1. Jopo on something I totally forgot about, naturally
3. why not just not get married at your peak of popularity, the end of college or so.
4. Fk yeah
I get a 230, yes?706 comments to I get a 230, yes?Leave a ReplyYou must be logged in to post a comment. |
|
|
Copyright © 2013 FREE KRAUT! - All Rights Reserved |
|
Mind if I throw a few links on your grill?
5. Corporations are people, my friend
6. Nihilists? Fk me.
7. Well, this hits home
up
5. good luck with that. I think the commissioner he is in front of will think its funny, then rule against him (as expected), then the superior court judges he appeals it to (if that is even possible) will reject it without a hearing, as will any other court due to lack of jurisdiction.
6. funny, but tl.
7. nice. every once in a while I think about a question posed in the 80s somewhere, “what would da vinci be most surprised about. the auther of the question had a compelling but surprising anwser I can’t for the like of me remember. SOmething like Dental floss
up
6.
up
7 — Thx andeux — Not much given to self-reflection, I used that in reply to a typical “you suck” review of some Year-in-Review doggerel I wrote for my weeakly blog.. It’s a much elevated version of “No, YOU suck.”
up
5. As predicted by Ed, the argument was rejected, and the scofflaw going to appeal.
up
Interesting. By that reasoning, anyone not licensed to operate a vehicle should not be considered a person and should not count towards the minimum number of people required to use the carpool lane.
up
Sure, but laws have to be capable of implementation. You want the cops to be able to count heads and move on.
up
What if they’re obviously not licensed? Like kids?
up
kids are ok. theory being you could be taking the kid to consolidate trips
1. Needs moar Rickey.
up
true story
up
Is there anything you can’t say this about?
up
Rickey Henderson?
up
He certainly doesn’t think so.
up
meh, He would prolly be better than MY. DOesn’t replace Hamilton though.
up
Profar in the line up will by moving Kinsler to LF and then Murphy and Gentry in CF.
up
Between Profar and Olt they have some really nice problems.
up
Yeah. I wish we had good prospects.
up
At least we HAVE ‘hitting’ prospects these days even if they aren’t budding superstars.
The demise of Desme and Doolittle was pretty harsh.
Carter hit pretty well for a couple months there, probably would do even better if they would quit fking around w/ his playing time- “Hit a light tower HR? That was great, we’re going to bench you for the next 4 games.”…
up
Chris Carter isn’t a prospect.
He is a 26 yo DH/defensively challenge 1bman with a wRC+ of 103 in his career.
You are comparing a yaris to a tesla.
up
I know, I didn’t mean to imply he was or compare to Texas duo, I was speaking to his rookie year and his development.
up
I think there is a pretty good chance that we have seen his most productive year in the MLB
up
Could be so, biggest issue is his K rate, if he could get it closer to his minor league totals (2012- 22.4% AAA/ 31.9% MLB) he could be successful. When he had regular at bats there were stretches where he looked great at the plate. IIRC there were also many questionable strikeouts calls in the second half.
His .369 wOBA was also consistant w/ his career AAA totals.
We’ll likely never know until he gets consistant PA’s which sadly may never happen w/ the A’s as there seems to be some level of a lack of confidence in him w/ regards to management.
He’s still better offensively than what we’re used to dealing w/ at 1B in recent years.
I also think it’s slightly unfair that he is somewhat maligned as compared to Moss who is 3 years older w/ similarly no real history of success at the major league level.
up
his minor league well AAA wRC+ isn’t inline with what he did… its 119 which is shitty for a defensive black hole
up
I wouldn’t call that shitty.
First of all, we don’t have to make a cut at AAA – as a 22 yr old in the AA he had a wRC+ of 172 in almost 600 PA (significant amount as compared to 1200 he had in AAA).
Second you forget (or don’t know) that minor league wRC+ numbers are only league adjusted, not park adjusted, and that Sacramento has park factors of 83, 80 and 78 for the three years Carter played there. As a simple comparison, his wOBA of .369 with Oakland, after being adjusted for league and park gives Carter wRC+ of 139. His career wOBA in AAA is .380
And third, even if his true talent were 119 wRC+ that is not shitty. Out of 25 qualified first basemen in MLB last year that would rank him 12th. Out of 14 qualified DH it would rank him 6th.
up
I thought that Sac has played much more neutral over the last five or so years? Is this not true?
up
Neutral compared to what? A general theoretical stadium – maybe, but to the rest of PCL (which is important in the context of league adjusted wRC+ numbers) not. The numbers I mentioned are from 2010, 2011 and 2012.
up
Im trying to figure out where I read this but I was under the impression that after being pretty pitching friendly early in its tenure that it had been playing closer to league average recently than the numbers that you gave.
up
If you want to re-check my numbers, just go to stat corner. But the point is, even if it were neutral to the PCL average, 119 wRC+ is still league average or better for, as you put it, defensive black holes
up
I believe you… Im trying to see where I errored.
up
It could be that you read that it plays neutral to an average ball park. But as most of the PCL parks are real hitters’ parks, it is at least relatively, a pitchers’ park
3 Well clearly I already fucked that up… Ive been out of school for four and a half years.
If I got married Id want to do it at SF city hall and then have a big party… way way less formal than that.
up
I got married by a snail puppet.
up
This is terrific.
up
City Hall is beautiful, next time your there check out the basement halls, SF Arts Commission puts on some really really good shows down there.
up
Yeah. I go there probably once a month or so.
up
I’d prefer to go to Vegas. Get married, get divorced, get married, get divorced, then get married. If possible do it over the course of a weekend. That way we can both say that third time was the charm.
up
Married in Vegas, wedding on Mount Tam.
up
married in vegas, FTW!
up
At the Wee Kirk Of The Heather to boot.
up
we were little church of the west. :)
up
I wanted a drive-thru chapel (the only place that spelling is acceptable), but Heather found her Wee Kirk.
up
<3
up
What decided you?
My favorite parts of the day were the line for licenses that was also for summonses and the post-wedding personal pan pizzas and margarita slushies.
up
i wanted to elope (since it is my second marriage). then G’s mom said she wanted to be wherever we got married. i didn’t want a huge to-do so we chose vegas after a lot of stress and freaking out. 25 people with us, 14 in our wedding party. it was a blast and we could afford a really fun reception. and it was a vacay for all of us! what about you?
up
That sounds nice. Simple. Quick. Yet personal.
up
Smaller is better.
up
it was amazing. there is absolutely nothing i would change about it. :D
up
Some day I might get married, it’s only been 11 1/2 years we’ve been together I guess.
up
we were together for a very long time before we chose to be married. no rush!
up
The eloping urgency was a biopsy. Yes, she married me for my healthcare benefits.
The wedding was the real thing, and timed for family & friends’ convenience and cost, though really we’d been life-longs since Burning Man ’96.
up
fking burners
up
’96 was the last good one, with guns and explosives and such.
up
It was indeed the last of its kind – mostly because it was the first with deaths.
up
And in turn you get to not be kicked out of the US on a government whim! True love triumphs!
up
Not so! I can still be kicked out on a whim (and hence I limit the ways I get involved in direct actions) and my green card came from my employment not my marital state.
up
anchor baby
up
ball and chain dude
up
if you want to limit people make it a destination wedding
up
If I had a destination wedding, I wouldn’t be able to go.
up
The marriage was just us, the wedding was the big party.
A pot-luck at the walking club’s bunk house (big deck, hall, kitchen, dormitory beds for 50) was perfect for access and cost.
up
3. My step-brother did that – the wedding was on Maui. It was still relatively sizable – probably 70-80 people. In hindsight, I would rather have the rejection letter, since I found out only after I had made tickets for Spawn1 and I (Mrs. PDX was 7-months pregnant) that it was an adult only wedding. Apparently, I was supposed to have inferred that from the way the invitation was addressed to just Mrs. PDX and I, since it didn’t say on the invite that kids were not allowed. Since the invitation was crumpled by the USPS, I wouldn’t have figured it out anyway. So I went to the wedding while my sister hung out with Spawn1 and we switched places for the reception, as I wasn’t keen on some hotel-sponsored stranger babysitting him.
My step-sister just got engaged and let us know already that it would be an adult-only affair (in LA, not Hawaii). I doubt we’re going, although I actually like her and her fiancee.
up
I have a cousin getting married in Sydney on the 18th. It’ll be kid-friendly. I can’t go, but if you want to take the fam, I’m sure they won’t mind.
Oh, and they’re having an 830am ceremony followed by a 6pm reception. Who does that?
up
Beg off the wedding party if at all possible; those staunch Catholic ceremonies go on forever.
up
Yeah. The catholic-est one I went to actually had seats for the bride/groom because they knew it would go too long for standing.
up
Pssh, that’s nothing. My family is Hindu. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a 9 hour ceremony.
up
Yeah, but you can get up, walk around and talk on the phone during the ceremony, and nobody will care. In the Catholic services you have to stay seated on hard wooden pews, stand up, sit down, mouth words so it looks like you’re chanting along with everyone else..it’s a lot of work!
up
But 9 hours! Can’t we get an intermission? Maybe sell samosas out in the lobby?
up
LOL
up
Not only that, but those of us who aren’t catholic have to sit awkwardly while all the catholics take communion.
up
That was the definitely the worst part of my best friend’s wedding, esp. since I was the only one in the wedding party who wasn’t Catholic.
up
yeah thats awkward turtle.
up
Dancing the night away with his cute French step-cousins more than made up for it, though!
up
You were already married… diminishes the value of that.
up
Not really. Just because you own a Ferrari, that doesn’t mean you can’t admire a Porsche.
up
Yeah it does if your Ferrari lease prohibits driving Porsches
up
You can admire the Porsche without driving it. You can gaze at it, sit in it, maybe watch someone else drive it…
up
Is anyone else getting aroused by this?
up
Very. But then I’m allowed to take that Porsche out for a spin AND the Ferrari. Damn you, now I need to blow off some steam.
up
I’d love a Ferrari or a Porsche, but I have a better chance with a Gremlin or a Pinto.
up
Well, yeah. I said I was “allowed” not that I was ever going to set foot in one.
up
This was summer 1998 – way before I was married and four years before I met Mrs. PDX. I was quite unattached at the time.
up
Oh, so you could drive the FK outta those Porsches!
up
Carry on then!
up
Except they were French, so maybe…Citroens. But really really cute Citroens.
up
Not Peugeots?
up
up
What beautiful curves.
up
Renaults?
up
I’ve never hooked up with a French girl. But French cars are hideous, both unattractive and high maintenance. Do not want.
up
I’m sure they taste delicious, though.
up
I’ll give you the high maintenance part. But boy, they have some classics
up
That’s always the most awkward thing of awkwardnessssssss. Even if you scope out a fellow non-Catholic or two to sit by beforehand.
up
Indeed. At least sometimes they pass the stuff through the pews so you don’t have to sit there contemplating hell while your entire row dutifully files out to
celebrate Christactually eat Christup
They could at least give the heathens a bag of chips or something so we can also have snacks. :(
up
That’s good, play on that Catholic guilt.
up
Try being a pallbearer at a Greek Orthodox funeral where the way you know the deceased is that your mother’s lesbian partner is the dead woman’s granddaughter. You are an atheist and want nothing to do with kissing icons or taking communion. You are also at the front of the entire funeral.
up
I just flat-out don’t do funerals.
