My boss told me this morning that over the weekend a certain video game company is requesting our services! I will beg, borrow and/or steal to go to those audits.
Joshua's Journal
My Podcast Link
10/31/2005 10:50 #24566
Interesting10/30/2005 15:56 #24565
In Response to AjayCategory: just for laughs
(e:ajay) I think you actually didn't read who posted the rant - it was me. You may be actually talking about the commentary that (e:jason) left on my last post... you know, that stuff you couldn't respond to directly so you chose to ignore it?
Anyhow, in response - I read 4 newspapers a day and parts of others - if you are suggesting that Niman is a "black sheep" you couldn't be more wrong. The thrust of his horeshit commentary is just as prevelant in major print media - the only difference is that in major media they are professionals and Mike Niman isn't. What does that mean? Its the difference between what you say in polite company and what you say amongst your friends - its the wording. His crybaby antics are inspired by and parroted because of what you read in papers like the New York Times, Washington Post and Baltimore Sun. Maureen Dowd is just as radical and arrogant as Mike Niman is.
As far as my comment concerning "policing" what journalists write - stop changing the subject - we aren't talking about President Bush, we are talking about Mike Niman. What I'm getting from you is that journalists, in your opinion, should be able to write as irresponsibly and untruthfully as they want to. That is hilarious to me considering that what I'm talking about precisely is the reason why Rather got in trouble. His editors did little to no fact checking because they were so in love with a false story that it didn't matter if it was true or not. You are fucking absolutely right that journalists should be policed by their editors in order to adhere to a standard. To not do so is absolutely insane because what you end up with is a media that you can't trust because of their partisanship and arrogance. The Minnesota Star-Tribune got into trouble recently because of this exact problem, and when the facts came out they got a black eye. Only after intense pressure did they feel compelled to write a correction. After that fiasco, who is actually going to trust what they read in that paper now? Editors checking the journalists is extremely important because it provides something that the print media sorely lacks right now - INTEGRITY. Now, for fucks sake please, don't digress. Do you think that its important for journalists to have integrity in the eyes of the readership?
Anyhow, I find it interesting that you would bring the war stuff up, considering that my post that you are responding to had NOTHING TO DO with the war. I expect better. Try to stay on topic please. The only thing I might add to your digression, since I'm feeling charitable, is that a) Cheney liquidated his Halliburton assets in 2000, and b) if you are suggesting that the Oil for Food scandal was somehow the United States' fault that is the stupidest thing I've ever read. The most interesting thing out of the OFF scandal, by the way, is that Marc Rich (Clinton's boy that got pardoned) was found out to have been wheeling and dealing with Saddam Hussein directly during the embargo. Notch another one up for Slick Willy!
By the way, I voted for Clinton. The single worst decision I ever made as a registered voter. Well, no... maybe I regret Gore more. :)
Anyhow, in response - I read 4 newspapers a day and parts of others - if you are suggesting that Niman is a "black sheep" you couldn't be more wrong. The thrust of his horeshit commentary is just as prevelant in major print media - the only difference is that in major media they are professionals and Mike Niman isn't. What does that mean? Its the difference between what you say in polite company and what you say amongst your friends - its the wording. His crybaby antics are inspired by and parroted because of what you read in papers like the New York Times, Washington Post and Baltimore Sun. Maureen Dowd is just as radical and arrogant as Mike Niman is.
As far as my comment concerning "policing" what journalists write - stop changing the subject - we aren't talking about President Bush, we are talking about Mike Niman. What I'm getting from you is that journalists, in your opinion, should be able to write as irresponsibly and untruthfully as they want to. That is hilarious to me considering that what I'm talking about precisely is the reason why Rather got in trouble. His editors did little to no fact checking because they were so in love with a false story that it didn't matter if it was true or not. You are fucking absolutely right that journalists should be policed by their editors in order to adhere to a standard. To not do so is absolutely insane because what you end up with is a media that you can't trust because of their partisanship and arrogance. The Minnesota Star-Tribune got into trouble recently because of this exact problem, and when the facts came out they got a black eye. Only after intense pressure did they feel compelled to write a correction. After that fiasco, who is actually going to trust what they read in that paper now? Editors checking the journalists is extremely important because it provides something that the print media sorely lacks right now - INTEGRITY. Now, for fucks sake please, don't digress. Do you think that its important for journalists to have integrity in the eyes of the readership?
