The only laziness I see is making an inaccurate emotional argument to do something when a well thought out and practical argument based on facts would suffice.

It's bureaucracy, not bigotry, that keeps it on the books. It shouldn't be shocking to anybody that an old, outdated, stupid rule is still on the books of a federal agency. To put this in interweb relevant terms, there are government buildings right now whose computers are getting there browsers upgraded as we…

Perfect example. While I suspect that odds of blood born illnesses are probably pretty equal between straight or gay donors, that wasn't always the case, hence the rule. The rule needs to be reexamined and probably removed, but to characterize it as some sort bigotry or hate crime is inflammatory nonsense.

Yes. WB-57F to be exact.

The Block 30 is the perfect example of my point. At the end of the day, it couldn't do what it was supposed to do. I don't disagree with you on any particular point. BAMS is a new mission and an important one. And these programs are complicated and even when you have delays and set backs and cost increases they…

Can't argue with you there, other than to point out that's not a Dragon Lady :) She's a WB-57F. Modified version of the B-57, first US Jet bomber to drop hardware on bad guys.

I'll stick with this beauty.

You'll forgive me if I take all this with a grain of salt. Remember that the Global Hawk was touted for years as the future of aerial reconnaissance. Only to finally get shut down for being to rigid and expensive. This thing isn't a hell of a lot more than a Hawk with a new paint job (ok, it's a little more, and it…

"Every man attempts grows a beard at some point in his life."

Simple reality is this. Our enemies do everything they can to involve innocent civilians in conflicts. We on the other hand do everything we can to avoid them. And by everything I mean from advances in tech and precision weaponry, to overall strategy, to rules for boots on the ground.

"if the government wants us to"

Building codes are there to ensure safe construction, not to drive a product. This simply isn't a safety issue. Now if you want to require the instillation to meet certain electrical safety standards, should a builder and/or owner choose to install it, that's fine. But requiring the installation is a clear…

"and in order todo that governments need to provide viable reasons for having one."

Ironically your initial statement kinda makes his point. Consumer desire should be driving this addition to new homes, not government. If there really is so much "public support", the government mandate would be totally unnecessary.

While I don't see this as a big deal because $200 added to the cost of a new home is negligible, I agree with you completely on principle. Consumer demand should be driving changes like this, not government.

I looked. But I couldn't find the pool.

Problem with this ammo is it's a bit pricey and hard to come by here in the US. Add to that the current state of things where all ammo is pricey and hard to come by and it's a round I'd avoid despite it's excellent performance.

That movie was hysterical. The Palin stuff had dying of laughter on the floor.

Diaz has been wrong about Apple stuff for years. Why should nazi tech be any different? ;)