Despite common belief, apparently it is not "Great, to Hate, the Florida Gators". This must be a huge misconception. Why do you ask, well let me tell you.
For starters, most of you have almost assuredly by now seen at least a portion of the video of the UF student being tasered at an event at which the junior Senator from Massachusetts spoke in Gainesville. If you haven't, scroll down a bit as my boy Hopps has uploaded the video to this illustrious blog.
Waiting for you to view.
Still waiting.
OK. It is pretty funny, huh? I at least think so, and so does about 3/4 of the free world. In Myanmar, they just call it "Wednesday".
Now you would think this incident is played out by now, with discussions over police tactics, selfish promotion by the student, ludicrous questions, and even why Senator Kerry was in Florida in the first place. He represents Massachusetts, which isn't even close to Florida. Heck, Massachusetts isn't even a state!!! (That's true by the way, look it up). (Oh yeah, and sorry Hopps - you don't live in an actual State.) Commentators have even brought out the issues surrounding the girl heard in the videotape (as well as her repeat performance the next day at the police station), and believe me, lots of people have already laughed at "Don't tase me, Bro."
Quick aside, if you haven't heard the audio of the same kid the next day at the police station - it is ridiculous. He asks for people to hurry up and help him because the police were going to kill him. The same girl is right by his side doing nothing more than screaming obnoxiously. I am pretty sure that he staged this whole thing just to get into her pants. If that was true, then I give him some credit for creativity, I usually just try talking to them. (Aside over.)
Now, I think the guy should have been tased (or is it tasered?) just for using the word bro, when no lesser authority on the English vernacular language than Shaquille O'Neal will tell you that the most commonly accepted form of the word is br, with the vowel dangling at the end of the syllable. Which vowel you ask? Any of them. He also should have been tased for saying, "Don't tase me". Some even suggest that he got what he deserved for simply acting like an idiot - not leaving the podium, asking stupid questions, not following instructions from law enforcement, and even flailing at law enforcement. However, none of those reasons are responsible for the tasing.
After much investigation, I was able to find some videotape that starts before the videotape that was circulated nationally. Once I receive the rights back from Senator Kerry and/or the University Florida (not sure who took it from me), I will upload it here. However, I did get a chance to view it. As it turns out, the extra law enforcement troops, the ones who "handled" the student, weren't even initially at the Kerry speech. They were summoned when the student had the audacity to comment to Senator Kerry that ...
1 - Tim Tebow still needs to develop as a quarterback;
2 - Tim Tebow can run and throw the short passes, but needs to work on his long ball and timing routes;
3 - Tim Tebow's rushing stats are artificially inflated because unlike other quarterbacks who have to scramble for their yards, Urban Meyer actually calls his quarterback running plays;
4 - Tim Tebow is not a legitimate Heisman candidate this year;
5 - Tim Tebow cannot be the greatest QB in Florida history because he hasn't won a title yet as a starting QB;
6 - Tim Tebow isn't even the best ultra religious QB in Florida history (see Wuerffel, Danny, aka Awful, Danny);
7 - Tim Tebow cannot play pass defense, thus keeping the Gators from winning the SEC, much less the BCS; and
8 - Tim Tebow is not better than Rex Grossman (Ed. Note - OH YES HE IS!!!)
(Ed. Note - If you don't know who Tim Tebow is, stop reading this blog. For good. I mean it.)
After point 2 - the extra law enforcement was summoned to the event. Unfortunately, since they were all watching Tim Tebow erect a house for a poor family in town singlehandedly after practice, it took them until after point 8 to arrive. Then the cameras started rolling.
So as you can see, the University of Florida Police were right in tasing (again, is it tasering?), this pompous, self righteous student. You don't make fun of Tim Tebow.
For those of you who may agree with any of the 8 statements made by the student, I direct you to the website of timtebowfacts.com. It will certainly enlighten your mind as to the greatness that is Tim Tebow.
Pepster
Thursday, September 27, 2007
William Wirtz?
