Gromnir

we would rather french kiss a light socket than watch some yutz play a video game. ... have somebody who looked like stephanie seymour circa the 1990 sports illustrated swimsuit issue host the "let's play" and we might be momentarily curious... 'cause Gromnir IS a guy. however, once ms. seymour's lookalike actual started playing the game in question, am certain we couldn't maintain interest for long. HA! Good Fun!

we can't give you westlaw or lexus access, but search wxyz-tv 2012 arab festival. a few such news bits describe the "free speech zone." dearborn is actual notorious for their "free speech zones." most case excerpts from your link simple repeat what we observed earlier in this thread, so no need to repeat fighting words or incitement.... and hardly any mention were given to the public forum aspect precisely 'cause o' the free speech zone. however... "Fundamentally, no police action that hinders the speaker’s freedom of speech should be deemed legitimate in the eyes of the Constitution unless it satisfies strict scrutiny, which requires the police to achieve their ends by using only those means that are the least restrictive with respect to the speaker’s First Amendment rights." keep in mind that you cannot read this as plain english-- is legal terms o' art. when a court applies "strict scrutiny," it is a near complete and total loss for the State. the government needs use the Least restrictive means to achieve their Compelling interest. we capitalized purposefully 'cause least and compelling is no joke. you can count on one hand (and have fingers left unused) the times the SCOTUS upheld state abridgement o' free speech wherein strict scrutiny were applied... and dearborn weren't a wartime case. when courts say least respective, they mean it. is not least respective given police manpower and resources available. money and cost does not overcome first amendment least restrictive. 'y'know the reason why Gromnir does mostly free exercise and establishment as 'posed to free speech? 'cause free speech is too easy. if you got facially neutral time, place and manner restrictions (volume outside a hospital) or incidental regulation (burning your draft card isn't ok even if is speech) then Gromnir needs put in a full day o' work, but that is rare. if is speech, and is protected speech, and if we ain't dealing with increasing number o' forum issues, then double-check for tpm or incidental regulation possibilities. nope? apply strict scrutiny and call it a day. too easy. thank goodness. HA! Good Fun!

I'm taking the wait and see approach. Eventually the whole package will get re-released in some "GOTY" edition (all DLC's included) at bargain prices that is our plan for almost every title. a week before christmas we purchased goty edition for pc dragon age: inquisition. $20. is not as if we is a pauper, but in addition to getting more stable games with additional content, waiting +6 months to get at 1/2 or 1/3 price reduces our nerd-rage inclinations. pay +$60 for a mediocre game that were made only marginal better with $30 worth o' dlc might anger Gromnir. pay $20 for a mediocre title and am gonna walk away after +40 hours o' gameplay feeling satisfied even if moderate underwhelmed. other than kickstarters, it takes an aberrational low sales price to get us to purchase any earlier than 6 months. HA! Good Fun! ps full disclosure: we actual already own fo4 as it came with an xbone deal which we indulged last december. however, the game is still in the shrinkwrap. *chuckle* will likely purchase a fo4 goty edition 10 months to get all the dlc at one low price.

http://www.nfl.com/combine with the combine workouts a few days away, am thinking we need a new thread. HA! Good Fun!

is always best to consider how you would feel if a repugnant group were holding a festival-- weird cults and racists and whatnot. is a permit to have a march, festival or parade justification for preventing the NAACP from showing up to protest a KKK rally being held in a local park? imagine the NAACP shows up on the street just outside the barriers set up for the planned kkk hootenanny and they shout at those folks entering and exiting the park. am also gonna once again observe that the event you reference were a street festival. even if the muslim group got a permit, that cannot possibly mean that all adjacent streets and sidewalks beyond the extent o' the festival should be off-limits to protest, can it? 'course not. were a street festival. as such, protesters woulda been able to be on streets and sidewalks within view and shouting distance o' the festival but again, the actual facts is that the bible thumpers who were protesting the muslim festival were doing so from a "free speech zone" established by the city o' dearborn and the ruling o' the court regarding the first amendment issue were never controversial or questioned. the legal issue being referenced in your article were the extent of dearborn's liability. liability were a forgone conclusion. from your linked article "Murphy’s order does not affect the portion of the appeals court decision that found Bible Believers’ First Amendment rights were violated and that members should be awarded damages by defendants Dennis Richardson and Mike Jaafar, who were both deputy chiefs with the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office at the time." were a question o' who pays for the wrong done to the protesters: city and county or city alone. the city police claimed they got an okie dokie from the county counsel to go ahead and arrest the protesters. county denied. HA! Good Fun!

still bugged as of 3.01. HA! Good Fun!

pc faith and convictions is still broken. HA! Good Fun!

