jakee
-
Content
24,958 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74 -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by jakee
-
He is right. Nixon's guilt has nothing to do with it. Stop being so petulant. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Quade - you don't know how impeachment works. The House Judiciary Committee is not the House. You're in a hole, stop digging. He absolutely was not. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
It reads like common sense. Being born with a fortune isn't the same as making a fortune. And sure it would be great to leave any kids I might have with loads of money, but if they started thinking they were better or more successful than other kids because of that, they would be sorely mistaken. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Nixon was never impeached. He resigned and got a pre-emptive pardon from Ford. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Except for the whole bit about how the republicans are currently tearing themselves apart through complete lack of unity, yeah (But I'm sure they'll be back singing off the same hymn sheet as soon as they find the next good war to get stuck into) Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Ya, and then there's Trump who doesn't seem to be particularly religious, nor homophobic...so what does that tell ya? He's the most anti-immigration But seriously, it tells me what I already thought - the blinkered pursuit of 'the base' has gone way too far. The Republican leadership has forgotten that just because they're the noisiest segment of the party they're not the most numerous or the most important. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
From an outsiders perspective it seems like from the late '90s through the Bush years the Dems were divided and infighting too much while the Republicans (for better or worse... mostly worse) were fairly unified behind the NeoCons and Bush with Iraq and the Anti-terror mission being their solid, unifying anchor point. Now that's disintegrated and all the ambitious Republicans are scrambling over the top of each other trying to be the one that appeals most to the 'base' by being the most religious, the most anti-taxation, the most homophobic or whatever - which pushes anyone moderate or even vaguely sensible to the fringes of the party, while the Dems are just quietly getting on with things. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
So what is your thread? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Nah, the problem with scientology is that they want you to be doing scientology all the time. Skydivers have got DZs to go to! Plus, skydivers don't need any ego massaging from scientology. All they need to do to feed the narcissistic urge is put up a video of a random jump on facebook and watch the likes roll in. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Since we've all got used to living in the new era of near constant (supposedly) imminent threats and fast responses to new inteligence it's worth remembering that 2001 was closer to the end of the Cold War than it is to today. To an intelligence agency fighting that sort of conventional enemy simply having a source of intel is the top prize. Doing something with the intel is secondary and often not doing anything with intel is even preferable if actioning it would tip off the enemy to your source. So why, in their minds, would the CIA give the FBI info about a possible threat if doing so would be more likely to expose how they got the info? That kind of institutional inertia, along with mundane stuff like personality clashes and territorial pissings is what stops the flow of info. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
No. Why would it? No. Why would it? They are supposed to share information. Just because the CIA doesn't work domestically doesn't mean that any information they gather on a domestic threat should disapppear into a black hole never to be used. That would be insanity. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Hang on, so now it's ok to pick either side, you just tend to favour the first one, but half an hour ago it was that the second one couldn't be defended by anything but 'pointless semantics or gratuitous SC abuse'? A bit more sideways? Benefit of the doubt? There is no doubt. The posts you accused the pro animal rights posters of making do not exist. The strawman was asleep in his hayloft, entirely undisturbed by the current discussion. Then do your part, and refrain from the gratuitous smears
-
So is his argument. You evidently agree with this "My point is that we have not given rights to them, and they have not asked for them." but why? The first part is simply an opinion which carries no more weight than the opposite opinion, and the second part is irrelevant. You just made that up. There are zero such examples in this thread. I wish you could argue your position without smearing the other side like that. Making people think your opponent is being mean isn't the same thing as showing he or she is wrong. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
So you turned too low to complete your intended rotation. When you posted this video did you feel that it was representative of your normal 'swoop' performance? If the answer is yes, then it conclusively shows that the problem with the recovery arc is becase of you, not the canopy. It's recovering quickly because you're stabbing out. You need to turn higher and let it dive. If no, do you have a video of a good turn? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Let's try a real discussion Two questions (both of which have already been mentioned) 1) Why were you using heavy toggle input directly after letting go the front risers, and what effect do you think this had on your recovery arc? 2) What benefit do you gain from loosening the chest strap if you haven't lowered your slider? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Technically, you wanted to add what you think you remember someone else saying that L&B stated... Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
But again: A) Why? B) Says who? You're not actually making an argument here, you're just stating an opinion. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Oh sure, I agree with that. I just take issue with the suggestion that the USA is ahead of the game somehow just because the DoI has a pretty little bit of preamble Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
So you didn't really mean anything in the whole paragraph about philosophy, and the bit where you said "and no" was also a jibe, since what you really meant was just "yes"? But again, in practice, it doesn't matter. But you just said no rights are expressly limited by the Constitution. And in the US you certainly don't have all rights, do you? You don't have all the ones in the UDHR, and you had fewer of them when it was drafted. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
They were already obsessed with Iraq and Saddam? But sure, in 2003 they were just following the evidence, and it just happened to lead to Iraq. What a happy coincidence for everyone Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
No, you were replying to my comment that, in practice, it's exactly the same thing. Sure, but that still means that in practice the US is no different to anywhere else. The rights that you have in practice are the ones decided on by other people. A perfect illustration. The Constitution can directly limit people's rights and it can be changed to annull a previous amendment, which could of course mean the removal of an enumerated right. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
OK, but if you're talking about Canada (or any other Commonwealth state) then it doesn't remotely work like that and you know it. (And if you don't know it then goddamn son, you need to get out more!) In a country that does work like that, well, you're in a dictatorship and have some more immediate concerns than what 'philosophy' your nation was founded on. And if the US government successfully goes through the (admittedly long and drawn out) process of changing your constitutional rights who will the court side with then? Which means that, like I said, in practice there is no difference Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Couch it however you want, in practice it's the exact same thing. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
So if someone stole your car you'd be pissed off on behalf of society? The state assumes the responsibility of prosecuting and punishing the offender, that doesn't mean they assume the brunt of the offense. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
-
Which thread have you been reading? I make it 50/50 at best. Do you want to have an ideagasm?