![]() |
Massholes
Quote:
Excerpts: -- Never get in the way of a car that needs extensive bodywork. -- Double-park in the North End of Boston and South Boston, unless triple-parking is available. -- Making eye contact revokes your right of way. -- Whenever possible, stop in the middle of a crosswalk to ensure inconveniencing as many pedestrians as possible. And if a pedestrian ahead of you steps into the road, speed up loudly and chase them up on the curb. Pedestrians have no rights. -- When making a left turn at an intersection with a red light, glare at the oncoming drivers, inch your way into the intersection, and floor it when the green light from the other direction turns yellow. |
Booze
Quote:
P(which totally changed my Lilly Pulitzer experience of New England)J |
Booze
Quote:
|
Booze
Quote:
Quote:
|
yesterday's article
Quote:
All of this was cc:d to someone else. I don't know who is whom so I don't want to name names. Anyway, it was that person to whom it was cc:d who came back and said something about cautioning me from attacking the integrity of one of their reporters in a public forum. He's also the one who said the petty and childish stuff. I prefer to address reasonable concerns, so I figured no big deal to make sure y'all got it was an opinion. Besides, I also knew what your reaction would be to understanding he actually had the nerve to ask me to do that...so win win yes? Someone asked if he said it was an opinion piece. No, I don't think so. He (the second guy) basically said they felt the article was fair and that it was a fair summary of the reasons, apparently those reasons were childish and petty for the most part. I'm honestly not sure what he thinks our reasons were. I have to wonder though who would actually go to the trouble I and everyone else involved went through to create this place, never mind the trouble you folks went through to follow us around to four different locations, just so we could curse. That's moronic. Anyway, the first guy was always polite, he just said he thought I hadn't separated opinion and fact well enough. I disagree with him, obviously. Actually though since I said I would say something I'm not sure why he bothered to respond. Maybe a last word kind of thing? I don't know. |
American Movie
Quote:
|
Booze
Quote:
|
Booze
Quote:
STOP IT PAIGOW! You're giving me terrible acid flashbacks. Oh, my aching head.... Speaking of Patriots' varsity jackets, my office resides right next to the apparent epicenter of Boston's BIG DIG. Each morning, I start my day to the cacophony of a dozen jackhammers furiously pounding rock to dust right outside my office. Although I'm actually quite high up, the noise levels somehow remain at near calamatous proportions until quitting time (4:00) for the damn construction workers. Needless to say, all this noise wreaks havoc with my billable intentions, reducing my Magna Chartas to mindless drivel. A well trained team of squirrels could generate papers equivalent to mine during the hours of construction. Now, however, I am thinking that I can buy off these guys by appealing to their more basal desires. Perhaps a few cases of Zima and some unrestricted access to some of the looser secretaries of my firm could at last bring me the peace and quiet that I so desperately crave. Any other Big Dig survivors out there? How are you coping with the noise? Seven (eh?) of Nine |
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them
Quote:
O'Reilly's point was that it's not a big deal whether he misspoke and called a Peabody award a Polk award. Franken's point was that O'Reilly is an inveterate liar. As I see it, the problem is that O'Reilly just won't live up to his tabloid past. Perhaps he made the mistake because the show won the award after O'Reilly had left the show. O'Reilly also had said that "we won a Peabody." This use of the second person is also deceiving. He didn't win anything. Of course, if I went to Syracuse, I could say something like, "We won the NCAA Final" and no one would question my meaning. The same wouldn't be true if my old firm won a $100 billion judgment and I said, "We won the biggest case of the year." I should have watched the O'Reilly Factor yesterday to see his reaction. Franken wondered aloud how the incident would be edited. My reaction after watching the whole thing was as follows (1) I'm not buying books from either O'Reilly or Franken, (2) Molly Ivins (the other panelist) comes off as Yoda, and (3) Pat Schroeder (wasn't she a presidential contender at some point?) was as ineffective as Cartman's mom ("Now boys, play nice together") at handling the situation. I suppose this should be on the Politics Board, but whatever.... |
Booze
Quote:
I'm thinking about entering some orienteering races this summer. Having had to figure out a new way to/from my office on a weekly and sometimes daily basis, I figure a race where they give a map and a compass should be pretty easy. |
Booze
Quote:
|
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them
Quote:
|
Monster House
Anyone see this show? It was hilarious. Brought to you by the folks from Monster Garage, we got to see a bunch a guys transform an ordinary house into a Theme House. The theme? Cars! The kitchen looked like a garage, with tool chest drawers and a pneumatic egg beater. The dining room table was a car hood. The kids room had a sofa made on the back of a Honda de Sol. Plus much, much more! Must See TV!
|
Booze
Quote:
|
What do you drink?
Quote:
Based on what I have seen at findlaw and here, I think that law.com article and reporter are full of crappola! What passes for content at findlaw looks to me like the inside of the holding tank of a Porta-potty! ole! Cantinflas |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:54 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com