Also, almost any thick substance like pancake or cake batter will do this (with electric beaters--@Asmo 's comment applies here too)). Just go make some!

Now, I must fulfill my quest of getting Coke™ to do this (with a lot of added material).

Now if the Police Unions would just condemn the beaters and cover-up artists I could fully support them.

>> ^Reefie:

Did he really refer to his hand as the "wife beater" or is my hearing really screwed?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wife%20beater

Did he really refer to his hand as the "wife beater" or is my hearing really screwed?

Where can I find a pic. of that BMX gold beater you talk about. Sounds pretty sick.

Does making a joke about something, make it ok to do? Let's look passed the fact that it was a pedestrian joke. Blankfist could've done a lot better. Does that make blankfist a wife beater? No, only shitty at making jokes. But we knew this about him. He's been trying to be funny for 3 years on this website. He's had a couple of hits but even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once-in-a-while.

You say there are some jokes off limits, I say there are none. Who is right? Well, neither, or both.

For the record, I hope Blankfist's fiancee beats the living shit out of him.
>> ^bareboards2:
I seem to have set off the Libertarian crowd.
Maybe this is just a failure of empathy on the part of rottenseed and blankfist. And of the two people who, so far, have upvoted rottenseed's comment.
Are you aware that people stay in horrifically abusive situations in part because of the internalized message "I deserve this"? The abuser uses the words "You made me do it" to justify the continuation of attacks? [Please note that I have left out pronouns. This is non-gender specific -- it is rooted in the roles of abuser and victim.]
Well, actually, you are aware. Clearly.
Look, just imagine for a second that you are a survivor or a current victim of spousal abuse. Can you just imagine, for a moment, what it would feel like to watch this video, feel like maybe you could get help, that something is wrong with your situation, and then immediately stumble across blankfist's comment?
If spousal abuse -- and sexual abuse -- weren't so common, then blankfist's post would be crude and maybe funny. As it stands, it has the potential of actively hurting someone's recovery or ability to step away from a very bad situation.
And please note that I didn't demand the pulling of the posting. Self "censorship" isn't censorship if it is an act of kindness to a stranger.
Leave it up. It's clearly up to you. Just be aware of the possible consequences. Know that you might be complicit in the continued suffering of someone.
Hopefully the person(s) I am concerned about will keep reading and see this defense of them. This acknowledgment that what you posted is not true. And not funny.
I look forward to the day when it IS funny. When abuse is so uncommon. When victims of abuse leave the first time something abusive happens to them and aren't trapped by their own internal messages.

I totally agree that it's not simple. That's why all of this bothers me so much. Congress members like to see it black and white, what they want (and their contributors want) should be kept or voted in. What they don't want (and their contributors don't want) is communist/socialist/anti-american/against God/whatever. There absolutely no sway with these people, and that's because they are paid to think the way they do. It's not the best interest of the country, it's the best interest of who paid them off.

It's pretty blatant when the people who are making out like bandits during a very bad economic recession if doesn't become a depression and still want more tax cuts and profits, while the food banks don't have enough food and people are literally losing their houses because they won't extend unemployment benefits.

And trust me, unemployment in the US does not pay enough to cover what you would have made with a job. Especially when healthcare is primarily provided by companies and not by a universal health plan, people simply can't afford coverage on unemployment and they are not provided coverage unless they meet stringent criteria.

And it has been shown that unemployment benefits stimulate the economy, for every dollar put into unemployment compensation a 1.60 or some such is generated. Rich tax cuts don't even come close to generating that, not even in the same ballpark. And they are supposedly the people who make the world go round if you listen to the bought and paid for Congress members.


In reply to this comment by Smugglarn:
While I agree with som of waht you say there is a caveat to all those wonderful programs. In my country (Sweden) the model of governance was that the ruling party (Social Democrats) essentially paid their voters with unemployment programs and social security benefits. You could actually earn less working than going on benefits. Immigrants who by nature of their endeavours are quite industrius and hard working quickly became pacified and dependant on the system. The only thing asked of the poorer classes is to vote "correctly" every four years. Remember though - they are only loyal voters for as long as they are not suffering as much . As soon as they get successful they get the full force of the tax system and change alliances. It stifles entrepreneurship and innovation.

Thankfully the Social Democrats were voted out. Regrettably, there is a high unemployment rate, a nationalist party gained a lot of seats in the parliament and violence plagues the projects and large cities around the country.


