Perhaps the FAA Administrator who made these changes should be forced to resign. This administration has had enough turnover that the President should be capable of appointing new leadership quickly.
The administrator of the FAA at the time of the certification of the 737 Max was Michael Heurta, who was appointed by President Obama. He took the position in December of 2011 and held it until January 2018. The 737 Max was certified in March of 2017.
It's not about winning Iowa in the general election. It's about winning or placing well in the Iowa Democrat caucus. There are currently eighteen candidates seeking the nomination. If all of them make it to the Iowa caucuses expect fourteen to sixteen of them to drop out shortly after the caucuses are held.
It's a smart move for her if she' s running in 2020. I actually find it shocking to see a candidate make an "appeal to the grass roots" move like this.
There's nothing shocking about this. Warren is currently campaigning in Iowa, announced this right to repair for tractors, and also announced a plan to target large agri-business like Tyson. These are all maneuvers to get her in the heads of Iowa caucus members. The caucus tend to result with all but two to four candidates dropping out. She may never bring it up again after Feb 3, 2020.
I was at an airport affected by this outage when it happened. There were at least three distinct issues with this outage which your solution would only feasibly address one.
The first problem was that tickets were not able to be printed. If you arrived at the airport expecting to check in for your reservation and print your boarding pass then you would not have been able to receive it. Your printed ticket and pre-printed passenger manifest doesn't help here if the problem is the passengers can't get their ticket printed.
The second problem was that the TSA checkpoints shut down. This was the largest of the issues. Your pre-printed boarding lists would have been extremely inefficient as they would need a list for all flights from the airport going forward for a reasonable period of time (at least the next 6 hours, possibly more). This physical list would possibly need to be duplicated. It wouldn't be an issue if the TSA could just do security without requiring the boarding pass but their mandate is to only allow ticketed passengers into the terminals.
The third problem is the only one that your solution would have readily helped, and that was with boarding. I witnessed my flight and another with delayed boarding. If they had a pre-printed manifest they could have began boarding, however, they delayed boarding partially because the first two issues were keeping passengers from getting to the gates in a timely manner. They also aren't going to board passengers on a plane just to have them sit there waiting. Realistically, this would have only worked for the flights that were supposed to board early in the outage. The snowball effect from the first two problems would have increased the number of empty seats and missed flights if they kept sending planes up.
Hell, 9 out of 10 times you don't even get to know for sure what kind of airplane, let alone what specific plane, you'll be flying on.
I don't know what airlines you fly on or where you buy your tickets but I can't think of a single time where I didn't know the model of aircraft I was flying on before I booked my tickets. The only time I've ever seen that was when using one of those discount sites like Expedia. They weren't able to provide any info on the plane being used for the flight but at the same time Expedia was able to and the air carriers themselves also had that when looking at the bookings on their reservation system. In fact, the most recent flight I booked said 737-800 as the model of the aircraft.
That's a good summary and then the icing on top is that the bribes were done as charitable contributions. Not only did they attempt bribery they were defrauding the United States and state governments of tax revenues.
It's not based on religious views. The Amish and Mennonite religions don't have doctrine against vaccines.
Christine Science is a faith which follows prayer/faith healing. Their opposition to vaccines is part of a general rejection of modern medicine and that is an important distinction to keep in mind. No amount of efficacy or safety of vaccines is going to budge the doctrine on faith healing religions, compare that against other religions where objections were based on an erroneous belief of the use of blood in vaccines (Jehova's Witness) or based on beliefs that fetal tissue was used. These religions revised their doctrinal stance on vaccines when evidence was presented to them because they accept modern medicine.
These sects also happen to form a vast minority of the anti-vax movement population and its pretty easy to let them keep their religious exemption because the total population we're speaking of is unlikely to be a risk to herd immunity. There does need to be stricter guidelines on the usage of religious exemptions. Parents are abusing them and treating them equivalent to philosophical objections when they have no faith or belong to a faith that doesn't have doctrinal objection.
Mennonites appear to have the same views for rejecting vaccines rather than religious.
The only religious objection to vaccine tend to come from sects where they believe in faith healing and that frequently manifests as a general across the board rejection of modern medicine.
