Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 

Dude, why are you still on this? What are you actually mad about? Is it that some people in Hollywood who think their industry is the most important thing since sandwiches is pissed off that one of their own will have to face a reality they are so out of touch with they think riding the subway would be method? If so, get over it. If not, what the hell are you so angry about? The guy got caught and hopefully he'll be brought back. What else is there?

TM

Re: Can I say how tired I am of the flu?
 

This reminds me that the ad at the top of my gmail the other day was for Green Bay Packer Zubaz. Recently reintroduced!! I will watch for them when we get to Lambeau in a couple weeks.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

Mawwage.
Mawwage is what bwings us togedder today.
Mawwage, that bwessed awangment, that dweam wifin a dweam
And wuv,
twue wuv,
will fowow you foweva
So tweasure your wuv.

top this, pirates
 

Ninjas know how to rob a bank.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

Did your avatar have her hips photoshaved off? I feel like she needs more hips.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

College is better live - for the atmosphere. But I also tape Cal games, so I can watch the good, bad, key plays later.

Best.Disclaimer.Ever
 

From a local attorney's e-mail:

PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. It should not be photocopied, transmitted via walkie-talkie, CB radio, satellite dish, cable TV, overhead projector, smoke signal, Morse code, pig Latin, sign language, short hand, or any other means. This e-mail is under no circumstances to be translated into French. This e-mail is not to be ridiculed, mocked, judged in a competition, or read aloud in funny accents while wearing fake mustaches and/or hats of any sort including, but not limited to, bandanas. Do not taunt or provoke this e-mail. People taking certain prescription medications may experience nausea, dizziness, hysteria, vomiting, and temporary loss of short term memory while reading this e-mail. Please consult your physician before reading this e-mail. All models depicted in this email are 18 years of age or older. If you have received this e-mail in error, it's probably because I am so consumed by self-importance that I wasn't paying any attention to whom I addressed it.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

Is this a potential bestiality-"uh oh" or a "I just realized my dad is a bear"-"uh oh?" Because I'm okay with either since it doesn't involve my kid.

TM

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

We crafted our whole ceremony from bits and pieces of different kinds of ceremony scripts found on the interwebs. I think most of it was humanist.* But we removed all the religious stuff and and the creepy humanist crap and made it about un-sickingly sweet love and mutual respect. But we didn't do the, "The winds of your love sweep over and shape me like I'm the sands of the Sahara" type garbage.

But we had a fake ceremony performed by an unoffical officiant who was just a friend of ours. We actually got married in 3 minutes down at City Hall.

TM

*Here you go, Wonk. A cued up come back just a few posts away from the bestiality joke.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

I went to the game Friday night with my (one) Red Sox fan friend. He wore a Red Sox hat. And there were plenty of guys there with Red Sox jersies.

We talked about the different attitudes of the fans. Yankees fans will boo a Red Sox fan, make fun of him, and talk about he and his friends will do to his girlfriend (who is probably with him). But they rarely get violent. And this is my friend's thought: What's the point? How angry at Sox fans could Yankees fans be? Those 5 years of being second to Boston haven't really had much effect yet.

In Boston, if you wear a Yankees jersey, you're looking for trouble. And you will most likely get it. Two stories:

1. At a playoffs game, I was sitting in the bleachers at the stadium. There was a guy there with a loud-mouth, female sox fan. He was not a sox fan. This woman would not shut up. She had a huge sign that said something stupid. Someone took it away from her and ripped it up in her face. She got louder. Someone called her an idiot and, get this, she said, "Fuck you, I'm in law school!" Her friend told her to sit down and shut up, but it was too late. He had to take her out of there when the beers started flying.

2. I went to the one playoff game that the Yankees lost to Boston in '99 (I think)--it was the Clemens/Pedro game where Pedro struck out roughly 28 of our guys and Clemens gave up roughly 18 runs and was booed off the mound. Early on, some Yankees fan, in a jersey was simply walking to his seat and on the way, he was pushed several times, his hat was stolen, he got drenched with 6 beers and someone hit him in the head with half a hot dog. The cops came over and escorted HIM out.

