wolfriverjoe

Money. A lot of the cruise passengers come down a day or two early, in case flights are delayed. They stay in the hotels, eat at the restaurants, go to the attractions, ect. Yup. The freedom to attract tourists and make money. The idea that Covid is increasing again, the idea that putting a lot of people together on a boat is a bad idea (think about how bad some of the Norovirus outbreaks have been), the actual well being of the tourists comes after the money. Bingo.

I'm not seeing it that way. He's just 'poking' a bit at your objections. I can see a lot of what's being suggested being fairly practical. Maybe. Look at how hybrid cars operate. Small combustion engine (C/E) and battery powering electric motor (B/E). For acceleration, like from a dead stop, both the C/E & B/E give the car pretty good pickup. A Prius can take off from a stoplight faster than a lot of people understand. When cruising, the car decides when to run the C/E to drive the car and charge the battery and when to shut the C/E down and run the car off the B/E. For planes, having a similar hybrid setup would allow both the C/E & B/E for takeoff and climb, as long as the battery lasts. Once at cruise, the C/E would then be used to propel the plane and charge the battery that was depleted from the climb. It's NOT anything close to a 'perpetual motion' machine (or even claimed to be) because the charging system is run from the C/E motor, dependent on the fuel supply. It wouldn't be too farfetched to see a system where the C/E runs only a charger/generator and the propulsion motors are only electric. This is analogous to a diesel/electric locomotive or 'old school' diesel electric submarine. As with anything in airplanes, the biggest deciding factor is weight. Can a hybrid setup be put in a plane at the same or less weight as a piston motor? Maybe. Can it be made lighter than a turbine? That I doubt. Not yet anyway. But, given the advances in Li-Po batteries, a turbine powered generator and battery/electric propulsion motor setup may not be as unrealistic as it seems to be today (totally unrealistic with today's technology).

Ha! I had a hell of a time getting stable in freefall. Maybe 3 or 4 really spectacular fails. I've noted this a time or two before, but it's been a while. Then I did an AFF jump. The comfort of knowing I had a pair of 'training wheels' along for the ride let me 'find my groove' and get over that obstacle.

No, that would make God a hermaphrodite (both at the same time).

I don't think he is aware. The denial runs that deep. He simply can't (not won't, can't) believe that Chauvin deliberately murdered Floyd. So he keeps looking for a set of 'alternate facts'. Like the claim that Floyd died of an OD. As such, he can't (again, not won't) believe that Chauvin will get a fair trial. And that the outcome is 'predetermined'. THIS is what "White Privilege" looks like.

It's not really a 'bailout'. It's cleaning up the mess they left behind... After making all the money. This is true of LOTS of mining/drilling companies. There are toxic sites all over the west. Mining companies used viciously toxic methods to extract minerals. Then just walked away from the mess. A quick search found this: https://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2019/0220/Toxic-water-US-abandoned-mines-leak-millions-of-gallons-daily It mentions the Colorado Gold King mine spill from 2015. I seem to remember there were folks who wanted to blame the EPA for the mess. Of course, they were trying to clean up a huge toxic waste dump and ended up spilling a bunch of it. Those who wanted to blame the EPA conveniently ignored the mine owners, who had created the mess, and then just left it there.

Well, I deliberately left out the Q nonsense because it's not all that widespread among the right. The stuff I listed is. Something like 60% of Rs believe that there was widespread election fraud and that Trump really won.

The right believes or believed that Obama was a Kenyan Muslim. That Hilary was responsible for the Americans that were killed in Benghazi. That male to female trans people are making the transition for the express purpose of gaining access to women's bathrooms. That Trump won the election. That the 'main stream media' is complete and total lies. And a lot more that's equally stupid or outrageous or both. Again, it's not an equivalent situation. I won't pretend that the left is perfect. Far from it. But right now the right is far, far more at fault for the divide than the left. Trump is a huge part of it. But, as I've noted previously, he's more of a symptom of the malady than the cause.

Please. Seriously, stop with the 'both-siderism'. I don't disagree that most politics is about control. And the Ds are a long, long way from perfect. But, for now, the number of ways the right is trying to force others to follow their beliefs far outweigh the left. From voting rights, to reproductive rights, to discrimination, to health care, to basic science. It's not even close.

Well, not the president, but his wife. Apparently she was wearing fishnet stockings the other day. Or maybe patterned ones. In any case, the Right wing went nuts. Kinda like Michelle Obama wearing a sleeveless dress. Amazing how much worse those are than posing nude. https://www.yahoo.com/now/first-lady-jill-bidens-fishnet-203400881.html

From a psychological point of view, it was an excellent demonstration of how stupid and gullible people can be. It worked really good conning fools into believing some really outlandish (and demonstrably false) garbage.