I’ve been to one, and I’m surprised I didn’t beat the shit out of the preacher. The deceased was a suicide, and the preacher talked on and on about how the deceased was going to hell and we couldn’t do anything about it.
Oh yeah, and the preacher was the deceased’s grandfather. I’m really surprised I didn’t break that son of a bitch’s neck afterwards.
up
fk thats messed up
up
the most messed-up extended episode of my whole life, by far…
My friend who killed himself had done mushrooms with people he thought were his friends, but when his trip started going really bad, those “friends” took him back to his apartment and left him there by himself. He tried to call me, but I wasn’t home. I was at work, with his girlfriend who happened to be my co-worker and best friend. I wish he had called work, but methinks he didn’t want to risk hearing her voice in that headspace. They had been fighting a lot of late.
Later that evening he ended up blowing his own head off with the shotgun he kept under his bed for protection (he was raised as a paranoid libertarian, just like me). A few hours later, three of my good friends dropped his girlfriend off at the apartment after a post-work social outing, and the four of them found the bloody mess and body.
It’s really hard to talk about this incident. Two little paragraphs took me 45 minutes to compose.
up
Im really sorry Kay. That sounds particularly horrible.
Its always good to have a minder when doing mind altering drugs. I have served in this capacity many times (including last night for my roommate) and I know first hand having someone there to keep people from doing stupid shit is essential.
up
So am I (sorry). Glad you managed to form those feelings and memories into what you wrote. Hope this helps the healing.
up
Oh gosh that is so horrible. I am so sorry that you had to go through that. And that preacher is a shameful person.
up
I’m so sorry, Kay.
up
Damn, Kay. That is intense and horrible. Very sorry that you had to experience that.
up
It is what it is. I pretty much lost a decade afterwards to drugs and drinking and not giving a fuck, until I met my wife, that is.
up
When the ex’s cousin died, the preacher kindly allowed as how she’d be going to heaven. The rest of us, on the other hand, would go to hell and never see her again unless we started attending his church every Sunday.
up
Oh, and he couldn’t even pronounce her last name correctly.
up
Four tickets PDX-> Sydney + 2 nights in Hotel, $2333.
Food, $A500.
36 hours on an airplane with a 2- and a 5-year old, reckless.
up
That’s per head, right?
up
Yep.
up
When I was about 12, and my brothers 8 and 10, we flew with our parents from Honolulu to Sydney in an unpressurized military cargo airplane. About 20 hours each way on a slow plane (including a 4 hour layover in American Samoa). You had to stuff your ears with wax and cotton balls to deal with the pressure issues, and had to be seat belted 100% of the time except for bathroom breaks. As miserable as it was for me, in retrospect I realize it was probably 10 times worse for mom and dad.
up
Oh my gosh that sounds HORRIBLE.
up
Is it open bar?
Are there hot girls?
If so Ill go in your stead.
up
Probably and probably.
up
Only addressing it to the people invited (you and Mrs. PDX, rather than Mr. PDX, Mrs. PDX, and Little PDXes) IS actually the correct way to not invite children according to traditional etiquette. Though it’s definitely one of the hot debate topics in the wedding/wedding etiquette community given that it does get ignored, or is difficult for things like destination wedding where planning is required before the standard, appropriate timeline for sending out a wedding invitation. Putting ‘no children’ explicitly on the invitation is considered terribly rude, even if the most practical approach, though finding other, gentler wording to be clear-yet-not-offensive has been a pretty big discussion over the last few years.
up
I guess the new thing would be to send an invite to the parents and a “you’re not invited” to the kids.
up
I am so doing this if I ever get married.
up
With a picture of you sticking your tongue out at them.
up
On the one hand, I understand that it is the proper etiquette. The problem is, as you say, because it was a destination wedding, we had to book beforehand. My stepbrother knew what our plans were before the invitations went out and never said a word until after we RSVP’d. Then the invitation got totally mangled in the mail, meaning that we couldn’t even read who the invitation was addressed to. Because of that, my stepsister was kind enough to let us know beforehand.
Also, neither Mrs. PDX nor I are particularly well-versed in etiquette, so I’m not sure we would have realized it anyway, especially since we’d never been invited to a no-kid wedding before.
up
Did you RSVP for the entire family?
up
I RSVP’d for all of us saying that Spawn1 and I would be attending. Mrs. PDX and Spawn2-to-be couldn’t attend.
up
Then when you RSVPed they should have had a talk with you about the presence of munchkins
up
They did – I got a call from my stepbrother. By then, however, I had already paid for the tickets to go and had reserved a condo to stay at. My point is that it would have been courteous to have been told about the no-kids policy prior to the invitations going out, while I was making my plans, which my stepbrother knew about. I wouldn’t have gone or made plans had I known.
up
If it makes you feel any better, I didn’t want a kid-free wedding but ozz-SOON-TOBE-EX-wife did. So she told her sister that she couldn’t bring her kids. On the other hand, my sister brought her daughter, and a few friends brought their kids. Somehow, I’m the bad guy to my sister-in-law.
up
Yeah, the fact that your stepbrother knew you were planning that and didn’t say, “Heeeey FYI…” is not cool.
up
My sister-in-law and her husband got married in 1999 on Kauai, two days before Christmas. We stayed at a condo about 4 miles from the end of the road on the north end of Kauai, which, for those haven’t been there, means you’re at least 30 minutes from the merest hint of civilization. Because of the time of year, there were no discounted plane tickets to be had, so it cost us nearly $3k just for airfare. Also, everybody in the family got sick with the flu except for my brother-in-law’s sister (who was a nurse) and me (I tend to be the last one in the family to get sick, and I also couldn’t stand the idea of wasting a Hawaiian vacation with Mrs doctorK’s family, so I stayed away from everybody). My brother-in-law got so sick that they had to take him to the hospital in Lihue on Christmas day.
up
That’s pretty awful. Hope you had at least a decent time away from everyone. There’s certainly enough to do on Kauai if you’re not forced to do what everyone else is doing.
I should qualify my bitterness somewhat by saying that we still had fun on the trip, but it was a long way to go for a wedding that only I could go to. I lied to Spawn1 (then 3) about the wedding and told him that the rehearsal dinner was the wedding. I hate that I did that, but he was (and still is) sensitive to being excluded from things just because he is a kid. In the back of his mind, I’m pretty sure that he knew that it wasn’t the wedding, but he fortunately never said much of anything about it.
up
I mostly hung out at the beach. I forgot to mention that we had what is known in the islands as Kona weather, when the normally pleasant trade winds shift to the south, and it gets really muggy and rains a lot. We drove up Waimea Canyon in this weather, during which I could see maybe 100 feet at best.
Also, finding a place to eat in Lihue on Christmas day was fun, although I did eventually find a local place serving typical island fare, which I LOVE LOVE LOVE (seriously, if I was still in Hawaii, I’d probably weigh 250+ pounds from to many visits to Zippy’s).
up
I’m going to Maui next month. Plate lunch every day, brah!
up
Mrs. PDX and I went to Kauai at the beginning of a flood (February 2006, I believe). The last four days were spent searching for a few things to do that didn’t involve beachgoing or hiking through red mud.
up
Awesome. One of my cousins’ll be getting married in Maui this year. Hopefully this history isn’t doomed to repeat itself.
up
As long as my in-laws aren’t invited, you should be fine.
up
That sounds awesome!
Love the out of the box ideas, so clearly 4 and 5 made me smile
I used google translate to see what one would get if parsing my article that you have linked to. On one side I was pleasantly surprised because you can sort of get the general idea of what it is about, on the other some things were really funny.
Changing 1. 2. 3. into worded first, second, 3rd, most of the time changing verbs like not having into having or not doing into doing, thus completely changing the sense and stuff like that
up
Strange:
That sounds… wrong.
up
Yeah, that’s one of numerous places where “not” was not picked up by the translator. It should read “We’ll quickly agree on the third postulate, as there is hardly anyone who doesn’t believe that education…
up
After further review, I highly suspect Google Translation doesn’t handle Croatian negation well.
up
I think it’s trying to turn Grace Kelly and her husband into brother and sister.
up
I didn’t translate it. I thought it was funnier in Croatian.
So I’m looking on Amazon, and A’s jerseys are way more expensive than 49ers jerseys.
up
In an apples-to-apples comparison, “authentic” jerseys? That’s really hard to believe. The Raiders jersey I bought last year was over $200, I’d be shocked that A’s stuff outpriced those.
up
Did you have to buy a Personal Jersey License first?
up
Depending on the player, “authentic” 49ers jerseys were as low as $120. All of the A’s jerseys were $177 and up.
up
Apparently the Raiders tack on an extra coolness fee for their jerseys that the Niners, of course, are ineligible to levy.
up
Fortunately, the 49ers don’t tack on a “competent team” fee.
up
“Commitment to Competence”
up
It’s a start.
up
Yeah, stupid lack of street-gang demand!
up
It could be a “national laughing stock” fee.
up
Or a tax on Raider fans.
up
I think you mean thug degenerate who fks up my baseball field fee.
up
Do you know who did the best financially out of the ’95 Mt. Davis deal? The Oakland A’s. By far.
up
Considering they got royally screwed as a result and had to sue for their gains, I’m not sure I’d call it a net win even though you are 100% correct.
up
The A’s make more money off Raiders concessions than the Raiders do. That’s not due to lawsuit; it’s part of the 1995 agreement.
up
OK thug degenerates that cant craft a financially profitable business deal while fucking up my baseball field fee.
I wonder if the Raiders never came back if the Coli would be thought of the way Dodger stadium is now.
up
not mexican enough
up
Extremely doubtful. The Coliseum was originally built for football. Dodger Stadium has always been baseball-only.
up
More likely it would have been closer to Angel’s stadium.
up
but fewer rats
up
Yeah, nothing from what I call “the Brezhnev Era” of stadium construction could ever have achieved cherished relic status (the Noah Cross axiom isn’t automatic). Riverfront, Veteran’s Stadium, Three Rivers, Busch I…all went unlamented to implosion. Off the top of my head only the Coliseum and Olympic Stadium in Montreal still stand.
up
Depending on your definition of the “Brezhnev Era”, Candlestick Park, the Astrodome and San Diego Stadium are all still around and could all be included.
up
None of these are still in use for baseball, though.
up
Well, he cited The Big O in Montreal. I think he’s referring to the multi-purpose places built mostly from about the mid 60s to the mid 70s. Candlestick, which was originally just a terrible baseball-only park, belongs more in the era of the Met in Minneapolis and County Stadium in Milwaukee. At the other end, Toronto built an obsolete style in the late 80s, and who knows what they were thinking in St. Petersburg.
up
Yes, I was thinking more generally. And to DFA’s question, I can’t imagine any level of nostalgic delusion which could lead to any of them being considered lovable classics.
up
The Stick and “Jack Murphy” for sure. I guess Astro- and King- are the domed equivalents (and why is the Astrodome still standing, anyway?).
