Rob's House

Is this a joke?

Hopefully it's just a down year that helps drop his price in contract negotiations.

I can't stand girls who don't want to get on top, then still have the nerve to be disappointed when the show ends early. I mean, WTF?

This was posted by B-man in the Christie thread, but I thought it should be mentioned in this one too

If that's clearly not a fumble then Orton was shafted with a fumble that should have irrefutable been an incomplete pass a few games back. The tuck rule basically said if the ball slips out when pump faking (or aborting the pass) then it's not a fumble. Brady had already completed that motion, brought the ball back to his body, and put his other hand on the ball before it was knocked loose. The language was cumbersome enough that it's plausibly understandable for a former player of middling intelligence to believe that, but I can't believe a lawyer like Goodell, who presumably has some experience reading and interpreting statutes, doesn't know better. The league understandably misconstrued the rule after the fact to protect itself from having to admit their idiot ref sent the wrong team to the Superbowl.

I have seen it, and perhaps "responsible" isn't the best word for it, but it sums it up as well as any word I can think of. Her situation sounds more to me like a guy I know who is now living out of his car and pan handling because he can't hold a job due to emotional problems that prevent him from being ale to work with people. It's different because he has some marketable skills, but in neither case is a minimum wage hike a realistic or efficient solution. I'm not really sure how anyone who has ever worked, even at a minimum wage job, for any length of time can't see the opportunity to at least get to around the level they're talking about. Even if they grew up poor. If you're bagging groceries or flipping burgers for $7/hr is the opportunity of assistant manager or cashier really that elusive? It seems these issues run deeper than mere lack of opportunity.

From minimum wage or low wage? Can she really not get a job paying $12-15/hr, and if not is it due to her situation caring for her disabled son and/or some form of mental illness? That's really what I see from these arguments. Anywhere I've worked there have always been useless employees that wash out and no one feels sorry for them. But in liberal la la land they project some made up story upon the statistics that are those people, and buy and sell it as a story of the virtuous but unfortunate downtrodden. It's fantasy.

Thank you. I agree. But this 3rd Inning mother!@#$er won't do the procedure until I pay him.

I know and have known a lot of people on those programs. I've also worked with a lot of people who can't hold a job for more than 6 weeks because they have a horrible attitude and a feeling of entitlement. What I've never seen, or know of anyone else having seen, is a responsible person perpetually stuck in a minimum wage job. Not one.

Fu©k you ass hole. I have a right to your services and if you didn't want to be compelled to provide them for whatever the government decides you deserve then you shouldn't have invested in yourself to obtain the requisite knowledge, skills, and credentials. No free veterinary service, no peace.

To your first point - Show me a state that's ever doubled minimum wage, or even hiked it up 50% in a short period of time. I can't think of any. Common sense tells anyone who's ever managed a small business that a 50% hike in labor cost can, and in many cases will, be disastrous. I haven't recently reviewed minimum wage effects, but last time I did I know states like CA with high minimum wage laws had double digit unemployment while states like VA Who adhere only to Fed min wage laws were at full employment. To your second point - You're speaking primarily of people who don't exist. If we're going to start subsidizing responsible people who are perpetually stuck in minimum wage jobs should we not subsidize Santa Clause as well?

Take a company that pays the average worker above minimum wage - say $10/hr. You think you can Jack his labor cost up 50% without serious adverse effects? And this "earned" tax credit business and it's de facto "subsidy" of Wal Mart's is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm all for testing the theory. Let's do away with it and see if its absence forces Wal Mart to raise wages.

Don't take this personally because this is more about my pet peeve with "respect" than anything you were trying to say here, but I think what you mean is courtesy. Everyone is entitled to common courtesy until they've proven otherwise, but no one's entitled to respect until they earn it. And those who do earn respect aren't entitled to equal respect. Respect is a ranking of people relative to others based on attributes they've demonstrated that you value. Equal respect is therefore the abolition of respect.

Let's not forget that this "protest" isn't about police misconduct, it's about race. If Michael Brwn was white not one of these dirty bastards would give half a **** about this. And there's been no evidence whatsoever suggesting the cop's actions were racially motivated. And this business of whether Michael Brown "deserved" to be killed is the dumbest point the double digit IQ crowd keeps throwing out. At no point in a self-defense analysis does the degree to which either party "deserved" to die come into the equation. And what exactly is this "protest" aiming to change?

While this is true in the most literal sense, it is so misleading that I don't think it's going too far to call bull ****. Figure 2/3 of teams already had their franchise guy, 4 others (was it more?) took other QBs prior to. There weren't any teams with our QB situation who passed on Russell Wilson in the 3rd round. Bills **** the bed on that one. No excuse for it.

You also defended the Brady tuck rule call. You'll always defend the refs no matter how badly they botch it. Being a referee apologist is no different from being the guy who always claims it's fixed. You're just on the opposite end of the spectrum. But still far enough out on the edge to predictably defend one particular side invariably.

We've go more important matters. Apparently a Republican PTA member in rural Kentucky was overheard telling a parent that she didn't want her child to wear the same outfit Obama's daughter wore to an event. We need to find out who this ©unt is and what skeletons are in her closet.

It's not that It's an organized campaign, nor is there an implication that the people watching it are victims. It's an acknowledgement that most major media outlets are overwhelmingly liberal, their bias influences their reporting, and as a result many people are misinformed. I have yet to hear anyone offer an alternative explanation as to why this story got so much press.

Difference is everyone knows what they're getting there. It's not like Law & Order where you're watching a crime drama with no political pretense, then they throw in a one sided political discussion where the token conservative is a stooge who is left speechless by some mind-numbingly simplistic point the writer thought was deep.

I don't disagree with that. I think they're often very good at weaving it in so that people like my mom don't realize the subtext. But they definitely slide it in there. They do it a lot in kid's shows too. It's not a coincidence that conservatives, Republicans, and the like are almost invariably cast in a subtly negative light while liberals, Democrats, and their ideals are almost always cast in a positive light. Edit: I will say that in the last several years that a lot of shows & movies have moved away from going political, but when they do it's almost always tilted toward the left.

CNBC is business news which necessarily leads to more fiscally conservative reporting. The brass stepped in to put a stop to that. To the bigger issue, as has been stated, there are outlets where you can seek out conservative news, but the average citizen who doesn't go out of their way to find it is inundated with liberal outlets that can't talk about constitutionally questionable acts by the government because it's more important to report that some rank and file nobody who works for a Republican said something mildly critical about Obama's daughter on her own Facebook page. They should get back to responsible reporting - like fact-checking the rare SNL skit that actually criticizes the chosen one.

No anger. I was just giving you back what you were dishing out and took it up a notch.

The "come on, it's obviously racism" argument is just so much more compelling.

As a matter of fact they do. They stepped in back around 08 to make sure CNBC anchors didn't go too hard on Obama.

Your wife sucks BBC for crack.