sundevil777

The problem is that they want so much for others to have the opportunity to enjoy it. Even when at a stoplight, they find it necessary to blip the throttle - making more noise for everyone else around them to "enjoy". Similar to those with the ultra woofer thumper stereos, they want to be noticed, don't give a damn how irritating it is to others. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

The South Park episode was hilarious, and I couldn't agree with it more. Loud cruiser style motorcycles wallow in a vast sea of lameness - look-at-me-I'm-so-cool loud, stupidly forward foot position, can't lean in a corner worth a shit, they aren't even especially fast. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

It seems that perhaps we're going back and forth over issues regarding exactly what a govt plan will actually be like and how it will be done in reality. We obviously don't know that yet. What we do know is that the Dem leadership in congress and our pres want it to be very competitive. From that I am concluding that it will be a very attractive service for a very attractive price, that will be very attractive to a lot of employers eager to save money. If the Dem leadership and the president fail to make it so, then they have failed at their stated goal and it will not have so much impact on private companies. We don't yet know what will happen, I contend we do know what the Dem leadership and the pres want to happen. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Why is it that you don't understand WHY the govt plan will be inexpensive? It will be because it is essential to the stated purpose that it be "competitive", meaning less expensive no matter how much tax dollars have to be devoted to that end. The amount of tax dollars put to that purpose is a part of that "effectively competing" to which you refer. The stated purpose of the govt plan will be to use anti-competitive practices to undercut private business. Employers will naturally want to save money, so they will be very tempted to put their employees on the plan. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

If that is what actually happens, then of course it won't be that significant. However, I don't believe that the gov't option will turn away customers. Pelosi, Reed, and Obama will be very happy to accept as many customers as want to enroll. Since it will be designed to be inexpensive, why wouldn't a lot of individuals and businesses choose it? I understand that others will believe that Pelosi, Reed, and Obama have no greater ambition for the govt option than 2% of the population, but I do not. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

No, I contend that they are voting in a system that they think will result in a single payer system over time, by introducing a public option that by design will be significantly cheaper than private plans. That is their desire - to have the public option be cheaper to the consumer (not counting the taxpayer money needed to make it cheaper). If the public option isn't cheaper, then they will have failed to introduce "competition" as they call it. We'll see what they are able to do. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

You and Kallend neglect the reality that Obama and Reed and Pelosi want a single payer system. If they want to fund a single payer system sufficiently so that it can take unlimited customers, then that is possible for them to do. I happen to take them at their word on this point - that it is what they actually want. They know this is a way to get there. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Thinking that family farms aren't factory farms is not realistic. Factory farming in the sense that you must do things as inexpensively as possible is how so many family farms compete in terms of the cost of their product. There isn't such a huge market for more expensive meat. Besides, I suspect that a good deal of the environmental impact is likely not related to how the animals are fed. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Is there anything that can be referenced refuting the environmental impact of the livestock industry? It seems to be logical/likely to me. I haven't eaten meat, including fowl or fish, since 1980. It is aesthetically unappealing to me. There are a lot of good, tasty alternatives. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

