transient

I don't understand... if having sex with relatives is punishable by jail time how is every native Alabaman not incarcerated? Are they all just out on parole? FYI, apparently in_cest trips the language filter.

To summarize... Ranch dipped hard on feels good? To each their own, I guess. Anymoooooore Noooo ooo o

When I first moved to NOLA one of the employees at a local grocery store struck up a conversation with me because of my Bills hat and told me Bad Santa used to give an intern $500-1000/wk to keep his desk stocked with junk food. It just so happens my brother-in-law is friends with one of the Saints’ trainers who joined us at a Mardi Gras parade, so I asked him about it. He burst out laughing and confirmed it. He wouldn’t give me particulars, but the impression I got was the dude was a walking punchline. He apparently also used to order thousands of dollars in rare wines at that grocery store, which he didn’t always show up to collect. Point being, cry me a river about providing for your family you millionaire gluttonous sloth.

How much was Allen's limited "aggressiveness" dictated by throwing to Kelvin Benjamin, who refused to fight for the ball and would make a better NBA backboard than an NFL WR, for 7 of his 11 starts.

Black Keys - The Big Come Up (with the exception of 240 Years Before Your Time, which is a few minutes of nonsense and 20 minutes of dead air) The Revivalists - Men Amongst Mountains Soundgarden - Bad Motorfinger Any Beastie Boys, Rage Against the Machine, or Nirvana album Foo Fighters - Sonic Highway Nine Inch Nails - Pretty Hate Machine or Broken Red Hot Chili Peppers - Blood, Sugar, Sex, Magic Social Distortion - White Light, White Heat, White Trash Stone Temple Pilots - Core Alice in Chains - Facelift Not all recent or often, but when I listen to them it’s typically the whole album start to finish

How about Frerotte?

Kelly... though it may be copyright infringement. You'd have to check with Kelly the Dog. If she turns out to have a bad temperament you could always name her Brady the Miserable B word. "B word" courtesy of the language filter, BTW.

I would have thought the content of my posts would have given some reassurance. I guess discussing the merits of Gugny's eggplant doesn't scream super genius, after all. Huh... who knew?

Gluon self-interaction. I may be dumb but I'm not a total idiot...

I looked, but I couldn't find a cornichon emoji.

My mistake... I thought I was calling your dick an eggplant.

DC Tom’s explanation of... whatever the hell it was he was babbling about upthread Also, how does one hold a camera and film themselves with their... you know... ?.

Probably... and unless she was endangering herself or others, who’s the dick that called the cops?

That's odd... I guess I must have tripped and fallen into the "punchable face" thread.

I was being facetious. I was the one who posted the Botched clip in response to the Chihuahua comment. It took me some time but I finally found another that supports your coin purse theory. Watch at your own risk... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0DcF8svT_Kg

I’m a step behind, here... is this an analogy for a little person or are you actually referring to a Chihuahua?

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/e05d1b1a-853e-44f3-951f-2783172bb9d2

If Sophie Turner looked like a sociopath...

She’s got some angular facial features. And the colored contacts and makeup make her look pretty artificial. Wonder if her boyfriend looks anything like Forrest Whittaker. What say you, Fergus? And even if she’s not a dude, I’m a no. I don’t have the patience or the energy for bats**t crazy anymore...

It depends on whether or not Olivia Culpo puts out on a first date. If not, then definitely Helen Mirren. If so... coin flip.

Let me make sure I have this straight, just in case... if I meet your wife I’m not supposed to tell her that you think she’s a loser?

20 years old... DAMN! Talk about an old soul. Thanks for sharing. I'll have to look out for him when he inevitably finds his way to NOLA.

Again, the problem with sites like this, as well as sites that have a clear agenda to defend pit bulls, is in addition to not being objective, they're completely inconsistent. Which data set do you believe above, the one that reports 284 fatalities over 12 years or the one that reports 295 over 32 years? The top site is clearly anti-pit bull by the graphic, and that becomes more clear when you look at the site content. The bottom link is the equivalent of MSN's popsugar spam, and if you go to the study that it references the author starts off by defending his approach against pit bull apologists, which to me is already a red flag about his bias. He tailors the data analysis specifically to how dangerous pit bulls are, and he lists in the notes on the pit bull fatalities such things as people who were hit by cars, people who were hit by trains, people who died of heart attacks, people who died of infections, a dog in Tijuana despite the fact that this is a study in US and Canada, 2 dead men that were determined by forensics to be dead then subsequently eaten by dogs, a child that was strangled by a leash, several instances of homicide where the dogs were either blamed by the person convicted without any evidence to confirm it or thought to play a role somehow (including being fed the body), two cocaine overdoses that were subsequently eaten by dogs, instances where it was clear they weren't sure what the dog was but it was assume to be a pit bull anyway, and one person who was hit in the head by a pan thrown by his brother to break up a dog fight. In fairness, 3 or 4 of these "cases" were not used in final tally of the numbers presented, which raises the question of "why put them in the paper?" If you're inclined to think "it doesn't matter which data set you look at, either one is still too much" consider the previous paragraph and ask yourself how quickly you could inflate those numbers if you take that sort of approach. Also, any breed that the author apparently doesn't think would behave this way on it's own and was part of a multi-dog attack has language that makes it seem like it was coerced by the pit bull(s)... unless it was a Rottweiler, then the language makes it clear that they're both equally at fault. The author then goes on to take an almost apologetic discussion of the numbers associated with German Shepards. In addition, his manner of looking through classified ads to see what dogs are available in order to determine percentage of the total dog population that a breed makes up seems very likely to significantly under represent certain breeds and over represent others. I'm not disputing many of the points that were made intelligently and thoughtfully by posters representing the full spectrum of opinions on this topic in this thread. I just have a hard time accepting it when pseudo-statistics are passed off as objective analysis.