Anyhow, I find it interesting that you would bring the war stuff up, considering that my post that you are responding to had NOTHING TO DO with the war. I expect better. Try to stay on topic please. The only thing I might add to your digression, since I'm feeling charitable, is that a) Cheney liquidated his Halliburton assets in 2000, and b) if you are suggesting that the Oil for Food scandal was somehow the United States' fault that is the stupidest thing I've ever read. The most interesting thing out of the OFF scandal, by the way, is that Marc Rich (Clinton's boy that got pardoned) was found out to have been wheeling and dealing with Saddam Hussein directly during the embargo. Notch another one up for Slick Willy!
By the way, I voted for Clinton. The single worst decision I ever made as a registered voter. Well, no... maybe I regret Gore more. :)
joshua - 10/31/05 10:46
Believe me, I acknowledge the insignificance of Artvoice. My problem is that people like him are indicative of a larger issue - infallability and irresponsibility in journalism. No, I won't be going after the Bee!
I beat you to the Marc Rich punch - at least acknowledge that Clinton pardoned a guy that should be in prison right now. Also, I do not believe that Cheney carries options right now - if anything he may carry a retainer of some sort just like any CEO gets when they retire from a job. Who is next on the list to go after if they are suspected of being corrupt, Michael Eisner? Lol.
Cheney was not actively trying to get the sanctions lifted, that is a factually incorrect statement - what you are referring to is a separate entity related to Halliburton that Cheney didn't manage. $100M to Republican supporters as a result of no-bid contracts... Ajay that is horseshit. I'm still waiting for my check. ;-)
I could go after a veritable plethora of people besides Niman - there are plenty of journalists with no integrity or fallability that are caught up like Niman are. I merely use Niman because a) he's a local "journalist" (at least you agree that Niman is a crackpot) and b) he wrote a story that was factually incorrect but ran with it because he liked what he heard - just like Rathergate!
I'm all for Iraq having to pay us back, at least partially. Are you suggesting its a good idea, or are you merely using that as a crutch to point out that NO will have to pay for part of its reconstruction? I mention it because I know god damn well that liberals do NOT like the idea (at least those that I've read on the subject) because they feel that it would be just another way for Big Bad America, their sworn enemy, to take advantage of poor people. So, which side is it for you Ajay? You can't have it both ways.
Believe me, I acknowledge the insignificance of Artvoice. My problem is that people like him are indicative of a larger issue - infallability and irresponsibility in journalism. No, I won't be going after the Bee!
I beat you to the Marc Rich punch - at least acknowledge that Clinton pardoned a guy that should be in prison right now. Also, I do not believe that Cheney carries options right now - if anything he may carry a retainer of some sort just like any CEO gets when they retire from a job. Who is next on the list to go after if they are suspected of being corrupt, Michael Eisner? Lol.
Cheney was not actively trying to get the sanctions lifted, that is a factually incorrect statement - what you are referring to is a separate entity related to Halliburton that Cheney didn't manage. $100M to Republican supporters as a result of no-bid contracts... Ajay that is horseshit. I'm still waiting for my check. ;-)
I could go after a veritable plethora of people besides Niman - there are plenty of journalists with no integrity or fallability that are caught up like Niman are. I merely use Niman because a) he's a local "journalist" (at least you agree that Niman is a crackpot) and b) he wrote a story that was factually incorrect but ran with it because he liked what he heard - just like Rathergate!
