First time visitor? Learn more.

Food – Beer – Music – Guns

by bar ( 49 Comments › )
Filed under Open thread at March 25th, 2009 - 2:56 pm

dscf0449

Picture of the view from the hotel room in Maui – 2006
In a few months I will be kicking it live there.

Tags: , , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

49 Responses to “Food – Beer – Music – Guns”
( jump to bottom )

  1. song_and_dance_man
    1 | March 25, 2009 3:09 pm

    Nice view bar.

    Tonight it’s broiled lemon talipia with parsley flakes, seasoned white rice with sauteed string beans with roasted pecan and from scratch tatar sauce. Yum.


  2. bar
    2 | March 25, 2009 3:17 pm

    That sounds good.

    Tonight for me its homemade Lasagna garlic bread and beer.


  3. song_and_dance_man
    3 | March 25, 2009 3:19 pm

    Oh, and a few beers. Work tomorrow and all.


  4. song_and_dance_man
    4 | March 25, 2009 3:21 pm

    bar

    I wish I could eat more cheese, but my age just isn’t conducive anymore to ingesting but a small amount of milk products on any given day.


  5. LanceKates
    5 | March 25, 2009 3:34 pm

    MMMMMMM……… guns….


  6. song_and_dance_man
    6 | March 25, 2009 3:41 pm

    Speaking of guns *looking at my biceps*

    Does anyone know the name of a good veterinarian. I need one quick,.. because these puppies are sick.


  7. no2liberals
    7 | March 25, 2009 4:20 pm

    Word up!
    CheyTac.


  8. no2liberals
    8 | March 25, 2009 4:28 pm

    Fried pork chops, rice and gravy, with green beans.
    /back later


  9. song_and_dance_man
    9 | March 25, 2009 4:33 pm

    I like pork but resist eating it. Same with shell fish.


  10. no2liberals
    10 | March 25, 2009 4:54 pm

    sadm,
    Resistance is futile!
    You are getting weaker.


  11. bar
    11 | March 25, 2009 4:56 pm

    I am a cheese freak.
    Cheese burgers are a major portion of my diet.
    My wife complains then I explain that pickles and onions are vegetables, I think?


  12. bar
    12 | March 25, 2009 4:58 pm

    n2l
    I never heard of a .408 caliber.

    That thing most be a cannon!


  13. bar
    14 | March 25, 2009 5:03 pm

    Wow, Angles in waiting was fired by the sociopath crazy Octo mom and now they are frying her on the news.
    I think the state should take those kids away, the state is going to pay for those kids anyways.
    That bitch is freaking crazy, like CJ. I wonder if he is the donor?
    :lol:


  14. Bayonet
    15 | March 25, 2009 5:08 pm

    Where is Wrath?

    Hamas is attacking Isreal again.

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/130591


  15. Bayonet
    16 | March 25, 2009 5:09 pm

    and Terrorists were stopped from attacking an Israel mall with a huge car bomb linked to Iran.

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/130546


  16. no2liberals
    17 | March 25, 2009 5:13 pm

    A song about food and fun.

    bar,
    Click on the video about the Cheytac on future weapons. It’s the most accurate long range rifle round.


  17. Bayonet
    18 | March 25, 2009 5:17 pm

    Over at 1.0 (not thread worthy)

    Queeg says:

    ON EVOLUTION:
    “On the pro-science side, we had distinguished scientists, researchers, and textbook authors. On the anti-evolution, pro-Dark Ages side, we had ministers, beauty queens, and Discovery Institute shill Casey Luskin.

    It’s sad and infuriating that in so many states, the Republican Party is now dominated by fanatics who want to force their fundamentalist religious views on everyone’s children, and ruin science education in America.”

    ON THE WAR ON TERROR:
    “I’m really not sorry to see the phrase “War on Terror” being retired by the Pentagon; it’s always seemed like a complete misnomer. You don’t fight a war against a tactic, you fight against people with an ideology. This battle would have been much better described as the “War on Militant Islam,” but our government is too hobbled by political correctness to ever be that direct and truthful.”

    ON SAUDI ARABIA:
    “The corrupt, obscenely wealthy rulers of Saudi Arabia continue playing Wahhabi bait-and-switch, promising reforms and delivering only more of the same Dark Agesmisogyny.”