The plane will still need to fly because it will be used for a departure from the destination airport later that day or early the next. Airlines don't keep a stockpile of spare aircraft lying around airports. They have just enough to be able to move planes out for the larger routine maintenances that they can't do while between flights.
The anti-vaxxers are probably vaccinated. Giving them injections won't do much and tying them down won't help unless you're doing that to keep them from interfering with you vaccinating their children.
Jehovah's Witness used to reject vaccination but revised their doctrine. They do also have the rejection of blood transfusions but they do have scripture to base that on. The religious who reject vaccinations do so because their doctrine is based on faith healing or divine providence and consequently they should be rejecting all medical care, not just vaccinations.
There may be some religious objections to vaccination that could arise based on what is required to develop vaccines but that would mostly revolve around using aborted fetal tissue and one should expect that it would be a refused against specific vaccines rather than a general anti-vaccination stance.
In all seriousness, when was Kubrick attached to the Hoax? My brief searching didn't find any references earlier than 2002, after Kubrick's death. Was his name attached to it before his death?
A budget bill cannot be filibustered. This is true but in order for that to be applicable a budget resolution has to be passed. No budget resolution was passed for FY2019 so there are zero appropriations bills for that fiscal year which are exempt from filibuster.
Solo is good and from a technical execution stand point it was done well. The script was good. It had a lot of good things about it. However, the problem that Solo had was one of baggage. It's a prequel starring 3 big name characters (Han Solo, Chewbacca, Lando Calrissian). This causes a lot of scenes to fall because you know they can't be maimed or killed. Rogue One didn't have that baggage. The only big character tied into the movie was Vader and he was ancillary rather than focal. That gave them freedom to develop entirely new characters and in the end they had the balls to kill them all.
I'd rather see a Tim Burton Star Wars than Episode 8.
My chief problem with Ep 7 and 8 so far has been that I felt like I was watching a reimaging of Ep4 with Ep7 and a reimaging of Battlestar Galactica with Ep8.
I initially had reservations about Rogue One because as an EU junkie Rogue One is eternally Wedge Antilles to me but it proved to be good. I enjoyed Solo. I think Ron Howard did a good job with what he had but it's difficult to get into to the story too much since you know Han, Chewbacca, and Lando can't die.
Most of the expanded universe for Star Wars was mediocre at best and a big part of it is that at the core and what sets Star Wars for itself is the Force. The Force created a lot of shit in the expanded universe (Kevin J. Anderson I'm looking at you... or a hutt Jedi). Combine that with an overwhelming desire to use existing major characters and you have a recipe for a lot of junk and a narrow focus (how many times did Han and Leia's kids get kidnapped?). It's no surprise that some of the best stories came from Timothy Zahn or Michael Stackpole where they had enough works on their own to create new major characters and perhaps more importantly the Force took a back seat to the stories and was downplayed.
Depends on the state, so check the laws, but a lot of states permit motorcycles and bikes to proceed through a steady red signal after conditions have been met. In many cases they require you to wait 2 minutes and then you get to treat the intersection and signal as if it were stop sign.
Navigating by compass alone only occurs when you're using dead reckoning for navigation. In all other situations the compass is aided by some other navigational tool which provides a corrective element against the compass.
Maybe I just haven't had my caffeine yet, but have there been any naval battles between equal-ish powers since WW2?
That depends on how you classify "naval battle". If you mean a battle in which warships participated then there's probably a few that you can point out in which naval forces were only employed by one side but air or ground assets on the other did provide a risk to the warships. The Falklands War had one or two of those if I remember correctly. If you want both sides to have naval vessels then nothing comes to mind.
It's interesting how many people continue to pretend that the Republicans hold the Senate when it takes 60 votes to get a budget passed.
Appropriations bills are explicitly exempt from the filibuster as long as a non-binding budget resolution was passed by both the House and Senate by April 15th of the year before the next fiscal year (April 15, 2018 for FY2019). That budget resolution is also exempt from the filibuster but the party in power in both chambers has to have enough unity to pass that simple majority.
It's not quite so simple as to say Republicans held the House and Senate. It ignores the procedural elements for a budget and funding the government.
