zarp86

Defense, Space and Cybersecurity account for 39% of Boeing's revenue.

Because the idea was always that we need a living wage.

It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living. -FDR

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9075220-it-seems-to-me-to-be-equally-plain-that-no

You know it's funny, I was about to correct you and say Bugs made the joke, not Daffy, but I looked it up.

It’s widely reported that during a cartoon short titled “A Wild Hare,” a wise-cracking rabbit named Bugs Bunny called his nemesis Elmer Fudd a “poor little nimrod,” a sarcastic reference to Fudd’s skills as a hunter. Whether Bugs actually said it or it was Daffy Duck who called Fudd a “nimrod” is debatable. Bugs would get credit (it was after all a Bugs Bunny cartoon).

More reading on that for anyone interested.

As long as they think fascism will only hurt the people they want hurt

Ah, makes me take a trip down memory lane.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/8/18173678/trump-shutdown-voter-florida

soft serve ice cream was partly invented by Maggie Thatcher, much-maligned ice queen of Britiain

This sounded so wild I looked it up.

Unfortunately, "most sources agree that the soft-serve industry arose in the United States, not Britain, and that it preceded Thatcher’s arrival at J. Lyons by about a decade. In 2008, Marian Burros offered a version of the conventional narrative in the Times."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-margaret-thatcher-soft-serve-myth

It's often better to have three 25% chances of sinking the other guy than one 50% chance.

Three 25% of sinking is the same as three 75% chance of not sinking. Which is (3/4) * (3/4) * (3/4) chance of not sinking, which is approximately a 42% chance of not sinking, which is a 58% chance of sinking. 58% > 50%, the math checks out.

I mean, China will still exist and is way better Boogeyman.

If you have to have these laws they should specifically target elective abortions. Not the medical procedure in general.

I understand you are just playing devil's advocate here, but even this is a bad idea. As we've seen in Texas, the law isn't designed for nuance, it is designed to attack women. The Texas law was supposed to have exceptions for health and safety of the woman/fetus, and we saw how that played out. Having a law that specifically targeted elective abortions would have the same problem where the state would undoubtedly put the burden of proof on the woman. "Oh, your baby has no heartbeat? Fill out this form in triplicate, get your doctor to sign it, have it notarized, and your abortion will be approved in 38 - 40 weeks."

Edit: for anyone who wants to or has downvoted me here, please do tell me how we can ban abortions and have an exception for rape

The answer here is simple: I reject the premise of the question. Banning abortion but having an exception for rape is morally disingenuous. You can't say "abortion is murder some of the time."

Ok? The DC can be 15 in both scenarios.

To be fair, NIPR sucks at everything.

Pendantic, but it was "is is," not "it is."

Contending his statement that "there's nothing going on between us" had been truthful because he had no ongoing relationship with Lewinsky at the time he was questioned, Clinton said, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.