frenchie

The Republicans have more veterans in Congress than the Dems, actually. 66 vs 30. Full list: https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/11/21/veterans-in-the-116th-congress-by-the-numbers/

You know what pisses me off a out this conspiracy bullshit? I've said it before. It's that it's such a distraction from the actual issues: intel failures, possile Saudi involvement, etc. The serious questions get conflated with Randum's transparent bullshit (I can't believe you're still posting the same shitty selectively edited video of blog 7, after I've debunked it, what 3 times ready?); and as a result, 18 years later, Barr can pull "state secrets" on Saudi government involvement... and only fringe media pays it any mind. Edit to add: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/09/17/saud-s17.html

503 interviews, 118 used the word "explosion", somewhere, in describing monumentally massive collapses... means 385 of them didn't use the most obvious analogy? That IS kinda surprising, actually.

FSMFD =/= NYFD Come to NY, ask any FDNY member what they think of your theories.

The cruelty and incompetence is a feature, Guy, not a bug. Has been for a long time, now. Trump's just more blatant. It's way past time for decent folks like you to take your Party back.

The reason someone clobbered Andy Ngo wasn't because they "didn't like his reportage"; it's because they knew he wasn't a journalist in the first place. But rather, an active member of the alt-right. Google him, and you'll find that, since then, someone got video evidence of Andy being part of a group of alt-righters planning a violent attack, and Quillette (the online site he wrote for) fired him. So he can't even pretend to be a journalist anymore. If the axis is authoritarian vs democratic? It's kind of a no-brainer that anarchists are at the completely opposite end from "authoritarian". That's the whole point, innit? "Anarchism: belief in the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion." If anything, it's past democracy, on that axis. I bolded the bit that makes all the difference. If WBC had acted like the alt-right thugs act, I guess it's you we'd be having to defend... I knew... a few. Good friends with 4 of them, in Vancouver. All of them were good guys, solid, gentle, nice... just maybe sorta fucked up, on a personal level. The way Rob explained it, was that he drinks too much, and tends to get violent when he gets drunk, and he can't help that - it's just how he was raised (dad was an abusive drunk) - but what he can control, is who he gets into fights with. He'd start hating himself if he hurt anyone he cared about, grew up to be like his dad... But violent racist shitheads who're trying to find gays and mixed-race couples to beat up? Beating them up gives you a reason to feel good about yourself. Defending the innocent, and all that. I sort of assumed the same was true, in some way or another, about Mike, and Fraser, and Jay. But Rob & I were room-mates, at one point, so he's the only one I had an in-depth conversation about it with. Nobody called themselves Antifa or anything, back then, though, just Punks. Met one of the current antifa, on a jobsite, couple years back (summer before Charlottesville?). We bonded over NOFX. Same vibe. Except he kept inviting me to rallies and protests when racist skinhead bands played anywhere nearby. I guess there was an email list he subscribed to... I had to explain that I was (a) never more than the guy who buys you a beer, after, I weigh 135 for fuck's sake; and (b) way too old for that shit nowadays, anyways. But rock on, kid, by all means, rock on. The funny thing about all 5 of them, is they're some of the most gentle, friendly, genuinely nice guys I've ever met. Which I definitely can't say about racist skins I've met. Had a room-mate back in Montreal, who was dating one, and wound up being home for some of their parties. Got a look at what they're like amongst each other? Assholes, even to each other.

Unless I'm guessing wrong: at least find someone with a vague clue what "section 179" means.

Welcome back, Dog!

To be fair, it's incomplete. Needs an "anarchist" in the lower-left corner, and a "libertarian" in the lower-right corner. BTW, some of y'all need to read up on where the terms "left" and "right" come from. It literally is just another way of saying "radical" and "conservative". Started around the French revolution, those who supported the King sat on his right, those who wanted to get rid of him sat on his left. I'm on my phone, you'll have to scroll down a bit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left–right_political_spectrum

Jsk, you contrarian twit - 1. What NASA said 2 weeks ago =! what they said 3 days ago. Fire season's only halfway through, will peak next month. So stop citing old data from the very beginning of the fire season. The updated info is that this season has more fires than any year since 2012 (or 2010, depending which set of data you're looking at); and definitely a big increase over the last couple years. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/145498/uptick-in-amazon-fire-activity-in-2019 https://www.space.com/amazon-rainforest-fires-2019-nasa-satellite-views.html http://www.globalfiredata.org/forecast.html 2. "Fire activity" or "fire count" = how fires are burning. (Roughly. One big fire can show up as a few different hotspots, a bunch of small fires can show up as one... the resolution is 1 square kilometer.) It doesn't really say much about how big/small the fires are, how hot the fires are burning, whether it's cropland or jungle that's being burned, or how much land is being burned. That data comes out later in the year. But preliminary data seems to indicate hotter fires than usual, suggesting more deforestation fires (as opposed to debrushing already-cleared fields) than usual. Upshot being, we don't know if this year will be average, as high in the 90's, or a new record. We'll know later this year. 3. You're drawing some profoundly wrong-headed conclusions from that "global greening" study. Two of the authors specifically stated, in a follow-up article, that: "felled forests don’t show as getting browner, because they are typically replaced by pastures and crops." https://theconversation.com/rising-carbon-dioxide-is-greening-the-earth-but-its-not-all-good-news-58282 Which leads me to suspect the LAI data they were using is not quite as fine-grained as you're assuming. 3.b. On the off-chance you're actually interested in reading the study, as opposed to repeating what you read about it on some global-warming-skeptic blog... have some non-paywall links: https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/22651/MS.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8mc6q011

Most republicans lack the requisite warmth, and depth.

I know a guy used to work for the onion; one of the original writers, only job he's ever had. He got laid off right after Trump won the election. Coincidence?

I used to live in Vancouver, which is at least the same Nation (Cascadia)... It sounded like you were saying it wasn't there at all, and I was a bit confused: anyone who lives in the PNW and cares about rivers wouldn't recognize the overall shape of the drainage basin. But I found higher-rez versions, and I can see what you mean: the 'artist' left the Columbia looking like a bunch of dis-connected segments, that drain to nowhere... In his defence, it seems he's Hungarian, did it with software. He's probably never set foot in the US. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3860062/The-veins-America-Stunning-map-shows-river-basin-US.html#ixzz4NpEezcqs)

Guy was saying people were more violent in general. I was correcting him on that mis-perception. The study cited in your TIME article, also mentions that homicides, overall, have fallen.