LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=879)

Not Bob 03-09-2017 06:24 PM

Who'd have thought they'd lead ya/back here where we need ya?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506186)
I think the major difference is that we know we are voting against our own (financial) self interest. I too want the government to invest in those things. I think a better safety net is a great crime fighter in the long run.

One thing I forgot: I'm totally on board with Trump's infrastructure proposal. Creates jobs and benefits everyone! With the understanding that I don't know what the details of the proposal are.

Coltrane aka Young Sebby comes back, and you people are acting like it's no big deal? For shame!

So, Coltrane, you must be almost at the Swinging Free in the Hickey Freeman stage of development - how's that going? Do you like peaty single malt Scotch (excuse me, "Scots") yet? Catching the eye of the hot clerk at the Hyatt reception desk?

(Seriously, welcome back! Now we need Spanky to come by and talk about the Plantonic Ideal of Free trade.)

sebastian_dangerfield 03-09-2017 07:39 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 506188)
Hyde Sebby: Give me a social liberal and fiscal conservative.
Jeckel Sebby: Don't give me someone who will preserve the status quo!

RT, can we set up a board where Sebby can just fight with himself?

Come on... We do not have anything close to fiscal moderation. Both parties spend like drunks. Medicare part d, defense budget, subsidies for ACA, countless administrative agencies... It's a fuckshow in terms of govt breadth and expenditure.

And we're not moderate. Half of this country is absolutely clinging to its backward religious nonsense. The fantastic thinking of these people is still infecting policy.

The silent majority is never given a good choice.

sebastian_dangerfield 03-09-2017 07:44 PM

Re: Who'd have thought they'd lead ya/back here where we need ya?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 506190)
Coltrane aka Young Sebby comes back, and you people are acting like it's no big deal? For shame!

So, Coltrane, you must be almost at the Swinging Free in the Hickey Freeman stage of development - how's that going? Do you like peaty single malt Scotch (excuse me, "Scots") yet? Catching the eye of the hot clerk at the Hyatt reception desk?

(Seriously, welcome back! Now we need Spanky to come by and talk about the Plantonic Ideal of Free trade.)

I went with Italian stuff years ago. The Hickeys don't drape well. Suits for fat Americans.

Still spread collars, however. And no underwear or visible socks (unless wearing a suit in summer, when boots can't be worn.)

But really, who the fuck wears a suit more than once a week, if that, anymore?

One other quirk: Peak lapels. Much nicer looking. But hard as fuck to find.

Not Bob 03-09-2017 11:06 PM

You're best bet's a true baby blue Continental,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 506192)
I went with Italian stuff years ago. The Hickeys don't drape well. Suits for fat Americans.

Of course you're doing Brioni now. But we're talking about Coltrane. If he ever catches up to you, I think that means you die. So keep growing and evolving.

PS - you know I love you like the nephew who stole my Scritti Politti t-shirt, but a Hickey suit paired with Allen Edmunds shoes is what America is all about. What are you talking about? Italian suits? What's next? Skinny ties and Mastroianni movies? Jesus Christ, man.

Quote:

Still spread collars, however. And no underwear or visible socks (unless wearing a suit in summer, when boots can't be worn.)
Free and easy in my Giusuppe, bay-bee! Just be careful of hitting the gents with anything other than navy or charcoal.

Quote:

But really, who the fuck wears a suit more than once a week, if that, anymore?
The Not Bobster, although even the old guys are starting to mock me. Fuck them. If I wanted to wear khakis and a cardigan, I'd be a professor or run a B&B in New England.

Quote:

One other quirk: Peak lapels. Much nicer looking. But hard as fuck to find.
You could really be a Beau Brummel, baby, if you just gave it half a chance.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-09-2017 11:23 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 506170)
Why Abby? Why not Mary Anne?

Along which lines, what's up with the Huntsmans? I mean, Abby has been feverishly normalizing Trump every morning on Fox, Mary Anne has provided the only actual western civilization in the White House performing there. And now Jon, someone whose next political job should have been SoS, is taking this suck-up position in Moscow that is three steps down from his China position.

Meanwhile, Utah actually hates Trump.

DJT already has other people handling his relationship with the Kremlin, so Huntsman is just for show. Contrast the sort of person he sent to Israel.

LessinSF 03-10-2017 05:54 AM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506185)
Oh I get it. And I totally agree.