Apparently these are all considered examples of the Brutalist school of architecture, which just perfectly describes what I see when I think of these places.
up
astrodon’t
2012
up
and nyt
up
Hard to keep a straight face for the historian’s arguments. Yes, the Astrodome was an important building in its moment. Today it’s ugly and has no purpose.
But among the various alternatives cited–renovate and re-purpose, tear down and build something else–the (certainly) cheapest and (maybe) most prudent choice might in fact be to let it decay.
up
From my one time in houston, I remember the city being a spread out mess of parkways. If they build the astro dome in like with the other stadiums at the time, that is far away from any reasonable part of town, my guess its apretty useless piece or real estate
up
@Ed – it’s located right next to the current NFL stadium.
up
I say burn it to the ground and salt the earth so that nothing may grow there again. Not just the Astrodome, but all of Houston. Maybe the entire state.
up
Tell us how you really feel, ozz.
up
Another option is to use the area for nuclear waste disposal.
up
Their $1 million lease was because the Coli Assoc. basically fked them over with the renovation per that very same lease. I don’t remember precisely, but I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if they had to add that to part of the suit in order to ensure they at least got that out of their original agreement. But money gains aside, it’s hard to quantify the negative financial impact the A’s suffered over the last nearly two decades as a result of that renovation. Partly considering the improvements that were supposed to be made instead of was actually done to the Coli, it wouldn’t surprise me if they’ve lost money despite how much they’ve received from concessions and the lease.
up
Did the A’s actually have the leverage to prevent the Raiders from coming back and stop the renovations?
up
No. Enough leverage to extract concessions, which is what Schott-Hoffman were interested in anyway.
up
^^This.
Also I remember hearing something (although I don’t have any linkable source) that the City/County/Coliseum Authority gave Schottman the option of having more input on the design or getting concessions, FREE RENT! and Diamond Level.
up
The only source I saw (ML) was the A’s lease back when it was built and the lease explicitly specified the opposite of what was put in.
up
I saw that too, and from what I know is that Schottmann could care less about those details and went for the quick easy buck of getting concessions, parking, FREE RENT! and other things, rather than work out something that could have been better for them long term.
This runs inline with their business model on how they ran the A’s.
up
From what I remember (which is highly faulty, mind you), those deals occurred after the Mount Davis was built as a result of the lawsuit after the fact. It doesn’t really jive much with the dates either. Mountain Davis opened in ’96 and the Haas family owned the team into ’95. I’m not sure how much sense it would make for Schott/Hoffman to have much say in the design process. I don’t disagree that they were in it for the short term/quick buck so anything that would have netted them that, they’d have jumped all over it. But given what it takes to get anything done, having the structure up in April ’96 to force the A’s to move to Cashman and still sell the team some time in ’95 just doesn’t fit with the notion that they were ever involved in the process at all.
up
Yeah. We are all running on assumptions and whatnot based on the tiny shreds of evidence that we have. Getting details on the 1995-1996 has been painfully hard. I Can only assume is has to do with one, two or a combination of the following factors
1. The internet was new and nothing was posted online
2. The whole deal was rushed and not much was put together
3. No one wants to talk about because of how it ended up working out
Part of me wants to do a deep dive and head to Courthouse/Hall of Records/Libary/Drunk guy on the street and see what i can find, but at this point it’s almost irrelevant. We can go into “What-ifs” until the cows come home but I don’t see how that does anything that hasn’t been covered.
up
It wouldn’t be terribly surprising to me if all three were true. And you’re right, the end result is what it is, so going backwards doesn’t really help much besides allow more what-if games, with little/nothing to be said of what-can-be.
1. Using Prime Topps card #s as a gauge of player popularity is a pretty neat approach. Hilarious that Aaron and Bonds finished tied.
This Houston-Cincy game is close and yet utterly uncompelling. Whoever wins this is getting crushed next week.
up
i am so bored. >:(
up
Me, too, yet I can’t seem to will myself to go to bed
up
Maybe a craft project, like crocheting a forearm cozy for Gronk.
up
i’ve decided to drink beer and peruse goddess statuary. the next game had better be more fun to watch or i will go insane.
up
Hey, Minnesota is starting Joe Webb at quarterback!
up
is that a good thing?
up
Yes, because it inspired me to find this:
up
Dum-da-DUM-dum!
up
Dum-da-dum-dum-cough
up
I think I’m getting heartburn.
up
My patient today complained of heartburn. Then she barfed. Three times. Bananas and tomato soup.
up
Sounds like a party.
up
Yesterday I stuck my finger up someone’s butt.
up
If you love what you do you’ll never have a bad day of work in your life!
up
Brown chicken brown finger!
up
Well, you can stick your finger up their butt or you can teach them to stick their finger up their own butt.
up
Yeah, those are pretty much the menu options, huh? Oh yeah… getting a third party to do the fingering is an option.
up
I was thinking more along the lines of that old adage, “Catch a man a fish and he can eat for a day. Teach a man to give himself a digital rectal exam and he can eat for life.”
up
chesterfields are perfectly packed!
up
Well that sure sucked.
up
But being Minnesotans we’re used to it.
up
And now those of us who root for the 49ers can believe the Vikings took the fight out of the Packers, while those of us who dislike the 49ers can believe the Packers are on a roll.
up
IDK about that. Getting the Packers on the road with a backup QB that hadn’t thrown a pass all season, and it was the third time they have played this year? Unfortunately the Vikings had no chance.
My big worry is Justin Smith isn’t going to be 100% healthy and Mario Manningham is out.
up
Yeah. No likey that part. Also, that was back when we had good Akers
up
My dream scenario had the Vikings and Redskins winning, but I don’t really like how the 49ers match up with any of the playoff teams right now. I really hope that bye week helped.
up
Justin Smith is the big question mark. If he’s miraculously healed, we’ll be able to play with anyone. If not, I bet the packers put up 30
up
Who knew a DE could pretty much carry a defense?
up
jj watt
up
Well ok, and him.
up
I’m just happy that I’m so perfectly sartorially positioned to climb aboard the Green Bay bandwagon.
up
Do you have these? FansEdge refers to them as A’s, but I think they would be much more appropriate for Packers fans.
up
Yeah, they’re marketing to Packers fans all right.
up
Hey, look, I still wear the same size jeans as in college
up
Me too. Occasionally I even wear a size smaller.
up
OMG the number of Wisconsin fans in red/white versions of those blew my mind. Not sure if I already noted this. There were also an alarming number of Badger ladies who were wearing them in nothing but a black bra. Terrifying.
up
Terrifying indeed. That’s the time to go Commando.
up
I don’t care — I hafta have the cargo pants. Those vertical stripes — why, I’ll look absolutely svelte.
up
Of course, last year the Saints put up 32 and lost.
up
It seems obvious now, but judging from the pregame remarks from Minnesotans on my Twitter and FB, they thought Webb was the secret weapon that would enable them to defeat the evil cheese.
up
Good for you.
Speaking of Goddesses, I can’t seem to find any who represent thunder or lightning or electricity. Do you know of any?
up
thinking of Oya, but She is hurricanes and wind. let me do some research. any particular purpose?
up
found Bronte and Astrape (greek) but i have never worked with either.
up
more: Thunder: Finnish Goddess Rauni, Japanese Goddess Naru-Kami
Lightning: Roman Fulgora, Hawaiian Pele, Finish Thorgerd, Chinese Tian-Mu, Chinese Xiu Wenyin (thunder & lightning), Greek Electra
i’ll keep an eye out for you.
up
Thank you so much.
I want to tie together my affinities with the future singularity/digital consciousness and past electricity deities, especially female ones.
up
let’s talk.
up
Why the FK are they playing this game at night when it’s 29 degrees? It might have been a cozy 40 or 45 in the noonday sun.
up
cuz there is a chance of SNOW!!!!! :D
up
Snow games are fun, at least on TV.
up
Because TV.
up
According to the pre-game, it’s warmer now than it was a few hours ago.
up
The network has gotten the Turkeytopia game it asked for.
I’m rooting for the Vikings, but I do like the Green Bay dude with the flowing golden locks.
up
up
I have a serious man crush on this man, anyone see the Fishing With John episode he was in? Priceless.
up
I hate him because of his stupid Zaxby’s commercials.
hi
up
Good evening.
Has your leg fallen off yet?
up
No but it looks worse, much darker color today so I guess its getting better
up
I think it needs amputated. I’ll get some gauze.
up
can I get a rubdown first
up
Are you allergic to iodine?
up
no
up
Then yes.
up
ok
up
And fade to purple haze.
Today’s Right Wing Roomie self-contradictory pictorial political post:
Does he mean like this?
Or, perhaps, like this?
I’d bother to post the latter two to his FB feed, but why disturb the fantasy? It’s not like actual facts of situations matter anyway.
up
boy I sure screwed those pix up…
His post:
Mine #1:
When you despair of US healthcare, imagine if it was run by a road-building conglomerate.
up
I didn’t know there were private NHS clinics. I thought the whole point of the NHS was socialization/anti-privatization of medicine.
up
Sounds like the health care version of charter schools.
up
That was the NHS of old, but it is being dismantled and privatized now.
up
This seems like an over simplification, though. Skanska also builds roads, as well as many other infrastructure items, and the fact was that the UK hired them to design, build and FUND many of UK’s healthcare facilities. The government couldn’t afford to do the design work, nor the funding necessary to pull it off. Just because Carillion is a bad company, doesn’t mean the entire principal is wrong.
up
More wisdom on Europe from Pat Robertson et al?
up
heh
up
Not at all. Why would you say that to begin with? I’m just saying that without the funding, design, and construction that Skanska brought to the table, the hospital would not have been built. In no way am I condoning the mismanagement by Carillion. I am also not saying that a private company is the best entity to manage the hospital. However, if the hospital hadn’t been built,( due to the government’s inability to do so), no one would have access to any services there.
up
You have previously linked to Pat Robertson garbage as evidence for your anti European views, which is why it is being brought up.
Further you are incorrect. If not for austerity and privatization fetishists the government just would have done it itself and you wouldn’t have had these problems.
up
No I’m not incorrect, and no I haven’t “linked” Pat Robertson.
up
You have in the past talking about the zones of Muslims that people wont go to.
Are you saying that the British government has no experience building and running a hospital, because you are most certainly, wrong.
up
Again your are wrong. I never said they were “Muslim” zones. I said they were zones that even the police won’t go into, period.
up
The source you linked to said that.
Which is why you have no credibility on these issues.
up
Partly because I was running out the door for a fun day with Lily, but couldn’t leave it unchallenged.
Partly because you have a very recent prior citing known-to-be-widly-unreliable sources on things European.
And partly because it is demonstrably untrue. The British government has a long and proud history of running a world-class health service, even to the point of building the whole fk-ing thing from scratch (and at the same time a public education system) in the post-war economic apocalypse in Europe. So don’t tell me they couldn’t do it today.
up
I second that. All the demonstrable incompetence the British have repeatedly shown playing (real) football, they more than make up for it with the health service they provide(d). That and Monty Python.
up
Despite the recent Olympic travesty, the British never play football. The English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish do though, each with their own individual brand of incompetence.
up
Oh, I know that. I meant in the United Incompetence and Northern Ireland kind of way
up
The English blend of arrogance and penalty shoot-outs is particularly hilarious.