Funny how many other cultures throughout history have recognized trans folks. Some even revered them. What's not funny is how many folks who claim to follow Jesus hate them. How many want to shove them back 'out of sight'

Yup. This is starting to come out. The fact that they were recurring donations was hidden. The 'opt out' for making them one time donations was also very difficult to find. Trump is a con man. His supporters are fools. Water is wet. The sky is blue.

Why? Honest question. From everything I've seen and read, Chauvin either knew or should have known Floyd was dying. He could have simply stood up. He chose not to. He's got a history of this sort of thing. I'm just now finding out that there is a previous incident where he knelt on a suspect's neck for an extended time. It was captured on his body cam. If you want to cling to some sort of noble belief that all cops are good people, wake up. Minneapolis isn't as bad as Chicago, Dallas, NYC or LA, but there are bad cops everywhere. People (lots of minorities, although not exclusively) have been claiming abuse, mistreatment, 'frame ups' and murder by cops basically forever. The cops have always 'closed ranks', stood up for each other and tried to pretend it didn't happen. And gotten away with it. With the explosion of hand-held video capability, the truth is coming out. Funny how many times we are now seeing video of stuff like this (or car crashes, or other stuff), yet zero of UFOs or Bigfoot.

No. When you stop breathing it's 'respiratory arrest'. When you are stopped from breathing, it's suffocation, or asphyxiation. "Poly-substance use" is 'more than one substance. Many (most?) accidental fentanyl overdoses happen because the user didn't realize there was fentanyl mixed in with (normally) heroin. Combining small amounts of fentanyl with other drugs is very dangerous. One more indicator that Floyd didn't die from an OD: He didn't 'fade out'. He was fighting to stay alive, begging for his life, the entire time, until he lost consciousness. That's not how an OD goes. How so? You've repeated that Chauvin won't get a fair trial a bunch of times. You've said that the city isn't ready for the reaction of an acquittal. You've said you believe Floyd died of an OD. You've claimed the independent ME was biased. I haven't seen you even come close to backing any of this up with data. What about the trial is unfair? The fact that a public video, showing Floyd's death was used in the opening statement? (I've seen some FB posts saying "if there's a video of the murder being committed shown on the first day of the trial, there really doesn't need to be a second day" - I disagree). The fact that the evidence is overwhelming? That's not unfair. That's how it goes. This is likely going to be a good example of the cliche: 'We gave him a fair trial, then we hanged him' The outcome being pretty obvious doesn't mean it's 'pre-determined.' Chauvin's defense has yet to present it's case. I have zero clue what they plan on doing, or what they might be able to pull off to raise the question of reasonable doubt. But the defense had as much ability to pick jurors as did the prosecution. And they will have a 'fair' chance to present a defense. The reality that Chauvin either knew or should have known that his actions were killing Floyd, the fact that he continued to suffocate Floyd despite a lot of people imploring him to stop doesn't mean the trial will be 'unfair'. It just means he's guilty of the crime of murder. Likely 2nd degree, also known as 'voluntary manslaughter'. Depends on how Minnesota statutes are written.

Yeah. Absolutely hilarious that the QCumbers, who started their idiocy by claiming the Ds were raping and murdering children in the non-existent basement of a real pizzeria, are now pretending that the allegations against Gaetz are fabricated. https://news.yahoo.com/qanon-believers-defending-matt-gaetz-195305611.html

Can we? And more importantly, WILL we? I don't think so. My faith in humanity, which was never all that strong to begin with, had been utterly devastated the past year. Between the political crap and the pandemic, I've been disgusted and appalled at how many stupid, selfish, short-sighted, gullible fools there are out there. The Wisconsin Supreme Court shut down the mask mandate in Wisconsin this week. Of course, cases have been rising some for a week or so. 7 day new case averages are back above 500. Fortunately, the vaccine situation keeps improving. Anyone over 16 will be able to get it starting next week (move up from May). I'm going to try to get mine as soon as I can.

