archer

If I won a million dollars, I'd give a quarter of it to charity.
 
Not sure what I'd do with the other $999,999.75

There was an old man who lived by a forest. As he grew older and older, he started losing his hair, until one day, on his deathbed, he was completely bald. That day, he called his children to a meeting.
 
He said, "Look at my hair. It used to be so magnificent, but it's completely gone now. My hair can't be saved. But look outside at the forest. It's such a lovely forest with so many trees, but sooner or later they'll all be cut down and this forest will look as bald as my head."
 
"What I want you to do..." the man continued. "Is, every time a tree is cut down or dies, plant a new one in my memory. Tell your descendants to do the same. It shall be our family's duty to keep this forest strong."
 
So they did.
 
Each time the forest lost a tree, the children replanted one, and so did their children, and their children after them.
 
And for centuries, the forest remained as lush and pretty as it once was, all because of one man and his re-seeding heirline.

"When you have a problem THIS big, try Gas-X."

Brainiac 5, of the Legion of Super-Heroes.
 
I've had many, many passionate loves for and breathless fascinations with many and varied members of the comicbook pantheon, which is not, perhaps, that surprising, as I'm in my 50s now and I've been a fan ever since I first read a comicbook -- in Western Australia, sometime in 1971 or 1972.  They or it (I might have had a digest issue, or I might have got my hands on several issues) were illustrated in glorious black and white, and though I recognised the names "Batman" and "Superman", the comic(s) also featured "Rose and Thorn", "The Metal Men", and a huge team of heroes from the future who were somehow connected to "Kal-El"; the Legion of Superheroes! 
 
Looking back, I think this was the Composite Superman issue, where a lightning strike triggered the release of the duplicated powers of the Legion from their miniaturised duplicates; this was a complete roster of the Legionnaires that Brainiac 5 had modelled in miniature as a "you'll always be one of us" gift to Superboy, and Superman had installed in his "Super-Museum", where a resentful former criminal was working as a custodian....  The tradition in Legion of Super-Heroes comics of including frequent "roll calls" -- to list the members appearing and offer squibs about them -- and footnote-style asides explaining that, for example, Garth Ranzz was Lighting Lad's real name, were all invaluable to a wide-eyed naif having her first superhero experience with a team she'd never heard of before!
 
And I never forgot.
 
Superhero comics and cartoons were only ever available sporadically in New Zealand (where we moved from Australia) in the 1970s, and what I encountered was extremely disjointed, random issues of titles-nobody-remembers-these-days that hinted at a bigger picture; one where the iconic Superman and Batman (and the Fantastic Four) were just two of many, many superheroes, all with fascinating and novel abilities, all capable of standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Clark and Bruce (and Reed, Sue, Ben and Johnny)....  And then in 1982, we moved to America; I went to high school and then to college, and I discovered -- the X-Men!  Alpha Flight!  The New Mutants!  Swamp Thing!  Teen Titans!  (with all but the latter two being Marvel titles).  Looking back, I realise that the mid-80s generated a disproportionately large number of comics now regarded as classics, both from Marvel, and, to a lesser extent, DC, and I read many of them at the time (courtesy of a college friend who was a Marvel maniac, and another who was obsessed with Swamp Thing; both would share their comics in order to be assured of an "informed audience" for their ravings).
 
I got older, I graduated, I went to law school, and my comic book tastes "matured" into a preference for DC heroes, especially the more esoteric heroes of the Vertigo line (all things Gaiman).  I'd become a rabid gamer back in my undergrad days and remain so to this day, and by associating with gamers, I picked up a lot of comic-book background... even though I never felt financially secure enough to buy my own comics.  And in the late 1990s, I met and quickly became fast friends with the Hero Board's own Dr. Anomaly, whom Hermit, Death Tribble and others of the Old Guard may well remember.  He was an immense Hero nerd, a voracious reader of fiction, science fiction, science and an incredible GM of damn near every system then popular (and many that weren't).  And he loved old classic comics... particularly a bright and shiny Silver Age title that had begun in the 1950s and sputtered on through to present day:  The Legion of Super-Heroes.  And yes, he had a copy of that issue, the Composite Superman, only his was in colour -- but otherwise it was just as I'd remembered.
 
