Eviora

How many candy bars have you eaten in your life?

How many times did I sneeze yesterday?

Tough one. In no particular order: Tales of Symphonia, Golden Sun: The Lost Age, Megaman Anniversary Collection (cheating, I know), World of Warcraft, and Portal 2 There isn't one. Espeon

I'm an attention whore, so I decided I'd play, too.

I haven't actually played the first five Fire Emblems before (I generally don't emulate games), so I don't know what I'll be getting into character-wise with this game. I do hope they give the same treatment to some of the other old FE games that haven't yet been remade, though. It would be nice to actually play FE6 in English. Also, I'm a wimp and generally just play casual mode. FE 7-10 were great, but I don't miss having to restart whole levels over a single character death. xD

Support conversations on the battlefield? xD The nostalgia! I remember waiting like 30 turns doing nothing on certain maps in FE7 just to for the convos!

Leftist. I've noticed that's a word that only conservatives ever seem to say. I don't have a clue what inspires Trump to do the nonsense he does, but most of his actions since taking office are very far from what I or any other liberal I've spoken with at any length would consider ideal. His travel ban was a pitiful and discriminatory disgrace, and his "spend more on military but be an asshole to our allies" attitude doesn't exactly mesh well with the diversity we embrace. If anyone seems to be regularly taking Trump's side, it's the now-infamous "Alt-right." I certainly don't like the idea of pharmaceutical companies basically preying on Americans, so maybe Bernie's proposal is worth looking into. Hearing that Cruz supports it makes me a zillion percent more skeptical of the idea, though. =p It's not like I'm 100% happy with the ACA, either. I'd prefer a universal healthcare system like Canada's. =p But it looks like Obamacare has beaten Trumpcare, at least for now, so I guess we'll just have to live with it. =p

I'm pretty sure even the ACA doesn't cover nose jobs. However, yes, there are a wide variety of medical issues. There are also a lot of things that appear minor if you have healthcare and end up being not-so-minor without it. For instance, I'm very prone to getting ear infections for some reason. When I do, I go get my medicine, take it, and a few hours later, voila, better. But apparently ear infections killed people much more frequently before the advent of effective medicine. I'm not at all an expert on the matter, so I could be wrong about that, but regardless I could easily provide plenty of other examples with a little research. Vaccines, for instance, pre-emptively turn all sorts of awful diseases into a little pinch. However, as people who do, in fact, realize that healthcare can be this complicated, we needn't just give up. We can make laws that take the uninsured into account if they suddenly get into life-threatening situations, for instance. Will it be a big mess? Undoubtedly! But even an opt-in healthcare system doesn't necessarily have to be as ruthless to the poor as Trump would have it. Of course, we're talking about a guy who gave up on his healthcare bill after zero failed votes. I won't be expecting any miracles.

Robbing a cancer patient, for example, of the treatment they need is a direct threat to their continued existence as an organism, i.e. "life". I find it odd that so many of the people who advocate for knocking people with serious diseases off healthcare anyway also so vehemently oppose abortion. If you take the position that fetuses are humans (which I do not), then the two are in effect the same thing - a removal of the the tools (medical treatment in one case, a womb in the other) necessary for a human being to keep existing. If people should be free to opt out from paying for healthcare to protect the very sick, why shouldn't women be able to opt out of protecting fetuses? There's a double standard here regarding when actions that are obviously going to end humans lives are acceptable. It's covered up by semantics, like the whole "life vs health" think, but you really can't talk it away. Undeniably, there are cases when having no access to healthcare is a death sentence. In those cases, to take away healthcare is therefore to take away life. The Chittister quote explicitly refers to the allocation of tax money, which is a government matter, so of course she's talking about opinions concerning how one should govern.

