6:15am: Get out of bed and smoke cigarette before baby wakes up. Make coffee immediately so that eating breakfast and lunch can be avoided.
7:00am: Begin third cup of coffee.
8:00am: Sit on couch and encourage child to run around. Avoid running after him for any reason.
10:00am: Drive two blocks to school. Park at median height of campus to avoid walking uphill either direction.
11:00am-4:00pm: Have to walk off campus now to smoke. Every time I get back to class I want another one already. Can't complain, out of breath anyway.
5:00pm: Go to store, buy ranch dressing for tater-tots and vinaigrette for wife's salad.
7:00pm: Spend an hour cooking ultra-healthy, carb-free meal for wife and son. Snack on cheese-crackers and diet soda (not because it's diet, I just like it better).
9:00pm: Put son to bed, go outside to smoke and play with bokken: today's only exercise.
9:30pm-12:00am: Fold laundry, clean, homework, etc.
1:00am: First meal of day: leftover pastry dough I made for pie wrapped around salami and some lettuce (gotta eat your veggies).
2:00am: Wake up on couch to Galactica credits. Go to bed. (I average the actual, completely awake viewing of one episode every four days at this rate.)

There, now I don't even need a Fitocracy profile.

Oh, and a thank you vid from "Walk Off the Earth."
http://videosift.com/video/Walk-Off-the-Earth-Thank-you-vid-for-Somebody-I-Used

Downvoting because Corgan is an egotistical little bitch. He thinks he's god's gift to music or something. He walked off stage after one song at a concert in my hometown because someone threw a glow bracelet and it landed near his foot. Didn't even hit him just made it on stage near him. Plus the thing weighed like 2oz.

Anyway he's a tool and not worth anyone's time trust me.

One: Do you believe that Randall should live or die? Plus your reasoning for it. I would suggest remembering his time in town (episode 10) and what he said to Daryl and Karl.

1: I think Randall will say or do whatever it takes to stay alive. He sees a weakness in their group's mindset and tries to play on it. He took the wrong approach with Karl. However his former group left him to die. He knew of the girl and her farm. Why did he not lead his former group to the farm for supplies at least if he a true member of it? I think he realizes numbers = better chance of survival and that the group we're seeing in the story is not very structured or strong. In the end, not living in a zombieland, he should live. However with the story how it is, and how he manipulated and saw how much the group who normally wouldn't have killed outright tried to kill him AFTER beating his ass....I think they need to kill him. I don't agree with it, I can understand it though. He will be the guy who sets the precedent that if they kill him, all future humans (but probably not women or children) will be killed. If they don't kill him, he will betray them and prove their decision wrong.

2: Karl sees everyone he doesn't know as a walker. Whether they are or not. I think seeing the walker kill Dale with it likely being Karl's fault has probably locked in his reaction from here on out. His only exception will be young women, due to Sophia. As for confession of possibly leading the walker, I think at the moment he's leading towards Shane in character so he probably will not confess to anything to the current group. Although I think it will come out eventually because this show is drama more than anything else.

3: Right time? Probably. Immediate reaction was: This is just stupid, he walked off alone into the dark, saw a torn apart cow and just froze like he was confused as to what possible could have caused it. The effect on the group will be seeing the world as uglier but acting as if it wasn't in his name, and it will be largely negative and become a plot device on how they will screw themselves going forward. I don't see Dale as a member with power, Glenn will take up his role and Glenn has actual juice to make it happen since he's the go to guy for getting supplies. There may be the possibility of Daryl and Glenn sharing the role Dale played as the group conscience since Daryl has been on the outs and needs to be brought back in. I have no idea on the television politics, but his character was doing less and less each episode. At least before he was keeping the RV running and things organized. Anymore he barely appeared in the episodes in any significant role. Daryl, Glenn, and Andrea were doing significant amounts of sitting on the RV and playing lookout.

