DanG
-
Content
6,580 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by DanG
-
I'm not changing the rules. I trying to get you to see my point. I suppose it is possible that only white mothers murder their daughters and try to cover it up (Casey Anthony). I suppose it is possible that only white women get killed on vacation (Natalee Holloway), or while jogging (Chanrda Levy). I suppose it's possible that only little white girls get murdered in their homes and the cases are never solved (Jon Benet Ramsey). Or perhaps these things happen to people of all races and genders, but the media only covers the white female victims. I can't think of any cases of black boys being murdered that should have made national media news, but that's a symptom of the problem, not a counterpoint. Do you believe that no young black boys have been murdered by their parents in America in the last ten years? - Dan G
-
We're talking about two different things. I'm talking about the modern American media. They only cover non-celebrity murders of white people, and almost exclusively young, white, females. The fact that the only examples you could come up with were blacks killed half a century ago because they were black only serves to illustrate my point. There is no coverage of non-celebrity, non-white murders in the national media, and certainly no coverage to the extent we see with the PWG (pretty white girl) case du jour. - Dan G
-
I meant people who became celebrities because they were murdered. The people you named were already celebrities. Face it, murder a pretty white girl and the case will be national news. The same can't be said for non-whites. BTW, 50 Cent it still alive, and today happens to be his birthday. - Dan G
-
Can you name the last black or Hispanic celebrity murder victim? I'm guessing you can't because there aren't any. On the other hand, the media jumps all over Caley Anthony, Jon Benet Ramsey, Natalee Holloway, Elizabeth Smart, etc. If you don't see that race plays a role in media coverage of murder cases, it's because you don't want to. - Dan G
-
You mean thumb wrestling? - Dan G
-
Looking For Best No Dogs, No Kids DZ
DanG replied to popsjumper's topic in General Skydiving Discussions
Need to, or want to? - Dan G -
Um, because you wrote this: From context I thought you intended for "the ones" to refer to atheists. I'm not going to go back and reconstruct the entire back and forth, I don't care to get into a war of semantics. - Dan G
-
Looking For Best No Dogs, No Kids DZ
DanG replied to popsjumper's topic in General Skydiving Discussions
Very much not true with regards to dogs, although they are expected to be on leash. Kids are discouraged, but not banned. - Dan G -
You're assuming that everyone who voted to remove the symbols is an atheist. That's not necessarily true. - Dan G
-
I would argue that too. And I'm an atheist. On the other hand, if some Christian were offended by my not wanting a cross on my gravestone, tough shit for them. - Dan G
-
What the fuck are you talking about? - Dan G
-
I think you'll find that those people you refer to don't object to religious symbols on Federal land perse, they object to the practice of putting only Christian symbols up on Federal land. In other words, as long as it's okay to display Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Wiccan, etc. symbols on the same Federal land, then it's okay to display Christian ones, too. Since military grave markers have whatever religious symbol desired by the deceased on them, it is not a problem. If the Feds said that the only acceptable symbol on a military grave marker were a crucifix, then we have a problem. Do you can see the problem with volunteers praising Jesus at a Jewish person's funeral? - Dan G
-
I said it before in a similar thread: religious people should be allowed to have religion at their funeral, but non-religious people should be allowed to have a religion-free funeral. Anyone attending a funeral (military or otherwise) should respect the wishes of the family of the departed. The cemetary director sounds like an moron (or is it sexist of me to say that, Gravitymaster?) It also sounds like her dumb decisions will be swiftly overturned by the judge. - Dan G
-
Of course you're right. I should have been more specific. I was addressing Shah's comment that it seemed like it was hard for him to hold in brakes without stalling the canopy. There is a place and time for minimum descent rate, the pattern is generally not that time, although it could be. Imagine what could have happened if the last jumper on the demo you mentioned hadn't known how to slow his descent. The broader point is that the canopy pilot has a lot of tools that can control not only where he lands, but when. Learning to use those tools most effectively is important. - Dan G
-
So, can I call Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton stone cold bitches and be okay in your book, or is that sexism, too? - Dan G
-
Irony much? - Dan G
-
That's a good option. The only way a collision can happen is if two parachutes are in the same place at the same time. To avoid collisions you have two options: land in a different place, or land at a different time. You might be using too much brakes to hold. Your goal should be a minimal descent rate, which may occur with significantly less than full brakes. The best way to find this sweet spot is to do a two-way canopy jump with an experienced canopy pilot. You can also work on finding the sweet spot yourself by making a series of dedicated canopy jumps. A canopy control course should also cover this topic. - Dan G
-
The rest of your analysis is pretty good, but you might want to bone up on your recent Presidential history. - Dan G
-
Or like have a political discussion board for skydivers. How stupid! - Dan G
-
This what I've been trying to say all along. You did a better job, and somehow without being a dick about it. Sorry I let myself get riled up. - Dan G
-
So close, almost got the Godwin in. You can do it! - Dan G
-
So your argument it to keep them out in order to save them? Are you trying to put the white hat on the anti-immigration people who would deport everyone and close the borders completely? It's not that simple. - Dan G
-
Evidently, since I asked you repeatedly. You could have saved considerable bandwidth by just answering the question the first time. Okay, and since there is essentially NO legal way for unskilled laborers or children to enter the country, we better be prepared for $5 tomatoes. Now you're being intentionally obtuse. It's boring. - Dan G
-
This whole thread is about people who are already here ILLEGALLY. You have yet to say anything about what should happen to them. - Dan G
-
No, I've made it quite clear that I think everybody should follow the law, but that judges and prosecutors should have discretion about how the law is applied in individual cases. You can try to twist what I say all you want, you're the one that ends up looking silly. I just re-read the whole thread, you have made no statements of substance whatsoever, except agreeing with GravityMaster that it is good that the Obama Administration is keeping up the deportation numbers. If that's your only position in the debate, I fail to see why you're still here. - Dan G