For starters - let's assume that I know as much about hockey as everyone else in the U.S., which means nothing. Then I see that William Wirtz, the longtime owner of the Chicago Blackhawks dies. I have no allegiance, affinity, or even interest for that matter, to Wirtz, the Blackhawks, or the NHL (except for the incredibly exciting quadruple overtime playoff games) until after watching PTI yesterday.
At the end of the show, during the segment where they talk about milestones, birthdays, anniversaries, etc., Wilbon is talking about Wirtz's death. Now, since I know specifically that MW and TK read this blog, I hope they will forgive me if I don't quote this correctly. Wilbon states something along the lines that he was always taught that if someone dies, "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all". Then he follows it up with, "To you, Tony". Now that is a statement. For everyone that thinks they have to talk all the time so that everyone knows what their opinions are on everything - please take a lesson from Michael Wilbon, who said an awful lot about Mr. Wirtz without saying a word at all.
Tony followed it up by saying, "They won a Stanley Cup".
Wilbon's response, "In 1961."
Kornheiser's reply was, "But he won one".
WOW!!!!!!!
Just for the record, this post has two purposes: 1) I was incredibly struck by the above conversation and I wanted to share it with those who may have missed it; and 2) Now I can honestly say I wrote something about the NHL, thus relieving myself from any further obligation of doing so ever again (at least until the next quadruple overtime playoff game).
At the end of the show, during the segment where they talk about milestones, birthdays, anniversaries, etc., Wilbon is talking about Wirtz's death. Now, since I know specifically that MW and TK read this blog, I hope they will forgive me if I don't quote this correctly. Wilbon states something along the lines that he was always taught that if someone dies, "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all". Then he follows it up with, "To you, Tony". Now that is a statement. For everyone that thinks they have to talk all the time so that everyone knows what their opinions are on everything - please take a lesson from Michael Wilbon, who said an awful lot about Mr. Wirtz without saying a word at all.
Tony followed it up by saying, "They won a Stanley Cup".
Wilbon's response, "In 1961."
Kornheiser's reply was, "But he won one".
WOW!!!!!!!
Just for the record, this post has two purposes: 1) I was incredibly struck by the above conversation and I wanted to share it with those who may have missed it; and 2) Now I can honestly say I wrote something about the NHL, thus relieving myself from any further obligation of doing so ever again (at least until the next quadruple overtime playoff game).
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Stupid People #1
Once again, welcome to the first installment of what is sure to be a recurring topic on this blog - Stupid People.
I had to make a day trip to Tallahassee, Florida, which is about an hour and a half flight for me - via prop plane. Fly up - do what I have to do - and return to the Tallahassee Regional Airport for my return prop flight. Get through security in about 1.4 seconds, so I have some time to kill, well, at least enough for a beer. Lo and behold I find an Irish Pub in the airport. I sit down on one side of the bar, and the place is empty, just another 2 people on the other side of the horseshoe shaped bar, and an older bartendress that I will call Edith Bunker. Edith happily gives me a Sam Adams draft.
About 1/4 of the way through my beer, another gentleman walks in and sits about 3 stools from me at the bar. By this point the couple across the bar had left. Edith Bunker gives him a beer, and she starts the pretty typical chit chat about whether Mr. New Guy was going on a trip or flying home. As it turns out - he was flying home to Fort Lauderdale, but his company is based in Tallahassee so he travels there often. Turns out that he works for the state lottery. He happens to oversee the Broward, Dade and Monroe County offices for the lottery (that is Fort Lauderdale, Miami and the Keys). Mrs. Bunker then asks him why it seems all of the big lottery winners are from South Florida and not the northern part of the state.
Now, this is where I become interested in the conversation. I chime in, which I am wont to do, admittedly, and ask if I could take a guess. Now keep in mind, I do not KNOW the answer, but I had two pretty good guesses, which I proceeded to contribute. My guesses - 1) More people; and 2) More ticket sales. Not that I am thinking this is rocket science and I am some kind of genius (which may be true anyway), but these two guesses were correct.
Edith Bunker's response was that she still thinks that people in South Florida win the lottery more because the state conspires to help the poor Blacks and Hispanics that live there win. REALLY?! IS SHE SERIOUS? (She was.)
