GTAVercetti

holy fucking shit. That was amazing. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

oh!!!! Now I am young. You are a paradox. And geese too. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

My rig is mean. it'll getcha! like my guns. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Are you talking about my rig? It rules. Owls are sweet. I think I see it. The white on the pop top are the eyes. The reserve flap kinda angles to what an owl's bridge does. If I squint.... Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I prefer a dectatorship huh....... Some one has a different perspective than you and somehow they must be evil, uneducated or stupid Open your mind. I am not as dump or evil as you must think I am. Its called exaggeration. Hyperbole to get his point across. At least that is what I was taking it as. I don't think he called you evil or dumb there. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

From the viewpoint of those who like to label judges as activists: Activist (bad) judge - a judge who clarifies the Constitution in a manner that opposes your moral viewpoint. Constructionist (good) Judge - a judge who clarifies the Constitution in a manner that confirms your moral viewpoint. Its too bad that morals are not Constitutionally bound. Here is a good page on the definitions of these "types" of judges: Activist and Constructionist Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Personally, I would follow what billvon recommended and go for some sizes inbetween. You could keep the 170 but see if you can borrow some bigger canopies before trying the 170 out. 280 to 170 is a large step. Hell, the difference when I went from 210 to 170 felt pretty big. You only have 15 jumps though. At 15 jumps I was down to 260. By the time I as off student status I was at 210. Perhaps you will be downsizing in your student progression as well? Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Ahh, a real issue. I can respond without repeating myself. Actually, it makes perfect sense within the laws we have made. You are right. Marriage is not in the constitution. AT ALL. Not just gay marriage but straight. And yet we have all sorts of laws about them. So, since the government has decided to make laws about marriage, they must either apply the law (and the constitutional rights within) EQUALLY to all who want to get married or we scrap all the laws about marriage. As for me, I am for getting rid of ALL laws pertaining to marriage...thereby enforcing what the constitution has to say about it (which is nothing), but that is not about to happen, so instead we need to apply Constitutional rights pertaining to them equally to all citizens. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Here is how it works: Leg. makes law A which states that situation B cannot occur. A person disagrees with this and goes to court. Judge C looks at arguements from each side and upon examining law A under the auspices of the constitution, finds that law A disallowance of situation B is not constitutional Judges strikes law A down. The implied effect is that if Leg wants law A to exist, it must be changed. Until it is, law A is not a valid law. Now, in the meantime, one group that was in favor of law A (not because it was constiutionally sound, but because it fit their moral ideas) calls the Judge an activist for striking down THEIR law. But he is not. He is just doing what he is supposed to. THAT is the mechanism for improper laws. The judge is not changing the law, he is saying it must be changed to exist within the framework of our Constitution. I am not really sure how many more ways I can say the same thing. After this next example, I think I am done with this vein of argument. We have had this same debate in another thread so I am done repeating myself. To take it to a real situation. No where in the Constitution does it say that gay people cannot marry. What it DOES say is that all men are equal. All have the same rights. Therefore, if a straight person has the right under law while a gay person does not, that law is unconstitional and is no longer applicable until it is changed. So you either throw out government recognizition and sanction of marriage (which I am in favor of anyway) or you allow anyone to marry. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Do you think a court telling a state that they have to write a law that acepts same sex partners is what a judge is supposed to do? As far as I know, the courts have created no law which states that same sex marriage must be legal. I think you are confusing the issue. They are not creating new law. They are correcting the current one. The judge that rules in favor of gay marriage has found that the constitution does not prohibit suchs things. Therefore, the CURRENT law, which makes same sex marriage invalid, must be repealed. Since a law is struck down, does this imply that a new law must be written? Yes, but only to correct the one curretly on the books. And that is the judge's job: to point out when a law does not follow the constitution. if that results is that the legistalture having to make new law, then everything is working as it should. Ahh yes, "correcting" in "your" opinion. Using an un-constitutional tool.. the courts. The proper way is an amendment but, not being able to win that one the court will suffice huh? Yeah, striking down a law that is unconstitutional is definitely out of bounds. They are not forcing them to make law. They are telling them that the one that EXISTS IS UNCONSTITUIONAL. And being as such, would require a change. All the judge is saying is that until the law is changed to not violate the Constitution, it cannot be enforced. If you want to take that as a judge changing the law themself, you go ahead. You are wrong, but go ahead. That is not using the courts inappropriately. That is using them correctly. The court is to enforce CONSTUTIONALLY SOUND laws. If a law is not constiutional, the courts cannot and should not enforce it until it is changed. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Do you think a court telling a state that they have to write a law that acepts same sex partners is what a judge is supposed to do? As far as I know, the courts have created no law which states that same sex marriage must be legal. I think you are confusing the issue. They are not creating new law. They are correcting the current one. The judge that rules in favor of gay marriage has found that the constitution does not prohibit suchs things. Therefore, the CURRENT law, which makes same sex marriage invalid, must be repealed. Since a law is struck down, does this imply that a new law must be written? Yes, but only to correct the one curretly on the books. And that is the judge's job: to point out when a law does not follow the constitution. if that results is that the legistalture having to make new law, then everything is working as it should. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