I'm all for Iraq having to pay us back, at least partially. Are you suggesting its a good idea, or are you merely using that as a crutch to point out that NO will have to pay for part of its reconstruction? I mention it because I know god damn well that liberals do NOT like the idea (at least those that I've read on the subject) because they feel that it would be just another way for Big Bad America, their sworn enemy, to take advantage of poor people. So, which side is it for you Ajay? You can't have it both ways.
ajay - 10/30/05 19:38
Josh, there is a difference between an op-ed piece and a news report. People who read newspapers know the difference. Heck, I am a liberal and I am sure I've read Niman way less than you have. Your fixation with Niman is intriguing, though.
Here's the bottom line: if what Niman writes is crap, then don't read it! Simple! Problem solved. Artvoice is such a small "newspaper" that they have to give it away free to get readership. Don't you think if Niman was that great, he would have been syndicated by bigger newspapers? Next, you'll start targetting the Amherst Bee! ;-)
The Billion-dollar loss I was talking about was the corruption scandal in the Iraqi Ministry of Defence. Obviously, since the media is so liberal as you claim, every major newspaper is screaming about it, right? So the 4 newspapers your read must have covered it in great detail, right? And hence you must have read about it, right?
BTW: Cheney may have liquidated his stock, but he has options. And you know how valuable options are when a stock goes up.
And before you trot out Marc Rich, remember that Cheney was actively campaigning to get the sanctions on Iraq lifted, and Halliburton set up offshore shell corporations to deal with Iraq even while sanctions were in place. And they did the same with Iran. And do I need to point out the no-bid contract that Halliburton got? The largest such in history? With no oversight? With 100s of millions of dollars siphoned off into Republican supporters' pockets?
Your talk about Niman is the classic strawman argument: find one lame figure on the other side and hammer away at him. All you're doing is fiddling while your Republican government burns down the house. 300+ Billion in Iraq and counting. And the ironic part? The Iraqis don't have to repay Uncle Sam, but the Katrina victims do!
Don't forget to get your magnetic sticker! ;-)
Josh, there is a difference between an op-ed piece and a news report. People who read newspapers know the difference. Heck, I am a liberal and I am sure I've read Niman way less than you have. Your fixation with Niman is intriguing, though.
Here's the bottom line: if what Niman writes is crap, then don't read it! Simple! Problem solved. Artvoice is such a small "newspaper" that they have to give it away free to get readership. Don't you think if Niman was that great, he would have been syndicated by bigger newspapers? Next, you'll start targetting the Amherst Bee! ;-)
The Billion-dollar loss I was talking about was the corruption scandal in the Iraqi Ministry of Defence. Obviously, since the media is so liberal as you claim, every major newspaper is screaming about it, right? So the 4 newspapers your read must have covered it in great detail, right? And hence you must have read about it, right?
BTW: Cheney may have liquidated his stock, but he has options. And you know how valuable options are when a stock goes up.
And before you trot out Marc Rich, remember that Cheney was actively campaigning to get the sanctions on Iraq lifted, and Halliburton set up offshore shell corporations to deal with Iraq even while sanctions were in place. And they did the same with Iran. And do I need to point out the no-bid contract that Halliburton got? The largest such in history? With no oversight? With 100s of millions of dollars siphoned off into Republican supporters' pockets?
Your talk about Niman is the classic strawman argument: find one lame figure on the other side and hammer away at him. All you're doing is fiddling while your Republican government burns down the house. 300+ Billion in Iraq and counting. And the ironic part? The Iraqis don't have to repay Uncle Sam, but the Katrina victims do!
Don't forget to get your magnetic sticker! ;-)
10/29/2005 00:36 #24564
12 Tribes and Mike NimanCategory: outrage
I read Mike Niman's article in the Artvoice, essentially lighting up the communal religious organization known as 12 Tribes. I went ahead and did what Mike Niman DIDN'T do, which is engage these people in conversation today. Yes thats right - Mike Niman was given an opportunity to actually talk to 12 Tribes before publishing his article and he didn't. Why am I not surprised? The man has an irrational and innate hatred of anything related to the Bible, and the fact of the matter is that the other side of the story didn't matter to him. Only his prejudiced and halfwitted opinion article matter to him.
