wolfriverjoe

Well, you did give Fidel Castro a ride on your sled. Seriously, that sort of 'believer' will do or say ANYTHING if it advances their agenda. Or harms those they perceive as 'the enemy' (which is anyone who disagrees with them).

We haven't seen a single official medical report. NOT ONE. Donnie Von Schitzenpants has been seen in public without the mini-pad on his ear. Nobody has been able to identify a bullet wound or scar. Go figure.

Seen elsewhere: Think about what the alt-right would be screaming if Kamala Harris had given birth to 5 children by 3 different men.

One thing I've been hearing is that since it was the "Biden/Harris" campaign, Harris and her organization has full use of the money, even the PAC money for the campaign.

If I'm reading correctly, you aren't in the US. If you were, I'd say this is pretty much impossible. FAA rules for this sort of thing are a HUGE obstacle. Here in the US, you can build just about anything you want, and fly it under "Experimental" category. But carrying passengers for hire is "a whole 'nuther" proposition. Over and above the cost factor mentioned above, the regulatory approval would be my biggest concern.

Seen elsewhere: The "Back the Blue" crowd is supporting a convicted felon and rapist over a former DA and California state AG. Go figure.

Yes. I do. I just don't think either should be censored (porn restricted for juveniles, but not adults).

You're assuming that the MAGA morons will actually listen to the words she says. Or actually believe the truth. Or listen to the insane and incomprehensible drivel that Trump is spouting. He's actually said he wants to suspend the Constitution. And that he wants to be a dictator. And the dumbasses just lap it up. They are stupid enough to think that, because they support him, he won't hurt them. Just the people that they don't like.

Unfortunately, there is a LOT of that denial. Even from a couple people on here. Fun fact: The "Back The Blue!!!" crowd is picking a convicted felon over a former prosecutor.

No I am not assuming that. I'm assuming that the teacher knows more than some of the parents and is a LOT BETTER at teaching that material than many of them. And 'how did they become parents in the first place'? By not fully understanding the consequences of sexual activity. By believing stupid crap like 'you can't get pregnant the first time you do it'. By not being taught they are in charge of their own body and they can say "NO" to anyone at any time. You know, by not being taught properly.

Apparently he's already making excuses as to why he won't debate her. I'd love to see her call him the coward he is if he refuses.

Hi Jerry, The problem is that Musk is not an engineer. He loves to hype stuff. Stuff that isn't ready.

I have zero problems with explicit porn not being available to kids (not that anything will ever completely stop it). But comprehensive sex ed should cover more than just 'reproduction'. The fact that different people have different feelings about things (whether one likes boys or girls for example), and that feeling differently from others doesn't make one 'bad' or 'immoral'. The fact that sexual activity feels REALLY good, and that giving in to those good feelings has consequences. And that some people will lie and manipulate, and disregard those potential consequences in order to feel those feelings. That some people will do or pay just about anything to experience it. And that other people can and will exploit people for, or over it. All that and more should be taught. In a 'perfect world', the family (parents) would be the ones to teach that. But, as we are well aware, not all parents are willing or able (or have the accurate knowledge themselves) to do that.

I'm glad you feel that way (really, not being snarky). You present a decent case as to why she can and will win. I can't argue with it. But my gut doesn't agree. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

Those goals have NEVER been achieved. To be a bit repetitive, we seemed to be a lot closer than we really were (and a lot closer than we are today) 10 or 15 years ago.

It had to start somewhere. Someone asked a week or so ago (?) when we 'stopped teaching history'. I answered that it was never really taught to begin with. Much of the reality of US history is pretty unpleasant. Slavery. Along with the treatment of African Americans after the Civil War. The genocide of the indigenous peoples. The treatment of women. The atrocities committed by large businesses (and I use 'atrocities' on purpose). The corruption of various levels of government, all the way up to and including the Presidency. The destruction of the environment. By businesses, the government and just plain ordinary citizens. Lots of people like to vilify the CIA for some of the garbage they pulled, both in other countries and inside the US. And while there was some pretty egregious conduct, it pales in comparison to what the rest of the government did. And none of this is taught until college level instruction, some of it not until graduate level. Still, the basic concepts that the country was founded on are pretty noble. And while the US has fallen short in all sorts of ways, it still has done better than many other places.

