they missed conception bay, dildo, south dildo, come by chance, little heart's ease, tickles, nugget's bay, random island, lady cove, and the motion. and that's just on the east coast of newfoundland.

Your video, A Tribute to Monty Python from South Park, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 232 Badge!

Your video, Puppet Show - "Mexican Joker " - s23e01 - South Park, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

How do you solve something that's going apeshit in another country? For starters, in the case of Ukraine and Crimea, we keep our obligations we agreed to and support them with the U.S. military from day one when Russia invaded Crimea, and again in Ukraine proper. Had we done that as we specifically and unambiguously agreed to do when they gave up their nukes in return, the "civil war" (that's clearly a foreign invasion) wouldn't have occurred. That's an Obama administration failure, one that seriously harmed our international standing and trustworthiness, imo. If we had just put 100 Marines on the borders, Russia wouldn't have risked WW3 to invade either country.
My point is human political or boundary issues are nothing compared to intentionally reengineering the makeup of the atmosphere and getting enough cooperation to implement the desired (required) changes.

If she changes policy in the west, that will impact the East....and South. What America does is more often than not mirrored, especially when we're successful.
Her impact is more for the public than governments. Sway enough of the public, get them to vote on your issue, and politics will evolve at light speed.

Her delivery is exactly what's needed. An angry, educated young woman (they called me young man at 14, so don't balk), being unpleasant about having her future stolen makes exponentially more impact to the audience she targets than a thousand dry, factual, statistic rich talks by scientists. (Those are a dime a dozen today) Kids telling their parents that when the shit hits the fan, the kids are tossing them in the swollen river, not supporting them through their old age, is exactly the kick in the face many need. Kids of today will blame adults of today for the future they live in. Adults of today clearly don't consider that enough.

Something is better than nothing, she's demanding something. She's 16, do you expect her to have all the answers? (Some feasible solutions would be nice) She's well ahead of the curve just understanding the severity of the problem. I'm sure if we listened to all her speeches she gives some suggestions of action we could take to move in the right direction, but I doubt any one person has answers that solve every major effect of climate change, much less all the secondary and tertiary effects. I certainly don't expect her, at that age, to do more than demand those in power take it seriously and find solutions....and act. Chastising a major polluter who walked away from the weak, insufficient Paris agreement is a good start if it works, but I agree it's only barely a start.

You should consider it, she got millions to March for her cause worldwide. Even if she is a willing tool for some adults, it's clear more adults are tools for her. Consider, she isn't talking to kids, she's talking to adults, and some at least are listening to her, not her parents.

Personally it disturbs me that emotional delivery like this is required for many to even consider the issue beyond "what does my political party say on this issue, that's what I say too." I wish scientific issues like climate change were immune to politics, propaganda, and emotion, but they aren't. That's why we're hosed imo, humans are too willing to be deceived if the lie is more pleasant than reality, and denying there's a problem or need for change is quite pleasant to lazy Americans, far easier than facing facts and implementing difficult solutions....until it's not at least, by which time it's far too late.

Your brain has turned to mush.
Seek medical attention.

The Southern Strategy was in response to Kennedy's civil rights act, which passed after his assassination....a strategy implemented largely after it's passing.

Although the phrase "Southern Strategy" is often attributed to Nixon's political strategist Kevin Phillips, he did not originate it[15] but popularized it.[16] In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, Phillips stated his analysis based on studies of ethnic voting:

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats".[1]

So, if by "sensible Democrats" you mean the racist ones angry that non whites now have rights, you're partially correct, except that it did work, he did peel them off and won the presidency because of their support.
*facepalm

Yet another fool drinks Kool Aid.

Bogus Dog whistle you listen to. They don't exits.

Nixon tried to peel off the sensible democrats and it did not work. That Racist Democrat south held tight.

Racist Democrats kept the south. Republicans pushed for Civil rights bill of 64. 80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats.

Democrat party are the party of racism not Republicans.

Even more so today Democrats are spouting that racism is worst that ever. Such BS.

No sir.
I even mentioned one group in America that never adopted petroleum...Amish...and I would counter your assertion with the fact that most people on earth don't live using oil, they're too poor, not too fortunate. 20-30 years ago, most Chinese had never been in a car or a commercial store bigger than a local vegetable stand.