This is also a very important event in Anglo-Celtic relations.
up
I love how they rid the goalpost
up
The British do play less-competent-than-you’d-expect rugby though.
up
Yeah… surprisingly less competent.
up
You have totally misread my comment. At no time did I say the British couldn’t run it. At no time did I say they couldn’t design it. I said they couldn’t afford to pay for it’s upfront costs. Since they did in fact fund the hospital through Skanska, I don’t see your argument on my statement. Carillion has messed up their hospital,(and they should be held accountable for those horrible decisions), but my point was that that doesn’t call for all the good that private companies bring to the healthcare industry be thrown out.
up
Also, those “unreliable” sources as you call them, weren’t wrong, as EC admitted the conditions do exist. You get your information from sources that others don’t find reliable, but that also doesn’t change the facts of the information. I don’t believe I ever relied on the editorial portions of any of the links I posted.
up
I am afraid that you quote me contrary to the spirit of my comments on the topic.
I’ll give it one more try. The sources you used were correct in the naming that such zones exist. They were wrong on the characterizations of those and used absolutely biased extremist with agenda to push their point across.
It’s like I find a newspaper that says you live on, say, 500 Mullholland drive and that you store guns in your house. The article also says that you are a gun-crazed, white-supremacy radical who wants to violently overthrow the government and re-introduce slavery.
Now, you wouldn’t call such a source reliable, even though you’d be force to admit that your house and your weapons on such address really do exist, would you?
up
No. I did not.
I did not say you agreed with the sources editorialized reason they exist, which you disagreed with.
If you remember the discussion, you had presented socialist Europe as a sort of Utopia, and I said that Europe has it’s own problems that the US doesn’t. Instead of arguing the issue, by presenting evidence that those conditions didn’t exist, or that they also existed in the US, others chose to argue that there was no proof the zones existed, due to the sources. This effectively sidestepped the point. You in fact did admit they existed, and that is all I said here. I have a question for you. If something happens but isn’t reported by a source that you find acceptable, did it still happen? If the only report comes from an unacceptable source, does that invalidate the event happening?
up
Let me see if this helps:
1. There are zones in France (and, presumably, elsewhere) with the labels you identify.
2. You think that means police don’t go there.
3. When I looked, I found no evidence of #2.
up
Let’s try. I have an unacceptable source that says you kicked your dog today. Does that invalidate the event happening?
up
Also, I did not present “socialist Europe as a sort of Utopia”. First of all, I never ever mentioned “socialist Europe”. The differences in the culture that I mentioned do not portray any one place as “Utopia”. They, in my opinion very accurately, describe the fine differences in what a general majority in each place considers to be freedom. You have obviously understood that as an attack on your way of opinion and started the whole FRANCE HAZ BAD HOODS!!!1! thing, that is totally beside the point that I was making and not answering anything that I wrote.
up
They absolutely could have fully funded the NHS through Keynesian deficit spending over the last 5 years or so, but the Conservative government hasn’t done so, due to their embracing austerity, which by the way has kept the UK economy in the doldrums over this time while the US has significantly dug itself out of the depths of the recession through stimulus.
However, what doesn’t seem to be popping up in this argument is that we have to recognize that the process of replacing human work with robot work and computer algorithms is going to keep unemployment high, likely for the rest of human history, even with future tech bubbles and bull markets. Certain future tech bubbles have the possibility of rendering vast swaths of humanity economically unnecessary as producers, and eventually unemployable altogether.
up
You said the UK government couldn’t afford to design/build/run a hospital. I cited the counter-example the creation of the NHS during the post-war economic hangover. I don’t see any misunderstanding here.
up
I never have said they couldn’t run it. I said that the fact that they funded it through a private company shows that it was necessary to involve Skanska. They obviously went to the most affordable source to get the facility built, which was a private company. Government design teams are notoriously ineffective, and tend to have tremendous cost overruns. By making the company responsible for the design/build, the UK saved their citizens a ton of tax costs. In the case of Skanska, instead of paying them interest on the funding, the UK gave them the management of the hospital for a set term of years.
up
Not necessary, not obvious, not true, and not really worth continuing.
up
If government design teams in terms of hospitals are notoriously inneffective then why does every one of the top countries in health outcomes have government run healthcare?
How do you like dem apples huh?
up
Because there is a difference between designing a hospital, and running it. You can’t even read the comments correctly. jeesh!
up
You are incredibly obtuse.
The governments of those countries design their own hospitals for the most part.
up
Clearly you don’t understand the concept of a government issued bond.
You realize that this pretty much only started when privitization fetishists took over their government right?
The Canadian version of taking a cold shower: “Keep your hands off my daughter and build me a magical colored igloo.”
up
rude
up
This is awesome!
up
I love that mom, she sounds just like mine. “Good to see you, kids, and I’ve spent the last few months collecting milk cartons and freezing them into multi-colored bricks, in case you wanted to spend your vacation building an igloo in the yard. No pressure though!”
up
Having grown-up in Buff’lo, I’m suspicious of the yellows.
up
Having grown up in Marin, I wouldn’t touch yellow ice or snow with a ten foot pole.
Terry Bradshaw just mentioned the Immaculate
ReceptionIncompletion game as an example as “great things can happen” during your first playoff games. For justice to have been done, Howie Long should’ve stood up and pile-drove Bradshaw into the floor.up
Howie is far too reasonable. I loathe Terry Bradshaw more today than I did back then, and I didn’t think that was possible.
up
Back then, all we had to do was watch him play. Now, we have to hear him talk.
up
And occasionally see that ugly face of his. {shivers}
up
I had to play golf with him once on a promotional thing. “Had to” modifies “golf;” I don’t mind him so much. He was just BIG all over — wrists, forearms, neck, shoulders, thighs. And I remember seeing a clip of a defensive lineman just taking and cartwheeling him on a sack — incredible strength and violence — and that was what, 25 years ago? The game’s toll is unsurprising — it’s just not sustainable at the current toll it takes.
Punchbowl, meet turd.
The Seahawks defense takes a lot of cheap shots, don’t they?
up
Sure looks like it.
How ’bout Wilson sprinting downfield and busting off a monster block to facilitate the Lynch TD? Wow.
up
That was a helluva play.
Just saw a rumor the Mets have interest in Coco, went to check out their roster and they are collecting ex-A’s: Cowgill, Recker, and Hicks.
up
Alderson
up
They had Hairston too.
Harvey, D’Arnaud, and Wheeler are all pretty exciting, wonder what else it would take.
man, if you take out Wright and Davis, their offense is really horrid…
up
There is no way either of the three is a part of a Coco deal
up
That’s what the ‘what else’ part was about…
up
Oh, you mean Coco and what else on the A’s side? Sorry, misread that
I think the feeling in the FO is that the A’s should go for it this year, so I don’t think they would trade for a prospect
I just realized that you’ve got a former 49ers OC vs. a former 49ers DC.
Are you too Mexican for Delaware?
up
Signs have been taken down.
up
The question remains: how were they approved in the first place?
up
Apart from it being a different message than the English one, it is also written wrong. Hooray for schools as bastions of education
up
Yeah, that one strikes me as an honest (but stupid) mistake.
up
Yeah, like that sign in wales that was the translator’s OOO message that went viral awhile ago. Someone just mismatched the sign and translation, since the spanish version describes an actual sign used elsewhere in the park.
up
The rest of the time not in Buff’lo, I grew up in Delawhere, which is divided into to Upper and Slower regions, divided by the C&D canal. Slower DE is a truck-farming, chicken-FKing sandspit, that, except for the beach towns, may as well be Mississippi. They may have used the holes from the ‘whites only’ signs to put up the more recently offensive ones.
FSU:
I am going to be gifted a 99 RAV. It worked fine when it was driven regularly but for the transmission popping out of 3rd or 4th gear. (I can’t remember which one).
Also, it has been sitting for about 2 years now. Less than a year ago, it wouldn’t start do the battery was changed and it started fine. A few days ago we had it jumped but it wouldn’t stay started. The alternator belt spins.
1) I had a couple thousand dollar clutch repair estimate related to me by the giver. Does that sound reasonable? do you know of anywhere I should check out. (time is not an issue, it would be a second car for us)
2) any ideas about getting the thing started? is it just a battery thing?
up
I should say FSU or Soaker of anyone else with cars brain
up
I had the 1996 RAV for 16 years but I’m no expert about what goes on under the hood. When $1500 spent at the shop in 2011 still left it with problems, I took the thing out and shot it last year. A car that old with known problems is likely to be a liability rather than an asset even if it’s a true “gift”, though since you live in an income tax state you could presumably recover some of what you spend by taking a deduction for donating it to Cars for Tots. Just make sure you limit your rehabilitation spending to some fixed amount relative to the value of the deduction.
up
You can still get FMV deductions if you look carefully (e.g.)
up
sage advise.
There are certain inconviniences of only having one car, and truckish car seems cool. Since will will pay off our regular car soon, I figure a little more on a second car might be good. But yeah, not to exceed $X is a great idea
up
1) Sounds high for just a clutch.
2) Like you jumped it or it wouldn’t hold an idle, or it wouldn’t start up again after it was turned off? Just idling won’t recharge the battery, the engine RPMs won’t be high enough. I’d recommend hooking a trickle charger up to it to charge the battery and see if it holds, or just say screw it and replace the battery. Most auto parts stores will check batteries for free to see if they’re still good or not.
up
I agree with Mike, that’s a lot for just a clutch. However, the tranny randomly popping out of gear while under way could be more than a clutch problem, and if the estimate is meant to include a tranny repair also, then that amouint makes more sense.
Get the battery charged then drive on the freeway for 20 minutes; that’d tell you if the battery can hold a charge. Or take the battery to O’Reillys like Mike says.
Art’s Automotive in Berkeley is a good shop for Toyotas, that’s where I take mine when a repair exceeds my abilities or the time/effort I’m willing to invest. Also it’s near Chez Upgrade, so you and your kids could drop it off then have a playdate with me and my kids.
up
cool, thanks guys!
up
Yes, Art’s has told me in the past that something I thought was a $500 repair was only going to cost $100, or wasn’t really necessary. They tend to be booked up far in advance, but since you’re not in a hurry it shouldn’t be a problem.
up
Note to self: If you want to hang out with FSU steal the following: 1 non functional toyota, 2 children.
up
we jumped it using a portable battery pack. I began to drive it and it died. Jumped again, then I tried driving got 50 feet then it died. Happened to be at the crest of a good hill, popped the clutch a couple of times, with no real success.
THe car did idle for about 5 minutes before I tried to drive it.
up
Battery is probably shot, but like I said idle isn’t enough for the alternator to actually start putting a charge back into it, either.
up
Yes according to the people I had look at it.
