They are both obviously old, so a couple sitting down breaks in the debate seems legitimately reasonable.
I’m in my 40s, and while I could stand and talk for 90 minutes, it would be pretty uncomfortable and my back would be aching a bit by the end. I don’t think I could do it at 80.
A put a hole in the side of a helicopter that left it grounded for a week.
I accidentally tapped it with another piece of the helicopter. I’m happily working on helicopters that are made of metal now, so no more of that nonsense.
Edit: also, honorable mention because it wasn’t my fault, but I made a helicopter drop an external fuel tank when it took off… by replacing a light bulb. It was on the button that makes the helicopter drop the external tanks, but there are failsafes so it will only do it in the air. Apparently the internal switch got stuck, so the second the weight was off of the wheels CLONK… and a tank was laying on the active runway. Excellent.
It’s not even a “gotcha” question. He seems to be clear that his girlfriend’s abortion allowed her to live her best life, and he supported it. So it stands to reason that if he’s voting to restrict abortion, that there must be some line between his girlfriend’s situation, which he supported, and what he votes to restrict. And asking that question is key to understanding his position (if giving him a whole HEAP of benefit-of-the-doubt he doesn’t deserve).
If he wanted to maintain any kind of consistency, he could have simply said “it’s legal right now, so it was her decision and she was able to get one, and if there is a financial burden in that I should take equal responsibility. I don’t think it should be an option, but I can’t make her choose not to when it isn’t illegal.” And that would be that. Even the “best life” thing could be squared away: “It’s never good when a life that should come into this world never sees daylight, but there are, of course, some options that are available that wouldn’t exist with a child, and she has those options. Many women have children unexpectedly and have rich, fulfilling lives, even if they weren’t what they planned. What I meant by her best life is to say she could continue on the path she found to be best, before she found out she was pregnant.”
I’m about as pro-choice as it gets and even I can come up with some shitty justifications for his bullshit hypocrisy. So it’s not just that this guy is a hypocrite, he’s also an idiot. If you’re incapable of explaining your actions and voting, you have no business running for any political position.
You know who I don’t feel bad for? The clerk flying a Trump 2024 flag after he tried to go against the will of the people, claimed a fraudulent election, and incited his supporters toward insurrection. And then for the next several years heard lie after lie about the thing that she had expertise in.
This is beyond leopards eating faces. This is still voting for the leopards eating face party after they’ve already been taking bites of your face.
If it’s something you want and your partner doesn’t care one way or the other about, it shouldn’t factor in.
If you want to make the candles you use around the house, maybe they smell nice, maybe they get used, maybe they’re cheaper than store-bought, but that’s a hobby.
If you do a bunch of baking, especially for people outside the home but even inside it, and your partner isn’t all about you cooking, that’s a hobby, and you clean up your own mess. That’s not chores (unless you’re getting paid).
Chores are necessities to keep the communal house going, not anything that takes effort.
No American (except German History majors, I suppose) hearing the word “Reich” thinks of anything except the third one.
This is like the white dude rolling into a party with swastikas on their coat and then claiming it has other cultural meaning. So what? You and we all know that the reason the reference was brought out is to make you think of Nazis.
You’re missing the point. It’s not a one time thing. Evidence existed, that evidence was found, and that’s what made it change to being accepted.
That evidence still exists, so if you claim dinosaurs don’t exist, we can just point to the evidence that still exists. That evidence didn’t get spirited away like golden plates to heaven. We’re still finding dinosaur bones.
If you claim dinosaurs don’t exist, I would point to the wealth of evidence that they do. If you were raised in some religious cult that never taught anything about dinosaurs and taught that the Earth was 6000 years old, and therefore didn’t think giant creatures existed hundreds of millions of years ago, it would absolutely be on the person claiming they exist to show you dinosaur bones. Which is evidence.
Your premise is incorrect. The burden of proof for quantum mechanics is on the people claiming they exist. They provided those proofs, which is why people believe in them. I haven’t studied quantum mechanics, but if you asked somebody who does, they could offer proof or evidence. And if they couldn’t, then your claim it doesn’t exist (until proof was proffered) would be correct.
Almost invariably, if a question is asked in a headline, the answer is “no.”