Personally I'd like to see Daryl replace Dale and then have the other "big" group headed up by Daryl's brother who lost the hand in Season 1. Hopefully it'll be action based and cleverness instead of drama and talking. Where Glenn and Daryl are more fixtures in the series, because Im tired of hearing about the baby/pregnancy and Hershel's family is largely just boring as all hell. And that farm looks like possibly the worst possible place to pick for fortifying and they have done nothing to prepare it......like boarding the lower windows.

I may have to look into the books.....in the middle of some other books right now though.

Lots of stuff bugs me about this show. I know the farm is to keep budgets down, but they added a shitload of recurring characters at the same time as they picked a dull setting....so Im not sure how that saved them money.

>> ^Gallowflak:

@westy
Structured debates between intelligent and articulate people aren't watched somewhere you generally find westy.


Zing! Sorry..

someone needs to put this to the music at the end of the original Incredible Hulk series, y'know the part where Bruce Banner is thumbing rides along the highway, walking off into the distance

the girl turns around to get sprayed point blank in the face by a fat old white cop without any warning or cause... he just walks up and casually sprays them all and walks off, no verbal orders or warning.

the guy did it on purpose to hurt them. no more badge.

All opinions for or against all of the above aside, I'm just wondering about one thing. And apparently, I'm not very in-the-know about specifics of rights at all.

If so many people get beat up, tazed, shot, locked up, etc., for not cooperating with police (which sometimes means withholding ID), then how did a guy who did same just walk off carrying a loaded gun? My point is this represents a huge inconsistency in law enforcement. Piss a cop off and get beat up and arrested (spend a weekend in jail only to be released on monday morning -- one of the biggest intimidation tactics a cop has beyond physical threat), but walk down a street armed with a gun and refuse to identify yourself and... it's fine? What?

Frankly internet video has me all but believing that that no ID = arrested (or tazed or dead, on a really bad day).


Edit: Apparently you only have to identify yourself in some states. I guess this wasn't one. That and the right to carry a gun. So I assume because he did nothing 'wrong', this checks out. I guess...

It is insane, but when people know someone or think someone will lose, they vote against that person. I.e., Christ. Add that percent to Christ's and you come up with a bigger voting base.

The great part was---even burning with utter loss before the battle was finished, Christ still earned what he earned. I was pleased. Independents went to Rubio because he was the winner... Sad.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Christ to me will always have lost because he was tag-teamed. Meek was asked to drop out because he was a loser that siphoned votes. He intentionally stayed for what purpose? I can't think of one besides pride, and that doesn't motivate politicians often enough to be valid.
Crist had a huge grassroots, and large support even if it wasn't tea party fanatics. He should have never been the one to walk off stage. He did the right thing, but right typically loses to the wrongs. I think Crist would never have been happy being a slave to either party--and that's why he left the insanity that is Florida's republicans.
He supported the Obama stimulus and that's fine. He went on attacks but even then kept a positive attitude. And this is why winners cannot be politicians.

Take a look at the exit polls. Scroll down to the breakdown by party ID.
Rubio got 87% of the Republican vote, and 51% of the Independent vote. Crist and Meek split the Democratic vote (with Meek getting slightly more of it than Crist), but Crist getting 38% of the Independents, with Meek getting only 10%.
Crist lost because Republicans abandoned him. He only got 12% from the party he was in just a few months prior.
Hell, looking at these numbers again makes me think Rubio would've won in a straight-up contest with Crist.
FWIW, it sounded like Crist was a good guy. I'd rather have him in the Senate than Rubio. I probably would've voted for him if I were a Floridian, even.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

Christ to me will always have lost because he was tag-teamed. Meek was asked to drop out because he was a loser that siphoned votes. He intentionally stayed for what purpose? I can't think of one besides pride, and that doesn't motivate politicians often enough to be valid.
Crist had a huge grassroots, and large support even if it wasn't tea party fanatics. He should have never been the one to walk off stage. He did the right thing, but right typically loses to the wrongs. I think Crist would never have been happy being a slave to either party--and that's why he left the insanity that is Florida's republicans.
He supported the Obama stimulus and that's fine. He went on attacks but even then kept a positive attitude. And this is why winners cannot be politicians.


