themadhatter114

Something is only cliche if it is overused. Cliche = banal and boring. Tropes and archetypes can bring some comfort and familiarity to an otherwise unfamiliar setting, but cliches are inherently overused.

How can you question us about your perception of the game as a whole? Ask yourself why you perceived this as so bland and provide us the answer so we can agree or disagree. I wouldn't call it bland. The pacing is deliberately slow. You have time to get immersed in the world. The problems you deal with are pretty low key except for some incest. But this is a game more about a personal struggle set within a hollowborn epidemic disrupting the local economy and perverting scientific research. You get to find out the true cause of the epidemic, you get to chase the man who inadvertently caused your awakening, and you get to learn some startling revelations about the nature of the gods. These things were all presented in an interesting manner without being melodramatic but without banality. The companions are pretty low key as well. One is spying on you and dealing with his own minor awakening, another just needs to get out of Gilded Vale and wants to know if he fought in the wrong side of the war. The NPCs are generally just traveling companions without their own melodrama. Grieving Mother is drawn to you through her own unconscious recollection of her time as a faux Watcher and she believes you are the one who can help end Waidwen's Legacy. But mostly they just need a friend and ally and they have your back. It's not bland just because it avoids making every issue feel epic. You're not traveling with an heir to the throne and the mother of an Old God. You're not traveling with the warlord of an entire species or the man who crippled their reproductive systems. Dialing back the epic and makes for a well-paced story and makes the extraordinary actually feel extraordinary. Just like with tv, sometimes it's okay for a show where every single event is epic and over the top, and sometimes I want something a little more grounded and deliberately paced.

Was the Hollowborn epidemic going to end regardless of the players actions? Did Thaos have enough souls for he already? Woedica doesn't seem like she was getting shorted when you gave her the available souls and ended the continued gathering of more souls. Was killing Thaos a completely hollow act if you take that ending, or would Woadoca eventually need more souls?

Let me think about this for a moment, NO! Are you insane? I am against gun control, but having every person with a gun, and with there being more than a few trigger happy people out there, That would be an immensely STUPID idea. Frankly that is the stupidest idea I have read so far here. The police is there to keep the peace, to arrest criminals, and to maintain order. If we remove the police and let everyone have a gun and "police" themselves we would have total and complete anarchy. Yeah, towns should probably be able to pass local taxes to support a police force. But everyone should have their own guns and be ready to defend themselves, especially against the police when the time comes. Are you stupid? Do you know how many towns in this country have a volunteer fire department? In my home county there are 3 volunteer fire departments, and they all have fundraisers to buy equipment and for training, and they all do an excellent job. But, yes, in a city, it's important to have full-time fire department paid for by city funds. I don't want the government to have any more interest in legislating my consumption habits than they already do.

My main reasoning for being against government-funded health care is that, once the government has a vested interest in your health, they then assume the power to legislate your health. I'm just so excited to see all the Nazi tactics they use to combat the "obesity epidemic." It will be so awesome if we have socialized medicine and then the Center for Science in the Public Interest gets taken seriously!

After 8 years of Bush and Republican leadership, and seeing where it brought us, why would I even want another 4 years of a Republican White House? Also I don't get why you are so against socialized medicine. It works quite well in Canada and the U.K.. Are you against other socialized emergency services such as police and fire departments? Imagine that you had to "pay" a police officer to investigate a break in to your home or to investigate an an assault charge. Imagine if you had to pay the fire department yourself to put out a fire at your home. Imagine the need to make a payment for a 911 call. Only major credit cards accepted! Or, or, imagine this. Perhaps you could get yourself a gun and protect yourself and tell the police to go to hell since protecting you is NOT their job. As for fire departments, localities could institute a 'fire tax' to maintain a fire department. Or they could have a volunteer fire department, which is what just about every small town has. The same could be done with police, or you could hire a private investigator, or, as I said, you could buy a gun and leave the cops out of the equation.

Amusingly, a New York Times poll found that 49% of Republican delegates at the convention supported either gay marriage or civil unions. But I don't see anywhere that Palin has stated anything about gay marriage. The only reference to it I've seen is in her gubernatorial debate when she made reference to the 1998 Alaskan Constitutional amendment defining marriage. Marriage should not be defined as "two individuals who love and cherish each other to the point they are committed to each other in both a spiritual and physical bond." That's just silly. The church should define marriage however they want, and the government shouldn't define marriage at all. Gay couples should have no more privilege than cohabiting siblings or best friends. Nor should married couples.

The amusing thing about the Republicans trying to separate her from the AIP is that the AIP and the Republicans are pretty friendly in Alaska. The Republican who tried to remove the leader of the Troopergate investigation is the son of the former AIP chairman. Her flirtation with the AIP is a huge plus for me. Has Palin ever made a statement against civil unions? Marriage is defined in Alaska's Constitution as between a man and a woman. Therefore denying spousal benefits to gay couples is not a discrimination issue. Gay couples are no more deserving of spousal benefits than cohabiting siblings. Of course, in my view, they should all be the same. Gay civil unions are the undoing of marriage as a social institution. But if the government would simply stay out of the marriage debate altogether, it would be so much better. But what views on foreign policy, health care, or the economy have Palin even expressed so far? I understand if you're simply saying you're against the McCain ticket, or the Republicans, but stating specifically that you are opposed to Palin's views when she has not expressed those views is a little silly. I don't expect to get to know her actual views, though. Right now she's being given the McCain party line and will have to stick with it. Honestly I think Palin is an isolationist at heart. She preaches energy independence and I'd say that's because she wants to get the hell out of other countries. She was singing Ron Paul's praises during the Republican primaries. Though I wouldn't be surprised if her views will put her in the pro-Israel lobby.