Want the truth? Different races live together in the local 12 Tribes commune. The organization consists of every race on Planet Earth, and there are multiple communes around the world. Wow, clearly they are white supremacists if they are best friends, live together and take care of each other. The organization is neither Christian or Jewish, but they live by the Bible in a peaceful and if anything, reclusive lifestyle. I'm completely outraged and incensed by Mike Niman right about now. I mean, don't get me wrong, his completely lopsided and irrational articles appear in Artvoice practically every week - the only thing that he suceeds in every week is displaying how much of a fringe lunatic he is. I've hated Mike Niman for a long, long time but this week is absolutely the pinnacle. If it doesn't scare you that this man is a college professor paid by the state, it should. DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING YOU READ IN THAT ARTICLE.
Artvoice should be held responsible for publishing such utter garbage. Do you think you'll see an apology from Mike Niman anytime soon? Hell no - he's busy with his head in the sand and I personally guarantee that he is a chickenshit just like every other radical left wing writer in this country. Flip through the Artvoice this week - practically every response to Mike Niman's article lambbastes him and points out his obscure, poorly researched and small-minded predilection. He feels the need to defend himself by suggesting that because he's participated in Co-Op organizations for 25 years that he has the authority to speak on the subject? HORSESHIT. Not good enough for ANY publication in America let alone our shitty local pubs. Want the truth? Guys like him get away with this crap because they are completely unpoliced by their higher ups. I'm certainly not surprised that Jamie Moses let this one pass - he's just as much of an asshole as Mike Niman.
Want the truth? Different races live together in the local 12 Tribes commune. The organization consists of every race on Planet Earth, and there are multiple communes around the world. Wow, clearly they are white supremacists if they are best friends, live together and take care of each other. The organization is neither Christian or Jewish, but they live by the Bible in a peaceful and if anything, reclusive lifestyle. I'm completely outraged and incensed by Mike Niman right about now. I mean, don't get me wrong, his completely lopsided and irrational articles appear in Artvoice practically every week - the only thing that he suceeds in every week is displaying how much of a fringe lunatic he is. I've hated Mike Niman for a long, long time but this week is absolutely the pinnacle. If it doesn't scare you that this man is a college professor paid by the state, it should. DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING YOU READ IN THAT ARTICLE.
Artvoice should be held responsible for publishing such utter garbage. Do you think you'll see an apology from Mike Niman anytime soon? Hell no - he's busy with his head in the sand and I personally guarantee that he is a chickenshit just like every other radical left wing writer in this country. Flip through the Artvoice this week - practically every response to Mike Niman's article lambbastes him and points out his obscure, poorly researched and small-minded predilection. He feels the need to defend himself by suggesting that because he's participated in Co-Op organizations for 25 years that he has the authority to speak on the subject? HORSESHIT. Not good enough for ANY publication in America let alone our shitty local pubs. Want the truth? Guys like him get away with this crap because they are completely unpoliced by their higher ups. I'm certainly not surprised that Jamie Moses let this one pass - he's just as much of an asshole as Mike Niman.
jason - 10/29/05 18:52
Niman got some bunk info from someone, liked what he heard, and started telling people the 12 tribes are white supremacists. He didn't need or want anything other than what he agreed with. He wrote an entire article making his case. He is peddling his opinion as if it is fact, and people are going to read the article thinking it is fact. If you were to ask Niman if what he wrote was opinion or fact, what do you think he would say? The "this is just an opinion piece" argument shrivels up as a result.
Maybe you're right. Maybe he isn't lying. Maybe he didn't already have his opinion in his head before he tried making a case for it. Maybe he just got BS information. Apparently that passes as a legitimate argument nowadays. We are seeing it more and more.
Don't think that just because I don't talk about Fox News that I don't have an opinion about them. There are 120239879834798 people talking about Fox News, and zero talking about the alternative press, who get a free pass from everyone. You tell me to be skeptical about what I read, but are you skeptical about what you read from the alternatives or from any information source? I'm sure the answer is yes but I've never asked. I want to make sure that you are willing to be as honest as you want me to be.
