|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Majik Mouf wrote:
Seeing all you people jump all over that guy, slamming him left and right for nothing at all is making me want to vote for Trump just to spite you all.
Sadly, as pointless as that would be (as we have no way of knowing how you voted, or why), that is far from the worst reason I've seen someone give to explain voting for Trump.
Which, if you think about it, is really kinda scary.
Majik Mouf wrote:
This is why Paizo is (rightly) perceived as an liberal echo chamber.
Hey, we don't all have an entertainment -- sorry, "news" -- network devoted entirely to being our echo chamber. Some of us have to make do.
To me, the fundamental Libertarian point-of-view is "As few constraints on individual rights as possible." Which is sensible, but only with the caveat that "as possible" includes ensuring that the rights of others aren't violated.
As to whether the actual Libertarian party actually supports that idea, I cannot say. But nonsense about poisoning other people is just that: Nonsense. Murdering someone obviously violates their rights (hence my mention of "irrational extremes").
It is also possible my understanding of "Libertarian" is fundamentally flawed. :)
I see that Trump is still saying he'll do (help the working class) the exact opposite of what he has actually done (screw the working class...e.g. use Chinese steel, offshore jobs, use dodgy visas to avoid hiring Americans). That isn't really surprising. What's more surprising is that the working class still appears to believe him.
Dear working class:
News flash: Trump is going to lose. Lucky for you, his impending loss is in your best interest...whether you realize it or not.
Quark Blast wrote:
They might be funded locally, but they have to buy all those shiny military surplus weapons and equipment somewhere.
So when I hear those politicians telling me what I didn't do, my response is, "I paid for all those infrastructure projects, and then paid for all your double dealing time wasting favors, pork barrel projects, and slush funds (to your friends) on top of that. Don't tell me what I didn't build until you clean up your own messes."
Look, I sympathize. Government can and does get out of control. But surely you realize that your business benefits from services provided by the government? Public schools, the highway system, courts, jails, police, firefighters, food and transportation safety, etc. Yes, you help pay for those things TODAY. But your businesses benefited from all of them from the moment they existed, and you personally benefited before that. Is it really so unreasonable to expect that you and your businesses pay taxes now? Or do you imagine that your view of the "free market" is somehow the natural state of mankind, existing with no social contract? Because I assure you it isn't. :P
Sorry if it seems like I'm overly critical, but your implied argument that taxes = theft is one I've simply never understood. Or perhaps I misunderstood?
Except the government acts for and by the will of the people, for the collective good, while businesses act for their own enrichment. Obviously government isn't perfect, and abuses occur, but the purpose and goals of government are drastically different from those of a business (legitimate or otherwise). As such, the government is afforded certain powers not available to private industry. And rightly so.
I took the bait and answered your question. You can imagine what you like. He takes risks, they win/lose - typical venture capital loses 9/10 times. If you can run a company without any risk - you should try to get it funded. I've lost twice on customers due to bankruptcy over a period of 25years. Assess risk, take your losses, and move on.
Only he takes risks with other's people's money. He's not playing by the rules that you imagine he is.
Flip mats all the way. The only map packs I would consider worth getting are the ones designed to fit together multiple ways (the dungeon stuff, mainly).
I always thought a series of tiles of, say, forest features would go great with plain flip-mat of the same texture. Then you could place features without worrying about lining up tiles. It's probably hard to get the color to match up just so, though, which would be an absolute necessity.
Of course, of course, I'm a big giant racist for believing in dissenting thought. I should just agree with you on all on topics. I'm just a big racist because it fits the narrative you make in your head. I'm the one that needs to see a psych, I have the problem. Only liberals have opinion that matters.
Get over yourself.
We all believe in your right to hold and express an opinion. Just as we have a right to respond to that opinion. No one is going to arrest you for being wrong, but you can be damn sure they're going to tell you you're wrong. That's the entire point of free speech.
You're not the victim. That would be the girl on the bike.
