i'm all for privatization of schools. it's a rare tax payer who thinks that he/she is getting what they're paying for. as it's the law that children be educated, there is a ready market for private schooling. wherever we can remove government from our daily lives i'm all for it. the profit motive has made this country the great place it is today and our kid's education should reap the benefit.

i suppose you're right but do people really care what i think of me? i'd hoped that the few words i wrote would give an idea of the type of person i consider myself to be. i think we all have a tendency to think of ourselves like we'd like others to think we are but is that really an honest account of who and what we really are? still, your comment deserves considering. thanks.

think anybody'll just rent me?

kind words, soufle. thanks for the comments. i've been living my retirement in my rv traveling the states for the last couple years. spent some time on the oregon coast and plan to return soon.

looks aren't everything but they are something and my guess would be that your face looks every bit is good as the rest. so, yeah, more pics that show how you can smile. and lose the unemployed thing. that's not something about you. more something that you're going through at the present time.

since i've been on mingle i can count the private messages i've recieved on one hand even when i've messaged others. are people really here to meet others or not?

hard to say if you're babblin' to much without seeing the babble. but if it comes to your mind perhaps there's something there. we guys are quite different when it comes to babble. most of us simply like to get to the point. many gals like to lead with a story which i'm sure is what makes you a successful writer but most guys aren't interested in a novel when it comes to talking with a lady. maybe there's a problem with balance so you might try dialing down the babble a bit. but like i say, haven't seen your babblin'.

having said that, i've always replied to messages, the extremely few i get that is. seems the polite thing to do. if you're not getting replies it just might be in your choices in the profiles you find interesting. but i can't imagine that if someone does not have the courtesy to respond to your message that you'd be interested in the person if you ever met anyway. so consider it their loss.

as we used to sing in the army, 'standin' tall and lookin' good, oughta be in hollywood!' thanks for your service, jarhead.

hello leigh. i think the christian folks need a supreme court like we have. nine guys and gals in robes to interpret what the bible really means. what they say is final i think the've plenty of folks who already own the robes.

of course the value of the dollar is a big part of the inflation equation. 3.5% is 3.5%. i'll take it.

well eight to ten hours at three g's acceleration would still end up with a speed far greater than orbital speed. and once you are in orbit how do you slow down in the atmosphere enough to land? how do you build a balloon that can withstand the heat build up due to friction? anyway, if you really think your idea would work you can be a multimillionair if you can sell it to somebody who agrees. but your balloon will never reach a high enough atmospere that will allow a craft to overcome the aerodynamic affects. it will need a dense enough atmosphere to remain boyant and the affects of drag will always hinder the smaller amounts of acceleration an ion engine might produce which would be way below the three g's you're talking about. and now keeping the balloon in tow will provide even more drag that will need to be overcome. it simply won't work but as i say, sell your idea and you'll be rich but i'm far from sold.

lol

but he thought he was in india. hense, native americans are called indians.

separation of church and state itself is an interpretation of the establishment clause of the first amendment and goes far beyond simply barring laws mandating or prohibiting religion. and of course the only interpretation that matters is that done by federal judges when it comes to separation of church and states. citizen's take on it simply is moot unless of course you wish to push for an amendment.

nobody's defining anybody. but the evil deeds did happen and a true representation of history will include such.



the offensive behavior was justified by the religious dogma that the perps adhered to. we're talking about a large group of catholics that condoned these attrocities not simply the behavior of a few criminals. without the teachings of the catholic faith the inquisition could not have happened an many people would have lived out happy lives. but no, the dogma, required that these people suffer in the name of god. yes, we can prevent future atrocities by understanding history but only if history is accurately taught.



who's morality should be taught? that of a kkk klansman? morality, like religion, needs to stay at home and out of the classrooom.

i do see the difference but i don't see that schools teach 'that catholics want blah blah blah.' we're talking history here. if the history class was about the holocaust we wouldn't teach that 'some people commited these atrocities,' we'd teach that the national socialist party, nazis, were the perps. if the topic is the inquisition it's not teaching religion to say that catholics were the perps.

safer = al queada in caves.

when religion is the issue, i think calling them catholic or protestant is not out of line. we don't seem to have a problem refering to the followers of hitler as 'nazis' but they too were just people, no? just people did not commit the atrocities against humanity during the crusades, the inquisition and the salem witch trials. they were people, for sure, but people who made decisions regarding life and death based on their catholic or protestant dogma. many even claimed commiting the dastardly deeds 'in the name of god' and then pathetically excused their actions as 'god's will.' so identifying them as catholic or protestent as opposed to just people is helpful if we are to really get a grasp on history.

i don't think it'll make any more sense even if you could read it, conrad.

that's the problem. the 'slowly builds momentum' part. how does the craft stay in the thin air after release from the balloon until it finally builds orbital speed? what provides the lift required while it slowly spirals into orbit. three g's is about what the shuttle astronauts experience during launch and can hardly be called 'slowly building momentum'. have you ever felt 3 g's? imagine your body weighing three times what it weighs. no human has ever withstood three g's for ten hours. not even close. i wonder how fast the shuttle would be going if it could maintain that acceleration for eight to ten hours especially once it reached thin atmosphere and beyond? likely millions of mph if you did the math.

at any rate, there is simply no way to deal with lift in an atmosphere, especially a thin atmosphere, that does not involve lots of airspeed. in any atmosphere there are four forces acting on an aircraft. gravity [load factor], lift, drag and thrust. until the craft has escaped the atmosphere and reached orbital speed drag must be overcome by thrust and lift must counter gravity if the craft is to remain aloft. i can think of no way for a craft to slowly build momentum from zero airspeed when released from the balloon to orbital speed without an adequate amount of lift. and in a thin atmosphere the slightest amount of lift requires alot of airspeed.