again, you don't mention the model. How butt ugly is it? my mp3 player goes in my pocket. If you are relying on an mp3 player to be cool, you have bigger things to worry about. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

man, you are really angry. Did apple kill your family like clowns did mine? Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

That is right. The majority of ACTIVIST judges are not rewriting law. They are striking down laws which violate the Constitution. Are their judges who try to make laws? Sure? But then Congress often tries to pass laws that step out of bounds for their power too. Abuse exists in every branch. But this term activist judge is too often used for those who are actually striking down a unconstutional law (especially when the law is popular with the christian right). Hell, if a judge struck down a law that the christian right loved, I can bet that judge would be praised as being righteous and good and not an Activist. But for those who liked the status quo, this is a problem. Unfortunately, the status quo does not equal correct in every situation and so judges who change that suddenly become evil and accused of rewriting the Constitution. on topic a little more: There are a lot of groups that I do not agree with that the ACLU supports. Hell, on most days I hate the ACLU. But people fail to realize that in these extreme cases they are not defending a certain person or group. They are defending the RIGHT of that group (no matter how much our societal morals find that group repugnant) to say their piece. They are not defending the KKK to allow them to lynch black people or firebomb churches, but to simply allow them to speak. I depise the KKK and everything they stand for, but if we silence their right to speak, where does it stop? All it takes is one precedence where they were denied the right to free speech for some crafty lawyer to apply it to another group, even one the public finds more palatable, and another and another. The right to free speech is not the right to free MORAL speech. You may not like it, but they must be allowed to say it. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

You don't know what you're talking about, magazines RULE. Someone should kick your ass! - Jim Obviously you are a facist. Magazines killed my entire family. Or clowns. I can't really recall. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

uhhhh....I am so angry at magazines. rant, rant. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

You mean Closer? I concur Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

320 give or take the jumps I forgot to log Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Here are some lyrics from Bright Eyes. Apply them to friends or lovers as desired. They are good with music too. "First Day of my Life" This is the first day of my life I swear I was born right in the doorway I went out in the rain suddenly everything changed They're spreading blankets on the beach Yours is the first face that I saw I think I was blind before I met you Now I don’t know where I am I don’t know where I’ve been But I know where I want to go And so I thought I’d let you know That these things take forever I especially am slow But I realize that I need you And I wondered if I could come home Remember the time you drove all night Just to meet me in the morning And I thought it was strange you said everything changed You felt as if you had just woke up And you said “this is the first day of my life I’m glad I didn’t die before I met you But now I don’t care I could go anywhere with you And I’d probably be happy” So if you want to be with me With these things there’s no telling We just have to wait and see But I’d rather be working for a paycheck Than waiting to win the lottery Besides maybe this time is different I mean I really think you like me Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

And another example of people not maintianing their gear. I can;t count the number of times people bring me their rig for a re-pack and the Cypres or Cypres batts are expiring before the next re-pack and need maint/replacing and the owner didn't know. Derek I would like to know why 120 days is the rule. Where did it come from? Why do other countries not do it? Why have they found that a longer repack schedule is okay? Honestly, I don't know the answers to those questions. Not being sarcastic. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

hooray for bypassing cultural stigma!!!

alcohol is not necessarily poison. a glass or two of red wine makes you health better and your life expectency longer. ... prohibition is the problem. Dude, I am not against marijuana or alcohol. But I often find that people are against pot simply because it is illegal. And these same people often act like drinking is so much better for you. But alcohol (the chemical) IS a poison. It dehydrates the brain and make the kidneys work overtime. it is not the alcohol in wine that is benificial. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I love that our choice other than marijuana is drinking a poison. Doesn't mean I don't do of course. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Whoe exactly does your harness "fit like a glove?" It fits whoever is in the pic pretty poorly. The juxtaposition of the photo and the post is hilarious. Made my day. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.