  18. song_and_dance_man
    19 | March 25, 2009 5:27 pm

    So what else is new? 1.0 shows once again its dereliction bloomers in a Can Can dance of fools.


  19. song_and_dance_man
    20 | March 25, 2009 5:30 pm

    Kick it.


  20. bar
    21 | March 25, 2009 5:40 pm

    Warning, very hot chick.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9nqCM8Ito8
    At least I always thought so.


  21. no2liberals
    22 | March 25, 2009 5:55 pm

    bar,
    She was alright, but this girl was HOT.


  22. The Osprey
    23 | March 25, 2009 6:00 pm

    I think I stayed in the hotel that is on the right side of your picture when I was there in May of ’92.


  23. no2liberals
    24 | March 25, 2009 6:24 pm

    Verwy interestink!
    Charles Darwin’s Illegitimate Brainchild.

    History has bestowed the dubious credit for the idea of evolution by natural selection on Charles Darwin. Apart from the fact that selection itself, while a real phenomenon, is utterly impotent to provide the extra information necessary to produce new traits, most, if not all, of the major ideas attributed to Darwin had previously been discussed in print by others. Not only was this ‘brainchild’ of Darwin’s not really his, but it also had many fathers!

    Do the Darwin Dance.


  24. One of the Banned
    25 | March 25, 2009 6:45 pm

    #24, n2l-

    Just because Darwin drew upon older theories, doesn’t make it any less true.

    Also, a contemporary scholar of Darwin’s published much the same theory a year earlier, IIRC


  25. bar
    26 | March 25, 2009 6:54 pm

    23. The Osprey

    I think that will be were I will be staying a few months also.

    Whats kinda funny, you were there in Maui in May ‘92, me and the wife were in Oahu in May of ‘92 when the LA riots was going down.


  26. bar
    27 | March 25, 2009 7:02 pm

    # 24. n2l

    I forgot about her, she is hot. And I like Ozzy also.

    I cant recall where I read it, but someone was arguing against natural selection. Explaining that when random chance is added to this equation, natural selection is pretty invalid.
    Survival of the fittest, yet only those that survive are deem fittest.
    It sounded reasonable to me.


  27. no2liberals
    28 | March 25, 2009 7:12 pm

    One of the Banned,
    That doesn’t excuse plagiarism.


  28. no2liberals
    29 | March 25, 2009 7:14 pm

    bar,
    Survival of the fittest?
    Just look at the goof balls in Congress, and tell me where selection has been a success.


  29. no2liberals
    30 | March 25, 2009 7:15 pm

    South Parks on.


  30. One of the Banned
    31 | March 25, 2009 7:21 pm

    n2l-

    Plagiarism?

    More like convergent evolution of theories.


  31. no2liberals
    32 | March 25, 2009 7:33 pm

    One of the Banned,
    Did you read the article?
    He was scolded, repeatedly, for not giving credit for others work, and in some cases not even then.
    Even if he did build on others work, there are huge gaps in their collective findings.


  32. One of the Banned
    33 | March 25, 2009 8:00 pm

    I did read the article.

    I’ve heard this argument before, from much more reputable sources than a ‘Creation Ministries’ article.

    As to the ‘gaps in their collective findings’ argument, evolution is still more provable than creationism.

    And neither of us will know who is right until we die, unless science takes a big leap forward in the meantime.


  33. gclaghorn
    34 | March 25, 2009 8:03 pm

    Okay, this is getting ridiculous:

    Charles is now going after Republicans who want Obama to fail, thus buying into the media ploy to make the GOP sound like an America-Hating group.

    Good job, Charles. Way to think independently.

    I hope Rush calls out and thoroughly kicks his sorry, attention-whoring ass on air for the whole country to hear.


  34. no2liberals
    35 | March 25, 2009 8:06 pm

    …still more…unless…
    Whatever.


  35. no2liberals
    36 | March 25, 2009 8:06 pm

    gclaghorn,
    So the descent into madness is still on pace, I see.
    CJ is too insignificant for Rush to even notice.


  36. gclaghorn
    37 | March 25, 2009 8:29 pm

    I know, it’s a dream of mine that will never be fulfilled. But it would be nice if Rush made Charles even more insignificant than he is now (assuming that it is not physically impossible for Charles to get any lower for more blog readers).