I'm willing to "set the example" but I feel like I am completely alone in that sentiment. I feel like people just want ME to point the finger at the right so they can tell me how correct they are, while they stay silent. Nobody wants to point the finger at the people who represent their political "side". As of yet I am the only person on e-strip who is willing to do this. Will you join me? =)
Yes I know Fox News reporting is skewed to the right, everyone knows that. They are the only TV news outlet in the USA that reports this way. There isn't any reporting from any media outlet that isn't skewed. They do report facts, but not the same facts and not in the same context. Hannity and O'Reilly and Rush and the rest - no I do not think everything that comes out of their mouth is fact. I am not so far to the right as a Hannity or a Rush.
Ultimately I want truth, and truth does not come from a single source. It comes from reading a broad spectrum of pieces. I feel like I'm the only person on e-strip who does that as well. I feel like I'm the only one who is willing to challenge his/her ideas and to grow. I'll never be a partisan.
Niman got some bunk info from someone, liked what he heard, and started telling people the 12 tribes are white supremacists. He didn't need or want anything other than what he agreed with. He wrote an entire article making his case. He is peddling his opinion as if it is fact, and people are going to read the article thinking it is fact. If you were to ask Niman if what he wrote was opinion or fact, what do you think he would say? The "this is just an opinion piece" argument shrivels up as a result.
Maybe you're right. Maybe he isn't lying. Maybe he didn't already have his opinion in his head before he tried making a case for it. Maybe he just got BS information. Apparently that passes as a legitimate argument nowadays. We are seeing it more and more.
Don't think that just because I don't talk about Fox News that I don't have an opinion about them. There are 120239879834798 people talking about Fox News, and zero talking about the alternative press, who get a free pass from everyone. You tell me to be skeptical about what I read, but are you skeptical about what you read from the alternatives or from any information source? I'm sure the answer is yes but I've never asked. I want to make sure that you are willing to be as honest as you want me to be.
I'm willing to "set the example" but I feel like I am completely alone in that sentiment. I feel like people just want ME to point the finger at the right so they can tell me how correct they are, while they stay silent. Nobody wants to point the finger at the people who represent their political "side". As of yet I am the only person on e-strip who is willing to do this. Will you join me? =)
Yes I know Fox News reporting is skewed to the right, everyone knows that. They are the only TV news outlet in the USA that reports this way. There isn't any reporting from any media outlet that isn't skewed. They do report facts, but not the same facts and not in the same context. Hannity and O'Reilly and Rush and the rest - no I do not think everything that comes out of their mouth is fact. I am not so far to the right as a Hannity or a Rush.
Ultimately I want truth, and truth does not come from a single source. It comes from reading a broad spectrum of pieces. I feel like I'm the only person on e-strip who does that as well. I feel like I'm the only one who is willing to challenge his/her ideas and to grow. I'll never be a partisan.
ajay - 10/29/05 17:55
First of all, lying can only be associated with facts; opinions, are, well, just opinions. And most of Niman's writings are opinions; if his facts are incorrect, feel free to point them out.
Second, instead of saying "why don't the lefties do this or that", why not set an example and show us what needs to be done, by doing it to your paragon of impartial reporting, Faux News? Talk about a pack of liars!
First of all, lying can only be associated with facts; opinions, are, well, just opinions. And most of Niman's writings are opinions; if his facts are incorrect, feel free to point them out.
Second, instead of saying "why don't the lefties do this or that", why not set an example and show us what needs to be done, by doing it to your paragon of impartial reporting, Faux News? Talk about a pack of liars!
jason - 10/29/05 15:54
Ajay, how could you possibly equate "policed by their higher ups" with the condoning of a police state? More importantly, why don't you think that the alternative press should be accountable for the inaccurate things they write? Why do you think that anybody (err, I mean lefties) should be able to lie and lie and lie and not suffer the consequences? This isn't a challenge against diversity of opinion, and any honest reader could (should) have gotten that out of Josh's post. It is a challenge against inaccurate and hatefully biased pseudo-journalists who "police" every other media outlet, yet refuse to police themselves. Who else is going to watch the "watchdogs" for us?
