GTAVercetti

I am not sure if there is a stiffener or not..but it IS stiff. And it is not just a piece of folded fabric like that picture. I will have to look at it more closely. I dunno. It just is not tight. And just for further info, my rig was custom made for my Spectre 170 so it is not an improper canopy size issue. I even tried, on purpose, to pack my canopy with the bulk on the right side...the bottom of the right flap still was not tight enough to hold the handle. And evne though I say tight, I just mean that iit does not "grip" the handle well. I still have to grab the flap and lift a bit to get the handle in. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I have had the same problem. I am eventually going to get a hackey but for now I just had a piece of velcro attached. no problems anymore. The handle is the one thing I have a problem with on my Wings. Otherwise I love it. The FF handle I have seems to be made so that the flap on it is quite stiff and cannot mold to the shape of the bottom of container under the right flap. And since it is wide, it cannot be shoved fully under. Even with the velcro I have had numerous people tell me it looks like my handle is sticking out. I have seen the pics of AggieDave's handle and his seems to bend at the pillow alot more. I have tried packing quite a few different ways and still cannot get the right flap tight enough to hold it. But anyway, the velcro works for me so i am happy. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Yes, withdrawn after a cloture failed. But that does not mean a fillbuster on a judical candidate was never implemented by Republicans as they are fond of saying these days. I love blinding following my political party. Its fun and the whole family can do it! Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

That kind of line walking gets you no where. Just because get the filibuster did not happen does not mean they did not try hard to get it;with probably the same effort democrats are giving it now. And all this talk about it being unprecedented forgets about Abe Fortas: In June 1968, Chief Justice Earl Warren informed President Lyndon Johnson that he planned to retire from the Supreme Court. Concern that Richard Nixon might win the presidency later that year and get to choose his successor dictated Warren's timing. In the final months of his presidency, Johnson shared Warren's concerns about Nixon and welcomed the opportunity to add his third appointee to the Court. To replace Warren, he nominated Associate Justice Abe Fortas, his longtime confidant. Anticipating Senate concerns about the prospective chief justice's liberal opinions, Johnson simultaneously declared his intention to fill the vacancy created by Fortas' elevation with Appeals Court Judge Homer Thornberry. The president believed that Thornberry, a Texan, would mollify skeptical southern senators. A seasoned Senate vote-counter, Johnson concluded that despite filibuster warnings he just barely had the support to confirm Fortas. The president took encouragement from indications that his former Senate mentor, Richard Russell, and Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen would support Fortas, whose legal brilliance both men respected. The president soon lost Russell's support, however, because of administration delays in nominating the senator's candidate to a Georgia federal judgeship. Johnson urged Senate leaders to waste no time in convening Fortas' confirmation hearings. Responding to staff assurances of Dirksen's continued support, Johnson told an aide, "Just take my word for it. I know [Dirksen]. I know the Senate. If they get this thing drug out very long, we're going to get beat. Dirksen will leave us." Fortas became the first sitting associate justice, nominated for chief justice, to testify at his own confirmation hearing. Those hearings reinforced what some senators already knew about the nominee. As a sitting justice, he regularly attended White House staff meetings; he briefed the president on secret Court deliberations; and, on behalf of the president, he pressured senators who opposed the war in Vietnam. When the Judiciary Committee revealed that Fortas received a privately funded stipend, equivalent to 40 percent of his Court salary, to teach an American University summer course, Dirksen and others withdrew their support. Although the committee recommended confirmation, floor consideration sparked the first filibuster in Senate history on a Supreme Court nomination. On October 1, 1968, the Senate failed to invoke cloture. Johnson then withdrew the nomination, privately observing that if he had another term, "the Fortas appointment would have been different." ----------------------- He may not be an appellate judge but I say a filibuster of a Supreme Court Judge is pretty damn signifigant Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

How many times are you going to repeat essentially the same post? WE got it, You don't like the democrats. And this filibuster will hurt them. Yes, we got that too. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

all he did was the SAME thing you did...Show the similarities between the two parties...He used quotes. You should be gald he proved your point, not bitch at him. The way the reply started with "Yes, all those nasty republicans" followed by democrat examples, does notsound like he was agreeing that republicans are just as responsible for big government as democrats. If you cannot see that simply saying that republicans can replace democrats as big government creators is a slam to both, then there is not much else I can do. Anyway, that's it. I am done with this line of debate. You are COUNTING the number of slams. Next time, I will make sure that I give out my jabs in even numbers. Jesus. Besides, you should be glad I am bitching. Otherwise, what would you have to bitch about? Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Whoever told you you will have a hard time finding people to jump with because of fallrate should be beaten. I sunk out of nearly every dive I went on for my first 50 with my team. It takes time to really learn the nuances of slowing down. But with practice, you can get it. One of my teammates wanted me to wear a T-Shirt or get a baggy suit, but the LO of my DZ said to get something that would let me "fly my body, not my suit." So that is what I did. Now I can control much better because I had to learn to do it myself and not rely on a suit You really don't want to have to fly in a de-arched position all the time. It is very hard to do much if you are constantly "hugging the tree". As was said, suit manufacturers have plenty of options to help with fall rate if it truly becomes a long standing issue. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Never said you supported one...I said you slammed one. Its a shame that people assume when you mention that they are slamming something you assume that they think you support the other. Look. the minute I took a poke at BOTH parties, a response was posted using Bill Clinton's quotes to show me that I was wrong to think poorly about Republicans. For some reason, only the jab at Republicans was seen and instead of simply showing why that is not true about THEM, I was given examples of how it is true of the other major party. If that is not assumption that I support the opposition, I do not know what it. Not only that, but it is a poor debate tactic. If tell you that the engine is blown and that the tires are flat, reiterating that the tires are out of air does not convince me that the engine is okay. You also assumed that my previous post was about you. It was not. But I am glad that you can point out that I made a slam. Hey look! I just typed the word 'slam'. I hope someone points that out to. People may not realize it unless someone says something about it. Pointing out the obvious is fun. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