TM

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

Depends on how long a view you take. In the end, FSU wins the ACC every year between 1992 and 2000, and Persia gets nukes. By comparison, "Spartan" becomes a synonym for austere, and we lose a foot ball game to a college named "Mary."* If that's a happy ending, I want my money back and I'll finish the jerk-off myself.

*Admittedly it is also named "William," but that's not much comfort, as the last foot ball figure to go around calling himself "William" and not get his ass beat was doing the Superbowl Shuffle with Coltrane circa 1985.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

Hung on a goal post.

Most memorable moment? Walking into the crowded stadium next to some locals, one of the turned to the other and said, "Whut in THEE hell...[and then he made a really exaggerated dumb, hee haw face]...is goin' on 'round HAR?"

I had never heard anything like that before.

TM

Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 

if what you're proposing is all socks should drop an argument once it dies, of its own volition, then I agree. but don't forget.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

How far did you get into this week's game?

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

She's in training for the South African track team.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

I had seats to the "fight"- Ron Artest and the Pacers v. Pistons' fans generally. My daughter and wife went with each bringing a friend. When I saw the fight break out, at first I was afraid for my family's safety- then I remembered we didn't have E/O seats.

Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 

No no no. By all means, keep arguing. I just don't know what you're arguing about. I think you're generally mad about people defending Polanski (which I don't think anyone here is doing) and it has morphed into some kind of weird statutory rape argument.

TM

Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 

You take that back, goddammit!

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

Many Unitarian Universalists are humanists. As a general rule, we tend to find bestiality disrespectful and exploitive for the animals.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

especially if you're the human in the coupling.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

What is the point of adding UU then?

Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 

i started by asking why anyone defended him. then i spend too many posts trying to help flower realize he wasn't making sense.

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

Yep, those Seminole fans are some dumb fucking hicks, yessir.

My eldest niece is at Scott Stadium at this very moment for the Muse/U2 show. My guess is it was the right size for them, but if Tim McGraw or Big & Rich ever came to town, they might need to find a bigger venue.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

We did something similar. Each of our siblings read a poem and/or essay. We said the equivalent of "I do". Our fathers blessed us. He stepped on a glass.

Easy peasy.

City Hall was unnecessary because you can solemnize your own marriage in Colorado.

And right on to cocktails.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

Sadly, this is more or less my goal for the half marathon I am running in January.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

I can't do something I like for three hours and nine minutes.

Re: Big news!
 

He was running for something in the South Bay a few years ago.

Last year I read in that his bar membership had been suspended, but I guess he has made his amends to the powers that be - http://members.calbar.ca.gov/search/....aspx?x=206882

Change agent, indeed!

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

It was away so I didn't tape. Blessedly. Hell, we left the bar at which we were watching in the 3rd quarter because we couldn't bear (or is that duck?) it anymore.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

We actually scripted our entire service. But we were married by a UCLA professor who moonlights as an (internet ordained) officiant. He gave us scripts from other ceremonies to crib. It felt wrong for a prof to give me papers to plagerize.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

translation: thank god I've never been constipated.

edit- wow


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/sp...ntia.html?_r=2

edit edit chris rock- on roman P.- "he made some good movies? so what? even johnny cochrane didn't have the balls to say, 'didn't you see OJ run against New England?"'

Hey, little sister; shotgun!
 

I'll be happy to take care of it. I'll bring my old Martin, and do this number, followed by this.

You are all quite welcome.

Re: Big news!
 

I remember when Peter was around and it was extremely odd. Now skimming the opinion above it looks like life is still extremely odd for him. Wasn't he the one with the wacky website?

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

This is definitely not your best work.

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you are not hip to the notion of fellowship.

You can jerk off, so what's the point of talking to the paralegal, right?

Re: Sorry Guys... Another Wedding Question
 

One can get fellowship at the local watering hole with way less "spiritual" bullshit.

