One of the LEGAL ways to come here is "Show up at a port of entry and request asylum.". The Trump administration ignored that entire process and told people they had to stay in Mexico while they awaited a court date, which Trump also sabotaged. https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/11/trump-administrations-final-insult-and-injury-refugees

I'll point out a couple of significant differences in the way you characterise Joe's comment and what your Dear Leader said -
1. Biden made this statement in public and to their faces, and...
2. It was clearly said in a joking manner and meant to be in the spirit of camaraderie judging by the reaction he got from the troops.
Very different than the way Donnie snidely and backhandedly disrespected those who gave their lives many years ago and who still serve today. The fact that Mr. T could not be bothered to attend the memorial in France for these fallen heros because he was worried about mussing his ridiculous comb over (due to a misting rain) adds insult to injury.
So, technically, you are correct in ascribing Bidens quote, and probably not one of the smartest comments he has made, but you evidently can not understand, or don't want to admit, that the situations and context were totally different. Seems a little trollish to me, but that's just my take.
Btw OAN, really?

Damn, sorry to hear that. I could go off on a frothing at the mouth rant at how bad it was, what we went through. To save money our original company, a nationwide US health insurance company, outsourced us right at merit raise time (nice touch, a-holes) to an off-shore company that would probably only ever meet expectations running an assembly line operation for building PCs.

They were out of their league taking over level 1 and 2 operations for a large company, which was already working through the pains of merging with other companies they had acquired. Instead of inspiring the legacy workers to stick around to make the transition work, their attitude was we were lucky the host company insisted we get first crack to reapply for "our" jobs. Like it was all one big assembly line and we could be easily replaced with someone with an A+ cert for $11\hr. The equivalent of pulling up to a storefront and having IT landscapers jump in the back of a pickup truck to work that day. Might work for an assembly line but not for a complex embedded IT infrastructure with 1001 local support quirks. They were completely clueless.

Add insult to injury, their internal processes were so bad, over the course of a year they asked us continually to remind them of the phone# of the iPhone they gave us and the serial# of the laptop they gave us. At least half a dozen times, it was fucking absurd. And when we were offered an incentive to help reduce the ticket log backup, they mailed unsigned money orders to fictional home addresses they had on record for us. With the stamp on the wrong part of the envelope for those lucky enough to receive their unsigned money orders. You had the option of mailing the money order back to get it signed (good luck getting it back) or committing a felony to get the money you legally earned, by not using the first option. Took me 7 months to finally get my money order, who knows where they originally mailed it. Their indifference during this whole mess was staggering, you had to badger management and HR like they were a deadbeat drunk brother-in-law who owes you money.

And they kept putting off the review\raise process until they finally offered us 50 cents an hour for the highest performers. I gave my notice the next day.

Sorry for the rant, it was such a colossal failure on all fronts, except no doubt for the amount the host company saved on IT during that time. But of course nobody is interested in capturing the countless hours of downtime and lost productivity introduced by these IT cost "savings". Last I heard they were putting the contract back out to bid before the scheduled end of the current contract, which doesn't surprise me. What a freaking waste.

I hope you find work soon, Ant.

All well and good, but the reason why all the oversight costs piles up is because this plane isn't a solution to a military problem, it's a solution to an economical problem.

It's government stimulus, pure and simple. Get a whole bunch of different contractors from different companies and hand them money to build parts for a warplane that covers roles that are already covered. Keep those guys ticking over to prevent a collapse of the arms industry (or to prevent them developing products for sale to buyers the US might not consider kosher).

And then, because you're dealing with different companies, you need to coordinate, ensure compatibility, oversea each company to make sure they are on time/program/budget etc etc.

You build a plane under one roof, the entire process is overseen by the company and the government get's to check up on them. Far simpler. One department doesn't deliver inside that company, their management has to fix the problem or default on the contract. One company holds up the whole plane, do the other companies get penalised? Of course not, their staff sit around drawing wages with their thumbs up their asses waiting. And the government keeps paying.

Additionally, the planes the F35 is supposed to replace are all better at their jobs because they are specialised. You put every topping ever conceived on that government pizza and no one will like it (apart from perhaps the homeless who would eat anything to stave off starvation). Build a new warthog, improve on the materials, give it better armaments etc and put the tried and true design back to work. That's the core of the super hornet program, right?

When you look at the state of the world, the only real threats currently to America are the bloody terrorists (which, as you note, isn't exactly an existential threat), and the flexing of military might in 2nd world countries not withstanding, there is very little need for a frankenplane that doesn't do anything particularly good.