We started a Legion of Super-Heroes Champions campaign, of course, and I did a lot of background reading in the old Legion issues, and what I discovered only confirmed what I'd realised back in 1972 and never forgotten:  The impossibly brilliant, aggressively intelligent, arrogant and unlucky ultra-genius Brainiac 5 is my favourite super-hero -- even if his skin is green (something I only learned in 1996).

"When you have a problem THIS big, try Gas-X."

My friend just watched a documentary on Chernobyl.
 
He actually grew up in Ukraine during the 1980's and was able to count at least 8 historical inaccuracies on one hand.

I KNEW they shouldn't have changed the costume.
 
 

If Mary gave birth to Jesus, and Jesus is the Lamb of God...
 
... does that mean that Mary had a little lamb?

A priest, a rabbit, and a minister walk into a bar
 
The rabbit says, "I'm only here because of autocorrect."

Don't worry, I already know how to French.

I doubt if Joe can stand for 4 hours, much less keep his thoughts straight for 4 straight hours. I know I couldn't do either.
 
Trump doesn't mind slumping over a podium and using it to support himself, he does that at most of his rallies. And he doesn't have to worry about trying to make sense: everyone expects him to make stuff up and lie continuously.
 
====
 
Personally, I'd rather have multiple long-format debates with both candidates sitting.
 
No advance warning about what topics would be brought up.
 
The question would be asking the candidate to start off explaining the nuances of some public policy issue. Then explain how his philosophy of governance would generally deal with that and similar matters. Then ask him to come up with a policy proposal to be incorporated into his campaign and be a promise to the voters that he would work to enact if elected.
 
And none of the questions would be based on things which are part of the candidate's stump speech, campaign website, or legislation he had already proposed at some point.

What did Donald Trump do when he heard the Vice President was thirsty?
 
He gave Pensacola.

Bill Gates is pulled over by a police officer one night after his car is seen swerving on the highway.
 
The police officer asks, "Have you had anything to drink tonight, sir?"
 
Bill says, "Absolutely not, officer."
 
The cop says, "Can you please count backwards from 10 for me?"
•
Bill replies, "10, 8, 7, Vista, XP, ME, 2000, NT, 98, 95, 3, 2, 1."

I'd like to apologize to all my fellow Californians for the recent forest fires.
 
Apparently I'm the only one that could've prevented them.

I think with the COVID that many of us are subconsciously thinking about the advantages of being isolated inside a large invulnerable robot body.   

I think with the COVID that many of us are subconsciously thinking about the advantages of being isolated inside a large invulnerable robot body.   

Yeah, that's my impression as well. 
 
“While on routine patrol, I observed a female exercising inside Waipio Neighborhood Park,” one officer wrote. “Female was stopped and cited for park closure.” - well, the parks were closed to everyone from Aug 6 - Sep 10th.
 
"Officers have issued citations to individuals walking alone outside and to homeless people who live outdoors." - those don't appear to be legit if that's exactly what happened.
 
"Officers have issued citations to parents at the beach with their own children" - The beaches were closed to everyone from Aug6 - Sep 10th. At this point, the rules still say, "Group activities are NOT allowed with any number of people regardless of household."
 
@ScottishFox Thanks for that link. It's often very difficult to get local news of an area which is published on sites which I don't know even exist.
 

The Senate these days have a virtual filibuster (where someone threatens to filibuster so the legislation is never brought to the floor in the first place). They do those so that the whole Senate never grinds to a complete halt. That one thing might be stalled, but the rest of the Senate can function.
 
However, they can still do a real filibuster for anything except for SCOTUS nominations and budget reconciliations. A Senator who takes the floor can stall the whole Senate from moving forward with ANY business as long as he keeps talking and stays on the Senate floor. And he can keep talking about any topic he wants (so if the topic is trade relations, for example, the Senator can talk about SCOTUS nominations).
 
So if they let any Senate Democrat speak from the floor on any other topic, he can just keep going as long as he can. 
 