There was a futurama episode which match up candidate John Jameson with candidate James Johnson. They both had the same positions, they looked the same, they just spoke about the positions with a slightly different emphasis. We are there already today. Both parties want to take and spend our money and want to control certain aspects of our lives. Organized government is like organized religion - all the best intentions in the beginning do not stop the eventual cynicism and corruption. And it is funny to see people take sides in such an emotional manner. The indoctrination of the people is complete. I will have to check that episode out. I love Futurama. Yes, I think it is hilarious and yet disturbing how polarized people get. You are totally correct though, the main idea is that both parties want control. The only difference is the method they use to get it. And even then, the results are often so similar it is hard to see the distinction. It is a testament to how unproductive and sad partisan politics are today that when I say something bad about one party it is AUTOMATICALLY assummed that I support the other. This is followed then by party line and canned party response (hmm, sounds like cable news). There may be only two major parties, but there are CERTAINLY NOT two major trains of thought. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

You have to die. Foolish mortal. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Drive by poking again? Yup, only those dang conservatives. Good thing liberals' hands are clean of being judgemental in any way. It's a good bit of advice for everyone, particularly those that are very political in their thoughts. Well, he was probably referencing the relgious right in the commentary I posted so it was not a total drive by. And yes, it is good for everyone. We could all be a little less judgmental. Will we actually do it? Probably not. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

The conservatives should remember that Jesus also said "Judge not, that ye be not judged." Don't worry bout that. They may choose to ignore that but if they truly believe in JC, then we are ALL getting judged. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

And what exactly did I just say in my last post? That yes, I DID indeed slam Republican. My point is not whether I did or did not take a poke at them, but that I don't need someone to show me that what I said applies to Democrats because I ALREADY KNOW THAT. sheesh. You would think that if I say the moon sucks and the sun sucks, I would not have people from the moon camp coming back to tell me how the sun can give me cancer. Instead, everyone could just go on knowing that I think they both suck. But I forgot, this is SC. My bad. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I put one between my fingers and press gently until the shell cracks. Then I eat off half the shelf in pieces and then the rest. But that is only if I have time. Otherwise, they get eat a bag or handful at a time. Now skittles? I eat a whole bag. Nothing like a giant rainbow colored ball of sof candy to really get ya going. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

To be honest GTA started with a slam on Republicans. ARGH. Read it again. You will notice that I said we do not need Democrats for big goverment. Now we have republicans to do the same thing. My implication -- to ENTIRELY spell it out -- is that democrats were (are) responsible for big government, but now, so are the Republicans. So yes, it was a slam on Republicans. It was also a slam on Democrats so no one needs to quote Democrats to show me how wrong I am. As far as I am concerned, the democratic and republican parties can both disappear and we would be much better off. Next time I will make sure to keep my slams on the two parties separate. Apparently, not liking them both in the same post just blows everyones' minds. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Well, someone has to counter the gratuitous Bush slams, now don't they? I would like you to point out where I slammed Bush so I know your Clinton quotes are validated. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

That was a pretty quick reply with those quotes wasn't it? I think he has macros set up. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

In case you did not understand, I dislike Republicans at the same level as Democrats. But thanks for all the quotes. Let me write them down. And I am sure this quote was taking out of context. I don't know the speech but I bet he was saying that to make some other point. And if he was not? WEll that just enforces my opinions of the two major parties of this country. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Absolutely. Who needs the Democrats to make big goverment? With Republicans we have more Big Government AND a desire for more government influence in our personal lives. Its win-win in my book. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

So I was right- definitely odd! Does it walk upright? No. but red pandas don't walk upright either. They can stand on them but they walk on all fours. Billy Bumblers can talk a bit though. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

oy! an animal from The Dark Tower series. Mix of badger (or racoon) and dog I would say a red panda looks more like a mix of cat and badger. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Yes, a red panda is a lesser panda. The red panda is DISTANTLY related to the giant. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I am anti-fullface!!!! But that is just my personal feelings. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I like my "small" DZ with our three fridges. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

You are exactly right. The bible is not absolutely clear on masterbation and all that. In fact, it does not mention it. On the other hand, Jesus said that if one "looks upon a woman in lust, he has committed adultery." THe sin is not in the act of masterbation itself, but the lust which forwards the act. In any case, I stand by my belief that restricting vaccines is a retarded way to deal with premarital sex. And I also strongly believe in what Dan Savage says: while too many people focus on gay rights, we neglect to see the damage being done to straight people's, not rights (I think he misspoke there), but our personal lives by the religious right. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.