scruffy

I really can't get over the republican's insistence in trying to legislate morality. The problem is that I don't believe the republicans will drop it. The question is whether or not that insipid belief in a moral majority is enough to warrant continuing the policies we have endured under this congress and president. For me the answer is no, perhaps I have too much faith the republicans will stick to their promises in the pledge though. Peace, love and hoppiness

Just because I like being an outlier: 10 jumps 3 skydivers 473 Jumps Peace, love and hoppiness

Negative. What's the point of doing so? Peace, love and hoppiness

I hope everyone (Republican, Democrat, or otherwise) sits down and reads the whopping 21 pages that summarize the goals of the republican party if they take a majority this year. For republicans, understand what you're buying. Democrats can get a different perspective to filter through their own views. Others can make an informed decision on who they want to see with a majority. Say what you want about the republicans, but remember that in 1994 I believe every single goal of their "contract with america" was at least proposed in the congress to varying levels of success, and I do think that republicans will be sincere in at least doing their part in implementing what they say they will. So if you agree with it, than that's all the better, if you don't at least you know what you'll be up against if they get the power. Personally I think the pledge is more aligned with my political ideology than it isn't. I didn't like the line about traditional marriage and other value statements, but that's par for the course with the RNC and just has to be weighed against the pros of the piece. I also would have liked to see a commitment to real substantive tax reform and not a conservative band-aid like small business tax cuts. So what do you guys think? After reading are you more or less content with the idea of a republican house and possibly a republican senate? I tried to just attach the PDF but DZ.com wasn't having it, so here's a link to get it: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/22/gop.pledge.to.america.pdf?hpt=T1 Peace, love and hoppiness

Most definitely, I just used that number because it's what the President has seen as sufficient to not warrant continuing the tax cuts to...even though it comprises 2/3s of sub chapter s businesses. Well, neither am I, I'm no economist. But I've attached some census/BLS data that you might find interesting. Peace, love and hoppiness

I'll take a stab at it. A large portion of those individuals filing tax returns of incomes higher than 200k a year are small business owners who are filing the profits of their business on their returns. These small business also the central driving force in private sector job creation. Eliminating tax cuts for these individuals directly affects the bottom line of these businesses and consequently whether or not they have the ability to reinvestment in others by creating jobs...which I thought was the President's priority now. Peace, love and hoppiness

Finishing up my first batch of papers of the semester tomorrow. Hiking/Kayaking/life experience Sunday and Monday. Peace, love and hoppiness

why not Peace, love and hoppiness

All's I'm trying to say is I get you're doing your whole tax cut rant in a few threads here. That's cool. But understand the CBO serves one purpose, and that's providing a static view of the economy so congress can decide budgetary matters. Figuring out whether or not tax cuts are effective is better left to people who don't have their hands tied to the bottom line of how much is this going to cost the government as written. I agree with you whole-heartedly the status quo won't stand, but someone who clearly researches this topic should know the silly nature of quoting the CBO as it actually affects the economy. Peace, love and hoppiness

I can dig that. Peace, love and hoppiness

The CBO uses a static, not dynamic method of scoring. Not really going to argue this with you, I'm going to be pissed about anything tax related from either party until tax reform is taken seriously in Washington. Just saying anything they say is irrelevant. Good day. Peace, love and hoppiness

Are you implying any religious text holds up to the strict scrutiny of reality? Peace, love and hoppiness

Why not? It's life experience if nothing else. Peace, love and hoppiness

Thanks for all the replies guys. I can't wait to put some jumps on this altitrack this weekend Peace, love and hoppiness

So I just got my Altitrack in today. I got this altimeter because I figured it could suit any needs I had for quite some time, so please don't think I have any intention of doing a balloon jump in anything resembling the near future. This might be silly but I was showing this thing out to a friend and he asked about seeing as the altimeter doesn't show altitude changes till it goes into "airplane" mode...what if you want to jump out of something with a much slower rate of ascent...like a balloon? Has anyone ever done a balloon jump with an alitrack? I'm sure this is nonsense but L&B shut down their forum apparently so I figured I'd ask here. Peace, love and hoppiness

I actually sorta had fun with the first one. The ones afterward were really disappointing. Glad to hear someone took the bullet and saw it so i can go ahead and scratch that one off my list. Peace, love and hoppiness

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXa4w4aYKEk Peace, love and hoppiness

I think unless the courts could show your expression would always result in "immediate lawless action" Texas v. Johnson (1989) would have you covered. Not saying it's a good idea, but the 1A has your back. Peace, love and hoppiness

Are you not describing the exact reason the jump shack came out with the BASER? Peace, love and hoppiness

that's what you get when you insert logic into an irrational value laden act. Peace, love and hoppiness

Obviously from my jump numbers I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I did read the SIM cover to cover and the BSRs state that " Student freefall training for group freefall jumps must be conducted by... a USPA D license holders provided there is a minimum ratio of one D license holder to one student with a maximum of a 4-way." So just reading the SIM it seems as though a student fresh off AFF could do a 4-way with two other people with a fresh A given there is someone rocking a D liscense. Does my reading comprehension suck or is it just not true that you can't jump with "anyone but an instructor, coach, or instructor approved D-liscense holder" as you put it Peace, love and hoppiness

Yeah, I can't think of Terry Jones as anything other than Fred Phelps/WBC light. Peace, love and hoppiness

Just like Fred Phelps, I don't think Terry Jones has paid a minute of care to the words of free love, acceptance, and forgiveness Christ taught. I would say, and I'm in no way an authority, this event probably has "bad tendencies" or at worst is "clear and probable danger," neither of which have been valid tests for decades. So no, I don't think there is a judiciable way to prevent this from happening. But I also think his actions do not represent the teachings of Christ, and I'd rather see this absurdity ignorned and take away the power of the message than giving him the ability to profiteer of being a pariah Peace, love and hoppiness

No arguments here. The good doctor is the last in a long line of people suffering from a severe rectal cranial inversion lately. I'm not sure what it's going to take to get past this us versus them mentality, but certainly this isn't it. I think my big problem is that people are giving the focus to Terry Jones and actually validating his lunancy...but then again I guess I'm contributing to that by being in this thread. Peace, love and hoppiness

I don't think anyone is arguing what he is doing is a smart decison, but our constitution is there to protect unpopular beliefs. Peace, love and hoppiness