I disagree. That bear is well known for going off-script and doing things his own way... it's the main reason for most of his wacky adventures. Similarly, Bond is a notorious improviser.

I just pity her security detail around a bear and a guy who tends to shoot first and ask questions later. Remember the Frank Drebin debacle?

The only silver lining in this whole goddamn debacle. With any luck they'll immediately become a permanent minority party at the federal level, and at the state level within a few years. Frankly that needs to happen (ideally via voter abandonment of the party, rather than through viral attrition), as the anti-science assclown brigade has made it clear they'll be no help with climate change. It'll be the same fucking pack of lies and denial of obvious objective reality, except with more flooding, fire, extreme winds, and with much less food. It's going to be a clusterfuck of horrific consequences, within a few decades. Unless the anti-sciencers get the reins of power stripped away.

Your video, Trump's Debate Performance Was an Embarrassing Debacle, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Astonished @bobknight33 posted a video about Trump using more stolen data to further manipulate voters. Kudos.

This whole debacle is a prime example of why I won't ever join Facebook or other similar social media. It's been clear from day one they are not going to keep your data safe. Posting your life there is like writing everything you do and think in your diary that you then leave open in the public library every day, assuming the librarian is going to keep it private. Getting your information there is like wading into a mob of angry people and believing what you overhear them scream at each other. I just do not see the appeal, but I am pretty anti-social.

The last couple of decades I've really begun to see the military as corporate welfare. We have a force capable of crushing, literally crushing any non nuclear power nation 20 times over. We can never use that force against a significant nuclear power nation like Russia or China lest we risk WWW3, the war that will REALLY end all wars (by humanity at least). Our tech is also pretty much useless against a guerrilla force because they can melt across borders and into the local population.

Our outdated technology still would destroy any of the nations other than Russia or China. We have shit mothballed and decaying that would do so. We have a fucking stockpile of main battle tanks that we will never use, but we keep building them and storing them because, apparently, if you let the people go who know how to make them you can never replace that knowledge.

All the while, we let people get mired in school debt, credit debt, and increase our national debt because we need to crush some unknown force. We spend a fraction of what we should be spending on space exploration and colonization. I could go on, but why bother.

If you have any doubt, just look at the F35. By the time it is all said and done, we will have close to half a trillion sunk into that fucking debacle and it STILL isn't functioning capably. Russia and China haven't got anything close to it and we don't need it against anyone else. You could take that money and give close to 2 grand to every single man, woman, and child in the country. Instead we basically are lining Lockheed Martin's pockets.

This week it has been:

• Wanted Adventure (for example https://youtu.be/wjQgjoZBjhI )
• Blancolirio (the name is spanish for white lily, Juan is a commercial pilot who has been covering the Oroville Dam debacle but it turns out his other videos are also really cool)
• Goodwood Road and Racing (Vroom!)
• Deep Look (and The Nature of Science) for nature videos from scientists.
• Arika Okrent (and also Langfocus) on linguistics
• Luna Lee (for example https://youtu.be/ANmvwQYRglw )

I've been wondering about the pipeline theory, it would be much easier for them to tie into Iraq's pipeline systems and just go through Turkey, wouldn't it? Who would think a pipeline through non friendly territory would work? The Syrians could sever it at will.
As a distraction, it could work temporarily, but it opens Trump up to more, new, constitutional issues on top of international ones and only distracts from the Russian debacle temporarily.
No matter what, you're correct, it's a total shit show.

Aha! This is pretty recent, and I've seen the actual play that is being, uh, highlighted.

The Colorado Avalanche (COL, white jerseys) are dead last in the NHL this season, and it isn't even close. They are beyond terrible. I'm a fan, but this season is so grim that I can't bring myself to watch games; just catch up once in a while on a week or two's worth of bad news. I saw this play came up just a few days ago.

In the play in question here (can't see much of it in the video, I'll embed below) a Colorado player gets a breakaway. Scoring a goal wouldn't do anything dramatic like get them back in the game, or save the season or anything. But it might save some pride and make it actually appear like they are professional hockey players. Hell, I think Avs fans would have been happy if he just hopelessly shot the puck right into the logo on the goalie's chest. Going through the motions would be an improvement for this team.

Instead, he inexplicably decides to stop, turn around, and attempt to pass to his teammate a few strides back. But the pass is intercepted by a defenseman from the other team, because OF COURSE it is. So they went from a guaranteed scoring chance (a breakaway shot) to nothing. Pretty much sums up their season, in one play.

Here it is:


Considering all that, I think the whole debacle was completely deserving of having a big dick drawn all over it.

Are you really blaming the debacle that is Trump on a small sect of the left wing, cos like, maybe its contributory...but you know, the straw that breaks the back is, afterall, still only a piece of straw.

Have you actually, personally, been pepper sprayed for just trying to speak?

If not...faux outrage? Irony detected.

Idk. I'm white, I'm male, I'm straight, but we clearly swim in different circles. The only person censoring me is me. I think the white, male, straight demo is heard from quite enough. He IS President afterall.

Not that I don't think there has been a tendency to stifle discussion through the abuse of "poltical correctness", but honestly, sometimes the "precious snowlflakes" thing seems like a more apt to description of the anti-SJW crowd that seem more butthurt that some people disagree with them than the people they offend.

non-brexit brexit seems like a complete nightmare.

Uncertainty is bad for business, but how do you reassure without those 52% catching on? The Sun, The Daily Mail etc will put the migration figures on the front page and people will go absolutely potty. We'll be in exactly the same place as before, only we'll be poorer for the whole debacle and people will be even more angry and distrustful of establishment politicians. There will be plenty more like Farage, and worse besides, who'll use that climate to gain power.

More on the Nevada debacle http://heavy.com/news/2016/05/nevada-democratic-convention-what-happened-roberta-lange-delegates-election-fraud-videos-recount-denied/

Um...who called you a pig? The voices in your head? Certainly not me. I don't know why you would say you can't be both though. That's just silly. ;-)


That's a pretty big 'If it can' that's already been proven to be an 'it can't'. Even IF it did everything it was supposed to, yes, it's 10 years too late and at least double an acceptable price tag, and still not ready for prime time, or even the 2am slot.
Yes, modification happens, but the idea is not to produce something that needs to be modified out of the box in order to do anything well.
No, many bombers are in use that were designed as bombers. Sorry, but that's just wrong.
Once again, the idea of the F-35 doesn't grant air superiority, neither does a few of these planes, especially if we are too afraid to lose a $200+ million plane so we just don't use them, which is the most likely outcome. It is in NO way a deterrent to full scale war with any foe we might ever use it against, like Russia. If it was some magic anti-war bullet, that might be money well spent, but is simply isn't in any way and NEVER will be, so that argument is just silly.
In 10 years, the stealth properties of this plane will be 5 years past obsolete....and it may STILL not be in the air.
There are no countries with air forces that can come close to ours, not one. I don't think there's even a group of 10 nations combined that come close to ours. We will NEVER be in a fair fight excepting a nuclear one where every one dies, and we'll still out nuke everyone else 10-1, it just won't matter.
Yes, Trump likely would take us to war, that's no reason to waste more money on unneeded weapons for a possible, unknown, unlikely future conflict with an unknown, unestimated enemy.
Still testing....and still testing....and still testing....$1.3 TRILLION later.....Still testing (and failing those tests)....still testing...still testing. Eventually it should be admitted that it's a failure, more testing won't help (it hasn't yet), and quit throwing mountains of good money after bad.
No, it doesn't. It's TASKED with all the same stuff the aging, multi types of planes do, but it can't do it. Stealth is not something new, BTW, we have many stealth planes already, better ones that work.
Again, out of the box needing to be upgraded is a fail. A massive, indisputable fail. That an engine powerful enough to move this pig like other planes already can doesn't exist should tell you something. It's aerodynamic....great....that's one part of a dozen that have to fit together.
The price tag is multiplied 10 fold because it has a pilot.
You want them to eventually pass ALL required tests...not fail them all, then change the parameters so it isn't canceled.
Nope...Warthog.
Not so far. So far, other stealth planes do what it's supposed to...better. Upgrading them is clearly a better plan.
Not true. All I hear is 'it sucks' because I don't read Lockheed Martin's press releases. When you look at test results, it sucks. When you look at price, it sucks. When you look at upkeep, it sucks ass. When you look at a fleet of them doing everything a dozen different planes today do, we're bankrupt and far less capable militarily, and that sucks.

But it seems no amount of logic and results will dissuade you from your love of this unmitigated debacle. That's your choice, but you aren't convincing anyone else to go along with you.

That is all well and good, but the F35 is not just a sniper. It's a multi-role aircraft that needs to be an interceptor, a bomber, and a close ground support plane. You can be a 'sniper' and hide long range in interceptor mode, but bombing and close ground support are not going to be as kind to a plane that relies completely on stealth to overcome it's shortcomings in maneuverability, etc.

Additionally, the sheer cost of the vehicle is going to make it prohibitive for our allies to purchase it, meaning that in NATO combat groups, we will have it and our allies won't. It also means that we can't offset the trillion dollar development cost in ally purchases. Of course, it is likely that we won't even try to export it for the risk of having the stealth breached. We didn't export the F22 for similar reasons and it is dead now.

The simple fact is that we have sunk a ton of money into a pit and for little return. There are still huge long term delays in Russian and Chinese stealth programs, so just like the F22, this plane is going to come into production with no real enemies to fight against. Are we going to risk sending these vs last gen or earlier systems when our older planes are still more advanced than those and cost far less?

We aren't going to stop making this plane, we've gone too far. But it is going to be just as much of a waste as the F22 and probably more of a debacle when the enemy does come up with hardware capable of defeating it's stealth capabilities. Once that happens, we have a plane that is worse than the previous generation facing enemies more than capable of taking it out of the sky.

Do a search, it is completely true. The Air Force tried to play it down, saying that the test was only to test current dogfighting methods and that the F35 was designed for future conflict dogfighting which is 'going' to be stealth based and long range conflict only.

The plane is a debacle worse than the Bradley fighting vehicle, more expensive, and we are too far in to back out without embarrassing the big players.

I just don't understand how anyone thinks a multiparty election can work in a 1 person, 1 vote system for 1 office.

Let's say, 60% of the voters lean liberal and you have 2 candidates vying for the liberal vote and 1 for the conservative side. Your liberal candidates split the vote and you get a conservative president that the majority don't want.
Please explain to me how it works out differently in our voting system. If you can't, please stop acting like this is a realistic option. Our system might not be perfect but it's better than the debacle you're proposing.