I found myself rolling my eyes reading the piece on Joe Magats yesterday until I got to the end when I read that the authors were his lawyers. If the Trib had taken your advice and put that information at the beginning, I could have saved myself a few minutes.
I am opposed to hecklers in any venue, particularly those that try to shout down or drive off the speaker. But speakers desire a positive audience reaction (applause, cheers, bravos) and learn from negative reactions (boos, hisses, silence) when the responses are not orchestrated or preplanned. O'Rourke knows how to exploit media coverage and did so effectively. Pretending that the m-f- was reacting to murdering children. I thought that the mock laugh was aimed at the idea that the reason someone buys an AR15 is to murder children. Or that the law allows the purchase of weapons for the purpose of murder. Particularly since half of the households in Texas have firearms and a third of those own AR15 type rifles.
Only some fucking asshole would be unexpectedly concerned that some dickhead called the goddamn verge a bullshit parkway. That sentence is probably not grammatically correct, I won't write one like it again.
Thank you Eric for at least having the integrity to point out that the Beto O'Rourke heckler was not laughing at all about the tragic death of innocent children, but rather by the glaring ignorance of firearms by O'Rourke (a very common trait among those gun haters who seek to disable our Second Amendment freedoms). But I am again dismayed over your gleeful celebration of O'Rourke's response using the mf'er.
Do you not see at all how corrosive this is to civil discourse? And can you also not see how this is just more partisan red meat, and you would be horrified and outraged if someone were to refer to one of your heroes like Hillary or the soon to be departed Liz Cheney as a miserable (euphemism for a female body part)? To be all right with this is simply to be all right with our politics continuing to descend into nothing more than vulgarities and name calling instead of ever trying to find common ground to work for the benefit of our country.
I think that I have said before that we need a new party. I would love to see Cheney (or anyone) lead the creation of a new center-right party that rejects the lies and extremism. I would be reluctant to welcome the timorous or unprincipled exploiters that currently ride the Trump wave out of expediency, but any erosion of the Trump base is good. And any interim losses to center-left candidates are an acceptable price to pay.
I agree on over-the-counter hearing aids. It is just another example of regulatory inefficiency that this wasn't always the case and then took years to begin to correct. But as usual the statistics may be misleading. Prescription hearing aids can be tuned to amplify specific frequencies. Hearing amplifiers are available over the counter now and amplify all frequencies. Many people with hearing loss have the loss across the entire spectrum. There are about 1.5 million hearing amplifiers sold annually ($20 - $200). People using these devices are not in the 'only 14%' statistic. While I am sure that more than 14% can benefit from an aid rather than an amp, it is not a good stat for people using hearing enhancement. Also, the FDA numbers include a guess at the number of people that don't admit to having a problem or won't use a device (the 'stigma' problem). Original Medicare (Part A and B) does not cover dental, vision, or hearing. But most Medicare Advantage (Part C plans) do. Not sure why that is an outrage.
Thank you for informing me that I am not the only one peeved about misplaced "onlies." That has bothered me almost as much as the use of the words "jealousy" and "jealous" when what is meant is "envy" and "envious." Jealousy is a zeal for something already possessed while envy seeks what one does not yet have. The instances of this misuse of jealous and jealousy are legion, which led me to try the clarify the matter with the following poem:
Zealous for Jealous
Run your nails across a chalkboard,
that’s like music to my ears,
but use jealous when you mean envious
and you’ll bring me to the verge of tears.
Jealous is such a singular word,
with roots so clear and deep,
that its multilingual pedigree
is a legacy I’m obsessed to keep.
In Greek, Latin and Middle English,
and even in Old French, too,
the bond between jealous and zealous
holds as tight as Crazy Glue.
A zeal for something already possessed,
that’s the essence of jealousy, you see,
While envy seeks what one does not yet have,
quite the opposite you’ll have to agree.
Jealous husbands and wives are just fine,
as is also a jealous God,
but a neighbor jealous of your car
gets a head shake not a nod.
Jealousy is a vice of wayward virtue,
a passion of sometimes tragic excess,
while envy is a quite tacky sin,
a weakness we’re all loath to confess.
I care not a whit that in Roget’s and Webster’s
envy is listed as a jealousy clone.
I’ll ever resist this mistaken synonymity
though I have to be zealous for jealous all alone.