And of course that claim is based on zero research or historical evidence. Since when has taxpayer money made anything cheaper? Maybe it will be cheaper for the people actually in the public option (maybe. it could just go tits up like Hawaii)... but that's only going to be 2% of the population by 2019, according to the House bill. Usually the govt doesn't do things more efficiently, but in this case, the entire point of the public option is to offer competition, and if that means what is implied, it will be less expensive, with taxpayer money making it so. If the public option isn't cheaper, then of course that would be very different. I contend that congress and the pres will make any public option accomodate as many people that want it. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Whenever I hear this argument I wonder how all those other industries manage to do just fine with a mix of government and private management. For example, public universities are also government-subsidized and relatively cheaper but no one would ever suggest they will be putting Stanford and MIT out of business. The post office may deliver most our mail but I don't see FedEx or UPS hurting because of it. We even have a mix of public and private management for our prisons. So what's with this big fear that the public option will put private companies out of business? Answer: the fear of the private companies is not that they will go out of business but simply that they'll have to scale down their exorbitant profits somewhat. But of course that doesn't look as good on a bumper sticker. To compare it to Universities is very flawed. Universities have a limited supply of their service to offer. Do you suppose that the public option will limit enrollment? I think not. . Just because you "think not" doesn't make you correct. Your analysis is flawed. Many weaker private colleges have gone bust and disappeared following the opening of a public nearby. There is a finite customer base of students. The presence of public universities pretty much ensures that only the strong private shools survive. No doubt that is why the right keeps going on about how private education is superior to public. Your argument seems to make MY point. The govt offers the service at a price that private companies cannot match, so it erodes the customer base of the private company, and of course the subsidized public univ causes some "weaker" private univ to fail. In the case of universities, the public univ ability to enroll students is limited, and there are still more students than seats in public univ. In the case of the public health care plan, I assert that Pelosi, Reed and Obama will be very happy to accomodate as many as want the service. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Whenever I hear this argument I wonder how all those other industries manage to do just fine with a mix of government and private management. For example, public universities are also government-subsidized and relatively cheaper but no one would ever suggest they will be putting Stanford and MIT out of business. The post office may deliver most our mail but I don't see FedEx or UPS hurting because of it. We even have a mix of public and private management for our prisons. So what's with this big fear that the public option will put private companies out of business? Answer: the fear of the private companies is not that they will go out of business but simply that they'll have to scale down their exorbitant profits somewhat. But of course that doesn't look as good on a bumper sticker. To compare it to Universities is very flawed. Universities have a limited supply of their service to offer. Do you suppose that the public option will limit enrollment? I think not. The university example was only one of three I made. Do you have an excuse for the other two as well? No excuse is necessary. My understanding is that the U.S. Post Office must operate from the revenues it gets from postage - it is not subsidized, the price for postage keeps going up as needed when they go in the red. That is why private competitors can do well compared to them. Very different than what is intended for the health care public option, where taxpayer money will make it cheaper than the private competition, whatever that takes. My understanding is that private companies operating prisons are cheaper than when it is done by govt agencies. There are issues of accountability when they abuse prisoners, but not of cost. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Whenever I hear this argument I wonder how all those other industries manage to do just fine with a mix of government and private management. For example, public universities are also government-subsidized and relatively cheaper but no one would ever suggest they will be putting Stanford and MIT out of business. The post office may deliver most our mail but I don't see FedEx or UPS hurting because of it. We even have a mix of public and private management for our prisons. So what's with this big fear that the public option will put private companies out of business? Answer: the fear of the private companies is not that they will go out of business but simply that they'll have to scale down their exorbitant profits somewhat. But of course that doesn't look as good on a bumper sticker. To compare it to Universities is very flawed. Universities have a limited supply of their service to offer. Do you suppose that the public option will limit enrollment? I think not. If you operated a business, and suddenly the government decided they were going to undercut your prices with an unlimited supply of the same product because you're accused of making too much money, I think you would not like it. We should also assume that the govt would continue to undercut your prices no matter how much you were able to cut yours. If the health insurance companies are making too much money, perhaps they are guilty of price fixing. If so, that should be investigated, but no, instead the Dems are too focused on achieving their actual goal. Why doesn't the Dem congress remove the state boundary limits on companies? That would definitely increase competition. They don't do it because they aren't interested in that, they just want to start down the road of their ultimate goal of eliminating private health insurance. I've brought up the issue of removing the the connection from employers that Jack Kemp brought up so long ago. I think that is really worth considering because it means individuals will carefully consider what they pay for insurance and how they incur health care costs. Right now, with small doctor visit co-payments, there is little to motivate you to limit your costs. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

That is exactly why I am so strongly against the use of regular rubber bands for locking stows. They are too likely to break when you don't want them to. They can easily break while your rig is packed up before you deploy, they can easily break when the bag is getting lifted off your back and there is increased stress on the locking stows. Even the design of the Racer speed bag acknowledges this point. That is why they have SO many rubber bands used, they don't trust just a few to do such a critical function. Of course the pic in question may have resulted from something besides broken rubber bands. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Of course the Public Option is supposedly necessary for more competition. The only way the PO will be more competitive is for it to cost less than from private companies. That will be achieved by govt subsidy. If the PO is cheaper for a company, then companies will choose it for their employees (it won't matter to the company that the real cost including govt subsidy is more). So, the private insurance industry will vanish over time, by design. This should be no surprise, just Obama making happen what he wants to happen - he said that he wants it to happen. I think the PO would not be able to withstand antitrust law scrutiny. Jack Kemp long ago proposed changes that would help - getting away from the expectation that employers provide our health insurance. Let individuals get it from wherever they want, including associations and organizations to which they belong, whether it be USPA or NRA or NHRA, they are big enough groups that insurance companies would work out plans for their membership. Let employers simply pay employess what they would otherwise pay for insurance and make choices. The only way to reduce health care costs for real is to make it cost the individual something. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