The first thing to lay out on the table is that viewing Trump as a Republican is not an accurate depiction. He is an outsider and not part of the political establishment. You can see this with the number of Republicans and Conservatives that you can ascribe to being "never-Trumpers". The second point to lay out is that the Republican party is not as good as Democrats at holding ranks. They're a bit more fractured and at a minimum there's probably a group of Republicans that say "We must have the wall" and a group that says "We don't need the wall" and both will stick to those lines.
This brings on the process for budgeting and appropriations. If everything followed according to how it's supposed to the President submits a budget request, then a non-binding budget resolution would have been passed by a simple majority in both the House and Senate by April 15, 2018. This non-binding budget resolution permits appropriations bills to pass through the Senate without the risk of a filibuster. Congress would then craft and pass spending bills before October 1, 2018 in order to fund the government although as long as the non-binding resolution is in place it does greatly ease the risk of funding the government after the fiscal year starts.
A non-binding budget resolution was never passed for FY2019 in no small part due to the fact that during the period which it could be passed the Republicans held the Senate 51-49 permitting only a single party defector before any resolution would be canned. Getting the budget resolution that could pass both the House and Senate given those margins with Democrats that would not support the Republicans, a fractured Republican caucas, and never-Trump Republicans was not likely to occur but this was the easiest spending vote to pass as it really only requires one or two Democrats crossing to support the resolution. Congress was delinquent in passing the budget resolution and that causes all FY2019 appropriations bills to be subjected to filibuster.
The results have been predictable. The less contentious spending of the government was passed and those parts of the government remain open. The Republicans, requiring eight or nine Democrats to support any appropriations bill to get to cloture, were in a worse position that prevented the budget resolution from being passed. With the President threatening a veto it turns out that the Republicans needed 44 House Democrats and 16 Senate Democrats for bypassing the veto.
With the 116th Congress being sworn in it's now a situation where the Democrats require thirteen Republicans in order to pass a FY2019 appropriations bill without a filibuster killing it but they need 55 House Republicans and 22 Senate Republicans to overcome a Presidential veto.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps the FAA Administrator who made these changes should be forced to resign. This administration has had enough turnover that the President should be capable of appointing new leadership quickly.
The administrator of the FAA at the time of the certification of the 737 Max was Michael Heurta, who was appointed by President Obama. He took the position in December of 2011 and held it until January 2018. The 737 Max was certified in March of 2017.
She will probably forget about all these ideas fast, should she get elected.
That's being optimistic. She'll forget about it after Feb 3, 2020 with the Iowa caucuses over.
Start petitioning among the states and Article V it. That's the only way it'll get done.
It's not about winning Iowa in the general election. It's about winning or placing well in the Iowa Democrat caucus. There are currently eighteen candidates seeking the nomination. If all of them make it to the Iowa caucuses expect fourteen to sixteen of them to drop out shortly after the caucuses are held.
It's a smart move for her if she' s running in 2020. I actually find it shocking to see a candidate make an "appeal to the grass roots" move like this.
There's nothing shocking about this. Warren is currently campaigning in Iowa, announced this right to repair for tractors, and also announced a plan to target large agri-business like Tyson. These are all maneuvers to get her in the heads of Iowa caucus members. The caucus tend to result with all but two to four candidates dropping out. She may never bring it up again after Feb 3, 2020.
I was at an airport affected by this outage when it happened. There were at least three distinct issues with this outage which your solution would only feasibly address one.
The first problem was that tickets were not able to be printed. If you arrived at the airport expecting to check in for your reservation and print your boarding pass then you would not have been able to receive it. Your printed ticket and pre-printed passenger manifest doesn't help here if the problem is the passengers can't get their ticket printed.
The second problem was that the TSA checkpoints shut down. This was the largest of the issues. Your pre-printed boarding lists would have been extremely inefficient as they would need a list for all flights from the airport going forward for a reasonable period of time (at least the next 6 hours, possibly more). This physical list would possibly need to be duplicated. It wouldn't be an issue if the TSA could just do security without requiring the boarding pass but their mandate is to only allow ticketed passengers into the terminals.
The third problem is the only one that your solution would have readily helped, and that was with boarding. I witnessed my flight and another with delayed boarding. If they had a pre-printed manifest they could have began boarding, however, they delayed boarding partially because the first two issues were keeping passengers from getting to the gates in a timely manner. They also aren't going to board passengers on a plane just to have them sit there waiting. Realistically, this would have only worked for the flights that were supposed to board early in the outage. The snowball effect from the first two problems would have increased the number of empty seats and missed flights if they kept sending planes up.
