[temeculaguy]

[quote=svelte]…wanted to name him Salt, lol.

I’ll never forget the day my youngest son (about 6 or 7 at the time) walked up to my wife and me and stated, as serious as anything, that from now on his name was “Cheetah”.

We tried to call him that from then on, we truly did try.[/quote]

I’m glad you caught that svelte, it’s my favorite part. If my vasectomy and my sanity happened to fail at the same time, I’d argue to name that kid salt, I’d settle for a middle name. I keep wondering if it happens, if in 20 years I see nametags with the name salt, the same way that I used to snicker when I would meet my kids friends and I knew where their name came from because i saw the movie too. How many 20 year olds are there right now named Ariel, since the little mermaid came out about 21 years ago. So in the future, if I meet a person named salt, I’m going to hand them whatever ammount of money that equals the current cost of two drinks, and tell them to buy their parents a round on me, I don’t know them, but i love them already.

Keep fighting for cheetah, it’s never too late, love it. Just think, there’s a grown man that will likely be drafted in the first round named “Jimmer,” you know that had to come from a sibling, and it hasn’t hurt him one bit.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=svelte]…wanted to name him Salt, lol.

I’ll never forget the day my youngest son (about 6 or 7 at the time) walked up to my wife and me and stated, as serious as anything, that from now on his name was “Cheetah”.

We tried to call him that from then on, we truly did try.[/quote]

I’m glad you caught that svelte, it’s my favorite part. If my vasectomy and my sanity happened to fail at the same time, I’d argue to name that kid salt, I’d settle for a middle name. I keep wondering if it happens, if in 20 years I see nametags with the name salt, the same way that I used to snicker when I would meet my kids friends and I knew where their name came from because i saw the movie too. How many 20 year olds are there right now named Ariel, since the little mermaid came out about 21 years ago. So in the future, if I meet a person named salt, I’m going to hand them whatever ammount of money that equals the current cost of two drinks, and tell them to buy their parents a round on me, I don’t know them, but i love them already.

Keep fighting for cheetah, it’s never too late, love it. Just think, there’s a grown man that will likely be drafted in the first round named “Jimmer,” you know that had to come from a sibling, and it hasn’t hurt him one bit.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=svelte]…wanted to name him Salt, lol.

I’ll never forget the day my youngest son (about 6 or 7 at the time) walked up to my wife and me and stated, as serious as anything, that from now on his name was “Cheetah”.

We tried to call him that from then on, we truly did try.[/quote]

I’m glad you caught that svelte, it’s my favorite part. If my vasectomy and my sanity happened to fail at the same time, I’d argue to name that kid salt, I’d settle for a middle name. I keep wondering if it happens, if in 20 years I see nametags with the name salt, the same way that I used to snicker when I would meet my kids friends and I knew where their name came from because i saw the movie too. How many 20 year olds are there right now named Ariel, since the little mermaid came out about 21 years ago. So in the future, if I meet a person named salt, I’m going to hand them whatever ammount of money that equals the current cost of two drinks, and tell them to buy their parents a round on me, I don’t know them, but i love them already.

Keep fighting for cheetah, it’s never too late, love it. Just think, there’s a grown man that will likely be drafted in the first round named “Jimmer,” you know that had to come from a sibling, and it hasn’t hurt him one bit.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=svelte]…wanted to name him Salt, lol.

I’ll never forget the day my youngest son (about 6 or 7 at the time) walked up to my wife and me and stated, as serious as anything, that from now on his name was “Cheetah”.

We tried to call him that from then on, we truly did try.[/quote]

I’m glad you caught that svelte, it’s my favorite part. If my vasectomy and my sanity happened to fail at the same time, I’d argue to name that kid salt, I’d settle for a middle name. I keep wondering if it happens, if in 20 years I see nametags with the name salt, the same way that I used to snicker when I would meet my kids friends and I knew where their name came from because i saw the movie too. How many 20 year olds are there right now named Ariel, since the little mermaid came out about 21 years ago. So in the future, if I meet a person named salt, I’m going to hand them whatever ammount of money that equals the current cost of two drinks, and tell them to buy their parents a round on me, I don’t know them, but i love them already.

Keep fighting for cheetah, it’s never too late, love it. Just think, there’s a grown man that will likely be drafted in the first round named “Jimmer,” you know that had to come from a sibling, and it hasn’t hurt him one bit.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=briansd1]TG’s platform is a populist platform, with cosmetic surgery and porn thrown in.

