Please predict that he appoints independent senator from Vermont that the DNC thinks is a joke and lost an election to avoid nominating to something important next.
While I do think positively of him, I'll raise the counter example of Ronald Reagan.
Also press on the top of the knife instead of only using the handle. And cut it on an angle so it's not trying to press down on the whole length at once. And don't try to pull the blade towards the handle (which is usually the ideal way to cut) if you're cutting that much cheese because it grips the entire length of the blade and that might have more force than the handle can handle (heh), like in this case.
Lubricating the blade could help, maybe use a nice chili oil to give the edge a bit of a kick.
If it's water based, the temperature won't go over 100 C. Ideally, you'd want to simmer it below that rather than cook it at a high boil. Then you'd just need to make sure there was enough water in it that it wouldn't all evaporate off while unattended (though more accurately, you'd want enough water to prevent the bottom part from drying out faster than more water can replace it to avoid it burning on the bottom, though that's not so much a safety issue as it is a quality issue). Or just cover it so that any evaporating water recondenses and ends up back in the stew (though this only really slows the rate at which you lose water, since the pressure buildup will force the cover open and let some steam escape and many covers have a hole to equalize the pressure, so still keep an eye on water levels if you do a long cook).
If all the water evaporates, then the heat can rise, potentially to a flash point of some ingredient, which would start a fire, which I'd think would be the main safety issue with a slow cook like that, assuming you maintain a safe temperature above 60 C.
For microbial food safety, cooking over long periods is safer than soaking, generally speaking. It depends on how it is prepared/stored.
Like canning or jarring could be considered a soak, but you need to seal the container (so no new microbes get in) and cook it in the jar (to kill off any microbes that were already on the food), or use another method that creates an environment hostile to microbes, like make it too salty or acidic.
Or another option is to deliberately introduce microbes that play nice with our guts and allow it to ferment, which is essentially allowing it to digest a bit outside of our guts. The idea there is that any new microbes that try to move in can't compete with the existing colony and either die off or maintain a population small enough to not cause harm.
A long cook is basically maintaining the temperature that canning uses to kill off microbes without then sealing it away from new ones. New ones will arrive but then die due to the heat.
Note that some foods can break down into harmful compounds if cooked long enough or can contain harmful compounds that require a boil to cook off, like kidney beans. Also if the food already contains heat-resistant toxins, obviously cooking it for a long time won't get rid of them.
She might be wearing a tube top. Need a wider angle to be sure.
Yeah, Idiocracy has this basic assumption that people are generally acting in good faith, even the ones with more selfish tendencies. It's been a while since I've seen it, but didn't someone else get frozen along with the MC and started out with a "fuck you, I'll take care of myself however I need to" before later pivoting to a "we need to work together to save the world!"
Just like that Batman scene where the boat full of civilians and the boat full of criminals have the trigger for each others' bombs. In the real world, I'd bet the guard that was handed the trigger on the prisoner boat would have pressed it almost immediately. And if he didn't, there would have been a riot on the civilian boat to push it rather than a calm vote that decides against it, followed closely by the same thing on the prisoner boat. And many from both boats would have just bailed into the water rather than trust the other boat to not kill them. Joker would have been completely right in his prediction of how things would go. Especially in a city like Gotham. The catch should have been that the boats had their own trigger instead of each others'.
No disagreeing with the title or you have fragile masculinity!
If you don't like urinals, don't use them. If you say something shouldn't exist when many people prefer to use it over the other options, expect pushback, even if it's in a humorous context.
The comic feels like a joke here but the title feels like there's some serious sentiment behind it, even if it doesn't have any real intent to actually ban urinals.
That art style is pretty off-putting tbh.
Did you mean a DNR? Or if NDA is correct, what does it stand for in this context?
It didn't say he gave up. Maybe we all did him dirty in how we interpreted that description.
Running is when all feet leave the ground at some point during the strides, so any animal that runs could have a similar image taken when the front legs finish pushing off the ground and the back legs are in position to start their push.
Except for humans, because we still alternate legs while running and don't have bodies parallel to the ground that our legs would end up tucked against during part of a run. Though you could still get a picture where we're entirely airborne if you time it right and it's a run rather than a fast walk.
What's going on in the second one for the strands to diverge like that, though?