Random hamburger.

Posted by: rdbrewer at 10:00 AM | Comments (96)
Post contains 6 words, total size 1 kb.

Well that was a (still going on) game in Denver. Now it's time for Green Bay at SF.

When I was a little girl both of these teams crushed my dreams, so the hell with em.

However...

I feel a gold rush.. in my pants.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 03:31 PM | Comments (373)
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

Baltimore at Denver. The altitude was hard on Obama, it'll be hard on the Ravens.

Incidentally, some smart person pointed out that modern airliners are pressurized similarly to the altitude of Denver. Which explains a lot, Obama spending all that time in Air Force One.

Anyway I'm picking Denver in this one.

No reason.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 11:07 AM | Comments (823)
Post contains 58 words, total size 1 kb.

Afternoon Morons and Ette's

I gave ya'll yet another week to get through the game, so I hope spoilers aren't horrible. If you haven't played the game yet, but still plan to...Good luck with this thread. I'll do all my Walking Dead stuff right away below the fold, then I'll put in some line breaks and let you know when it's safe to keep reading. I will not put up spoiler images, those will be in links. I do know there are people playing that don't want to be spoiled (I gifted the game to two people for Christmas, and they are still playing), just be real careful. The one link to fan art ruined peoples day on Reddit, even though it was spoiler tagged, so be warned.

If you like the show and are current, Below the fold is going to be a fan made trailer that I found on TheWalkingDead Subreddit I was amazed by it and can't wait for the Season to kick off again in less than a month. So don't watch that unless you are current as it is Chock full 'o Spoilers.

As for World War Z, I finished it about a month ago. I personally enjoyed the book alot. It really makes the Movie Trailer look terrible. World War Z is based on slow zombies, and Brooks even explains why he thinks they'd be slow. I don't know wtf they are thinking with the movie, but I really do recommend the book if you like Zombie Apocalypse stuff at all. I liked the way it was formatted, written, and paced. I can't imagine how they are gonna port it well.

All the Undead Fun (Plus More!) below the fold. Lotsa :words: warning. more...

Posted by: Gang of Gaming Morons! at 09:21 AM | Comments (79)
Post contains 2259 words, total size 14 kb.

The weekend is upon us again. I'm a fan.

Posted by: andy at 03:28 AM | Comments (381)
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

Story at Politico, if you want to search for it. The basics are as the headline suggests: Even some senior editors at the Times are rumored to be on the chopping block in an effort to cut costs, and the rest of the media is worried, because the Times already slashed staff in 2009 and so was thought to be relatively trim.

The Times has already announced up to 30 layoffs, if it couldn't secure that many voluntary separations through buy-outs, but only a few people have taken that offer. So as of January 24th come the involuntary layoffs.

The Times says this is all perfectly normal.

But sources at the paper, who spoke to POLITICO on the condition of anonymity, said this time feels different.

“Whatever sense of invincibility that Times employees still feel after the earlier rounds of cuts is being chipped away in this round,” said one Times guild member, who is not affected by the latest round of cuts.

I didn't see an explanation as to why the NYT's layoffs rattle "the media," as Politico's headline has it, but I suppose it's a matter of the Times being the canary in the coal mine. And what happens to the Times in January will happen to MSNBC and Politico in August.

They shouldn't worry too much about being fired -- after all, this is a vigorous, growing economy with lots of opportunity for work, as they reported throughout the past three years.

So I'm very surprised to see them so worried.

Oh, btw, LiB.

Thanks to @rdbrewer4.

Posted by: Ace at 04:40 PM | Comments (338)
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.

Juice.

Posted by: Ace at 02:47 PM | Comments (171)
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

I avoided this show for years because of Murphy Brown. Murphy Brown was "about politics," but the extent of the "politics" was insipid references to people who were in politics.

Like, "Gee, I haven't been this drunk since I did tequila shooters with Gary Hart!"

Wocka wocka. You mentioned a name I've read in a newspaper. How political.

I assumed the Big Bang Theory would be exactly like that, but swapping out political references for geek ones -- "Gee, I haven't been this drunk since I did tequila shooters with Gary Gygax!"

But it's not. It's actually smartly written, with some genuine care put into it. Apparently they have an on-staff scientist vetting all the science -- all the formulas, all the references, all the scientific analogies -- that appear on the show.

