Which is too bad bc investment has been pouring into red states. Those ingrates don't even care.
Maybe throw northern New England a bone now and then? We don't get all that sweet sweet DOD money from all the military bases that seem to be in the South and West for some reason.
That's why I, as a real red-meat eating American manly man, use only internal combustion appliances: blender, vacuum cleaner, toothbrush (that fucker has some real good vibrations), television, etc.
I have to leave my windows open all the time to clear the exhaust, but they say fresh air is good for you.
Childless and (temporarily) catless cat dude here, also with solar panels. Never expected the investment to pay off in my lifetime, but when I hear from neighbors that they've gotten electric bills up to $700, I think I misunderestimated how long it would actually take to break even.
Yes, I think originally it was going to be about 17 years fir me, but with the invasion of Ukraine and the mad effect on prices, its now 13, and I've had them for 6 - I'm not going to thank Putin though
We had them as high a $1200 before we got solar. Now it's $20 which is the minimum they can charge, even though we put more into the grid than we use. We also got some bs charge for the year of $1800 called a "true up" which is 1984 for the opposite.
Just an FYI warning: At some point your area is going to have so much solar power that it overloads the grid during the day, in which case you need to either turn it off or start paying to get rid of your solar power.
If nobody else in your area (companies or government) does anything you can fix it with batteries and some smart use of simple electrical switches and wiring, for example have your water heater or washing machine automatically turn on when there is a surplus of electricity. I know someone who has wired something like that using 2nd hand car batteries and switches that turn on the next machine in the line if the preceding battery is 80% full. With some creativity and a stack of 2nd hand car batteries you too should be able to wire something like that. Though as always, consider hiring an electrician to set it up since faulty wiring is dangerous, especially when old batteries are involved.
I pay $20 every two months for the net meter. Every December I get a bill for a few bucks over the base charge, and nobody has been able to explain it to me.
For 90 minutes, American politics was unrecognizable: Two candidates, diametrically opposed on the issues, engaging in a friendly, respectful, substantive debate about the future of a country they love.
'The toll, with well over 100 killed in six states, is becoming clearer as meteorologists question if their messaging prior to the storm could have been clearer.'
THERE IS A HUGE-ASS STORM HEADED YOUR WAY! YOU'RE IN DANGER! seems pretty clear. However, yelling THERE'S A HUGE-ASS STORM HEADED YOUR WAY! THERE WILL BE MORE! YOU MIGHT WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM THERE PERMANENTLY! always falls on deaf ears.
Except that the majority of the people who die in these storms ignore the warnings. They are in the larger group of the ones who say the government "cried wolf" too many times (what would be the proper number of times to warn residents of a storm headed their way?) so they didn't evacuate because the crisis never happened before (so it will never happen), and then we risk other lives trying to get to them in their cut-off houses. I really don't think they'd ever be receptive to a message that said "you simply can't live there in safety."
I have some good friends on Sanibel Island. They always stayed put because of the many warnings that fizzled. Then Ian came knocking. They almost died, being among the last vehicles on the causeway before it was destroyed. They sustained major damage, some of which is still not repaired. Still, they didn't leave for Helene, either. Glancing blow, "only" a couple of feet of water in the basement and garage. They also own some undeveloped properties in western North Carolina near Grandfather Mountain, right in the path of destruction.
From what I understand disaster relief funds in the USA only pay out if you rebuild in exactly the same place. Maybe change that and allow people to use those funds to rebuild somewhere safer, like, not in a floodplain.
I've been thinking about this comment all day. You're right, the rules are going to have to change to help people get out of vulnerable locations. That said, I doubt anyone would have called Asheville a vulnerable location before last week.
They did. Residents in Florida were told that if they did decide to stay, they needed to write their names on their bodies so that they can be identified after the storm.
If THAT didn't make them evacuate (in more ways than one), then there's not much the authorities can do.
He's super-scary to me. Especially since he looked reasonable (if you didn't listen to his bullshit carefully) and sounded momentarily normal. It's clear that he could role-play presidential in a way that the felon never could and never did, and while he was acting all "everyday folks all together pulling for a bright future," his agenda would be tracking all our periods, removing all immigrants, forcing xtianity on everyone, deregulating everything, eliminating all social programs and the ACA, etc, and doing it in a slick-enough way that the majority of people might not even notice, especially with our complicit legacy media.