First of all, even if that were true, the studies suggest that lower income people play the lottery more than others, and thus are basically just throwing their money away. (Let's go out on a limb and assume for a minute that most people that play the lottery do not win). Perhaps Edith's conspiracy theory could be correct, but not because the State wants poor Blacks and Hispanics to win, but because if they win every so often, more Blacks and Hispanics would keep playing, thus actually keeping them impoverished.
Second, if the lottery system was to conspire to anything, wouldn't it simply be in the calculation of the prize money so that the State gets to keep more of the lottery purchases and less is paid out to the eventual winners?
Third, Leon County, Florida is 30+% black, and Tallahassee is about 34.2% black. Certainly not incredibly small percentages where the State wouldn't want to help poor Blacks there in addition to those in South Florida, if Edith Bunker's theory was correct. (Leon County is the county in which Tallahassee lies.)
Fourth, statistics would show that if more tickets are sold in a given geographic area, that over time, more winners will come from that geographic area. Please note, I computed no actual statistics of any kind in figuring this out, nor did I use any equations or algorithms. Nothing. I just watched Laszlo Hollyfeld do his own calculations, and even he undervalued the amount of prizes he would win. If you don't get the reference: (1) let us know, and we might help you out; or (2) shoot yourself. (Ed. Note - don't actually shoot yourself, at least not literally. Figuratively - go ahead and shoot).
And fifth, and most important of all, she said this to me (and Mr. Lottery), as I was sitting in front of her, AND I AM HISPANIC!!! Well, apparently I don't look Hispanic.
Some people really are just that stupid. No other explanation. So next time you are out at your favorite pub enjoying a Sam Adams (or other beverage of choice), just think to yourself if someone around that bar is as stupid as Edith Bunker. My guess is ... well ... depends upon how busy the bar is.
Pepster
I had to make a day trip to Tallahassee, Florida, which is about an hour and a half flight for me - via prop plane. Fly up - do what I have to do - and return to the Tallahassee Regional Airport for my return prop flight. Get through security in about 1.4 seconds, so I have some time to kill, well, at least enough for a beer. Lo and behold I find an Irish Pub in the airport. I sit down on one side of the bar, and the place is empty, just another 2 people on the other side of the horseshoe shaped bar, and an older bartendress that I will call Edith Bunker. Edith happily gives me a Sam Adams draft.
About 1/4 of the way through my beer, another gentleman walks in and sits about 3 stools from me at the bar. By this point the couple across the bar had left. Edith Bunker gives him a beer, and she starts the pretty typical chit chat about whether Mr. New Guy was going on a trip or flying home. As it turns out - he was flying home to Fort Lauderdale, but his company is based in Tallahassee so he travels there often. Turns out that he works for the state lottery. He happens to oversee the Broward, Dade and Monroe County offices for the lottery (that is Fort Lauderdale, Miami and the Keys). Mrs. Bunker then asks him why it seems all of the big lottery winners are from South Florida and not the northern part of the state.
Now, this is where I become interested in the conversation. I chime in, which I am wont to do, admittedly, and ask if I could take a guess. Now keep in mind, I do not KNOW the answer, but I had two pretty good guesses, which I proceeded to contribute. My guesses - 1) More people; and 2) More ticket sales. Not that I am thinking this is rocket science and I am some kind of genius (which may be true anyway), but these two guesses were correct.
Edith Bunker's response was that she still thinks that people in South Florida win the lottery more because the state conspires to help the poor Blacks and Hispanics that live there win. REALLY?! IS SHE SERIOUS? (She was.)
First of all, even if that were true, the studies suggest that lower income people play the lottery more than others, and thus are basically just throwing their money away. (Let's go out on a limb and assume for a minute that most people that play the lottery do not win). Perhaps Edith's conspiracy theory could be correct, but not because the State wants poor Blacks and Hispanics to win, but because if they win every so often, more Blacks and Hispanics would keep playing, thus actually keeping them impoverished.