China and Russia? Lol, the US has 75% more combat aircraft and 400% more combat helicopters. Factor in China's pretty sparse air assets, in an air war, including force multipliers such as electronic warfare/early warning/air co-ordination and carriers, the US would be able to show down both nations handily with it's existing fleet.

I really do appreciate the point you're making, but that just adds insult to injury. The awful waste built in to the program is even more appalling when you consider that the F35 is a plane no one really needs, or even wants.

@Asmo

Except my daughter doesn't want to play other games--she wants to play Mario Brothers games. They have excellent game and level design. Why should she have to go elsewhere? Are you trying to say Mario Brothers games not for girls?

All my daughter is asking is to be allowed to play as the Princess--maybe after you free her from Bowser. That doesn't seem like much to ask, as it would have exactly zero effect on gameplay.

Personally, I'd go much farther and say when a game series continuously sends the message that women are helpless victims who need to be defended by men, when they're continuously objectified as trophies to be passed from player to villain and back to player again, then something is very wrong with that game and things need to change. Yeah, other games may be great, but why should that prevent people like Sarkeesian or myself from pointing out the games that aren't? Why should the trend itself not be pointed out when we can find examples of it outside of the Mario series?

No, it's not required that every game have a male/female playable character. It is, however, good business sense not to insult potential female customers of a product by portraying females (playable characters or NPCS) in sexist ways (or homosexual characters in bigoted ways, or ethnic minority characters in racist ways, while we're on the topic). This doesn't seem very difficult to understand and clearly game companies DO understand it because most are making great efforts to be diverse and more realistic in their portrayals of characters. However, just because some are trying doesn't mean we shouldn't point out the bullshit in those that don't. Games like the Mario platformer series, for instance.

You disagree with the way Sarkeesian presents her message... okay. I don't have a problem with that. I think everything you wrote grossly misrepresents what she's saying about games and gamers, but you're entitled to your opinion there.

Moving on... sorry you felt insulted. That was never my intent. But your comments on this issue are written in an extremely emotional manner as if you've somehow been personally wronged. If you don't want people to take it in that manner, you might want to think carefully about the tone your posts on this topic take. I have no idea what that link you provided was supposed to prove, so I'll just leave it alone.

On "Damsel in Distress," it's "your trope" because you've been--throughout this thread--defending it as if it is some bastion of literature that must be preserved. You are quite literally the only person I've ever seen actually try to defend it. And as I said, if it is that dear to you, you can have it. Games will still get made using it.

Other media,though, have long since moved on from it. Take the movie Die Hard as an example. Yeah, the main character's wife gets taken hostage by terrorists and that provides a nice emotional hook to move the plot forward--damsel in distress, right? If it were a game, though, we never would have heard from Holly Gennarro McClane again until Bruce Willis killed all the terrorists. Or maybe a video recording of her would show up after every "boss fight" where she tells John McClane, "Sorry honey, but I'm being kept in another part of the building."

But that's not what happens is it? The character of Holly is central to the plot of the movie and she appears nearly as much as John McClane does. She tries actively to subvert the terrorists by hiding her true identity and by taking responsibility to make sure the hostages are treated well during their captivity.

In other words she's portrayed as a real human being with personal agency throughout the movie.

And that's the point that you seem to be missing. That doesn't happen often in games despite the fact that it does happen in every other form of media (or at least in the examples from media that we generally consider "good"). When we are talking about the "Damsel in Distress" trope in games, THAT is what is being critiqued. Not the fact that someone was kidnapped to provide an emotional hook, but that one particular gender is always targeted and--to add insult to injury--is presented as weak, helpless, and without any agency of their own. They exist for the sole purpose of being rescued.

Thanks for the pro tip, BTW. Had no idea you were a pro at being a patronizing git but I'll take your word for it.

Ha! That's awesome. And insult to injury, beer just seems to make it burn more.

Last time I ate a reaper straight was at a friends BBQ, she assured me she had milk...it was buttermilk. I've had better days.
The lunacy is that your brain doesn't remember the pain, so you end up doing it again. Right his moment I'm looking at about two dozen reapers on a plant that I brought in for the winter. I know sooner or later I'm going to eat one raw. I DON'T know why.

Isn't that kinda adding insult to injury?

Walmart would go out of business if non English-speaking nationals, illegals (undocumented), and people with IQ's below 110 withdrew their support.
Their grocery section sucks donkey balls.
Their clothing insures the slavery of millions and millions of Chinese for years to come.
Their concern for their employees well-being....Non-Existent.
Their buildings are a cyst on the landscape of the country.

Insult to Injury should be their corporate motto.