I had reached full capacity on listening to bullshit by the time Shady was spouting this crapola. He's such a . . . I don't know what he is. He reminds me of my brother, another awful human-like being, who turns everything back on you. He's the type who would dig a massive hole in your back yard and when you complained, would say "Why don't you want a hole?" Never acknowledges that anyone could have a viewpoint different from his, never acknowledges that your point might be valid. If you said it, it was stupid, and he makes fun of it; if he said it, it's just obviously right and true, and you must be stupid not to understand. It's a slick, nasty way to live, and it's one of the reasons people who meet him know within a half-hour at MOST that he's "off."
This is my attempt to explain a person I don't know by telling you all about a person you don't know. I hope it's as helpful as it was when it was still just inside my head.
I think both my brother and Vance are narcissistic sociopaths. The good thing about that is that my brother is one of those idiots who "don't care about politics." He rolls his eyes* at the idea that people should pay attention to politics and make informed choices. I doubt he votes at all.
* at least he did a decade ago, which was the last time I saw or spoke to him.
The US political system does actually run similarly to Quidditch, actually. There's this one trick you can pull that makes you win the game with an unfair lack of effort compared to the other ways to earn points, but in the end the game is mostly irrelevant for the plot.
The commentary today is dominated by the conventional wisdom that it was a civil affair. Sure, Vance did not completely repeat the blood libel of pet-eating. That's a pretty low bar.
But if one counts strategic lying for gain to be socially abhorrent, it was far from a civil affair -- at least from the JD Vance side of the room.
The most accurate summation of the event was that two men shared a stage but not a set of facts.
We've become inured to Republican lying -- heck, even Walz referenced it, trotting out the old analogy of simmering frogs to highlight how tolerant we've all become of targeted, strategic and smiley-faced lying.
You point out one good Vance lie-set in this post, but it gets distracted by the content of the lie rather than the real threat -- Vance's purpose for lying.
On saying manufacturing is down when it is up -- that's NOT Vance being accidentally correct. And it's NOT Vance making weak "arguments" that are easily defeated by a few off-stage facts.
And damningly, this is NOT soft lying -- not "spin," nor hyperbole nor marketing content -- nor any other socially-tolerated form of untruth.
This was purposeful lying with malice aforethought. It ought to chill good people to the bone.
What was, was Vance confidently, bare-facedly looking into the camera and lying for gain, lying to hide motives and goals, lying to influence a United States presidential election.
Even so, this not a time for "debunking" or "fact-checking," though debunking and fact-checking we need. Those tools are too weak, because they do not speak to Vance's *reasons for lying* .
This is the time to call a lie a lie, and to explain how the lie is told with a purpose. That last part is key. Vance is not lying to impress people, or to hide his ignorance or to escape accountability -- all typical reasons why humans lie.
He is lying to win a presidential election, and lying in strategic and important ways -- including lying to hide motives and intentions. Lying like that in any other context -- in court testimony, on a job application, in a retail exchange, in business negotiations, is manifestly anti-social and malignant. Lying of that sort is, rightly, and for eons, forbidden by every code of conduct in every culture in human history, and the law, right up to today.
That is because that sort of lying is destructive to human society. It is not an alternative point of view. It is not the typical shit spouted in a rowdy election cycle.
Walz said the moon was out, and Vance said it was pitch black. Walz said 2+2=4, Vance said when we need it to it equals 5 and sometimes 6. Walz said US manufacturing is growing, and Vance said us manufacturing is declining.
That's not "debate." That's not "alternative facts," even. Call it 'gaslighting' if you want. But the goal, unlike that of Charles Boyer's character, is not to drive a gullible spouse mad.
The goal is destroy the very concept of truth. That destruction is the necessary step toward the erection of a totalitarian dictatorship in the United States. On far-right podcasts, as late as what last month, Vance has been very clear that that is what he wants. He told an audience that yes, of course, "extraconstitutional" (ie, illegal) tactics would need to be employed.
