87 thoughts on “December 14, 2012: An Unconventional Wedding Date”

  1. My folks were married on December 15. My mom's brother was married one week later (same year).
    If I had gotten married in mid-to-late December, I just don't see how it could work with my current job and HPR's birthday and Christmas.
    I'd probably celebrate half-anniversaries.

      1. For years we've put our pocket change in a pig for our anniversary. Most years it's enough for a good meal out, but some years it's only enough for ice cream.

  2. Junior's birthday is on 12/21. We always celebrate early for many obvious reasons. His party this year was a week ago. He shares his birthday with one cousin and another (a sibling) is the next day.

    1. Good point. The takeaway is this: if you are a Minnesota high school football player that is good enough to play at Nebraska, Wisconson, or Notre Dame, you should go there. If not, Fargo is where you should go.

      1. The only reason to go to Division I-AA is if no I-A teams offer you a scholarship. This just shows how little Brewster knew about assessing talent. He could have had every one of those kids that play for NDSU.

        NDSU's success is a direct reflection of Minnesota's ineptitude. If the Gophers ever do build a program, NDSU's talent pool will be depleted.

        1. I will buy that a choice between a BCS school and I-AA is a no-brainer. But, how about between NDSU and, say, UNLV? They suck, they suck in a sucky conference, they have little following and no chance for anything other than getting their brains beat in. You can go to the I-A school, play on a worse team and get your brains beat in, or you can go play for I-AA National Titles. But, if the only reason to choose I-AA is no I-A offer, I guess you go to UNLV, play on a shitty team for 4 years, and act all smug about your rotten experience.

          The other thing is this: the Gophers don't have a decent program, and I'm not really thinking that Jer's gonna get it done. This was a terrible season for the B1G and they were only able to beat two other bottom feeders. I suppose the choice is to go to Minnesota, but do you actually think that Gopher football players are enjoying their careers more than NDSU players? Sure, they can say that they played B1G football. But was it fun? Did they enjoy the ass kickings? 'Cause I know the NDSU players are enjoying their ride. In the end, isn't enjoying the ride the real point?

          1. Fargo, vs. Las Vegas? Hmmmm...

            If I was choosing a school, I would want to choose the best program that I had a chance of playing on. I would rather start on a NDSU team, for instance, than stand on the sidelines of a Gophers team, regardless of their records. There is a limit to that, though.

            1. Of course, we are talking about testosterone-poisoned 17- and 18-year olds. Who knows what passes for thought processes in their heads?

        2. one thing I have notice about NDSU is that they are advertising the Twins Cities like crazy. Ive seen a bunch of tv ads.

      2. If it were me and I couldn't play for Nebraska, Wisconsin or Notre Dame, then I would certainly prefer to pay against them and similar schools in front of 10s of thousands in the stands and millions on TV each week.

          1. Or if you really want to beat up on some patsies, you could go to St Thomas and play Carleton every year.

            3. There was a article on St. Thomas coach Caruso in the NYTimes today. I was working at Macalester during Caruso's two years as its head coach. I went to about four or five games while he was there (I think he went 2-7 and 4-5 in his two seasons, IIRC), and saw him create a competitive team out of about four skilled players total just by utilizing matchups and tactics. I called my buddy who played at Gustavus and told him, "Whoever hires this guy away is going to be getting a great coach." I didn't expect him to immediately create a national title contender.

    2. "...He's a smart, resourceful football player..."

      He won't be for long if he keeps being involved in that many collisions each game.

  7. Another school shooting today.

    I think we need the media to start making up stories about homicidal maniacs deciding to kill themselves without taking anyone else with them. This would be a better copycat trend.

        1. It sounds like there was a body found at the house of a relative of the shooter.

          Apparently it was one of his parents, at their house in New Jersey, before the shooting.

          1. Right after I type that, I see what appears to be substantiated numbers:
            20 children dead (18 on site, 2 at school)
            8 adults dead (6 staff, 1 gunman, 1 at another site [presumed parent of gunman]).

    7. I cannot imagine what drives a person to take this kind of action. No amount of hopelessness, no amount of fear, no amount of suffering could ever result in motivating a person to engage in a mass killing of children. It is this phenomena that scares me - that the concept to act in this way ever enters into a person's mind. Where could that possibly come from? There must be a source, right? And I don't want to just say something like "insanity" because I deal with people who have significant mental disorders (both low and high functioning) on a daily basis, and none of them would be capable of carrying out such a deed - there is a level of competence required in carrying out the act that should be completely incompatible with the thought of committing a mass murder.

      I'm just ranting, I guess. But this thought is what's ringing in my ears today. There must be a cause.

      1. Ditto all this. I have the some of the sickest clients and none of them of would be capable of this, even if they were under the influence. My guess is that we're dealing with someone who never developed an iota of empathy, but even that seems too simplistic.

        1. I think I can repeat this without treading too far into the Forbidden Zone: Andy Borowitz on teh Twitters "Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I wish mental health care were as easy to get as, say, a gun."

          1. Unfortunately, it's not just about access. There's still such an enormous stigma against having mental health issues that they could offer it free to everybody and most people wouldn't use it.

            1. I know of these things from family members who quite clearly needed to at the very least talk things out with somebody. Their response?

              "I ain't going to no f***in' shrink, and I ain't takin' no f***in' meds. That's for crazy people. I'm not crazy."

    8. A guy that sits by me at work lives in Newtown and has young children... I hope everything. is. ok.

          2. If SBG resumes his pseudonymous FB account after I finally unfriend it, I'm going to be annoyed.
            Use the Twitters, as I assume you'll want to keep things off yr real FB account, which is viewed by so many friends & relations.

