Jump to content

DDD Dad

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    13470
  • Joined

Posts posted by DDD Dad

  1. 16 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    People who immigrated legally often wait YEARS in their home countries before acquiring a Green Card. Those that organized and joined the caravan are trying to abuse and overwhelm the asylum process so that clueless bleeding hearts like hayden can wail at the system and put pressure on the government.

    Some do, others don't.  Some ride rickety makeshift rafts across the Florida Straits, others from Haiti, fleeing desperate economic conditions and political, racial, or religious persecution.  Some walk hundreds of miles from Central America.

    The laws address each of these situations, including the one you mentioned (staying home waiting).  Each means is legal.

     

  2. 15 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    As I figured, I’m a hypocrite in your eyes not because of any contradictory statements or actions that I have made but rather because I violate YOUR ETHICS of how YOU THINK I SHOULD FEEL OR ACT with respect to the caravan all the while ignoring MY EXPERIENCES AND FEELINGS as a 2nd generation.  I have an aunt who left Iran after husband got in trouble with the Iranian government but did so LEGALLY and immigrated to Canada instead of the US because they were able to get a visa and permanent status easier there. Everyone I know with Iranian heritage here immigrated legally. Why the fuck should I be sympathetic to these people proudly and defiantly breaking our laws? If the members of the caravan are too stupid, uneducated and/or poor to navigate the means of legal immigration then that is even more reason to discourage hordes of poor, uneducated people who don’t speak English from coming to this country! 

    Immigration to you is an abstract concept while I have lived it through my family. Your position as you have stated numerous times is to let ALL of them in. From my experience, that is a ridiculous stance since my family and friends didot legally. Finally, my own family didn’t flee shit. My parents came here 5 years before the Revolution. I have said that numerous times yet you never pick up on it because it doesn’t fit into your imagined narrative about me.

    You do understand that seeking asylum is a LEGAL means of immigration, right?

    You are advocating making that LEGAL means harder (less "attractive") because of your own value judgment as to these people versus those who have come before or who might come from different places (non "shit hole" countries) (no racist).

  3. 4 minutes ago, pepper brooks said:

    fair enough.  I wasn't attempting to make the claim that their wine would necessarily age, and was worth being a "library wine", just offering one counterpoint that perhaps one could be aged if need be as I had a real world example of one that was aged with positive results.  I frankly, don't know that much about SO other than it generally is pretty tasty young.  

    I don't think I took it that way, either.  Just offering data points for folks.  SO (particularly the Napa) is a controversial wine among oenophiles; it tends to be very popular and well liked among general population but scorned by many wine snobs (hence my pickle juice joke).

    Bert, the pickle juice comment is one that goes back many years among many on some of the wine boards to describe the Napa Silver Oak.  Many find it has a kind of pickle juice flavor profile that I think may be based on the fact that the wine is aged in American rather than French Oak barrels.  Some find that flavor very off putting.  I'm not a big fan of Silver Oak anymore but I did like it a lot when I first started getting into wine about 20-25 years ago.  My tastes changed as I got more into it (for example I bought a shit ton of Australian stuff early on based on print reviews and ended up selling off most of it just a few years later when I realized I really didn't like the style).

  4. 21 minutes ago, Bert Orange said:

    So the facts are out there, the 2006 is a Jereboam and have 2 Magnums of the 2008.  All of them are Alexander Valley. According to wine tracker, both vintages are peaking right now. So I’m troubled as to what to do. I could a) source some Bordeaux’s on secondary market and b) open all of them with Coravin and keep seals in tact for empty celebration and drink instead the Bordeaux with them at 21st birthdays

     

    damnit. 

    I wouldn't kick myself too hard if I were you.  Even if the wine is peaking now in those formats they'll still be really nice for a long time after.  If they fall apart, it won't be the end of the world.  By way of example, last night I opened a bottle of 99 Flor de Pingus that I had stored away and forgotten, to celebrate my youngest returning from Austin for Christmas break.  According to Parker it was way past its prime, but it was spectacular.

    Do a little research on the vintages and see if you can find something good from a region that has a better/longer aging curve, but keep in mind the different styles of wine will result in a very different tasting experience.

    FWIW I still have a bunch of Napa cabs going back into the 90's and have only found a few to have totally fallen apart by the time I got to them.  I still have a double magnum of Robert Foley Claret from 2005 that I can't seem to pick the right occasion to open, and I have bottles of Montelena Estate and Philip Togni going back to the mid-90's.  Those two are examples of wines that hold up for 20+ years.   Another good one from Napa that does much better with age is Dunn Howell Mountain. 

  5. 1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

    you are a product of parents fleeing an oppressive regime. yes, that immigration is legal, as is what these people are doing. yet you want to treat them like dirt, rather than like human beings. 

    also, you didn't answer why ankle monitors are not enough. 

    because you are a fucking hypocrite who does not want to actually stop and think about why people engage in diaspora DESPITE being a product of it yourself.

    hypocrite.

    Hey man, I got mine.  Fuck everyone who wants to come in behind me.

  6. 3 minutes ago, Bert Orange said:

    Also I checked. It’s actually the Sonoma. Not the Napa. My mistake. 

    I think the Alexander is a better all around wine, and it's generally lower priced, which is a nice bonus.

