Netzilla

The virtue--for lack of a better word--of having Mike Pence serve out the rest of this term is that while Trump may have a solid chance of winning a second term, the successor of a President forced to leave office in disgrace would not.  (Remember what happened to Gerald Ford after he took over for Nixon.)  Pence might not even decide to run, should he end up becoming President, and if he does--again, remember what happened to Gerald Ford.
 
The important thing about impeaching Donald Trump, regardless of whether or not it succeeds, is that it sends a clear, resolute message to the rest of the world that not everyone supports this man, that not everyone shares his bigotry, his narcissism, and his hatred, that there are people in this nation and in this government that are willing to oppose him, not just with words, but with actions.  That there are still people in this nation who believe in the self-evident truths as written in the Declaration Of Independence, and the rights we have as human beings and citizens of the United States, as written in the Constitution and its amendments.  That there are still people willing to stand up for those rights, no matter who stands with them or who opposes them.
 
Don't give up on us yet.  As a wiser man than myself said--"It ain't over 'til it's over."

We know the republic is doomed when the voters are too feckless to even try and remove an openly corrupt and illegitimately elected executive.  When a thorough FBI investigation returns clear evidence of multiple felonies and a recommendation for impeachment and is met with "not a big bombshell", that's when we know America has given up.  Not with a bang, but a whimper.

It would be misleading to quote from the Wikipedia page on the NSV and assume that its policies represented those of the Nazi regime.  The page on the overall economy of Nazi Germany shows how the NSV went against core Nazi principles and was used as a vehicle for racial purification:
 
 
To be clear, the "socialist" in "National Socialist" was literally an attempt to redefine the commonly accepted meaning of the word.  Nazi "socialism" is basically fascism, i.e. the subordination of personal interests to those of the State.

Obama didn't put the kids in cages and lose their identities. He just sent them home. As a matter of fact he sent them home without putting them in dog cages at all. he sent them home without splitting up the families when possible. He was the highest deporting president ever, because his guys said get on the bus and go back to Mexico after your court date. Here's a stuffed animal for your kid. Come back next year.
CES 

If we're being realistic?  A normal human can break diamonds with a normal hammer.  Diamond is a fantastic conductor of thermal energy.  Diamond won't make good armor against most things. 
 
If we're wearing spandex?  Diamond is just a SFX, put in whatever values you see fit.  Focus on making the mechanics work. 

Tony built that gauntlet. I'm sure once he was in physical contact with it, his armor's shifting/reforming capability was up to the task.
 
Also, the movie was great.

I loved the oneupsmanship on Vormir.
 
I loved seeing Valkyrie on her pegasus.
 
I loved the McGuffin keepaway game, and that just about everyone had it at some point.
 
But mostly it was great to see Captain Hammer Time!
(even despite being Captain Hydra.)
 
 

Worth it. Go in spoiler free and bring tissues. 

It is somewhat understandable to immediately equate Nazis only with the atrocities that occurred from 1939-45, but that happened because they were allowed to get to that horrible endgame.  Not enough people spoke up in the 20s when they were formed, nor in the 30s when they came to power.  The Nazi party was probably dismissed as extremists.  They had a measure of popularity because of a strong economy, a narrative that sparked a beaten down populace with calls similar to 'Make Germany Great Again', and a leader that knew just what to say to the lowest common denominator. 

The difference, of course, is that Trump is openly a white supremacist based on his words and policies, whereas calling Obama a Nazi is obviously ridiculous.
 
People on the left aren't labeling white supremacists as Nazis.  White supremacists are proudly labeling themselves Nazis.  Wearing Nazi uniforms.  Flying Nazi flags.  Using Nazi symbols. Marching in public.  And Trump is proud to represent them, promote their views, and install them in his cabinet.

Controversial Trump administration ban on transgender troops goes into effect

Please look up the origin of the "National Socialist" portion of the Nazi movement and its relation (or utter lack thereof) to socialism before continuing that particular line of reasoning.

Maybe not for you personally, but if Hillary had been elected we wouldn't have concentration camps in my home state.
We wouldn't have a serial sexual abuser as our latest Supreme Court justice.
Our deficit wouldn't be skyrocketing at record pace from tax cuts that serve to concentrate wealth even more into the hands of the wealthiest.
We wouldn't have a federal government that wants to strip me of the right to exist in public.
We wouldn't be in the process of completely destroying the United States' status as a world leader.
We wouldn't be in a trade war that serves only to stoke the ego of a petulant man-child.
We wouldn't have the most corrupt administration since the Taft administration (and possibly ever).
We wouldn't have a president who takes every opportunity to stoke the fear of other.
We wouldn't have Nazis in the administration with the ear of the president.
 