Both customers and non customers are the victims.
Using (or selling) a product that clearly pollutes the air, land, and sea is immoral.

Yes, it's like our business is predicated on rebuilding wrecked cars overnight which we do by using massive amounts of meth. Sure, our products are death traps, sure, we lied about both our business practices and the safety of our product, sure, our teeth and brains are mush....but our business has been successful and allowed us to have 10 kids (8 on welfare, two adopted out), and if we quit using meth they'll starve and fight over scraps. That's proof meth is good and moral and you're mistaken to think otherwise. Duh.

Yes, we overpopulated, outpacing the planet's ability to support us by far...but instead of coming to terms with that and changing, many think we should just wring the juice out of the planet harder and have more kids. I think those people are narcissistic morons, we don't need more little yous. Sadly, we are well beyond the tipping point, even if no more people are ever born, those alive are enough to finish the biosphere's destruction. Guaranteed if they think like you seem to.

Um, really? Complete collapse of the food web isn't catastrophic?
Wars over hundreds of millions or billions of refugees aren't catastrophic? (odd because the same people who think that are incensed over thousands of Syrians, Africans, and or South and Central American refugees migrating)
Massive food shortage isn't catastrophic?
Loss of most farm land and hundreds of major cities to the sea isn't catastrophic?
Loss of corals, where >25% of ocean species live, and other miniscule organisms that are the base of the ocean food web isn't catastrophic?
Loss of well over 1/2 the producers of O2, and organisms that capture carbon, isn't catastrophic?
Eventual clouds of hydrogen sulfide from the ocean covering the land, poisoning 99%+ of all life isn't catastrophic?
Runaway greenhouse cycles making the planet uninhabitable for thousands if not hundreds of thousands or even millions of years isn't catastrophic?
Loss of access to water for billions of people isn't catastrophic?
I think you aren't paying attention to the outcomes here, and may be thinking only of the scenarios estimated for 2030-2050 which themselves are pretty scary, not the unavoidable planetary disaster that comes after the feedback loops are all fully in play. Try looking more long term....and note that every estimate of how fast the cycles collapse/reverse has been vastly under estimated....as two out of hundreds of examples, Greenland is melting faster than it was estimated to melt in 2075....far worse, frozen methane too.

You can reject the science, that doesn't make it wrong. It only makes you the ass who knowingly gambles with the planet's ability to support humans or other higher life forms based on nothing more than denial.

Edit: We are at approximately 1C rise from pre industrial records today, expected to be 1.5C in as little as 11 years. Even the IPCC (typically extremely conservative in their estimates) states that a 2C rise will trigger feedbacks that could exceed 12C. Many are already in full effect, like glacial melting, methane hydrate melting, peat burning, diatom collapse, coral collapse, forest fires, etc. It takes an average of 25 years for what we emit today to be absorbed (assuming the historical absorption cycles remain intact, which they aren't). That means we are likely well past the tipping point where natural cycles take over no matter what we do, and what we're doing is increasing emissions.

good video but a rather important thing he missed is, that many governments DO pay brasil to maintain the rainforest-

"Norway has followed Germany in suspending donations to the Brazilian government’s Amazon Fund after a surge in deforestation in the South American rainforest. The move has triggered a caustic attack from the country’s rightwing president.


Bolsonaro rejects 'Captain Chainsaw' label as data shows deforestation 'exploded'
Read more
Jair Bolsonaro, whose move to meddle in the environmental organisation’s governance led to Norway’s decision, reacted by suggesting that Europe was not in a position to lecture his administration.

“Isn’t Norway that country that kills whales up there in the north pole?”, the Brazilian president said. “Take that money and help Angela Merkel reforest Germany.”

After weeks of tense negotiations with Norway and Germany, the Bolsonaro government unilaterally closed the Amazon Fund’s steering committee on Thursday. The fund has been central to international efforts to curb deforestation although its impact is contested.

Brazil’s environment minister, Ricardo Salles, said the Amazon Fund had been suspended while its rules were under discussion.

In response, Ola Elvestuen, his Norwegian counterpart, said an expected payment of about $33.27m (£27.36m) would not take place as Brazil had, in effect, broken the terms of its deal. Norway has been the fund’s biggest donor, and has given about $1.2bn (£985m) over the past decade.