  7. 2 minutes ago, pepper brooks said:

    I had a 1990 Silver Oak Napa Cab about 4 years ago that was absolutely spectacular.  Of course that was time when Napa made very different cabernet.  I think it was about 13% alcohol.  Maybe 13.5.  It had that signature prune like pallet, but very silky balanced and smooth.  It had aged remarkably well for a Napa Cab, and from a fairly unheralded vintage.  

    Silver Oak Napa was never a wine intended to be built for aging.  I recall visiting the winery back in the late 90's and going through a tour where it was explained that they aged the wines in house both an extra year in barrels and then in bottles before release with the idea being that it would be at peak on or shortly after release.

    Anyway, in Jeroboam form it will probably be fine for a long time so long as it is stored properly.  But if you're really wanting something nice for your kid's 21st birthday I'd suggest looking at Bordeaux, Burgundy, or the northern Rhone. 

    • Like 2
  8. Most impressive. Daughter born the same year. While not as impressive, I bought a jeraboam of Silver Oak Napa and had it inscribed for her 21st birthday. Figured I could get her hooked on my expensive habit and ruin her. 

    Better drink that pickle juice soon.

     

    Silver Oak Napa does not age very well. The Sonoma (Alexander Valley) is more age worthy IMO. However I’m not a fan of heavy toasted American Oak in my cabs.

  9. Pancho gets off on calling people racists. I’m disappointed he hasn’t called me a racist, fascist so far today in his posts. He’s merely hinted at it. Shit or get off the pot Pancho.

    You might not be a racist. I don’t know you and can’t see into your heart.

     

    But if you can’t see that some of your posts can be inferred as racist I don’t know what to tell you.

  10. 4 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    Take a look at the pictures Nicholas Kristof took accompanying his piece in the Times today about what is going on in Yemen. Pics of starving kids. We have no business funding Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen. Doesn’t advance our national interests at all.

    Remind me how this relates to the Caravan and our current immigration (or more better termed "no brown people immigration") policy?

  11. 36 minutes ago, Caddox said:

    Well you either have to be selected in your fraternity or you have to go through a long interview process with an alumni board to even get invited. Are you telling me your son fell into one of those two categories and in the end turned it down?

    If I recall correctly he was approached through his fraternity but indicated he wasn't interested.  

  12. 8 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

    lol I think Malcolm is referring to the "Young Guard" which has nearly 200,000 members.  What exactly does that prove?

    That the Russians are seeking to infiltrate and influence our political system (and everyone else's)?  It takes a lot of people to accomplish that.

  13. I keep seeing Catastrophe mentioned. I watched S1 when it was initially released and I thought it was fine, but the two leads were so abrasive toward each other - to the point of toxic - by the finale that it felt like a relief to see the season end. That post-wedding scene where he calls her a "fucking bitch" as she storms out was as uncomfortable as anything I can remember watching the past few years.

    Yeah we haven’t started season 2 mostly because the end of the last season was so uncomfortable.
  14. It has to be Mueller.

    Blasey-Ford was a huge story but limited in time.  Trump has dominated the headlines all year but it's too soon after 2016.  Black Panther was a relatively minor story albeit groundbreaking for many reasons.  Khashoggi same thing.  Huge story, but has only been in headlines for a few weeks.  March for Our Lives protesters seems like it could be a good pick, but that story too has been overshadowed in recent months since we're becoming numb to mass shootings.  I guess Putin could get the nod but I think they would pick Mueller first.  South Korean president?  Eh.

    Meghan Markle?  Really?  No.

     

  15. 1 hour ago, lemonlime said:

    Why would the statute of limitations be tolled?  There would need to be a specific law tolling the statute of limitations, and Congress as far as I'm aware hasn't enacted a law stating that the statutes of limitations for crimes committed by presidents are tolled until the president leaves office.

    I'm not a criminal defense lawyer but I know that there are tolling provisions for civil actions that address things like being outside of the court's jurisdiction, and a quick Google search to the DoJ's website indicates that federal criminal limitations are tolled while a defendant is a fugitive, and an order of tolling can be obtained in certain circumstances (not specifically addressing any official immunity).  

    I think you're right, however, at least just based on my quick search that there doesn't seem to be anything directly on point.  Just wondering if this might be something that could be subject to creation by some type of judicial review (but that itself might constitute an ex post facto creation of law--just spitballing here).

    9 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

    Certainly sealing indictments handed down from a grand jury is one way to circumvent statute of limitations.  But if you can indict and seal for a sitting POTUS, it seems to follow you can indict and serve a sitting POTUS in real time. 

    My limited understanding of the DoJ policy around not indicting a sitting POTUS has to do with avoiding the national disruption to daily affairs and duties needed from a POTUS, not that a POTUS is above the law.  Sealed indictments would not interfere. 

    Either way, I think we're going to find out about that DoJ policy holding water.  I think we'll also discover that Mueller knows everything and can prove it cold with signals intelligence, financial paper trails, and cooperating witnesses.

    I tend to agree with this.  If it's simply a matter of DoJ policy, then Mueller will seek (or he's already sought) an indictment and either keep it sealed or release it and serve the President.

    Interesting times, to be sure.

×
×
  • Create New...