View topic - Is this the best we can do?

Is this the best we can do?

"Rant on your Soapbox" Revived!

Is this the best we can do?

Postby a. » Fri Apr 29, 2005 11:29 am

Surely someone has something to rant about, I'm tired of the masquerading as someone else line. Come on people, soccer players are ruining our fields, the government is stealing our money and/or implanting chips in our heads, today's young people lack character, Gaia's cleats suck. There has to be something.

Rant! else I'm goiing to have to go back to doing work.
User avatar
a.
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:40 pm

Over-the-top dog owners

Postby JohnyUtah » Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:19 pm

Dear Andy,

I am taking this opportunity to rant against dog owners that put little sweaters on little dogs and then place them in baby strollers to go for a cruise along the Path.

I was walking behind one of these 'happy families' just 10 minutes ago. What offends me the most is the fact that for 2 seconds I thought the dog was a child with a hideously deformed head. However, the dog looked quite content acting the part of the baby with his/her eyes rolling around looking at the local sights.
User avatar
JohnyUtah
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:42 pm
Location: Dances with Pylons, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

I will join in on this

Postby kenney » Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:59 pm

I think your topic of "is this the best we can do" certainly applies to my view on Canadian politics in recent years.

Seriously, what the hell do we have to choose from? We have corrupt Liberals, Regressive Conservatives, Inept NDP, Unfocused Green...and the Bloc (who is probably the closest to getting my vote at this point...are there any Ontario candidates?).

Shite, aren't we as a country an enlightened group of people? Shouldn't we be able to see through all of these career politians position jockeying?

Isn't it about time that we find a common path to continue to improve upon our nation?

It's time to evolve.

Dang, ranting is fun...not necessarily coherent, but fun.
The Majority is always wrong. Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform.
.
User avatar
kenney
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 10:30 am

Re: Over-the-top dog owners

Postby Wartank » Fri Apr 29, 2005 1:12 pm

JohnyUtah wrote:
I am taking this opportunity to rant against dog owners that put little sweaters on little dogs and then place them in baby strollers to go for a cruise along the Path.


what a good example of horrible north american excess. a creature that has not even two, but FOUR working legs is carted around in stroller. On the flip side, way to support our growing economy!
"I do not like swimming. It is too much like . . . bathing." - Worf
User avatar
Wartank
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:55 pm

Why do angry Scottish people try to sell me things?

Postby HotSauce » Fri Apr 29, 2005 1:26 pm

First question: Are all Scottish people always angry?
Second question: Why are so many of them on TV commercials?

OK. So I can understand Alexander Keith being the pride of Nova Scotia, yada, yada...but do we really need angry Scottish pieces of chewed gum or shrunken angry Scottish men complaining about a mini cereal bar being HUGE? Let's spread the racial stereotyping around. I, for one, miss the ancient Chinese secret commercials.

And don't get me started on stupid rant and rave forums in which everyone rants but no one raves...

As for the dogs being dressed and treated like babies, I would never dress my dog as a baby and push him around in a carriage. However, I might be tempted to dress my baby up as a dog...which is why God created wives...to make sure we don't do stupid stuff like that...
User avatar
HotSauce
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:02 pm

Dogs and the loons who love them

Postby JohnyUtah » Fri Apr 29, 2005 2:15 pm

In addition, why does the dog-child need a sweater? It is sunny with a high of 13C today. I have been walking around with a t-shirt and I have less fur than the wonder child.
User avatar
JohnyUtah
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:42 pm
Location: Dances with Pylons, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Re: I will join in on this

Postby GregS » Fri Apr 29, 2005 2:18 pm

kenney wrote:We have corrupt Liberals, Regressive Conservatives, Inept NDP, Unfocused Green...and the Bloc

All of which are better than the Republicans, IM(NS)HO.
User avatar
GregS
TUC Webmaster
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:45 pm

Rant-o-rama!!!

Postby HotSauce » Fri Apr 29, 2005 2:34 pm

OK. So we ONLY have FIVE parties to choose from. Boo Hoo...The Americans only have TWO. And frankly the only difference between them is the stupid animal mascots they've chosen. Elephant? Donkey? Boy, am I scared...

And, as for the dog in the sweater in the stroller...GET OVER IT! Obviously, that "family" has priority problems. But seriously, do you think they would be any less strange if they had their dog in the stroller WITHOUT the sweater?

And finally, who cares if you've been wearing just a t-shirt. Seriously, WHO CARES!?!?!?!

...how's that for a rant...

BTW, I think that zone defences should be banned in the lowest TUC tier...
User avatar
HotSauce
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:02 pm

Postby HotSauce » Fri Apr 29, 2005 2:35 pm

:D :) :shock: :lol: 8) :P :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :x :twisted: :evil:
User avatar
HotSauce
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:02 pm

Postby GregS » Fri Apr 29, 2005 2:56 pm

buddhasphincta wrote::D :) :shock: :lol: 8) :P :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :x :twisted: :evil:

What's up with the lame selection of smileys we have here? I clicked "view more" and there are a whopping two extra. Where's the "that's so lame I'm puking" smiley? Where's the "bullet in the forehead" smiley? Or the "viewed from an angle so it looks like it's a frisbee" smiley? Entirely too many smiling smileys, and not enough frownies.
User avatar
GregS
TUC Webmaster
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:45 pm

Re: Rant-o-rama!!!

