Obama started strong, but McCain literally rode his ass during the hour of foreign policy. When Obama responded to McCain with "Excuse me, excsue me, I have a response - I have a wristband too!" I laughed so hard I cried. Win for McCain in my eyes, as well as the eyes of the undecideds I was watching it with. In the words of one of them, Obama seemed like a mildly retarded child when compared to McCain. Honestly, from how Obama did speeches, I was expecting him to hold his ground a little better - he was visibly pissed the entire debate, and he seemed unable to string an entire sentence together without stuttering.
Not that I expect you all to agree - after all, 99% of sally are Obama fanatics =P
...or the implications of its upcoming election, but I would like to.
I'd wager that the answer to this question is "nothing"
In all seriousness, though, what possible changes could this really bring to canada, let alone the world (none)? Just a cursory glance at both the political climate in the country and the left slant of... everything? I find it hard to believe that any change (and none positive) could come of this - though I'm no pro.
yawg: I'm using liquitex acrylics, but I've got tube pigments - how much would I need to dilute them with water and/or gel base to get them to stay opaque but thin on a magic card? I just can't seem to get a good ratio of base to pigment to show up well on the card
At any rate, someone above called Illinois one of the most corrupt areas in the country.
Alaska is the most corrupt, so the argument against Obama there is really moot.
Hodoku, trickle-down economics haven't done anything for the economy in the past 8 years, so why would they start now? Bush thought the stimulus thing would help the economy, but people just paid bills with it.
By rolling back the tax cuts on the rich (250k plus, not McCains definition of 6million) more money could be pumped into the starved government which has already been sucked dry repeatedly by the Iraq war.
The rich aren't suffering from the poor economy, sorry. They are the ones who can position themselves to gain, if anyone.
Two bits: Palin went into politics to cut down on corruption, Obama is friends with the ones responsible for it.
The government is starved because 66% of our budget goes to deprecated social service programs and interest on debt. Cutting welfare and medicaid, as well as corporate taxes (we have one of the highest and the most disproportionate in the world) paying off debt, and doubling our education budget is the way to improve the country - throwing money at a mentally crippled lower class through tax cuts does nothing but cycle the cash back into the government thru taxes and does not give money to anyone that is capable of creating jobs.
This entirely depends on the persons/organizations from which the money is taken and the programs to which it is assigned. The most sustained and dramatic period of economic expansion in this country, namely the postwar boom, took place in a period of extraordinarily high tax rates for the rich and fairly high rates for everyone else. A great deal of that income was channeled to aid the great expansion of the middle class, and ultimately the economy benefited greatly, at least until the entire edifice began collapsing in the 1970s. At this point, old-fashioned Keynesian policies are fairly impractical, given the drastic changes that have taken place in our economic structure, but you're still wrong to categorically assert that increasing taxes will always harm the economy.
But nowadays, the money would be going to a terrible healthcare program and tax cuts to the lower class that will cycle back into the government thru taxes. While saying that taxes ALWAYS hurt the economy is a bit of an exaggeration, it is far from inaccurate in this situation.
Regardless, it still marks a candidate as conservative. Most liberals are of the opinion that the "let's talk about this later" argument in regards to minority rights is merely a coy way of expressing socially conservative tendencies.
Fair enough, though I'd be FINE with it being brought up in more economically favorable times (not that I wouldn't argue against it, just that right now ISNT the time).
I'm curious as to what you're referring to here, since I've never heard of it. There is a preexisting ban on partial-birth abortions, so what you describe should never occur. In regards to the more prevalent and relevant methods of abortion, however, a firmly negative stance is still a position that betrays a socially conservative mindset.
Second-trimester abortions can be botched, resulting in a viable baby being born. Obama refused to pass a law that would demand medical care for those children (using a trivial excuse), essentially allowing the doctor and mother to toss the newborn into a dumpster.
If you were balling out into a sweeper, that is a play mistake and is entirely your fault, dude O_o
The ONLY genuinely difficult matchup I've seen for the deck is Demigod Deck wins - against control we have a 3-power 2-drop, and a 2-power one drop, as well as tokens and hard-to-kill pump, and 7!!! Manlands. Against aggro, we ball out and laugh. Where is the problem?
