Andy9o8
-
Content
24,279 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by Andy9o8
-
Sigh. Applied to most modern skydiving, that statement, much like its aging cousin about seat belts, is - even if anecdotally correct - so non-representative of a huge body of evidence that those using it sound silly. Put another way, there's a world of difference between a small sample of anecdotes and a huge body of evidence that reflects trend and probabilities.
-
Your problem is you're fast becoming a poop with no joy. Me, I conjured an image of Obama in a row boat off the coast of Libya, holding a bake sale.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0znNiN0lYAQ
-
No Tar and Feather? What about branding? It was a play on the word quarter, derived from the play on the word dime. Ok, never mind.
-
ok thanks
-
Fine. Draw and quarter him.
-
fine - stop spewing then. http://www.shoeboxblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/arguing-internet.jpg
-
Newbie! Put your teeth in when you say that, mister.
-
Wadda they gonna do? Throw him outta airplane or something? Dime him out the the Man. If he truly does have a felony warrant out on him, those usually are in the nation-wide NCIC database, meaning most LEOs pretty much anywhere in the country will take him into custody as a fugitive.
-
I've seen it happening again in several posts just this past 2 or 3 days. Firefox, IE, and Samsung Galaxy Android. When you go into the text (of whatever post in question), you can see the "close quote" tag where it's supposed to be, but it seems to ignore that closing tag in display mode, so that the last quoted message appears to be part of the reply. That's the best way I can describe it.
-
QED, I hope you realize. This isn't a reading comprehension class, nor am I willing to keep repeating myself.
-
Most employers' policies that prohibit faculty and staff from engaging in romantic relationships with students make no distinction as to which party is the hitter and which is the hittee. And properly so. As I noted up-thread, such policies are not only to protect the student from being taken advantage of (or the appearance thereof), but also to guard against students receiving favoritism (or the appearance thereof).
-
Well, there's your first mistake. You can either choose to go down the rabbit hole.... or not.
-
So for shits & giggles I Googled "humanist invocation". Got 1,450 hits: https://www.google.com/#q=%22humanist+invocation%22 You'll even see that an Arizona state rep. delivered one about a year ago. Interesting. That said, I've attended lots & lots of local govt council meetings in some fairly conservative towns, where they always begin with a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance. I imagine a "humanist invocation" at one of those sessions would be about as well-received as doing a strip-tease at a Taliban meeting.
-
No, I'm afraid you don't have it straight Oh. You didn't point us to that article then. Sorry. I don't know where I got that from. ======================== Seriously? That's the level you want to take this to? Your reading comprehension is just fine; I seriously doubt you truly failed to understand my complete post as badly as you pretend. Sorry; I'm just not going there with you.
-
Let me get this straight. You point to a poorly written and referenced article .... No, I'm afraid you don't have it straight. I certainly don't base my point on that one little article. I first made the point in this thread 2 days previously in my post #40, and I've made the same point in other threads previously. I base my point not on guesswork, but from actually knowing what I'm talking about, based on practicing insurance law and vehicle liability law, as well as working both in and closely with the insurance industry, all for about the past 30 years. Look, I really don't care if people choose to assume the risk of helmet-less riding, any more than I care what the hell whuffos think about you or me assuming the risk of skydiving. But when I'm aware of a cause-and-effect that affects more than just the rider for his own choice, I'm not going to be shouted-down into silence just because my point is unpopular to riders.
-
Really? Well, I've worked vehicle-crash cases (professionally) from both sides for almost 30 years (plus I've been driving for almost 40 years) and my experience is that the VAST, VAST majority of multi-vehicle crashes, including those involving motorcycles, result from shared liability. Given that I've neither said nor meant to imply that, No.
-
Sigh.. it's really not conspiratorial as you seem to think. Beyond, that, I'm not going to expend energy convincing you.
-
Yet insurance does kind of mean that others pay your bills. It sort of is the concept of insurance. Indeed. http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1084540_motorcycle-helmet-law-repeal-could-cost-michigan-taxpayers-money I support the principle of people's freedom to choose to ride w/o a helmet (which is more than the risk I'm willing to assume for myself) the same as I support the principle of their freedom to choose to BASE jump (which is more risk than I'm willing to assume for myself). But BASE jumping doesn't make everyone's auto insurance premiums higher. Un-helmeted bike riders do.
-
All that really meant was that he had little tolerance for in-your-face stridency of demeanor by people of any stripe.
-
Virginia proposal would limit size of gatherings at private homes
Andy9o8 replied to airdvr's topic in Speakers Corner
Hmmm...seems a bit off. Just like the title of your thread. In fairness, it's a copy & paste of the articles headline.... which is a bit off. It's a local proposal, not a state one. -
Virginia proposal would limit size of gatherings at private homes
Andy9o8 replied to airdvr's topic in Speakers Corner
Hmmm...seems a bit off. People don't realize how often state and local legislators (etc.) propose laws or regulations that clearly are unconstitutional. You know, like this one. More often than not, especially nowadays thanks to Al Gore's Internet, they don't get passed before their proponents are publicly outed as fools. -
But the prayers - by definition, of course - were theist-specific. And there's the rub. The net effect gives official sanction to giving non-theists a lose-lose choice: either be forced by social pressure to pretend to be a theist, or be openly non-theist and risk (and almost certainly receive) relegation to second-class citizenship. There's already a heapin' helpful of that in society at large. But government, at least in the US, should steer clear of that. And the fact that, historically, "it's always been done" (a/k/a "prayer before deliberative bodies convene is common") is irrelevant. Historical wrongs always can eventually be righted. Today the 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court squandered an opportunity to do so.
-
Well, this may or may not be helpful. I found a pic of one of his student dirt-dives HERE.
-
S w/your students. Don't E or F them until they're off student status.