Leaderboard

anyone who can claim to have not changed their way of thinking, or their opinions on anything, for 19 years is in one hell of a shape. not a good one, but by all means, wear this a badge of pride. it is an achievement alright, just not in the way you think it is. i'll try to say another prayer for you. i do hate wasting my breath though.

I don't think so. Abortion has been legal for so long that they really think that all they are doing is "saving the babies" from all the evil promiscuous women who use abortion as birth control because they are so lazy they can't be bothered to think ahead. And who cares what bitches like that think? Then when their mistress gets pregnant, they will rationalize this as "well, she's not like all the whores and sluts, we just made a mistake" and push her into flying to a blue state to get an abortion. Consider GOP anti-abortion stalwart Scott Lloyd who once blocked a 17 year old girl from getting an abortion after she was raped. When his ex got pregnant, though, not only did he drive her to the clinic - he paid for half. Or Elliot Broidy, the former RNC finance chairman who was staunchly anti-abortion, then paid his Playboy Playmate mistress $1.6m to get an abortion and keep quiet about it. Or Tim Murphy, the pro-life Pennsylvania Republican who tried to force his mistress to get an abortion. Or Scott DesJarlais, who not only agreed with his wife to get two abortions, he also pushed his 24 year patient who he had sex with to get an abortion. After he supplied her with prescription opioids and marijuana. (And she was only one of six patients he had sex with.) Needless to say, Scott still claims to have a “100% pro-life voting record" and is still serving - and is very popular with republicans in his home district in Tennessee. He has stated that "God has forgiven me." None of this will change. The only thing that will change is that republican politicians will have to shell out more to fly their mistresses to California. Maybe they can deduct the airfare?

As most people know, the right wing is trying to cancel Disney, primarily because their new president, Karey Burke, supports minorities and gays, and wants to have more of them in Disney movies. Her sins are that, first, she wants to get representation of minorities and LGBT characters up to 50% - which is about the percentage of minority and LGBT people in the USA. (40% of the US is non-white, and 7% identifies as LGBT.) Second, and perhaps this is the more mortal sin, she has two children who are LGBT. And so the right has announced that Disney must be cancelled. This, of course, is odd coming from the side that uses insults for the left that include things like "cancel culture" "special snowflakes need a safe space" "social justice warriors" "fuck your feelings" etc etc. And now we see the social justice warriors of the right wanting to cancel Disney and create a safe space for themselves, because their feelings are hurt. And they are going all out - claiming that Disney is training little girls to be raped and claiming that Disney is going to make your child go gay (which, for many conservatives, would be a fate worse than death.) Why all the anger? I think it is because the right feels betrayed. For decades Disney was a bastion of right wing values. Snow White, who was the most beautiful woman in the kingdom because she was so white. ("The fairest of them all.") Uncle Remus, who longs for the long-ago days of slavery, when “every day was mighty satisfactual.. If you’ll excuse me for saying so, twas better all around." Sleeping Beauty, where a woman lies helpless (and literally unconscious) until a man kisses her, at which point she is eternally grateful. Peter Pan, where the Indian chief explains that "redskins" are red because they are embarrassed. The bad-guy black crows in Dumbo, whose leader was literally called "Jim Crow." All reinforcing right wing beliefs about minorities and women. Now, at the time these films were made, they were barely to the right of center. Song of the South got some negative reviews from black reviewers and academics over its racism, but for the most part it was accepted without much note - and honestly it wouldn't have taken much modification to make it neutral (for the time.) However, as time has gone on, those tropes have become part of the background support for the many conservatives; the sort of "great" they refer to when they say "make America great again." When old black men perhaps don't yearn for the days of slavery, but at least acknowledge that they were certainly not mistreated by white men in the past. When women were seen as passive objects of conquest, to either do nothing or to resist ineffectually until a man "won her over." And now there's a new president who has said there will be more minority and gay characters in their stories. This is literally nothing new. Toy Story 4 had a lesbian (and interracial!) couple oohing and aahing over their child's art project in the far background. You could have blinked and missed it, but conservatives certainly didn't - they freeze framed the movie until they could get angry enough to write nasty letters. One Million Moms wrote a piece that included "the scene is subtle in order to to desensitise children. But it is obvious that the child has two mothers, and they are parenting together.” Two men dancing together in Beauty and the Beast. The gay brother in Jungle Cruise. Even the newer properties - the last Infinity War movie had a guy in a support group talking about going on a date with another man, and the last Star Wars had two women kissing in the background. So what's new? Maybe it's that now there is a 1) woman who is 2) in charge and is saying 3) that she is going to make an effort to include gay and minority characters, and who has a 4) nonbinary child. Perhaps those four things combined pushed them over the edge. Or maybe it's just that this last bastion of traditional conservative values has said explicitly that they are going to be moving into the present. It's not just quick scenes in the background any more; now it's intentional. And the special snowflakes of the right do not want to give up their safe space, even if they have to destroy Disney and find a new one.

