Helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick. You can tell a proper flick from its opposite, as it is both soft and quick and seems like there is a lot of it, which may or may not be an optical illusion. The danger be your cocks is full of bruisin’ if you fuck it up. There are a multitude of factors. I found a club in which a bunch of dudes do practice helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick.

At the totem of the storeroom I showed them how to relax and to tell a proper flick from its opposite as it is both soft and quick, strong as an apocalypse. Don’t knock it Miss. It is a ritual of manhood. A man should preserve it like canned good, not that there’s very much choice in the matter. Young boys innately know the joys of hey batter, batter, picking up stick to swing in a rock. Isn’t any shot because they know the grip flicks swish to their own cock quicker than they learn to love the lick of another boy’s lollipop, not undermine the sucking of dicks.

Live in love my brothers. Teach me some of your tricks. It is not my own area of expertise. I only know my own dick as I check to squeeze. I got on it tighter than you might expect, but if my rhyme is so tight how would I ejac-ulate is what you contemplate, but if you really want to know it ask your mom for the tape, because I came to cockcenteric Centrifusions, stretch out with your feelings and sense the hugeness. Oh, the impulse to prove this newtonian concept of the universe, whether through boners or non erect dudes rehearse their mystery over gravity, magically flinging their anatomy as they battle the old enemy of Adam and Eve, not the devil, not the serpent, but the apple, drop in the knowledge on their heads like my rappel du-tee-de you, mother fucker.

Helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick. Can stop to check if you are rocking it properly, wouldn’t want to let you be flopping it sloppily, ladies in the house, don’t let us with the monopoly; Ying to the Yang, to the wang – to the follow me. Helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick.

You can tell about the flick from its opposite as it is both soft and quick and seems like there is a lot of it. Don’t throttle it, ease up on throttle. You can got a lot of lift with a little bit of twaddle, which is like twiddle but from the bottom in the middle, pop-up to the top, flop back down like a griddle cake, or the smack with a little shake.

The more you practice helps you mitigate the inaccuracy of hitting shapes not exactly within the state of helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter dick, helicopter helicopter dick. [https://lybio.net/c-command-helicopter-dick/comedy/]

Really? Can you offer a comparative American/Russian timeline of computer telecommunication innovations, or are you just assuming? Be sure to focus on pre '68 era, before American socialism was applied in large part (public funding/monopoly busting).

And for some unknown to you reason China is beating the ever loving pants off America lately....so what's your point? Certainly not that Capitalism always beats socialism, I hope you aren't that deluded. Both have strengths and weaknesses, both ebb and flow. Neither are the sole determining factor for inventiveness, neither has a monopoly on invention.

Russia beat America into space even with their near poverty level economy at the time, and despite the fact that their scientists definitely didn't personally profit from their myriad of inventions required to make it happen.
I'm not arguing which is better, that's like arguing over which color is better....better in what way? I'm arguing against your contention that ONLY personal profit drives invention or innovation. That's clearly a mistaken assumption imo.

In reality, it wasn't spare time tinkering at all, it was serious academics doing full time paid research funded by the government. ARPANET, while funded by the defense department, was designed by and connected college researchers, the first transmissions were between UCLA and Stanford in 69, not the military. This was the first networking, the infant internet.
The military system in the 60's was a point to point tonal encryption system that ran on proprietary bell telephone systems with dedicated direct phone lines until the FCC forced Bell to give up it's capitalistic monopoly in 68, allowing for advancements in both the public and eventually private sector that led to the infant internet instead of just individual "computers" (and I use the term lightly here) directly communicating. Remember, back then, almost into the 90's, you needed to know the direct phone number of the other computer to connect (think "War Games"), there was no publicly accessible network.
The first retail internet transaction wasn't until 94.

Also imo, it was weird individuals tinkering in their spare time that made home computing anything more than very expensive word processors/calculators. We've had PCs since the 70's in my home, I remember what they could do then....I'm one of those weird individuals.

Long and short, your 5 different capitalistic ways ALL stem from a purely socialist base and a socialist denial of private for profit monopolies, and most if not all of them were developed and implemented using at least some public funding. Without that, we would still be using bell telephone phone modems to direct dial each other. Without public/private cooperation, neither sector could advance like they have together.
Imo, it's not an either/or situation, it's both.