There's been four filibusters in history which have lasted over 20 hours, with the longest one being over 24 hours.
 
Obviously that wouldn't permanently stop a SCOTUS nomination from going forward unless the Republican leadership is dumb enough to try to keep bringing up other business and allow Democrats to step forward one after another to filibuster. But the attention media attention given to even one filibuster might be enough to embarrass some Republicans from going forward with a SCOTUS nomination under these circumstances.
 
If nothing else, the person doing the filibuster could read off the public statements of each Republican Senator in 2016 who claimed that 11 months until the next president was due to be sworn in didn't give enough time for the Senate to adequately evaluate a SCOTUS nominee.
 

I didn't say I expected complete silence from national Republicans.
 
I said I didn't want national Democrats to mention names for Republicans to take potshots at.
 
If by some miracle the Democrats manage to stop Trump from getting a nominee confirmed before the end of January, Biden deserves to be able to come up with his own list of potentials and his own nominee without giving the Republicans four months of free reign smearing those people.
 
A president can use his office and his administration to help defend the reputation of a nominee.
 
With Biden not being the president, not having an administration, and not having a press corps stationed a few feet from his office, he's not in any position to defend anyone. And particularly not now when he has to focus on getting elected rather than defending the reputations of random judges and law professors.

My friend just watched a documentary on Chernobyl.
 
He actually grew up in Ukraine during the 1980's and was able to count at least 8 historical inaccuracies on one hand.

If you have enough lead time before the ritual starts, I'm a fan of giving the PC's clues that something big is going to go down and letting the final confrontation build over time.
 
Then maybe a cultist member (who wants out and is fleeing the city) takes the time to warn the PC's that the cult still needs to collect X number of items before starting the ritual. The mutilated body of that cult member is found the next morning not far from where he met the PC's.
 
A desperate race across the city to find the items in competition with the cultists.
 
Whatever plan the PC's come up with to destroy or secure the items falls apart. The PC's are forced into making a rappelling the descent into The Pit in a desperate bid to stop the ritual.
 
The Big Bad Guy attacks the PC's while they're in mid-descent. He reveals that most of his cultists have deserted either altogether or to join other cults, and that the rest have died in luring the PC's to The Pit. But his portents showed that the cult's fortunes would be completely reversed if he defeated the PC's in single, personal combat. There never was any ritual other than the ritual of combat.
 
So he arranged to meet the PC's in the most favorable circumstances possible but without any minions as backup.
 
The battle takes place with the PC's dangling from ropes and the opponent in the mouth of a tunnel on the other side of the pit. He tries to either kill the PC's outright or sever their ropes, while hindering their movement toward the mouth of the tunnel.  

What killed bipartisan compromise was the end of congressional earmarks.
 
Formerly, congressmen were allowed to designate money to go to specific projects which were near and dear to their hearts. The way that deals were cut between the two political parties was that money, which was going to be spent anyway, was assigned to specific projects in exchange for a particular legislator's vote on a bill.
 
That system did cause problems.
 
A congressman were allowed to add those earmarks to legislation without his identity being known. So if a legislator wanted to be completely irresponsible with money, he could designate money be spent on useless projects, usually within his district and for the benefit of a friend or campaign contributor. And it would never be discovered who was at fault because it could have been any of them who added that earmark to the legislation.
 
Worse, former staffers of congressmen came forward and revealed that it was common practice to not bother a legislator with details of what was going on and that staffers would write and add earmarks to bills. 
 
It was much easier to add an earmark than it was to remove it. And many times earmarks were added to bills almost literally at the last possible moment, long after any other legislator or staffer would have read the bill. So bills were being voted on without the congressmen in either party knowing everything which was in the legislation.
 
They could have fixed the problem by forcing specific congressmen to take credit for the earmarks they put in legislation (so the voters could hold them responsible for their actions) and by not allowing earmarks to be added at the last moment (so each legislator could know what he was voting for and couldn't claim that he had no idea what had been added to the bill at the last moment).
 
Instead Congress fixed the earmark problem by banning all earmarks.
 