Walz also deserves some criticism for failing to mention that Vance tells the truth, but only when the audience is white supremacists and fascists.
The governor did all right -- his goals were to support the Harris program and do no harm. He achieved that. But Vance was allowed to mainline strategic lies into national ear canals. This article is a good one, but it does not go nearly far enough. Not by a longshot.
See? An informed media would have asked Vance about his actual statements instead of boilerplate policy questions that could have part of a debate 20 years ago.
It was in the Opinion section. I haven't had a chance to read it yet but the headline at least says he "prevailed at tone and presentation," which.....Americans are dumb dumb heads and go for style over substance.
I think he did "win." Not by a lot, mind, but he did. He won on style, not substance - but style is the more important criteria in these things. When Harris debated Trump, she won by a larger margin; she won on style *and* substance.
I realize the horse race is the point, but it truly would have been so easy to set a rule that allowed for moderators to fact-check during the debate without the damn thing going on for five hours: any time moderators need to provide a correction gets taken off the liar's next response.
If that had been the rule last night, Vance would have had to either figure out a way to lie a lot less, or all of his responses would have to be about a minute. Either way, wouldn't have made correcting him Gov. Walz's problem, which is unfair and gives the advantage to the liar.
It could have been even easier. Instead of having the candidates respond to one another, the moderators should be given the power to simply say "That is untrue," cite the truth, and move to the other candidate with the next question. IOW, put the moderator in the position that they tried to force on Walz last night, of being the caller-out of the lie and corrector of the record.
This is why debates are stupid and a waste of time if you don't fact-check (and the fact checking needs to be of actual facts, not stupid bullshit like "they didn't use that EXACT word so you're lying").
Vance complained that we have only built one nuclear power plant in decades. That power plant is in Georgia, is billions of dollars over budget, and is years late going online. The Republican Public Utility Commission has already allowed the full cost of this boondoggle to be passed on to consumers rather than coming out of profits or investor returns. If the same money had been spent on placing wind turbines on farms in the Georgia coastal plain the work would have been done long ago, the energy produced by the sea breeze/land breeze reversals that occur daily there would be cheaper, and farmers would have a new source of revenue.
I have nothing against nuclear on an pollution or environmental position, especially when compared to other electricity producers that can be that consistent, but it is quite known for being expensive. Wind and solar makes a lot more sense, especially if you have a way to store energy for low production periods and a way to use the unavoidable excess energy. I personally like hydrogen plants as easily scalable use of excess energy. All you need is a vat of water, two wires, two pipes, two compressors, and storage for the hydrogen and oxygen gas. Oh, and a way to monitor electricity surplus, but I hear there are apps for that.
Bullshit is forever. The physicist Wolfgang Pauli was reviewing a paper one time and was heard to yell, "This is terrible. This is so bad, it's not even wrong."
The thing is, wrong can be corrected. Bullshit is sufficiently vague that you can't even correct it because you can't discern the meaning well enough to know where it went wrong. Bullshit is far worse than wrong!
It's worse than that. When Barnum said that, the US had fewer than 50 million souls. The population is now nearly 7 times larger, so there is a sucker born every 8 seconds or so.
Big strong Golfers with tears in their eyes came up to me and said, "Sir, I missed my approach shot to the 7th green because the sky was raining birds!"
"Maybe if we can develop some technology that translates bullshit into reality" how is this election even within 40 points?
The legacy media needs a horserace.
🍊🤡 probably thinks that Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Cambodia are all in China. Has anyone ever asked him?
They are like, right beside each other on the map!
You get a windmill cancer! You get a windmill cancer! You all get a windmill cancer!!!
That factory investment graph looks a little bit like a hockey stick. Doc
My MAGA buddy told me manufacturing was down
THEY just don’t know. Never even heard about it. Etc
Which is too bad bc investment has been pouring into red states. Those ingrates don't even care.
Maybe throw northern New England a bone now and then? We don't get all that sweet sweet DOD money from all the military bases that seem to be in the South and West for some reason.
The four oceans and the seven seas are not vast enough to fill with what Jay Divans and Eric's dad don't know.