Your objection to the “only” in the Dear Abby quote makes you sound more like an editor with a tin ear than the skilled writer you are. A good editor lets good writers bend/break some rules, especially in a case like this where the positioning of “only” doesn’t change any meaning. But maybe that’s just me….
It is really hard to understand how our society seems unable to address long term problems. I was discussing the climate provisions in the absurdly named Inflation Reduction Act with a friend. She said that politicians find it difficult to act without a crisis. I said they like being Santa and telling rosy fairy stories. The Colorado River is a good example. The creators of the seven-state water usage deal, in 1922 knew they were overestimating the amount of water available. The last 100 miles of the river disappeared in the 60's. The water levels in Lake Mead and Lake Powel have been declining for at least 40 years. The problem is now exacerbated by climate change. Yet the consuming states have done virtually nothing to reduce water consumption or the growth in consumption. The seven-state commission has done little, and the federal oversight has not acted, but now 'might' need to reduce the flow to Nevada and Arizona - in order to let the 'higher priority' states continue to gulp. All of these states are also drying up their aquifers. But there are bi-partisan efforts to get the federal government to build a pipeline from the Mississippi or the Great Lakes. Duh. Makes our pension problem seem smaller.
Beto's mofo was pleasing in the moment, but it remains frustrating to me that gun control advocates persist in leaving themselves open to "flyspecking" attacks on their own issue. That's a great word, all the more great when you realize that it's ironically a sort of bullshitting, but I'm not sure that's quite what's going on. I'm not convinced that such objections are meritless, and I find it disconcertingly difficult to get to the bottom of them using Google. Wouldn't it be even sweeter than Beto's mofo for a gun control advocate to call the flyspeckers' bluff and, per Reason, yes, actually know what they're talking about? That is, after all, what we should want from policymakers and regulators on any side of any issue, no?
The poll option for “only” should read “something only pedants care about”. You need to work harder on this!
In The Montana town where I grew up it was known only as the boulevard. I had never heard the word parkway until I moved to Chicago.
It sure seems that a lot of people who decry the use of profanity in public discourse think that "Let's go, Brandon!" is hilarious.
I'd expect a greater appreciation for non-vulgarity-based insults from a bow tie fiddle player sissy such as yourself.
I found myself rolling my eyes reading the piece on Joe Magats yesterday until I got to the end when I read that the authors were his lawyers. If the Trib had taken your advice and put that information at the beginning, I could have saved myself a few minutes.
I am opposed to hecklers in any venue, particularly those that try to shout down or drive off the speaker. But speakers desire a positive audience reaction (applause, cheers, bravos) and learn from negative reactions (boos, hisses, silence) when the responses are not orchestrated or preplanned. O'Rourke knows how to exploit media coverage and did so effectively. Pretending that the m-f- was reacting to murdering children. I thought that the mock laugh was aimed at the idea that the reason someone buys an AR15 is to murder children. Or that the law allows the purchase of weapons for the purpose of murder. Particularly since half of the households in Texas have firearms and a third of those own AR15 type rifles.
Only some fucking asshole would be unexpectedly concerned that some dickhead called the goddamn verge a bullshit parkway. That sentence is probably not grammatically correct, I won't write one like it again.
Thank you Eric for at least having the integrity to point out that the Beto O'Rourke heckler was not laughing at all about the tragic death of innocent children, but rather by the glaring ignorance of firearms by O'Rourke (a very common trait among those gun haters who seek to disable our Second Amendment freedoms). But I am again dismayed over your gleeful celebration of O'Rourke's response using the mf'er.
Do you not see at all how corrosive this is to civil discourse? And can you also not see how this is just more partisan red meat, and you would be horrified and outraged if someone were to refer to one of your heroes like Hillary or the soon to be departed Liz Cheney as a miserable (euphemism for a female body part)? To be all right with this is simply to be all right with our politics continuing to descend into nothing more than vulgarities and name calling instead of ever trying to find common ground to work for the benefit of our country.
Death is not unexpected. Only the timing is unexpected.
I think that I have said before that we need a new party. I would love to see Cheney (or anyone) lead the creation of a new center-right party that rejects the lies and extremism. I would be reluctant to welcome the timorous or unprincipled exploiters that currently ride the Trump wave out of expediency, but any erosion of the Trump base is good. And any interim losses to center-left candidates are an acceptable price to pay.
