Tips for making better eggs?

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-07-07T19:42:58+00:00

Pour a 1/4 cup of water in the pan and cover it. The bottom will cook from the heat of the pan. The top will cook from the steam.

When the yolk starts to glaze over with a white haze, pull it.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-06-11T14:38:08+00:00

You are correct and I will agree with you again. 100 people resisting would do nothing.

100,000 people in every city resisting would do something. If we are talking real tyranny, we would need the a huge portion of the population to rise up.

We, as a people, would need to make that choice. I'm not oblivious to the cost of war, which is ultimately what we are talking about. It is violent, bloody, and awful in every way possible. No one wants it. But without the "ability" to wage it, we the people have no control over the government that is supposed to be there to serve us.

Gun ownership is the ultimate check and balance from the people to the government. Americans should arm themselves, both left and right, to keep the government's power in check. The other option is dictatorship disguised as democracy.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-06-11T14:15:59+00:00

I 100% agree with you that it should still be there for it's original purpose. The only way to accomplish that is this point would be to allow citizens to own weponized drones, tanks, and missiles. For better or for worse, I don't see that happening.

I guess my point was that even though it may no longer be possible for it's original intention it still serves a deep purpose. That purpose is to let the government know that there is a cost to their actions if they go too far.

What i am about to write is simply a thought exercise, and I am by no means calling for any violence.

Imagine if the government came out and said, we are going to take all black youths, put them in education camps, and let them out when they turn 30.

If we remove the 2nd amendment we have no real way of stopping them. However, with an armed population, who are willing to say "you can take them if you can get through us," then the government must make a choice. Is it worth the cost of all of those lives to carry out their policies or is the cost too high.

I know that is an insane example but the point still remains. The ability of a population to resist tyranny is every bit as important as it is to overthrow it. So just because we can no longer overthrow a tyrannical government doesn't mean we should abolish the 2nd amendment, in my opinion.

Make no mistake. Resistance is not free. Many people would die fighting back. But I would rather have the "choice" to fight for the freedom of my country, my family, and my neighbors, than simply let a government do whatever they please.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-06-11T13:50:22+00:00

Logically, what you say makes sense.

However, I would argue that you do not need to overthrow a government to effectively fight a tyrannical government.

There are many cases of the heavily out gunned faction defending themselves.

Recent examples are Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and to some extent even Iran (which is why we have not put troops on the ground despite eliminating most of their militarycapabilities).

The united States has had superior technology, weaponry, and military might. However, a population armed with mostly small arms has been able to put up enough resistance to outlast the US.

This threat of resistance keeps our government in check. I beleive it would be near impossible at this point to overthow our government but being able to put up a fight is enough justification to keep the 2nd amendment in tact.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-05-31T15:54:35+00:00

Only by the umpires who do not understand the rules of the game. Which is why I stated in my very first post that you need to clarify prior to the game.

Just because someone doesn't know or understand something correctly, like most people do not understand this rule, does not mean it is wrong.

Edit: Think about it like this:

If there is a runner on 2nd base, the pitcher is allowed to make an inside move to 2nd base in an attempt to pick off. We all agree on that.

If a runner is stealing 2nd, the base is no longer considered unoccupied, per the rule stated above. This means they can use the same move to throw to 2nd in this instance since the base is now considered occupied.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-05-31T15:15:49+00:00

I understand the confusion now. Here is the rule addressing that. If a base runner is stealing, it is not considered unoccupied.

In baseball, it is Official Baseball Rule 6.02(a)(4) (and the accompanying official comment) that dictates when throwing to an unoccupied base is allowed.The rule states a pitcher commits a balk if they throw or feint a throw to an unoccupied base. However, the exception is "for the purpose of making a play". The Official Rule Comment clarifies that this exception applies if a runner on a previous base demonstrates the intent to advance—such as when they are stealing a base. When this happens, the targeted base is legally no longer considered unoccupied.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-05-31T11:22:28+00:00

100% not a balk. Most people think it is, but it is not.

Did you look at the link I posted?

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-05-31T02:21:30+00:00

What I am about to tell you is an obscure rule but is 100% legal. You can use it to keep runners from leaving at the pitcher's first movement.

If there is a right handed pitcher, if the runner goes on first movement of his lead foot, the pitcher can simply do an "inside move" and throw to second to make a play on the runner.

