aphid

I added the bold text. It has been a very enlightening past few months. John

He isn't on this website, and while he has enormous jump numbers (likely 20,000+), he only sought a tandem rating about 4 years ago. I think you are mistaken. You could ask him the next time you see him.

Both of your current presidential candidates seem to be okay with blowing off international agreements. NAFTA and the TPP, for examples.

From your link: UPDATE: Breitbart issued the following correction: "A photograph that was incorrectly attributed on social media to the rally in Jacksonville has been removed." Using any variant of social-media as a go-to source without thorough vetting while professing to be a News Network is laughable beyond imagination. An aside to [muff528] - no response to this? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4809783#4809783

Yes, Pierson acknowledged the mistake with the time line. But, when she was trying to make her larger point that Obama's evacuation and abandonment of Iraq created conditions which resulted in even more US military being killed the CNN reporters didn't want to hear about it. Also, turned out to be not so healthy for those Iraqis who were trying to move into the 21st Century. And when Pierson brought up the fact that the Constitution-thumping Khan was a supporter of Sharia and has advocated as much in his Islamist writings, all the CNN reporters had was "an audible sigh" and “Katrina, he doesn’t stand for it, he never has stood for it,” the CNN host insisted. “He carries around the U.S. Constitution. He abides by the Constitution.” Maybe Khan has changed his mind, maybe not. Snopes seems to have a differing view of what Mr. Khan is purported to have done. On review, they concluded that "in no part suggested support for Sharia law or membership in the Muslim brotherhood and appeared to be an academic piece, not an advocacy paper." source: http://www.snopes.com/khizr-khan-is-a-muslim-brotherhood-agent/

Thank you for the quick response. I presume the deadline(s) for an eligible write-in candidate has passed? John

Can eligible voters write-in candidates for specific positions in your national electoral procedure and are they counted as legitimate ballots? In other words, could voters write in (examples chosen only for the sake of my question); President: Mike Pence Vice President: Jon Huntington (ETA - maybe I should go re-educate myself on how your electoral college works?)

Way to take personal responsibility America!! Go easy! I was just starting to enjoy the amount of control he claimed we exert.

With all due respect, that is uninformed. Neither you nor Mr. Trump have any way of knowing what other countries citizens are willing to do when threatened and attacked. You need look no further than recent American history for examples where the locals were victorious against an unpopular and superior foreign force.

“The Hare Psychopathy Checklist” by Canadian criminal psychologist unqualified socialist Robert D. Hare. Well, there's the basic problem right there.

That was deliciously entertaining. Thanks.

Yeah, we actually have the capacity to laugh at ourselves when encountering criticism from afar. We're kinda tolerant that way. Have a great day, eh.

Damned straight! :)

Rather than give credit or affix blame, perhaps aim for..."we are going to have to put aside our prejudice and open our pockets and minds to help fix it."

You lost me when you suggested that the blame for their (I won't dignify this by reducing myself to use your name for them) lot in life included factors as multiple absentee baby-daddies, indiscriminate/easy access to abortions, ingrained weak cultural standards - all of which you also placed firmly at the feet of the left-of-centre Americans who apparently have enabled all these problems. In the manner you initiated the thread-that-has-been-deleted, can you really believe a majority of your citizens are actually capable of maintaining a civil and productive conversation on a number of sensitive emotional issues, most especially this current one? I do not.

Best advice you'll receive, right there.

Thank you for the reminder that my foreign perspective has less value here. Regards, John

You could have scrolled-up just two posts, but perhaps this will be more simple for you: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4806062#4806062

God love ya, Less than 16 hours after an atrocity in a foreign land, this thread has degenerated to; Defend American gun-rights against all threats, Bill Maher has been tasteless too, Go fuck yourself if you don't like my/his offensive post, And the time-honoured, Blame Obama. 'Murica. Fuck yeah!

I wonder what the reaction would have been, if within just hours of the Orlando nightclub massacre, some French skydiver posted a similarly styled remark here. I honestly don't give a fuck what anyone says. I'm certain that was firmly established by your initial post.

My domestic TSE and yankee DJI stuff has recovered. Beats me. I wasn't panicked, just simply offering evidence from personal observation to illustrate that the posters statement that there were no immediate negative results was premature and incorrect.

I wonder what the reaction would have been, if within just hours of the Orlando nightclub massacre, some French skydiver posted a similarly styled remark here.

In my lifetime alone, I recall The Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam, and the Invasions of Granada and later also of Panama. Obviously, your citizens collective memory can suffer from a rather short half-life, so I wouldn't be too confident in avoiding similar manufactured "adventures". Those prompts have been quite costly for some. I think about the Japanese Internment Camps and asset-seizures of WW2, lynchings of black people in the deep south, cold-blooded murders of Freedom Riders, black church bombings, Kent State student deaths. It would be nice if people could react sooner to issues without the need for such blunt prompts.

So, you think he'll have some sort of "final solution" in mind? No. He will cause the eyes of the public to open and more readily accept everyone. I don't know if your prediction of increased tolerance for racial, social, religious and sexual differences you claim Mr. Trump is capable of fostering in your nation will be fulfilled/sustained, but I do know that in my part of Canada, Mr. Trump's campaign rhetoric has encouraged many of us to further assess the alleged mindset of so many US citizens who support much of his "vision". Time alone will determine the validity of your statement. I think you are dead-assed wrong. But I hope more fervently that I am incorrect.

I enjoy how often this statement is spat out.