This is no exception.
I agree that they public schools should teach the history and dangers of communism. And the history and dangers of capitalism. And the history and danger of monarchies. And the history and dangers of democracy (and republics). And especially the history and dangers of fascism.
Those are all important subjects to teach, and there is not a governmental or economic system in current or previous existence that wasn’t vulnerable to corruption, inefficiency, or evil in some way. An educated populous is the way to mitigate those vulnerabilities.
I think either you don’t understand what they were saying, or you don’t understand “all lives matter.”
They were saying that it’s not just bad for incarcerated people, but a generally bad system that denies rights to everyone. It supports the argument.
“All lives matter” is about deliberately misunderstanding what “black lives matters” means in order to dismiss it.
Two very different things.
Easter isn’t even about Jesus. At least Christmas has the name, and some manger imagery, and other Christian-based stuff they can stamp on top of Saturnalia, but Easter is still named after the goddess of fertility with all the accompanying fertility and spring parts, from eggs to rabbits, to little sprouting plants and whatnot.
And I get that the Christians try to associate that spring renewal and rebirth with the resurrection, but I think that’s a pretty big stretch to try to make it work.
Easter is not about Jesus. Every time somebody says “keep Christ in Christmas” I want to say “then get him out of Easter.”
You know when you’re sick and pretty much bed-ridden, and you think “if only I wasn’t sick, I would be working out today and doing such-and-such,” but then as soon as you feel okay again you don’t actually do it or think about it until you physically can’t again?
I feel like it’s like that. That doesn’t mean you should work out while you’re sick. It just means that we need to remember when we’re well.
(To be clear, what I’m saying is I get it and you’re right, but regardless we can’t reasonably do it right now. But once we put fascism down, or if it wanes enough to make a reasonable go of it, we absolutely should remember and fix the voting system).
I responded in detail to the comment before yours (you and I posted within a minute of each other), but in a word, superdelegates.
The superdelegates, which in 2016 made up about 15% of the delegates, were not elected and are not beholden to any voters, they just chose whichever candidate they wanted, and 604 out of 651 went for Clinton immediately, which meant Bernie started off at an immediate disadvantage.
There’s this idea that if it’s technically possible to succeed, that the system is not rigged (see racism, sexism, etc). But that’s ridiculous. If someone starts off at a major advantage over their competition, the system is rigged for them. If, in the general election, one candidate started off with 75 electoral votes because some unelected people just decided they liked that candidate, I imagine we would call that system rigged in favor of that candidate (even if it is technically possible for their opponent to win). Not only that, but starting off at such a deficit for what would already have been considered a close race is likely to make those who might have voted for Bernie just not bother showing up.
So yes, I’d say the primary was rigged against Bernie. And the Democrats seem to agree, because they got rid of superdelegates for the initial vote, because everyone was pissed.
That’s not really true. Primaries weren’t rigged in the Rupublican primaries in 2016. They voted Trump in despite what the RNC wanted. It was the Dem’s primary that was rigged (and turned a bunch of people off of voting in the main election, and it seems those people still haven’t learned anything).
Seriously. If they don’t get hooked on Vimes, I don’t see them enjoying anything in the Discworld series.
I’m thinking of the mechanics of a shape-shifter being pregnant… like, if they switched genders would the fetus just get stuck inside between organs and die, or would it cease to exist? Would the shape-shifter be able to take on a male outward appearance while maintaining a uterus? Or would they just not shift for 9 months?
Much simpler, I suppose, for the shape-shifter to father a child.
It is never quiet enough in my house to hear myself think without difficulty, so it definitely never gets quiet enough for that.
What a power move that could be.
“Currently, any act, no matter how illegal, is available to me without repercussions due to this Supreme Court decision. So I am going to fix that. I would like an amendment to be put forth explicitly stating as much, and also would like to have an amendment put in place to establish ethical rules for the Supreme Court and an enforcement method for it. Keep in mind, currently any action I consider part of my duties, including… removing… legislators who vote against Democracy itself, until I have enough of a majority of whoever is left t9 accomplish the same goal. Before that, though, I would like a voting reform to establish rules across the nation to maximize voter participation and remove gerrymandering and other systems to diminish the voting power of any group.”