I'm not at all one to put any stock in religious beliefs, but this line of thought reminded me of a quote by Sister Joan Chittister (a Catholic nun), and I thought it, too, belonged here. "I do not believe that just because you're opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is." Of course, I would extend that to include "a child healthy", too, despite not being pro-life at all. What you are engaging in, Hunter, is a mental gymnastics argument that conflates should and is. Clearly, not everyone is healthy. Otherwise, this line of discussion would be extremely pointless. The question is whether we should do what we can to ensure as many people are healthy as possible, knowing that we'll never be able to protect them all. Plenty of the Constitution's so-called "unalienable" rights have been denied before. Take slavery as an example. Plenty of people were robbed of their freedom. How is this possible? Because that right is, in fact, alienable. There's no point in defending rights that literally cannot be taken away. Unless you think Jefferson was a complete idiot, it follows, then, that he must have meant something else. Such as defending rights that should not be taken away. Besides, you're going to have to do a lot better than quote some old document to convince the kinder ones among us to let people die of horrible diseases without lifting a finger. If we go by your insipid definition of life - "existing as an organism" - then I guess we're all pro-life. After all, a fetus has to be a living thing before we can kill it. Since, apparently, all you want to protect is the right to a moment of existence, that should be plenty, right?

Well, I don't think I would say politics are a passion of mine, despite how much I follow them. I would describe looking at articles and such as more akin to opening up an old newspaper and checking the obituaries to make sure no one you know has their name listed. It's not something I usually enjoy; in fact, it's a rather morbid obsession despite managing to occasionally be funny. Fortunately, my personal situation regarding this particular matter - healthcare - gives me the luxury of enjoying the irony without worrying too much, because I'll be fine either way. if the topic were something that hit closer to home, I would definitely be in a far less friendly mood. Opinions are something I have in abundance, but usually, people don't like me very much when I defend them logically. Frankly, I think I'm a little bit too good at it, and come off as horribly condescending. I also think I take a little personal offense when people say especially stupid things to me. (Example: A while back someone accused me of being bigoted against drugs because I voted in favor of marijuana legalization. I don't even...) As a result, probably strike back with contempt that is a little bit too obvious. It's not a good strategy for making friends. =p (Oh, by the way, to keep this post tangentially on topic, Trump is indeed blaming Democrats for his Team-Rocket-tier level of incompetence. Shocking.)

I follow political drivel more than I care to admit, but like I said, given our current president, it's hard for me to take this all that seriously. So if I'm being thanked for being snarky rather than my usual no-nonsense self, then I guess you're welcome, although I'm not entirely certain what I'm bringing to the table beyond superficial humor. As far as laughing at people goes... today, Trump is the star. I'm sure I'll fixate on something else later - although I can't promise it won't be malicious.

I mean, I want to say that's technically a good thing, in my eyes, but surely they'll be back later with another bill that's even worse for lower and middle class people. And so the circus will repeat itself. Still, I was hoping for some entertainment. Maybe Trump will have a nice Twitter meltdown later. I'm sure Obama - recurring villain in this merry narrative - was behind this somehow. Doubtlessly, the Toddler-in-Chief will have many rebukes for him. That should occupy me for 20 seconds or so. Edit: I just saw someone post this and thought it belonged here.

I got a reputation point for being cynical and sadistic? Hahaha. I think a sizable percentage of Trump's voter base won't benefit so much from the removal of Obamacare, though. In fact, aren't a bunch of people supposed to be left uninsured under the new plan? I guess the Trump supporters among them voted to shoot themselves in the foot. I can't say I feel particularly bad for them.

I'm having a hard time taking most of the things this administration has done so far seriously. Basically, the election amplified my already significant misanthropy by about a billion percent. I don't think this health care bill will particularly hurt my family, and Trump's tax plan will put more money in our pockets anyway, so I can barely bring myself to care anymore. I'll just hide in my tower and watch the fireworks. A mean little part of me is kind of hoping the healthcare bill does pass just so I can see the reactions of Trump supporters when they realize what they voted for. So, y'know, whatever.

If Trump wants some better approval ratings. all he needs to do is sign an "executive order" replacing Obamacare with the Affordable Care Act. (Yes, I know...) That way, he can avoid congress entirely! Anyway, we all know that the most hated aspect of Obamacare is the "Obama" part. Get rid of that and I think Republicans nationwide will celebrate their victory!

I'd like to live atop a very tall tower, of course, with minions to bring me the things I need. That way, I wouldn't have to deal with others.