Curious, considering how the ability was pegged as lackluster when it was revealed. possible explanation: the player character and his party can be devastated by prolonged prone, but seeming 1/4-1/3 o' foes in the game is immune to prone and knockbacks. HA! Good Fun!

seems to confirm what we thought. during a pre wm completionist run, we mighta seen azzuro 4 or 5 times... w/o trying to game the game. typical game for us would see us get to almost 120 turns (edit: ~120 before starting final burial isle run.) wm adds content, but it seems clear that as the opportunities for other stronghold events has increased, if only 'cause is more options, the chances o' getting an azzuro initial or follow-up visit has decreased. do everything to maximize the stronghold and don't get even the first azzuro dilemma til turn +75? *shrug* is a bonus thing, so no biggie we s'pose. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking that because more visitor options has been added, your chance to see him has decreased... substantially. am not certain what modifies the chance o' an azzuro visit, but he is clear in the same pool o' options as random attacks on the keep, prestigious visitors, potential special henchman and those seeking to purchase the release o' prisoners... may be our ill luck, but the tuning for the prisoner release opportunities appears a bit too frequent compared to other options. HA! Good Fun!

Just behind and slightly left of the breastbone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eulSbXIjzk the grinch heart were positioned correct... were just a bit small. any chance trump's metaphorical heart grows and he saves christmas? ... we stress metaphorical growth 'cause we seem to recall that an enlarged heart is rather unhealthy. HA! Good Fun!

if you are having a street festival, somebody can use the street to protest your festival. am thinking you don't necessarily have all the facts o' the case, but that is understandable. the anti-muslim protesters occupied portions o' the street not in use by the festival to taunt attendees. don't let papers confuse you when they observe that the bigoted anti-muslims "disrupted" the festival. free speech does not mean that others need remain quiet while you exercise your free speech rights. thank goodness. whenever the kkk or nazis have their little marches, people come out to protest. good. we would be mighty disappointed if some group dedicated to bigotry held a street festival in dearborn and the good folks o' michigan did not respond with public chastisements. the thing is, the Constitution doesn't make judgement calls on the quality o' speech and there is no right to be free from offense. we do not force the naacp to remain quiet while the kkk marches. reverse must be true if everybody gets same free speech, yes? and nobody says you need listen to bigots or offensive speech. respond and educate, or leave. nevertheless, if is a park or sidewalk or street, people got a right to speak their mind. avoiding your inconvenience is not the kinda government objective that is gonna survive a strict scrutiny analysis. HA! Good Fun! ps is actual kinda amusing how the police attempted to prevent the events o' the dearborn incident. as we noted, streets and parks and sidewalks is Public Forums, though even those has been diluted by recent Courts and by well-intentioned local officials. officials in dearborn were not caught unaware by the anti-muslim protesters, so they set up a "free-speech zone" where the protesters could gather. *chuckle* such "free-speech zone" limits near always fail legal challenges, but rare do the protester have the means or opportunity to get injunctive relief. regardless, the bigots were in their zone when the folks from the muslim festival began hurling soda cans and such at 'em. pps after re-reading, we need kinda apologize for how little we explained public forum doctrine, but is kinda confusing. is an irresponsible oversimplification to state that parks, sidewalks and streets is the only genuine public forums, but is, for all practical purposes, true. the only public property where people can expect to get full free speech protection is parks, public streets and public sidewalks. in the 1980s the Courts started using a peculiar original intent rationale to put limits on public forums. example: the founding fathers couldn't have envisioned airports and so airports were not public fora. wacky. pre 1980s, all public property were either a public forum or a closed public forum. for obvious reasons, locations such as prisons, hospitals, military bases were closed. everything else were fair game. in the past, the public forum doctrine were raised almost exclusively as a bar on the State-- can't restrict speech 'cause _______ is public. in the 80s (pre Reagan appointees actually) the Court gets creative and uses the public forum doctrine as a limit. more and more locations become categorized as either closed or limited public fora 'til now we got only streets, parks and sidewalks as traditional public fora. is very few places where an American has full free speech protections that cannot be abridged. streets, parks and sidewalks is the totality o' the list. so if you not wanna be offended, is easy to get away from the offending speech. am still indulging in almost negligent oversimplification. apologies.

