senate, the press is not the enemy of the people. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-16/trump-indirectly-rebuffed-by-senate-over-freedom-of-the-press later in the same day, the Senate unanimous concluded the earth is roughly spherical and not flat. the wh criticized the resolution as advancing liberal bias and indulging in a witch hunt against flat earthers. trump, via tweet, claimed a real AG would have prevented the spherical earth hoax and betsy devos reassured americans by pointing out how it would remain up to individual states to decide whether or not to teach alternative earth theories. in other news, inspired by trump's recent tweets regarding the press, Sinclair media announced it is hard at work crafting a response to address the evil which is media collusion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCuX4Up-plc HA! Good Fun!
  7. it perplexes us why trump, o' all people, would want a military triumph through the streets o' dc. in days and weeks leading up to such a parade, we will no doubt be regaled by numerous news sources with the military exploits o' cadet bone spurs. he shed no blood for his country. he won no victories for his nation while fighting on the battlefield. why advocate a costly endeavor which will only draw more attention to trump's avoidance o' military service? at the very least, if a parade does happen, we suggest trump riding at the back o' the parade, with a muslim woman or mexican child deportee holding a golden crown over the President's head and whispering into his ear, sic transit gloria mundi. HA! Good Fun!
  8. am not certain we agree. increasing political polarization makes it easier for folks to label democrats and republicans with blanket generalizations despite nuance. the greater polarization, ironic, also makes for less room for fringe parties. democrats and republicans has, in recent years, assumed political territory once reserved for non-traditional parties. even so, most folks will recognize a spectrum w/I the major parties and a kinda middle ground where the two parties is more similar than dissimilar. the problem for libertarians (in particular) is two-fold: 1) the libertarian party doesn't have enough presence if you only have a handful o' identifiable and recognizable candidates and office holders, then the potential for recognizable nuance is extreme limited. a small handful o' visible libertarian men and women has admitted not done a particular good job o' distinguishing themselves on national topics at the heart o' national elections, which leaves the public with only the generalities. 2) nuance requires numbers short o' gary johnson suffering from mpd, the libertarian presidential candidates had no spectrum o' viewpoints. one viewpoint. is too few visible national libertarians to claim noteworthy nuance. ultimately, what is the point? the single most identifiable democratic socialist in the country at the moment ran as a member o' the democratic socialist party? nope, she ran as a democrat. alexandria ocasio cortez ran as a democrat. she self-identified as part o' the democrat spectrum. and libertarians, for years, has as often as not been running as democrats or republicans... particular at the national level. after all, what distinguishes libertarians from democrats and republicans, as much as anything else, is lack of a national agenda. again, national politics is almost antithetical to the core values o' libertarians, so run for US national office is necessarily adopting republican or democrat platform goals... even if nuanced. HA! Good Fun!
  9. correcting you is making us feel old. HA! Good Fun!
  10. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/first-world-war-ii-masters-degree-program-will-launch-january-180969971/ am suspecting there is more to it than watching a bunch o' good war movies and documentaries, but... HA! Good Fun!
  11. might not be possible. is paradoxical for a libertarian candidate to be most concerned 'bout national and international issues. interviewer: what is your platform ms. candidate? libertarian prez candidate: nothing. ... i: what? lpc: we need less government and less international entanglements, so my platform is nothing. the federal government shouldn't be involved in any activity beyond what is absolutely imperative. to advocate a national health, education or welfare plan would thus be counterproductive to the needs of the ordinary American citizen. the interviewer, momentarily slack-jawed and nonplussed, recovers quickly and asks about the rumors of the candidate's marijuana use in college... libertarian is a tough sell at the national level. HA! Good Fun!
  12. beast of winter run: rymrgand's toothpick HA! Good Fun!
  13. thought nature's mark were deflection and reflex. boeroer mention o' morningstar is worth repeating-- am thinking the club and morningstar modals is overlooked far too frequent. also, secret horrors, a low level cipher ability with a large aoe, targets will but produces sickened. use clubs to reduce will and then hit with secret horrors and expose vulnerabilities to seriously put a cramp in a foe's defenses. spreading plague is a nice druid ability which weakens, but it targets fort. am personal finding the best way to deal with a foe who has high fort is to attack will. is many debilitating will effects. HA! Good Fun! ps priestly 1st level barbs is also underutilized. am guessing lack o' use is in part 'cause o' its relative poe1 impotence. the -5 to all defenses effect is more significant in poe2 than were the case in poe 1 and is doing respectable damage for a level 1 ability with great range. only drawback is, once again, it targets fort... and there is other even more essential first level priest spells if you only got 1 priest in your party. shining beacon is also kinda keen as it lowers fort (and everything else) by ten while targeting will. but again, chances are good you missed shining beacon in favor o' devotions or triumph or whatnot.