  37. 38 | March 25, 2009 8:29 pm

    Memo to certain commenters: Comparing “evolution” with “creationism” does not make you look smart.

    The -ism suffix denotes a doctrine. Creationism is a doctrine. Evolution is a process. You cannot really compare a doctrine directly against a process, only indirectly in how the doctrine may address the process. In most cases this bit of masturbatory semantic foolery is sloppy arguing.

    Evolutionism and Creationism: two doctrines. Evolution and Creation: two processes. Try not to conflate the two comparisons and you will seem a good bit smarter.


  38. no2liberals
    39 | March 25, 2009 8:43 pm

    George guy,
    Since plagiarism is an act of volition, my use of the suffix is not applicable. :grin:


  39. no2liberals
    40 | March 25, 2009 9:16 pm

    People, whatever you do, don’t take a flight to Prague.
    /unless you are an existentialist


  40. One of the Banned
    41 | March 25, 2009 9:17 pm

    George guy-

    I’m posting at a blog, not writing an answer to an English exam, and I do know the difference between a doctrine and a process.

    /You’re a highschool English teacher, aren’t you?


  41. bar
    42 | March 25, 2009 9:26 pm

    Memo to George guy

    Wow, who knew that “evolution” was not a doctrine. Nothing like looking smart while telling others they are not.

    Note: consult a dictionary before you stick your foot in your mouth, unless you like doing that.


  42. bar
    43 | March 25, 2009 9:34 pm

    Here let me help you.

    Doctrine

    1 archaic : TEACHING, INSTRUCTION
    2 a : something that is taught b : a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : DOGMA c : a principle of law established through past decisions d : a statement of fundamental government policy especially in international relations e : a military principle or set of strategies

    How you can exclude “evolution” from that definition only the “smart” people know I guess.

    Its amazing the deformations some “evolutionist” try to perform, in order to stop criticism of their ideas.

    Is “ist” something special I should know about, I don’t want to appear stupid now.


  43. no2liberals
    44 | March 25, 2009 9:58 pm

    WOW!
    A new addition to the fossil record.


  44. 45 | March 25, 2009 10:25 pm

    I am saying that habitually referring to evolution and creationism as such usually is a deliberate use of those words. What I am suggesting is that it is an intentionally cretinous word play to consistently use evolution to refer to the doctrine of evolutionism and conflate it with scientifically observed processes, in order to imagine it as superior to creationism. That is, pretending evolutionism is not an -ism is somehow expected to earn some cheap points from the start. Anyone who wants to make that argument that evolutionism is a better perspective, fine. I just want to point out that the stupid word games are not necessarily impressing everyone.


  45. bar
    46 | March 25, 2009 10:34 pm

    45. George guy

    Ok, I think I understand your point now.
    I am a dumb creationist, so it takes a bit longer for me to get.


  46. Anastasia
    47 | March 25, 2009 10:52 pm

    #45- George guy
    #46- bar

    I THINK George is saying that accepting evolution, i.e., “the scientifically observed process,” is not the same thing as being an ideological “evolutionist,” or a metaphysical Darwinist, a believer in pure materialism and chance, as opposed to creation………which, for example, would make me an accepter of evolution, but NOT an evolutionist…..or actually an accepter of evolution and a creationist.
    And that people like CJ deliberately muddy the terms.
    But I’m getting confused. It’s late here.(Just because I have insomnia doesn’t mean my brain is still awake!)


  47. Anastasia
    48 | March 25, 2009 10:56 pm

    Re food and guns:

    We had tuna casserole for dinner.

    I don’t know anything about guns, but my son taught me to zap moths with rubber bands.


  48. bar
    49 | March 26, 2009 12:18 am

    Funny thing:
    I got this message on facebook the other day

    Of all the weird things people can remember about elementary school. The one thing I remembered about you was when we had assigned seating in Mrs. Etchies class. Before you would sit down, you’d fart right in my face and then I’d punch you really hard in the arm or stomach. Nice seeing you on facebook. hahaha

    Damn my reputation precedes me. I had no idea I was doing that in elementary school, I thought I didn’t do that until later in life.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David