dorbie

There was no character assasination, certainly none intended, but thanks for the compliment. Keep on laughing. P.S. And where did I imply any such thing in the posts we're discussing? It just ain't true, my last response in the topic was to Funks. P.P.S. My earlier assumption w.r.t. your supplying supporting data to Funks is understandable. You're fueling the bonfire but claiming you didn't strike the match.

In the economy? We seem to have enough people on the left trying to undermine any confidence that might exist. Economic growth has been very healthy for a prolonged period.

I see quoting wildly out of context is catching on around here. If you will look back and read my post, (ROFLMFAO), it was in respect to Shrub running on character. To say that he is a man of character, well its just really f@#$ing funny, hence the (ROFLMFAO). It should not be taken to literally ......... Not really out of context at all. Let me be clearer about what I'm saying. I get the impression that nothing Bush does amuses you. I suspect it infuriates and angers you based on your writings. I might expect ROFL in response to a joke but from you in response to a Bush campaign issue you take issue with it's only more cynicism (or sarcasm). Maybe you really find it amusing in which case that's probably healthier for you.

I say if you have no job and are a struggling student, there's no better way to spend your time than posting on DZ.com all day long about how tough it is to be you. That's really bustin' it.

I'm having difficulty visualizing this given your comments. All I see is a lot of bitterness and hatred. If you're really "rolling on the floor laughing your fucking ass off" you're not really projecting that in your posting style. Huddled over your keyboard in a twisted knot of cynical derision is more what I'm perceiving, (HOKTKCD).

I've got one, but you should also realize that this was the most vivid dream I've ever had which made it all the more strange, more like a sleeping vision that woke me. I had a dream of the end of the world, I knew it was ending dunno why, shit was happening the sky was dark I was home with my family (that I don't actually have) huddling and waiting for the inevitable, this was very brief. Then looking out the window the clouds parted forming a blue triangular shaped gap (picture a large scale spectacular Hollywood special effect on the horizon) and in the triangular shaped frame of cloud was a big blue guy, sitting on a red pedestal/cushion (that may have been formed from cloud). The cloud triangle was bathed in blue light and the pedestal in red. The blue guy was in kind of a Buddha pose but he didn't look like him, he wasn't fat and he was bright blue and had no human chest anatomy, he had a defined body and shape with a chest but no nipples for example, he had two arms and two legs but I suppose was kind of asexual, there was no ornamentation. In my dream I went from thinking "Oh shit we're all going to die, this is the end", to thinking "Hey the big blue guy in the clouds suggests something pretty friking supernatural is happening and there is life after death afterall", and wondering if/thinking that he probably was God. I woke up feeling excited and pretty good and wondering if it was a warning. Strangely I couldn't remember his face or his hand gestures. I have to emphasize that this was the most vivid and realistic and spectacular dream I have ever had. I've occasionally pondered the identity of the Deity.

They will total to 100% when you add up all the odds of dying from every cause.

The Cannon 100-400L is a great and versatile image stabilized lens with 2 modes one of them will allow you to pan to track the jumpers if you can handle the pushpull zoom, but even 400mm will not get you as up close as "in your face" (depending on height I suppose) and longer glass prices are insane. The sensor crop on the 20D helps you a bit there though I suppose. You can always add a Canon 1.4x teleconverter to that too, that on a 20D would get you nice and close. Handholding that even in daylight you probably don't want to be shooting at ISO 100. Going to a tripod you'd be talking about a fancy head like a Wimberley and of course turning off IS.

Yep, but there's a mixture of sensationalism and just ignorance when they get it wrong. A voiceover will at least inform them, but it will almost cetrainly not be used I'd expect. There are national and international performance artists rights issues with that and they like their own themes and sound quality. The also probably want the original audio track unmolested.