You think this is exceptional?

Let's create an imaginary group, we'll call them Kopz. Now, Kopz are trusted. Kopz are rarely, if ever prosecuted if they commit crimes in the line of duty. If a member of Kopz does something bad, it's his friends, other Kopz who will investigate. If he's actually caught and his fellow Kopz turn him over for prosecution, well the Kopz have a very cozy relationship with prosecutors, so he'll probably have a friend there too. Oh and Kopz are allowed to carry guns and have a monopoly on legal violence.

What kind of person do you think would want to join Kopz?

Now, let's say the people who pick who is and who isn't allowed to join the Kopz, are themselves Kopz. After several generations of inbreeding, what sort of people do you think they'll select to join their fraternity?

These guys only ever get busted when there is absolute incontrovertible video evidence, and even then the first words out of every police chief's mouth inevitably are, "Well, the video doesn't tell the WHOLE story. We need to know the context before we can decide if the behaviour was inappropriate." (guess what, he's a Kopz too!)

http://archive.is/4CVqH

10 year plan. Twice as effective as the USSR's 5 year plans

...Fully rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, restoring our natural ecosystems (needed), dramatically expanding renewable power generation (needed, but it also doesn't mean we should be throwing money away on stupid shit like solar roadways), overhauling our entire transportation system (regional flights, which sort of make up around 70% of total flights, would be targeted for elimination and massively expensive (slower) electrical trains would be put in their place), upgrading all our buildings (most businesses are already moving to green solutions) , jumpstarting US clean manufacturing (see highly expensive and non-competitive with cheaper overseas mfg), transforming US agriculture (forcing a move from cows/pigs/chickens to plant based proteins)...

While we are at it, might as well do the following:

A job with family-sustaining wages, family and medical leave, vacations, and retirement security (Nice, but you can't just make these jobs available. They are supply and demand.)

High-quality education, including higher education and trade schools (Needed)

High-quality health care (Needed)

Clean air and water (Needed)

Healthy food (Subjective, is meat considered healthy?)

Safe, affordable, adequate housing (because this works, ie Projects...)

An economic environment free of monopolies (Technically this exists already, except in countries outside of the USA and EU)

Economic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work (SWEET! SIGN ME UP FOR THAT CHECK!!!)

I get that his spiel is comedy based, but the GND is about half reality and half looney tunes.

WTF are you talking about?
The CNN article was totally unbiased, simply explaining why some counties missed their deadlines for recounts by 2 minutes (inexperience and ignorance of the process) and so didn't have their recounts count, and why another (properly) invalidated it's own recount because their machines kept breaking and they couldn't verify their own results.
I also don't get what you're saying about their title. Not a bit. Where's the bias there? What?! No recount counts, they're doing them all over....by hand.

Where's the excusing law bending, like the Republican who unapologetically broke state law to allow email and fax voting, but Fox reported that type of voting isn't"normally allowed" not "is specifically forbidden by state law"? Notice any patterns yet?

I just don't see what you're talking about at all.

I've been clear, Fox doesn't have a monopoly on bias, but they are the clear master of the field and are also the most willing to make up their own facts, as they've been caught doing thousands of times.
If CNN has a bias rating of 4/10, Fox is closer to 9/10. If Fox has an honesty rating of 4/10, CNN is closer to 8-9/10. That's what I've been saying all along. They aren't equivalent.

Side note-A federal judge reinstated Acosta's press pass today.

Am I the only one who thought the ant was beside some kind of folded up Monopoly Board?

Yep, a comedian on a comedy tour taking a joke picture pretending to assault a sleeping woman who then quit of his own accord is exactly the same as a long term pedophile who enjoys his parties full support and never backs down or apologizes even after losing, or a philanderer who blackmail his mistress by taking naked pictures of her tied up and threatening to make them public then fights removal.

There is no equivalency. There's not a monopoly on one side, no, but there's absolutely not "every bit as much corruption and dishonesty on the Democrat side of politics as there is on the Republican". Republican dishonesty is about selling the country to Russia and raiding the treasury, and hiding or excusing inexcusable behavior and permeates everything they say. Democratic dishonesty is about which email account an email came from and pretending the leadership has no bias, and bowing to hyper sensitivity and disingenuous faux outrage.