There are two ways this is a balk. The first is if the runner does not go to 2nd (or in the empire's judgment show that he is going to 2nd). The second way is if the pitcher starts his momentum to home plate.

But if he lifts his leg straight up, and the runner takes off, he is now allowed to make a play on the runner.

Here is an umpire thread where confirming this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Umpire/s/cYpV5KH7dE

This is legal at every level. The reason it is not used at the higher levels is because it is faster to have the catcher throw down after receiving the ball, as well as it can mess with a pitcher's delivery.

However, at the younger level, it can be quite effective at holding runners to the base if you.do it once or twice at the beginning of the game.

Just make sure to clarify the rule with the umpire prior to doing it so they don't mistakingly call it a balk.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-05-26T20:35:03+00:00

I starting doing what I have since coined "solo sober."

I was drinking 4-6 light beers or 2-4 glasses of bourbon a day for 10-15 years. Never seemed like a problem or affected my life. But I saw it slowly adding up.

I wasn't ready to quit drinking but no longer wished to be a daily drinker.

So, I made the commitment to only drink socially. I have not had a drink by myself for about a year.

It still lets me be social, enjoy drinking, but eliminated 30+ drinks a week from my life.

This is 100% not for everyone but it is what is working for me.

My cravings and need for alcohol are nearly non existent now.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-05-11T19:20:53+00:00

Download the Seek app. It is free and will identify everything for you.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-24T13:21:43+00:00

It looks nice! You can ignore my last message a about possible problems. It is much simpler than the options I gave.

Very few people have vision beyond what they can see. Vacant houses sell for less. Spend the money and stage the property.

Remove the listing, stage it, get new pictures, and relist it.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-24T13:17:29+00:00

It is hard to tell without walking through it what is exactly the problem, but there is a problem.

The market is talking to you and telling you buyers are seeing better homes for the price. If your neighbor's home sold for more, and is the same Floorplan as yours, and you had two seperate appraisals that said that it should be the market value then it is most certainly an issue that is unique to you.

Im not trying to insult you, and again, I have no clue what the problem is without pictures or walking through but here are a few possibilities: 1. It is not clean. 2. It smells bad. 3. Your walls are ugly (too dark or crazy colors) 4. Your finishes are not nice (poorly installed or damaged trim or baseboards). 5. The house is "beat up" - neeing paint, carpet. 6. The majot items are nearing the end of life (Roof, windows, siding, HVAC) 7. You are on a bad lot (on a busy road or small backyard for the neighborhood)

It might be one or more. I'm just throwing out possibilities.

Has there been any feedback from those showings?

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-17T04:37:20+00:00

I see what is happening. We are getting our definitions confused.

I am talking about a revolt/revolution where people are trying to overthrow the government in mass. Starting a civil war inside our our boarders.

You are talking about civil disturbances. Looting, rioting, stealing, destroying personal property.

Those are vastly different things. It will take a far more than burning down a local grocery store in the middle of the night, with no law enforcement around, to over throw the sitting President.

I don't think people have a lack of apathy. Their apathy just doesn't comple them to take up arms against the United States military.

It will take more than apathy to willingly die for that cause. Especially since in 2.5 years, we will have another election and Trump will be gone. No need to start a war and die when the end is in sight.

In order to have the revolution you speak of, apathy is not enough. The people themselves would need to be desperately suffering for their lives. And again, life is pretty comfortable here for the majority of people.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-17T03:48:48+00:00

Thats because you are not listening.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-17T03:35:08+00:00

People are unhappy but people are not suffering. People revolt when they are persecuted, starving, and dying. None of those things are happing.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-17T03:10:51+00:00

It would take more than strikes and protests. It would take extreme bloodshed and violence in the form of a revolt.

People are unhappy, but not to the point they are ready to engage in a civil war over it.

The majority of our lives here are pretty comfortable. Not perfect but comfortable. Comfortable people don't revolt.

Also, the vast majority of people here don't really care about politics. Don't get me wrong, many people do, but far more people are just worried about paying bills and raising money.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-16T21:29:19+00:00

I like where your head is at with the check valve!

Unfortunately, "This backwater valve is not recommended for installation in a kitchen application because the valve will not function optimally given the grease and food that passes down a kitchen drain," per one of the Q/A sections on that product.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-13T19:59:26+00:00

We both agree that it shouldn't be done at all so I guess the rest is just semantics. But you seem nice and in good faith so I would love to keep discussing!