  14. Yes, your experiences MUST be absolutely representative of everyone else in the world. Jeez, you guys sell out so hard just to be snarky that we cant ever really discuss anything. I don't see where the snark has been on my end. You made a snarky comment about sexual assault claims. I asked you if you knew the number of false reports, you responded with snark. I gave you the numbers. You misunderstood 70-90% going unreported as meaning 70-90% of people are assaulted. I was surprised by that. Are we caught up? I just don't get what your message is here. It reads like you are being dismissive of people who come forward with sexual assault claims. That seems like a terrible precedent to take. HA! Good Fun!
  15. groovy HA! Good Fun!
  16. I miss oby if the obsidian boards has a rogue's gallery, it is far closer to http://www.thetick.ws/tvvillains.html than http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Batman_Villains HA! Good Fun!
  17. sharpshooter/shattered pillar, particular as a tank. shattered pillar gains wounds from inflicted melee damage, but attack speed is slowed and deflection is lowered by 10. sharpshooter gains benefits to crit and penetration at distances greater than 4m, but again, the shattered pillar only gains wounds from melee. HA! Good Fun!
  18. the video is kinda misleading. is not wrong, but is misleading. US liberals, in general, has become increasing dismissive o' fundamental rights. extreme cases such as antifa is becoming less extreme and more mainstream 'mongst liberals. am gonna quibble 'bout the right o' a seller to refuse to sell to anybody for any reason as such is covered by civil rights LEGISLATION and were addressed, in part, during the 60s... thank goodness. gauche to quote self, but... https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/102573-politics-thread-ka-tet-of-19/?p=2063361 but again, the video is correct 'bout liberals, in general, being less dedicated to preserving fundamental rights... though am thinking "progressive" label is also misleading. however, the notion o' conservatives being the new protectors o' such rights is equal misleading. a disturbing large % o' conservatives, following the lead o' their president, has decided the media is the enemy o' the people and has even called for journalists to be jailed for scurrilous articles. a large % o' conservatives supported the muslim ban and were equal invested in a border wall 'cause o' the rapist and murderous tendencies o' mexicans as described by trump. progressive? am thinking not. reaction 'mongts the 30% conservative trump base to charlottesville were hardly progressive. sure, support free speech is okie dokie, but when was the last time a republican President or Presidential candidate failed to take an opportunity to make clear their disgust o' white supremacists? go ahead and tell bob dole or george h. w. bush how progressive it is to be getting the neo-nazi vote. a tax cut which primarily benefits the rich, thus increasing income disparity is progressive? the problem ain't liberals and conservatives. the problem is Americans. traditional American values has, in recent years, been eroded as political polarization increased. libertarians and an increasing small % o' liberals and conservatives is fighting a rearguard action 'gainst the willful diminution and marginalization o' fundamental rights. try and paint liberals or conservatives as the bad guy is only contributing to a far more pervasive problem. as soon as some arse jack blames republicans or democrats (or some other group dujour) for what is in truth a general, widespread and growing problem, you should feel free to criticize the pundit as the equivalent o' a p00p hurling primate with anger issues. as such, the video guy ain't wrong, but he is also so wrong on so many levels. Americans gotta take notice and gotta take responsibility. ain't a "them" who is at fault, but is us, as a whole, who is failing America. where is loretta castorini when we need her? HA! Good Fun!