Ajay, how could you possibly equate "policed by their higher ups" with the condoning of a police state? More importantly, why don't you think that the alternative press should be accountable for the inaccurate things they write? Why do you think that anybody (err, I mean lefties) should be able to lie and lie and lie and not suffer the consequences? This isn't a challenge against diversity of opinion, and any honest reader could (should) have gotten that out of Josh's post. It is a challenge against inaccurate and hatefully biased pseudo-journalists who "police" every other media outlet, yet refuse to police themselves. Who else is going to watch the "watchdogs" for us?
ajay - 10/29/05 14:21
"Guys like him get away with this crap because they are completely unpoliced by their higher ups."
Right!! That's what we need: a police state. Everyone's opinions must be checked and vetted by someone "higher up", for God forbid that there be a diversity of opinions. But who'll vet Bush's opinions? Hmmm.... wait! Bush already claims that God speaks to him, so I guess that's covered. Damn! You Righties are so smart....
"Guys like him get away with this crap because they are completely unpoliced by their higher ups."
Right!! That's what we need: a police state. Everyone's opinions must be checked and vetted by someone "higher up", for God forbid that there be a diversity of opinions. But who'll vet Bush's opinions? Hmmm.... wait! Bush already claims that God speaks to him, so I guess that's covered. Damn! You Righties are so smart....
10/28/2005 21:46 #24563
LibbyCategory: politics
The media's spin on this, and its been like this from day one, is that somebody is guilty. Never mind the actual evidence or the actual law, somebody is going to be guilty. Hopefully it would be Rove (oops!) so now Scooter Libby was indicted (legal speak for accused with no way to defend himself) for charges generated from an e-mail that he wrote. Surely the press is disappointed and will find some way to tie this to President Bush... which is a strategy that will ultimately fail since when you actually look at the law nobody broke any laws. Thats right, nobody is going to jail and ultimately this is going to be another black eye on the Democrats. What we are seeing here is the culmination of Democratic lunacy that started after Nov. 4, 2004. What? President Bush was re-elected? IMPEACHMENT TIME.
The bottom line is that the law that this entire investigation was about 2 years ago isn't applicable. Patrick Fitzgerald is a saint, but Ken Starr was a witch hunter. Hypocrisy anyone? This entire fiasco is a big steaming pile of horseshit that was trumped up by a media that hates the right wing. The media was exposed during Rathergate, during Newsweekgate which was even worse since people actually died as a result of inaccurate and sensationalistic reporting. Completely and utterly inexcusable. Just an FYI, "covert" is different than "classified."
Honest to God, the most interesting commentary I've heard as a result of this mess is from a liberal - good ol' Lefty Lanny Davis - former special counsel to President Clinton. He is shaming the media for being accusatory, and essentially ignoring the actual evidence. At least there is one honest Democrat out there!
The bottom line is that the law that this entire investigation was about 2 years ago isn't applicable. Patrick Fitzgerald is a saint, but Ken Starr was a witch hunter. Hypocrisy anyone? This entire fiasco is a big steaming pile of horseshit that was trumped up by a media that hates the right wing. The media was exposed during Rathergate, during Newsweekgate which was even worse since people actually died as a result of inaccurate and sensationalistic reporting. Completely and utterly inexcusable. Just an FYI, "covert" is different than "classified."
Honest to God, the most interesting commentary I've heard as a result of this mess is from a liberal - good ol' Lefty Lanny Davis - former special counsel to President Clinton. He is shaming the media for being accusatory, and essentially ignoring the actual evidence. At least there is one honest Democrat out there!
ajay - 10/29/05 14:18
Don't let ignorance of the law or the facts cloud your judgement.... ;-)
If this had happened under a Democratic administration, you'd be livid that these anti-CIA lefties are "weakening the country". The fact that is was a Right-wing nutjob who destroyed the carefully cultivated career of a NOC is now no big deal.