Personally, I feel for this guy. Verizon has been the bane of my existence for the past three months. I can especially relate to being transferred multiple times only to have to retell my story each time from the beginning. They sold me home phone/wireless internet equipment and services they assured would work for my upcoming needs. After the move, I spent about three weeks daily with tech support and customer service only to find out it was completely incompatible with my set up. Adding insult to injury I was charged $350 for early termination of the two useless services PLUS they won't accept a trade in of the brand new wireless home phone unit base and 4G LTE wireless device after I was assured by phone several times that they would issue me a "gift card" for them. Bastards. =o(

Dayum ... insult to injury right there boy! =oO

@SDGundamX

I apologise for making assumptions about your knowledge of Pat's videos; it seems to be - again - a question of seeing the same thing through different lenses. After rewatching the video and reading your comment, I agree that there are elements of pure insult and sarcasm in this (and surely other of Pat's) video(s). That being said, I cannot agree with you that he's being a hypocrite, because I don't think the caustic sarcasm of the phrase you point out is supposed to be taken seriously, but to mock the similar responses that people like him get for criticising religion.

Btw, what's wrong with insulting religion, when much of religion itself is an insult (and injury) to the basic integrity and morality of humankind? There is another function of rants like Pat's, and that is the cathartic effect* it provides for people who share Hitchens' opinion that "religion poisons everything" and who, like me, are often sick of and enraged at not only religion's rampant influence, but the lenience it receives from moderates and timid atheists.

As for quoting Sagan, I simply used his elegant phraseology to make a parallel point about the danger of silent assent.

*edit: sure beats rioting in the streets and murdering people, don't you think?

My tiny town here in south Georgia just voted out a mosque, the Judge was worried over the possible violence due to the small nature of the town (only 2 red lights on mainstreet)

this was about 6 months ago, but the building permit was pulled and they had to stop construction. What added insult to injury a group of indians hurridly petitioned to buy the build permit for the same area and has now built a gas station on the land the muslims had cleared.

To add insult to injury a little extra spice, it's nice to know that "Baise Moi encore" in 21st C slang basically means "F___k me again".
Gives a whole new dimension to the song and lyrics if you're familiar with the language :-)
Very good accent I might add.

Here's the thing about these constant recessions.

Every time someone screams 'recession' the corporate world immediately responds by pulling back their investment in any project that's not directly profit generating and begins laying off workers. The remaining staff is then tasked with maintaining productivity with a smaller work force...and they do, out of fear for their jobs. Then comes the withdrawal of annual raises, so your income is no longer keeping up with cost of living increases. To add insult to injury, you then sit through quarterly or annual presentations from senior management who proudly display their charts showing how the company has maintained profitability.

Fuck You.

In the modern, stock market driven economy corporations seem unable to hedge against downturns in the economy. They are expected to offer up the highest returns possible to their investors which makes for instability during hard times. No matter though, because they'll just use their workforce as a buffer against economic hardship. Reducing staff and placing a heavier burden on the remaining workers for less compensation has become a replacement for long term fiscal planning.

If I was more conspiracy minded I'd be of the belief that recessions are artificially created as a fiscal tool that allows corporations to remain competitive by removing the burden of constant investment in long term fiscal security. As it is, there is little reason to doubt that recessions shift the financial burden of corporate stability to the working class, allowing the upper layers of management and investors to play dangerous games during good times.

If the average worker were compensated based on productivity then we wouldn't be in the financial mess that we are. Productivity has constantly gone up over the last 30 years due to the computer revolution. As it stands, worker compensation has remaind flat during this unprecedented gain in productivity while credit has skyrocketed. We all own vastly greater debt than the generation that preceded us while being vastly more productive. It is this credit that has acted as the primary stimulus of the economy during this period. We are producing more and the wealth we're generating is being loned back to us instead of payed to us directly. It's the old 'company store' on a massive scale.

But a credit driven economy is inherently unstable. You are profiting in advance on wages that have not yet been earned. You have essentially tapped existing capital from the consumer and begun to draw from their reserve of future capital. Growth based on this model is constrained by the limits of the individuals ability to borrow against their future earnings. It gets worse though, when the thirst for capitol for continued economic growth drives lenders to extend credit far beyond anyone's ability to repay. This creates a short term extension in economic growth balanced against inevitable long term catastrophe when consumers find themselves unable to meet their payment obligations.

Don't waste too much energy defending the status quo in economic trends. The current model for continuous economic growth is unsustainable. It's only a matter of 'when' a more responsible economic model overtakes the current paradigm.

Nah, he deserved the flag, his showboating instigated it all. That slap across the helmet was barely anything, since he was already in the act of wincing in priceless self-inflicted agony.

Great vid, though. The proverbial added insult to insult to injury.