Jump to content

NameAlreadyInUse

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    2729
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NameAlreadyInUse

  1. 8 hours ago, Jhawkmvp said:

    In Kansas, as a Gen Xer to play sports in high school required a physical, including the good old "turn your head and cough" mass physical that F250 experienced. Middle school did not, at least when I was in it.  I assume it is the same now. In my town, lucky students got their parents to take them to their family doctor and the rest of us, who were poor or had cheap parents, went to the locker room for the free sports physical and lined up completely naked to go through processing. Basically a bunch of doctors and coaches. Coaches did shit like weighing and height that anyone could do and the doctors were spread around the room.  One checked for hernias, one blood pressure, heart beat, etc. The worst is for some reason they inspected our fucking assholes. No finger, but the whole bend over and spread your cheeks prison style. That was the most degrading, since you had a bunch of other dudes standing in line behind you. No idea what girls had to go through for their free physical day. After that fun experience as a freshman, I figured out that if I waited to decide to play sports until after the mass free physical day, that happened a week or two before HS football practice started, my parents would pay for the family doctor to do the physical. So my freshman year was the only time I had to do the free group physical.   In the immortal words of that simpleton GWB, "That was some weird shit."

    Wow, sounds like your school district athletics department was set up by a pedophile.  Good lord.  

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. Holy shit.

    Ok what's worse optics:

    1) Doubling down on lax laws after the death of multiple children and then expelling the black members that raised a stink about those lax laws (while keeping the white woman who joined them)

    2) joining a chant with protesters about those lax laws while being black.

    Taco Bell guy, want to give us an update on your view of optics now that this has played out?

    Also, what's your stance on 1) Pissing in the seat of a fellow member, 2) child molesters?  According to information learned today, it sounds like neither of those are as big a deal as chanting with protesters while being black.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  3. 48 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

    Nashville home prices are approaching Austin levels and the entire state is much higher than neighboring states. 

    For politics, I can't support the 3 yahoos that are fixin to be voted out.  Stop shouting, do something substantive.  Neither will work of course but being a street hoodlum is bad optics. 

    Which optics are worse?

    Doubling down on terrible policies after those policies led to the death of multiple children?  Or chanting with protesters?

    • Hook 'Em 3
  4. Yeah for a lot of kids, getting that physical is the first time they are showing their dick to someone on purpose.  It's not a pleasant experience.

    The asshole side of me agrees with Brisket, that we should absolutely be pushing to reconfirm the gender of every kid for every game just to make this as difficult as possible for these assholes to get away with this.  But the part of me that remembers having to show my dick to my doctor in 7th grade is like "Yeah, that's a terrible idea." 

    Luckily in our school we only had to line up in the gym for lice checks and scoliosis checks.  We went to the doctor to get the hernia check, so we had that going for us, which was nice.

  5. On 3/29/2023 at 2:43 PM, YGIFS said:

    100,000 dead from drag show?  Wow.  We should do something about that.  

    I mean if that's just from drag shows, how many die at shows/movies/concerts/theaters overall?  Say 1 in 100 performances nationwide is a drag show, that means we're losing 10mm people overall just from the performing arts?  Somebody has got to put a stop to this.  Our entire population will be completely gone by the time "Top Gun Maverick: The Musical" is off Broadway.  

    I think some people are misunderstanding what the word slay means when a drag queen is using it.

    image.gif.388366cd08a7d7898dbae8122cd3f410.gifimage.gif.66ca8da13572667f7e680a6fd5072e1b.gifimage.gif.8229b647d7a31dbf005f771f7f056fa0.gifimage.gif.1a8d37089ea8861b65679cf4a240412e.gif\

    None of those are referring to actually killing anyone.  Maybe this has all just been a slang misunderstanding after all?

    • Haha 1
  6. 21 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

    TikTok is now the preferred search engine for 13-25 year olds in the U.S. If they want to know something, they don’t Google it— they TikTok it. If you can’t see the potential for exploitation by a hostile foreign power, I don’t know what to tell you. 
     

    TikTok is also collecting vast amounts of biometric data, preferences, psychological profiles, and using that information to develop cognitive weapons. They don’t hide that they are investing in this. 
     

     

    And Facebook is the preferred search engine for the olds.  I see the potential for exploitation, in fact I've been watching it going on for a good long while right here with US based companies as well, and I think Facebook is playing a major role (along with Fox) in why so many of us have lost our parents to the cult of the GOP. I don't really see the thing you are concerned about being different because I've already watched Facebook sell to whoever wanted to buy it, including foreign governments.  So why should I care if I'm lining the pockets of some Singaporean CEO vs Zuckerberg if the end result is that governments against the US are still going to wind up with the same data? 

