SageAgainstTheMachine

Thanks, plenz. It sounds like your kids have a lot of character and you should be proud of that. This is the sort of kid that will probably get picked on a lot by his peers, and the fact that your children have befriended him without any prompting speaks volumes about them.

I respectfully disagree. Surely, I can't provide as much insight as the parents on this board...but worthless? You can provide logic without actually having experience something.

I don't know what you have against me, but it seems like you've always got a bone to pick. I'm not 18. Anyway, are we back to this thing where you insinuate my opinion is worthless because of my age? If you read my first post, you'll note that I suggest plenz should definitely get to know the kid before he encourages the friendship. Heck, I had several neighborhood friends who were all 3-5 years older than me when I was a kid...there really weren't any kids my age on the block. We had fun, they liked beating me at basketball. They were my heroes, I was their little sidekick. I'm still in contact with a couple of them. I didn't say plenz shouldn't be careful, I just said that he shouldn't automatically shun what might be a nice relationship.

Oh come on geeeeze, I remember very well being a horny-ass 13 year old. It means that you start taking longer showers and secretly downloading porn, not "experimenting" with the kids down the street.

But what's the problem with an age gap, as long as the 13 year old is a nice, harmless kid? Kids should learn how to interact with those not immediately within their own social circle, it's an important skill as an adult. Get to know the kid and make sure he isn't trouble (given his backgroud, he might have issues). If you don't detect anything suspicious, then I don't see the harm in your kids having a friend that's a few years older. In fact, if the kid indeed has Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, his maturity level may be closer to that of an 8 or 10 year old. That might explain the friendship in the first place.

But people aren't upset about the fact that he wants to play. They're upset that he's retired, then unretired, then retired, then unretired, then retired, then unretired, then retired, and now might unretire again. He's jerking people around, including his own family and the team that was loyal to him for 18 seasons, all the while basking in the glory of the mainstream sports media sucking his dick every day. That is the source of the resentment. Nobody wants him to retire because he's too old, they want him to retire because that's what he said he was going to do 4 separate times.

It's a place for sick people, but that's beside the point.

Oh snap!

Thanks, that is very interesting. We all think of football players as guys who live, die, breathe football...but I guess not everybody can be that way. I guess it sort of speaks to his lack of a killer instinct.

Yeah, but it was for Memorial Day. The supervisor could have thought to himself "Well, that's a little gaudy." But he should never have asked her to take it down.

Wow that supervisor is a giant douchebag. Hopefully it's just him and not hospital policy.

Yeah? What's his name?

Isaac Bruce...nobody appreciates just how great his career has been.

Nah, I say we can still point the finger. Starks intentionally attempted to hurt a person (a police officer no less). None of our guys did that.

Hold on a second. I have inside information that he has received plenty of interest and that he is weighing his options. He's trying to decide between the Vikings and the Panthers and he's having a really difficult time with it. Now, I'm not calling you a liar, but since we both have conflicting inside information one of us has to be wrong. Like you, I could post information to make myself more credible but I choose not to. This is a very interesting scenario. Two people with equally sound, yet opposite, inside information. I think JP is throwing one of us for a loop!

Yeah Owensmania, it's almost bikini season. You'd better go with a Brazilian.

I think they're really that boring. I mean, don't me wrong, I respect the hell out of them for their abilities, focus, and determination. But they both have the personality of a saltine cracker.

You're a good poster so I'm not calling you a liar...but how exactly do you know this first hand?

How about the Chargers?

Cristiano Ronaldo vs. Lionel Messi...this is going to be brilliant.

You should probably move to Antarctica. You can say stupid sh*t to penguins all day and they won't call you out on it.

Roo-dee...Roo-dee...Roo-dee...Roo-dee WHO'S THE CRAZY MAN NOW?????

Normally I'd agree, but the 3-pointer has been their offense M-O all season long and it has gotten them to within one game of the NBA Finals. It's hard to say they rely too heavily on the three ball, when it has brought them so far.

I love it when people try to use words above their vocabulary level, and then mistakenly reveal that they clearly don't know how to spell said word. Sorry for being a dick, but it just tickles me.

Hey, it's not as if the White Stripes and Raconteurs are dead or anything like that. The White Stripes released Icky Thump in 2007 and have another one coming out later in 2009. The Raconteurs pushed out Consolers of the Lonely just last year. He's been overlapping the two bands and he's clearly capable of adding a third...why shouldn't he? If you like Jack but don't want to listen to The Dead Weather, pop in one of his other albums, I don't see the cause for displeasure here. Besides, don't you get the feeling that The Dead Weather is just a side project that will last a couple of years? It's a supergroup amalgam, an experiment consisting of 4 members that all have allegiances to other bands. Not generally the kind of thing that lasts, unless they hit it huge. The point is, he's not abandoning The White Stripes if that's your concern. And I wasn't trying to equate him with Clapton, that'd be ridiculous. My point was that Clapton dabbled in a myriad of other groups and never lost his essential sound. Neither will Jack.