Tightening the shit out of the borders won’t work and will never happen. Economic growth depends on continual immigration and new household formation. That’s what America is all about.[/quote]

maybe I should have clarified, I am against illegal immigration, not immigration. I’m cool with the same amount of immigrants, but with pictures and fingerprints on the way in, not the way out, that’s all. Bring us your tired and weary, but can you sign the guestbook? And dont tell me we can organaize or coordinate that much data, we cant get our s%^t together when we want to.

Secondly, and most importantly, why is a populist agenda bad? Am I misinterpreting the word “populist.” Does it mean that it is popular? SO does that mean most people want it? How is it, that in the society that is most free, where markets and products and everything else shifts to the “populist” opinion, that politics cannot? Can’t either side figure out that certain elements of their platforms are not popular and modify them. Can I make an anaology, it’s as if there are only two vehicles available for sale, a prius or a suburban, nothing else. And neither company can figure out that neither of those vehicles will be be the best selling vehicle in the country if there was another choice. The camry, the accord, the F-150, even the taurus, I think ahve all had their turn as the top seller (forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m guessing). I understand that an argument can be made for each, but they are extremes, most of us want something in the middle somewhere. Maybe it’s a fairy tale that doesnt apply, but one is too hot, one is too cold and the third one is just right. Do I need to break into the home of the three bears to get one that’s just right? The first one to the middle wins, how is this so hard to see. In the immortal words or Judge Smails….”Well,….were waiting.”

[temeculaguy]

[quote=briansd1]TG’s platform is a populist platform, with cosmetic surgery and porn thrown in.

Tightening the shit out of the borders won’t work and will never happen. Economic growth depends on continual immigration and new household formation. That’s what America is all about.[/quote]

maybe I should have clarified, I am against illegal immigration, not immigration. I’m cool with the same amount of immigrants, but with pictures and fingerprints on the way in, not the way out, that’s all. Bring us your tired and weary, but can you sign the guestbook? And dont tell me we can organaize or coordinate that much data, we cant get our s%^t together when we want to.

Secondly, and most importantly, why is a populist agenda bad? Am I misinterpreting the word “populist.” Does it mean that it is popular? SO does that mean most people want it? How is it, that in the society that is most free, where markets and products and everything else shifts to the “populist” opinion, that politics cannot? Can’t either side figure out that certain elements of their platforms are not popular and modify them. Can I make an anaology, it’s as if there are only two vehicles available for sale, a prius or a suburban, nothing else. And neither company can figure out that neither of those vehicles will be be the best selling vehicle in the country if there was another choice. The camry, the accord, the F-150, even the taurus, I think ahve all had their turn as the top seller (forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m guessing). I understand that an argument can be made for each, but they are extremes, most of us want something in the middle somewhere. Maybe it’s a fairy tale that doesnt apply, but one is too hot, one is too cold and the third one is just right. Do I need to break into the home of the three bears to get one that’s just right? The first one to the middle wins, how is this so hard to see. In the immortal words or Judge Smails….”Well,….were waiting.”

[temeculaguy]

[quote=briansd1]TG’s platform is a populist platform, with cosmetic surgery and porn thrown in.

Tightening the shit out of the borders won’t work and will never happen. Economic growth depends on continual immigration and new household formation. That’s what America is all about.[/quote]

maybe I should have clarified, I am against illegal immigration, not immigration. I’m cool with the same amount of immigrants, but with pictures and fingerprints on the way in, not the way out, that’s all. Bring us your tired and weary, but can you sign the guestbook? And dont tell me we can organaize or coordinate that much data, we cant get our s%^t together when we want to.

Secondly, and most importantly, why is a populist agenda bad? Am I misinterpreting the word “populist.” Does it mean that it is popular? SO does that mean most people want it? How is it, that in the society that is most free, where markets and products and everything else shifts to the “populist” opinion, that politics cannot? Can’t either side figure out that certain elements of their platforms are not popular and modify them. Can I make an anaology, it’s as if there are only two vehicles available for sale, a prius or a suburban, nothing else. And neither company can figure out that neither of those vehicles will be be the best selling vehicle in the country if there was another choice. The camry, the accord, the F-150, even the taurus, I think ahve all had their turn as the top seller (forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m guessing). I understand that an argument can be made for each, but they are extremes, most of us want something in the middle somewhere. Maybe it’s a fairy tale that doesnt apply, but one is too hot, one is too cold and the third one is just right. Do I need to break into the home of the three bears to get one that’s just right? The first one to the middle wins, how is this so hard to see. In the immortal words or Judge Smails….”Well,….were waiting.”