Postby Wartank » Fri Apr 29, 2005 4:12 pm

you want raves?

Rave #1: I think i'm in love with the woman i'm dealing with at Rogers Business Services. By telephone.

Rave #2:
buddhasphincta wrote:BTW, I think that zone defences should be banned in the lowest TUC tier...
"I do not like swimming. It is too much like . . . bathing." - Worf
User avatar
Wartank
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Rant-o-rama!!!

Postby TerryBobJack » Fri Apr 29, 2005 4:17 pm

Wartank wrote:Rave #1: I think i'm in love with the woman i'm dealing with at Rogers Business Services. By telephone.



I think I know that Dude.
Me fail English? That's unpossible!
User avatar
TerryBobJack
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:02 pm
Location: Throw Les Vaches

Postby bargold » Fri Apr 29, 2005 10:16 pm

although the commercial for Jane's fish with the Scot ordering fish into his net was br-r-illiant.
User avatar
bargold
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:05 pm

Re: Rant-o-rama!!!

Postby GregS » Fri Apr 29, 2005 10:42 pm

TerryBobJack wrote:I think I know that Dude.

"Know" in the Biblical sense?
User avatar
GregS
TUC Webmaster
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:45 pm

Re: Rant-o-rama!!!

Postby TerryBobJack » Sat Apr 30, 2005 2:06 pm

GregS wrote:
TerryBobJack wrote:I think I know that Dude.

"Know" in the Biblical sense?


no
Me fail English? That's unpossible!
User avatar
TerryBobJack
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:02 pm
Location: Throw Les Vaches

Postby Happy Camper » Sun May 01, 2005 11:49 pm

Why ban zones?

I think it would be rather funny to see some C team spend a lot of time and develop a really good Chinch and start throwing it on other C teams. The straight up force would negate most hucks and the fact the zone takes away the swing, the only thing a beginner team might know to do against a zone, would cause mass confusion and frustration for the other team.

If the team running the zone could score on a reasonable number of their possessions they would probably win the C league.

Other teams would be forced to adapt or die (well, lose - sorry for being overly dramatic).
User avatar
Happy Camper
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 1:50 pm

Postby lennox » Mon May 02, 2005 8:54 am

Happy Camper wrote:Why ban zones?

I think it would be rather funny to see some C team spend a lot of time and develop a really good Chinch and start throwing it on other C teams. The straight up force would negate most hucks and the fact the zone takes away the swing, the only thing a beginner team might know to do against a zone, would cause mass confusion and frustration for the other team.

If the team running the zone could score on a reasonable number of their possessions they would probably win the C league.

Other teams would be forced to adapt or die (well, lose - sorry for being overly dramatic).


1999 Thurs summer league... won with zone. And lots of practicing. Just do it.

So I heard yesterday that a British labrador retriever is stalkier/chunkier than an American one. Who classified THAT?! :lol:
User avatar
lennox
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:42 pm

Postby HotSauce » Mon May 02, 2005 1:07 pm

lennox wrote:So I heard yesterday that a British labrador retriever is stalkier/chunkier than an American one. Who classified THAT?! :lol:


...so where would I find a stroller that would fit a BRITISH Labrador Retriever?

...how about a SCOTTISH Labrador Retriever?

...come to think of it, isn't Labrador in CANADA? Where's American Labrador and British Labrador? Is this like French Guyana/Guiana which is nowhere near Guyana?
User avatar
HotSauce
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:02 pm

Postby GregS » Mon May 02, 2005 1:31 pm

buddhasphincta wrote:Is this like French Guyana/Guiana which is nowhere near Guyana?

In the interests of correctness, and also of doing something other than work, French Guyana is separated from Guyana (formerly British Guyana) only by Suriname (formerly Dutch Guyana).
User avatar
GregS
TUC Webmaster
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:45 pm

Postby HotSauce » Mon May 02, 2005 2:19 pm

GregS wrote:In the interests of correctness, and also of doing something other than work, French Guyana is separated from Guyana (formerly British Guyana) only by Suriname (formerly Dutch Guyana).


Maybe I was thinking of Ghana...

...but I'm pretty sure British Labrador is nowhere near Labrador.
User avatar
HotSauce
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:02 pm

Postby GregS » Mon May 02, 2005 2:22 pm

buddhasphincta wrote:I'm pretty sure British Labrador is nowhere near Labrador.

Nowhere near Britain either.
User avatar
GregS
TUC Webmaster
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:45 pm

Postby Marteau » Wed May 04, 2005 12:03 am

Okay, we definately need a geography course. Maybe pair it with an Ultimate strategy session.
Stephane
User avatar
Marteau
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:03 pm

Postby Gonzo » Wed May 04, 2005 11:12 am

Only if Greg Lang is running it, because he's all over the map anyway. :lol:

Bill
Gonzo
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:22 am


Return to Rant and Rave!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron