Absolutely yes.
My lab carried my disks, rags, place markers, and sometimes even my cigars in her backpack until she was paralyzed. She was my caddy.
My Shepherd would only chase the disk and “mark” where it stopped by touching it with his nose, but I never taught him to sit there so you had to watch him closely. He was not a caddy.
I’ve also known people who performed the same duties for friends, boyfriends/girlfriends, even for the “blind” disk golfer I played with a few times (he actually beat me). I’ve seen people tired of playing all day caddy for their friends quite often.
I’ve also seen caddies used in tournaments.
It’s not the norm, but it’s certainly not unheard of by any means.

Edit: is a caddy a prerequisite for it to be “golf”? If so, I guess there are a bunch of municipal bumpy ball whacking fields, but no municipal golf courses?

I will say, I’ve never personally seen electric disk golf carts.

And then he was thrown out for tossing things onto the field of play and banned from events for the next year.

It seems the "news" just had to deem this to be fake till after the Mid Terms.

Now this will clear the field for Dems to run against Joe.

Joe most likely will not run again in 2024 citing its time to retire.

Hey @newtboy Is this still fake?

Your point?
States with highest gun violence rates
Mississippi -- 28.6 per 100000
Louisiana -- 26.3.
Wyoming -- 25.9.
Missouri -- 23.9.
Alabama -- 23.6.
Alaska -- 23.5.
The list, and trend continues.
Republican states consistently have higher gun death rates, the top ten states for gun deaths are all Republican led….so much for blaming Democrats.
Republicans don’t care. The #’s point this out horrifically and consistently.
Republican states also don’t care about keeping the lights on or having running water in their cities anymore…I’m looking at you, Texas and Mississippi. Florida has abandoned education in favor of far right wing indoctrination for children (maybe with field trips to Epstein island with the ex president if they’re good and pretty and will sign a binding NDA).

(Pretty chicken shit to claim Dems don’t care, while Cons block every attempt they make to solve the issue, but you do you.)

Um….did I EVER advocate gun free zones, or even indicate I think they’re possible in America? I don’t think so. Why must you always fight windmills and paper tigers? It doesn’t make you sound sane.
It would be excellent…if it were possible. No one is hunting inside city limits, if no one had guns, no one would need guns. It’s not possible unless we take drastic, unconstitutional actions (or change the constitution like the founders intended).

There aren’t enough gun regulations when a schizophrenic person can legally buy as many guns and as much ammo as they wish, and so can murderous gang members who served their sentence/probation.

They DO need MUCH better enforcement of existing gun laws, we agree there. If laws were applied consistently regardless of the perp, there would already be less gun crime. The problem with that being prisons are so overcrowded they simply cannot house more, and most police seem to not be interested in or capable of legal crime-preventative policing, so making illegal gun possession/use come with harsher sentences simply isn’t going to happen….and has never worked to stop crime.

They also need to remove “loopholes” (intentional back doors) that allow mentally ill and violent criminals to legally purchase firearms with absolutely no background checks and no paperwork. Seems to be a no brainer, but your ilk calls that “terkin’ er guns” (I have to believe because you know you’re all insane and can’t pass mental health screenings), not sane regulation.

No surprise you think more draconian punishment is the answer….how’s that been working out? Not great. Countries that focus on rehabilitation of convicts instead of simple housing for profit have recidivism rates near zero, unlike the US.

Using a gun in the commission of a crime already comes with pretty harsh penalties, btw….often turning misdemeanors into felonies just by having it, not using it.

Prison reform is one part of any functional answer, not more, bigger, worse prisons for longer sentences. Funny, you thought the same when Jan 6 defendants started being rounded up and denied bail…odd you cared about all those ANTIFA and BLM activist though. 😂

yeah. fake.

fake like a 10-year-old rape victim.

must be exhausting. trying to shepherd one's own sheep of thoughts from straying into fields of lush reality. like the examples in this video, all those finely financed fabulists frantically deny the undeniable thus cringing from the credible. they hide from honesty like vampires from sunlight. vain vapid vampires.

'fake news' is Scientology's 'S.P.'; Amish's 'English'; JW's 'worldy'...it's an ever closing circle. like a garoutte.

Aaaaahahahahaha!! Trump is threatening to sue CNN for saying he’s a big liar spreading his big lie. His claim….it’s his “belief”, so when he says it he’s not lying…not that it’s true, not that he can prove it, just that he believes the lie and that magically makes it not a lie.
He will never sue because 1) he has no case at all 2) he’s terrified of discovery and they would gain access to all the Jan 6 documentation he’s hidden from the committee, and 3) it’s a slapp lawsuit, which he would lose badly and be forced to pay millions in restitution and punitive damages for a frivolous lawsuit designed to silence critics….to anyone he sues.

Derp! What a sad, powerless little bully, enraged that no one takes his threats seriously anymore.

Also, his Saudi Arabia PR golf tournament is losing him so much Republican support. The FBI has said definitively that the Saudi government was directly involved in 9/11…not just the 15/19 terrorists being Saudis, but Saudi intelligence agents supplied them with funding, lodging, and “travel assistance”.
Trump was well aware of this, but chose to keep it secret to protect the crown prince and billions in arms sales. Biden declassified this information and stopped protecting those that attacked America.
Birds of a feather….no wonder Trump likes the terroristic draconian Saudis. I wonder how 9/11 Rudy feels about it.

Side note, the sedition caucus voted against helping victims of human trafficking. Their press conference celebrating protecting perpetrators of human trafficking was disrupted when Gaetz was asked if he’s a pedophile and instead of answering “no” he and the rest literally ran away in fear.

Second side note- Republican senator Mike Braun has said the quiet part out loud and proclaimed the right’s next move is to make interracial marriage a state right, not federally guaranteed, so states whose legislature is controlled by Republicans who are against it can ban it, just like abortion. I’m sure you won’t admit you see that as racist, but everyone else does.
Next comes voting rights for non whites and women, they need to be barefoot in the field, or barefoot, pregnant, and always silent and submissive anyway, right?

then you laugh from head to toe.

please try to define the 'unhinged' part? what is so funny about caring about others not in your family, in your Party, not in your field of ideology, or even in your state?

that's the separation. deep empathy versus emotional apathy.

the morality of putting an unattached stranger's judgment ahead of a woman and her doctors is more heinous than holy. the facts bear this out.

would spend more time 'enlighting' but doubt that's your gig: b/w. by-the-book. my way or the highway.

hard to grow flowers in a salt mine.

* * * *

also amazed by the amount of less-than-stellar perspicaciousness of people that use 'stupid' as a counterpoint.

B: "yer just stoopid."
L: "oh. that's why you don't make sense." {how does this guy find his ass to wipe? nope. doesn't have to. he laughed it off.}

* * * *

buy their albums. save them. support them. rescue dying fetus from annilation.

I immediately wondered that; a low yield dirty bomb, at say, the UN on the Upper East Side would be a different EMP profile, I presume, from a higher yielded ship born bomb inside, say, a container which had cleared customs in Pakistan, and that would be different from a high altitude air burst, right? So, and the physics seems calculable if annoyingly in my past--you should be able to calculate a range of EMP from various yields?

The "Quora" answers are: a ground-based (ship based?) lower yield weapon has EMP effects of note to the 3 mile range.

An airburst would be a different issue. "Starfish Prime”. In this high altitude nuclear test, carried out in 1962, a 1.44 Mt warhead was detonated at a height of 400 km. Electrical damage, including burning out hundreds of street lamps was caused in Hawaii - about 1500 km from the point of detonation.

By contrast there was no direct blast damage at all at that range.

The maximal electric fields induced in the Starfish Prime EMP in Hawaii were estimated at 6 kV/m. At high latitudes the value could easily be ten times higher.

For electrical equipment to be damaged by an EMP from a nuclear detonation, the detonation point must be above the visual horizon.

A large yield weapon detonated 400 km above Kansas would have an EMP that extended across the entire continental US, but the ground intensity pattern of that EMP would be peaked towards the South of ground zero, it would not be symmetrical."

just seeing the plane pass under those lines produced a gasp.

rode with a crop-dusting pilot when they decided to 'buzz' fellow co-workers in a field. almost forgot about the wires at the end of the field.

the flashback was chilling.

but reading your story [damn shame] produced sweating to even things out.

I see Axl Rose leaning over on stage singing into a microphone with a big red arrow sticking him in the butt.

Anybody...?


Birds Aren't Real!
Strawberry Fields Forever

That's absolutely happening here - it's a really good practical example of the speed of sound. It doesn't really take much distance for the effect to be noticeable - I was in marching band in high school and when we were spread out across a football field it was *really* important we pay attention to the conductor, or everything would end up sounding super muddled to the audience.

They are real women, no matter how you wish otherwise.
Are men that take testosterone supplements not real males? Same for women taking estrogen, not real females? Women who’ve had a hysterectomy? Men who had penectomies or testicular removal?
Is this a “real woman” who should compete against women? https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/31662608/boxer-patricio-manuel-transgender-pioneer-looking-next-fight

What expertise in the fields of gender vs sex vs sexual orientation do you boast to contradict the actual experts with careers in those subjects?
A:None, you’re an alleged maintenance/service tech with embarrassing language skills, and apparently a total lack of scientific knowledge.

Where’s your evidence of that “disadvantage “? Where are the rest of the 2% of athletes that are top of their sport and trans? You make the claim, prove it (one example does not prove anything). Guess you failed math too.

That could be true if your loopy idea that men are pretending to be women to get an advantage in sports were in any way true, but it’s pure unadulterated nonsense.
Trans women must go through years of hormone therapy; supplements, hormone blockers, sometimes even surgery to be able to compete. In many leagues they must never go through male puberty. They cannot, as you clearly think is the norm, just put on a woman’s swimsuit and compete with women, then whip their dicks out after competition and go back to being macho men. Your insistence on keeping your head firmly encased in your lower intestine, in the dark, listening to yourself echo through your own fart chamber is what lets you believe such utterly ridiculous nonsense.

I think it’s abundantly clear to everyone which of us lives in an echo chamber of lies and nonsense and which of us thinks for themselves, and equally clear which prefers the light of knowledge and fact and which sticks to their dark cave of ignorance and misinformed opinion.

Er mer gerd…. ROTFLMFAHS!!! Mr cranial rectosis projects so freaking hard, yo.

I hope this monument to opulence fails miserably and the developers lose their shirts.
There’s no way they won’t damage or destroy that reef.
The first big storm is going to destroy much of the sand island.
But, 10% are special protection zones! Won’t matter, they can’t survive if huge amounts of the non protected reef are destroyed.

Not to mention sea level rise will put it underwater quickly, it’s barely above current sea level in the plans.

Look at Mexico, dozens of comparatively tiny resorts not even on the reefs, but on land, and that reef is not 10% what it was in the mid 80’s. Building ON the reef is guaranteed to destroy it, as is tourism.

I hate when companies are allowed to build on natural wonders to exploit the beauty, they invariably destroy that beauty within decades. That entire reef/coastline should be off limits to construction so the two desert properties have an attraction. When the reefs die from sun tan lotion poisoning, bleaching, sand displacement, accidents with supply ships, the first major fuel spill, etc, that place will be a $5 billion waste, abandoned to the desert.

Remember the “islands of the world” project in Dubai? This sounds even less thought out than they were, more ecologically disastrous, needing more infrastructure to be built, requiring ships to bring fuel as there’s no nearby port to run pipelines from (guaranteeing oil spills). All for what? So billionaires can get off their yachts for a while in luxury?

Wiki-Significant changes in the maritime environment [of Dubai]. As a result of the dredging and redepositing of sand for the construction of the islands, the typically crystalline waters of the Persian Gulf at Dubai have become severely clouded with silt. Construction activity is damaging the marine habitat, burying coral reefs, oyster beds and subterranean fields of sea grass, threatening local marine species as well as other species dependent on them for food. Oyster beds have been covered in as much as two inches of sediment, while above the water, beaches are eroding with the disruption of natural currents.

That was a $12 billion project to exploit the pristine coast and beautiful waters that no longer exist, the islands themselves are sinking and eroding, most were evacuated or never used at all, the water is now mud colored, the reefs are gone. An unmitigated disaster. This sounds extremely similar.

Oppose this and similar projects.

If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?