America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 38,738 comments
  • 1,659,439 views
Speaking of refueling, the most expensive portion of the SR-71 program was refueling logistics. After the plane took off it would immediately rendezvous for refueling. Then it would fly from its base to its area of operation where it would again refuel. Then it would accelerate up to altitude and complete its mission. After completion it would descend to refuel again, then head back to base.

Oh, and they had some mishaps during the early stages.
 
@Danoff I'm not sure they need to drop payload. In the article they mentioned hypersonic missiles. Cap those with nuclear warheads and launch them off a battleship fleet from thousands of miles away, to hit in less than an hour.

What scares me more than us having them is that technological advancement is held back by psychological barriers more than technical. Once one guy does something suddenly everyone knows they can do it and eventually a number of them do.

Of course, information can spread far faster than it can be caught these days, so chances are someone will have the knowledge to do it without having to work for it.

The only reason we seem to make this stuff first and faster is access to resources. Since the end of the Cold War we have had the ability to be the only kid on the block with cool toys. With recent economic trends that might not hold true for much longer.
 
@Danoff I'm not sure they need to drop payload. In the article they mentioned hypersonic missiles. Cap those with nuclear warheads and launch them off a battleship fleet from thousands of miles away, to hit in less than an hour.

Someone might be able to detect that launch in time to respond. Not so from high overhead.
 
Someone might be able to detect that launch in time to respond. Not so from high overhead.
I see what you are saying. Depending on the enemy though the missiles might be enough.

I guess the better question is acceleration and deceleration rate. Can they slow down to drop the payload fast enough to not be detected? I mean, you can't drop payloads at Mach 6, can you?
 
Statistics show that at least two-thirds of the Swiss are not retarded.

Salary cap fails at ballot box.

David Roth President of Young Socialists Switzerland
We’re disappointed [we] lost today. Our opponents used scare tactics.

Scare tactics? You're a goddam socialist! It's in your name. Have you no shame?!

EDIT: More news from Europe. Slavery is not only legal, it is the law.
 
Last edited:
Or maybe they weren't doped up on meth when they voted that day. I noticed that they also rejected a right-leaning proposal as well.
 
Or maybe they weren't doped up on meth when they voted that day. I noticed that they also rejected a right-leaning proposal as well.
This isn't a matter of left- and right-wing. Switzerland is known for economic stability and sensibility, moreso than the US. The fact that they not only voted down a fairly pure socliast economic proposal but also a very fallacious blend of right-wing/statist/conservative/liberal ideologies shows that they aren't easily tricked, even when an idea sounds wholesome but is actually totally contradictory.

Let me explain. The "right-wing" proposal was to offer tax breaks to families who don't use daycare centers. Sounds nice, right? Family values, raising the kids right, tradition, etc. A very conservative thing to do. But wait, I thought right-wingers also supported small business and economic choice? So now you want to entice people not to spend money at their local daycare? That's inconsistent. Further, the reason you want kids to be raised at home is because scientific studies show they grow up better when raised at home? That's a liberal thing to do, isn't it. But wait, I thought liberals supported women's rights and think women should be strong and build their own careers? So now you want them to pull their kids out of daycare and be stay-at-home moms? That doesn't make any sense. Not only were typically-right-wing business organizations against the proposal but so were typically-left-wing women's rights groups. Because they're not dumb and are able to spot an asinine contradiction, unlike the vast majority of Americans.
 
Last edited:
Statistics show that at least two-thirds of the Swiss are not retarded.

Salary cap fails at ballot box.



Scare tactics? You're a goddam socialist! It's in your name. Have you no shame?!

EDIT: More news from Europe. Slavery is not only legal, it is the law.
Yeah, can be sometimes a bit tough for me to use reddit because by and large redditors were in support of the absolutely asinine 12:1 rule. It makes zero sense that a CEO's pay should be limited by some high school dropout scrubbing toilets, just ridiculous. Switzerland is an odd blend of liberal and libertarian poliicies, one of the most free economies in the world and very open on gun rights but also can be quite liberal in other senses. Interesting to say the least. Glad the feels and rhetoric didn't win the vote over economic sense, because a 12:1 salary cap is ridiculous and would have lead to a mass exodus of businesses in Switzerland.

In the abstract of course the CEO of Coca-Cola isn't "worth" more to humanity than a surgeon, but when you strip away the feels and look at the value they provide the picture changes.
 
Last edited:
Agreed, but from one of the articles you cited:

"Furthermore, § 683 BGB let´s you demand reimbursement for expenses and damages you incurred while helping from the person you helped."
 
EDIT: More news from Europe. Slavery is not only legal, it is the law.

Oh my god.