Exactly how would it have been worse under Hillary?

My wife and I just saw it last night and I quite enjoyed it.  I'd put it in the top half of MCU films but not in the top quarter.  My wife enjoyed it more than I did.  Compared to WW, I consider them about on a par with the exception of CM having better villains.  As a result, it gets a (very) slight edge over WW from me.
 
As for what the underlying theme of the film is, I see it as having several.  First is how the Kree higher-ups find someone with massive potential power and then try to turn that person into a weapon to fight their wars with no real concern as to her well-being.  This has echos of how soldiers get treated in the real world by politicians all the time.  Useful in a time of crisis but otherwise ignored or simply paid lip-service to without any real regard for their actual well-being.  Additionally, as others have pointed out, there's the theme of the protagonist's true strengths comes from within and finding out who one really is, not from being told what to do/how to act.  Also already pointed out, is the theme that getting back up and continuing to try after failing is what makes one strong.  Finally, the theme of not abiding by limitations that others put on you but rather finding out for yourself just how far you can go.  That was possibly the most obvious theme of the film in my eyes.
 
On a different story/characterization beat, I liked getting to see a relatively young and unjaded Nick Fury.  I would have found it hard to suspend my disbelief if he was as confident and competent 24 years ago as he is currently.  I also didn't consider him to be simple comedic-relief or useless.  He did a pretty good job of evading Skrulls and was even able to out-fight one in HtH except that mere human strength isn't enough to really hurt one.  I'll agree that his main role in the film was to be Carol's guide on earth, but really, he's never been a front-line fighter/problem solver in any of the MCU films.  He's always been in the role of shadowy behind-the-scenes manipulator who arranges things so that the best person available can get the job done.  Probably pretty hard to do that when you've only got level 3 clearance in SHIELD.   His losing an eye to an incredibly dangerous alien animal that was able to disguise itself as a cat, I was perfectly fine with.
 
So, all-in-all I quite enjoyed it and my wife wants to see it again in the theater which is something she almost never does.

I think I’ve been overly concerned about allowing Blocks with a large penalty (-5). Really what’s the odds of it succeeding? 1 in 216? And even if it does, since Block can be described as “Dodging” and Green Dragon is specifically described as Blocking and Dodging Missiles, I don’t think it would be bad to say that if a Normal rolled 3 ones, the sfx of the Block was some sort of luck involved which caused the attack to be missed.

2020 Presidential Candidate Pete Buttigieg Announces Bold Plan For 2,500-Mile Intercontinental Riverwalk
 
Touting the benefits in tourism and business revenue that such a project had already brought to his hometown, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and South Bend, IN mayor Pete Buttigieg announced Thursday a bold plan for a 2,500-mile intercontinental riverwalk. “At a time when Americans are more divided than ever, what this country needs is a riverwalk that will provide people from all strata of society with continuous strolling, dining, and festival opportunities,” said Buttigieg, gesturing to a watercolor architectural rendering of the Intercontinental Riverwalk that he described as his “core campaign plank,” which would revitalize the country’s heartlands by attracting sorely needed coffee shops, clothing boutiques, and artisanal cocktail bars in riverside locations stretching from coast to coast.

High school valedictorian. Graduated Harvard Magna cum Laude, dual major in history and literature.  Rhodes Scholar, graduated Oxford with first class honors degree in philosophy, politics and economics. Naval Intelligence officer in the Navy Reserve.  Deployed to Afghanistan 2014.  
Speaks Norwegian, Spanish, Italian, Maltese, Arabic, Dari and French.  Plays guitar and piano, and played in 2013 with the South Bend Symphony Orchestra as a guest piano soloist.  
 
His husband seems like a really nice guy, too.

As written, the Green New Deal is almost certainly too ambitious. But it seems to have triggered at least some discussion along the lines of, "Well, we can't do this, but what if we did that?" People are taking a look at alternatives that they may not have considered before. It makes me wonder sometimes if Representative Ocasio-Cortez did it on purpose.
 