Take a look at the exit polls. Scroll down to the breakdown by party ID.

Rubio got 87% of the Republican vote, and 51% of the Independent vote. Crist and Meek split the Democratic vote (with Meek getting slightly more of it than Crist), but Crist getting 38% of the Independents, with Meek getting only 10%.

Crist lost because Republicans abandoned him. He only got 12% from the party he was in just a few months prior.

Hell, looking at these numbers again makes me think Rubio would've won in a straight-up contest with Crist.

FWIW, it sounded like Crist was a good guy. I'd rather have him in the Senate than Rubio. I probably would've voted for him if I were a Floridian, even.

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
My problem is more that both sides pretend they hate each other while maintaining the status so that both sides are employed. What is the loss of one seat for one politician? Nothing, not when that pol can just sign a million dollar book deal or get a job somewhere else with "help..."
I guess I think status-quo bias is mostly just baked into the way Congress was set up in the Constitution. More recently, it's baked into the idea that the Senate can't pass a damn thing without a 3/5ths majority, which is really pretty much something new as of 2009.
To the degree that politicians themselves work to maintain the status quo, I say that's usually lobbyist pressure talking. Businesses don't want the environment fixed, they want the freedom to make a profit polluting the world. Businesses don't want health care universal and inexpensive, they want it to be a huge profit-making industry.
Businesses also have wealth that makes the government's budget look like a triviality, and certainly have more wealth than any individual politician does. Bribery can be a strong motivator, and it's effectively legal now.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
For example; Charlie Christ ran against Marco Rubio. By himself, he would have won as a non-party candidate. However, Kendrick Meek (Democrat), a jackass with no chance in hell, not even Ralph Nadar close, kept in the race declaring he would be the victor. Either the man is mildly brain-damaged, or the quo was kept by two opposing allies. That's not paronia, that's simple math. Rubio won with Meek's full support, otherwise, the threat of someone who got tired of his party's bullshit would have threatened his precious "R"

In this case, I just don't think you have your facts right. Charlie Crist was the Republican governor of Florida, who stepped down to run for Senate as a Republican. Democratic party officials didn't really think they stood much of a chance against Crist, so they didn't really try to recruit a strong candidate, or devote much money to the race. Essentially, the Senate seat was going to be Crist's.
But, Crist made the fatal error of publicly endorsing the Obama stimulus package, and the rabid crazies that run the Republican party demanded he be primaried. In comes Marco Rubio to challenge Crist for the Republican nomination for Senate. This turns into a big, ugly battle, and both Crist and Rubio spend boatloads of cash on the primary. Rubio ultimately wins in a landslide -- 20 points, and gets endorsed by all the bigwigs, i.e. Boehner, McConnell, the NRSC, Michael Steele, etc.
Instead of taking the defeat and walking off the stage, Crist vowed to keep campaigning. At that point there was a ton of talk about whether Crist would run as an Independent, or a Democrat. A bunch of Democratic bigwigs, including Bill Clinton, personally approached Crist about running as a Democrat, even though Meek had already won the Democratic nomination.
Crist rejected that offer, and immediately started running ads slamming both Meek and Rubio. He burned his bridges with both parties.
So the election was a big three-way clusterfuck. Rubio was the Republican nominee, Meek was the Democratic nominee, and Crist chose to try to fight both parties. Even so, Democrats asked Meek to drop out and endorse Crist, but Meek thought that was a bridge too far -- Crist had not made any commitment to the Democratic party, and he was a Congressman and a full-fledged candidate for Senate in his own right, why should he drop out to help someone who wasn't a Democrat?
In the end, Rubio came out on top, but that was because he was the only one with any serious backing to his campaign, both monetarily and in terms of grassroots support (Rubio was a Tea Party darling). Meek had no money, and no grassroots support, and neither did Crist at the end of the day.
I remember it vividly because I was tantalized by the possibility of flipping Crist to the Democratic party and turning a sure Republican hold (due to Crist) into a situation where it became a likely Democratic pickup (due to Crist!). That kinda thing doesn't happen too often. <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/smile.gif">