First driver behind an accident stops to help.
Second driver behind an accident stops to help.
Third driver behind the accident sees the other two, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Fourth driver behind the accident sees the other three, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Fifth driver behind the accident sees the other four, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Sixth driver behind the accident sees the other five, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Seventh driver behind the accident sees the other six, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Eighth driver behind the accident sees the other seven, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Ninth driver behind the accident sees the others, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Tenth driver behind the accident sees the others, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help
Eleventh driver behind the accident sees the others, but since no ambulance is there he stops to help

And an accident in which nobody was seriously injured and which was easily removed from the road shuts down said road completely until an ambulance can get through the traffic to the scene.
 
This isn't a matter of left- and right-wing. Switzerland is known for economic stability and sensibility, moreso than the US. The fact that they not only voted down a fairly pure socliast economic proposal but also a very fallacious blend of right-wing/statist/conservative/liberal ideologies shows that they aren't easily tricked, even when an idea sounds wholesome but is actually totally contradictory.

Let me explain. The "right-wing" proposal was to offer tax breaks to families who don't use daycare centers. Sounds nice, right? Family values, raising the kids right, tradition, etc. A very conservative thing to do. But wait, I thought right-wingers also supported small business and economic choice? So now you want to entice people not to spend money at their local daycare? That's inconsistent. Further, the reason you want kids to be raised at home is because scientific studies show they grow up better when raised at home? That's a liberal thing to do, isn't it. But wait, I thought liberals supported women's rights and think women should be strong and build their own careers? So now you want them to pull their kids out of daycare and be stay-at-home moms? That doesn't make any sense. Not only were typically-right-wing business organizations against the proposal but so were typically-left-wing women's rights groups. Because they're not dumb and are able to spot an asinine contradiction, unlike the vast majority of Americans.
If one gets a tax deduction for utilizing daycare facilities, wouldn't it make sense to offer that same deduction to someone that decides to stay home with their kids? There is a direct cost associated with the daycare, but there is also a direct cost to raising kids at home in the form of a lost second income in the case of a father/mother working outside the home and one remaining at home to raise the kids. Why would not both sets of parents get the same tax break? Maybe there's more to it but it doesn't seem all that contradictory to me.
 
Agreed, but from one of the articles you cited:

"Furthermore, § 683 BGB let´s you demand reimbursement for expenses and damages you incurred while helping from the person you helped."
That's good. If I were a doctor I'd certainly send the city, county and state three separate bills because they all have the law on the books. Three birds, one stone.

But that doesn't resolve the fact that you're not allowed to choose whether or not to serve the person in the first place. The medical industry is a glaring example of this - they aren't allowed to not serve you and you aren't allowed to not pay for services you didn't ask for. I say we go to the Human Rights thread and argue the idea that any reasonable person with a broken leg would want it fixed.
Oh my god
According to European posters on Reddit, if there are already people on the scene you don't have to stop. However, the law doesn't define a limit which opens the opportunity for a ridiculous traffic scenario or unwarranted citations.
If one gets a tax deduction for utilizing daycare facilities, wouldn't it make sense to offer that same deduction to someone that decides to stay home with their kids? There is a direct cost associated with the daycare, but there is also a direct cost to raising kids at home in the form of a lost second income in the case of a father/mother working outside the home and one remaining at home to raise the kids. Why would not both sets of parents get the same tax break? Maybe there's more to it but it doesn't seem all that contradictory to me.
I don't believe people who use daycares in Switzerland get a tax break for it.
 
I don't believe people who use daycares in Switzerland get a tax break for it.

Then you're in for a little surprise:

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_n...antic_family_model.html?cid=37332576&link=ers

Voters are due to cast their ballots on November 24 on a popular initiative by the rightwing Swiss People’s Party which calls for tax breaks for parents with children at home to be "at least equivalent" to those for parents using daycare.

Even moreso now, the proposal makes a great deal of sense, as it's patently unfair to reward parents who both choose to work, with a tax break that is not available to couples who choose to have one parent stay home and raise their child or children. It's actually providing a disincentive to the traditional family model of having a parent home to raise the children.
 
To those who regularly watch MSNBC, Martin Bashir is out at MSNBC. Via The Blaze:

“After making an on-air apology, I asked for permission to take some additional time out around the Thanksgiving holiday,” Bashir said in an email first obtained by Mediaite Wednesday. “Upon further reflection, and after meeting with the president of MSNBC, I have tendered my resignation. It is my sincere hope that all of my colleagues, at this special network, will be allowed to focus on the issues that matter without the distraction of myself or my ill-judged comments.”

“I deeply regret what was said, will endeavor to work hard at making constructive contributions in the future and will always have a deep appreciation for our viewers – who are the smartest, most compassionate and discerning of all television audiences. I would also wish to express deepest gratitude to my immediate colleagues, and our contributors, all of whom have given so much of themselves to our broadcast,” Bashir said.