In all fairness to the seas and oceans, our trash is already taking up a lot of space in there.
I WAS PROMISED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO TRASH.
Oops, I'm yelling.
And, I read that wrong.
Everybody knows that if you aren't getting electricity by burning something then you turn gay...
That's why I, as a real red-meat eating American manly man, use only internal combustion appliances: blender, vacuum cleaner, toothbrush (that fucker has some real good vibrations), television, etc.
I have to leave my windows open all the time to clear the exhaust, but they say fresh air is good for you.
Well, I have solar panels and I AM a childless cat lady, so there's that too
Childless and (temporarily) catless cat dude here, also with solar panels. Never expected the investment to pay off in my lifetime, but when I hear from neighbors that they've gotten electric bills up to $700, I think I misunderestimated how long it would actually take to break even.
Yes, I think originally it was going to be about 17 years fir me, but with the invasion of Ukraine and the mad effect on prices, its now 13, and I've had them for 6 - I'm not going to thank Putin though
We had them as high a $1200 before we got solar. Now it's $20 which is the minimum they can charge, even though we put more into the grid than we use. We also got some bs charge for the year of $1800 called a "true up" which is 1984 for the opposite.
Just an FYI warning: At some point your area is going to have so much solar power that it overloads the grid during the day, in which case you need to either turn it off or start paying to get rid of your solar power.
If nobody else in your area (companies or government) does anything you can fix it with batteries and some smart use of simple electrical switches and wiring, for example have your water heater or washing machine automatically turn on when there is a surplus of electricity. I know someone who has wired something like that using 2nd hand car batteries and switches that turn on the next machine in the line if the preceding battery is 80% full. With some creativity and a stack of 2nd hand car batteries you too should be able to wire something like that. Though as always, consider hiring an electrician to set it up since faulty wiring is dangerous, especially when old batteries are involved.
I pay $20 every two months for the net meter. Every December I get a bill for a few bucks over the base charge, and nobody has been able to explain it to me.
For 90 minutes, American politics was unrecognizable: Two candidates, diametrically opposed on the issues, engaging in a friendly, respectful, substantive debate about the future of a country they love.
https://www.axios.com/2024/10/01/hurricane-helene-damages-35-billion
This may be a bit rosy, but there is still a lesson: Once you get Trump out of the picture, politics can be fairly normal.
well, except for all the deliberate lies
'The toll, with well over 100 killed in six states, is becoming clearer as meteorologists question if their messaging prior to the storm could have been clearer.'
THERE IS A HUGE-ASS STORM HEADED YOUR WAY! YOU'RE IN DANGER! seems pretty clear. However, yelling THERE'S A HUGE-ASS STORM HEADED YOUR WAY! THERE WILL BE MORE! YOU MIGHT WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM THERE PERMANENTLY! always falls on deaf ears.
Except that the majority of the people who die in these storms ignore the warnings. They are in the larger group of the ones who say the government "cried wolf" too many times (what would be the proper number of times to warn residents of a storm headed their way?) so they didn't evacuate because the crisis never happened before (so it will never happen), and then we risk other lives trying to get to them in their cut-off houses. I really don't think they'd ever be receptive to a message that said "you simply can't live there in safety."
I have some good friends on Sanibel Island. They always stayed put because of the many warnings that fizzled. Then Ian came knocking. They almost died, being among the last vehicles on the causeway before it was destroyed. They sustained major damage, some of which is still not repaired. Still, they didn't leave for Helene, either. Glancing blow, "only" a couple of feet of water in the basement and garage. They also own some undeveloped properties in western North Carolina near Grandfather Mountain, right in the path of destruction.
How about a message like "We can't tell you where to go, but if you stay there, you're on your own"?
From what I understand disaster relief funds in the USA only pay out if you rebuild in exactly the same place. Maybe change that and allow people to use those funds to rebuild somewhere safer, like, not in a floodplain.
I've been thinking about this comment all day. You're right, the rules are going to have to change to help people get out of vulnerable locations. That said, I doubt anyone would have called Asheville a vulnerable location before last week.