As usual, here is a batch of things white should get:
Taxes! W(R)
Enchantment
Spells cost 1 more to play.
Fair Play 2WW(R) Enchantment
As an addtional cost to play a spell, that spells controller must gain a spell counter.
Players with spell counters cannot play spells.
If there are no spells on the stack and each player has a spell counter, remove all spell counters from all players.
And a red bonus!
Tear and Toss 2RR(U)
Instant
As an additonal cost to play ~, sacrifice a creature.
~ deals damage equal to sacrificed creature's power to target creature and target player.
W00t! Undefeated at FNMZ, using 3x Vigor and 3X Troll Ascetic in the board - both awesome beatsticks against red, and sealing me two whole rounds against em!
right hand: TOOO busy. I know it interacts with left hand, but the sac ability is nearly useless otherwise, and alone it is completely unelegant.
Left Hand: Intersting and fair. Works well against control, though again, the creature clause is kinda boring =/
Passion: WTF?! Insanely overpowered. I recall a recent thread where someone designed a white 2/2 with protection from nonwhite that was deemed "powerful" at WWW - this is just ridiculous, and insanely over the cuve by ANY standard (hurr hurr, no mass removal? I win!) A red phantom warrior with shroud and immunity to anything but wrath of god is NOT fair at 3 mana. Try RRRRRR for a 3/1
Red doesn't beat you as hard if you make the right trades and play the right cards. That's why I play anthem over champion, they can't kill it. If they wanna Flame Javelin your Vanquisher, let 'em, that's 4 damage not hitting your face. Overall just stall out until you overwhelm them, it's not too tough.
The problem is twofold:
- Their threats are bigger
- They have removal
We have smaller threats and no removal, and the usual ability of elf-ball to out-aggro another deck is completely stifled by the fact that they can burn out your druid before you ever get a chance to do anything. I might be playing the matchup wrong, but for the love of me, I can't figure out what we can board against them and how to effectively play, ESPECIALLY on the draw (which sucks). Perhaps I just need to test more against red, but I kinda want to pull a merfolk and splash white for lark and forge tender in the board
So yeah. Notes: Red SUCKS for us. Worst matchup by far IMO. Won 2-0 against Lark, Faeries, Faeries and QnT, and lost miserably to Red in the final round. Vigor was NUTS the game I got him out turn 3, but beside that, He is unimpressive. Colossus was okay, nothing crazy, but okay. Bowmaster was insane, won me both faeries g2's - if they had no terror for him, he was a reaper king for elves. So dumb, esp. coming out t2 off of a mana elf.
In the end: Red sucks, everything else is winnable. We need a side against red... splash white for pro-red kithkins?
Not that I expect you all to agree - after all, 99% of sally are Obama fanatics =P
I'd wager that the answer to this question is "nothing"
In all seriousness, though, what possible changes could this really bring to canada, let alone the world (none)? Just a cursory glance at both the political climate in the country and the left slant of... everything? I find it hard to believe that any change (and none positive) could come of this - though I'm no pro.
Two bits: Palin went into politics to cut down on corruption, Obama is friends with the ones responsible for it.
The government is starved because 66% of our budget goes to deprecated social service programs and interest on debt. Cutting welfare and medicaid, as well as corporate taxes (we have one of the highest and the most disproportionate in the world) paying off debt, and doubling our education budget is the way to improve the country - throwing money at a mentally crippled lower class through tax cuts does nothing but cycle the cash back into the government thru taxes and does not give money to anyone that is capable of creating jobs.
But nowadays, the money would be going to a terrible healthcare program and tax cuts to the lower class that will cycle back into the government thru taxes. While saying that taxes ALWAYS hurt the economy is a bit of an exaggeration, it is far from inaccurate in this situation.
Fair enough, though I'd be FINE with it being brought up in more economically favorable times (not that I wouldn't argue against it, just that right now ISNT the time).
Second-trimester abortions can be botched, resulting in a viable baby being born. Obama refused to pass a law that would demand medical care for those children (using a trivial excuse), essentially allowing the doctor and mother to toss the newborn into a dumpster.