we got some considerable stamina in dealing with these kinda things, but even Gromnir can only manage so long. nevertheless, ros argument contains two pet-peeves we got which has made us wanna keep at it a bit longer than is typical. the first is the inexplicable misuse o' "irony." honest, what is it 'bout irony that so confuses folks? why do people use interchangeable with curious, quixotic, hypocritical and a half-dozen other more applicable words? the other is the frequency with which we sees folks mischaracterize aspects o' the law. some people got this weird notion that the law is all just subjective gobbledygook and that lawyers finagle it however they so desire. there is grey areas in the law, but hate speech laws in europe is not fungible with euro defamation or incitement anymore than they is in the US. also, in all fairness, there were a five-page and three-day gap during which Gromnir assumed the discussion were finished. hasn't so much been "still arguing" as arguing again. ... am tempted to reference a few o' the gg thread endurance-fest arguments we saw in recent past... well, recent from our pov. al2o3 surprise is a bit curious in light o' such. but yeah, point taken. this one should've been dead awhile ago. HA! Good Fun!

while thinking o' the siege o' dragonspear expansion, we loaded up bg:ee and looked for our last save. 82 days in and it appears as if we are about to enter the ducal palace for the big brouhaha with sarevok, but is as if somebody else played the save, 'cause we recall almost nothing. 82 days means we invested many hours, but is all... fuzzy. the journal is a mess, so am not even certain if we did totsc. our party is all max level, but you can do that easy w/o totsc. am likely gonna try and finish bg, but is just so strange that we recall so very little. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna ignore your misapprehensions o' law, 'cause if you won't bother to self-educate a bit, we can't help. if you don't understand what is defamation and incitement, then you cannot hope to understand why hate crime laws is different. am just not certain why you continue to embrace ignorance. and no, am not forgetting the context o' your offensive "my ancestors and distant cousins were raping and killing your Indian ancestors" nonsense. that is precisely why we posted the link to the post. try and reimagine however you wish, but if it weren't so ridiculous and over-the-top, we likely woulda' bee offended. the actuality were that we were momentarily stupefied, but not offended... and we already responded. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66123-israel-vs-palestine/?p=1473966 *sigh* as to irony... Am sad we need repeat this, but this were your observation ‘bout irony. "That's ironic you know, that you are so opposed to hate speech laws. The Swedish hate speech laws was initially pushed by American Jewish groups, after some wacko handing out Nazi propaganda became an international embarrassment in 1948." Ok, so am thinking we are safe in assuming that ros weren’t going for Socratic or dramatic irony, ‘cause those don’t apply even with ros obtuseness working to max. gonna go with the everyday and garden-variety irony that alanis morissette and ros is seeming trying for: “incongruity between the actual event of a sequence of events and the normal or expected results.” Now, what ‘bout GD’S POSTING were incongruous with the normal and expected? Ignore your 1948 jewish-americans for the nonce (most o’ Europe ignored or harassed jews for centuries, so a few moments longer shouldn’t cause any strain,) and focus on GD. Is it actual ironic that GD is “so opposed to hate speech laws?” Has his past behavior, the sequence leading up to his posting, led you to believe that he were opposed to free speech? Let’s be magnanimous and use some kinda stereotyping to aid ros in his pursuit o’ irony—is something ‘bout GD that woulda made one guess that he would be in favor of hate crime legislation? Perhaps his race, creed or national origin misled you? Surely gd’s American citizenship did not lead you to believe that he would be in favor o’ hate speech legislation, after all, we got no hate speech laws in the US, and whenever some yutz tries to create such laws, folks like GD is fighting to prevent such from successful being passed by state and national legislatures. You personal have seen GD post for some years on these boards, so