Have wondered where all the tariff money goes. Do I want to know?

Will wait for the movie.

I am an alcoholic living with a Parkinson's patient. Having no luck trying to find a joke for this.

@wtg said in About those shutdown firings: “And we have laws here, and the things that are being articulated here are not within the law.” Louder for the people in the back!!

@CHAS said in Checking out the competition: @AndyD A two liter, two turbo gas burner should be quite zippy. Also 7speed automatic and 4wd, with 328bhp... so everyone can drive it 0-60 in under 5sec and max 172mph. Sat in a couple, about £23k for a 3yr old with 30k miles on the clock. Maybe get one late next year. Sorry off topic. Back to the threats of China. Their spying on and hack of our government was discussed in Parliament today.

I remember that. Seems so ancient watching the clip.

@Steve-Miller thanks!

Oops

Charlie Brown is involved I am sure.

"Barbarians" is what they called us. Ok, so we lack some manners.

@Steve-Miller said in Daughter's wedding: What a beautiful wedding and such beautiful people! Even the old man looks pretty good! Ha, scrubbed up quite well in my new Beckham@Boss suit & old tie. It is nice to occasionally dress like a gentleman, put on some handmade wingtips.

Good grief.

Interesting! And given the damage that auto-immune diseases cause in other parts of the body, the argument has some intuitive appeal.

I don't know why he and his fans might have expected him to win the prize now. The stipulations for qualifying say quite clearly, it's for the person who've done the most to help the world IN THE PRECEDING YEAR! I see this meaning, though, originally accurate (see below) is no longer applied so strictly. *"That interpretation is incorrect in practice, though it is based on a specific, and now more loosely interpreted, phrase from Alfred Nobel's will. While the award is meant to recognize work that "shall have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind," the Nobel Committee does not strictly limit its consideration to only the preceding year. Here is a breakdown of how this misconception arose and how the selection process actually works: Alfred Nobel's original wording: In his 1895 will, Alfred Nobel stated the prizes should go to those who "during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind". A flexible interpretation: The Norwegian Nobel Committee has not interpreted "the preceding year" literally since the first awards in 1901. This is because the kind of work that promotes peace is often a long-term endeavor that may not show its full impact within a single calendar year. Looking at a nominee's full body of work: Instead, the committee considers a candidate's overall body of work and long-term contribution to peace, even if the award is prompted by recent developments. Example: Martin Luther King Jr.: When Martin Luther King Jr. won the prize in 1964, the committee recognized his years of sustained work and leadership in the Civil Rights Movement, not just his actions in 1963. Example: Narges Mohammadi: More recently, Narges Mohammadi won the 2023 prize "for her fight against the oppression of women in Iran," a cause she has championed for decades. The committee's deliberations are private and held under a 50-year confidentiality rule, giving them the freedom to look back over an individual or organization's career to find the most deserving recipient. " In any case , you-know-who most certainly does NOT qualify for the prize for countless reasons, not the least of which is the time frame.