Bungee Jumper

Wouldn't that mean that lobbyists and politicians are responsible for consumer behavior? It seems to be the prevalent belief, at any rate. The environmental laws in Maryland, at least, seem to be predicated on the idea that the state can legislate how the consumer will and will not spend their money... ...which I'm sure in some weird TPS/Holcomb's Arm/molson_golden world makes perfect sense. Too bad this is Earth.

Let me shout it for the cheap seats: MATH Had you understood the math, you wouldn't have butchered the concepts, you idiot.

Wait...those look like facts. They have no place here. Once again, it's the Great Media Conspiracy at work: not the liberal media conspiracy, not the conservative media conspiracy, but the media's penchant for digging into a story and making it as scandalous and salacious as they possibly can to pull a rating.

Conversely, $30k doesn't even cover fuel costs. I wasn't providing an exact calculation, I was saying that from a basic order-of-magnitude estimate, I'd sooner believe $300k than I would $30k. I'd sooner still believe around $90k-120k.

There's valid public health reasons for preferring malaria over DDT (namely: DDT has a track record of making malaria epidemics worse in the long run). But Rachel Carson has gone on record as disagreeing with the direction the environmental movement has taken, regardless of how much they worship her and her book.

And if you'd ever understood any of the math, you'd know you were completely and utterly and hilariously wrong.

In the absence of actual facts, I'd have to say that $300k per flight for a jet crewed by sixteen sounds more realistic than $30k.

It's statistics. He read it on a Stanford web site. You just don't understand it.

I'm pretty sure it means there's going to be a big earthquake in British Columbia...

You're right...200 years. Either that, or a century's 81 years long.

Air Force buys them already, they don't cost that much. And there's very practical separation-of-powers reasons for not having the Speaker of the House beholden to the White House for a private jet...or vice-versa. If it's an actual need, Congress should get their own. And I think it's pretty clear that it's NOT a need, anyway...Congress did just fine flying commercial through 9/10/01.

Yeah. It's more like 300 years ago.

I say the solution to this is: have the House buy their own damn Gulfstream V for the speaker. It'll avoid the "Did not!/Did too!" pissing match between the executive and the legislature, at the very least.

It has a nice symmetry to it. He can't avoid being an idiot in any response. Why do we keep arguing with this spud? Not only does he not know anything, but he's completely oblivious to the fact that he doesn't know anything. Why are you wasting your time?

...but you'll hear the duelling banjos coming in plenty of time to escape...

True. Most people probably think "The Raven" was nothing more than a Simpson's Halloween episode.

You believe a die has a "true value" of 3.5, and any other roll is wrong. So why the hell would I care if you believe I'm pathetic?

Plus, the free market doesn't protect the genetic heritage of the species...

1) The president can't increase his own pay. It takes an act of Congress at least (I believe it requires a constitutional amendment). 2) I though that happened in the middle of Clinton's term, didn't it?

This is turning into a nice, old-fashioned thread hijacking. Cool...

Still doesn't clarify why you brought up Dole.

No, I've been making observations. Not assumptions. That my observations were both fair and accurate is beside the point, since you can't tell the difference between an observation and an assumption - yet another concept you have precisely no clue about. Indeed, you give the retarded a bad name.

Brilliant reference. We need more Poe analogies here for poster meltdowns..."Quoth the raven: 'I'm telling you, if it takes less than an hour, you're not doing it right!'"

I think it's an even money bet that molson can't distinguish "a difficult situation" from a message board argument.

Arguably the best thing for Pelosi politically, too: send the message the the Democrat House is committed to cutting spending. "Arguably", because Pelosi flying commercial could also send the message that the administration's security policies have made commercial flying safe again...which may not be politically advisable.