StrangeSox

Thanks, "crowd sourcing" internet!

jesus christ this rain. The retention pond next to my work, which is usually about 6 feet below our driveway, is within a foot of coming over the top. Half of my yard was flooded before I left.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 05:54 PM) Wasn't sure what thread to use for this, forgive me if it should have been elsewhere. I haven't been in the Buster in months... Today, the US Senate rejected the background check amendment to the larger gun control bill. The amendment would have expanded background checks to gun shows, online purchases, and other currently exempted venues. It left exceptions for family transactions, and one-off private sales. It also specifically stated that no gun registry could be created. Rejected. Why? The NRA cannot give you a reason. Seriously, try to find it - they give literally no reason for opposing it. 80 to 90% of Americans favor it. It does not restrict ownership to anyone, other than those who might fail a background check, like violent felons. It does not create a registry. It does not effect familial transactions. The opponents are the small minority here, and cannot give you a single reason why they oppose it. Still failed. Now, people here who know my past posts on this topic know, I am opposed to registries. I am opposed to most or all new restrictions on types of guns. I am opposed to most new gun regs. But this, to me, is a no-brainer. No harm is done, and some harm will be prevented. How is this even controversial? Will it solve everything? No one is saying that. Except the NRA's straw man. I am disgusted. As if the Senate shouldn't already be embarrassed for a multitude of reasons, this one really stands out. The cowardly losers who voted against this should be ashamed of themselves. That is all. Why? Combine the Senate's anti-democratic heavy weighting in favor of rural states with their dumb procedural rules that Reid refused to revise.

A minority of Senators killed the highly popular watered-down background check bill in the Senate. Isn't it great when every single bill requires a supermajority? If only the head of the Senate could have done something about this arcane, aconstitutional rule? Oh well.

http://gawker.com/5994892/your-guide-to-th...crowd+sleuthing

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 03:57 PM) Who needs big brother to do that, when we have all willingly done this ourselves? I guarantee it won't have been surveilance cameras that will have caught this, but cellphone or tv cameras. Supposedly the best shots come from a Lord & Taylor's surveillance camera. I dunno if you can count that as "big brother" though.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/update-th...nocent-b,32088/

Pretty much all of the stops along BNSF have reinvigorated downtown areas right near the train station.

QUOTE (daa84 @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 02:03 PM) Wtf CNN saying who cares

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 01:43 PM) Is it possible they leak bad information to the media to maybe make the real suspect "relax" so he's easier to catch? Is it possible bad information is leaked on purpose to find leakers? It's possible, but Occam's Razor just points to incompetent media trying to "break" the news

https://twitter.com/Boston_Police/status/324591574807891968 Boston Police Dept.Verified account ‏@Boston_Police Despite reports to the contrary there has not been an arrest in the Marathon attack.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 01:34 PM) I remember a day where I had to argue for hours about journalistic integrity. That being said, we will now slowly begin the walk back towards 1984. 1984 was a well-orchestrated propaganda machine controlled by a central entity. This is just a clusterf***.

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/324589083559092224 Reuters Top NewsVerified account ‏@Reuters No arrests made yet in Boston bomb investigation - government, law enforcement sources

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 01:29 PM) cnn.com hasn't taken anything down yet. this is what rushing to be the absolute first by a few seconds or minutes gets you:

hey dips***s in the media, stop trying to worry about "scooping" a story that will become public within a short time anyway, it doesn't actually mean anything and always makes you say dumb things.

QUOTE (Jake @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 01:25 PM) SS will like this Joseph Weisenthal ‏@TheStalwart 7m RT @guan: Is the arrest rumor based on an R&R Excel error? lulz

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 01:15 PM) @RBecklerPSU Wow. Some people on 4chan are compiling photos of possible Boston bomb suspects. Solid, very compelling work here. http://bit.ly/XGI25h yeah, I'm going to say that's a really terrible idea and is going to lead to a lot of people, victims actually, having their lives picked apart by random internet morons. The "Saudi Suspect" has already had his name and personal information go through the wringer.

Superman is pretty much a god on Earth, but not even a flawed god like the old Greek ones, which is why he's such a lame character.

That was a brilliant display of bipartisanship.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 12:22 PM) They said his statements were weird like "I thought there was going to be another explosion" that was probably enough. yeah but he was right, there were multiple explosions.

It's not impossible for police to be racial-profiling s***heads, let's not rule that one out.

We had a series of fights with our seller (really it was his real estate agent) including multiple threats to cancel the contract and re-list if we didn't agree to ever-changing demands.

Forgot to post this yesterday. It was the 50th Anniversary of King's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." One of the most powerful pieces of writing I've ever read. http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/L...Birmingham.html

Every person buys everything in cash. The mortgage industry disappeared somewhere around 1988. Which was one of the major theoretical problems with R&R's conclusions: if you followed them through and the US sold off some of its trillions-of-dollars-of-assets to lower the ratio to, say, 30%, we should expect substantially improved growth in the very near future. The whole thing was just an exercise in correlations, not a development of an actual explanatory model. And they likely got the causation wrong, anyway (slow growth leads to higher debt, not the other way around).

seems relevant: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comm...rathon-man.html