Christ to me will always have lost because he was tag-teamed. Meek was asked to drop out because he was a loser that siphoned votes. He intentionally stayed for what purpose? I can't think of one besides pride, and that doesn't motivate politicians often enough to be valid.

Crist had a huge grassroots, and large support even if it wasn't tea party fanatics. He should have never been the one to walk off stage. He did the right thing, but right typically loses to the wrongs. I think Crist would never have been happy being a slave to either party--and that's why he left the insanity that is Florida's republicans.

He supported the Obama stimulus and that's fine. He went on attacks but even then kept a positive attitude. And this is why winners cannot be politicians.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:


My problem is more that both sides pretend they hate each other while maintaining the status so that both sides are employed. What is the loss of one seat for one politician? Nothing, not when that pol can just sign a million dollar book deal or get a job somewhere else with "help..."

I guess I think status-quo bias is mostly just baked into the way Congress was set up in the Constitution. More recently, it's baked into the idea that the Senate can't pass a damn thing without a 3/5ths majority, which is really pretty much something new as of 2009.

To the degree that politicians themselves work to maintain the status quo, I say that's usually lobbyist pressure talking. Businesses don't want the environment fixed, they want the freedom to make a profit polluting the world. Businesses don't want health care universal and inexpensive, they want it to be a huge profit-making industry.

Businesses also have wealth that makes the government's budget look like a triviality, and certainly have more wealth than any individual politician does. Bribery can be a strong motivator, and it's effectively legal now.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

For example; Charlie Christ ran against Marco Rubio. By himself, he would have won as a non-party candidate. However, Kendrick Meek (Democrat), a jackass with no chance in hell, not even Ralph Nadar close, kept in the race declaring he would be the victor. Either the man is mildly brain-damaged, or the quo was kept by two opposing allies. That's not paronia, that's simple math. Rubio won with Meek's full support, otherwise, the threat of someone who got tired of his party's bullshit would have threatened his precious "R"


In this case, I just don't think you have your facts right. Charlie Crist was the Republican governor of Florida, who stepped down to run for Senate as a Republican. Democratic party officials didn't really think they stood much of a chance against Crist, so they didn't really try to recruit a strong candidate, or devote much money to the race. Essentially, the Senate seat was going to be Crist's.

But, Crist made the fatal error of publicly endorsing the Obama stimulus package, and the rabid crazies that run the Republican party demanded he be primaried. In comes Marco Rubio to challenge Crist for the Republican nomination for Senate. This turns into a big, ugly battle, and both Crist and Rubio spend boatloads of cash on the primary. Rubio ultimately wins in a landslide -- 20 points, and gets endorsed by all the bigwigs, i.e. Boehner, McConnell, the NRSC, Michael Steele, etc.

Instead of taking the defeat and walking off the stage, Crist vowed to keep campaigning. At that point there was a ton of talk about whether Crist would run as an Independent, or a Democrat. A bunch of Democratic bigwigs, including Bill Clinton, personally approached Crist about running as a Democrat, even though Meek had already won the Democratic nomination.

Crist rejected that offer, and immediately started running ads slamming both Meek and Rubio. He burned his bridges with both parties.

So the election was a big three-way clusterfuck. Rubio was the Republican nominee, Meek was the Democratic nominee, and Crist chose to try to fight both parties. Even so, Democrats asked Meek to drop out and endorse Crist, but Meek thought that was a bridge too far -- Crist had not made any commitment to the Democratic party, and he was a Congressman and a full-fledged candidate for Senate in his own right, why should he drop out to help someone who wasn't a Democrat?

