m308gunner

Happy New Year VGS!

I want to like them more than I actually like them. A few songs I enjoy, but nothing I would seek out. Interviews I've seen of Dave actually make me like them more, but musically they are pretty bleh. And I would actually pick Nickelback over Foo Fighters if they were playing on the radio at the same time.

Put the kids to bed and try to beat TMNT again. Then wake them up just before midnight so they can experience it (and probably wonder why we make a big deal of it).

Love seeing this type of stuff. Thanks for sharing!

Welcome to the party pal! Look forward to engaging in some commerce.

Twas a hard but good year/decade. Whatever may come, be it good or ill...

Congrats gentlemen!

I'll give you this, you love to ask big questions. Even the question "what do you really believe"... a forum like this is too small to fully explore that idea, even when constrained to the issue at hand, because it is so multifaceted. Politics dips it's tentacles into pretty much every facet of modern life (to all our ill I would say) so I'll try to keep things constrained, but prepare for a waist high wall of text regardless. And I'm not sure how one come's to any opinion of worth apart from the input of others, considering how finite and constrained our own experiences are, but I digress. The crux of the matter, and why you may think it "not valid" is that I do not subscribe to any type of "purity test" for anyone outside of my everyday personal sphere (and many of those in it, but that would be a huge tangent). I have a personal moral standard for myself and a detached pragmatic standard for when I view Trump. People can be horrible and still do good things, because life is not a comic book or movie and does not adhere to such simplistic modes of conduct or analysis, especially in the political realm. You can assume something about someone's character, but unless you can somehow read that person's mind you don't really know in any given circumstance what they are thinking or what their motives are. You can often come to a reasonable conclusion, given a person's history or policy choices, but that is not a sure road down Personal Conviction Lane. You can't know definitively. (And with Trump, I'd be inclined to think he doesn't have any personal convictions apart from "what can this do for me".) Which is why I haven't completely ignored Californication. I don't know for sure what is going through his mind, what his life experiences have been, what he's been subjected to (or not subjected to) so I always have to leave room for doubt. I've always tried to leave him an escape hatch. Even when his conduct would lead me to believe otherwise. And if you ever see someone treat an individual a certain way because of their perceived group identity ("he's a Trump follower!") then what does that say about that person? "Look! He's a *fill in the blank*! He must be *fill in the blank* and think/act like all the other *fill in the blank*!" We've seen that ideology played out many times in the past century. Has it ever produced good results? They're taking the perceived actions of a group and transplanting them onto an individual. Charitably, I think the old term for that would be "scapegoat", but there are more accurate/worse terms for the situation. And you seem to indicate that that is the reason Californication is treating me the way he has, but I'll leave that there. And that is where the left has gone off the rails in recent years. They are completely assured of their own moral, philosophical and informational correctness. There is no room for doubt (because they also tend more towards the emotional side of the spectrum). They are "true believers" and to hell with the heretics. They have become the new puritans (oh the irony). Which is not to say that each individual that identifies themselves with the left is of equal character (it is a broad brush I am painting with), but when grouped together certain ideologies tend to come to the forefront and gain the most attention. As for your characterization of "the majority of his followers", how are you measuring that exactly? Do those you see as rude and violent make up the majority or are they the loud minority? We've been constantly told that the nutbags on Twitter that try to get people fired or cancelled for failing some purity test or other are the "vocal minority", but per your standard can we now judge the left by the actions of Antifa? The president is not, nor ever has been, my moral compass or role model. No elected leader should be for anyone in this day and age. I am not on Trump's "team", but I will confess that I find him amusing on occasion and frustrating on others. He is, however, a direct reaction to the left's years of overzealous activism. In a very real sense they created him. Finally, to hopefully dispel what seems to be a constant refrain, I do not watch Fox News (or any old dusty media company who's sole purpose is profit) and I don't visit Breitbart (had to google the spelling). Those sources I do listen to are up front about their biases and range from far left-ish to almost far right. And if I could put them all in a room I'm pretty sure they'd get along just fine.

Trust me. I'm a professional. *burp*

I'll be your huckleberry.

My God... we actually agree on something... QUICK jot down the time and date!

*sigh* You seem incapable of carrying on a conversation without eventually relying on slander and/or insults. This is at least the second time you've done this to me personally in this thread. I think any casual observer could see that I've been trying to keep things civil and given you the benefit of the doubt, but you don't seem to be operating on the same level with me. I understand you may feel frustrated, but you're making it as hard as possible to come to a consensus on this issue. I never "made you get articles that specifically point out the law". That's on you. You may have felt that I implied something to that effect, but AGAIN, refer to my previous posts on the subject of Trump's personal vs our nation's interests. And I don't have to accept your opinion, just as you don't have to accept (or apparently read) mine. And in the context of the article you linked I pointed out a few portions that seem to indicate that nobody has all the information they need to come to a definitive conclusion on this matter, so stop making declarative statements that sound like established concrete facts. There is not "one piece of information" that I have been relying on. Not in our interactions, and certainly not in the scope of this entire thread.

In regards to your aversion to the video format I linked I understand your feelings about the presentation and accept that it isn't for everyone.

Man I'm waiting for mine to arrive like...

Ah, I see. Well, you do you.

I don't think I argued either way about the legality of Trump temporarily withholding the aid, but feel free to quote where I did. Learning is fun. I've maintained that as long as Trump's goal aligned with our national interests I'm fine with how thing went down. Also, from the article you linked: "At present, it is unclear whether OMB withheld the money in a manner consistent with its legal obligations. Without drawing any definitive conclusions, this post explains the complex legal underpinnings of the issue about which Congress seeks information." And from Dick Durbin (emphasis added), "... They were withholding these funds that had been appropriated and signed into law by the President until the last two weeks of the fiscal year. That’s crazy. It hardly ever happens." "Whether there is some good legal or other explanation for the long delay in releasing the money is a question that lacks a clear answer, and that might remain unanswered indefinitely if Congress cannot get its hands on the requested documents." There are other passages that seem to indicate there's more wiggle room legally (lawyers will be lawyers), but I would have thought if there was something the Democrats could hang their hat on it would have been more clearly defined in their articles of impeachment. Color me unimpressed until we get more information. Also, most Americans who haven't been baying for Trump's blood since his inauguration probably give less of a toss than I do. Pretty sure the president not obeying an obscure law/code/ordinance ranks pretty low on their daily list of concerns or how they would rate his performance.

So I got a friend of mine the SNES Classic Mini for Christmas. Was super excited, and started off playing Mariokart. Then during a bathroom break I tried out Mega Man X, and thought I noticed some controller lag. Anyone else able to chime in or verify if it is a thing?

"You check that door for heat Tim?" -Backdraft To this day, I check every door

Post Christmas depression bump

To take alot of paaaaain, take a lot of pain...

You ever make a video of a walk through of your game room? From the pics it looks like it would be good time.

TMNT on the NES. I forgot how dang catchy the tunes are in this game. I also forgot how friggin' hard it is. And yeah, I picked it back up because of cinemasacre

I still check the smoldering remains every once in a while and I saw your post. Glad someone (Mae247) pointed you in the right direction. Welcome to VGS!

I'm glad to see someone use the NES homebrew scene to address such a serious topic and await the download. Thanks!