They did. Residents in Florida were told that if they did decide to stay, they needed to write their names on their bodies so that they can be identified after the storm.
If THAT didn't make them evacuate (in more ways than one), then there's not much the authorities can do.
Oh nonexistent Gawd, I’m going to fucking puke!
It can *look* normal, at any rate. Vance's agenda may be even scarier than he lets on.
I'll tell you what scares me is that eyeliner. I mean WTAF?
He thinks he's in a silent film or else he admires how the actors in those were made up, raccoon eyes staring eerily out of the screen.
He's super-scary to me. Especially since he looked reasonable (if you didn't listen to his bullshit carefully) and sounded momentarily normal. It's clear that he could role-play presidential in a way that the felon never could and never did, and while he was acting all "everyday folks all together pulling for a bright future," his agenda would be tracking all our periods, removing all immigrants, forcing xtianity on everyone, deregulating everything, eliminating all social programs and the ACA, etc, and doing it in a slick-enough way that the majority of people might not even notice, especially with our complicit legacy media.
He reminds me of The Smiler in the comic Transmetropolitan. Trump is The Beast, obviously. Though I previously thought Bush was The Beast, IIRC.
Like Reagan, but even more damaging.
Like Pence the Dominionist.
Yep. Vance's vision is Paleo-Catholic flavored.
The elephant may not have been in the picture, but he was definitely in the room.
I watched the debate. All 23 minutes of it.
Wait, what? It went longer?
Oh.
I had reached full capacity on listening to bullshit by the time Shady was spouting this crapola. He's such a . . . I don't know what he is. He reminds me of my brother, another awful human-like being, who turns everything back on you. He's the type who would dig a massive hole in your back yard and when you complained, would say "Why don't you want a hole?" Never acknowledges that anyone could have a viewpoint different from his, never acknowledges that your point might be valid. If you said it, it was stupid, and he makes fun of it; if he said it, it's just obviously right and true, and you must be stupid not to understand. It's a slick, nasty way to live, and it's one of the reasons people who meet him know within a half-hour at MOST that he's "off."
This is my attempt to explain a person I don't know by telling you all about a person you don't know. I hope it's as helpful as it was when it was still just inside my head.
I lasted to the end, but after JD claimed that Trump had 'salvaged' Obamacare, I was yelling loudly at the screen and didn't pay too much attention.
In the sense that he was too stupid to figure out how to destroy it.
So a narcissistic sociopath?
I mean, that just sounds like a younger and less stupid Trump.
Trump isn't aware of reality enough to be a narcissistic sociopath. I'm not entirely sure he is sapient.
I think both my brother and Vance are narcissistic sociopaths. The good thing about that is that my brother is one of those idiots who "don't care about politics." He rolls his eyes* at the idea that people should pay attention to politics and make informed choices. I doubt he votes at all.
* at least he did a decade ago, which was the last time I saw or spoke to him.
This is what happens when you are overcome with JayDee Vance fatigue
https://substack.com/@treehuggerxxxtreme/note/c-71131182
Media for the past few months: Kamala is light on details. Voters want details! She can’t win over undecideds without details!
Media today: Sure, Walz had the substance and facts but Vance won on Style and smoothness alone.
GAHHHHHHH!!!!!
GAHHHHHHH!!!!!
All form, NO substance.
The American impulse to admire a smooth liar is amusing in fiction, dangerous in reality.
This. I hate being held hostage to the chuds who don't have a discerning, reasonable bone in their bodies.
The media makes up this shit as they go. There’s no consistency. No rhyme or reason. They just arbitrarily award points based on bullshit.
“You knew there were no rules when you entered the Calvinball Arena”
'Everything is made up and the points don't matter'
I like that as a premise for a game show better than a premise for political debate.
Just like Quidditch!
The US political system does actually run similarly to Quidditch, actually. There's this one trick you can pull that makes you win the game with an unfair lack of effort compared to the other ways to earn points, but in the end the game is mostly irrelevant for the plot.
YES.
I bet Walz has Substance - both the Joy Division AND New Order releases. On vinyl even!
He has that tshirt, from 198X.
Also, a non-ironic Che tee.