I agree on over-the-counter hearing aids. It is just another example of regulatory inefficiency that this wasn't always the case and then took years to begin to correct. But as usual the statistics may be misleading. Prescription hearing aids can be tuned to amplify specific frequencies. Hearing amplifiers are available over the counter now and amplify all frequencies. Many people with hearing loss have the loss across the entire spectrum. There are about 1.5 million hearing amplifiers sold annually ($20 - $200). People using these devices are not in the 'only 14%' statistic. While I am sure that more than 14% can benefit from an aid rather than an amp, it is not a good stat for people using hearing enhancement. Also, the FDA numbers include a guess at the number of people that don't admit to having a problem or won't use a device (the 'stigma' problem). Original Medicare (Part A and B) does not cover dental, vision, or hearing. But most Medicare Advantage (Part C plans) do. Not sure why that is an outrage.
Thank you for informing me that I am not the only one peeved about misplaced "onlies." That has bothered me almost as much as the use of the words "jealousy" and "jealous" when what is meant is "envy" and "envious." Jealousy is a zeal for something already possessed while envy seeks what one does not yet have. The instances of this misuse of jealous and jealousy are legion, which led me to try the clarify the matter with the following poem:
Zealous for Jealous
Run your nails across a chalkboard,
that’s like music to my ears,
but use jealous when you mean envious
and you’ll bring me to the verge of tears.
Jealous is such a singular word,
with roots so clear and deep,
that its multilingual pedigree
is a legacy I’m obsessed to keep.
In Greek, Latin and Middle English,
and even in Old French, too,
the bond between jealous and zealous
holds as tight as Crazy Glue.
A zeal for something already possessed,
that’s the essence of jealousy, you see,
While envy seeks what one does not yet have,
quite the opposite you’ll have to agree.
Jealous husbands and wives are just fine,
as is also a jealous God,
but a neighbor jealous of your car
gets a head shake not a nod.
Jealousy is a vice of wayward virtue,
a passion of sometimes tragic excess,
while envy is a quite tacky sin,
a weakness we’re all loath to confess.
I care not a whit that in Roget’s and Webster’s
envy is listed as a jealousy clone.
I’ll ever resist this mistaken synonymity
though I have to be zealous for jealous all alone.
Eric, you're becoming Larry David in the Krazy Eyez Killa episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.
Watch the 1:07 video on YouTube.
Warning: Every bad word in the book.
BTW, after you watch it, you can add to your list of words that can be "used affectionately".
Your objection to the “only” in the Dear Abby quote makes you sound more like an editor with a tin ear than the skilled writer you are. A good editor lets good writers bend/break some rules, especially in a case like this where the positioning of “only” doesn’t change any meaning. But maybe that’s just me….
It is really hard to understand how our society seems unable to address long term problems. I was discussing the climate provisions in the absurdly named Inflation Reduction Act with a friend. She said that politicians find it difficult to act without a crisis. I said they like being Santa and telling rosy fairy stories. The Colorado River is a good example. The creators of the seven-state water usage deal, in 1922 knew they were overestimating the amount of water available. The last 100 miles of the river disappeared in the 60's. The water levels in Lake Mead and Lake Powel have been declining for at least 40 years. The problem is now exacerbated by climate change. Yet the consuming states have done virtually nothing to reduce water consumption or the growth in consumption. The seven-state commission has done little, and the federal oversight has not acted, but now 'might' need to reduce the flow to Nevada and Arizona - in order to let the 'higher priority' states continue to gulp. All of these states are also drying up their aquifers. But there are bi-partisan efforts to get the federal government to build a pipeline from the Mississippi or the Great Lakes. Duh. Makes our pension problem seem smaller.
Beto's mofo was pleasing in the moment, but it remains frustrating to me that gun control advocates persist in leaving themselves open to "flyspecking" attacks on their own issue. That's a great word, all the more great when you realize that it's ironically a sort of bullshitting, but I'm not sure that's quite what's going on. I'm not convinced that such objections are meritless, and I find it disconcertingly difficult to get to the bottom of them using Google. Wouldn't it be even sweeter than Beto's mofo for a gun control advocate to call the flyspeckers' bluff and, per Reason, yes, actually know what they're talking about? That is, after all, what we should want from policymakers and regulators on any side of any issue, no?