And the geek stuff is almost all stuff geeks actually talk about (or at least have thought about). Plot holes in movies, time-travel paradoxes, superhero continuity issues. Even when they talk about something that hasn't actually been a topic of geek conversation -- like Raj's contention that mummies are no different than zombies, except with respect to one minor fashion choice -- it's at least in the ballpark of a Real Geek Topic.

I wanted to mention it because last night's show, which should be on demand if you have that service, was a pretty good entry point for people who don't watch the show. It's a solidly above-average episode, if not really in the top ten,* and requires almost no prior knowledge to enjoy -- except, basic idea: Four geeks, three Ph.D. scientists in physics and one engineer, are friends and work at the same university (CalTech, I think); three of them have girlfriends.

The episode is called "The Bakersfield Expedition." Should be the most recently aired one. Or: Thanks to MamaAJ, it's available online right here.

It has a killer punchline at the end I keep repeating to myself. I was going to try to explain the line, but realized how ridiculous it is to try to explain a line that depends 90% of the actress' delivery.

The line's near the end, by the way. The helium-voiced blonde Bernadette says it from behind a closed door. You'll probably know it when you hear it.

Bizarrely, this episode has garnered minor geek controversy by claiming that girls don't read comic books. Online geek-girls dispute that. Whatever -- the girls on the show are not geeks (except for one, and she's not so much a geek as she is socially inept) and they don't read comic books generally.

Damned geeks. Let's kick them out of their frat house and take it for our own.

* All the tip-top episodes star Sheldon, who is both the show's standout actor as far as comic talent and the character written with the most abundant comic potential -- he's sort of Stewie from Family Guy, but with intense OCD and Asperger's.

I think in later seasons they try not to feature him too much and make it a more balanced show where everyone's featured fairly equally; and the rest of them are pretty good and all, but seriously, Sheldon's the star. He's the Kramer, the Stewie, the Fonz.

This one has only moderate Sheldon content but is a good example of the show giving good lines to the other characters.

Posted by: Ace at 02:18 PM | Comments (340)
Post contains 571 words, total size 3 kb.

I saw that an NRA official believed that they consider such an effort unlikely.

Now the NYT (safe link to NRO) reports the same prognosis.

According to the New York Times, the administration’s prospects of pushing an assault-weapons ban through Congress are slim and, as a result, the White House “is focusing on other measures it deems more politically achievable.” The story suggests that the White House doesn’t want to spend political capital on “a losing cause at the expense of other measures with more chances of success.” Though the administration will recommend the passage of such a ban, it’ll be a hollow recommendation. The White House is already defining success downward, “emphasizing other new gun rules that could conceivably win bipartisan support and reduce gun deaths,” which would include universal background checks and research into the causes of gun violence.

Now, the White House is in full damage-control mode, telling the Washington Post that “the report is false.” According to a White House spokesman, “the president has been clear that Congress should reinstate the assault-weapons ban and that avoiding this issue just because it’s been politically difficult in the past is not an option.”

Does that mean the last month of agitating and counter-agitating have been a waste of time? Was it always obvious from the jump that Democrats were talking to appease their liberal, urban members, but would refrain from acting rather than betraying their rural, less-liberal members?

Or was it clarifying to have the debate?

Posted by: Ace at 01:33 PM | Comments (289)
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

A nation of status, not laws.

Having carefully reviewed all of the facts and circumstances of this matter, as it does in every case involving firearms-related offenses or any other potential violation of D.C. law within our criminal jurisdiction, OAG has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion to decline to bring criminal charges against Mr. Gregory, who has no criminal record, or any other NBC employee based on the events associated with the December 23,2012 broadcast. OAG has made this determination, despite the clarity of the violation of this important law, because under all of the circumstances here a prosecution would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust.

Apparently Gregory had a non-criminal reason for possessing the magazine... Just like almost every other person prosecuted under the law for possession, but having no additional criminal intent.

But David Gregory is on television!

This is leaked on a late Friday, notice.

Think about what it says about a society that people are afforded extralegal (or extra legal) privileges due to the fact they're in the entertainment business.

Then again, I suppose Hollywood's been this way for a while. And DC's also been disgustingly corrupt about protecting the powerful within its own show-biz industry (Congressmen, etc.)

So perhaps it's not all that bad, given that the city has always been sleazy and corrupt as the pit of hell.

Thanks to @benk84.

The Letter: Wow, break what DC calls a "very serious" gun infraction and some people get sentenced to five to eight... paragraphs (which could be reduced to three paragraphs, with good behavior).

See the fifth paragraph on Page 2.

Posted by: Ace at 12:52 PM | Comments (222)
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.