Serious question. Why am I wrong here?

The ACA was doomed the moment it added so many people with their conditions and costs without adequately adding premium and without reducing costs. The costs would have been reduced by limiting wasteful expenditures on end-of-life care. So called "death panels" would have decided - on behalf of taxpayer, not private money, - that paying millions for machines that go ping for a few weeks was asinine and cost ineffective.

But the Republicans in their fervor to be all things anti-Obama defeated the most fiscally responsible part of the Bill. Thus, it beacame a half assed project doomed to failure. We spend close to 20% of our GDP on health care, and over 75% of that on the last year of someone's life, i.e. the machine that goes ping when your grandparent is dying but may only add days to their life, but we added millions of sick patients without the ability to limit their care.

Do the math. Trump is right here about it expoding. Obama and Congress gave the doctors and insurance companies carte blanche to raise rates (or quit) 25% this year without recourse. And next year, etc. I may be wrong, but nothing I have read from either side - other than single payer - has proposed anything realistic on the cost side, so costs coninue to rise without equivalent revenues. Well, duh, Trump is right that that is unsustainable.

Icky Thump 03-10-2017 06:17 AM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 506195)
Serious question. Why am I wrong here?

The ACA was doomed the moment it added so many people with their conditions and costs without adequately adding premium and without reducing costs. The costs would have been reduced by limiting wasteful expenditures on end-of-life care. So called "death panels" would have decided - on behalf of taxpayer, not private money, - that paying millions for machines that go ping for a few weeks was asinine and cost ineffective.

But the Republicans in their fervor to be all things anti-Obama defeated the most fiscally responsible part of the Bill. Thus, it beacame a half assed project doomed to failure. We spend close to 20% of our GDP on health care, and over 75% of that on the last year of someone's life, i.e. the machine that goes ping when your grandparent is dying but may only add days to their life, but we added millions of sick patients without the ability to limit their care.

Do the math. Trump is right here about it expoding. Obama and Congress gave the doctors and insurance companies carte blanche to raise rates (or quit) 25% this year without recourse. And next year, etc. I may be wrong, but nothing I have read from either side - other than single payer - has proposed anything realistic on the cost side, so costs coninue to rise without equivalent revenues. Well, duh, Trump is right that that is unsustainable.

Sad reality and what I have said again and again:

Single payer countries do away with end of life expenditures. As you know, I deal with this on a daily basis. In Canada, UK, no chemo, surgeries for 65+ people. They say "sorry", give you pain meds, and say "call us when it is . . . time."

sebastian_dangerfield 03-10-2017 08:46 AM

Re: You're best bet's a true baby blue Continental,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 506193)
Of course you're doing Brioni now. But we're talking about Coltrane. If he ever catches up to you, I think that means you die. So keep growing and evolving.

PS - you know I love you like the nephew who stole my Scritti Politti t-shirt, but a Hickey suit paired with Allen Edmunds shoes is what America is all about. What are you talking about? Italian suits? What's next? Skinny ties and Mastroianni movies? Jesus Christ, man.



Free and easy in my Giusuppe, bay-bee! Just be careful of hitting the gents with anything other than navy or charcoal.



The Not Bobster, although even the old guys are starting to mock me. Fuck them. If I wanted to wear khakis and a cardigan, I'd be a professor or run a B&B in New England.



You could really be a Beau Brummel, baby, if you just gave it half a chance.

Were I could stock the closet with regular price Brionis...

Allen Edmonds? There's a layer of dust on my lace ups. Yes... I break the loafers-with-a-suit rule. But never with buckle or tassel-free loafers. Only with those old school tassel jobs (Alden). And you have to discover the joy of boots. One never has to match his hidden socks to anything.

My wife also had me get the suit pants more tightly tailored. Not Sticky Fingers tight, but a bit more fashion-forward. Is terribly constricting on those random half-erections, but cuts a nice silhouette.

There's a special ring in hell for people who put that song in other peoples' heads, you know that?

sebastian_dangerfield 03-10-2017 08:53 AM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 506195)
Serious question. Why am I wrong here?

The ACA was doomed the moment it added so many people with their conditions and costs without adequately adding premium and without reducing costs. The costs would have been reduced by limiting wasteful expenditures on end-of-life care. So called "death panels" would have decided - on behalf of taxpayer, not private money, - that paying millions for machines that go ping for a few weeks was asinine and cost ineffective.