In the end, Rubio came out on top, but that was because he was the only one with any serious backing to his campaign, both monetarily and in terms of grassroots support (Rubio was a Tea Party darling). Meek had no money, and no grassroots support, and neither did Crist at the end of the day.

I remember it vividly because I was tantalized by the possibility of flipping Crist to the Democratic party and turning a sure Republican hold (due to Crist) into a situation where it became a likely Democratic pickup (due to Crist!). That kinda thing doesn't happen too often.

I think a hero can be more than a dangerous situation or accomplishments..

The man who works his fingers to the bone for his children and still has time to throw them around in the air like superman (That's to you dad.)

The woman who looks to an abusive husband and says, "Fuck you, I don't need you." (That's to you Mrs. Lawdeedaw--when she did that to her previous husband.)

The little girl who returns the penny to the man who dropped it because his mother gives 'that nod' to her. Then the man who smiles at her, and gives her a dollar for the effort.

We have sensationized 'hero' so much that few people are heroes at all. The Soldiers fighting the wars? Mecenaries. The cops? Same. It is why you do something that vastly outweights what you do.

*Steps off soapbox.

>> ^messenger:
I mostly like the risk/sacrifice definition of "hero", but I think there's also an element of "saving a dire situation with a feat of excellence at a critical moment". It's like when Joe Carter hit his walk-off home run to end the 1993 World Series (heroic), as opposed to when he merely caught the ball in a routine play at 1st base to win the 1994 series (not heroic). That's the one that I feel applies here which unquestionably makes this guy a hero.>> ^burdturgler:
>> ^EMPIRE:
He saved her, and that's great. Really is.
But... isn't the word hero being thrown around rather lightly? Why was that heroic at all?

I can't win with titles on the sift. I say a cop smashes a girls teeth out and I get called a liar because her teeth were only chipped out, not knocked out. A cop leaps forward and snatches a girl when she has half an inch of ass on the ledge of a 40 foot roof.. "hero" is too strong a word.
You say he saved her life and then ask why that's heroic in the same comment. Isn't that enough? What did you do today?

I mostly like the risk/sacrifice definition of "hero", but I think there's also an element of "saving a dire situation with a feat of excellence at a critical moment". It's like when Joe Carter hit his walk-off home run to end the 1993 World Series (heroic), as opposed to when he merely caught the ball in a routine play at 1st base to win the 1994 series (not heroic). That's the one that I feel applies here which unquestionably makes this guy a hero.>> ^burdturgler:

>> ^EMPIRE:
He saved her, and that's great. Really is.
But... isn't the word hero being thrown around rather lightly? Why was that heroic at all?

I can't win with titles on the sift. I say a cop smashes a girls teeth out and I get called a liar because her teeth were only chipped out, not knocked out. A cop leaps forward and snatches a girl when she has half an inch of ass on the ledge of a 40 foot roof.. "hero" is too strong a word.
You say he saved her life and then ask why that's heroic in the same comment. Isn't that enough? What did you do today?

The end of this video reminded me of a baseball game I played when I was about 17. (Bear with me, there is a connection.)

Our league was broken down in your typical age fashion, and I think I was in the 16-20 bracket. I was on first base when the other teams batter walked to the plate. He was 20, and in the "I'm as old as you can get in this league, so I'm going to be an cocky twat" mindset.

I don't remember the exact count, but strike 3 was called on a ball that was low and on the outside corner of the plate.

He stood there for a solid 10 seconds just glaring at the ump until I finally said "That means you gotta walk."

He then turned and glared right at me and said "No, I got a strikeout."

I replied "That means you gotta walk.. Off the field." and pointed to his bench.

Much laughter ensued, and for the rest of the season that kid hated me. Worth it though.