  19. it isn't difficult for Gromnir to add to the list o' Obama executive orders which offend beyond immigration and minimum wage, but such stuff is in our wheelhouse as it were. expansion o' domestic surveillance by means o' order were a particular troublesome example, but is hardly solitary. can laundry list stuff if need be. *shrug* in any event, am thinking it is a common mistake to get over invested in the executive orders while ignoring regulations and, to a lesser degree, memorandum and proclamations. am gonna suggest Obama did more to intrude on legislative domain than any executive since LBJ, and he were bold and unapologetic 'bout it. his pen and a phone comments were deserved criticized. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/executive-action/ whether you like universal health care, increased minimum wages, changes to immigration, net neutrality along with some o' the more sinister stuff Obama tired to slip past Congress (and were often failing to do so-- no other recent President, regardless o' party affiliation, has had such a dismal record when facing SCOTUS review) the chief executive's role is not to legislate... and were not just executive orders which Obama were using to transform the Presidency. when Schumer and Pelosi were cheering on Obama as he found ways to marginalize obstructionist (*snort*) republicans, Mitch McConnell (and Gromnir) were warning o' the eventual day o' reckoning. took little imagination to foresee what would happen when a republican President were sitting in the oval office and had access to a pen and a phone. thank goodness for the relative impotence o' the current chief executive and the common sense o' a few republicans. more than once during the recent Prez elections we opined how trump would have much difficulty advancing his policy agenda. much stuff promised by trump, such as a muslim ban, were patent Unconstitutional, and most other stuff were requiring legislative action. seeing as how trump were not a consensus builder, we predicted a certain 'mount o' Presidential impotence... and thank goodness we were right. a more skilled chief executive with advantages o' a majority in both houses woulda' been punishing democrats for the excesses o' Obama. is also a relief republican leadership has chosen to put a stop to some o' the madness o' the previous administration. trump failure to overcome filibuster has not been met by Congressional effort to change rules such as happened when Obama appointees were being routine held-up. regardless, numbers of executive orders is extreme misleading even if many conservatives reflexive complain 'bout numbers. too many conservatives nowadays is only capable o' parroting what they see on fox news or read in a trump tweet... and we all know just how accurate such sources is. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/08/01/president-trump-has-made-4229-false-or-misleading-claims-in-558-days/?utm_term=.7408a268d4c7 two quick asides: 1) Obama, a Con Law prof complaints o' gridlock bothered us a bit https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/102573-politics-thread-ka-tet-of-19/?p=2076988 he knew better. 2) Obama didn't wake up on the first day o' his Presidency and single-handed transform the office 'cause Congressional indolence in recent decades made it increasing necessary for chief executives to do what Congress were failing to do. HA! Good Fun!
  20. am thinking monk tanks deserve love, particular votary. 'tween blade turning, soul mirror and exalted healing, a votary is able to survive indefinite while foes kill themselves. the stronger the enemy's melee attack, the more devastating is blade turning. HA! Good Fun!
  21. disagree. the genesis poster o' the thread lamented how developers forced a player into piracy and later in thread the same poster observed how at endgame levels, he/she would eliminate the pirate scourge in the deadfire. wait 'til endgame to eliminate pirates when is possible to do so earlier reveals hypocrisy o' the initial moral quandary. for all those reasons already described, ship-to-chip combat in a potd game allows a prospective pirate hunter to eliminate the threat o' piracy much earlier (weeks, if not months 'ccording to game calender) than would be possible with boarding actions. if there is a moral component to the ship combat mini-game, and the player avoids ship-to-ship combat which would allow for a quicker elimination o' the piracy evil for no other reason than entertainment value, is not the player indulging in moral bankrupt behavior? answer is clearly a yes. as such, assuming as a given the proposition o' the evil o' piracy, then am gonna suggest the moral player must consider and implement methods which is in their power to be bringing 'bout a quicker end to piracy. as such, in the context o' the present thread, it is not only proper but imperative to discuss difficulty o' ship combat. HA! Good Fun!
  22. the "why" were the whole point o' the previous post. you need to wait 'til endgame to succeed at boarding and by then the rewards are negligible. do ship-to-ship as soon as you leave port maje and you will not only gain numerous levels but you will gain superior gear and a bit o' money too. ship-to-ship ignores player level and it also ignores potd difficulty adjustments. by doing ship-to-ship, a low-level player will reap rewards for defeating late game challenges, but will be doing so immediate after port maje. *shrug* you like the squad-based tactical combat o' boarding actions? fine. after all, is a perfect reasonable choice to make entertainment a prime factor when playing a game. however, the "why" benefits o' ship-to-ship combat should be obvious at this point. HA! Good Fun!
  23. sorry, but the only thing we can think 'bout when considering mid-sixties dorn reprising worf for a role is the following: HA! Good Fun!
  24. actually HA! Good Fun!
  25. historical, the russia/soviet suspicion has been less party affiliation than it might seem. no doubt before gd time, but Kennedy were not running primarily on a platform o' social reform. Kennedy were the hawk responding to Eisenhower/Nixon dove policies-- were almost the totality o' his platform. am also doubtful any but the true wackadoodle storm trumpers exhibiting the worst aspects o' dunning-kruger effect (we got one or two regular trump-fan posters who is textbook d-k) has forgotten Russian behaviors. again, worth viewing (McMaster starts at 'bout 1:11:05) the Russian sanction votes by house and senate has been getting passed almost unanimous, so is not as if guys such as Mitch McConnelll and Paul Ryan has forgotten what the Russians is 'bout. am knowing you were partial kidding, but a picture o' less than gifted trumpers at a rally is hardly indicative o' the republican party as a whole... though am admitting there is increasing cause for concern given the President's seeming unassailable popularity with his base. HA! Good Fun!
×
×
  • Create New...