UConn James

Maybe he said "Coach Brown" at UTexas....

Big difference in letting people do what they want on their residential property and someone using said in a commercial or other capacity. That's what zoning is there for, and it's fairly straightforward. Fire and safety hazards need to be rectified for any structure; not saying those should be thrown to the wind. It's the "You can't park your car in your driveway!" "You have to move your evergreens over there!" and "You can't cohabitate in sin with your girlfriend!" types that draw ire. Those damn Founding Fathers and their "Pursuit of Happiness" garbage in the DoI! Guess they should have added a parenthetical "unless a group of your neighbors forbids such pursuits."

Because I have a "Different Strokes For Different Strokes" mentality about what people should be free to do on their own property, that makes me Fred Sanford with 20 rust-colored Cadillac lawn ornaments? I don't live in sloth; house has been appraised at $300K, and probably more since I built a 100' dry stone wall on it. There are people on my street that don't have the nicest of yards, yet my name isn't on the deed and what place is it of mine or anyone's to act like it is?."People like you" ... Wonderful, that. You should've stayed in journalism, Mock. You fit it to a T. If everyone here closes their eyes for a second, we can all visualize a high-pitched "NO-OOO-OOO! You need to do it MY way!!!"

And here, I thought you were going to ask 'Why do dogs lick their b---s?'....

I think the 'You can do this, and you can't do this' is more ingrained in the social agendas of Dems/Repubs rather than in liberal/conservative. And they both have their own pick-and-choose points on certain of issues. ----- LA and VA, I guess things just go a little differently here in (rural) New England. For us, if our name is not on the deed, we don't so much think it's our place to be telling people they can't have a fixer-upper in the driveway or whether they cut their grass every three days, or every two weeks. May be an issue of people not wanting to throw stones, as most houses here are works in progress. But I guess when you live in an area where everyone is expected to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, hire out for pesticidal TruGreen landscaping, and Endless Pools, you have nothing to worry about except how the Jones' aren't living up to your standards b/c they pick a shade of blue that you don't find appealing. Not to say there aren't limits to this. There's a guy in town raised in the uber-Depression mindset who saves EVERYthing from rusty old motors to dry-rotted tires to used 30-year old shingles. He raises 20 goats on a 1/2-acre lot. He would dig through the Dumpsters at the transfer station until they put up a 'No Picking Through Dumpsters' (aka the John W.... Law) sign. The town actually removed some things from his property because it was so full of sh--; whereupon he put up a big sign that read "Bullies, Butchers, Theives!" in 18-inch green hand-spraypainted letters and went on from there in smaller black and white. There is a time for intervention for people who are hoarders (pet hoarders especially, which is so sad), but these are truly some Sorry-ass Little First-World Problems. ----- But back to the original topic, we have a couple who like/love each other enough to live together, yet they're not quite ready for the (relatively recent, when you think about it) legal concept of marriage. And yet, in many courts, they'd beconsidered common-law husband-and-wife. And yet, even tho two of the kids are fathered by the homeowner, the woman and kids are basically being told by the city to Get Out or Get Married And Adopt. I choose to call bullsh-- by its proper term.

I'm NOT "the liberal." Far from it. And yet you insist on deeming me as such. I didn't imply doing anything illegal. Just be every bit an officious bastard as the beauracrats are being. Go over every bit of their decision-making, note their mistakes be they small or grievous and publicly air them loudly and often. Attend every town/city council meeting and raise your voice, call the newspaper, etc. Be the squeaky wheel. Sh--ty ordinances like these only get rectified when enough people say, 'Hey, that's BS!!' This and stories like it are a true example of where the media does its best work. From one standpoint, I could understand a town/city not wanting Joe Blow to send his kids to live with his friend Guy Bastard b/c that town has better schools. But it's in the making of the law that doesn't account for 5 million unmarried couples who live with each other that is the stink of it.

That's exactly the type of rationale the city used to take people's homes in New London, Conn. in order to sell the land to build a shopping mall. Which you (and most everyone else in this country) regularly bemoan.

As long as a dwelling is sturdily constructed and safe to inhabit, and YOURS, what damn right does anyone else have to say how it looks? Land of the Free (as long as you have a Green Lawn© (or, it's your ass. Because your land doesn't belong to you. The government just lets you inhabit it for a while.)) And yes, I'm not one who uses this term loosely, but this kind of stuff smacks of racism.