am pretty sure you can’t use your own personal interactions with GD to establish the incongruity o’ his current opposition to hate speech. Perhaps you see GD as a kinda wild-eyed, gun-toting, red-Stater who drives a big pickup and is one controversial Supreme Court decision away from starting his own militia group? Oh, wait, that is Gromnir’s image o’ GD. Regardless, whatever were your personal image o’ GD (not that such would make ironic) am doubting you genuine expected GD to support hate speech legislation. Sooooooo, now we get to the curious example o’ jewish-americans in 1948. What about jewish-americans convincing 1948 Sweden to adopt hate laws makes GD’S POSTING an unexpected result? You cannot possibly suggest that ‘cause you read an article that created a rather suspect causal link ‘tween an unspecified jewish-american group and Sweden’s adoption o’ ate laws that GD’s BEHAVIOR were transformed from expected to incongruous. Did you perhaps mean that the 1948 jewish-american’s behavior were incongruous or unexpected? No, that wouldn’t make much sense, would it? Is difficult to work up any surprise that people o’ the jewish faith would be angered by a guy promoting nazi propaganda. So, what is it ‘bout the 1948 Jewish-Americans made GD’S POSTING in opposition to hate speech a surprising? How were GD’s actions unexpected? Given GD’s past behavior or his inherent qualities, what made HIS behavior incongruous with your expectations? Now, we can see a certain black humor in your mistaken irony. After all, if sweden’s adoption o’ hate speech laws were the result o’ pressure from a jewish-american group in 1948, we cannot help but see the scenario as a monumental farce. To observe that the jewish people faced considerable bigotry across much/most o’ Europe for many centuries previous to 1948 is an understatement, but particular starting in the late 1800s, the endemic bigotry the jewish peoples faced became marked by systemic violence. Sweden weren't as bad as some nations (ain't saying much) and we get that sweden wanted to stay neutral during ww2, but given all that EUROPEAN JEWS suffered for so very long, for sweden to sudden have an epiphany about hate speech 'cause an unidentified group o' american jews 'posedly complained about a guy handing out nazi pamphlets is... *shrug* as we said, is black humor. HA! Good Fun!

Not exactly sure, but something is happening that has never happened before: it's one minority (Asians) openly revolted against another minority (Blacks). Have you seen something like this before? I haven't, certainly not in recent memory. I have a feeling that, it's just a matter of time before Asians rebel against and break away from the "rainbow coalition" on the left. am realizing that it ain't what you are talking 'bout, but pretty much every major city has regular and real violence between minority groups occurring with some frequency. crips and bloods run up against nortenos and surenos with startling frequency in many cities with sizeable black and hispanic populations. the asian gangs has weird names. am not being racist. particularly hmong/vietnamese, but other asian gangs as well, typical use three-letter abbreviations to identify their gangs. TLL. ok, now in spite o' us having read some chomsky, we know next to nothing 'bout linguistics. nevertheless, am doubting that when the rather widespread TLL gang came up with their brand, they didn't want to be know as Tiny Little Leprechauns. regardless, gang related inter-racial tensions run high in most major cities, and those gangs is often expressing anger and animosity that their law-abiding communities already got for each other. am also thinking o' the rather heated affirmative action conflicts we recall at Berkeley during the late 80s and early 90s. had some sprinkling o' white students fighting both sides, but the crowds were typical asians being opposed by every other minority group... and 'course Gromnir were ridiculed by everybody 'cause we were initially at school on an athletic scholarship. HA! Good Fun!

aside-- while we wouldn't call it ironic, am admitted surprised that given rubio's candidacy, none o' our more colorful boardies has taken the opportunity to post photos of mrs. rubio when she were a miami dolphins cheerleader. perhaps has somebody done so and we missed? admittedly, we ain't followed this thread too close til recent. anyways, just sayin. HA! Good Fun!

