That describes the entire Star Wars Expanded Universe. Every character was critically important to the survival of the galaxy! Some strong books, some weak ones, and its ridiculous storylines all look phenomenal compared to the travesty of Disney canon, IMO
True, but I liked how they referenced Glup in the early Yuu’zhan Vong books by the asking about how he basically was the only reason Tattooine survived the Desolation! Nice nod to previous characters
We’re not there yet, but I could see a bit more fear-mongering smashing us into V For Vendetta territory
I am lucky enough to have a local vet that is excellent and caring and independently owned. When the owner wanted to retire a few years ago, several of the veterinarians pooled together to purchase it, so it wasn’t bought by a big company. My cat died earlier this year, but I will continue to donate to them even though I don’t have a pet right now.
All that being said, I’ve known two people who’ve worked at the VCA, and both are excellent. One (a vet tech) is still there and loves it and her manager is great, but the other left because she was overworked and underpaid (an actual veterinarian). In an ideal world, huge conglomerates wouldn’t buy out and jack up the prices of independent vets and then cut costs by stressing staff, but that doesn’t mean that the people working there aren’t caring and dedicated. Depends a lot on the specific location.
Carl Weathers: Master of HTML
This is so real. Some kid in 5th grade discovered marquee and told me about it, and it was my favorite thing for a good year or two
Imagine the terrifying reverse, though.
You’re out at night, and see some critter scurry across the path. You think nothing of it, but then moments later, an ear-piercing squawk rings out in the dark night. A flash of white, feathers lopsided and flying whizzes past you, and then you see it smash into a bush, tumbling end over end before the rough sounds of scratching and clawing shake the air in front of you. You stare, frozen, as after nearly a minute, the seagull, drenched in blood and dirt, hops out of the bush with something in its mouth. It could have been a rat, a squirrel, a gerbil, anything for all you know, but now it is mangled with guts spilling out on the ground. The gull, its mouth already overstuffed, stares you down as it gobbles up the fallen entrails, its eyes never leaving yours, as if daring you to make a move. It drops the rest of the carcass from its mouth and snatches the creature awkwardly in its talons to save for a snack later, then more jumps than flies upwards, its wings blowing air past you loudly in the quiet night. You stand there in shock, and as you finally begin to walk again, a guttural squawk of triumph again rings through the night, followed by loud echoes of many others, as the seagull brags about its stealthy and elegant kill.
The next morning, you take a trip down to the beach with your friend and his daughter. Sitting on a boardwalk bench, you tell them the crazy story, captivating your enthused audience. The young girl laughs, but then suddenly stops. You look over to see her staring in shock at her empty hand, which moments ago held a half-eaten hot dog. She raises her head to look up at the sky, and you follow her gaze. The owl silently flies up and away with its catch, the bun clutched neatly in its talons as its wings beat softly. No one even heard it coming.
And their Instagram, before the motorcycle pics so you have to login or cheat, is https://www.instagram.com/cobabeda99/
Damn it now this is going to be stuck in my head for the day. “64. How did 64 get into it? I hear you cry.”
Charlie’s Angels’ Colon must have been a direct to TV sequel
This and inflationary language are two of my favorites from him!
National Treasure is a mediocre movie that I will always watch the shit out of. It is the perfect balance of ridiculousness and action, and just always brings me joy.
Better than jumping the shark
Northerners: The American Civil War
Southerners: The War for States’ Rights
Deep Southerners: The War of Northern Aggression
Deep Deep Rednecks: North 1, South 0, HALFTIME!
Oh god how have I never realized this. You monster!
Also, it’s crazy to me that we still use the normal metric prefixes for a logarithmic scale!
When I was younger, I assumed that trans people wanted to transition because they felt their personality wasn’t their “assigned at birth” sex. And thus, because of society’s expectations that “men should dress and act this way” and “women have to do/be this,” a lot of people who didn’t meet that would be trans. But as I met and talked to more people, both trans and agender/genderfluid/etc., it does seem like those with body dysphoria actually feel uncomfortable in their bodies, and want a different body. But I’ve never actually asked any trans friends about it, because it does feel too personal, even though some of them are very good friends.