The town where my brother and s-i-l built their house wouldn't give them an occupancy permit until they planted a row of 4' hedges along their driveway. Which turned into a Saturday killed by yours truly digging holes (I have a PhD in shoveling from my construction days). What do hedges have to do with occupancy of a building? Flipping bureaucrats who get their jollies by telling people where they can and can not plant their rhodedendrons and what square footage they need to build their homes in such-and-such a residential area. By what ^%$&ing authority does a town deny someone the right to live in a house that has been paid for by a private person? And people shrug, and say, What can you do? You know what? I'd put up yellow tape and a "Occupancy Denied" sign on the town hall. All of those people working together and they're not all married to each one of the others. I would make it my mission in life to $%^& over these people's work lives, if only as a deterant to other said bureaucrats. Too many good, hard-working people are at the mercy of town halls.

No hooks. But there's the Anchor Bar. Like Vinny Testaverde said when he was switching teams back when, it's nice to be close to the family, but being back in the same city can be a little too close. Maybe this would work in our favor, but like you, I have serious doubts about our ability to attract FAs right now. Bentley is like the hot girl in high school who breaks up with her bf. And, hate to break it to everyone, but she doesn't usually ask the short, tubby kid with glasses to go to the prom. Unless she's slumming. Or if said kid buys her a diamond ring and gets a limo.

And this is in PPP.... why, exactly?

I attend things at several gun clubs, and the only hunting mishaps I've heard from people I know have been a heart attack and one guy who scared away a 12-point buck (by his estimation, which means it was really a 2-pointer) by the click when he failed to remember to take the safety off. Sure, there've been second-hand stories of guys who tried to go over a fence/wall while carrying the gun (stupid, stupid, stupid). But shooting a hunting partner, no. But there was a time I was at my grandparents' farm in WNY, and some guys in blaze orange come up the driveway, went over to the silo and three shots rang out. Seems that they'd shot the deer elsewhere and tracked it there. When my uncle went out to confront them (mainly in a 'WTF are you doing on MY LAND?!!?) they huffed and puffed, then ended up dragging the deer with four bullet holes in it, through the liquid-sh---fertilized field. Would it have counted as a hunting accident if those fecking morons were shot with my Marlin? Darwin probably would have approved....

Fair warning, dude.... Just wait until Coli gets here. He's going to own you.

All of those *ahem* "sticky substances" probably cemented his caps lock button. Having to make a choice.... mehhh.... I go with Plant.

I watch the speed-skating. And I think that's only b/c I'm half Dutch, so I'm hard-wired to watch ice skating. Ireen Wust was just awesome in the 3,000. And she's not bad looking. Bi-athalon is on now (that's cross-country skiing mixed with rifle shooting) and it is something to watch. As it is, riflery is difficult, and then there's an added challenge of having to slow your heartrate and breathing in such a short time to be able to shoot accurately. That is true fitness and having ultimate control over your body. Also, there's something to it that it was in this same geographic area that the 10th Mountain Division opened up Italy/S. Europe from Hitler, doing pretty much this same exercise.

That hit often being on one of our guys. I remember a game at the Colts (may have been the one where we knocked out all of their QBs -- Harbaugh, Justin, and the third stringer got beat up too but stayed in), when KS came into the pile a good 2-3 seconds after the play was over and plowed his helmet right into Phil Hansen's back. Hansen turned around with a look of hellfire like he was going to punch the Colt who did it.... then he saw that it was Schultz and did a WTF!?! face.

The flashbacks in this ep occurred in 1991, during the Allied/UN rebuffing of Saddam. Proven when the CIA guy said something about not going to Baghdad, but having driven Saddam out of Kuwait. It could easily be that Kate's dad was there in '91 for a tour, then came back and the video was being played at that later date in the office.

I would think that the NFLPA would look at what happened to MLB and the NHL in the most recent strikes in major sports. They both took a SERIOUS blow in revenues b/c people find it hard to relate to a guy who stays home from work b/c $12M/year isn't enough for him. MLB is only now getting to about 70-75 percent level; NHL is playing their games of on the friggin' OLN. I would think that. But considering how everything about the NFL and NFLPA is "ME!ME!ME!"-oriented, making an assumption of common sense is skating on thin ice.

Switch in "car" and there's Teddy Kennedy's thoughts, to a T. Goes to show that even 40 years removed, you get what you give. And that is why we talk about flight suits, bulgies in suits during presidential debates, et cetera instead of sitting down over a nice glass of 20-year-old Scotch and finally coming to the conclusion that Social Security needs some drastic overhaul, that veterans aren't getting the care they need from the VA, why asbestos compensation legislation that won't use taxpayer dollars has been wisping like a ghost through the halls of Congress for decades.....