am genuine not certain if our azzuro issue is a bug, but at least one other person is having a similar experience. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/83695-azzuro-the-merchant/?p=1776729 in the past, when azzuro would show up in the stronghold, he were in the main keep. am not recalling which build made it possible to purchase azzuro's goods even if you did not return to the keep, but we recall having been able to do so. sadly, now we get azzuro to show and... nothing. am informed that he is present, but am not able to find him within the stronghold complex. furthermore, we no longer have the option to purchase his goods from afar. HA! Good Fun!

took you a long time to respond, and that is what you come up with? again, it still ain't irony. is a difference 'tween irony and hypocrisy. is a difference 'tween irony and simple ignorance... something don't become ironic 'cause you is wilfully obtuse. dramatic irony can happen when audience/reader is aware o' information unknown to the characters in the play/book/movie, but such use o' irony is inappropriate as you is not a character from a play. did you sudden become aware when GD posted in defense o' speech that Americans actual were serious 'bout free speech rights? as a character from a play, if you had been somehow kept in the dark about American pov o' free speech and your only previous experience were based on the 2014 article you link, then we can see ros as a character exemplifying dramatic irony. unfortunately, you are the freaking audience. you saw GUARD DOG's posting in defense o' free speech as ironic? sadly, this is a misuse o' the term. perhaps you and alanis morissette can create a support group? dunno. given that the US did not choose to suppress free speech in 1787, 1948 or 1977, or at anytime since then, it stands to reason that folks such as GD, ordinary Americans, rejected the pleas o' offended groups hundreds and even thousands o' times. were anybody on these boards genuine surprised that Gromnir and others posted in defense o' free speech rights? no? GD's behavior were the expected and quite possibly the norm. is why there were no actual surprise at behavior incongruous with what one would expect. point out jewish-americans in 1977 or 1948 were offended by nazi propaganda, or that black groups were offended by kkk rallies, or that catholics and christians were offended by jon stewart's vagina-manger does not sudden make GD's behavior ironic. thanks for final posting a link, but am also amused if you thinks we should be convinced by a swedish article from 2014 that doesn't even identify the s'posed jewish-american groups that convinced sweden to change its free speech laws... and as we already noted, the existence o' such wouldn't create irony. is also, if is accurate, it is a pretty sad commentary on swedes that they didn't follow America's lead and side with defending liberty. "Of course it would seem different, if you look at only this example. Just how dense are you, really?" all the examples is gonna be different. you already got defamation and incitement just as does the US. the US doesn't have hate speech laws. the reason why the examples is different is because defamation and incitement is fundamental different. how obtuse are you gonna be 'bout this? sweden and other euro nations had to come up with new laws 'cause your previous legal traditions did not provide a basis for criminalizing and punishing those behaviors you now, as a society, find intolerable. am sorry, but from start to finish you is simple being obtuse. your ignorance makes irony possible? so now your ignorance is justification for seeing defamation and hate speech as similar? truth is a defense against defamation, and opinion is NOT considered defamatory, even in sweden. for chrissakes, for defamation you gotta prove injury except in cases of libel where certain categories is considered inherent damaging. point out that your ancestors raped Gromnir's ancestors is not defamation. "I guess I owe people like you some kind of thanks. Hundreds of years ago, when my ancestors and distant cousins were raping and killing your Indian ancestors and stealing their land, people like you made all of that possible. I can't say it feels very good now, but I'm sure you gave those old Europeans one hell of a good time in America, at the expense of all the Indians. I'm sure my ancestors did not call your ancestors "terrorists", but there must have been other words - "savage brutes", "filthy beasts", "barbarians" - words justifying revenge attacks on your women and children for resisting your ethnic cleansing." is offensive and makes ros look bad, but ain't defamatory. the only person whose reputation were damaged when you shared such thoughts were ros. we can't show that we suffered any kinda damage. heck, we can't even claim that our feelings were hurt as the statement were utter ridiculous, but hurt feelings is not actionable... save for when re-imagined as hate crimes. even sweden's peculiar Criminal defamation laws wouldn't seem similar to hate. read actual laws and you is gonna see. call somebody, "a dirty catholic who should burn in the hell he imagined," is not gonna be criminalized defamation even in sweden. call somebody, "a dirty catholic child pornographer who should burn in the hell he imagined," is gonna get you defamation in sweden or the US. again, your defamation laws weren't enough... weren't even close. is precisely why you need hate laws to criminalize those who offend. is nothing wrong with being ignorant, but you show little interest in fixing that shortcoming. HA! Good Fun! edit: we post linky to ros' rape post just so it not seem like Gromnir did anything funny and imagine a person or group o' people making offensive comments. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66123-israel-vs-palestine/?p=1473922

