Ask Scoates

True, there's something about Judy that suggest firepower; but don't forget the fact that JJB has that mysterious looking blonde woman on his side. They'd just double team her; and, even if she could resist that, da Brotherhood of Wack Judges would just come in and finish it off.

As for the publishing thing; I only offered in a maniacal and suspicious way as a joke. Yay for my mediocre sense of humour! Even so, I have a book of short stories and a poetry collection coming out this November: why would I want to steal your ideas when I have plenty of my own (and when your ideas would seem suspiciously different from my style, were I to use them.)

And where my ideas are unpublishable.

Anyway, as far as JJS vs JJB, you must not know who Judge Judy's bailiff is. He is a match for Judge Joe Brown himself. So if it's a tag team match, it comes down to Judge Judy vs the mysterious blonde. Again, I know where I'd put my money.

Oh, you know that I'd just engineer it so that I would win. If Judge Judy managed to defeat da Brotherhood of Wack judges, then I would come in, dressed as Joan of Arc, with two-hundred freaks dressed like Napoleon under my control, who think that the whole 'match' is a weird, Sadistic pornography movie. They'd remove Judge Judy, and JJB would be crowned as Judge Superior.

Oh No!
My wife's preggers! Would it be cheaper to raise the kid, or use the money I'd spend on raising it to build a time machine, go back in time, and stop the event from happening?

dlowan,

I had the best meal of my life at a restaurant in Adelaide. Contrary to what the song might say, I do not believe Adelaide is a "hole". In fact I quite enjoyed my time there.

Re: Oh No!


Set the dial on that time machine a year ahead of now, and I'll bet you wouldn't want to prevent it! CONGRATULATIONS, DAD!!!

okay, why do they always tell the girls on American Idol they are too fat and never said anything to Reuben...they call him a velvet teddy bear...that sucks...

Turner, you cannot change that fact by going back in time, seeing as the event is what inspired you to go back in time in the first place. It's a very classic paradox: if you stopped the event you would also stop your future motivation for stopping the event, and would have never travelled back in time in the first place. It's weird stuff.

Willow, women are expected to be thinner than men. It is socially acceptable for a man to be fat, but taboo for women. It's not really fair, but that is a factor in the answer. Also, Reuben was talanted. Sometimes the judges get tired of just telling people they aren't talented (they want each insult to be original) and so they will insult their appearance. In the case that they actually are talented, it can also involve the way they dress (anyone who is a fan will know exactly which fat lady I am speaking of from this year).

Lastly, sometimes the judges are dumb, and inconsistent for no reason at all.

Also, I would like to point out that we all love and adore David Quincy Matthews' and his band, yet when the band came out David was a hefty 280 lbs!

Dear SKotc...

I see your point about the paradox related to going back in time, but that point of view stands only if your view is limited to one method of time-travel. That would be that you go back in time, and (much like Back to the Future) you need to avoid your other self while changing an event. I propose a varying mode of time travel. I propose that it may actually occur by simply rewinding events. This would not create a double, nor create the paradox you speak of. You could then begin to relive time from that moment, but time-machineless.

I do see one error in my thinking. going back in time would be useful only if you could retain the ideas and memories you had at the time you traveled. There would need to be a way to avoid rewinding memories; otherwise, by going back in time to change an event, you'd just be doomed to relive it.

If there was a way to not rewind memories, it would be useful to go FORWARD in time without the "anti-brain rewinder" on and gain all your life's knowledge, and then go back in time with the rewinder on. You'd have 80+ years of knowledge at your age right now.

You'd have to make sure you didn't go too far though, like to when you're dead!

SCoates

My time spent in the library is often disturbed by the awkward feeling that any talking whatsoever is inappropriate. I think we can all relate to that feeling you get when you're reading along and you and a friend simultaneously notice one another, close the distance, and begin talking. It just feels awkward, like you're sinning almost and need to repent. What causes that feeling? Why do I get that feeling when I speak at ALL (in the library)? Is talking altogether wrong? If not... at what volume is it appropriate to talk? And where?....

I think the judges' bash against reuben was about as close as it gets to calling a girl fat. Both "fat" and "velvet teddy bear" are direct attacks on what the genders stands for. Women seek to look nice and be thin, and men try to avoid velvet and Theodore Roosevelt. I think the bash on Reuben was pretty witty myself, and if I were called a velvet teddy bear, I would feel darn insulted.

Answer to question one: sin. You get that feeling because no matter how quietly you speak, you are sinning to some degree. Talking in general is not wrong, but it is wrong in the library. Is that something your most respected ecclesiastical leaders would do? The answer to my own question is "no". As for what you a should do, seeing as you have obviously already transgressed, I would refer you to The Good Book. It's fat with good advice for sinners.