Dr. Pomade

Some of us are heading up to the Easton area in the next hour or so. Anyone who's interested in picking on or being picked on by some 03/04 Cobras should report to the parking lot near the Best Buy off Morse.

Originally posted by Tony_K:

You have just thoroughly demonstrated that you haven't the faintest clue what the APA is…I have never called someone's post on CR ignorant before, but what you just wrote is one of the most decisively ignorant things I have ever seen.

I’m not sure how to respond to this portion of your post without embarrassing you royally. So I won’t.

 

 

In response to your list of my "ignorant assumptions":

 

1) I never implied that it was a search engine;

2) The APA “takes stances” on things all the time (e.g., prescription privileges for psychologists) that have strong political over- and undertones;

3) I never implied that the APA doesn’t involve itself with reliable information – instead, I implied that results can be manipulated for all sorts of reasons, including political;

4) The APA is indeed a political group – I’m not sure how else I can say that – it’s entrusted with, among other things, promoting the political interests of American psychologists;

5) I never implied this, although the APA does it’s fair share of marketing, just like all powerful lobbying groups do.

 

Originally posted by Tony_K:

Do you really think porn is good for you? Do you really honestly think that use of pornography isn't associated with addiction, obsessive behavior, mistreatment of women, lack of discipline, relationship problems, and a host of social and relational problems? This is COMMON KNOWLEDGE. graemlins/slap.gif The research that demonstrates such associations has been with us and widely accepted for years.

If it’s “COMMON KNOWLEDGE,” then why would you need to cite the authority of the APA to support your claims? After all, if we all “know” these things to be self-evident, then we shouldn’t need to consult the APA to learn something we already “know.”

 

Originally posted by Tony_K:

"Men who regularly watch pornography are more likely to mistreat women than men who don't regularly watch pornography" is an example of an ASSOCIATION.

So are men who watch professional sports.

 

Now, will we be seeing from you a dissertation denouncing professional sports in America, given the “obvious” detriments that they pose to our society?

 

Tony_K, I initially responded to your post because I thought it might be a good exercise in exchanging healthy dialogue. In doing so, I worded what I said with care, as I’ve done here – attempting to maintain the spirit of civil debate. So, when you craft your response, recognize that referring to my posts or assumptions as “ignorant” strains my ability to consider this a worthwhile conversation as well as my tolerance for not up and flaming the living hell out of you.

Originally posted by controler:

Human limit is 4 in a night though... 5th you puke.

There's a challenge if I've ever seen one.

Originally posted by Mowgli:

So I just sorta decided to leave you far behind to continue whatever it was you were about.

Owned.

Originally posted by Tony_K:

http://www.apa.org/

 

have fun.

What exactly was I supposed to find? Some conclusory statement that reads, "Four out of five psychologists agree that pornography is bad," or something to that effect?

 

Seriously, I'm not sure that APA has issued forth a statement on their stance regarding pornography. Even if they did, who's to say they're right? As an organization, they are a political body, with a politial agenda and political influences. Thus, what they say (be either pro-pornography, anti-pornography, or somewhere in between) may be politically based, and not necessarily research driven. Also, we all know (or we all should know) that you can make "research" say whatever you want it to say. So, simply because Dr. Puritanism completes a study and makes some conclusions about pornography being "bad" doesn't make it psychological law.

Originally posted by stillpimp:

Buster Hyman *who is the girl who posted pics of her boobs awhile back if I'm not mistaken*

Now would be an opportune time for a repost.

Originally posted by Dark_Viper01:

I wish I could shoot those geese, I hate them.

+1. And geese are about arrogant, aren't they? Just slowly sauntering out in front of traffic as though they're expecting you to stop, or hissing at you as you walk by. It's like they don't realize they're lower on the fucking food chain.

Originally posted by Fastest Bench on CR:

i did a paper about this in school. like 2 million or so birds die yearly from flying into windows.

Yes, but how many of the windows were also hurt? Windows have feelings too.

Originally posted by Slo Pony:

(nearly) 2 ton terror vs. da world.

Oh,(nearly) two tons isn't that hard to get moving quickly. smile.gif

 

The White Snail owns.

Bikes > * at pulling bitches.

In the comics, Bullseye was a wicked villian. But, yeah, the movie sucked, including the movie version of Bullseye.

Yikes. Badass.

Originally posted by General:

Did anyone read my post? The police are not going to handle the check being ripped up or the "stolen mail".

Originally posted by Venomss:

I wouldn't be surprised if CPD aren't terribly receptive, especially if you call them and ask for an escort. I don't know the law, so I'm not sure if, legally, they are obligated to provide an escort.

Yeah, they're just alike, but only not.

Originally posted by Mowgli:

I wasn't impressed at all by Gladiator's fights scenes. That is, the secnes were good - the filming of them sucked. Switching to every-other-frame and 15fps mode in a full sized film is pure cheeze. Better ways to convey the cnfusion and franticness of cmbat than that... eh.

I have to respectfully disagree. I remember the opening sequence (e.g., "On my signal, unleash Hell...") being masterful, and I particularly liked the filming - something about the filming speed or film quality that reminded me of the opening sequence to Saving Private Ryan (which, IMO, is the most griping and intense opening sequence of any movie, ever).