    What I'm getting at is that if we're going to be banning social media from China, then we should be banning Facebook from selling data to non-US citizens, and banning US citizens from sending that information outside the borders of the US.  If we're not ALSO doing that, then China will just buy the data from Facebook and carry on with their plans unabated.  If the data is what's important, then we should be protecting the data, no matter how it is collected.  It's as simple as that.  Until such time as we decide to protect the data no matter where it's being collected, I don't really understand the picking of winners and losers among the data collectors.  That really shouldn't be the business of our government.

  7. 1 hour ago, kevwun said:

    It's been a Chinese spying app since it was launched.  The government is finally getting around to getting rid of it.

    I'm sure they are getting a lot of good intel about me, now that they know that I tend to like all things about people getting startled, or dogs doing cool/funny stuff, or Karens getting owned.  

    I don't have any more heartburn over the Chinese government having this information than Zuckerberg or Musk.  

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. Satchel's post above comports with my experience growing up in the SBC.  I never actually got sexually assaulted, but I'm 99% sure that my youth pastor was working on me for awhile while I was in high school "to save my soul."  He eventually figured out I wasn't going to play with his balls and stopped asking me to go out for a ride with him.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Rage+1 2
  9. 3 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

    Most cases involve disputes about two different and non-compatible versions of the facts.   

    We do not charge 50% of the parties and their lawyers with perjury because one side lost 

    So if your client says she had the green light, you still bring the suit even if the other driver and a disinterested eye witness say she had the red. 

    You might lose, but you might not.  

    The key is, do you know for sure the client is lying when she says  she had the green light?    If the client says she had the red light, but she will say it was green in court, a lawyer bringing that case will likely suffer significant sanctions if that ever comes out.

    If there are 10 disinterested witnesses saying your client ran the red light, there is a high likelihood you will lose, but the lawyer does not know what color the light was before the accident. And our job is not to believe the other side ‘s witnesses.    You will not be sanctioned if you bring that case to trial and the judge or jury does not believe your client.

    So the question about Sydney’s filings is whether her factual situation resembles the first scenario closer than the second scenario.  Because the facts and the allegations under our system are to be reviewed and determined under the crucible of trial. Whether she is sanctioned will require an investigation of how readily apparent it was that the allegations were false, and more importantly, that she was absolutely aware that they were false when she made them.

    Put another way, I should suffer no discipline because I believe my client had the green light when there is no definitive proof that my client is lying and the light was really red.   If however there were three security cameras who caught the accident in real time, and all three showed that my client had the red light, and I knew that, then I should be sanctioned for bringing the suit.
    I’m not sure if this helps. I’m just trying to explain that it is not black and white.

     

    Yes I understand this.  But anyone stupid enough to believe a letter written to them by a person who claims to be beheaded and who got their information "from the wind" is not a competent person and should be removed from practice on the grounds that she is no longer mentally capable of advocating for any client. In this case, if she truly believed the story she was telling she should be in a loony bin.  If she truly didn't believe it, she should be sanctioned severely for filing multiple cases despite knowing she was not telling the truth.  Fit for the loony bin doesn't appear to be a sanctionable offense, though, based on what you lawyers are telling us.

    This isn't a dispute about facts in a he said/she said fashion, this is a dispute about facts where the reason she supposedly believed the losing fact pattern was because a beheaded person told her about them in a letter, based on what that beheaded person heard in the wind.  Let's keep in mind, if you are fucking beheaded you can't hear shit anywhere because you don't have ears anymore, even if you could somehow survive a beheading.

    • Rage+1 1
  10. If you believe a random letter from a person who tells you they have been beheaded and they heard what they heard on the wind, and you choose to actually believe it, you should be deemed incompetent to be an attorney.  If you don't believe it, but move forward as if you do, you should be be up for discipline due to lying.

    The fact that only the second one is actually true is the one that is hard to believe for many of us.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  11. 20 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

    I’m on the verge of telling my mom that I can only conclude that she chooses to get all her “news” from Fox News and Newsmax because she wants them to lie to her. Despite what she might say, she doesn’t care about truth. Deep down she knows they’re lying to her and she doesn’t care. It’s just easier that way. 

    So I tried this awhile ago.  She didn't like it.  She didn't disagree.  She kept right on watching and believing.  Good luck.

  12. Craziest part of that story are those who are like, "I started taking this and I have 1,000 things wrong with me that weren't before, what should I do?"  

    What the fuck you mean what should you do?  What you should do is stop being a stupid idiot, you moron.

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 1
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
×
×
  • Create New...