Gonna pick it up next week. My brother in law’s brother teaches auto shop at LBCC or some such place, I think I may consult him.
he is one of the reasons I thought the car elevator knock on ROmney was dumb. He has had lifts in his garage in Long beach for years to park his rotation of 4 or 5 cars. Its just a space maximizing tool
up
It’s easy. Get underneath the car and hit it with a hammer. If that doesn’t help, use the sewing needles
up
New squirrels might also be needed, the ones in there probably got too fat to make the wheel turn.
up
I believe squirrels were under the hood.
up
Initially I read that as jumped it with a port-a-potty and wondered who in the their right mind would do that. Then I wondered how.
up
How long was it sitting? It might be stalling because of old gas in the tank.
up
2 years
up
Ozz makes a good point. Get a bottle of STP gas treatment and fill-up with premium gas and see if your results are different. If the tank is already full of two year old gas you might have to pay to drain it.
up
SO I should get all richard petty on its ass?
up
So, gas treatment was bomb. AAA came out and jumped it, worked great.
Drove on highway, about 8 miles in, all electrical out.
Called AAA again, took it to a shop. Seemed to work at shop.
Insurance for it is cheap, so so far not enough to not continue with operation superfluous car.
up
Sorry. In general, you shouldn’t act on anything I say.
up
no no, it was a good thing.
up
Oh, I see. I thought you meant it bombed, like it didn’t do any good. Ok, well at least one problem was solved.
up
Maybe it’s haunted?
up
awesome
up
Uh oh. Intermittent electrical problems are the worst. The battery and alternator are easy to have tested, but if it’s neither of those, watch out, the car could eat your brain.
up
Objection, assumes facts not in evidence!
up
I think it’s safe to assume Ed has a brain.
up
take judicial notice?
up
I don’t know. What if he’s a Turing machine
up
Nah, just a philosophical zombie.
up
2 people told me the battery was 3 years old. GIver said he had AAA replace the battery last time them came to jump the car a year ago. Shop mechanic said AAA batteries are shit. His brief look gave the electrical system the A-OK. he will drop a new battery and call me tomorrow.
I drove well, save for the breaking down and popping out of gear.
If there is expenses tomorrow (other than battery) I think its charity time, but otherwise its seems alright.
I don’t have title yet so I am out the $3 for gas treatment and whatever the battery will be tomorrow (which giver will reimburse if we give it away)
up
forgot to add, I think AAA drivers may be swindlers
up
AAA (which I have) is a cross between a franchisee and a procurer of bounty hunters. The basic deal–tow any car up to 10 miles for only the AAA-reimbursed contract price–is square. So the tow driver is picking up the contract, then giving himself of the chance to steer you to other services which he’d be quite happy to sell you.
For like 20 years I’ve had an evil tow truck driver minor character ready to drop into a novel, based on the tow scam scene at Pismo Beach.
up
I know a book agent!
up
Pismo Beach? I really like that place.
up
Suffice it to say that when you allow anyone to drive on the beach in any kind of car, lots of them get stuck in the sand, and when the tide is fast approaching the family wagon loaded with kids and gear, the tow truck drivers are keenly aware of the market forces working in their favor.
up
nicely phrased
up
Driving on the beach sounds like a stupid idea to start with.
up
I’m surprised this is even legal, and am pretty sure it should not be.
up
Huh??? The whole point of going to Pismo is to go four wheeling on the sand, or on a motorcycle or quad or whatever.
Pismo is HUGE.
up
Personally I like the surfing/skimboarding and the hot union girls at the union convention.
Im going to try to make out with the president next time. Last time I spent too much time working on people I didn’t know were married
up
Hate to break it to you, DFA, but President Obama is also married. But if you can make out with him, more power to you.
up
New life goal… make out with the President.
Gillibrand for Pres in 2016
up
Huh Only time I’ve ever been to Pismo Beach, I got my tongue pierced, and then proceeded to get completely hammered by a campfire on the beach and went skinny-dipping at like 3am with my group…we were all there for “leadership training” courses…hehehe
up
Erm.. When we goin back?
up
Very similar to my Pismo experiences, except without the piercing.
up
Im going in late Feb i think…
up
The only electrical problem I had with the old RAV4 was an intermittent problem with the starter early on. It would do exactly what is shown in this video (which doesn’t appear to be much like Ed’s issue). Finally one morning I couldn’t get it to turn over at all, had it towed to the dealership where the starter was replaced (still under warranty then) and I never had any further issue like that, even in the two winters at the end when it was parked in a carport at Tahoe.
up
we had a starter problem with the honda like that.
AAA sold us a battery, problem persisted, finally took it in, the mechanic replaced the starter, and like you, no more problems.
Blahblah – blahblahblahblah…..FAN FEST!!!!! lol.
1. Oh man, I used to be obsessed with this as a kid. A player getting a 100 number for the first time would instantly elevate him to legend status in my formative brain.
up
Awesome fact that I just learned from the comments in that Pospost is that in the first set of Upper Deck, #666 is the current Arizona manager trotting after hitting a certain home run. I am stunned that I never noticed this as kid, since that first UD set was the apogee of my baseball card nerdiness. Most likely I just pretended the card never existed.
Apparently the UD designer was an SF fan who gave a Dodger the number of the beast each of the first three years.
up
That’s pretty damned funny.
Any of you ST holders bought Fan Fest tickets yet? Anyone want to buy some for me and get paypal’d?
Houndton Tabby
Studes (THT) is running a petition to change the voting process for baseball Hall of Fame. Give it a look and sign if you agree
up
Is it a radical idea to abolish the Hall of Fame? Do we even need it anymore?
up
The HOF itself is a really fun visit.
Need? Of course not. Abolish? No thank you.
My buddy Phil assembles his 12 favorite car posts from 2012. Lots of good reads, with bonus shots from
19972004 of me in the summer I went (voluntarily) bald.up
up
Speaking of tailgates…there will be an informal one on the 27th, after Fan Fest at 3:30pm in the usual spot. Bring stuff that doesn’t need cooking, etc.
up
Gold Alt?
up
Jackson #9. I think I still have it, though it’s pretty ragged at this point. I loves me some Reggie.
up
Is that Latoya?
Holy Carp that would be sweet, never happen, but sweet nonetheless.
up
Yeah I signed that
up
K-Thug disagrees.
up
Yeah, that’s what led me to the story I posted.
up
Well considering they haven’t implemented anything that he has said, I do have my doubts.
up
well put.
I thought Notre Dame might have one coming to them and so far that appears to be the case.
up
Good. Fraud team shouldn’t have been anywhere near this game. In an eight team playoff they’d go out in the 1st round.
up
Yup… If the Furd game hadn’t had that shitty call they wouldn’t have even been here.
up
Would have loved to see Oregon/Bama
up
If the farm only had one loss im not sure how you could put Oregon in the game ahead of them.
up
It was a possibility, because the NCG participants are determined by the BCS standings; they don’t necessarily have to be the automatic qualifier from the conference. This year the Ducks were #4 in the BCS while Furd was #6. I know Nebraska got into the championship game one year without winning their conference; think it happened at least one other time too.
up
Right, but I don’t think if they only had one loss the Furd wouldn’t have climbed two spots right?
I mean one extra loss has to be worth two spots.
up
Oh, I see, you’re assuming Stanford beat Notre Dame and just had the one loss to Washington. Then I think you’re probably right, Stanford is #3 and Oregon is #4, and we’re watching Alabama-Florida tonight because SEC! I was mostly hoping Notre Dame would lose to USC at the end of the season to knock themselves out.
up
The SEC should have to play the Pac 12
up
Yup.
up
Heh. Maybe.
I wasn’t thinking much about the Pac-12 side of that
up
2001 season. Nebraska went (to the Rose Bowl!) over Oregon (whose only loss was at home to Furd) despite Nebraska having given up 60 to Colorado in their last game.
up
Was that Akili Smith’s year there?
up
It was the legendary Joey Harrington.
up
It was also Jeff Tedford’s final season as OC at Oregon. I think he was with the Ducks in their Fiesta Bowl game in spite of having already been hired at Cal.
up
At least Brent Musburger entertained himself.
up
Yes. That was awkward.
up
He sure had a PeeWee’s Playhouse moment
up
He probably still has fond memories of feeling up Phyllis George under the desk all those years ago.
up
He has been saying stupid things for even longer than I thought
Turns out he wrote at the time that they looked like “a couple of black-skinned storm troopers.”
up
I didn’t know about that story, but I’ve always hated Brent Musberger. Mostly because as a pxp guy he’s always conscious of trying to make a call which will sound epic on replays for decades to come, and as a result he regularly calls games “over” long before he should.
up
He’s pretty terrible, but I’ve always had a soft spot for “You are looking live…”
up
I love that he had the nerve to tell Apollo Creed that he thought Apollo lost his first title fight aginst Rocky.
up
I remember an issue of SI where he bragged about how he and his buddies used to pound down a few after work, and then speed through the toll booths on the way home while
buzzedbombed.up
Was it him, Jimmy the Greek and Irv Cross?
up
And, ESPN apologized. Unrelatedly, they also fired the “cornball brother” dude.
up
New foursome for bridge at the Merlin Olsen Home for Aged Announcers in 2013: Brent Musburger, Dick Stockton, Tim McCarver and Ray Fosse.
up
Tag. FKing. Line.
up
Done.
up
Every time I see something about Rob Parker and ESPN I assume they mean Ron Parker and wonder what the Sklar brothers are up to.
up
They have a pretty funny podcast called Sklarbro Country.
Jennifer says my leg now looks like a bruise and not like I wrecked my bike and got road rash.
up
1. And you haven’t bothered to let us look too?
2. And she couldn’t log on here and tell us herself?
3. Just a flesh wound.
up
1. I shared with my nursey friends.
2. I’m busy.
up
1. Whatever. We like gross stuff too.
2. No you’re not.
up
1. I posted a pic on FB.
up
FK>>>FB
up
I saw some kid riding a mini bike this afternoon that looked like a hog (the bike, not the kid). It was strangely awesome.
up
It looked like a hog tht I could hunt in Yosemite in a yer or two or the type that my friends wife calls “her personal massager”? Either would be honest, but just need some clarity.
up
Actually, it bore a striking resemblance to Boss Hogg.
up
up
If she were a bike, I’d
lickride her.up
God. Damn.
She reminds me of back when I was a boy and I’d see a beautiful strong woman and couldn’t figure out if I wanted to be her or fk her, and it would so frustrate me.
up
Her personal massager.
Australian Bureau of Meteorology has had to add a new color to the scale of its temperature maps.
up
The temp is too damn high!
up
Were the lakes of fire and little guys with pitchforks not clear enough?
up
Australian Scientists Discover Mordor
up
That also answers the question of why the wedding at 8:30 and reception at 18:30…
up
At least they aren’t getting married in Alice Springs.
up
Let’s get married in the pink zone!
up
No matter where in Australia, it’ll be the marriage from hell.
I’m glad that I don’t work in an equivalent position in North Carolina.
up
Well, how-the-FK-else did all thet tar git on all them heels?