Entered several variations of my name (first + last, first + middle + last, first + middle + last + jr.), and here's what I got:

 

Cowboy

Rabbit Slayer

Bearded Lady in a Circus

 

Then, I entered my "porn name" (i.e., name of first pet + name of first street you lived on) and this is what I got for my job prediction:

 

Shoplifting

Congrats. Enjoy. graemlins/thumb.gif

Originally posted by Keyword:

It does not have their name on it. The mail does not belong to them, they will not give it back to him, they have stolen his mail. My logic is not warped, it is correct. Think about it for a minute. If you live with your parents, and own your own car, you will have your name on the registration. The car is registered to you, and you alone. Just because the car is registered to the same address as your parents doesn't mean the car belongs to them too. If they wouldn't let you take your car, you could report it stolen and they would be arrested. I know it is a weird example, but it is the only way to describe it.

Okay, I understand where you're coming from, and I think we're essentially in some kind of agreement.

Yeah, I've always been a fan of Greek and Roman mythology. Less knowledgeable about Norse mythology, but I still dig it - how can you not like a God of Lies? graemlins/thumb.gif I've read the "classics" (e.g., Illiad, Odyssey, etc.) several times over and taken several courses in mythology. Really good stuff.

Originally posted by Keyword:

It is stealing mail because it is not addressed to them. THeir name is not one it, and they refuse to give it to him, therefore they are stealing his mail.

If they live there, and it has their address on it, then they cannot be accused of stealing it if it simply delivered to their residence. To take it to the absurb (but still abide by your warped logic), we've all committed this so-called federal offense whenever we've found someone else's mail (e.g., a previous tenant) in our mailbox.

 

Now, if they are withholding property that rightly belongs to another, then I'm sure that qualifies as some crime, though I'm not sure it would be stealing.

 

Also, it's not his mail, it's hers.

Not sure they could be convicted of a federal offense (i.e., stealing mail) - after all, they live there too, and the mail's coming to their address. However, if they opened the mail with the intent of defrauding the contents or cashing the check, then that's a different story. (Though I'm not sure they've done either of those things.)

 

I wouldn't be surprised if CPD aren't terribly receptive, especially if you call them and ask for an escort. I don't know the law, so I'm not sure if, legally, they are obligated to provide an escort. Then again, in my experience, it seems like CPD, in good faith, would provide an escort, particularly given the parameters (e.g., a woman with men as ex-roommates, her trepidation about returning, etc.).

 

Taking over some bruisers to strong-arm the check out of them may backfire. All the roommates would need to do is look out on the porch, see your meaty friends, and then call the police to frantically report that you're bringing by goons to work them over. They may just very well convince the police that they are the "real" victims in the situation, leading the police to view you as the aggressor and the party at fault.

 

Maybe you could have a convincing friend call, act as though they are an attorney, indicate that they are representing you and that, in order for them to avoid legal prosecution, they must deliver your check to a specified address within two business days. After all, you can always use the force (i.e., the strongarm tactics) at a later date if other options don't work.

 

Also, I agree about calling the place where the check was issued and letting them know the situation. It may be easiest just to have another check issued. Also, they'll be able to tell if the check has been cashed (and thus tip you off with respect to any fraud/theft on their part).

 

Additionally, you can call just about any attorney in the phone book and receive a free, albeit brief, consultation on the matter.

Done.

Originally posted by yenner:

Your welcome dick. Colin Farrel my ass. She's a no talented ass clown who got rich because she was a sweet innocent little virgin. Now she's just another slut. Sorry I may have ruined your fantasy's about her. My bad.

Dumbass - I'm critiquing you because your so called "secrets" are pretty much common knowledge and your "proof" of whiskey and cigarettes in a dressing room amounts to just about dick, not because I give two shits about Britney Spears or because you ruined some fantasy I had about her.

 

Originally posted by yenner:

Also, believe everything you see on TV.

Or, how about I believe every stupid ass post I come across on the Internet?

It looks as though the weather's taking a turn for the worse.

Originally posted by yenner:

Allow me to shine light on the situation.

 

While away from CR for a year I held 2 positions consecutively at Nationwide Arena. 1st as event security, gaurding the stages, backstage, what have you (advantages of being massive, and I don't neccessarily mean muscle mass). The 2nd was as an engineer. A good friend of mine is head engineer at the Arena and has allowed me to be in on many "secrets", a.k.a. the shit the public doesn't get to know. I was working the night she came to town. Every artist that comes to the arena from Brittany to you name it has requirements for their dressing rooms. In their contracts with the Arena, if the room is not stocked according to their specifications, they are allowed to refuse their performance. Such as security must allow them to take any girls they want backstage, and we did. I would be gaurding the door with a few others and band members from numerous groups would come out and start asking girls if they are over 18 and would take them backstage. Now that you have a somewhat general knowledge of how things are run at the arena let me show you Brittany's list of dressing room requirements while performing at the Arena in 2003. Keep in mind she had few (less than 15 that I saw, but thats a general figure) other people in the room with her throughout the night.

 

1) 2 5th's of Jack Daniel's

2) 2 CARTONS of Marlboro's

 

I shit you not and swear on my whole family's graves.

What light does this shed on anything? Anyone who's watched VH1 in the last year has seen about a dozen programs on the lifestyles of rock stars and demands performers make on arenas prior to staging a concert. No news there. And you even admitted that there were other people in the room with her for the entirety of the night. Thus, reasonably, she could have avoided both the booze and the cigarettes altogether. For all we know, all that booze and all those cigs could have been for Colin Farrel.

 

Thanks for the crack insider info.