But the Republicans in their fervor to be all things anti-Obama defeated the most fiscally responsible part of the Bill. Thus, it beacame a half assed project doomed to failure. We spend close to 20% of our GDP on health care, and over 75% of that on the last year of someone's life, i.e. the machine that goes ping when your grandparent is dying but may only add days to their life, but we added millions of sick patients without the ability to limit their care.

Do the math. Trump is right here about it expoding. Obama and Congress gave the doctors and insurance companies carte blanche to raise rates (or quit) 25% this year without recourse. And next year, etc. I may be wrong, but nothing I have read from either side - other than single payer - has proposed anything realistic on the cost side, so costs coninue to rise without equivalent revenues. Well, duh, Trump is right that that is unsustainable.

I believe the descriptive you're seeking are, "opened the flood gates," "foot in the door," or more cynically, "Trojan horse." The end game was always single payer.

It was a long term transfer of care dollars from the last-years-of-life demographic to the too-poor-to-pay-for-insurance demographic. In that regard, on an exclusively economic basis, it's quite defensible. From the perspective of an old person who paid into the system her whole life, however, it's a rotten bargain. Perhaps even a bait and switch.

sebastian_dangerfield 03-10-2017 08:57 AM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 506194)
DJT already has other people handling his relationship with the Kremlin, so Huntsman is just for show. Contrast the sort of person he sent to Israel.

His daughter is seriously fucking hot. How did I not know of this person before?

Shame she doesn't drink, and a google image search for her nude is pointless...

Religion. It Ruins Everything.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-10-2017 09:40 AM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 506194)
DJT already has other people handling his relationship with the Kremlin, so Huntsman is just for show. Contrast the sort of person he sent to Israel.

Well, we now are getting a better answer as to where we'll be fighting our next wars. We dropped more bombs on Yemen last week than in the previous two years.

In other news, ground troops were greenlighted for Raqqa.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-10-2017 10:06 AM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 506195)
Serious question. Why am I wrong here?

The ACA was doomed the moment it added so many people with their conditions and costs without adequately adding premium and without reducing costs. The costs would have been reduced by limiting wasteful expenditures on end-of-life care. So called "death panels" would have decided - on behalf of taxpayer, not private money, - that paying millions for machines that go ping for a few weeks was asinine and cost ineffective.

But the Republicans in their fervor to be all things anti-Obama defeated the most fiscally responsible part of the Bill. Thus, it beacame a half assed project doomed to failure. We spend close to 20% of our GDP on health care, and over 75% of that on the last year of someone's life, i.e. the machine that goes ping when your grandparent is dying but may only add days to their life, but we added millions of sick patients without the ability to limit their care.

Do the math. Trump is right here about it expoding. Obama and Congress gave the doctors and insurance companies carte blanche to raise rates (or quit) 25% this year without recourse. And next year, etc. I may be wrong, but nothing I have read from either side - other than single payer - has proposed anything realistic on the cost side, so costs coninue to rise without equivalent revenues. Well, duh, Trump is right that that is unsustainable.

The principal cost reduction measures in ACA are just starting to take effect, including a move to outcome based payments. Most of the cost control efforts are nerdy and incremental, but cumulatively can have some significant impact. The rate of increase of healthcare costs has been steadily declining throughout the Obamacare period.

This is not to say something is not out of whack. A quick comparison of us to any other developed country says we aren't getting our money's worth as a society. But the Trump / Ryan solution is to make us less like countries that are getting more bang for their buck. Ah, yeh, sure, why not.

And what's your source for 75% being spent in the last year of life. The often-debunked statistic I'm used to seeing is one-third of healthcare costs being spent in the last year of life, a number that depends on some studies of the Medicare only population and so excludes that large group of working age folks covered by private insurance. There are other studies that look at ranges in the 12-20% range based on type of payor. 75%? Really? Seems like an alt-fact.

It would be a lot easier to fix healthcare expenses if the problem was so simple.

Replaced_Texan 03-10-2017 10:34 AM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 506195)
Serious question. Why am I wrong here?

The ACA was doomed the moment it added so many people with their conditions and costs without adequately adding premium and without reducing costs. The costs would have been reduced by limiting wasteful expenditures on end-of-life care. So called "death panels" would have decided - on behalf of taxpayer, not private money, - that paying millions for machines that go ping for a few weeks was asinine and cost ineffective.