So, my question: if there were no gender norms or societal expectations, would you still want to transition? Would that answer change if surgery/hormones aren’t desired, and you instead do want to keep the body you were born with?
Ridiculous. The metric system is all the same. How many millimommies in a decamommy? I dunno, but it’s 10 or 100 or 1000 or something like that. Everything is a factor of ten, and the unit conversions are even a factor of 10! You can look that up in a table, and a 6-year-old can properly measure things. Booooring!
Now look at the Imperial/English/Standard/US/Florida system: how many hogshead in a cubic furlong? Nobody knows offhand, so you have to get creative. Is it a US standard colonial, also called a tobacco hogshead? Or is it the British hogshead? It may depend on the contents, like whether it’s brandy or sugar or fish (the species matters!). You can convert to firkins if you wish, but that’s optional. As for furlongs, it used to depend on the horse, but sadly they standardized it to 40 rods, because German feet were longer than English feet, probably due to the toes. Fortunately, some states in the US still disagree on definitions, so the length may depend on the state. Once you figure that out, you can easily calculate that using a English wine hogshead and an international furlong leads to about 34,136,818.7 hogshead in a cubic furlong. Explain to me how that’s not better than your silly metric system!
Congratulations on 1 year! I don’t read every day, but I’m glad when I do. Quite a commitment! Thanks so much for your contribution!
Yes to the filibuster, no to the quorum. Although I think you might be using quorum incorrectly. If you mean these as 1 question, about simply removing the filibuster and setting the minimum threshold for passing a bill to 50 votes, then that happens automatically, although it’s actually 51 votes without a tiebreaker.
Answer here, my personal opinions below. The filibuster is a Senate rule, not a law, and can be changed by a simple majority vote of the Senate. It does not require approval by the house or president. Changing or creating exceptions to the filibuster has been done several times over the years, from budget acts to disapproving actions of the executive branch. More recently, it has been removed for approval of federal judges. Harry Reid, a Democrat Senate Majority Leader got rid of the filibuster for approving federal judges, not including Supreme Court justices. Republican Mitch McConnell followed up a few years later by removing it for SC justices.
Without the filibuster, any business (well, almost any) such as approvals, bills, etc. requires a simple majority of Senators voting, assuming they have a quorum. If there are no absences or vacancies or abstentions (Senators there but not voting), that’s 100 Senators, so 51 votes needed. If there are only 95 Senators voting, you would only need 48 votes (half of 95 is 47.5, so 47 would not be enough). If there is a tie (50-50, for example), the Vice-President (technically acting as the President of the Senate) can break ties, so a bill could only pass with 50 Senators voting yes, rather than 51, if you add in the VP’s vote.
Quorum of the Senate is not a Senate rule. It comes from the Constitution, which says that a quorum is a majority of the full Senate (always 100). Vacancies are not counted. This means at least 51 Senators have to be physically there for any business to proceed. Changing it would require a constitutional amendment.
In my opinion, Harry Reid’s filibuster removal was somewhat understandable, as Republicans really were obstructing judges, but it was nonetheless a political mistake and backfired horribly, opening the door for Republicans to eventually follow-up by removing the filibuster for SC justices and take firm control of the court. Removing the filibuster for ALL business, including laws, would have similar risk. John Thune, the current Republican Senate Majority Leader, has resisted doing so, despite pastor from Trump. I disagree with Thune on almost everything politically, but respect the backbone/wisdom of keeping the filibuster in place. In general, a good rule is “never give yourself political power you wouldn’t want your political opponents to have.” I kind of feel the same way on the quorum question, but I think that’s not exactly what you were asking. No one really has a major problem with quorum rules, excepting rare intentional absences.