[temeculaguy]

[quote=briansd1]TG’s platform is a populist platform, with cosmetic surgery and porn thrown in.

Tightening the shit out of the borders won’t work and will never happen. Economic growth depends on continual immigration and new household formation. That’s what America is all about.[/quote]

maybe I should have clarified, I am against illegal immigration, not immigration. I’m cool with the same amount of immigrants, but with pictures and fingerprints on the way in, not the way out, that’s all. Bring us your tired and weary, but can you sign the guestbook? And dont tell me we can organaize or coordinate that much data, we cant get our s%^t together when we want to.

Secondly, and most importantly, why is a populist agenda bad? Am I misinterpreting the word “populist.” Does it mean that it is popular? SO does that mean most people want it? How is it, that in the society that is most free, where markets and products and everything else shifts to the “populist” opinion, that politics cannot? Can’t either side figure out that certain elements of their platforms are not popular and modify them. Can I make an anaology, it’s as if there are only two vehicles available for sale, a prius or a suburban, nothing else. And neither company can figure out that neither of those vehicles will be be the best selling vehicle in the country if there was another choice. The camry, the accord, the F-150, even the taurus, I think ahve all had their turn as the top seller (forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m guessing). I understand that an argument can be made for each, but they are extremes, most of us want something in the middle somewhere. Maybe it’s a fairy tale that doesnt apply, but one is too hot, one is too cold and the third one is just right. Do I need to break into the home of the three bears to get one that’s just right? The first one to the middle wins, how is this so hard to see. In the immortal words or Judge Smails….”Well,….were waiting.”

[temeculaguy]

[quote=briansd1]TG’s platform is a populist platform, with cosmetic surgery and porn thrown in.

Tightening the shit out of the borders won’t work and will never happen. Economic growth depends on continual immigration and new household formation. That’s what America is all about.[/quote]

maybe I should have clarified, I am against illegal immigration, not immigration. I’m cool with the same amount of immigrants, but with pictures and fingerprints on the way in, not the way out, that’s all. Bring us your tired and weary, but can you sign the guestbook? And dont tell me we can organaize or coordinate that much data, we cant get our s%^t together when we want to.

Secondly, and most importantly, why is a populist agenda bad? Am I misinterpreting the word “populist.” Does it mean that it is popular? SO does that mean most people want it? How is it, that in the society that is most free, where markets and products and everything else shifts to the “populist” opinion, that politics cannot? Can’t either side figure out that certain elements of their platforms are not popular and modify them. Can I make an anaology, it’s as if there are only two vehicles available for sale, a prius or a suburban, nothing else. And neither company can figure out that neither of those vehicles will be be the best selling vehicle in the country if there was another choice. The camry, the accord, the F-150, even the taurus, I think ahve all had their turn as the top seller (forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m guessing). I understand that an argument can be made for each, but they are extremes, most of us want something in the middle somewhere. Maybe it’s a fairy tale that doesnt apply, but one is too hot, one is too cold and the third one is just right. Do I need to break into the home of the three bears to get one that’s just right? The first one to the middle wins, how is this so hard to see. In the immortal words or Judge Smails….”Well,….were waiting.”

[temeculaguy]

I agree with BG, and I do hate to nitpick, but the dates and the credit are partially inaccurate, however the conclusion is correct. 1990-1993 was perhaps the highest crime rate locally and nationally. Yes, those programs were invented in the 70’s and 80’s, but they didn’t get implemented on a large scale until the early 1990’s, combined with three strikes and later DNA and technology (cameras, cashless society, cell phones) each took another bite, the trends all started heading downward in the mid 1990’s. Today, despite horrible economic conditions, we are in the 1960’s and in some categories, the 1950’s as far as crime statistics go. However the media exploded with technology at the same time, so the perception began to seperate from the reality at about the same time. Locally we lay claim to being the jeruselum of meth production and in the late 80’s, was its local heyday and it caused the creation of task forces that drove the production from the region, but it took a decade and we are still dealing with the aftermath but not on quite the scale. I hate to get into politics, those that know me, know this to be true. But it was during the Clinton years (1993-2001) that the community policing grants and the officer next door program were given priority(where cops got cut price housing in the worst areas but had to live there). Luckily, after the the terroist attacks and the funding drying up for domestic uses, the crime rates didnt reverse direction.