You don't actually know what caused your "dump". It may have been that the rubber bands were already broken - it can easily happen while your rig is packed and you won't even know it, or the bands may have broken while the bag was lifting off the container. That is why I am such a big advocate of tube stows for the critical locking stows, because they are so much more resistant to breaking. Anyway, I think if you're going to use rubber bands, what is important is appropriate tension. My rig required large bands, single wrapped because the canopy was a little bit large for the d-bag. To say that you can't use single wrapped large bands with the typical small diameter lines nowadays is to not recognize all that contributes to the proper tension. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I buy the tubing that fishermen use, available in many sporting goods stores, very cheap. I don't know why they use it, but that is a good source. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I make them for myself, they are cheap too. I can make them on proper size. There is no need for the glue if you put the "joint" at the base of the larkshead. I think tube stows are important for the critical 2 locking stows. I like knowing they are strong and unlikely to break when they are under so much tension - as the bag is being lifted off. There is a lot of stress on the middle locking stows at that time, and you definitely do not want any kind of stow to break at that time. The result can be canopy dump with violent opening shock. Regular rubber bands will often tear the very first time they are used. Once they are slightly torn, they will break with very little tension. Tube stows will retain a lot of strength even after they have started to tear. The advise to not mix types of stows is largely bogus. It is worthwhile to seek an even force for each L/R stow pair, but there is no reason to not have, as I do, tube stows on the locking, regular bands for the non-locking stows. The ability to have non-symmetric forces for the stows releasing is possible even if you use all rubber bands. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

oh dear oh dear! You could just have it shipped to Idaho, and avoid shipping/customs charges and hundreds of dollars on gasoline. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

It is not the launching weapons at the west that is so likely, it is launching them at Israel. Aquavelvajob has said that he wants to wipe Israel off the map. Some very learned people speculate that they see the fullfillment of prophecy if such a war is started. I understand that for some the elimination of Israel does not cause any concern. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Star wars - yea I know it was a nickname for fun. As for feasability, they send a missle from Vandenburg to Kwajalein every now and then and I think they miss most of the time with the intercept missle, don't they? Putin - I don't know volumes about that relationship, but any time we can try to mend our relationships it's a good thing. They were mostly sending missiles from Kodiak, Alaska. They were missing early on, but had very good results lately. Also, the airborne laser weapon is a totally different method, and results look good from that also. Back to Obama scrapping the missile shield - Michael Savage has suggested that Obama may have worked out a deal with Putin. We don't deploy the missiles, and they don't do anything substantial (they'll just put up token complaint) when Iran's nuclear program gets destroyed by either Israel or the US. Given Netanyahu's secret meeting in Russia recently, his analysis may be spot on. Time will tell. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I agree that it's terribly unfair to automatically presume that a person who is conservative is also a racist. But I think it is both fair and accurate to say that the vast majority of racist comments that I've heard and read, not just currently but over my 50 years of life, have come from people who consider themselves to be conservatives. So it is what it is. Not fair, not accurate, in my opinion. I think that it is quite the opposite. Unless of course it is impossible for a black person to be racist. Much of the liberal racism I have heard is from blacks. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

http://www.alternet.org/rights/142706/limbaugh%27s_racist_shocker%3A_%22we_need_segregated_buses%22 If it had been white kids beating up a black kid, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would have been competing for time in front of the cameras denouncing the hate crime. Prosecutors would have faced immense pressure to go after it as a hate crime. If someone proposed that if black kids face a demonstrated risk of violence that they need a separate bus, they wouldn't have been accused of being racist. Why is it proof of racism for Rush to say it. Besides, I would think he was saying it for exactly that reason, to make the counter point. If the kid looking for a seat on the bus, the kid that had to move a backpack to get a seat had been black, do you think he would have been beat up? Kids should not face violence on school buses, no matter what their skin color. Why is it racist to propose segregated buses for this purpose? I suppose it is because blacks don't like to have it noted that they are capable of hate crimes. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I think the charges of racism against Obama are supported by his history. He even called his own grandmother a "typical white person". His spiritual leader of 20 years was a rabid nearly foaming at the mouth racist. His mentors when he was in college and after were racist. His has hired key people into his administration that are obvious racists. Michelle's college thesis is racist (ya, I know it is his wife's, but his college stuff hasn't been released). People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Intelligence: Sure, no argument there Poise: Sure, he's got that Talent: At what? What are his accomplishments? Making speeches? He's made more of them since he's been pres than he has days in office, so I guess that is a talent. Being a community organizer, that now criticizes organizing of communities when they don't like his plans? His time in the Senate, that was very short and without significant contribution, besides the most liberal voting record of the bunch, so I'll give him that he talented at being a liberal. Charisma: That is not working so well for him anymore. Broken promises, lies, doing so much just as Bush was doing, too many speeches saying the same thing...he just doesn't have the star power he had before, and he certainly did have it before. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am