The ONLY genuinely difficult matchup I've seen for the deck is Demigod Deck wins - against control we have a 3-power 2-drop, and a 2-power one drop, as well as tokens and hard-to-kill pump, and 7!!! Manlands. Against aggro, we ball out and laugh. Where is the problem?
Anyways, my girlfriend actually came up with this list after playtesting for a while, much to my surprise:
3 Keldon Megaliths
21 Snow-Covered Mountain
Creatures - 12
4 Figure of Destiny
4 Boggart Ram-Gang
4 Ashenmoor Gouger
4 Demigod of Revenge
4 Skred
4 Lash Out
4 Incinerate
4 Flame Javelin
3 Sulfurous Blast
1 Rekindled Flame
No board yet, but I imagine It'd be pretty simple.
Taxes! W (R)
Enchantment
Spells cost 1 more to play.
Fair Play 2WW (R)
Enchantment
As an addtional cost to play a spell, that spells controller must gain a spell counter.
Players with spell counters cannot play spells.
If there are no spells on the stack and each player has a spell counter, remove all spell counters from all players.
And a red bonus!
Tear and Toss 2RR (U)
Instant
As an additonal cost to play ~, sacrifice a creature.
~ deals damage equal to sacrificed creature's power to target creature and target player.
I designed the exact same card, sans name, all the way down the the creature types
Oh, and mine was rare
Left Hand: Intersting and fair. Works well against control, though again, the creature clause is kinda boring =/
Passion: WTF?! Insanely overpowered. I recall a recent thread where someone designed a white 2/2 with protection from nonwhite that was deemed "powerful" at WWW - this is just ridiculous, and insanely over the cuve by ANY standard (hurr hurr, no mass removal? I win!) A red phantom warrior with shroud and immunity to anything but wrath of god is NOT fair at 3 mana. Try RRRRRR for a 3/1
4 Heritage Druid
4 Llanowar Elves
4 Nettle Sentinel
4 Bramblewood Paragon
4 Wren's Run Vanquisher
4 Imperious Perfect
2 Reveillark
Spells - 13
4 Gaea's Anthem
3 Gilt-Leaf Ambush
4 Hunting Triad
2 Overrun
3 Mutavault
3 Treetop Village
4 Brushland
4 Wooded Bastion
1 Pendelhaven
6 Forest
4 Burreton Forge-Tender
3 Lys Alana Bowmaster
2 Wheel of Sun and Moon
3 Elvish Hexhunter
3 Krosan Grip
The problem is twofold:
- Their threats are bigger
- They have removal
We have smaller threats and no removal, and the usual ability of elf-ball to out-aggro another deck is completely stifled by the fact that they can burn out your druid before you ever get a chance to do anything. I might be playing the matchup wrong, but for the love of me, I can't figure out what we can board against them and how to effectively play, ESPECIALLY on the draw (which sucks). Perhaps I just need to test more against red, but I kinda want to pull a merfolk and splash white for lark and forge tender in the board
4 Heritage Druid
4 Llanowar Elves
4 Nettle Sentinel
4 Bramblewood Paragon
4 Wren's Run Vanquisher
4 Imperious Perfect
2 Elvish Champion
3 Gilt-Leaf Ambush
3 Harmonize
3 Overrun
4 Hunting Triad
Lands - 21
1 Pendelhaven
4 Mutavault
3 Treetop Village
13 Forest
3 Vigor
4 Lys Alana Bowmaster
4 Elvish Hexhunter
2 Krosan Grip
2 Chameleon Colossus
So yeah. Notes: Red SUCKS for us. Worst matchup by far IMO. Won 2-0 against Lark, Faeries, Faeries and QnT, and lost miserably to Red in the final round. Vigor was NUTS the game I got him out turn 3, but beside that, He is unimpressive. Colossus was okay, nothing crazy, but okay. Bowmaster was insane, won me both faeries g2's - if they had no terror for him, he was a reaper king for elves. So dumb, esp. coming out t2 off of a mana elf.
In the end: Red sucks, everything else is winnable. We need a side against red... splash white for pro-red kithkins?