rcxb's Comments
Some of those sites are conservative, while some aren't. Either way, they're just a convenient source of facts and figures you can easily click-through and check for yourself. Facts don't have a bias.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Show me the feminists who actively advocate for women taking part of selective service (draft/conscription), men getting paternity leave, rape and custody laws being less biased against men, etc. etc. Because right now, young men who were *raped* by women, are still held responsible for child support. Even if a man's sperm is *stolen*, he can be held liable for child support. Numerous such cases have been upheld by the courts: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2883/can-a-sperm-donor-be-forced-to-pay-child-support
I can point you to feminists who advocate for men to be criminally liable for rape, if the woman simply regrets her decision to consent to sex up to 10 days after the fact. As an end-run around legislators, in a fit of political correctness gone insane, these policies are being adopted by colleges, acting like private courts, with a ridiculously low burden of proof, and practically no rights or protection for the accused. This is *required by the Department of Education*, as of April 2011. Merely disagree with this policy, point out the inaccurate facts, and expect to be persona-non-Grata at colleges across the country: http://claremontindependent.com/tag/rape/
I can't help but notice that I'm the only one who has included facts, dates, citations, etc. into this discussion, while nobody else has offered ANYTHING to support any of their opinions.
I can point you to feminists who advocate for men to be criminally liable for rape, if the woman simply regrets her decision to consent to sex up to 10 days after the fact. As an end-run around legislators, in a fit of political correctness gone insane, these policies are being adopted by colleges, acting like private courts, with a ridiculously low burden of proof, and practically no rights or protection for the accused. This is *required by the Department of Education*, as of April 2011. Merely disagree with this policy, point out the inaccurate facts, and expect to be persona-non-Grata at colleges across the country: http://claremontindependent.com/tag/rape/
I can't help but notice that I'm the only one who has included facts, dates, citations, etc. into this discussion, while nobody else has offered ANYTHING to support any of their opinions.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I'll give Predator credit for strictly only killing people who are armed, giving an easy-out to folks who don't want to play the most dangerous game... But as for the rest, who cares WHY they are motivated to kill you? A tiger may just be doing what comes naturally to it, but I'd still curse it, try my damnedest to survive, and kill it if possible.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
With meals like that, I'm surprised the UK is only #7 on the list of most obese: http://listcrux.com/top-10-fattest-countries-of-the-world/
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I'm sure this problem makes the house more difficult to sell, but I'd be happy to take it off their hands... as I'm sure many other people would. Get a few college guys to room in the house, and I expect the problem will solve itself.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Who thought light-grey text on a white background was a good idea for that chart? It seems that you're not meant to actually read it.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Pretty sure our Presidents already KNOW that a nuclear first-strike will kill millions, including many of our own, and will hesitate for that reason alone... Unless they're sociopaths, in which case, killing one more person, up-close, won't give them pause, either. But in either case, the delay could be BAD... Responding to a full-scale nuclear strike is a game of seconds, and the extra delay would make it that much harder, and give even more advantage to the aggressor.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Hard trailers aren't just 35ft monsters. There are VERY light and tiny ones even small cars can tow, like Casita, Burro, or MeerKat: http://littleguytrailers.com/ ... I'd even go with a tiny teardrop camper, before I'd consider a tent-trailer. If you need more room, I'd either carry a family-sized tent along, or add sides to the awning for some extra living-space.
A pop-up trailer is a bit smaller in your driveway, but it's just a big obstacle there. Even the tiniest solid trailer is more like an extra room added onto your house, inconspicuous and always ready to use.
A pop-up trailer is a bit smaller in your driveway, but it's just a big obstacle there. Even the tiniest solid trailer is more like an extra room added onto your house, inconspicuous and always ready to use.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
The "pretty fantastic" perks sound HORRID... 40% off the insanely marked-up merchandise and in-park food? Yikes. And it's astonishing to hear how bad the pay is, even with all the demands, and how profitable the parks are.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
#1 makes no sense... Monica Lewinsky was not an internet public shaming at all. When your name reaches presidential impeachment hearings, you're going to be world famous, even in the old days with just newspapers.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Hmm... I'd say it's an ideal spot for growing mushrooms. But for most anything else, you can get all the same advantages growing inside a greenhouse on the surface. And a greenhouse will cost a fraction as much as solar panels + LEDs. It might be a good idea for Iceland, where there's lots of cheap electricity and insufficient sunlight, or Canada if you could work out a deal for off-peak and interruptible electric supplies from the grid, but proximity to US Ag giants would undermine that. And even there, it would probably be built above-ground.
I can certainly see some future potential... Plants are very inefficient at converting sunlight. When PV panels get very cheap and very efficient, it might become cost effective to cover fields with solar panels, and direct a small fraction of the output to green LEDs under them, shining down on the field of crops, but that seems quite a long ways off.
I can certainly see some future potential... Plants are very inefficient at converting sunlight. When PV panels get very cheap and very efficient, it might become cost effective to cover fields with solar panels, and direct a small fraction of the output to green LEDs under them, shining down on the field of crops, but that seems quite a long ways off.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
It's got a handful of interesting ideas (I'm not sure if they will work out well in practice, rather than just in demo videos), but mostly it's just a pop-up camper/tent trailer like any other. e.g. https://youtu.be/4dwK8z6NNx0
Personally, I would NEVER buy a tent trailer. A traditional, solid travel trailer is just INFINITELY more useful. A tent has no insulation value, flaps around and doesn't entirely stop wind (pretty miserable), no sound-deadening, etc. The tent material decays and cracks and needs to be replaced after a few years. The tents often leak water. Tent trailers have very little cargo room while towing. Absolutely no security against break-ins. The tent is dangerously flammable, making cooking inside much more risky. etc., etc. Probably a million more. Sure, it looks large and impressive on video, but they are really miserable in practice.
Personally, I would NEVER buy a tent trailer. A traditional, solid travel trailer is just INFINITELY more useful. A tent has no insulation value, flaps around and doesn't entirely stop wind (pretty miserable), no sound-deadening, etc. The tent material decays and cracks and needs to be replaced after a few years. The tents often leak water. Tent trailers have very little cargo room while towing. Absolutely no security against break-ins. The tent is dangerously flammable, making cooking inside much more risky. etc., etc. Probably a million more. Sure, it looks large and impressive on video, but they are really miserable in practice.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
* John Krasinski had a fan stick her fingers in his mouth while he was talking.
* George Clooney had a fan jump out of her car to run after him, while it was in-gear, leaving it rolling down the street with an infant inside.
* Bruce Springsteen got called "Rick Springfield" by a cashier at Barneys in New York.
* Benjamin Bratt heard about a huge fan who was down on her luck (from the girl's Aunt) and went to surprise her, but she didn't even recognize him... The Aunt completely lied, just trying to get to the Oprah show.
* A Giselle Bunchen fan in a crowd ripped off his shirt (while crying) to show her a tattoo of her body across his chest... She was frightened and quickly left.
etc.