Second, if the lottery system was to conspire to anything, wouldn't it simply be in the calculation of the prize money so that the State gets to keep more of the lottery purchases and less is paid out to the eventual winners?
Third, Leon County, Florida is 30+% black, and Tallahassee is about 34.2% black. Certainly not incredibly small percentages where the State wouldn't want to help poor Blacks there in addition to those in South Florida, if Edith Bunker's theory was correct. (Leon County is the county in which Tallahassee lies.)
Fourth, statistics would show that if more tickets are sold in a given geographic area, that over time, more winners will come from that geographic area. Please note, I computed no actual statistics of any kind in figuring this out, nor did I use any equations or algorithms. Nothing. I just watched Laszlo Hollyfeld do his own calculations, and even he undervalued the amount of prizes he would win. If you don't get the reference: (1) let us know, and we might help you out; or (2) shoot yourself. (Ed. Note - don't actually shoot yourself, at least not literally. Figuratively - go ahead and shoot).
And fifth, and most important of all, she said this to me (and Mr. Lottery), as I was sitting in front of her, AND I AM HISPANIC!!! Well, apparently I don't look Hispanic.
Some people really are just that stupid. No other explanation. So next time you are out at your favorite pub enjoying a Sam Adams (or other beverage of choice), just think to yourself if someone around that bar is as stupid as Edith Bunker. My guess is ... well ... depends upon how busy the bar is.
Pepster
Reason #1 We Hate Lawyers
Welcome to the first installment of what is sure to be a recurring theme in this blog - reasons we hate stuff. In this episode, you will learn reason #1 why we hate lawyers. Now - just so everyone is on the same page, unlike my much smarter colleagues Hopps and Sinickal, I am an attorney - and have been one for some time now. And although I have come across a few who might actually seem normal, most of them are people around whom I would never, ever, want to hang. Here is reason #1 why ....
THE ARE COMPLETELY DISCONNECTED FROM REALITY!!!
I absolutely mean this to be true. Most lawyers live within their own legal realm, where everything is neither black nor white, but rather simply analogy and distinguishing of why things are particular shades of grey. Where things may happen, but technicalities determine whether or not we ever hear of the occurrence of these events. Now this isn't a rant on whether or not the technicalities are proper or not, or whether the constitution is too lenient or not, those rants may occur some other day (well, probably not). This is about how lawyers have cut the synapses in their brain that allow them to think like humans instead of lawyers. Here is my story ...
So I have a hearing in the Broward County Courthouse the other day. Those of you intelligent readers will note that this is the same courthouse where the Anna Nicole Smith debacle, err trial, occurred. While I am awaiting to enter the Judges chambers, I hear another attorney speaking on his cell phone. Now, because he is on his cell phone, I only hear one side of the conversation, but I am able to discern the back story. The attorney in the courthouse (the one I can hear and see), practices family law, but one of his clients or former clients was injured in an automobile accident. That client asks the family law attorney for a referral. The attorney on the other line was the attorney to whom Mr. Family Law was going to refer the case - we will call him Mr. Trial Attorney.
Now - part of the back story that I can infer is that Mr. Trial Attorney not only does personal injury cases, but also is a criminal defense attorney. Now before anyone gets sidetracks as to whether or not criminal defense attorneys are evil for defending criminals, or just doing their part to protect rights of all people, innocents and criminals, this story actually isn't about Mr. Trial Attorney, but about Mr. Family Law. See, Mr. Trial Attorney is currently defending a father who was accused of strangling his son (or step-son, I couldn't really make out the details, since I wasn't on the telephone call). After hearing this, Mr. Family Law then says, wait for it .....
Why would he strangle his step-son? I mean, why do the prosecutors say he strangled his step-son?!!!!