        3. i think bS is saying, and i would agree, that other forums (where many people here are also present and can participate at their choice) may be more appropriate.

          1. exactly.

            because the Boss knows I'm pretty much copacetic with his views on the Zone topic in question.

          2. I need a ruling: is my ribbing of Minnesota Gopher fans more acceptable here than my outrage over the latest example of a ridiculous public policy that practically encourages the slaughter of innocents? Because if so, I'm pretty much done here.

            3. I'm of the mind that we're all good enough friends here that we could pretty easily set aside a political opinion or two - regardless of whether we agree or not - especially when the comments are motivated by such an event.

              The "no politics" rule seems designed to facilitate a welcoming environment. On a day like today, being forced into a type of silence on an obvious issue isn't welcoming. The spirit of the law, not the letter.

              1. I'm probably the last person to chastise anyone else here for venturing into the Forbidden Zone. So yea, I am good with people venting here in this context.

            4. look, i'm just a random citizen here, but in my mind i would say technically yes. the current incarnation of the .org was created in accordance within guidelines that you yourself set. the points of today's horrific tragedy that you wish to discuss, i feel, would fall under those guidelines. i'm not suggesting in any way that this is something to be glossed over and ignore, but i just don't feel this is the most ideal place to discuss it.

              again, i'm one of many here, and those are just my thoughts. i'd hate to lose your presence here over something like this since the anger could be much better focused. if you wish to discuss it here, i won't object or stop you, but i won't participate in it in this forum.

                1. many have noted the reasons that they come here are due to the lack of divisiveness. it's certainly one of the reasons i do. i think to do so would be to the detriment of the community as a whole. if that's the tide of opinion, well, then that's up to the nation. with the vitriol that we will all be submerged in over this issue in the coming days, i'd prefer to have a little sanctuary and escape from all that, if only temporarily.

                  1. maybe we could just start a separate post, and those who wanted to participate could do so, while those who wanted to steer clear could do so?

                    1. Sounds like a venue for my temporary (though I forgot to add that word, was it implied?) experiment.

                    2. I think a separate post would be good intermediate step. People want to vent and discuss things otherwise forbidden here, so relaxing the rules in a temporary location seems worthwhile to determine whether relaxing them sitewide merits further consideration.

                    3. sean, can you set up a post category such that comments for that category won't show on the sidebar?

                    4. Done. I created a Forbidden Zone category and there's an option to ignore comments for a list of categories; I added the FZ category to that list.

                2. In general, I'm not a fan of making big changes while stressed. Regardless of what is eventually decided, we should all take a few days before we revisit the issue so that we might be able to think things through without the fresh, raw feelings.

              2. I'm with Hungry Joe, but was reluctant to say so due to what I perceive to be minority viewpoints here, and because I value SBG's contributions and friendship.

                Phil would like to change the rules. I could see an argument for an experiment.
                He wasn't here when the rules started. I was. One day SBG banned Moss when discussing automobile-manufacturer pensions. Another day in 2008, the Republican presumed presidential nominee announced his selection for a running mate.

                SBG, if you're still interested in breaching across things heretofore deemed forbidden, please first reflect on your feelings at the end of those days.

                1. When I say change the rules, I don't mean let the flood gates open. I just mean to better tailor the rule to the spirit of the law. I like Zombieman's suggestion above re: separate posts. And even then I think it should be on rare, rare occasion.

                  I trust people here not to go so far down the rabbit hole on political discussions that expressing an opinion here or there is the kind of thing I could live with.

                2. I remember fall of 2008. I very nearly stopped coming to the site at that point, because of the near constant bickering and overall bad vibes. If it got that bad again, it would destroy everything that makes this web community great.

                  I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to a subset of this site that would be split off from the main (to the point where things said in that subset might not even show up on the sidebar, maybe?). It absolutely has a place, and there are enough people here that feel strongly enough about these things that there should be a place here that can cater to those people. I just don't feel that it's worth damaging what we've got in the process.

                3. I know I'm mostly just a lurker, but I was very turned off by the tone at the former site circa fall 2008.

                  I am one who loves discussing politics, and wishes it didn't have to get so personal, but for some reason it seems to always happen.

    2. I'm not really sure what the vitriol was about there. Actually, I'm not sure about anything right now.

  11. Posted on my facebook page yesterday, I shit you not:

    You need a legacy to pass on to your children to protect themselves from the Zombie Apocalypse (hint hint). A Springfield Armory Socom 16 .308/7.62 The framework and engine is all high quality craftsmanship by Springfield. The body work was enhanced by Troy Industries of Israel. Optics provided by Vortex Viper PST 1-4X24 with illumination. Sweet piece of mechanical and engineering feat. Question comes which kid will get this...hmmm

        1. For the most part at least.

          Edit: Ah hah! some debugging code I added was causing the problem. Okay, fewer bugs than I expected, although can only select which categories to appear rather than the opposite it seems.

  13. Who said it:

    God told Adam not to eat the apple. Eve tried it and nothing happen. But when Man bit the apple all hell broke loose. Men are the HEAD!!!

    Spoiler SelectShow

  14. NBBW quote of the day: "I remember when Gandalf was a modem (at work)."

    (We were talking about the new Hobbit movie)

    1. Harris said his 2012 season in Colorado Springs helped him restore his ability.

      “It was real good to use all parts of the field, hit with some power, drive in runs ... and just kind of get back swinging the way I was.”

      ==

      the Twins missed a chance to bring him back!!!one!

Comments are closed.