But the Republicans in their fervor to be all things anti-Obama defeated the most fiscally responsible part of the Bill. Thus, it beacame a half assed project doomed to failure. We spend close to 20% of our GDP on health care, and over 75% of that on the last year of someone's life, i.e. the machine that goes ping when your grandparent is dying but may only add days to their life, but we added millions of sick patients without the ability to limit their care.

Do the math. Trump is right here about it expoding. Obama and Congress gave the doctors and insurance companies carte blanche to raise rates (or quit) 25% this year without recourse. And next year, etc. I may be wrong, but nothing I have read from either side - other than single payer - has proposed anything realistic on the cost side, so costs coninue to rise without equivalent revenues. Well, duh, Trump is right that that is unsustainable.

I still maintain that that keeping the 21-26 year olds out of the exchanges did the ACA no favors. Fuckers are adults. Throw them to the wolves.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 03-10-2017 10:41 AM

Re: Who'd have thought they'd lead ya/back here where we need ya?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 506190)
Coltrane aka Young Sebby comes back, and you people are acting like it's no big deal? For shame!

So, Coltrane, you must be almost at the Swinging Free in the Hickey Freeman stage of development - how's that going? Do you like peaty single malt Scotch (excuse me, "Scots") yet? Catching the eye of the hot clerk at the Hyatt reception desk?

(Seriously, welcome back! Now we need Spanky to come by and talk about the Plantonic Ideal of Free trade.)

Hey NB! I'm drinking good tequila and mescal. So smooth and neither seems to affect me the next day.

If you have a Steinmart you can get HF ties for $25.

Adder 03-10-2017 02:38 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 506163)
The people who are hurting Trump are the intel leakers, and Schumer, and Franken.

Should we look at recent poll numbers for this?

Quote:

The Extreme Left/Protestor/Pussy Hat wing of the party is playing right into Bannon's hands.
Women are not the extreme left nor are they playing into Bannon's hands. That's dumb.


Quote:

So would the majority of the country, which is comprised of fiscally moderate/socially tolerant Republicans and Democrats. The problem is, what solution could we reach? Neoliberal economics, the religion of the moderate wing of both the GOP and Democrats, is failing an enormous portion of the population, and we don't have a good Plan B.
The majority shares a political view and yet they can't win elections? Do you ever let evidence break into your world view?

The majority isn't paying attention and doesn't give a damn. Minority that consistently vote have various motivations, including lots of things that are not tolerant (opposition to gay marriage for example) that matter more to them than fiscal responsibility. The game of politics is finding the right package of those motivations to turn out more voters than the other guy.

And we just learned that hating Muslims and immigrants is a big winner there.

Actually, we knew that but we'd been relying on the character of individual GOP candidates to restrain themselves.

Adder 03-10-2017 02:41 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 506164)
Consider for a moment what will occur in this country if Trump were to be removed from office.

Perhaps there's a smooth transition to Pence. That's possible, maybe even likely.

But a just as likely scenario is a bit more disturbing...

What happens to the "movement" -- and yes, Trump has created a movement -- which would view his ouster as a coordinated attack by elites, or the "deep state," or the Establishment? And what happens to those last vestiges of trust in institutions existing in the population?

I'm sure you think we have ample enforcement to keep control under any circumstances. And on the surface, we do. Demonstration of brute force can compel the population to refrain from a certain narrow category of behaviors we all agree should be prohibited. But actual, meaningful control is very fragile, and the slide toward something like Brazil -- a govt that has power over perhaps half of its population, at best -- isn't a long one.

Our govt's coercive power is a lot like credit. It's all based on confidence, and in reality, much of it is a bluff. We are already destabilized. I'm not sure I want to know the wages of another Watergate ("Russiagate") occurring in our current tenuous position.

Oddly, this fear is receding in my view, as his evidence of his corruption and incompetence is mounting.

I also think evidence of a real movement is fading too. The Chan troll culture isn't going to stay with him as he actually has to do more than bloviate.

Adder 03-10-2017 02:44 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506172)
Are you saying I can't carve out his corporate plan from his individual plan?

Segue: I do find it interesting that people always talk about poor rural whites voting against their self interest (which they do), when many urban/suburban upper-middle class voters do the exact same thing (I know I do). Trump's tax plan would benefit both of us significantly more than Clinton's would have.