Interesting alternative on gun control.
up
A third of our population and an infinitesimal fraction of the gun violence.
up
Link it on FK and break the FKing site!
up
Hah! I probably drove MORE THAN 7 hits
up
I managed to read it. Sort of takes the wind out of the sails of the “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” crowd. Of course, the pro-gun lobby doesn’t think you can compare the US to any other country except Switzerland when it comes to gun control.
up
And Nazi Germany
up
That was more or less my reaction too. The Fking Yuzuka aren’t willing to carry guns now. That’s tells “it works.”
up
And for an opposite result, you can compare it to the 1974 Jamaican gun ban
up
I’d think Japan is a much more apt comparison than a small island with a pretty major history of being in the middle of pirated water. That’s not to say it’s not a fair point as a cautionary tale. Realistically you’d need to put Japan’s method up next to theirs to see where things went wrong and not duplicate them. But it’s really hard to argue with Japan’s results.
up
Yup under a dozen homicides.
up
I thought the other crimes it affected was interesting as well. A little harder to rob a convenience store without one. I guess you could use a bat or knife or something, but it’s not nearly as intimidating.
up
My observation is that it’s effect has less to do with the gun ban, and more to do with the societal differences.
up
Japan also has a suicide rate of 24.4/100k which puts them second only to Russia’s 30.1. The US is less than half the Japanese rate at 11.4. It seems they found a way to do so without those banned guns.
up
If the goal of banning guns had anything to do with stopping suicide that might be relevant.
up
Yes, Japan and Jamaica have different cultural imperatives. Also different by hundreds of years of self-governance, decades of democracy, and a shit-ton of affluence. The US is a lot more like Japan than Jamaica on those scores.
up
Possible. But when you compare the lower crime rates around countries with higher weapon bans, perhaps that’s more of a statement on our problems as a society than it is a pro-gun defense.
up
Then I’m for fixing those issues first.
up
Changing societal mores is a lot harder and longer term than simply outlawing the immediate problem. For example, it’s easier to make segregation illegal than to eliminate racism.
up
Okay. Since they’re intertwined, how about we remove things that serve no purpose other than to kill first?
up
Isn’t the #1 reason for gun related deaths of persons 17-30 the gang/drug trade that many here wish to legalize?
up
I think that one of the major reasons for legalization is to reduce the death count and gang influence. The alcohol trade was much more violent during prohibition than it has been since (though you could probably argue that public health problems due to alcohol outweigh gang murders… but I wouldn’t argue this because beer is awesome).
up
True
up
So, you are trying to compare crack-cocaine, meth, and heroin to beer? The reason many want it legalized is so they wont be arrested for smoking a joint.
up
It seemed like you were implying that drug legalization would increase the number of drug related murders. I think it would decrease the number of drug related murders because that is being driven by the criminality of the drug trade. Right now, if you are a drug dealer, you have to protect yourself against others because you can’t go to the cops and say “so-and-so stole my merchandise”. Also, since this drug dealer is already breaking the law on a regular basis, they probably have fewer qualms about further breaking the law by committing violent actions. I think the analogy of bootleggers and gang activity during prohibition is appropriate.
Now there are obviously public health risks involved in drug legalization, which vary dramatically depending on which drugs we are talking about. But I acknowledged that in my comment as well, and in any case it doesn’t have anything to do with gun violence.
You brought up crack, meth, and heroin, but I think that most drug legalization discussions (or the realistic ones, at least) are about marijuana. But, to engage with your straw man, I think that legalizing hard drugs would reduce the amount of gun violence, but the public health consequences would be net negative.
up
I don’t think that legalization of hard drugs would be a public health net negative.
Much of the damage that is done from cocaine and heroin is from the shit it’s cut with, not the drug itself.
If the hard drugs are pure, they do a lot less damage to the user, short of overdose of course.
up
I think you are right that legalization would improve drug users health on a per-person basis. Whether it is a net positive or net negative would depend on how many more people would start using if it was legal. I don’t have a good idea of whether that is a lot of people or very few.
up
Do you think stable functional people would take up hard drugs for funsies?
Or are you thinking that maybe there are a lot of semi-stable semi-functional people who WOULD take up hard drugs for funsies if they were pure, reasonably priced, and available?
up
or what?
up
I’m not making much sense this morning. I should go do something that doesn’t involve words.
up
I’d guess there are kids that would be more likely to have access to it and get addicted to it. And I do think there are those that would do it just for funsies who are currently stable, functional people. How many and the overall effect of that is certainly up for debate.
up
I don’t really know one way or the other, but I think the public health impact hinges on that question. Legalization certainly isn’t going to *reduce* the number of people taking drugs.
up
You mean both of them?
up
Clearly no one on this blog.
up
this is a key question
up
No.
up
Though it is older, this government study doesn’t agree with you.
up
This also shows that our drug culture is closer to that of Jamaica, than Japan.
up
Yah mon!
up
It doesn’t really agree with you either.
I think the takeaway from this is we should outlaw gangs.
up
I WAS RIGHT!
up
About studies…
up
Sad
up
I think its only me that wants decriminalization on those things.
I work in the industry and I can assure you that the methods that have been legislated don’t work for the vast majority of people.
Further the vast vast vast majority of drug users do not shoot people.
the vast vast vast majority of drug sellers do not shoot people.
Some do. Some law abiding citizens shoot people too.
up
Have you read this? Maybe you already know a lot of what’s in it.
The fact that stood out to me (even before the recent discussions here about guns): gun priors are a much much stronger indicator of who will commit murder (and who will be murdered) than “drug/gang” priors.
up
I want full decriminalization as well, with lots of money taken away from law enforcement and funneled into treatment and prevention programs.
up
Thirded. So, is it now law?
up
The biggest societal difference when it comes to gun violence is that you guys want to own guns and most of the rest of the world doesn’t. So, if you want to fix societal issues, that would be a good place to start.
up
Ask the lady in Atlanta, when a criminal broke into her house yesterday. She grabbed her two children, ran and hid in her own house. The man didn’t look for things to steal, instead, he went looking for her and her children! He opened the door to the room they were hiding in, and she shot him 5 times(WOW, he didn’t die, even when shot multiple time in the face and abdomen! I thought guns only kill.). All this happened while her husband was on the phone from his office with 911( he was talking to her on another phone). WITHOUT HER RIGHT TO PROTECT HERSELF, THE CRIMINAL WOULD HAVE HURT HER OR HER KIDS! IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ALL OVER BEFORE THE POLICE SHOWED UP!!!!!!!!!!. This is NOT an isolated case. They happen every day in the US, but gun-control advocates refuse to admit they exist.
up
IF YOU WRITE IT IN ALL CAPS IT WILL PROVE YOUR POINT!!! THE PEOPLE WILL THINK YOU HAVE BETTER ARGUMENTS!!!!!1!
up
To be fair, it is his argument’s strongest point.
up
I was just trying to emphasize the point, not piss EC off. Sorry, EC.
up
Wow, now that was a great rebuttal! Will you next attack my source, so you won’t have to actually argue the facts? How about if I use italics? will that be ok?
up
Technically you didn’t cite a source, but I know the incident you’re referring to. Though, you probably need to cite your source that it’s not an isolated case.
up
Ok, here.
up
Can you site something that’s a little more recent than ’96?
up
That was the latest study that I could find. I could link the NRA’s website that lists the local newspaper reports from throughout the country, but many would probably not accept it, even though they include the newspaper dates after each report.
up
Fair. I only asked for the sake of intellectual curiosity. I’m sure there’s actually other cases. It’s just one of those things that’s hard to quantify.
up
I have written a long response. Consider it a present that I deleted it
up
OK, here is the rebuttal of your facts
up
You do understand that the link was in response to dmoas’ request that I show a source that self-defense with firearms is not an outlier, right?
Where did this come from? Kleck is a professor of criminology at Florida State University. I surely don’t sell firearm equipment. Who are you speaking of?
up
And you do understand that your source is a piece of shit, right?
The hosts of that site and the people who I presume wrote that paper
up
No, they only reported the work. It’s only a “piece of shit” because you don’t like its findings. I noticed you didn’t include the peer review by Morgan Wolfgang in you rebuttal, where he says:
I do understand that because there is little empirical data on the subject, there may be issues with the study, but you can’t conclude that self-defense with a firearm is rare. It’s interesting that you look to question the total number of deaths as wrong, which I can’t comment on one way or the other, while ignoring that the lives saved by defensive firearm use are just as valuable as those lost in illegal mass shootings.
up
There are no findings, Tutu. It’s one big load of lying bullshit – there is no way in a fucking hell that law abiding citizens save a life thanks to their firearms every 1.3 minutes. I have explained it in a way an elementary student could understand it if he had his head out of the sand.
up
If you insist on rhetoric, then there is no proof that gun banning saves lives, as PROVEN by the fact that Canada has the same rate of suicides after their gun ban as they did before. Since you refuse to accept that people have a legitimate differing view than yourself, I understand why you consider their finds wrong. Its hard to accept when you are wrong. I’m done with this.
up
By the way, you are totally misleading when you claim the study said:
The study said firearms are used in self defense every 1.3 minutes. Quote the study properly, or you tend to lose credibility.
up
Can you read? I’m serious. Learn to read or you tend to lose credibility
up
It also says this:
Obviously one is wrong.
up
I’m serious. Did you read my article? Or are you joemorganing moneyball here?
up
Also this is not about whether guns are good or bad. It is about people like you believing every stupid shit thrown in their way, as long as it reaffirms their point of view
up
So, none of what you believe is bullshit thrown your way?
You have personally performed all the research and data to support your view? Because, if you haven’t, then you are relying on the reports/studies of others, just as I am. And you believe those because they support you view. It works both ways.
up
No, it really doesn’t Tutu.
I have personally performed the calculations whether the statistics you linked to and they mentioned could be true. And I have personally came to conclusion that it is impossible for them to be true. It is called math and it is called logic, and it has no opinion.
If you think that there is any fault in the way I conducted my math, please point it out.
up
The error I see, is that you are accepting as fact the opinion of those interviewed as to whether the life was saved. Of course this can’t be known as an absolute. Much as you can’t know for positive that every unarmed person is saved from death in an attack. However, this is totally irrelevant to the fact that the firearm was used to successfully protect the individual. Many times simple exposure of the firearm is enough to thwart the attack.
up
I don’t do that, the paper you linked to does. It says explicitly
So, you say the paper is wrong, then?
up
I spent a little while looking up Gary Kleck and he is in fact a professor of criminology at Florida State University. This is astonishing to me, because I agree with you that simple statistical arguments show that the result is ludicrous.
The relevant paper is Kleck and Gertz (1995), published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. It reports on a survey, conducted by Kleck and Gertz, that contacted 5000 households and asked them whether they had used a gun in self-defense in the past year. The shortcomings of this method follow exactly from the logic problem that you posted here a few days ago regarding false positives.
Suppose that the true fraction of households that has used a gun for self-defense in the past year is 1%. Now, suppose that 2% of people give a false answer to the telephone survey.I’m not going to assume any bias in the false answers — it will be equally likely for someone who used a gun in self-defense to say they didn’t as it is for someone who didn’t use a gun to say they did.