am suspecting that bruce has a point... maybe not a big point, but one worth considering. recall how fervent and animated were obama before he were elected regarding the need to stop the US from spying on Americans, and to close down guantanamo. these were campaign promises that, unlike various domestic policy issues, obama did have the power to see actualized. almost eight years pass and near 100 of the guantanamo prisoners is still incarcerated at the site, and domestic spying has increased significant. why? just how dangerous must those remaining 91 in cuba be? were obama a liar who never intended to follow through on his promises? doubtful. makes one wonder what changed obama's perspective, no? am suspecting that only a small number o' folks know how great the threat o' terrorism actual is. terrorist acts prevented is subject to a great deal o' subjectivity. am also not sure what is being counted and how these folks decide that a particular threat is/were credible enough to count towards their statistics. furthermore, as shady's link shows, there is a bit o' fuzzy math and outright bamboozling going on when speaking o' USA counterterrorism success. even so, we cannot help but wonder that a President such as obama, who were no doubt genuine concerned 'bout the excesses o' the bush administration regarding attempts to curb terrorism, changed his tune considerable once coming into office. again, is hardly evidence, but is worth considering. HA! Good Fun!

Japanese Internment weren't knee jerk. Americans didn't wake up December 7, 1941 and decide that all Japanese had to be locked up for the safety o' the nation. *shrug* how 'bout a different example? in the US, cops can make searches incident to an arrest. makes sense that cops could search the person they were arresting, yes? the thing is, cops can also search those areas within the immediate reach o' the person to be arrested. so, the courts clarify and announced that if cops wanted to arrest bob in his home, even if cops didn't have a search warrant for the home, they could search drawers and shelves n' such that were w/i immediate reach o' bob. and what do you think law enforcement started to do? it became standard policy to arrest suspects in homes, and then the cops would escort the suspect from room-to-room o' the entire domicile, searching everything w/i reach. it took awhile, but the Court finally put an end to the practice o' escorting a defendant through homes to facilitate a search. law enforcement is tasked with stopping crime. law enforcement, more than the average citizen, sees criminals getting away with stuff all the time. unlike some folks on the boards, we do not see dirty cops everywhere, but cops (local, state, fed) will use every legal option available to them to apprehend those they believe is criminals... and that ain't a bad thing as long as the courts do their job. what we call reasonable suspicion or probable cause in the US is much higher standards than similarly labeled standards in virtual all o' europe, and to top it off, we got the near unique exclusionary rule and fruit of the poisonous tree which makes cops job even tougher. am understanding why cops feel hamstrung at times, and we get why so many feel justified in doing anything legal to make an arrest that sticks. the point is that if there is the possibility that a law can be abused by law enforcement, you should not be surprised when it happens. obvious solution: don't expose law enforcement to temptation. HA! Good Fun! ps to wod-- there is no Constitutional right to have a peaceful and undisturbed festival, but there is a fundamental right to free speech. am likely to muddy the waters a bit, but part o' first amendment is the public forum doctrine. if wod wants to hold an undisturbed festival, he should avoid sidewalks, streets and parks, and he should avoid making it open to the public. over-simple observation is that streets, parks and sidewalks is fair game for protesters. hold a street festival and the possibility that losers carrying pig heads and offensive placards becomes increasing likely.