I don’t want to get into a protracted argument, just want to point out that we haven’t enjoyed low crime rates since the 70’s or 80’s, in fact those years and the early 90’s were the worst in history, that’s where the bars come from. But I do agree with BG, it’s nothing is like it once was, dont get too bent out of shape by the bars, I lived in two of those zip codes in the 80’s, I lost a couple of car steros, big deal.

Now Mexico, different story. What once was a fantastic place for the under 21 students on a budget and without a fake i.d., has gone to hell in a handbasket. Keep him out of there until they get a handle on their little “issues.”

[temeculaguy]

I agree with BG, and I do hate to nitpick, but the dates and the credit are partially inaccurate, however the conclusion is correct. 1990-1993 was perhaps the highest crime rate locally and nationally. Yes, those programs were invented in the 70’s and 80’s, but they didn’t get implemented on a large scale until the early 1990’s, combined with three strikes and later DNA and technology (cameras, cashless society, cell phones) each took another bite, the trends all started heading downward in the mid 1990’s. Today, despite horrible economic conditions, we are in the 1960’s and in some categories, the 1950’s as far as crime statistics go. However the media exploded with technology at the same time, so the perception began to seperate from the reality at about the same time. Locally we lay claim to being the jeruselum of meth production and in the late 80’s, was its local heyday and it caused the creation of task forces that drove the production from the region, but it took a decade and we are still dealing with the aftermath but not on quite the scale. I hate to get into politics, those that know me, know this to be true. But it was during the Clinton years (1993-2001) that the community policing grants and the officer next door program were given priority(where cops got cut price housing in the worst areas but had to live there). Luckily, after the the terroist attacks and the funding drying up for domestic uses, the crime rates didnt reverse direction.

I don’t want to get into a protracted argument, just want to point out that we haven’t enjoyed low crime rates since the 70’s or 80’s, in fact those years and the early 90’s were the worst in history, that’s where the bars come from. But I do agree with BG, it’s nothing is like it once was, dont get too bent out of shape by the bars, I lived in two of those zip codes in the 80’s, I lost a couple of car steros, big deal.

Now Mexico, different story. What once was a fantastic place for the under 21 students on a budget and without a fake i.d., has gone to hell in a handbasket. Keep him out of there until they get a handle on their little “issues.”

[temeculaguy]

I agree with BG, and I do hate to nitpick, but the dates and the credit are partially inaccurate, however the conclusion is correct. 1990-1993 was perhaps the highest crime rate locally and nationally. Yes, those programs were invented in the 70’s and 80’s, but they didn’t get implemented on a large scale until the early 1990’s, combined with three strikes and later DNA and technology (cameras, cashless society, cell phones) each took another bite, the trends all started heading downward in the mid 1990’s. Today, despite horrible economic conditions, we are in the 1960’s and in some categories, the 1950’s as far as crime statistics go. However the media exploded with technology at the same time, so the perception began to seperate from the reality at about the same time. Locally we lay claim to being the jeruselum of meth production and in the late 80’s, was its local heyday and it caused the creation of task forces that drove the production from the region, but it took a decade and we are still dealing with the aftermath but not on quite the scale. I hate to get into politics, those that know me, know this to be true. But it was during the Clinton years (1993-2001) that the community policing grants and the officer next door program were given priority(where cops got cut price housing in the worst areas but had to live there). Luckily, after the the terroist attacks and the funding drying up for domestic uses, the crime rates didnt reverse direction.

I don’t want to get into a protracted argument, just want to point out that we haven’t enjoyed low crime rates since the 70’s or 80’s, in fact those years and the early 90’s were the worst in history, that’s where the bars come from. But I do agree with BG, it’s nothing is like it once was, dont get too bent out of shape by the bars, I lived in two of those zip codes in the 80’s, I lost a couple of car steros, big deal.

Now Mexico, different story. What once was a fantastic place for the under 21 students on a budget and without a fake i.d., has gone to hell in a handbasket. Keep him out of there until they get a handle on their little “issues.”