In other words, kumbaya, motherfucker.

Re: Big news!
 

Totally bizarre! Didn't he get arrested in Mexico for stealing socks or something?? I actually know a guy who is also running for the seat. May have to tell him to check out the state bar site on Thottam. I don't know enough about local politics to say whether he has a shot or not...

Re: Tucker is an Irvin fan?
 

I watched most of the recorded version, in part to hear what the announcers were saying before and during the beat down, I mean, game.

Autzen was crazy loud, even for Autzen. I felt a tiny bit bad for Riley, my fellow BHS alum. But not too bad.

And I was a bit disappointed the Duck didn't take it to Ozzie, or Occy, or whatever the hell y'all call that bear. A bit trigger shy after getting suspending for stomping on the Houston Cougar last year, I guess (sorry, RT!)

Maybe Hank isn't entirely wrong
 

If I'm correct, I'm the only poster on this board who has actually prosecuted both adults and juveniles for forcible and statutory rape. With that said, let me say that I might understand what Hank is getting at.

As a prosecutor in California today, I am not on board with pleading someone out to a PC 261.5 statutory rape if I believe that the defendant violated PC 261(a)(2) by forcibly raping someone. But sometimes what you thought was a statutory rape case turns out to be a forcible rape case. The victim might be so traumatized in a date-rape situation with an older man that she minimizes or doesn't explain the perpetrator's conduct during the first interview with the police. The reverse is also true: sometimes what you thought was a forcible rape is actually statutory rape. Dad assumes that the reason his precious angel is pregnant is because she was raped, and daughter is too afraid to explain the whole story until after the police have been called.

If I'm the prosecutor now on a case with Polanski's facts, I'm not going to let it settle for a PC 261.5. Not when I can get a conviction on a PC 288(a) for lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 14. That's harder for the defense to fight than either the 261(a)(2) or the 261.5. And unlike a PC 261.5, the judge can't reduce it to a misdemeanor. The middle term is six years prison. The mitigated term is three years prison.

Two more points. First, prosecutors do file charges on statutory rape cases even though there's no issue involving force or actual consent. If you're 25 and your girlfriend is 15, expect charges. Same thing if you're 17 and your girlfriend is 13. And I can file PC 288(a) on a juvenile if they're over 14 and having sex with someone under 14. Now the typical DA's office in California is going to turn down cases where the 17-year old boy sleeps with his 15-year old girlfriend, and her angry parents drop a dime on the boyfriend. But if he gets her pregnant? And she's keeping it? Maybe someone wants to make sure the boyfriend takes a parenting class or a sex ed class or is staying in school so he at least has a diploma for a slightly better-paying job over the next 18 years. Now that's where there's a lot of discretion and leeway, especially in juvenile court, and where statutory rape should be charged as or settled for a misdemeanor.

Second, it's worth noting that the main reason society needs rape shield laws is because judges consistently and appallingly lacked the fortitude to sustain objections to the victim's past sexual history and what she was wearing and other irrelevant evidence that was solicited solely to sully the victim and make her cross-examination an ordeal. Just look at the transcript from the Polanski proceedings. The lawyers make it plain what tactics they had planned for the victim. None of that should have been admissible 30 years ago under a 352 analysis (think FRE 403) or even an FRE 402 analysis. It's shameful that we need them, and it's even more shameful when judges don't use them properly today. [/RANT]

I can't speak to what the prosecutors should have done 30 years ago, as my main interests at that time were Legos, Star Wars action figures, and the Muppet Show.

With today's Penal Code, I'd bury Polanski.

Re: Big news!
 

The note in the Cal Bar newspaper that discussed the suspension* was cryptic, but it sounded like it was based on the sock incident. Who knows though, maybe he has other odd criminal activities in his past.

* I always skim that section to see if I recognize any names. When I am old and bitter, can I expect to skim the obits??

Re: Big news!
 

The CA Bar website link you posted says he stole textbooks in Irvine!! Socks and books. And he wants to be my state assemblyman? I don't think so.