For example...
Asked how his tax plan benefits the rich, he replied....
Trump: "No, I don't benefit. I don't benefit. In fact, very very strongly, as you see, I think there's very little benefit for people of wealth."

When asked about his rich friends....
"They can call me all they want; not going to help," he said Sept. 27, 2017. "I'm doing the right thing and it's not good for me, believe me."

When asked about the Trump zero tolerance plan to tear families apart as a political ploy, Trump claimed the Democrats did it and only they can reverse it, then he reversed his plan himself proving both family destroying lies to be lies.

The consistency, levels, and importance of the dishonesty from Republicans is exponentially greater than that from Democrats, who are far from perfect themselves.

Edit: Btw, Mahr has addressed the issue of him running for office repeatedly, he's capable and intelligent enough to be honest and say he's a horrible politician and would probably never run, and he knows he's far more influential exactly where he is than he might be as a freshman representative.....and he's smart enough to see that a candidate that gets out the vote for the opposition (like Clinton) is a horrendously stupid idea.
And Franken worked out great until he caved to false outrage and quit while pedophiles and abusive philanderers were welcomed into the opposing party feigning the outrage over a funny (but disrespectful) picture.

If that was the policy, I could agree, but the corporate representative has said publicly that in that region it's their written policy that non customers can't use the rest room or loiter inside, and they set up the manager, unintentionally, to fail with their policies. It's horrific to me that, for following written policy, the manager is now fired.

Crazy that you, of all people, are arguing the manager in a privately owned business doesn't have the right to eject even customers, much less non customers. How can that work? Any place open to the public is now publicly owned? No business may prosecute anyone for trespassing? Even non customers? Or is it just franchise coffee shops? I've seen many a white punk asked to leave Denny's at 2am for no purchase, or for nursing their coffee for hours....I've been one.

The cops have said they asked the men at least 7 times to leave peacefully over a prolonged, disruptive time period, and they continuously refused. During that time, backup and a supervisor were called and had time to show up while the men remained seated, ignoring the police requests/commands.

How hard would it have been to just buy their own coffee instead of causing all this over obstinate refusal to respect the manager's requests because they're waiting for someone? How often would you expect that excuse, if accepted, to end with hours of free WiFi and restroom use but no sales? Seems to me they caused all this themselves, and had dozens of easy opportunities to avoid even being asked to leave, much less arrest, just by being a customer in the store they set up shop in.

Edit: and I shouldn't have said it had nothing to do with race, there's likely a racial component....it's not only or definitively about race.

All that said...please go ahead and boycott Starbucks, if not for this then because they're out of control and a near monopoly.

Problem is the majority of Democrats are in bed with almost the same rich people/lobbyists/corporations/corrupt unions as the Republicans.

We've slipped back into a Oligarchy unseen since before Roosevelt busted up the trusts during the Great Depression. Only now, instead of monopolies, we have oligopolies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly#United_States

I remember hearing that the who came up with FedEx got a bad grade in his business school class because the idea wasn't considered possible; the cost of entry is all of those facilities worldwide plus all of the airplanes or in other words pretty damn high; and then you have to turn all of that on at the same time; so if you're first you pretty much have a monopoly and can set really high prices; so the rewards are extremely high, but so are the costs and risks

Congratulations! Your video, Tractor Hacking: Farmers Breaking Big Tech's Repair Monopoly, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 18 Badge!

Your video, Tractor Hacking: Farmers Breaking Big Tech's Repair Monopoly, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

No, it makes them like the Democratic Party who don't have any problem simultaneously touting their position on women's rights and supporting Bill Clinton who was a serial groper and philanderer... in the same way that they condemn Trump for a lack of respect for the rule of law while they worshiped Barrack Obama who didn't feel it was necessary to enforce (or even recognize) immigration law or drug laws.

I don't really think either party has a monopoly on hypocrisy...

Get your ears, and overt outdated biases checked.
I heard plenty of women whooping in agreement.

Women don't have a monopoly on being abused, men do not have a monopoly on being perpetrators, as the article/study linked above proved conclusively. Shed your bias and use your brain.