The amusing thing about the Republicans trying to separate her from the AIP is that the AIP and the Republicans are pretty friendly in Alaska. The Republican who tried to remove the leader of the Troopergate investigation is the son of the former AIP chairman. Her flirtation with the AIP is a huge plus for me. Has Palin ever made a statement against civil unions? Marriage is defined in Alaska's Constitution as between a man and a woman. Therefore denying spousal benefits to gay couples is not a discrimination issue. Gay couples are no more deserving of spousal benefits than cohabiting siblings. Of course, in my view, they should all be the same. Gay civil unions are the undoing of marriage as a social institution. But if the government would simply stay out of the marriage debate altogether, it would be so much better. But what views on foreign policy, health care, or the economy have Palin even expressed so far? I understand if you're simply saying you're against the McCain ticket, or the Republicans, but stating specifically that you are opposed to Palin's views when she has not expressed those views is a little silly. I don't expect to get to know her actual views, though. Right now she's being given the McCain party line and will have to stick with it. Honestly I think Palin is an isolationist at heart. She preaches energy independence and I'd say that's because she wants to get the hell out of other countries. She was singing Ron Paul's praises during the Republican primaries. Though I wouldn't be surprised if her views will put her in the pro-Israel lobby.

Even so, it's still essentially the same either way. The study found that students that went through abstinence-only programs didn't seem to have less sex, but they seemed to use contraception just as often.

That is my view of her and I am not going to change it and I will not be voting for her. I don't care whether or not you are voting for her. But yet you still cling to a view of her that is based entirely on lies. There are interviews from February on Youtube where Palin is talking about her focus on helping Alaska become more self sufficient. One way to do this was to try to balance the state budget and cut unnecessary spending. However, yes, she had before shown support for the bridge project. Then despite the stink everyone raised about the Bridge to Nowhere, Congress gave them the money, anyway, though they'd removed the actual earmark. It wasn't enough money, so Palin decided to use the federal money on more fundamental infrastructure issues and has been discussing a more fiscally responsible way to provide access to the island. Not a big deal as far as I'm concerned, but I do honestly wish the McCain campaign would stop hyping it up since the story is different from what they claim, but it's not really a flip-flip, either. At least, what happened wasn't a flip-flop, really, but the way the campaign is presenting it is.

not to nitpick buuut... nearly all of these are news articles, which means little, and the first is a report by a democratic congressman, which hardly constitutes a scientific study. this one, http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publication...tabstinence.pdf, however, is truly a comprehensive study and it found no difference between the control and program groups for just about any category. i.e., your terminology is incorrect, or at least exaggerated, but it would seem (based on the comprehensive mpr study), that abstinence programs don't do much either way, which is not a surprise. i'm quite certain sex education in schools doesn't do much regardless of how it is taught, IMO. taks PS: again, i should add, studies such as these are incapable of assessing cause and effect, only correlation. He's already been called out on this. When asked for statistics that show abstinence-only is worse than other programs, he simply posts a list of studies that show no difference or articles that simply complain about people lying in sex education classes. Unfortunately comprehensive sex ed classes lie, too.

We have done so well in the US with Christian Conservatives in power. OH YES WE HAVE! *takes a good look at Bush* Christian Conservatives are stuck in 19th and 20th century mode of thinking. Sorry, but it is true. This is the 21st century and we need 21st century leadership. We need forward thinking people, progressives, in power, not those who use antiquated beliefs and traditions to influence national and state level policy. I don't mind fiscal conservatism. In fact I am all for it. However social conservatism needs to go the way of Jimmy Hoffa. You are dodging the issue. You want to trash her for being a Christian conservative but you will not take responsibility for being completely dishonest about her views.

Yes, the first link is a blog. That blog happens to link to news stories for verification about how he clarified most of the rumours. In particular, you can find the full text of her prayer, or a video. Which is why I would expect someone who is going to comment on that particular story to actually check up on it. Hell, it's number 23, the quote's directly from the NY Times.

Funny, what she definitely says is that she doesn't consider condoms part of explicit sex education and that children should learn about condoms in other avenues if not at home. So, her statement saying "Explicit sex ed programs will not find my support" is now clear that she is not saying that comprehensive sex education programs will not find her support. So now will you blame comprehensive sex education for failing Bristol Palin? And, as I expected, you didn't even both to read the first link. She did not claim that our troops are on a task from God. She was giving a standard "pray for the troops" plea and hoping that God had some plan. Beyond that, Palin's public commentary about the Iraq War up until her announcement as VP candidate were statements about how we needed an exit plan. It is clear that you and others have no interest in learning who this woman truly is and only wish to trash her for being a Christian and for being a conservative. There are avenues of criticism you could take, but you are clearly disingenuous and your point of view on the matter is apparently unchanged by things like facts.