Formerly, bipartisan legislation could be passed because the last votes needed could be gotten by allowing individual legislators on each side to earmark something. Congressmen who were concerned about US ground troops dying could earmark part of the Air Force budget to saving the A-10 Warthog aircraft, which the Air Force hates because the Warthog's mission is to fly low level missions to support ground troops (while the Air Force institutionally loves fighter planes rather than bombers or ground support aircraft). Another congressman might want highways fixed in some part of his state and earmark federal highway funds for that. But earmarks would be allowed on both sides in order to get enough votes to put legislation across the finish line.
 
With no earmarks, there's no way to get legislators from different parties to work together unless the legislators from both parties genuinely like all the parts of the proposed bill. So partisan bills repeatedly get passed out of the House then die in the Senate because the bills aren't bipartisan.
 
House party leaders can put pressure on their own members in order to get them to back particular bills. But one side has no lever to use to gain cooperation from the other party so that a bill gets passed with apparent widespread support from both parties.

Yeah, that's my impression as well. 
 
“While on routine patrol, I observed a female exercising inside Waipio Neighborhood Park,” one officer wrote. “Female was stopped and cited for park closure.” - well, the parks were closed to everyone from Aug 6 - Sep 10th.
 
"Officers have issued citations to individuals walking alone outside and to homeless people who live outdoors." - those don't appear to be legit if that's exactly what happened.
 
"Officers have issued citations to parents at the beach with their own children" - The beaches were closed to everyone from Aug6 - Sep 10th. At this point, the rules still say, "Group activities are NOT allowed with any number of people regardless of household."
 
@ScottishFox Thanks for that link. It's often very difficult to get local news of an area which is published on sites which I don't know even exist.
 

What killed bipartisan compromise was the end of congressional earmarks.
 
Formerly, congressmen were allowed to designate money to go to specific projects which were near and dear to their hearts. The way that deals were cut between the two political parties was that money, which was going to be spent anyway, was assigned to specific projects in exchange for a particular legislator's vote on a bill.
 
That system did cause problems.
 
A congressman were allowed to add those earmarks to legislation without his identity being known. So if a legislator wanted to be completely irresponsible with money, he could designate money be spent on useless projects, usually within his district and for the benefit of a friend or campaign contributor. And it would never be discovered who was at fault because it could have been any of them who added that earmark to the legislation.
 
Worse, former staffers of congressmen came forward and revealed that it was common practice to not bother a legislator with details of what was going on and that staffers would write and add earmarks to bills. 
 
It was much easier to add an earmark than it was to remove it. And many times earmarks were added to bills almost literally at the last possible moment, long after any other legislator or staffer would have read the bill. So bills were being voted on without the congressmen in either party knowing everything which was in the legislation.
 
They could have fixed the problem by forcing specific congressmen to take credit for the earmarks they put in legislation (so the voters could hold them responsible for their actions) and by not allowing earmarks to be added at the last moment (so each legislator could know what he was voting for and couldn't claim that he had no idea what had been added to the bill at the last moment).
 
Instead Congress fixed the earmark problem by banning all earmarks.
 
Formerly, bipartisan legislation could be passed because the last votes needed could be gotten by allowing individual legislators on each side to earmark something. Congressmen who were concerned about US ground troops dying could earmark part of the Air Force budget to saving the A-10 Warthog aircraft, which the Air Force hates because the Warthog's mission is to fly low level missions to support ground troops (while the Air Force institutionally loves fighter planes rather than bombers or ground support aircraft). Another congressman might want highways fixed in some part of his state and earmark federal highway funds for that. But earmarks would be allowed on both sides in order to get enough votes to put legislation across the finish line.
 
With no earmarks, there's no way to get legislators from different parties to work together unless the legislators from both parties genuinely like all the parts of the proposed bill. So partisan bills repeatedly get passed out of the House then die in the Senate because the bills aren't bipartisan.
 
House party leaders can put pressure on their own members in order to get them to back particular bills. But one side has no lever to use to gain cooperation from the other party so that a bill gets passed with apparent widespread support from both parties.

Personally, I pull for the channel switching button on my remote during Tom and Jerry cartoons.