At the Nerds for Harris zoom, Wil Wheaton had a Harris/Walz shirt in the design of the Husker Du logo
Of course he did.
He's one of me.
The commentary today is dominated by the conventional wisdom that it was a civil affair. Sure, Vance did not completely repeat the blood libel of pet-eating. That's a pretty low bar.
But if one counts strategic lying for gain to be socially abhorrent, it was far from a civil affair -- at least from the JD Vance side of the room.
The most accurate summation of the event was that two men shared a stage but not a set of facts.
We've become inured to Republican lying -- heck, even Walz referenced it, trotting out the old analogy of simmering frogs to highlight how tolerant we've all become of targeted, strategic and smiley-faced lying.
You point out one good Vance lie-set in this post, but it gets distracted by the content of the lie rather than the real threat -- Vance's purpose for lying.
On saying manufacturing is down when it is up -- that's NOT Vance being accidentally correct. And it's NOT Vance making weak "arguments" that are easily defeated by a few off-stage facts.
And damningly, this is NOT soft lying -- not "spin," nor hyperbole nor marketing content -- nor any other socially-tolerated form of untruth.
This was purposeful lying with malice aforethought. It ought to chill good people to the bone.
What was, was Vance confidently, bare-facedly looking into the camera and lying for gain, lying to hide motives and goals, lying to influence a United States presidential election.
Even so, this not a time for "debunking" or "fact-checking," though debunking and fact-checking we need. Those tools are too weak, because they do not speak to Vance's *reasons for lying* .
This is the time to call a lie a lie, and to explain how the lie is told with a purpose. That last part is key. Vance is not lying to impress people, or to hide his ignorance or to escape accountability -- all typical reasons why humans lie.
He is lying to win a presidential election, and lying in strategic and important ways -- including lying to hide motives and intentions. Lying like that in any other context -- in court testimony, on a job application, in a retail exchange, in business negotiations, is manifestly anti-social and malignant. Lying of that sort is, rightly, and for eons, forbidden by every code of conduct in every culture in human history, and the law, right up to today.
That is because that sort of lying is destructive to human society. It is not an alternative point of view. It is not the typical shit spouted in a rowdy election cycle.
Walz said the moon was out, and Vance said it was pitch black. Walz said 2+2=4, Vance said when we need it to it equals 5 and sometimes 6. Walz said US manufacturing is growing, and Vance said us manufacturing is declining.
That's not "debate." That's not "alternative facts," even. Call it 'gaslighting' if you want. But the goal, unlike that of Charles Boyer's character, is not to drive a gullible spouse mad.
The goal is destroy the very concept of truth. That destruction is the necessary step toward the erection of a totalitarian dictatorship in the United States. On far-right podcasts, as late as what last month, Vance has been very clear that that is what he wants. He told an audience that yes, of course, "extraconstitutional" (ie, illegal) tactics would need to be employed.
Walz also deserves some criticism for failing to mention that Vance tells the truth, but only when the audience is white supremacists and fascists.
The governor did all right -- his goals were to support the Harris program and do no harm. He achieved that. But Vance was allowed to mainline strategic lies into national ear canals. This article is a good one, but it does not go nearly far enough. Not by a longshot.
See? An informed media would have asked Vance about his actual statements instead of boilerplate policy questions that could have part of a debate 20 years ago.
Lying egregiously is now an accepted campaign tactic.
For Republicans.
OMFG, even The Guardian is claiming Vance "won."
My God people are truly stupid and can't help but be suckered in by some quick-talking, confident-appearing flim-flam man.
I just can't with this country.
That is NOT the Guardian article on the debate that I just read.
It was in the Opinion section. I haven't had a chance to read it yet but the headline at least says he "prevailed at tone and presentation," which.....Americans are dumb dumb heads and go for style over substance.
LiKe a common Monorail salesman...
I think he did "win." Not by a lot, mind, but he did. He won on style, not substance - but style is the more important criteria in these things. When Harris debated Trump, she won by a larger margin; she won on style *and* substance.
Yeah. Vance is of the "debate me bro" culture. That's part of the reason he's so off putting to so many people.