5000 people households surveyed, so 50 households (1%) used a gun for self-defense. 2% of these (i.e. one household) give a false answer, so your survey only finds 49 out of 50. Meanwhile, you also talk to 4950 households that didn’t use a gun for self-defense and 2% of them (99 households!) give a false positive answer. Using this methodology, you would claim that 148 out of 5000 households used a gun for self defense in the past year. That is 2.96%, so you overestimated the true value by a factor of almost 3!
Anyway, I can confirm that both Gary Kleck and Marvin Wolfgang are real criminology professors, so my main conclusion is that criminology is a field that has a very poor understanding of really basic statistics.
up
Thanks. I am not implying any intent to deceive to the named gentlemen. However I stand by my question – if it only takes elementary school math to show how ludicrously wrong their results are, why do people use this as an argument twenty years later?
up
I took advantage of my institution’s wide range of journal subscriptions to dig up a pdf of the paper in question. It’s 38 pages long, so I certainly haven’t read it, but people are welcome to take a look here.
up
I did a quick search of articles that cite Kleck and Gertz. The first one cited the very same issue that you did as far as the false positives. Also they note other surveys that indicate much smaller numbers of civilian DGUs.
Cook and Ludwig (1998) in Journal of Quantitative Criminology. Abstract as follows:
up
wait, they teach math in elementary school? not in America, that would be socialism.
up
Because it’s all they have.
up
Ok, let’s say you are correct and he is off by a factor of 3, ( I’m not saying you are correct, just using your figure for this exercise). Instead of 2 million, there are only 700k. This still dwarfs the total number of homicides in the US.
up
The “true rate” of 1% and “false answer rate” of 2% were chosen arbitrarily to illustrate the problem of looking for rare events with this type of survey, so I’m not claiming that 3 is the right number. The really critical number is the false positive rate, because it sets the lower limit of the smallest event rate you can measure. Looking at Table 2 of the paper, the rate they quote that leads to the 2.5 million number is 1.3% — to claim that you measured that well, you have to believe that the rate of false answers is significantly less than 1.3%.
up
try cross examining these people as experts.
Sheesh
up
Only tangentially related, but LOL at the photo of Kleck on wikipedia. I wonder who chose that one…
up
facts… so inconvienent
up
Pretty staggering…
up
And it is interesting that you chose to ignore the very point of my article – you have been lied to about how many lives are saved by defensive firearms. This is the point where you should say, “oh, wow, I got played by sources I considered to be valuable, thanks for pointing this put”. Yet you try not to understand what I’m talking about because you like guns and will cover your ears when facts speak against you.
Here in the simplest of terms.
1. There are roughly as many armed law-abiding Americans as there are unarmed, give or take a 10-20%.
2. If every minute one armed American saves her/his/other life in a situation where only a gun saves a life, that means that every minute an unarmed American dies in a same situation
3. That means we should see half a million homicide victims in USA every year, victims of criminals killing law-abiding citizens
4. There were only 17,000 homicides all together in the USA in 2009, and probably less than a third were of the variety your study describes (criminals killing law-abiding citizens)
So, unless you want to say that carrying and owning a gun makes you hundred times as likely to be attacked,your “study” is off by a factor of about 100. This is the very definition of the “piece of shit”. It is like me linking to a study that an average MLB player hits 1000 HR every year. It’s a lie, it is a lie that anyone with half a brain can see for themselves and the only reason you don’t see it is because you don’t want to.
up
You failed to include that 91.7% of self-defense firearm uses were non-fatal.
up
You failed to understand that we are talking about defenders who would have been killed, not the criminals who were
up
But I have an exercise for you. If there were two and a half million uses of a defensive firearms and 91.7% were non-fatal, how many criminals does your study claim got killed?
up
So do we have different conclusions on what 8.3% of 2,500,000 is?
up
My mistake, EC
The quote was:
So, the 8.3% were wounded or killed.
up
So, that is 200,000 wounded or killed criminals a year just from DUG from law abiding citizens, huh? That sound about right to you?
up
His figure was 2.1m not 2.5m, so the 8.3% is closer to 174000, which I find every plausible in the US.
up
That number is preposterous, there is possible no way it is remotely accurate, and doggedly embracing a claim that law-abiding gun owners shoot even a small fraction of 175000 criminals each year makes you look foolish.
up
OK, I am tired of teaching you elementary math, so let’s take your 174,000. The number of ALL firearm related non-lethal injuries in all of US was about 80,000 in 1994, the number that includes all of gang violence, domestic disputes, accidental firings and criminals shooting unarmed law-abiding citizens.
Your move.
up
Actually strike that. I am not taking a single step back anymore when people try to pass misinformation.
His number was not 2.1 million, you just made that up. He said that a life is saved every 1.3 minutes. One year has 365 days. That’s 8760 hours. That’s 525,600 minutes. Divided with 1.3 minutes, that’s 404,308 lives saved.
He said lives are saved in 15.7% of attacks. That means that the number of attacks is 404,308/15.7%. That is 2,575,208 attacks. And 8.3% of that is 213,742 wounded or killed criminals.
Math is not an opinion dude, so please stop making shit up.
up
@ec Righteous, but you are missing a digit in this sentence:
Specifically, it should be 2,575,210.
up
Thanks, colin
up
As was reported in your study there is no accounting for injuries not reported to hospitals. Many criminals don’t report a shooting, nor go to hospitals, where they may have to account for the gunshot injury. Unfortunately, the actual study that colin linked will not come up on my computer. He also said that the opinion of the victims was that 15.7% believed their form of defense saved lives, and another 14% said it probably saved lives. There is no verifiable evidence one way or another, as to the number of injuries from self defense.Do you actually believe that every criminal shot reports it to the authorities? If not, then your number of 80000 is just as incorrect.
up
Besides, the number of injured/killed is irrelevant to the number of cases where self defense gun use is used successfully. To that end I can see how the number could approach 2+M
up
How about first admitting that you made the 2,1 million figure up and then we take the math/logic course from there?
up
How about you answering if you want guns banned for self defense or not.
up
And as for you seeing things possible, nothing surprises me anymore. If the number of attacks were how you see them, then about one out of three Americans who were alive in 1994 would have been a target of a violent attack since then.
I guess everybody on FK was alive in 1994, so we can start a survey to see if the numbers even remotely matched. I’m not all that uncertain that I am the only bastard around here who was shot at.
up
My stance on gun control has absolutely nothing to with this argument. This is about facts, and not about opinions.
You have made a number up to support your argument. Admit it.
up
See this is where you may be misunderstanding my position. I don’t know how many time guns are used in self defense cases. My point has just been that they, in fact, aren’t rare outliers. My point has been that if there are 11,000+ gun homicides, there are more than that number of self defense cases, where the victim was saved from injury. The right to use a gun for protection is viable, and it does work.
up
Saying that you made up a number is not misunderstanding your position. Where did 2.1 million come from?
up
Well, isn’t that a convenient way to not deny. Since I can’t access the actual study, I will concede that I can’t rebut the number. Now refute the numbers of the FBI report page 5 that compare crime rates between CCW states and non-carry/restrictive carry states.
up
Where did 2.1 million come from?
up
@ec @tutu
Not sure if this is what tutu was referring to, but Table 2 of Kleck and Gertz (1995) contains both 2.5 million and 2.1 million projections. The smaller number comes after they throw out some responses that they think might not really be defensive gun use (maybe because there are indications that the defendant was being aggressive? I’m not sure).
up
Well, then a life wasn’t “saved” every 1.3 minutes…
up
I fail to see how this is really truly relevant.
up
Okay. And how about the man in SF would recently stabbed his intruder to death (and in the spirit of hyperbole OMG YOU MEAN THERE ARE *OTHER* MEANS OF SELF DEFENSE???!!!) or that guy a few months back who killed his son with his gun because he thought he was an intruder or how about that kid who accidentally shot his friend “playing” with his parent’s gun? If we’re cherry picking, I’m sure we can find circumstances that are exceptions, not the norm.
up
Or, you know, how about the fact that the very son of the NRA president fired into a car after getting a case of road rage. As they say, guns don’t attempt to kill people, the sons of NRA presidents do.
up
If we really want to discuss this issue, you need the approximate numbers for all these. There are sob stories on both sides. How many accidental deaths have happened that wouldn’t have happened with easy access to guns? How many people have defended themselves from violence that wouldn’t have been able to without easy gun access?
I have a slight dog in this fight, but I’m willing to be convinced if the numbers suggest it.
up
We have to count suicides-by-gun in there somehow, too.
They’re a HUGE chunk of gun deaths in the US.
up
So are gang related killings.
Ban gangs, obv.
up
But who would give me my next prison tat?
up
Who will give you your first one?
up
Bubba
up
If we’re counting it in our metric, we have to subtract the amount of people who would have committed suicide by other means. As suicides go, are gun suicides (minus those who shoot others before themselves) worse than any other?
up
Not worse, but probably a lot easier.
up
This. A ton of people will throw back up pills and many don’t have the stomach to do it with a knife/razor (and slitting your wrists is a really ineffective way to go.
up
only if you cut your veins sideways
up
Car, garage, garden hose, duct tape.
Go to sleep and don’t wake up.
up
Way too expensive with current gas prices
up
Out here, with today’s garage prices.
up
Jump off the bridge.
up
Don’t you watch any movies? There is a boat filled with sand under every bridge
up
Only if your car is > 10 years old. The emissions from most new cars aren’t toxic enough to kill you in most garages.
up
Seemed to work OK for my buddy back in high school with a newish (at the time) Honda Civic.
up
Sorry about your friend.
up
Yeah it sucked. Actually though now that I think about it, it was freshman year college (before I dropped out. Degrees are for suckers, or something) and not high school. That would have put it around 1998.
up
Im sorry
up
who has a garage?
up
People who don’t live in the city.
up
I do. It’s crammed full of camping supplies, gardening stuff, old car parts, and toys and clothes my kids have outgrown that we’ll supposedly sell at a garage sale someday. I have never put a car in it.
up
I do.
It was full of bicycles, motorbikes and a mobile margarita bar but then we had to clear it out for the bands to play in at our last backyard ballyhoo.
Likewise never seen a car.
up
Me.
Like FSU and ptbnl, it is not used for storing a car, and has not been for at least 10 years.
up
If I have to clean before killing myself that would serve as a infalible deterrent.
up
I share one with the landlord, who keeps his camping van in there. My car appreciates it as the place is pretty well insulated and the indoor temp doesn’t get down to freezing even when it’s close to zero outdoors.
up
I have a garage, and get this…
It doesn’t have a car in it either! However, there’s a clear parking spot available in the garage for when I rent a car or have an overnight guest, so that, irony of ironies, means I win, right?
up
I have a garage with TWO CARS in it!
up
One garage. One car. Pretty much necessary when living downtown Stuttgart (well the former is if you have the latter. The latter isn’t). Also a bike in it (as of late). Skis, climbing stuff , a ball per sport, shoes, clothes, towels and stuff. I keep most of my sport stuff away from home, and as the washing machine is not in our appartment, but in the cellar, I cycle between it and the garage with my stuff.
up
Officially, I have a garage. Unofficially, I have a heaping pile of crap covered by some 2x4s, slats, and a roof. Even if the heaping pile of crap wasn’t there, the likelihood that I would use 2x4s, slats, and roof to house either of our cars is still nil.
up
As usual, Dorothy says it best:
*1925
up
This is one of my favorites from DP. The footnote made me laugh out loud.
up
I wasn’t thinking of sheer number as much as I was thinking of proportion.