Hit it on the head. The latest publicized cause? That is more offending than my view on Bushs donation amount. So far almost 3,000 Americans are reported dead, with the total count approaching 200,000. This is a world altering event that will effect generations to come and have immediate repercussions that last for years. And you view it as just "the latest publicized cause"???? There are hundreds of thousands of dead from malaria in Africa for the wont of DDT spraying (many infants) as an *ongoing* tragedy we could prevent and that doesn't resonate with you? What about the AIDS pandemic? What about ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing in Northern Africa and elsewhere? Your moral compass is so bent out of kilter it's actually a compliment in my book to hear I've deviated from your cardinals. You expect us to go into paroxysms over this and criticise a healthy, generous contribution when its context in a portfolio of other charitable contributions has been made clear. How are we supposed to respond to your cynical politicization and exploitation of this tragedy? It's a fact that the only reason you care so intensely about these deaths more than other incomprehensible devastation of lives is you see it on the news every night and it arrived unheralded in a single blow. The steady flow of death & misery form other causes doesn't invoke the same visceral response. The blow dried million dollar men are pumping the airwaves with this story when they have nothing to say about other devastating tragedies because it won't generate the same ad revenues for their network.

True, the salary of POTUS alone is currently $400,000. His response was still generous and probably in excess of proportionate with fellow citizens and the level that would be healthy for us to contribute at as a nation and needs to be viewed in the context of his other generous donations. Besides all this you're missing the underlying point that it's none of your business, this is all a bit surreal, you're criticizing the guy because his contributions to a single cause don't match what you think the level should be because it's the latest publicized cause. Moreover we don't know if that was merely last years contributions made before Dec 31 as this was still developing or if he intends to give more in FY05. Either way it's none of your business. It's just amazing to witness you criticizing this guy. There are many other causes involving far more death that warrant attention but aren't in the headlines. Maybe you should list them and blame Bush for not announcing a large enough contribution to them either. Maybe Bush should make charitable donations as a percentage of his net worth every year until he's a pauper just to keep you happy.

It wouldn't affect your opinion of him either, you'd probably still be carping about how his contribution is a small percentage of his net worth.

When they're in congested airspace on final approach pilots are supposed to be looking out for other aircraft, worrying about midairs, the aircraft configuration, the instrumentation, airspeed, the microclimate, terrain, obstacles and their approach glide slope with the color of PAPI lights. If a laser flash distracts them from any of these things or affected their color perception then it represents a significant danger. This may not be a trivial matter when you think about it, we don't know what the pilots saw in the cockpit, but we do know that someone on the ground pointing a laser at a plane has a responsibility to consider the consequences of their actions. Consider all the incidents that were reported of similar idiots in other cities and it just takes one laser flash at the wrong time for a really bad day. I have to ask myself if this was deliberate then why would he do it, the plausible explanations are not favorable. I mean he wasn't doing this for zero effect, he could have lased the sky for that.

What actually happened is serious enough as warrant some jail time if it was intentional and enough of the allegation is true. Your analogy is flawed a better one would have been if you had driven drunk and gotten away without crashing. You'd be charged with DUI not vehicular homicide. Similarly this guy is charged with interference in the operations of a commercial aircraft, not mass murder. He DID lase the aircraft, he's not being arrested purely because he might do something in future and never has. Reckless actions that have no consequences yet introduce risk that may have had consequences warrant attention. This guy did shine a laser at an aircraft and it allegedly distracted the pilot, he's not being arrested for something he hasn't done but might in the future. I'm happy let the court decide on the case based on the pilot's testimony, when this screwball's lawyer will get to quiz him under cross examination about genuine risk. Heck the pilot may sit there and say it had no effect on his flying, we don't know. He'll have his day in court. Sentencing also reflects the seriousness of the crime in individual instances so judges/juries have some discretion there too, 25 years is a maximum sentence. I don't know if/what the mandatories are on this one. It would be a pitty if you could direct laser pointers at aircraft and despite pilots saying there's a danger of distraction, you can walk away free as a bird. If your wife & kid were on an aircraft with some dickhead on the ground lasing the pilot for kicks would you be happy about it? Now multiply that by a few hundred people.

Real TV & similar shows occasionally show good stuff on Skydiving, celebrity tandems, guys jumping with cars, on unicycles or bigways. If you don't sell them the footage all you'll see is the whuffo bullshit.