“He cannot do that without Norway and Germany’s agreement,” Elvestuen said. “What Brazil has shown is that it no longer wants to stop deforestation.”

This week Berlin had said it would withhold an expected payment of about $39m. Norway and Germany questioned an initial proposal from the Brazilian government for the fund’s steering committee to be reduced in size, and had warned against any weakening of the structures of the fund.

Grave concerns about the rate of deforestation since Bolsonaro took power have been repeatedly voiced by the Norwegian government and others.

According to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, the government agency that monitors deforestation, the rate increased by 278% in the year to July, resulting in the destruction of about 870 square miles."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-amazon-fund-donation-dispute-brazil-deforestation-jair-bolsonaro


while I do agree that for 3rd world ex colonies it is extremely tiresome to hear lectures about ecology from the US and Europe, who tore up the planet to achieve their status and continue to consume far more than 3rd world people do, Bolsonaro is dead wrong here and sadly it has to be said this is what the democracy and capitalism produce: shortsighted win-now, defer the costs decisions.

Your video, Man shows impressive barehanded grip on South African cliff, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Seems they stuck it to themselves.

-----------------------------------------

A viral video making the rounds Monday shows a boy going to extremes to avoid detection by Bend Police.

The video, captured by a home security system, shows a boy running near the driveway of a single-family home on a south Bend cul-de-sac before climbing inside one of the home’s garbage cans and closing the lid. Seconds later, a Bend officer walks by and asks several nearby girls if they saw a boy run by. They say no.

Thirty minutes later, the boy exits the garbage can and runs off, seemingly consequence-free.

But according to Bend Police spokesperson Lt. Juli McConkey, that boy and three others were ultimately contacted at their homes and cited with second-­degree theft for allegedly stealing Pokemon cards from Walmart.

On July 5, Walmart loss prevention staff called the Bend Police Department to report several boys had stolen Pokemon cards from the store in south Bend. The store turned over security footage and still images of the boys that a Bend school resource officer used to identify them.

The boys, between the ages of 13 and 15, were not contacted until Sunday, when Walmart personnel called Bend Police to report the same boys were back in the store and had stolen more Pokemon cards.

Police arrived, but the boys were by then hiding somewhere in the store and playing the card game, McConkey said.

They eventually came out and were spotted by officers. The boys ran, spilling into the surrounding neighborhoods, which is when the home security camera captured one of the boys evading capture.

On Monday, the video had been viewed more than 1 million times.

The Bulletin does not typically identify juvenile criminal suspects or defendants.

— The Bulletin

....ok, Stan...but how are those farmers in Belarus doing?
(South Park - Stan Your Ground episode)

One of PWEI's best jams!

Augusta, Georgia, late September,
One Mr. Brown's hot tempeed,
This man's possessed, he's restless,
Armed and dangerous, drugged and reckless.
Mrs. Brown you've got a lovely son
But he's on the run on a shotgun mission
"Listen here cocksuckers, motherfuckers, pay respect to my building.
It's JB property and it could be the one you get killed in."
Cops arrive, "What's this, what's happening,
What's what, where's the hot shot?"
James pressed his luck too far this time,
His pick-up truck's flat out and flying.
Cops get excited and grin with glee;
They got themsevles a celebrity!
7 cars give chase "You're in the clear, this is the race of the year!"
"Faster Soul Master, they're coming at you from all directions,
Speed's your protection...Don't look behind you 'til south Carolina"
Cops spring a roadblock "He ain't gonna stop!"
"He's gonna take a pop!"
Someone opens fire, the trucks front tyres are blown out
"Get the hell out!"
As six mile skid, trapped in a ditch,
In the lap of the FBI, the Secret Service,
The Russians, "they're all in this, they're doing it to James
Like they did it to Elvis"
A "good-foot" dance in a dusted trance
Breath tested "No Chance!" Arrested!

"Some damned fool thing in the Balkans South China Sea."

Promotion or no, they got a good product.

Actually, I think all of south-east asia might.

If the US never recognized the confederate states, then wouldn't they say all the people in the south are still US citizens? Lee was a general, and an American, just not a general for the USA.