The left seeing the voters abandon them cry out for expanded immigration and more refugees. At first glance this could be thought of as a compassionate move - but in reality they want more party members to feed the machine. On the other hand the right want to expand immigration as well - for specialists nad other high quality workers - but also for cheap labour obviously.

What I'm rambling about is that it is not that simple.

In reply to this comment by Porksandwich:
Really no one knows what will fix the economy, often times opinion of the economy means just as much as actual changes. If people think the economy is in the toilet, they play safe with their money....if they think it's great they invest in more risky things (to me the tech bubbles demonstrate this, they don't know WTF they were investing in half the time but it sounded good).

But it strikes me as odd when you see a sudden decline in the economy and opinion of it tank....that they don't undo what they changed a few years prior to the economic downturn. Yes there are outside influences and other hard to account for things. But if tax cuts on the rich stimulated the economy in a beneficial way, we would not be in the situation we are in. Yes bank deregulation and other stupid moves, plus a blind payout to people who abused the system really hurt us. But the people who made those decisions also tend to be rich people with rich friends, after all it takes millions upon millions to campaign for any federal level job and you're going to notice the guy giving you a couple hundred thousand versus the guy who gives you 10 bucks.

As for making up the taxes in other methods...sales, consumption, sin tax, whatever you want to refer to. 1% of the population can go day to day without buying as much or can go to lengths to offset or remove the tax burdens they would otherwise face if they have many resources at their disposal. They could simply live somewhere else where those taxes do not effect them. And the rest of the people making, I think it's 250k or less a year to be the non-rich, they simply do not have the resources to avoid living near their jobs and are going to have the basic necessity expenditures as any rich guy.

I mean we all have things we need in common.
Food

Shelter (electricity, gas)

Toiletries (unless we're gonna wipe our asses with tree bark and not wear deodorant or brush our teeth),

Methods of transport (which is usually going to be a car, most places have pathetic public transport and riding a bike in sweltering heat or freezing cold is not going to cut it)

Medical - which at this point in time you have to be pretty destitute or disabled to receive government help with. And everyone at some point in their life is going to need medical assistance whether it's through a fault of their own or not. It's a stupid system where if you can't afford your treatment "RIGHT NOW" you may end up crippled and a burden on everyone else for the rest of your life over a few thousand dollars.

Rich people don't need to eat any more than poor people, they might have richer tastes but they can survive on poor people food. Rich people don't need any more than the minimum shelter. Same with toiletries, fancy colognes and perfumes are frills. BMWs versus 20 year old clunkers, rich can drive beaters too. Medical, rich people are going to have the basic care they need when they need it at every stage of their life....because they are rich and of course luck in genetic lotteries count for a lot.

So unless every rich person lives extravagantly INSIDE the US at all times, taxing them on anything but income is only going to get what they spend money on inside the country...even though they make their money and protect their money and assets utilizing what everyone else helps subsidize - roads, utilities, police, firefighters, etc.

It's the "I got mine, so fuck you." attitude that seems to be popular now. You can see it in a lot of things, unemployment extensions (I got a job, so fuck you.), universal health care (I'm not sick, so fuck you.), public transportation (I own a car, so fuck you.), Visa workers/offshoring (I can get cheaper labor, so fuck you.), etc.

So we end up with absolutely no positive future growth besides what you can afford to do for yourself. And we have more and more people falling onto government welfare programs where they are going to find themselves stuck until the problems become so blatantly apparent that no one can deny that paying your share benefits you just as much as it benefits others.

Really no one knows what will fix the economy, often times opinion of the economy means just as much as actual changes. If people think the economy is in the toilet, they play safe with their money....if they think it's great they invest in more risky things (to me the tech bubbles demonstrate this, they don't know WTF they were investing in half the time but it sounded good).

But it strikes me as odd when you see a sudden decline in the economy and opinion of it tank....that they don't undo what they changed a few years prior to the economic downturn. Yes there are outside influences and other hard to account for things. But if tax cuts on the rich stimulated the economy in a beneficial way, we would not be in the situation we are in. Yes bank deregulation and other stupid moves, plus a blind payout to people who abused the system really hurt us. But the people who made those decisions also tend to be rich people with rich friends, after all it takes millions upon millions to campaign for any federal level job and you're going to notice the guy giving you a couple hundred thousand versus the guy who gives you 10 bucks.

As for making up the taxes in other methods...sales, consumption, sin tax, whatever you want to refer to. 1% of the population can go day to day without buying as much or can go to lengths to offset or remove the tax burdens they would otherwise face if they have many resources at their disposal. They could simply live somewhere else where those taxes do not effect them. And the rest of the people making, I think it's 250k or less a year to be the non-rich, they simply do not have the resources to avoid living near their jobs and are going to have the basic necessity expenditures as any rich guy.

