Jump to content


Full Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. I saw that. He works at a commercial brokerage called Rein something. Her name is Melissa Rein Lively. So his FIL is his boss. That's got to be a little awkward.
  2. I have an idea, but what's an "fmg base"? I'm guessing foreign medical graduate and/or some variant of fucking new guy.
  3. I wouldn't try to get all flex-y. Whether there's a DTPA and whether it can be asserted against the state is going to depend on the state, so you're liable to just look foolish. Using the legislator in your soon-to-be district sounds like a great way to proceed.
  4. My main interest in infotainment is music. My CTS had a 500GB HDD, which I thought was a great solution. But, since CDs and mp3s are passe, now I'm stuck with streaming, so Android Auto was kind of important. Or I guess bluetooth would have worked.
  5. T-mobile seems to be screwing the pooch on the regular folding in Sprint's network and customers.
  6. Are they your only pair of ostrich? Obviously, to most, ostrich is pretty thin and flexible, but also durable. But I read somewhere that the holes in the bumps where the quills were function as ventilation. Makes perfect sense, but it had never occurred to me. Those Tony Lamas upthread are noice. It's a shame how far the Berkshire Hathaway boots have fallen.
  7. Yeah, I'm guessing county judges and mayors more or less have carte blanche at this point.
  8. Why not both. People with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia are extremely susceptible to drug abuse. This is one of those examples that amused and infuriated me at first and then made me kind of sad. Sad for her and sad that I was laughing at it. That her insanity is focused for the moment on Trump and Qanon is a relatively small part of the picture.
  9. What kind of noise are you experiencing? Creaking? Popping? Based on what I read about play in the crown/steerer and crown/stanchion joints, I took the wheel off, turned it upside down and "split" the fork and torqued it around and couldn't get it to make noise. Didn't notice any play in it, either, although I wasn't specifically looking for that. It cycles up and down normally and noiselessly, but when the front wheel is getting jounced around, particularly in a lateral or twisty fashion (as opposed to just going over bumps up and down), it creaks and pops a lot. Seems to do it, too, when the shock is compressed/ing. Turning the bars doesn't cause it, unless that contributes to a twisty condition, like I'm going over a rock or reacting to a deflection from something. I can bounce around like the beginning of or a lame bunny hop and it doesn't make much noise. It's weird. I know the upper seals are dirty af. Which means it's dirty af inside, too. I have never seen any oil coming out of it anywhere, but I suspect that it's dryer than it should be. Last year I had the bike in for a general purpose maintenance and they said it was fine. And who knows what could be jacked up inside as a result of the dirt, which is why I hesitate to DIY. The other day when I rode, it seemed to quiet down after a couple of bigger hits, as if it got down into the oil bath and lubed stuff up. Today it wasn't so bad either, but that was probably a product of the flatness of the trail. EDIT: Hahahaha. I went out and tried to do what wd40 mentioned by myself. So I'm holding the front brake and wobbling the front wheel around and stuff. And there's this kind of quiet thumping that's different from anything I have heard before, but it's sort of resonating through the frame like bearing type issues do. I clamp the back brake and do it some more. More thump thump. What fresh hell is this? Then I notice it's coming from higher than the hubs or bottom bracket and it's my under-seat bag moving and thumping against the seatpost.
  10. Rode in pretty similar conditions this morning starting about 11 or so. Was great for about six miles, breezy, overcast, a few sprinkles, hero dirt. But toward the end of the last loop, it got still and kind of gross and I just lost all motivation to go around again, even just one loop. Also, tons of mosquitos at the trailhead so I couldn't cool down to go again, had to GTFO. Didn't even ride an hour, but got a bit of a workout anyway.
  11. Are some municipalities insured or indemnified by TML, as far as you can tell? Or some other insurer? That's why I would, in fantasy-land at least, like to see some state law fixes for this problem. Even without QI, there's quite a bit of tiptoeing that has to be done with the federal constitutional tort.
  12. The whole "romancing the drink" issue is a little bit implicated by my love for fizzy water. A lot of us find that if you're in a drinky social situation, you can get a club soda with lime so as not to stick out like a sore thumb. Until you figure out that most people don't notice or give a shit whether you're drinking or not (and if they do, it's highly likely that they're working on a problem of their own). From that, I learned that I liked fizzy water and started buying it first as club soda, then seltzer water, and then Topo and all the stuff available now. By the time I became a real regular consumer of fizzy water, I was pretty secure in my sobriety. But, at least as far as I can remember, a nice cold carbonated water is the closest facsimile to a cold beer on a hot day. For that reason, I sometimes hesitate to recommend it to the newly sober.