I can't disagree with you more. fear has always been the greatest motivating factor in history. the terrible things we do to each other in the name o' fear is legion. am gonna avoid the obvious and overused european examples, but the US internment o' the Japanese in ww2 is a prime example o' the danger ' sacrificing liberties in the name o' safety and security. http://www.historynet.com/the-niihau-incident.htm Japanese internment were not unpopular, and many liberal-minded newspapers such as the LA Times actual wrote editorials in support o' internment before and after it occurred. peoples were afraid and they thought their fears were justified. the US government had cracked Japanese diplomatic codes which included Japanese ambassadors speculating that in the event hawaii were occupied by the Japanese, the bulk o' the hawaiian-japanese population would support the occupation. the fears were real. heck, perhaps the fears were more justified than is typical taught in US schools. even so, Japanese Internment is almost universal recognized as one o' the low points in US history... with the exception o' trump who sees Japanese internment as legitimizing some o' his more extreme immigration plans. he more liberty you willing give up, the easier it is for governments and corporations to take away your remaining liberties and freedoms. gotta learn from history. tHA! Good Fun! But Gromnir I can respect that analogy " the more liberty you willing give up, the easier it is for governments and corporations to take away your remaining liberties and freedoms " and course it is applicable. But is that Japanese example relevant? We were talking about WW2 and the fact that Japan was at war with the USA....but I am referring to a reality where the state security institutions are looking at ways to address the fact that technology is being used by Terrorist groups, so is it an invasion of liberties for the NSA to look at addressing this? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/08/justice-scalia-on-kelo-and-korematsu/ why ignore ww2? Patriot Act and the expansion of NSA role in spying on Americans were brought about 'cause o' fears resulting from 9/11. thankfully, the Court were willing to step up and squash a few excesses approved of by the President and Congress... folks like to ignore how complicit were Congress. we ain't talking 'bout a one-time event. any time we got a war or a terrorist attack, or fear of a possible terrorist attack, Gromnir weeps. the world has been relative safe in our lifetime, but there is always war and terrorist attacks and fear o' terrorist attacks. so we dilute freedoms now, when we are relative safe and what do you s'pose happens after the next 9/11 or war? add some fun the reason why james earl jones is being successful bullied in the scene from the 1992 movie sneakers is 'cause he represents the NSA, and the device (box) being referenced in the scene is a tool that would be evidence o' the NSA attempts to spy on Americans... which would be illegal and almost unthinkable in 1992. am old enough that 1992 doesn't seem that long ago. regardless, domestic terrorists is indeed a legitimate concern. next time a building or bridge gets blown up, how much more freedom does we give up, particular if laws is already in place that facilitate a diminution o' freedoms? and what is a domestic terrorist anyways? were the black panthers domestic terrorists? some computer program catches us using specific phrases too often in email or phone conversations and we get added to a list somewhere that results in a diminished standard of scrutiny when reviewing reasonable suspicion or probable cause? if the local cops, fbi, nsa or anybody else wanna read our mail or listen to our phone conversations, they should get a freaking warrant. we got a 4th Amendment that protects us from such nonsense. HA! Good Fun!

I can't disagree with you more. fear has always been the greatest motivating factor in history. the terrible things we do to each other in the name o' fear is legion. am gonna avoid the obvious and overused european examples, but the US internment o' the Japanese in ww2 is a prime example o' the danger ' sacrificing liberties in the name o' safety and security. http://www.historynet.com/the-niihau-incident.htm Japanese internment were not unpopular, and many liberal-minded newspapers such as the LA Times actual wrote editorials in support o' internment before and after it occurred. peoples were afraid and they thought their fears were justified. the US government had cracked Japanese diplomatic codes which included Japanese ambassadors speculating that in the event hawaii were occupied by the Japanese, the bulk o' the hawaiian-japanese population would support the occupation. the fears were real. heck, perhaps the fears were more justified than is typical taught in US schools. even so, Japanese Internment is almost universal recognized as one o' the low points in US history... with the exception o' trump who sees Japanese internment as legitimizing some o' his more extreme immigration plans. the more liberty you willing give up, the easier it is for governments and corporations to take away your remaining liberties and freedoms. gotta learn from history. HA! Good Fun!