I mean we all have things we need in common.
Food

Shelter (electricity, gas)

Toiletries (unless we're gonna wipe our asses with tree bark and not wear deodorant or brush our teeth),

Methods of transport (which is usually going to be a car, most places have pathetic public transport and riding a bike in sweltering heat or freezing cold is not going to cut it)

Medical - which at this point in time you have to be pretty destitute or disabled to receive government help with. And everyone at some point in their life is going to need medical assistance whether it's through a fault of their own or not. It's a stupid system where if you can't afford your treatment "RIGHT NOW" you may end up crippled and a burden on everyone else for the rest of your life over a few thousand dollars.

Rich people don't need to eat any more than poor people, they might have richer tastes but they can survive on poor people food. Rich people don't need any more than the minimum shelter. Same with toiletries, fancy colognes and perfumes are frills. BMWs versus 20 year old clunkers, rich can drive beaters too. Medical, rich people are going to have the basic care they need when they need it at every stage of their life....because they are rich and of course luck in genetic lotteries count for a lot.

So unless every rich person lives extravagantly INSIDE the US at all times, taxing them on anything but income is only going to get what they spend money on inside the country...even though they make their money and protect their money and assets utilizing what everyone else helps subsidize - roads, utilities, police, firefighters, etc.

It's the "I got mine, so fuck you." attitude that seems to be popular now. You can see it in a lot of things, unemployment extensions (I got a job, so fuck you.), universal health care (I'm not sick, so fuck you.), public transportation (I own a car, so fuck you.), Visa workers/offshoring (I can get cheaper labor, so fuck you.), etc.

So we end up with absolutely no positive future growth besides what you can afford to do for yourself. And we have more and more people falling onto government welfare programs where they are going to find themselves stuck until the problems become so blatantly apparent that no one can deny that paying your share benefits you just as much as it benefits others.

On the plus side it'd be a body shop's (panel beater for us aussie/brit folk ) wet dream to work in areas like this during winter

Ali was my first and only true hero, Since then heros dont stand up to the test of time, like Ali has, and only Ali.
Most athletes are steroid users and thugs, abusers of everything, drug taking , no drivers licencse having,dope smoking gamblers,whoremongering unfaithfull dog killing wife beaters, no tax paying chaufer shotgunning liars.
I know I'm jaded now and I don't call anybody a hero, even if they may deserve it. There have been a very few that could possibly make the list. Muhammed Ali will always be on top of the short list of true sports Heros.

Lets name a few.

Clyde Drexler..., I'm running outa names, You name some.

The guy in the wife beater is one half of Tic-Tac, a pair of identical twins who've been ripping up the floors of subway stations and NYC parks for about ten years. I don't think I've ever seen one without the other before. They've got a rotating crew of dancers who perform with them. If you ever catch them, it's a rare NYC local treat.

Wow, and wearing a wife beater as he prepares the food, appetizing!

As usual, RM doesn't see the hypocrisy of her own position. Quite typical. She started off OK. Yes - it is very true that focusing on OUTLIERS does not make those outliers normal. A few videos of rare full-court buzzer beaters doesn't mean that full-court buzzer beaters are normal. They are outliers. Well observed.

Where she loses it is in her classification of AGW as 'normal' and the snow in Washington as 'not disproving AGW'. The AGW movement has been defrocked in the past months. What I've known for YEARS has become relatively common knowledge. The so-called 'scientists' were rigging the data. They ignored contrary opinions. They buried contradictions in their own research. They used articles from laymen and called them 'experts'. They took articles from journalists, and called them 'scientists'.

In short - it is the AGW movement that has been trying to portray the outliers as 'normal'. They are taking the most extreme, far-fetched, and outlandish projections they can possibly distill from their faulty data. Then they have allowed politically motivated interest groups to falsely portray these unrealistic outliers as 'normal' or 'accurate' when in fact they are the opposite.

So who are the people that are trying to make the buzzer-beaters look like normal events? From where I sit as a professional analyst and statistician, it is the Global Warmers who are the ones exaggerating their case. Their AGW movement is political - not science. They want taxes and massive government spending, and they are wresting science to do it.

I'm sure that was the doing of James Thompson, the guy on the right. His previous profession was "gypsy-beater."

Wii wife-beater on the the horizon.