I don’t feel like looking it up right now, but I’m pretty sure something like 35% of all gun deaths in the US are by suicide.
up
I believe that is backwards. If we use this report, Page 50 shows that there were 37k suicides, 18.7k with firearms and 18.2k without. It then shows the total homicide death at 16.8k, with 11.5k using guns, and 5.3 without. The total of firearm deaths is about 31.3k with 18.7k resulting in suicide.
up
Page 4 here, shows that suicide rates don’t change when guns are banned, they just find other ways to do so.
up
I’m sorry, I pasted the wrong site. This is what I meant to link.
up
Back to the 90s? Did we just stop tracking this shit or something?
up
How is this different than people wanting to go back to the gun bans of the 90s?
up
I fully agree with you that reinstating the AWB is a bad idea, in part because I agree with you that many of its limitations are stupid.
We, of course, disagree completely about how to modify it.
up
And this is fine, nm. EC and others are promoting a total ban of all firearms, which isn’t.
up
$10 for you if you find a place where I do (me pointing that you linked to a false study does not count)
STFU for you if you don’t
deal?
up
how about:
up
@tutu
Pro tip: If you want to actually be taken seriously around here, making shit up about what other people say in addition to linking to bullshit studies and accounts, isnt really the way to go.
Most of the rest of the world doesn’t have a total gun ban and you know it.
up
@DFA
It wasn’t a bullshit study. We disagree on the conclusions.
up
@DFA
As the right to feed your family is very basic, the use of firearms for hunting is irrelevant. Our discussion is about possessing firearms for self-defense, which many countries do not recognize as a reason to own a firearm and refuse to allow the purchase for those purposes. You can find a partial list of them here.
up
I don’t know Tutu, what do you think? I’d say that
and
only have
in common. But I’m sure we only disagree on conclusions.
up
@EC
Fair enough. Since this entire discussion is about the US 2nd Amendment right to self defense, what did you mean in that comment?
up
Yeah it is bullshit. Self reporting level of danger? LOL.
Also you completely fail to address my study with better methodology and which is also more recent.
up
The whole “right to bear arms” is being mostly framed (when not pretending it’s for defense of government, because that fits better into the constitutional tale) into: criminals have guns and shoot the law abiding citizens who don’t.
If somebody wants to talk about facts, they should talk about facts.
What percentage of firearm injuries and casualties are:
1) People with criminal record shooting people without criminal record (AKA everybody according to NRA)?
2) People with criminal record shooting people with criminal record? (AKA, who gives a FK)
3) People without criminal record shooting people without criminal record for funsies (AKA NRA President’s family)
4) People without criminal record shooting people without criminal record by accident?
up
“Shoots his own family” has 52 million hits on google.
Protection!
up
I think I like you
up
I am rather fond of you too.
up
To be fair, millions of women serve their husbands a cold dinner, and just get what they deserve.
up
Hell, they probably wore SHOES in the kitchen while being NOT PREGGERS
up
Unforgivable!
up
she could have done that with a shotgun or a rifle, no?
up
The shooting today in Taft, CA was with a shotgun.
up
And that probably contributed to the fact that only two people were shot.
up
up
Yep, I saw that. Also, it sounds like he was targeting one person in particular, rather than trying to just shoot everyone. But are you actually arguing that it wouldn’t have been any more dangerous if he had a semiautomatic with a large magazine?
up
All guns are dangerous. Are you suggesting that if he had a semiautomatic with a large magazine he wouldn’t have just gone after the one person he was apparently targeting?
up
Colin: certain guns are more dangerous others, right?
MikeV: all guns are dangerous
Come on now.
up
If this person was targeting one specific person, perhaps it was retaliation from bullying or something, who knows – it doesn’t make a damn bit of difference what kind of gun was used.
up
Did you miss the part where he only wounded, and didn’t kill, the target? Surely the shotgun had something to do with that.
Also, colin’s point was more general, not specific to this incident.
up
Well, that would depend on a whole host of other variables, such as the type of ammunition that was loaded into the shotgun.
Perhaps it was a dumb kid who had no idea what he was doing and didn’t realize that it was loaded with bird shot. Perhaps it was a kid with experience who simply wanted to scare people and specifically didn’t load slugs?
Perhaps we have no idea and trying to jump to conclusions with basically zero data is FKing stupid and people should quit doing it?
up
Yeah. There are a couple of reasons why this particular shooting isn’t the best demonstration of the point I was making, but I still think the point is correct and certainly nothing here contradicts me.
up
@MikeV: Listen, you’re the one who inserted this incident into the discussion. Sorry for making you defend it
up
Making me defend it? By throwing out random questions and sounding like you don’t know what you’re talking about?
OK.
up
I did what now?
up
Er, Colin did. You guys look alike.
up
My dolphin avatar disagrees!
up
That’s a dolphin?
up
A dolphin playing with a frisbee.
up
I always thought it was a manatee!
up
How about if we just change my first comment to:
up
I disagree. You could damn near do MORE damage with a shotgun using buckshot or something to that effect, since each round is effectively 12 lead pellets.
up
And yet dick cheney proves you can shoot someone in the face with it and not do anything.
up
To be fair, Cheney’s gun was probably loaded with birdshot, not buckshot.
up
except that was birdshot, not buckshot, and it was 40 yards away.
up
I think it would be fair to say you could wound more targets, but not necessarily kill more, at least not without having to take the time to reload. The closer you get the more likely one body shields others… and the more likely that one dies. The further out, the less likelihood of critical damage.
up
And — lo and behold — the student (apparently) only got off two shots, and no one died (yet).
I found some energy and motivation to delve back into baseball research. Not much, but a few articles on THT will be coming up in the following days. I’m happy I did
up
Cool! Please to link when they land.
up
So, I wrote an article and submitted it into the queue. Nothing special but some, I think, uncommon analysis of platoons. I used standard platoon regression from The Book. But then, I thought – Hey! Why don’t I show the readers how to do the regression themselves and make it a series of a few articles, and also refresh the values because Andy’s platoon regressions from The Book are based on the data that is almost ten years old.
I can tell you one thing – calculating how to regress platoon splits is really, really FKed up…
up
Good work, looking forward to it!
If fake guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have fake guns.
up
The first comment made me LOL.
up
Tagline?
up
I’m kind of leaning yes.
up
Im lazy either you do it or i need someone with a stong opinion to tell me to.
These are both a dumb idea and exceptionally ugly. Way to go MLB!
up
Wow. Just… wow.
up
Don’t seem as horrible as Lukas rants to me. The garish Mets colors make it seem worse than it would be in, say, green and gold. I am curious about the little encroaching splat of alt color on the corners of the bill. Looks like rust is creeping in.
up
That gigantic league crest thing on the side is awful.
up
Well, when it says National, sure…
up
“And I’m tired of this question again/
Well I don’t know but I’ve been told, you always slow down, you always grow old./
I’m tired of screwin’ up, tired of goin’ down,/
Tired of myself, tired of this town”
-Excerpt from any and every Mets’ player’s post-game interview
up
hella win
up
up
Replacing dugout phones with cell phones!?!? What.The.Why?
up
Money?
or it could be the money.
up
Nope. Not at all. It’s the money.
up
I am sick of this argument. I am quitting FK
up
2013 HOF induction cap?
up
opening day hat!
up
These probably exist.
up
Performance enhancing hats!
up
Win
Hey Colin – out of interest, have you heard any rumours from McMurdo?
up
I heard some bad news yesterday from a pretty reliable source (but not someone actually involved with any of the projects) that all three of this years LDB flights lost the ability to point. Might not be a huge problem for Super Tiger, but pretty deadly for BLAST and EBEX.
up
Yup – the CSBF-designed pivot motor controller overheated and failed so all we could do was spin, spin, spin. It’s not official yet but I was interested in how far word had spread.
BLAST and Super Tiger also had 8 of their combined 12 SSDs fail – EBEX stayed with spinning disks because they’re cheap.
up
That seriously sucks. Is this a new motor controller? It’s not like they have never put a telescope on an LDB flight before.
I thought that SSDs are supposed to be reliable. Did they overheat or something? And did EBEX keep their disks in a pressurized enclosure? We worried about hard disks in Atacama because you aren’t supposed to operate them in low atmospheric pressure.
up
I believe it is a new controller, yes.
I don’t know anything about the reason for the SSD failures (nor about EBEX pressurizing its disks, though I could find out).
up
It sounds disastrous all around!
Hoarding = lost opportunity cost.
up
Essentially, they’re saying that all savings represent inefficient utilization of resources. They’re only showing the extreme cases with the super rich, but the “silos and silos of grain just sitting there” emotional appeal works just the same on the “one burlap sack of grain just sitting there” that someone like me may have when you’re looking through the lens of people with no grain at all. I get where they’re going with it and less inequality is absolutely a good goal, but I don’t buy that everyone spending/donating all excess money they bring in would fix everything.
It would take a rather huge shift in norms and perception to make having vast sums of money distasteful. The world would likely be a better place if such a thing happened though, so I suppose there’s nothing wrong with ranting on it.
up
Да, товарищ.
So……football.
Sammy Sosa. Yes, I’m the real Sammy Sosa, and this is my Pinterest.
up
nice
up
I guess he took it down. Lame.
up
No, it’s still there, just under a slightly different URL!
My birthday is April 10. APRIL 10, PEOPLE! And I’d like one of the over-ear types, please.
up
Said like a true Aries!
up
What, selfishly?
up
Nah, we’re just very vocal about our demands.
up
Agreed. I’m just trying to help out the non-psychics in the crowd. It’s a community service, really.
up
I would hope so.
up
naturally
up
My birthday is April 20th … April 20th… and I want a truck full of PBR cardigans and skinny jeans.
up
up
#WIN!
up
Ok, but I get the girls who were wearing the skinny jeans before we stole them and put them in the truck.
up
Sorry, only PBR ugly sweaters available
up
#want
up
Throw in a brand new bong for extra ironic effect.
up
not really my style thanks.
Meanwhile, in day-old internet mayhem with cats in Japan news…
This is kind of interesting. It’s not for everyone, but I’d love one for meeting with clients (if I ever have any of those) and showing my portfolio.
up
It lost me when it said “Windows 8″ and tablet.
up
Well sure, it’ll be better when Apple comes out with their iPad Giant or whatever they want to call it.
up
MaxiPad?
up
nice
up
True bleeding edge technology.
up
ew…
up
Hehe!
up
No, even numbered Windows suck ass. I’ll still to WinXP & 7 for now.
up
lost me at bigger.
The kindle fire size is great. It fits safely and securely in one hand, even a tiny one like mine.
seems like a professional product,which is ozz’s point really