On what are you basing the claim that the ME hired by the family is biased? Actual data? REAL information? Or do you just want it to be that way, like him dying of a drug OD? Think about it. The family wanted the truth most of all. If (as it turned out), he had been murdered by Chauvin, they were going to sue. For both of those, they would be best served by an expert, impartial ME. For their own satisfaction and peace of mind. And for any legal proceedings. Do you think a biased autopsy report would be accepted by the defense? Either in a criminal trial or a civil suit? Don't you think the defense would go through that report with a 'fine tooth comb' and do everything possible to discredit it? Don't you think the family and their attorneys & advisers KNOW THAT ? I know an attorney who specializes in defending doctors from medical malpractice suits. We got talking about what he does and how he does it a while ago (like years ago). One thing he said that's very important: Know who put together the 'independent reports' the plaintiffs bring to the table. Know who they are, what their reputation is and what their track record looks like. He said flat out that there were 'experts' who he could get discredited very quickly. And those who he would never be able to. Which one the plaintiffs were using had a huge impact on the strategy.

Oh please. Halloween is totally Christian. It's the day before 'All Saints Day' (which technically makes it "Catholic", not "Christian"). It's "All Hallow's Eve".

It's not ignored. It's just not found to be the cause of death. Why not? I don't know. I'm not a doctor. I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn last night. A couple guesses (if I'm wrong, someone with actual medical knowledge is welcome to correct me): Timing. Maybe Floyd would have died in custody from an overdose. It's just that the drugs hadn't had enough time to take full effect. In that case it was really stupid of Chauvin to kill a 'walking dead man'. Adrenalin. Maybe the struggle to keep from being killed caused Floyd's own body to pump enough adrenalin into his bloodstream to overcome the drugs. Maybe something else.

Bingo. I tend to mock and belittle Christians more than any other religion because they are the most prevalent in my life. I don't have a problem with them exercising their faith. I DO have a problem when they insist on me following it. That can include businesses being closed on their 'sacred days' (minor inconvenience). Or it can include my taxes paying for monuments and displays (again, fairly minor). It can also include insisting that their faith be taught in schools as 'science' (major issue) Or taking away rights from people because 'the bible says so' (also a major issue). Or pretending that discrimination is ok because of that faith (subtle difference, but important). Also, hot yoga is rather silly. But not quite as silly as cat yoga. News story from a couple years ago: https://fox11online.com/good-day-wi/yoga-with-kitties-event-benefits-safe-haven-pet-sanctuary Current class schedule: https://www.safehavenpet.org/event/yoga-with-kitties-17/

Because he was having trouble breathing? Maybe he was entering 'overdose'. Maybe his heart condition was 'acting up' and causing issues. Maybe he was anxious because he was likely going to be arrested for counterfeiting. Maybe he was afraid he was going to be killed during the arrest. In any case, for the cops to take him to the ground and kneel on his neck after he complained of a medical issue doesn't mean the medical issue and any contribution to his death removes their responsibility for his death. In fact, it would increase their culpability. They should have done a quick medical assessment and called for an ambulance if he was truly in distress.

That's debatable. The 'In God We Trust' has been challenged. As has the 'So help me god' when taking an oath. The money didn't change. The option to substitute 'under penalty of law' for taking an oath has been upheld. The placement of 'Ten Commandment' monuments at public buildings (courthouses mostly) has also been challenged. It's been upheld a lot based on the idea that most modern law has origins with the Bible and the commandments. Funny that very few of the monuments were proposed, paid for or placed by historians. Usually 'devout' religious types. Well, the answer to that question is 'it depends'. Is the Muslim being mocked for his faith? For daily prayers? For a once in a lifetime pilgrimage? Then 'no'. I would defend that person's right to their faith. Even though I think that faith is simply a fantasy. Is he (she) being mocked for claiming Islam the 'one true faith'? For calling for 'death to the infidels'? For demanding that all women cover themselves? Then I'd probably be at the front of the line. Same goes for Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Shinto, Rastafarians, Santa Rians or anyone else.

Ron's not mocked for being Christian. He gets shit for his hypocrisy and for the ridiculousness of his more radical beliefs. I wasn't aware that "SHTF" and 'prepping' was a Christian tenet. Anyone who claims that the Bible is factually accurate is going to get crap. Same goes for the Koran, Talmud or any other 'sacred texts'. Anyone who thinks mocking a religion or the fictional prophets or messiahs should be punishable by death is an idiot.

How is mocking Mohamed 'disrespecting an entire culture'? Arab culture is a lot more than Islam (and Islam is a part of lots of other cultures). Also, there are a lot of people who mock any and every religion. The South Park guys mock everything and everyone. I would say they are not discriminatory in doing that. I see discrimination as disrespecting one group while admiring the exact same traits in another group. Or fabricating derogatory things about groups you don't like (Mexicans are rapists).