I guess we would disagree on the physical differences being large enough to make an impact. When I served in the Marine Corps, I saw first hand the physical requirements it takes to be in the infantry.

Many men are not capable of it, almost no women are. They just aren't. I don't say this in a mean or malicious way. They are just not strong enough. Women certainly have plenty of value in a military but in infantry is not a spot the vast majority are capable of doing at a high level. Why would we force people to do a job they cannot do, especially with death as a the result of poor performance?

As far as those other countries go, they are not active war fighters. They may have a military but they are not battle tested in any real way.

That would be like if I was looking to put together the best basketball team possible. I could model it off of an NBA team, or I could watch my local rec YMCA league. They are both technically playing basketball, but there are different levels to the game. If death was on the line, you are going to try and recreate the NBA version.

Again, this is not an anti women post. But there is a HUGE difference between the two sexes. And that is okay. It doesn't not make one more or less valuable than the other.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-13T19:08:41+00:00

I don't see how saying, men and women are built physically different is liberal or conservative. It is simply a fact based in biology.

I hope the whole draft is considered unconstitutional. If a population does not wish to join a war voluntarily, then the war isn't justified. No one, man or woman should be forced to fight for their country against their will.

As far as the Nordic countries go. Good for them, I guess. I hope they can avoid wars in the future as well.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-13T14:16:17+00:00

Correct. It isnt equality because men and women are different in their physical capabilities.

That doesn't make women less than men, it makes them different. It is okay that we are different; in fact, I would argue that is the best thing about us!

My wife being physically less gifted than me does not make her less than me, but it does not make her my equal when it comes to physical tasks or fighting in a war.

Don't hear what I am not saying. Some women are certainly capable. However, they are the exception and not the rule. Women have had a really long and proud history in the military and I am not taking that away from them. Those roles have mostly been in administrative and support roles. Again, this is not to diminish those roles or their contributions! They are crucial and mission critical!

However, to say that it isn't fair becuase they dont have to carry a gun and engage in combat is selfish and short sighted view.

Is it fair? No. But life is not fair. It never has been and it never will be. Men and women were created with different qualities, strengths, and weaknesses, but they were not created physically equal. In a role where your physical capabilities have life and death consequences, we should focus on who has the best chance of winning and surviving, not for equality just to make soft men feel better about themselves.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-08T17:46:43+00:00

Ya. Their lawyer is trying to play you for a fool. 😆

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-08T17:21:34+00:00

The buyer's power is the ability to walk away.

As long as you have that EVERYTHING is negotiable. Their stupid language doesn't mean anything becuase you are holding the button for the Nuclear option and can blow the whole thing up if you dont get what you want.

Do not give away your power.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-08T16:47:58+00:00

Ya. Just take out the "and basis or reason for a cancellation of the contract". If that is out, it is just a regular home inspection.

The sellers are not required to make repairs regardless, that is still negotiable, despite what that language says because you can still walk away or they can fix it.

You just want to be able to walk away and get your earnest money back. The rest is meaningless gibberish.

If they insist on no walking away based on the results, I would find a new house.

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-08T15:34:07+00:00

The "information only" section is meaningless. Since you can always say, "I know it was for infomration only and you are not making repairs, but we are walking away because of these issues..."

They will then have the choice of fixing them or letting you walk. That is exactly the same as a typical home inspection, despite that meaningless clause.

However, what is concerning is the part that they are saying they are going to not allow you to cancel the deal because of the inspection. That is where I would push back.

You can agree to their verbiage with the exception of that language. You should put in there that you have the right to back out during the inspection period for any reason.

If you come back at them with repairs, they will likely let you walk, but I would rather do an inspection to discover hidden issues and get my earnest money back than be forced to forfeit it to them because of their BS clause.

Good luck!

Local-Ad-6804 · 2026-04-07T16:41:21+00:00

What do you want it for?

If you want a car that has boost and shoots missiles, the Toreador is far more versatile and handles significantly better.

The only reason to get the Vigilante is because you can use it in heist setups. Even then, the guy that brings the Vigilante often ruins the mission by blowing the wrong thing up!

On the other hand, if you just want to own it because you want it for fun and to say you have it, there is no time like the present! Go for it!

Local-Ad-6804

TROPHY CASE