Yes I understand that attorneys deal with "allegations", which they try to prove or disprove as facts, and that even the media reports on the "allegations" of a case. For example, Michael Vick was "ALLEGEDLY" involved in dogfighting (well, at least before his guilty plea). But, Mr. Family Law doesn't say anything like: (1) Man, that is a big case, how is it going?; (2) That must be a tough situation to have to go through.; (3) I couldn't imagine being accused of killing my own child; or any of the other countless human reactions that could have been made. Instead - he responds with, "Why do the prosecutors say he strangled his step-son?". If he wanted to speak in legal parlance, he could have asked what did the prosecutors have as evidence, or did they have a motive, but no, he wasn't even talking shop. Just utterly ridiculous.
At least he didn't have this telephone conversation in the hallway of the courthouse with about a hundred people around - oh wait he did. Well, at least his family law clients weren't around to hear his callousness. Oh, never mind - they were. (Never mind the fact that he was ignoring his clients that were next to him in person to speak to someone on the telephone).
It is attitudes like his that give the rest of us lawyers a bad name - well, mostly deserved actually, but that is Reason #1 why we hate lawyers.
Thanks for reading our blog, and look for more exciting, funny and colorful posts than this - but also look for more rants to come.
Pepster
THE ARE COMPLETELY DISCONNECTED FROM REALITY!!!
I absolutely mean this to be true. Most lawyers live within their own legal realm, where everything is neither black nor white, but rather simply analogy and distinguishing of why things are particular shades of grey. Where things may happen, but technicalities determine whether or not we ever hear of the occurrence of these events. Now this isn't a rant on whether or not the technicalities are proper or not, or whether the constitution is too lenient or not, those rants may occur some other day (well, probably not). This is about how lawyers have cut the synapses in their brain that allow them to think like humans instead of lawyers. Here is my story ...
So I have a hearing in the Broward County Courthouse the other day. Those of you intelligent readers will note that this is the same courthouse where the Anna Nicole Smith debacle, err trial, occurred. While I am awaiting to enter the Judges chambers, I hear another attorney speaking on his cell phone. Now, because he is on his cell phone, I only hear one side of the conversation, but I am able to discern the back story. The attorney in the courthouse (the one I can hear and see), practices family law, but one of his clients or former clients was injured in an automobile accident. That client asks the family law attorney for a referral. The attorney on the other line was the attorney to whom Mr. Family Law was going to refer the case - we will call him Mr. Trial Attorney.
Now - part of the back story that I can infer is that Mr. Trial Attorney not only does personal injury cases, but also is a criminal defense attorney. Now before anyone gets sidetracks as to whether or not criminal defense attorneys are evil for defending criminals, or just doing their part to protect rights of all people, innocents and criminals, this story actually isn't about Mr. Trial Attorney, but about Mr. Family Law. See, Mr. Trial Attorney is currently defending a father who was accused of strangling his son (or step-son, I couldn't really make out the details, since I wasn't on the telephone call). After hearing this, Mr. Family Law then says, wait for it .....
Why would he strangle his step-son? I mean, why do the prosecutors say he strangled his step-son?!!!!
Yes I understand that attorneys deal with "allegations", which they try to prove or disprove as facts, and that even the media reports on the "allegations" of a case. For example, Michael Vick was "ALLEGEDLY" involved in dogfighting (well, at least before his guilty plea). But, Mr. Family Law doesn't say anything like: (1) Man, that is a big case, how is it going?; (2) That must be a tough situation to have to go through.; (3) I couldn't imagine being accused of killing my own child; or any of the other countless human reactions that could have been made. Instead - he responds with, "Why do the prosecutors say he strangled his step-son?". If he wanted to speak in legal parlance, he could have asked what did the prosecutors have as evidence, or did they have a motive, but no, he wasn't even talking shop. Just utterly ridiculous.
At least he didn't have this telephone conversation in the hallway of the courthouse with about a hundred people around - oh wait he did. Well, at least his family law clients weren't around to hear his callousness. Oh, never mind - they were. (Never mind the fact that he was ignoring his clients that were next to him in person to speak to someone on the telephone).
It is attitudes like his that give the rest of us lawyers a bad name - well, mostly deserved actually, but that is Reason #1 why we hate lawyers.
Thanks for reading our blog, and look for more exciting, funny and colorful posts than this - but also look for more rants to come.
Pepster
Friday, September 21, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)