You're assuming we see our interests as lower taxes.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-10-2017 02:45 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 506205)
Oddly, this fear is receding in my view, as his evidence of his corruption and incompetence is mounting.

I also think evidence of a real movement is fading too. The Chan troll culture isn't going to stay with him as he actually has to do more than bloviate.

You're arguing with a man who didn't know who Abby Huntsman is. He pays no attention.

Adder 03-10-2017 02:48 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 506191)
Come on... We do not have anything close to fiscal moderation. Both parties spend like drunks. Medicare part d, defense budget, subsidies for ACA, countless administrative agencies... It's a fuckshow in terms of govt breadth and expenditure. .

16 years of Clinton & Obama and you still say this crap? Facts do not enter your thoughts.

Adder 03-10-2017 02:53 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 506207)
You're arguing with a man who didn't know who Abby Huntsman is. He pays no attention.

I don't know who Abby Huntsman is.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 03-10-2017 03:10 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 506206)
You're assuming we see our interests as lower taxes.

No I'm not. There's no dispute that under Trump's proposed tax plan, high earners will see a financial benefit. But maybe your interests are purely altruistic. If so, welcome back Jesus.

Adder 03-10-2017 03:15 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506210)
No I'm not. There's no dispute that under Trump's proposed tax plan, high earners will see a financial benefit. But maybe your interests are purely altruistic. If so, welcome back Jesus.

It's not altruism, it's thinking past the next tax bill.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-10-2017 03:18 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 506195)
Serious question. Why am I wrong here?

The ACA was doomed the moment it added so many people with their conditions and costs without adequately adding premium and without reducing costs. The costs would have been reduced by limiting wasteful expenditures on end-of-life care. So called "death panels" would have decided - on behalf of taxpayer, not private money, - that paying millions for machines that go ping for a few weeks was asinine and cost ineffective.

But the Republicans in their fervor to be all things anti-Obama defeated the most fiscally responsible part of the Bill. Thus, it beacame a half assed project doomed to failure. We spend close to 20% of our GDP on health care, and over 75% of that on the last year of someone's life, i.e. the machine that goes ping when your grandparent is dying but may only add days to their life, but we added millions of sick patients without the ability to limit their care.

Do the math. Trump is right here about it expoding. Obama and Congress gave the doctors and insurance companies carte blanche to raise rates (or quit) 25% this year without recourse. And next year, etc. I may be wrong, but nothing I have read from either side - other than single payer - has proposed anything realistic on the cost side, so costs coninue to rise without equivalent revenues. Well, duh, Trump is right that that is unsustainable.

Costs were rising before the ACA was passed, and it has slowed the rate of increase. If you compare what we spend on healthcare to other countries, it definitely seems like we pay too much. If you compare what we spend to what we used to spend, it also seems like we pay too much -- but in some ways we get better care than we used to, and there is no doubt that what we spend money on changes over time.

Pretty Little Flower 03-10-2017 03:19 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 506211)
It's not altruism, it's thinking past the next tax bill.

Typical son-of-God modesty. Don't worry, JC, your secret is safe with us!

Did you just call me Coltrane? 03-10-2017 03:31 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 506211)
It's not altruism, it's thinking past the next tax bill.

There's no reason we can't kick this can down the road in perpetuity.

Although for the son of God, perpetuity probably isn't nearly as long as it is for us humans.

Pretty Little Flower 03-10-2017 03:46 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506214)
There's no reason we can't kick this can down the road in perpetuity.

Although for the son of God, perpetuity probably isn't nearly as long as it is for us humans.

If I were to guess which one of us was secretly Jesus, I totally would have gone with Sebastian. Like he was sent here to test us or something. Adder would have been pretty far down the list. But I guess that is part of the Mystery and the Wonder of the Almighty!

Pretty Little Flower 03-10-2017 04:03 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 506215)
If I were to guess which one of us was secretly Jesus, I totally would have gone with Sebastian. Like he was sent here to test us or something. Adder would have been pretty far down the list. But I guess that is part of the Mystery and the Wonder of the Almighty!

On the subject of the Divine, it's time for the Daily Dose. But first, it's been a while since I've seen a good old fashioned Pitchfork Hit Job. Thank you, Ed Sheeran!