I realize the horse race is the point, but it truly would have been so easy to set a rule that allowed for moderators to fact-check during the debate without the damn thing going on for five hours: any time moderators need to provide a correction gets taken off the liar's next response.
If that had been the rule last night, Vance would have had to either figure out a way to lie a lot less, or all of his responses would have to be about a minute. Either way, wouldn't have made correcting him Gov. Walz's problem, which is unfair and gives the advantage to the liar.
Why do they agree to these debates when there is no fact checking?
It could have been even easier. Instead of having the candidates respond to one another, the moderators should be given the power to simply say "That is untrue," cite the truth, and move to the other candidate with the next question. IOW, put the moderator in the position that they tried to force on Walz last night, of being the caller-out of the lie and corrector of the record.
This is why debates are stupid and a waste of time if you don't fact-check (and the fact checking needs to be of actual facts, not stupid bullshit like "they didn't use that EXACT word so you're lying").
| any time moderators need to provide a correction gets taken off the liar's next response
I'd have gone with electric shocks, but this solution works too
Electric shocks would be so much more entertaining, but the human rights issues would probably force most of the networks to say no.
How about buckets of "slime", like on some old Nickelodeon game show?
The cast of "Jackass" has entered the chat
If all debates were on MTV or Nickelodeon, they would be so much better: electric shocks, wrestling, bull-baiting, slime dumps...
"You can tell a lot about a candidate by how they handle being body-slammed."
Vance complained that we have only built one nuclear power plant in decades. That power plant is in Georgia, is billions of dollars over budget, and is years late going online. The Republican Public Utility Commission has already allowed the full cost of this boondoggle to be passed on to consumers rather than coming out of profits or investor returns. If the same money had been spent on placing wind turbines on farms in the Georgia coastal plain the work would have been done long ago, the energy produced by the sea breeze/land breeze reversals that occur daily there would be cheaper, and farmers would have a new source of revenue.
Bullshit can grow whiskers. Who knew?
I have nothing against nuclear on an pollution or environmental position, especially when compared to other electricity producers that can be that consistent, but it is quite known for being expensive. Wind and solar makes a lot more sense, especially if you have a way to store energy for low production periods and a way to use the unavoidable excess energy. I personally like hydrogen plants as easily scalable use of excess energy. All you need is a vat of water, two wires, two pipes, two compressors, and storage for the hydrogen and oxygen gas. Oh, and a way to monitor electricity surplus, but I hear there are apps for that.
Bullshit is forever. The physicist Wolfgang Pauli was reviewing a paper one time and was heard to yell, "This is terrible. This is so bad, it's not even wrong."
The thing is, wrong can be corrected. Bullshit is sufficiently vague that you can't even correct it because you can't discern the meaning well enough to know where it went wrong. Bullshit is far worse than wrong!
Very true, and very well put.
What was the last time a US infrastructure project came in UNDER budget? I'm thinking the Panama Canal.
Grant's Tomb?
Who's buried there, by the way?
Anybody's guess.
Never new it but it's a thing:
https://www.google.com/search?q=grants+tomb&rlz=1C1GCEB_enIN903IN903&oq=grants&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBggAEEUYOzIGCAAQRRg7MhIIARBFGDkYgwEYsQMYyQMYgAQyBwgCEC4YgAQyCggDEC4YsQMYgAQyDQgEEAAYkgMYgAQYigUyBwgFEC4YgAQyCggGEAAYsQMYgAQyDQgHEAAYgwEYsQMYgAQyBwgIEAAYgAQyDQgJEC4YrwEYxwEYgATSAQgyMDc4ajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Media: Vance lied, but he lied confidently.
PT Barnum was right about Americans, sadly.
It's worse than that. When Barnum said that, the US had fewer than 50 million souls. The population is now nearly 7 times larger, so there is a sucker born every 8 seconds or so.
I think he was being kind.
Vance missed a great opportunity to talk about the horrible mounds of dead birds under windmills.
Poor things, all killed by acute cancer.
Big strong Golfers with tears in their eyes came up to me and said, "Sir, I missed my approach shot to the 7th green because the sky was raining birds!"