That you apparently believe that serves as evidence that your position isn't racist is rather telling.
But yeah, Fergie. I'm done here.
They didnt assault her at all. How about this, when a cop questions you next time, you tell him to f@#$ off and walk away.
What is wrong with you? THEY PERPPER-SPRAYED A CHILD FOR CONVENIENCE AND/OR AMUSEMENT!
I strongly suspect you'd feel differently if that child was yours. Or even simply had the good sense to NOT BE BLACK. >:(
My bad. I was being sarcastic, but apparently that wasn't obvious.
That was a child. Who had apparently collided with a car on her bike. The police escalated the conflict (the opposite of what they're supposed to) for no apparent reason. Then they PEPPER-SPRAYED a child who was zero threat to anyone, which was completely unnecessary. Or maybe you think she's lucky they didn't just shoot her? Is that clear enough sarcasm for you?
She likely had very good reasons to fear the police going in...now she has one more.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Some of us maybe just aren't that resigned to the fate our corporate masters have decreed.
If you have a viable alternative, I'm all ears.
And for the record, I'm probably the last person that would be accused of being pro-corporation. I'm just tired of people who somehow want to not vote, but then refuse to accept responsibility for the outcome. You don't vote, you have no credibility if you don't like what you get.
Syrus Terrigan wrote:
Of course, because silencing any dissent is the only good thing to do.
...said no one in this thread. But we've been having the same argument for pages and page.
Your dislike of the choice we face -- Clinton vs. Trump -- is irrelevant. On November 8th, one or the other of these people will be elected president. That may suck, but that's how it is.
If given the choice between a person who pushed to remove their jobs and factories, and someone telling them they are going to bring the factories back, who do you think they will pick? Is anyone really surprised?
Since Trump is a poster boy for the lassiez-faire capitalist class -- you know, the people who actually shipped the jobs away -- yes, I'm surprised. Anyone paying any attention at should know that Trump is part of the problem, not the solution.
The fact is that it is overwhelmingly likely that either Trump or Clinton will be the next president. Pick one. Or don't. But ultimately, your reasons for doing so don't matter...if you're eligible and able to vote, but choose not to, you own the outcome.
In other words...if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. :P
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
No, I don't.
Too bad. I thought one round of out-of-context sniping deserved another.
The primary is over. Bernie lost. You can either help Clinton get elected -- even if just by voting got her -- or you can plug your ears, hold your breath, and do nothing. Which helps Trump get elected. Of course, it allows you to pat yourself on the back for ideological purity, which is easier (and safer!) than supporting something that has a snowball's chance in hell of actually happening (unlike, say, Communism in the United States).
At which point you might as well stop playing Pathfinder at all. It's not a game about realism. Even martials are heroic enough they can do unrealistic things. Whether that's small characters taking on medium sized ones or medium ones fighting giants.
Someone posed the question "why all the small race hate?"
I answered by pointing out that it not hate, necessarily, but people having trouble suspending their disbelief with respect to something with which they have direct personal experience (ever wrestle with your six-year-old nephew?). On the other hand, not many people have direct personal experience wrestling with a giant or a dragon, and therefore probably don't have that same trouble with suspension of disbelief.
Your response to that is to say that Pathfinder is a fantasy game, and that if you can't suspend your disbelief in this particular case, then you shouldn't play at all?
Sorry, but that's bunk. Exclusionary bunk, to boot. >:(
Back in 2014, Obama already had twenty supreme court cases where all nine justices ruled against him -- even the justices he appointed. That's pretty clear proof that he's not qualified to sit on the court.
It's nothing of the kind.
First, I"m not even sure what "rule against him" even means. Did they rule his existence Unconstitutional? Or just say they really didn't like the guy? Second, why on earth would that prove he's not qualified? Is a lawyer who loses a case therefore never qualified to be a judge?
Here's a far, far more likely alternative: You're not qualified to judge his qualifications. :P