"Ed Sheeran sells trite innocence by the pound. He uses bland wisdom and unimaginative music to ponder the basic good and bad in people around him, without once looking inward."

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/22960-divide/

Now, here is some crazy old funk that sounds like some sort of oompah band got loaded on whiskey and stanky green. It's The Pazant Brothers with "Skunk Juice":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0ba5d4feDw

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-10-2017 04:07 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
I prefer days when I don't have to deal with people with guns.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 03-14-2017 12:17 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 506217)
I prefer days when I don't have to deal with people with guns.

I think that person killed the board with his gun.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-14-2017 12:43 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506227)
I think that person killed the board with his gun.

Drama past. But we corporate lawyers lead exciting lives, what with arguing over MAC clauses, defining the scope of licenses, and dealing with firing someone who is mental and carries.

Hank Chinaski 03-14-2017 02:18 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 506228)
Drama past. But we corporate lawyers lead exciting lives, what with arguing over MAC clauses, defining the scope of licenses, and dealing with firing someone who is mental and carries.

We did that four or five years ago. We did it in the crazy's office. My one partner was standing over him as he begged and cried for 2 hours. Later I asked why he stood there and he said he wanted to be ready in case the guy went for a gun. We later found two in his desk.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-14-2017 02:35 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 506229)
We did that four or five years ago. We did it in the crazy's office. My one partner was standing over him as he begged and cried for 2 hours. Later I asked why he stood there and he said he wanted to be ready in case the guy went for a gun. We later found two in his desk.

The day before he started shooting people on the LIRR, Colin Ferguson came to my FIL's office, looking for him. He choose not to go out to reception, and Ferguson went away.

Icky Thump 03-14-2017 02:52 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 506230)
The day before he started shooting people on the LIRR, Colin Ferguson came to my FIL's office, looking for him. He choose not to go out to reception, and Ferguson went away.

And instead killed 6 innocent people on the LIRR. And your father in law shares that with people? What. A. Guy.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-14-2017 03:06 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Icky Thump (Post 506231)
And instead killed 6 innocent people on the LIRR. And your father in law shares that with people? What. A. Guy.

Well, Ty shares it with people. Maybe Ty and his FIL don't get along?

Tyrone Slothrop 03-14-2017 03:07 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Icky Thump (Post 506231)
And instead killed 6 innocent people on the LIRR. And your father in law shares that with people? What. A. Guy.

My FIL doesn't talk about it.

Pretty Little Flower 03-14-2017 04:52 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 506227)
I think that person killed the board with his gun.

Listen, I'm not in the job of having evidence, but here is some advice. When you are standing shirtless in front of the microwave heating up some Hormel chili, cover that shit up. That is not a pretty picture.

Some real early Kool & the Gang for the Daily Dose today. "N. T. Part 1"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-83Zkvt6vsM

Not Bob 03-14-2017 07:58 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Icky Thump (Post 506231)
And instead killed 6 innocent people on the LIRR. And your father in law shares that with people? What. A. Guy.

Come on, man -- Ty's FIL couldn't predict that his daughter would end up marrying Ty.* Are you really going to blame him for not realizing that Mr. Ferguson was going to leave his office to go calmly shoot a bunch of people on a train?

*No offense, Ty.

Hank Chinaski 03-14-2017 08:57 PM

Re: Let me just add my echo to the chamber
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 506236)
Come on, man -- Ty's FIL couldn't predict that his daughter would end up marrying Ty.* Are you really going to blame him for not realizing that Mr. Ferguson was going to leave his office to go calmly shoot a bunch of people on a train?

*No offense, Ty.

Aren't people commuting on the LIRR basically dead already?




too soon?

Hank Chinaski 03-14-2017 10:14 PM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
I don't know Rachel Maddow's work, but that seemed an embarrassing moment? I mean the secret is he did pay taxes even though he said he didn't?

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 03-15-2017 09:40 AM

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 506238)
I don't know Rachel Maddow's work, but that seemed an embarrassing moment? I mean the secret is he did pay taxes even though he said he didn't?

That was vintage Maddow. Her show is usually at least 2/3 hype. Once upon a time she did smart interviews on substantive issues, but then her ratings went up and now she does chatty snark on whatever dominates twitter that day.

She got great ratings and it was a huge success. Thanks to that, she'll top O'Reilly two weeks in a row.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:12 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com