In a perfect world, I'd love to see the new President in 2020* open his/her administration with a Kennedy-like challenge: To achieve energy independence by 2030. Yeah, it'll be expensive, and politically neither side will love it--Democrats because it'll require more domestic drilling in the short term, Republicans because it'll require development of non-petroleum energy resources which will make their current Big Oil partnerships less lucrative--but I feel like it would solve two problems in the long term. One, it'll hasten the development of cleaner energy sources, which would help address the climate issues that even some Republicans are starting to take seriously now. Two, it would help get us out of bed with countries like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Venezuela.
 
I know it'll never happen, but I can dream, right?
 
--
*We ARE going to have a new President in 2020, right? PLEASE tell me we are.

Report Reveals Jesus Christ May Have Benefited From Father’s Influential Position To Gain High-Powered Role As Lord And Savior
 
"Examining evidence from the Gospels, as well as recently unearthed ancient Christian and Gnostic texts, researchers at Yale Divinity School concluded that Christ’s close familial relationship to the Creator of Heaven and Earth likely contributed to His meteoric rise from obscure carpenter to high-level divinity"

The Blackmoor supplement for original D&D introduced hit locations, including effectively instant kills.
 
Empire of the Petal Throne had "true" critical hits, although not under that name.
 
Both were published in 1975.
 
Runequest used the term. Its first edition was published in 1978. It seems to have been mechanically derived from early D&D variants.
 
It's possible that the term was used in wargaming prior to any of these.

I don't think anyone is arguing that everyone has to like it.  I think folks are arguing about how reasonable it is to allow unarmed blocking of ranged attacks.  Unsurprisingly most folks mileage varies.  The other main argument is whether or not allowing the unpurchased ability to block ranged attacks has somehow ruined the game or made it unplayable or is just plain bad game design.  All 3 claims have been made and I say they're all vastly overstating the situation; just like with the hyperbolic arguments about the removal of COM or the decoupling of figured chars.
 
Take out all the hyperbole and aggressive attitudes and we could have a reasonable discussion about what the original poster wanted: how do you, as an individual GM, handle the situation?  If you don't like it, you can simply post, "I don't like it and don't allow it" and them move on to allow other GMs to have their say.  This whole argument seems rather pointless as 6e's been out for 10 years already.
 
To address the OP's question:
Currently, I'm running a 6E Golden Age supers game and allow blocking ranged attacks.  To me, the fact that someone with quick enough reflexes can grab a book off a table to stop a thrown knife seems reasonable for a game emulating golden age comics.  They just have to deal with the -2 penalty I'll assess them for it.  If they tried it bare-handed, I'd make it -4.  If it were a bullet, I'd rule it unreasonable (bare-handed or with a book; use something more resilient and we'll discuss modifiers).  My base penalty for blocking a ranged attack bare-handed will be, at a minimum, -4.  That would be for blocking low-velocity weapon bare-handed.  Catching a non-weapon (a baseball) would be easier.  Blocking something high-velocity would be harder if not impossible. 
 
Like many things in GMing, I make rulings on the spot based on circumstances.  I'm a game judge so I use my judgement and haven't found doing so onerous or game-braking in any way.

My personal ruling regarding weapon-based CSLs in defense is that either the attacker or defender must be welding the weapon in question.  The knowledge behind the skill means you know how to use the weapon defensively as well as how to defend against the weapon.
 
In your specific scenario, neither party was wielding a sword, so the CSL would not apply.

This thread is an example of why I'm backing away from these forums for now. We have angry responses, accusations and so on.

Just playing Devil's Advocate, your use of an offensive weapon to reduce an opponent's ability to hit you does not necessarily involve blocking but it might require you to have the weapon in hand.  If you are chasing me and I have a gun, that I use to threaten or actually shoot at you, I can degrade your offensive capabilities.  If I did not have the weapon in my hand then I would not be as good at doing that.  #ItsNotAllAboutDodging
 
?
 
Doc

Saw CM for the second time.  Perhaps it's because I was looking out for it, but I don't think Brie's performance was wooden so much as subtle.  She's quietly competent and confident without crossing the line into actual arrogance.  What I still didn't get was that the film wasn't funny.  The jokes were there, but the timing or delivery is just off.  I can't put my finger on it.
 
Still a good film, but like some other films, I felt there were wasted opportunities.  Anyway, people in the audience cheered when the screen flashed "CM will return in Endgame".