1) Never been this bad? I suggest you do some further research and base your argument less on off-the-cuff emotion of MEDIA BAD! Can anyone say 'idealized past'? If you don't like it, you are well within your rights to turn off the radio, disconnect the Internet, unsubscribe from your newspaper, dismantle your satelite dish and live in a cave. Save for some classic rock stations and the Internet (which is getting harder and harder to justify spending $15/month), I'm almost there myself. 2) You think it was just meant to bust up conspiracies. Well, hell, let's just go ahead and change the Constitution then! 3) Whether they are "worthy of those freedoms"? WTF is this crap? Let me don the headgear of Karnak the Magnificent.... You believe that certain of media outlets are worthy, while certain of others are not. 4) Just like the Islamics burning, killing, rioting over a fecking cartoon, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED!!!!!!!

True, that. But I would hopethat the majority of owners are wise enough to value the long-term success it will bring (look at how much the NFL's market share and earnings have jumped just since the cap was imposed) rather than the short-term ability to fix one's cap situation b/c you gave several players more money than they were worth.. You can, of course, cross Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones off this list out of hand.

Reads pretty high on the bullsh-- meter to me. 'Henry' knew exactly what was happening. Notice how he kept asking Sayid personal questions, trying to connect with him? The idea behind that is if you establish a personal rapport with someone, it's harder to hurt them, or whatever. But that line... "My name is Sayid, and I am a torturer!" And yes, for someone who remembers what the exact weights and percentages of gases in his balloon, that he stuttered/didn't respond to how deep the grave was means he didn't ever dig one. That's not a question the Others would probably prepare for, and he got caught right there. The closing scene with Sayid talking to Charlie was interesting too. Sayid was doing much the same as the CIA guy was when he showed the video of the sarin attack. That time has lessened fear that the Lostaways should have for the Others. He was talking to Charlie, perhaps, b/c he'd been a near-victim and in how he shot Ethan, is most likely be an ally to Sayid. But also, people are talking to Charlie again (tho, those who are have something gain by doing so); they sure have short memories on who's supposed to be ostracized.....

Nope. 'Zeke' is not Clancy Brown. And that's something pretty major that they wouldn't do on this show. ----- Also, the captive's name is 'Henry Gale.' On a balloon. Wizard of Oz, anyone?

They kind of looked like hyroglyphics(?). I remember the bird and the feather-shaped one. I don't have the deciphering book anymore, nor any way to rewatch the ep. So, we know that the countdown, or for ~5 seconds after the countdown, nothing happens and you can still enter the code. Some of them were red drawing on black background, some were vice versa; different from the white/black imagery used so far in it. We'll see if they start experimenting with this. Sure looked like Kate. This is the time period where they had the video of Sayid being led in handcuffs that was playing in the recruiting office. I didn't recognize her 'father' but he's only had about 2 minutes of screen time and he was in the Kevlar helmet here. And so, we can establish this time period as 1991, which for some reason, despite all evidence showing this back in the What Kate Did ep, some people were contesting that it was 2003. It's now fact that Kate was on the run for more than 10 years! ----- To run down, I'd first say this was the best episode this season. It was back to that feeling of 'Where did the time go; that felt like 15 minutes!' First off, in the side-story, Sawyer getting worked up by the tree frog's noises. It's weird how they write him, and this does go back to last season. One week he's the bad man, and the next he's kind of pathetic, asking, "Will you help me?" Hurley gets caught chowing on a private stash.... Not cool to hoard food, dude. Some tree frog species are poisonous. Sayid joins the Jack vs. Locke power struggle. Saw that same Jack-ness return when he was holding Locke back from going to the computer. I keep wanting to get a slow-mo of what numbers are flashed one by one when that ticker is going all out, but I have neither the time nor the means to do it. Sayid's backstory. Again, he says to the captive guy (I forget his name already) that before he learned to torture he was a "good man" --- there's that phrase again --- but that deep w/in there was always a part of him that could become that torturer. Clancy Brown as the CIA-type guy; he was really good in "The Shawshank Redemption." Anywho, I'm trying to think about what the parallels are b/w the main story and the flashback, b/c there's always parallels for each character. I'll have to sleep on it. That final look the guy gave, you know he's an Other. And Sayid is right --- sometimes you just know something is true; w/o any evidence or anything, you just know. There's a part that does want to believe the captive, like when he was describing the balloon, but that's the thing about the Others; they have detailed preset stories, just like Goodwin with the Peace Corps....