Don't get me wrong, the default Eternity UI is solid, and more than functional. It's problem is it is a little... plain I guess for some, has sort of a wishy washy color/highlight on characters, at high res like 4k you can't hide the chat box, the top of the UI gets lighter which makes it blend with the background in many cases, and so on. Just niggling things nothing crazy. is a perfect fair assessment and we don't begrudge you for wanting change. if the ie mod fixes the problems you got, so much the better. nevertheless, we hardly even notice the ui anymore... which should come as no surprise given how many hours we got invested in the game. regardless, our comment weren't directed at you personal as we has seen other folks rather more animated in their displeasure with the poe ui. is difficult for Gromnir to get as emotional about the ui as those folks do, but we recognize that such people exist and that their anger is genuine. our apologies if it seemed like we were singling you out somehow. HA! Good Fun!

we do not personal identify either republican or democrat. am more libertarian than anything. that being said, in terms o' economic policy, we more frequent identify with republicans, though am actual pretty even split between republican and democrat when it comes to our personal voting history for all offices. the democrat and republican parties is frequent described as a liberal v. conservative choice. is a mistake. both major US parties is flavors of moderate. there is notable exceptions to that generalization, but for many decades the parties has offered little to distinguish one from the other in any meaningful way. example: during the 80s there were few American politicians more conservative than a typical southern democrat. as such, Gromnir votes for candidates rather than parties. as for this Presidential race... well, first o' all, keep in mind that Gromnir recognizes just how little actual power a President gots when it comes to domestic affairs. if you want meaningful domestic change to be initiated by a President, it is likely gonna occur early in his Presidency and only if he/she is of the same party as is controlling Congress. shouldn't be a surprise as is Congress that actual writes and creates all the laws, and the primary job o' any Congressman is to get reelected. a President who is elected with a mandate from the people, and who gots a sympathetic Congress, can initiate domestic change. the most important power o' a President is found nowhere in the Constitution. the President is the single most visible politician in the United States, and as such, he/she has functional power to shape the national political agenda. nevertheless, a typical President is more significant in the international sphere than domestic. warning: the following will be VERY generalized. am gonna avoid analysis o' specific plans or programs not 'cause such stuff is unimportant, but because we would be here all day explaining our self. of the remaining Presidential candidates with any likelihood o' victory, bernie sanders is the one we find most interesting. is not a particular meaningful candidate as we do not see him winning by enough o' a margin to establish the kinda mandate Congress would respond to... and if republicans hold onto Congress, most all o' bernie sanders' plans will die stillborn. free higher education and meaningful change to income inequality is unlikely to make it through Congress. is extreme tough to predict his impact on the international sphere. even so, we like the idea o' a guy from brooklyn becoming President. clinton... *sigh* am thinking that of the remaining candidates, she would be most effective at brokering international consensus. clinton is the one most likely to be able to work with european allies. her husband also has cache in the international arena. even so, we don't personal like her anymore than we liked her hubby. from a domestic policy pov, clinton is as boring a moderate democrat as is possible to imagine. ultimate condemnation: she is a politician. Americans don't trust politicians, and clinton represents more o' what we personal dislike 'bout politicians than any candidate. disingenuous and boring. trump is a cartoon character whose popularity is based on the fact that he is easily the most recognizable republican candidate, and 'cause so many Americans is sick and tired of endemic and stifling political correctness. for those folks who has lost faith in politicians such as clinton and cruz, trump is an alternative. even so, we almost universal disagree with everything trump utters and we would hate to have him being the guy trying to broker peace in the middle east or negotiating with china. cruz is a politician like clinton, but more o' a bully. we don't see him as having any genuine plans for dealing with the debt crisis or income inequality-- our two greatest domestic concerns. guy talks 'bout carpet bombing isis? if indiscriminate carpet bombing is the plan, then we might as well let putin and the russians handle the fight 'gainst isis. would save a lot o' money and all the civilian corpses could be stacked in front o' putin's door-- he don't seem to mind. bernie sanders is our first choice o' the remaining candidates who seem to have a legit chance. is hardly a ringing endorsement. HA! Good Fun!