Please do not misunderstand, the radio did not quit... I was hearing nothing and thought the ground was closer than it was so THOUGHT it was not working. When I had committed to the flare, I then heard the instructor go "Flare Flare Flare", at that moment, I knew I was just a fraction too early and prepared for the landing. Lesson learned, just have trust in your instructors.

To be a sport I read the article for you. There were actually a couple of interesting ideas that might not be visible in the conservative light spectrum. For example, the idea that you might feel your race shift in reaction to wrongs done to a loved one of another race. Well, obviously that's not happening. What is happening is called sympathy and empathy, the essence of simpatico. So, for some folks it might indeed cause them to feel somewhat more aligned with another humans circumstance. Seems to me that's a good thing. The other bit was how someone might feel if they were discriminated against because they had a name that sounded African American, or perhaps, just happened to live in Cabrini-Green or Harlem. Maybe it wouldn't bother you because it didn't count because you aren't African American but I do believe it would leave me damn angry and feeling as if I were discriminated against racially even though I'm Caucasian. Hmm..

From 2015 but updated in 2016? Got anything newer on a floppy you can slip into your Commodore?

Race is biological. Racism - how we treat other races - is societal.

The state of Florida avoids having an income tax largely due to tourism. Disney is one of their largest attractions. Disney is a huge employer. When you make a deal with the devil, or the mouse, it comes at a price.

If you’d had the power to invade Ukraine, and thereby force an energy crisis, would you have done it to get this result? Sometimes one is forced to make an unpleasant decision; e.g. would one rather have a leg amputated or die? This doesn’t mean amputation is desirable, only that it’s more desirable than death. Or maybe a prosthesis is more desirable than a disfigured, useless, unbraceable limb Wendy P.

If it can't fit in a Tweet, it's too complex for many right wingers.

If all of your knowledge fits in under 100 words...you know that's not a thing to be proud about, right?

Well, often they are not, because you fail to read them. Indeed they often say the opposite of what you claim. But you take them as confirmation of your erroneous claims anyway. Perhaps that's why you have so many problems understanding science?

Virtually every item on that list could just as well apply to "why automobiles will never replace horses" if written in the early 1800s. "You would have to drill hundreds of thousands of oil wells, and build hundreds of refineries, plus we don't even know how to process oil into gasoline, and there's no way to get the gas to where it can be accessed by automobiles, and besides that all the roads are just mud so automobiles just get stuck. Right now we already have plenty of pastures and hay fields, plus horses don't get stuck in muddy roads, and anyway horses are beautiful and automobiles are noisy, smelly, hard to crank-start, and they are always breaking down. Only an idiot would think automobiles will ever replace horses."

One big factor that hasn't been mentioned is when USPA required its group member DZs to separate high-performance landings from standard landings by either space (separate landing areas) or time (separate passes). In the late 2000s and early 2010s, collisions in the pattern could account for 25% of a year's fatalities (and they often occurred two at a time). Those have virtually disappeared.

Gentlemen: There are two types of deployment of a canopy; 1. canopy first, lines second. With this type of deployment, malfunction can and do occur with a higher. what often occurs is the canopy start inflating before line stretch. If the filling is asymetrical (Off center), you can count on line-over malfunction. I have seen in testing when the canopy is lifted off the pack asuction occurs and the lines are unstow in masse. Line entanglements, burning as the tension is applied to the system as line stretch occurs. Line stretch is were the canopy mass has decelerated and the jumper mass is still the original velocity. The parachute system will stretch until the elastic force is reached the changing canopy mass is reaccerated and the jumper is decelerated and equilibrium is attain in the system. There are two forces on opening, line stretch and opening. The smaller the pilot chute in mass(pilot chute and included air.) the less force in the line stretch and the greater opening force. The pilot chute has not decelerated the system sufficiently at line stretch. The canopy /include air have not been sufficiently. The snatch force at line stretch has to be increased with a more effective pilot chute. Stronger stowage loops or rubber bubber bands double will help prevent the lines beig sucked off the pack tray. 2. Lines first, canopy last. This requires the use of a sleeve or a deployment bag. The sequence Pilot extracts the sleeve or bag. The suspension lines are deployed under tension.Pilot chute bridle sleeve/bag lines, risers jumper. Tension is maintained from the pilot chute through the system during the deployment sequence. Strong rubber bands should always be used. The more the deployment sequence is controlled, the better the deployment with less the opening force. I prefer bags to sleeves and line stowage pockets nice and snug, uniform deployment and force is implemented with each set iof lines being unstowed. The stowing of the lines is more work, but it works better. Blue skies, 26ftconical