Very true. However, the overall 'racial tolerance climate' has changed in the past 15 years. I've said this before, and more than once: Obama's election demonstrated to me that the reality of racial equality in the US was far less than it appeared. Racism was not accepted in 'polite society', but it simmered and bubbled below the surface. Once Obama got elected, the racists all started coming out of their caves and out from under their rocks. The "Birther" bullshit. The 'secret Muslim' garbage, which was especially ridiculous given how much negative publicity the pastor at the Obama's church generated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright_controversy Once Trump gained some traction as a candidate, the hatred escalated. Once Trump won, it got worse. Can you imagine a "Nazi & KKK Rally" during ANY previous administration? And can you imagine the sitting President saying, after the Nazis killed someone, that there were 'very fine people on both sides'? With Trump's anger and hatred, people were emboldened to say stuff that would have been 'not okay' previously. With it now more acceptable to say that sort of crap, the people who feel that way now realize that there are a lot more of them than anyone realized. Which accelerates the acceptance. Much of it is still 'unsaid', but the number of people that would never vote for a woman, or never vote for a person of color is not small. As I said in the post you quoted (you left it out, but I understand and appreciate trimming the quote for brevity), if Harris is the candidate, I hope I'm wrong about it. But I can't see her winning the election.

Not you. Bigun. While he didn't explicitly state he'd outlaw porn, he made it pretty clear he was in favor of censoring it.

Me too. I've said more than once that if it was Trump vs Howdy Doody (with Clarabelle the Clown as his VP), I'd vote Howdy. Prior to the debate debacle, I felt Biden had a decent chance of winning. That chance has evaporated in the past few weeks. However, I don't think Harris has much of a chance. A woman of color won't be able to win the undecideds, the uninvolved, the casual racists and misogynists If she's the candidate, she has my vote. But I don't think there is enough of that mentality to beat Trump. I hope I'm wrong. Or that she gets replaced by someone who can win.

One question: Why do you feel that porn should be outlawed?

Can you please share some of that evidence? Not being snarky, genuinely curious. Almost everything I've seen of the 'ancient advanced civilizations with technology beyond what we have now' has been shown to be inaccurate.

Again, what about art? There's a LOT of legitimate art that blurs the line between art & porn. Some of it intentionally (Robert Mapplethorp is a great example of that). Who decides where that line is? You? The 6 extreme and corrupt Christian fanatics that rule the Supreme Court? You complain about 'gotcha' questions, but what I REALLY want to know is why you feel the need to regulate private behavior by adults. And why you think you, or anyone else should have that ability.

City Attorney & District Attorney of San Francisco. Attorney General of California (elected twice). But she has no 'experience or capability to problem solve or manage a complex task' Sure. Right.

Seriously? The 'hole in the ozone layer' was caused by the prolific uses of CFCs. By humans. The Montreal Accords that largely banned those resulted in the ozone layer recovering. Burning incredible amounts of high sulfur coal resulted in acid rain, which wreaked havoc in lots of areas. Most well known is the Northeast US, but large parts of Eastern Europe (former Soviet Bloc) were affected even worse. The lack of freedoms prevented the crisis from being widely known. Reducing or eliminating the use of 'soft' coal greatly reduced acid rain. Something like 700 lakes in the Adirondacks were considered 'dead' at the worst point. No life in them. Many, but not all have recovered, at least partially. https://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/news/local-news/2021/03/acid-rain-is-leaving-the-adirondacks-but-scientists-say-restoration-is-still-a-long-way-off/

What about art? Where do you want the line drawn for that? Venus de Milo? David? How about ESPN's 'The Body Issue'? https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/27400369/the-body-issue Note: the link is athletes posing without clothing, but in positions and with props that hide all the 'naughty bits'.