Bashir became known for his particularly brutal takedowns of conservative politicians and pundits, but his Palin comments prompted an especially strong backlash. In an apology several days after his remarks, Bashir said he had brought “shame” on his MSNBC colleagues.

“Martin Bashir resigned today, effective immediately. I understand his decision and I thank him for three great years with MSNBC,” network president Phil Griffin said in a statement to TheBlaze. ”Martin is a good man and respected colleague – we wish him only the best.”

A spokeswoman for MSNBC said there would be no further comment on the matter.
 
Ted Nugent more than likely running for President. When asked if he his statements were confirmation of his running, he replied "Sure, why not."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...ing-for-president-sure-why-not_n_4218027.html

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/...t-on-possible-run-for-president-sure-why-not/

My favorite comment:

Nugent, an outspoken supporter of the Republican Party, has called President Barack Obama a liar, a racist and a “piece of :censored: who can “suck on (his) machine gun,” and he said recently that the government had been taken over by “gangsters and America haters.”

God I love that man.
 
I don't have enough information on Nugent's political ideology to make a decision. All I hear are rambling comments about how Obama sucks and Obamacare sucks and he hates America to hell with communism, etc. I have to assume that Nugent is just another Cold War artifact like John McCain who thinks we could go to nuclear war at any moment and would therefore be perfectly willing to support a nationalistic police state.

Everybody rambles about the Constitution these days because Ron Paul made it popular. But nobody says anything thought-provoking like Ron Paul does. Once Nugent starts saying things that make Baby Boomers think outside their bomb shelter, maybe then I'd be able to support him.

I don't have a problem with hillbillies until they start acting like hillbillies, and that goes for any type of person who has either been given or earned a name for themselves. Logic, reason and science trump everything, no matter who you are or where you're from. If Nugent can show me that he agrees then I'd support him.
 
Anywhere in America is a pretty nice place to be. Except on days like today.

DPuvIGM.png


Damn you Florida!
 
I don't have enough information on Nugent's political ideology to make a decision. All I hear are rambling comments about how Obama sucks and Obamacare sucks and he hates America to hell with communism, etc. I have to assume that Nugent is just another Cold War artifact like John McCain who thinks we could go to nuclear war at any moment and would therefore be perfectly willing to support a nationalistic police state.

Everybody rambles about the Constitution these days because Ron Paul made it popular. But nobody says anything thought-provoking like Ron Paul does. Once Nugent starts saying things that make Baby Boomers think outside their bomb shelter, maybe then I'd be able to support him.

I don't have a problem with hillbillies until they start acting like hillbillies, and that goes for any type of person who has either been given or earned a name for themselves. Logic, reason and science trump everything, no matter who you are or where you're from. If Nugent can show me that he agrees then I'd support him.
Everything I've seen from him is basically him supporting everything that the current system is trying to take away.

His views are basically what every citizen in the US wants right now. I think he has a real chance at getting elected should he run, since basically everyone is agreeing with what he says. He's just not afraid to voice his opinion, which is one of the things I like about him.
 
His views are basically what every citizen in the US wants right now.
That's a very serious problem, see, because most people want everything to be regulated...except when they do it. They want everything to be illegal...except things they do. They want everybody else to be held accountable for their mistakes except themselves.

The Constitution and the rules by which our government must operate don't give a squat about what people think.
 
That's a very serious problem, see, because most people want everything to be regulated...except when they do it. They want everything to be illegal...except things they do. They want everybody else to be held accountable for their mistakes except themselves.

The Constitution and the rules by which our government must operate don't give a squat about what people think.

I was more so referring to the fact that he stresses the constitution and everything it stands for.
 
Ted Nugent would be destroyed by the press. He could do his cause well though, by communicating it to the American people while the spotlight is on him.
 
Ted Nugent would be destroyed by the press. He could do his cause well though, by communicating it to the American people while the spotlight is on him.
I don't think so. He's done well shutting a lot of them up.
 
Second Verse, same as the first. Current temps as of 7 am EST:

View attachment 87134

I wish it were 76. Man, I'm sweating outside. It's so warm.

Ted Nugent would be destroyed by the press. He could do his cause well though, by communicating it to the American people while the spotlight is on him.

Nuge can't be an idiot and go screwing up the GOP. It would be such a circus that it would distract from the real circus on Penn Ave.

Anyway, I'd never vote for Nuge. That guy is a nutcase. Love him on gun rights and guitar, but that's about it.
 
Hey, LA County, WTF?!



Everyone in LA should be supporting these residents. Everyone not in LA County should be tweeting @CountyofLA to no end.

Welcome to the land of the free, unless they say it's not.
 
Back