Hell, 9 out of 10 times you don't even get to know for sure what kind of airplane, let alone what specific plane, you'll be flying on.
I don't know what airlines you fly on or where you buy your tickets but I can't think of a single time where I didn't know the model of aircraft I was flying on before I booked my tickets. The only time I've ever seen that was when using one of those discount sites like Expedia. They weren't able to provide any info on the plane being used for the flight but at the same time Expedia was able to and the air carriers themselves also had that when looking at the bookings on their reservation system. In fact, the most recent flight I booked said 737-800 as the model of the aircraft.
That's a good summary and then the icing on top is that the bribes were done as charitable contributions. Not only did they attempt bribery they were defrauding the United States and state governments of tax revenues.
It's not based on religious views. The Amish and Mennonite religions don't have doctrine against vaccines.
Christine Science is a faith which follows prayer/faith healing. Their opposition to vaccines is part of a general rejection of modern medicine and that is an important distinction to keep in mind. No amount of efficacy or safety of vaccines is going to budge the doctrine on faith healing religions, compare that against other religions where objections were based on an erroneous belief of the use of blood in vaccines (Jehova's Witness) or based on beliefs that fetal tissue was used. These religions revised their doctrinal stance on vaccines when evidence was presented to them because they accept modern medicine.
These sects also happen to form a vast minority of the anti-vax movement population and its pretty easy to let them keep their religious exemption because the total population we're speaking of is unlikely to be a risk to herd immunity. There does need to be stricter guidelines on the usage of religious exemptions. Parents are abusing them and treating them equivalent to philosophical objections when they have no faith or belong to a faith that doesn't have doctrinal objection.
Amish populations don't object to vaccines over religious reasons. The largest reason they provide is concern over the safety or efficacy of vaccines.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
Mennonites appear to have the same views for rejecting vaccines rather than religious.
The only religious objection to vaccine tend to come from sects where they believe in faith healing and that frequently manifests as a general across the board rejection of modern medicine.
The plane will still need to fly because it will be used for a departure from the destination airport later that day or early the next. Airlines don't keep a stockpile of spare aircraft lying around airports. They have just enough to be able to move planes out for the larger routine maintenances that they can't do while between flights.
What about the followers of the First United Church of Nikola Tesla?
The anti-vaxxers are probably vaccinated. Giving them injections won't do much and tying them down won't help unless you're doing that to keep them from interfering with you vaccinating their children.
Jehovah's Witness used to reject vaccination but revised their doctrine. They do also have the rejection of blood transfusions but they do have scripture to base that on. The religious who reject vaccinations do so because their doctrine is based on faith healing or divine providence and consequently they should be rejecting all medical care, not just vaccinations.
There may be some religious objections to vaccination that could arise based on what is required to develop vaccines but that would mostly revolve around using aborted fetal tissue and one should expect that it would be a refused against specific vaccines rather than a general anti-vaccination stance.
In all seriousness, when was Kubrick attached to the Hoax? My brief searching didn't find any references earlier than 2002, after Kubrick's death. Was his name attached to it before his death?
A budget bill cannot be filibustered. This is true but in order for that to be applicable a budget resolution has to be passed. No budget resolution was passed for FY2019 so there are zero appropriations bills for that fiscal year which are exempt from filibuster.
Solo is good and from a technical execution stand point it was done well. The script was good. It had a lot of good things about it. However, the problem that Solo had was one of baggage. It's a prequel starring 3 big name characters (Han Solo, Chewbacca, Lando Calrissian). This causes a lot of scenes to fall because you know they can't be maimed or killed. Rogue One didn't have that baggage. The only big character tied into the movie was Vader and he was ancillary rather than focal. That gave them freedom to develop entirely new characters and in the end they had the balls to kill them all.
I'd rather see a Tim Burton Star Wars than Episode 8.
My chief problem with Ep 7 and 8 so far has been that I felt like I was watching a reimaging of Ep4 with Ep7 and a reimaging of Battlestar Galactica with Ep8.