It's pretty bad seeing this used as an excuse for partisans to attack Bush over a signficant personal contribution when measured against his earnings. In a year we'll be hearing the same voices complain over his low rate of tax after he deducts his numerous charitable contributions from his earnings.

You weren't listening to Air America then were you.

His supporters gave to a campaign to elect him because they believed it was right for this country, this is not about people giving money for Bush. I wouldn't send Bush a dime to put in his account, but if I was a U.S. Citizen I might cut his campaign a check. I would also expect him to spend that check for the intended purpose of the pledge.

Australia is in the region and feels an affinity it's at their discretion to give more, but it's nothing to do with the US and it's contribution. The US isn't grandstanding anything, people are turning and asking about what the US is giving, look at your post. People complain when Bush doesn't come out and make an early statement and complain about grandstanding when he does. You compalin about grandstanding and in the same breath complain about a small contribution, when Powel has stated it will be in the billions, what's Powel supposed to do, advertise his already stated position to inform you and grandstand some more? Understating early aid commitments and getting to action with deployed assets like navy carrier groups teh real cost of which probably won't hit the bottom line on the aid total is the opposite of grandstanding. The US is there now with massive air and aid operations saving lives, other nations can't hope to do this no matter what dollar pronouncements their governments make, be proud of that. Get over the whole relative contribution thing, if you want the US to give more then donate like millions of others here, their contribution doesn't appear on that total either.

Yes I remember it. It didn't permanently blind the pilot, it gave him permanent vision problems and headaches, and it would have been a very powerful military laser probably mounted on a tripod with sight etc. not a domestic laser pointer. The coast guard boarded and searched the ship. The search was incomplete because the crew refused access to one room and foolishly the U.S. didn't press the matter. Rendering the search useless. Then came the coverups. I don't think there's an issue with admitting spy ships exist, this is one reason Reagan extended territorial waters. I think there's a problem admitting there was an attack on a US aircraft by a Russian vessel and the accompanying international incident. The thing is, when you shine a laser at someone, they SEE the fricking laser and exactly where it's coming from. This was the case with the pilot in question, I think there were a couple of crew on the helo affected. From memory the pilot eventually sued the government who refused to acknowledge that his eye damage was the result of a service incident, I think he got congress involved etc.

I don't think he was advocating your position, however he was contrasting this generous emotional and contrite response with other spending priorities. He makes many good points in his article.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/tblankley.htm The content will be replaced by a new article in a week.

Isn't a case of 'dicking up PK's thread'. Shit, I have everysympathy with the guy, especially if he has a family or partner depending on his income. But most of this thread is about identifying and dumping on the person who did this to PK. PK appears to have pointed a finger. WTF is this? A kangaroo court or a community forum? Sorry, Dave, but I find even the suggestion of that sort of 'justice' as hard to stomach as I do screwing with someone's employment prospects. There's absolutely nothing wrong with posts directed at an anonymous guilty party. Accusations that it was a specific poster are unfortunate but let's separate the two issues. The scum who did this should be banned when they're uncovered. Accusing someone without evidence is no better than the original act but understandable until things calm down, even this hasn't actually happened, someone has merely said they think they can guess who it is in the heat of the moment. I don't think you realize the magnitude of the injustice or the psychological effect of a successful anonymous attack like this. This guy lost his job because some anonymous asshole wrote a poisoned pen letter. He's left wondering who it is and having to suffer the injustice with no closure or knowledge of who did this to him. NOBODY has advocated banning any specific individual without evidence.

Err... if you're replying to me I don't think you have followed my posts. I think we agree. It's the other poster who's saying the guy is a hero.

Knowing what I know of fourm software and DB's in general the only things that they are able to read are things that you actually click "Post Reply" to. Thats the only time things are entered into a SQL table and then are loggable. Tracking current user movement can be done, and it is... but how much of it is logged is up to HH. Most likely a lot of the day to day clicking is not logged due to no real purpose for it. Kev, as always... if you road trip you've always got a couch to crash on here. I'll even treat for sushi and sake