[temeculaguy]

I agree with BG, and I do hate to nitpick, but the dates and the credit are partially inaccurate, however the conclusion is correct. 1990-1993 was perhaps the highest crime rate locally and nationally. Yes, those programs were invented in the 70’s and 80’s, but they didn’t get implemented on a large scale until the early 1990’s, combined with three strikes and later DNA and technology (cameras, cashless society, cell phones) each took another bite, the trends all started heading downward in the mid 1990’s. Today, despite horrible economic conditions, we are in the 1960’s and in some categories, the 1950’s as far as crime statistics go. However the media exploded with technology at the same time, so the perception began to seperate from the reality at about the same time. Locally we lay claim to being the jeruselum of meth production and in the late 80’s, was its local heyday and it caused the creation of task forces that drove the production from the region, but it took a decade and we are still dealing with the aftermath but not on quite the scale. I hate to get into politics, those that know me, know this to be true. But it was during the Clinton years (1993-2001) that the community policing grants and the officer next door program were given priority(where cops got cut price housing in the worst areas but had to live there). Luckily, after the the terroist attacks and the funding drying up for domestic uses, the crime rates didnt reverse direction.

I don’t want to get into a protracted argument, just want to point out that we haven’t enjoyed low crime rates since the 70’s or 80’s, in fact those years and the early 90’s were the worst in history, that’s where the bars come from. But I do agree with BG, it’s nothing is like it once was, dont get too bent out of shape by the bars, I lived in two of those zip codes in the 80’s, I lost a couple of car steros, big deal.

Now Mexico, different story. What once was a fantastic place for the under 21 students on a budget and without a fake i.d., has gone to hell in a handbasket. Keep him out of there until they get a handle on their little “issues.”

[temeculaguy]

I agree with BG, and I do hate to nitpick, but the dates and the credit are partially inaccurate, however the conclusion is correct. 1990-1993 was perhaps the highest crime rate locally and nationally. Yes, those programs were invented in the 70’s and 80’s, but they didn’t get implemented on a large scale until the early 1990’s, combined with three strikes and later DNA and technology (cameras, cashless society, cell phones) each took another bite, the trends all started heading downward in the mid 1990’s. Today, despite horrible economic conditions, we are in the 1960’s and in some categories, the 1950’s as far as crime statistics go. However the media exploded with technology at the same time, so the perception began to seperate from the reality at about the same time. Locally we lay claim to being the jeruselum of meth production and in the late 80’s, was its local heyday and it caused the creation of task forces that drove the production from the region, but it took a decade and we are still dealing with the aftermath but not on quite the scale. I hate to get into politics, those that know me, know this to be true. But it was during the Clinton years (1993-2001) that the community policing grants and the officer next door program were given priority(where cops got cut price housing in the worst areas but had to live there). Luckily, after the the terroist attacks and the funding drying up for domestic uses, the crime rates didnt reverse direction.

I don’t want to get into a protracted argument, just want to point out that we haven’t enjoyed low crime rates since the 70’s or 80’s, in fact those years and the early 90’s were the worst in history, that’s where the bars come from. But I do agree with BG, it’s nothing is like it once was, dont get too bent out of shape by the bars, I lived in two of those zip codes in the 80’s, I lost a couple of car steros, big deal.

Now Mexico, different story. What once was a fantastic place for the under 21 students on a budget and without a fake i.d., has gone to hell in a handbasket. Keep him out of there until they get a handle on their little “issues.”

[temeculaguy]

Yang’s odds were 60 to 1, McIlroy was 20 to 1, before it started. I’ve never bet on golf, my most recent trip to vegas was my first time even in the sports book, since it was the middle of march madness, I never ventured out of the basketball area. I love the horse races, I guess golf is just a big horse race with 100+ horses. Well my picks were doing well at about the midway point, but they all seem to stumble on the back 9. It’s still early, 3 more days to go, hopefully 3 of them will make the cut.

http://www.gambling911.com/sports/us-open-championship-betting-odds-2011-061511.html

I’m not sure if this link changes its numbers, because I know they odds change, especially after the cut, not sure if they let you bet after each day. I wonder if they have exactas or trifectas, it must be lottery like payoffs. Just think, $10 on Yang pays $600, Yang is an easy $10. I think McIlroy will eventually finish a tourney, he’s young and he’s good. The open and the courses they usually use often reward consistency, the average age of the winner is 32, McCilroy’s history and the history of the open seem to work against him for this event, but at some point he’s going to add the last element he’s been missing, finishing. The local indian casinos need to get approval to add sports books, they have everything else. Golf betting seems so slow paced, far less than horse racing or blackjack and those are legal.

I’m still in my low 40’s and now I’m talking odds about golf, could this be the signal that I’ve begun andropause? Maybe I should just go buy a buick and get it over with.

[Author]

Posts