I initially had reservations about Rogue One because as an EU junkie Rogue One is eternally Wedge Antilles to me but it proved to be good. I enjoyed Solo. I think Ron Howard did a good job with what he had but it's difficult to get into to the story too much since you know Han, Chewbacca, and Lando can't die.
Most of the expanded universe for Star Wars was mediocre at best and a big part of it is that at the core and what sets Star Wars for itself is the Force. The Force created a lot of shit in the expanded universe (Kevin J. Anderson I'm looking at you... or a hutt Jedi). Combine that with an overwhelming desire to use existing major characters and you have a recipe for a lot of junk and a narrow focus (how many times did Han and Leia's kids get kidnapped?). It's no surprise that some of the best stories came from Timothy Zahn or Michael Stackpole where they had enough works on their own to create new major characters and perhaps more importantly the Force took a back seat to the stories and was downplayed.
Depends on the state, so check the laws, but a lot of states permit motorcycles and bikes to proceed through a steady red signal after conditions have been met. In many cases they require you to wait 2 minutes and then you get to treat the intersection and signal as if it were stop sign.
Navigating by compass alone only occurs when you're using dead reckoning for navigation. In all other situations the compass is aided by some other navigational tool which provides a corrective element against the compass.
Maybe I just haven't had my caffeine yet, but have there been any naval battles between equal-ish powers since WW2?
That depends on how you classify "naval battle". If you mean a battle in which warships participated then there's probably a few that you can point out in which naval forces were only employed by one side but air or ground assets on the other did provide a risk to the warships. The Falklands War had one or two of those if I remember correctly. If you want both sides to have naval vessels then nothing comes to mind.
Shouldn't it be how much cheese a Library of Congress contains? Why wrap and waste all the non-surface volume?
It's interesting how many people continue to pretend that the Republicans hold the Senate when it takes 60 votes to get a budget passed.
Appropriations bills are explicitly exempt from the filibuster as long as a non-binding budget resolution was passed by both the House and Senate by April 15th of the year before the next fiscal year (April 15, 2018 for FY2019). That budget resolution is also exempt from the filibuster but the party in power in both chambers has to have enough unity to pass that simple majority.
It's not quite so simple as to say Republicans held the House and Senate. It ignores the procedural elements for a budget and funding the government.
The first thing to lay out on the table is that viewing Trump as a Republican is not an accurate depiction. He is an outsider and not part of the political establishment. You can see this with the number of Republicans and Conservatives that you can ascribe to being "never-Trumpers". The second point to lay out is that the Republican party is not as good as Democrats at holding ranks. They're a bit more fractured and at a minimum there's probably a group of Republicans that say "We must have the wall" and a group that says "We don't need the wall" and both will stick to those lines.
This brings on the process for budgeting and appropriations. If everything followed according to how it's supposed to the President submits a budget request, then a non-binding budget resolution would have been passed by a simple majority in both the House and Senate by April 15, 2018. This non-binding budget resolution permits appropriations bills to pass through the Senate without the risk of a filibuster. Congress would then craft and pass spending bills before October 1, 2018 in order to fund the government although as long as the non-binding resolution is in place it does greatly ease the risk of funding the government after the fiscal year starts.
A non-binding budget resolution was never passed for FY2019 in no small part due to the fact that during the period which it could be passed the Republicans held the Senate 51-49 permitting only a single party defector before any resolution would be canned. Getting the budget resolution that could pass both the House and Senate given those margins with Democrats that would not support the Republicans, a fractured Republican caucas, and never-Trump Republicans was not likely to occur but this was the easiest spending vote to pass as it really only requires one or two Democrats crossing to support the resolution. Congress was delinquent in passing the budget resolution and that causes all FY2019 appropriations bills to be subjected to filibuster.
The results have been predictable. The less contentious spending of the government was passed and those parts of the government remain open. The Republicans, requiring eight or nine Democrats to support any appropriations bill to get to cloture, were in a worse position that prevented the budget resolution from being passed. With the President threatening a veto it turns out that the Republicans needed 44 House Democrats and 16 Senate Democrats for bypassing the veto.
With the 116th Congress being sworn in it's now a situation where the Democrats require thirteen Republicans in order to pass a FY2019 appropriations bill without a filibuster killing it but they need 55 House Republicans and 22 Senate Republicans to overcome a Presidential veto.