Fitzgerald is a widely-respected prosecutor, who both sides agree is balanced (unlike Ken Starr). And there is no comparison between Whitewater and Plamegate; none whatsoever. Keep grasping at the straws, maybe you'll get enough to make a strawman argument ;-)
Don't let ignorance of the law or the facts cloud your judgement.... ;-)
If this had happened under a Democratic administration, you'd be livid that these anti-CIA lefties are "weakening the country". The fact that is was a Right-wing nutjob who destroyed the carefully cultivated career of a NOC is now no big deal.
Fitzgerald is a widely-respected prosecutor, who both sides agree is balanced (unlike Ken Starr). And there is no comparison between Whitewater and Plamegate; none whatsoever. Keep grasping at the straws, maybe you'll get enough to make a strawman argument ;-)
10/28/2005 00:45 #24562
UnbelievableMy brother and I decided that instead of returning our bottles and cans ourself, that we would just stack up everything on the curb next to the big blue CoBuffalo trash bins. Now keep in mind, this wasn't a small amount of bottles and cans. There were probably $25 worth of returnables there. So, how long did they last?
It took us longer to bring them out than the length of time it took for somebody to scoop them up. I heard someone yell, "HOLY SHIT!" then about 10 minutes later they were gone. (e:jason) wanted to take a picture of them, but they were gone before he could. Simply amazing. At least I scratched one chore off of my to-do list and somebody got some money. Try that in the 'burbs, suckers!
My brother and I were going to come to the party as a soldier/detainee combo but I think we're going to try something else. I might just come "as myself' since I"m plenty enough of a character as is.
It took us longer to bring them out than the length of time it took for somebody to scoop them up. I heard someone yell, "HOLY SHIT!" then about 10 minutes later they were gone. (e:jason) wanted to take a picture of them, but they were gone before he could. Simply amazing. At least I scratched one chore off of my to-do list and somebody got some money. Try that in the 'burbs, suckers!
My brother and I were going to come to the party as a soldier/detainee combo but I think we're going to try something else. I might just come "as myself' since I"m plenty enough of a character as is.
theecarey - 10/28/05 14:46
I lived a very short while in the Falls.. people around there did the same thing.. except in stead of cans, it was just my garbage.
Now thats living..
I lived a very short while in the Falls.. people around there did the same thing.. except in stead of cans, it was just my garbage.
Now thats living..
leetee - 10/28/05 11:01
We could totally do that here, too. Way out in the wicked west end. Unfortunatly, we sometimes have cans and bottles from Canada that aren't returnable, and they get taken from our blue bin on garbage day... I reckon we need to hide them to save someone the effort of taking them in!!
We could totally do that here, too. Way out in the wicked west end. Unfortunatly, we sometimes have cans and bottles from Canada that aren't returnable, and they get taken from our blue bin on garbage day... I reckon we need to hide them to save someone the effort of taking them in!!
ladycroft - 10/28/05 02:00
Cool! I'm glad you guys did that :)
Cool! I'm glad you guys did that :)
terry - 10/28/05 01:07
Dudes, I totally used to do that. It was like why go all the way to the store when you can stack it at the curb and feel good about feeding a bum at the same time? Then one day the lady next store saw me stacking them and she was like, "that's you honey?" And I was like yeah, "I just put them here and someone takes them." She says that it was her most of the time and I should just stack them on her porch from now on. And that's what I did. Everytime they took up too much room, off to the neighbor's they went. Ahhh, to live on the old Elmwood...
Dudes, I totally used to do that. It was like why go all the way to the store when you can stack it at the curb and feel good about feeding a bum at the same time? Then one day the lady next store saw me stacking them and she was like, "that's you honey?" And I was like yeah, "I just put them here and someone takes them." She says that it was her most of the time and I should just stack them on her porch from now on. And that's what I did. Everytime they took up too much room, off to the neighbor's they went. Ahhh, to live on the old Elmwood...
Hell yeah!