  13. Since you do attempt partially to make a living off these cases, who pays if you take a judgment or settle?
  14. Haha yeah, nailed it. I can totally see that.
  15. Relapses happen, sometimes even kind of by accident. Don't let it bury you. Kudos for your honesty. Also, pro-tip. The general rule on NA beer is a) it still has some alcohol in it and probably enough to goose those neural pathways and start up a craving if you guzzle them; and b) even if it was completely alcohol-free, it is "romancing the drink," which is not a good idea for the newly sober.
  16. I am aware. I might submit that those cases aren't very good under existing law. And existing law sucks, but there it is.
  17. I loved him, was ecstatic when he came to Dallas. Didn't stick around long, though.
  18. Thanks, gents. I enjoy going back and forth with you and was kind of wondering if I was taking crazy pills. I try to clarify or restate my arguments if someone seems to be not getting them, but I guess that's belaboring the point, or dying on a hill, so I should just STFU.
  19. I blew it on the Bivens/1983 thing. Flat wrong. I admit it. I get shit wrong from time to time and am usually free to admit when I do. I am also generally not going to call people flat wrong for having a different opinion. I'll argue with them, as much to test my opinion as theirs. But I get the issue with interlocutory appeal. It's a pain in the ass, but it's the nature of immunity as discussed above. I submit that you failed to get what I was saying. It's a "secondary" wrong. The first wrong is the standard for granting immunity. Or the immunity itself. If you have any type of immunity from suit, though, you're pretty much going to have to have an interlocutory appeal. I have actually done these cases, too, but not in the cop context. And we lost every one of them on QI, having predicted that we probably would. Thankfully, I have never had to make a living off them.
  20. One might even argue that on a narrow-ish, dispositive issue like immunity, having an appeal early in the process beats the snot out of trying the case, taking a judgment, defending the judgment on a wide range of issues on appeal, and getting poured out on the immunity issue. In my practice area, there's a preliminary ruling that's potentially dispositive and sometimes the parties stipulate that the plaintiff can't win with a certain ruling and go to final judgment immediately in order to get to what amounts to an interlocutory appeal. But yeah, I get that it sucks. But it's the nature of immunity. It's not like an ordinary defense, in fact it's not really a "defense." A funny-ish thing, sovereign immunity was originally based on the idea that the "King/government can do no wrong." But that idea quickly yielded to "yeah, it can, but it can't be bothered by all these pesky subjects and citizens."
  21. Totally agree that its current incarnation leads to absurd results. There was a time when it wasn't much of a barrier to excessive force claims, as the constitutional right to be free of being killed or injured was obvious. One thing worth mentioning. You said you thought it was created at a time when crime was high. I don't think crime was high then, but more importantly, I don't think the Supreme Court is that sensitive to those kind of practicalities. Certainly isn't in other areas of the law. What it does hit on, though, is one of my pet peeves about Supreme Court justices, of both political persuasions. And that is that they tend to have spent large chunks of their careers in government service. Not only as prosecutors, but usually as some sort of senior official in the DOJ or another government agency. I think they tend to be too deferential or susceptible to government arguments and interests at the expense of the actual litigants and actual lawsuits and the general effect of laws on the people.
  22. I don't think I can watch this. There's a show on Showtime or Starz, the name of which I can't remember, that is about exonerating the innocent. It's infuriating, but it focuses mostly on the efforts of the investigators and lawyers to free people and less so on the events and actions that led to their wrongful conviction, so it's tolerable, if just barely.
  23. Couldn't have said it better. You hear in AA sometimes that a shorthand for the program is to "grow the fuck up." There's also a notion that your emotional development or intelligence becomes sort of frozen as of the time you started drinking pathologically. But Hornius Emeritus' story kind of illustrates what we say about the test of whether you're an alcoholic. First, do the consequences make it seem like stopping (or moderating) drinking is necessary or at least a very good idea, and second, can you stay stopped (or moderated)? The catch is that even an alcoholic will feel pretty good about everything for a couple of weeks or months after stopping drinking. It's later that the problems or compulsion arises again, if active recovery measures aren't taken. It's pretty obvious that many surlsters are regular to heavy drinkers. I'm guessing that no more than the usual 10% or so are problem drinkers/alcoholics.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
  • Create New...