Lola at the Coffee House

@spendius,

Quote:

I'll have some cow-pie Washup.

Noun 1. cowpie - fecal matter of a cow
cow pie
droppings, dung, muck - fecal matter of animals

Is that really what you meant, spendius?

1 Reply

@Ticomaya,

He shouldn't have to say what it means, to anyone but an idiot. It was clear what he meant. Only an idiot would leap to the ridiculous conclusion that it held the same meaning as it does in North America.

So far that idiocy seems to have only extended to you and Farmer.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

You're certainly an odd one to be chiding others, Set.

You've badly mistaken setting some idiots straight for hatefulness.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Wassau, some coffee please,

Just think, FF, there's a good chance that y'all have murdered, at the very least, thousands of Wassau's countrymen.

Quote:

I remember hearing about Pablum as a particular brand of baby cereal which was marketed in the U.S.

That's the baby cereal. Small 'p' pablum is the stuff that y'all have been fed since birth to help you form the crazy notions way too many of you have of your country.

Unlike the capital 'P' Pablum, which actually had some nutrient value, the crap you were fed was a monstrous series of lies. But you all dutifully swallowed it, even as "adults", you still do daily.

MW:

pablum

3 : something (as writing or speech) that is insipid, simplistic, or bland

AHD:
pablum
Trite, insipid, or simplistic writing, speech, or conceptualization: "We have to settle for the pablum that passes for the inside dope" (Julie Salamon).

Etymology Pablum

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5303197)
All the experts said Woods should have been disqualified.

That is abject blather, Spendius. Several of the "experts" were the people who made the call...and the officials of the PGA and USGA who agreed with the call.

Quote:

As I understand things there is a new rule by which a committee can waive the rules if it is in the committee's interest to do so as it was in this case.

That is not what the new rule says...so your understanding of it is as faulty as your so-called understanding of what "all the experts" have said.

Quote:

The implication is that Media is running golf.

The implication is that you are expounding on a subject about which your knowledge is suspect.

Quote:

I saw Fred Couples say that it took him an hour to play one hole.

Try to speak the Queen's English so that it can be understood. Does the "him" in that sentence refer to Fred Couples or to Tiger Woods. There is no way to determine that from the wording you used.

2 Replies

@firefly,

What do you think?

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/7/72648/1397196-cowpie1.jpg

3 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

jtt: Again, what is it that fails you so badly when it's ten plus million foreigners murdered by American war criminals/terrorists?

Quote:

Spendius: I have no idea whether that statistic is true or not or whether, if it is, it can be justified, but even if it is partially true I think it is important to debate it and not hide away from it.

When cake decor takes precedence over matters of that nature there is a sense of voluntary self-lobotomy being in operation.

A short 7 minute video that takes us to, about, 1987. But it lays out the whole sordid picture of the US. Remember this is only since WWII.

=======================

6 million people have died in CIA covert actions John Stockwell ( Ex CIA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaP60qnoQDw

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Cow pies are the staple of Desperate Dan, a character from the Dandy comic, which has just recently gone online since running from the 1930s. He's a tough cowboy who lives in Cactusville in the "Wild West." It's called a cow pie because there's a whole cow in it.

Cactusville is very much a British version of the "Wild West," as the following cartoon demonstrates.

http://superitch.com/images/2011/04/The-Dandy-1773-P03.jpg

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Quote:
I saw Fred Couples say that it took him an hour to play one hole.

Quote:

Try to speak the Queen's English so that it can be understood. Does the "him" in that sentence refer to Fred Couples or to Tiger Woods. There is no way to determine that from the wording you used.

You're getting involved, AGAIN, "on a subject about which your knowledge is suspect", Frank.

Quote:

That is abject blather, Spendius. Several of the "experts" were the people who made the call...and the officials of the PGA and USGA who agreed with the call.

Masters 2013: Should Tiger Woods have been disqualified?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/golf/22139506

Tiger Woods' Penalty Should Have Been Assessed On The Spot Or Not At All
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidlariviere/2013/04/13/tiger-woods-penalty-should-have-been-assessed-on-the-spot-or-not-at-all/

You should disqualify yourself! Faldo says Woods will damage legacy by playing on at Augusta
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/golf/article-2308544/Tiger-Woods-disqualify-Masters-says-Sir-Nick-Faldo.html

"Was there intent to break the rule is the question? I think he should WD. He took a drop to gain an advantage. DQ believers aren't wrong. 2 shot penalty believers not wrong. Precedent is now set."
David Duval

Quote:

Normally, signing an incorrect scorecard would be an automatic DQ but the rules were amended last year so that penalties could be assessed later without disqualifying the player.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidlariviere/2013/04/13/tiger-woods-penalty-should-have-been-assessed-on-the-spot-or-not-at-all/

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Suit yourself!!

Your experts are money experts. I meant golf experts.

I said "can waive the rules". Obviously they wouldn't if a player picked up his ball and put it in the hole. I meant if the committee thinks it can get away with it when money is high on the agenda. It has got away with it and a lot of players are $ooos of dollars lighter. Perhaps Woods will send them all a cheque.

What does the new rule say then? I've only read it once and I may have misunderstood it and the explanations of it offered by golf experts. What's your explanation? It is marking your own homework, once again, if you content yourself with asserting I don't understand it without bothering to explain why.

I hope you are not intending insulting the intelligence of Lola's clientele by asking them to believe that you understand the new rule, which came out of another incident involving the same player in a Gulf state tournament last year, on the basis of asserting that I don't. You doing that proves nothing. By which I mean a big fat zero.

Of course I meant Fred Couples said that it took him (Fred Couples) an hour to play one hole. Hence the separate paragraph.

I fully understand the money experts reasons as well, and I assume the other players do, because bums on seats are what create the prize money. The only problem with that argument is the players become sandwich-board men. Highly paid ones because they are good at fixing eyes on adverts by whacking a little ball about a patch of landscape embroidery and getting the sort of people who buy the gear advertised sitting on the edge of their seats. No magical floor cleaning fluids.

All based on the simple proposition that playing golf is a superior behaviour than playing darts or dozing on the sofa. I watched it all to have a look at the USA more or less live. With its pants down.

Good day for the umbrella franchise. That stood out. I have never seen as many identical umbrellas in one place before. Were they hired or will they all be used in the future like ladies use a Dior shopping bag?

1 Reply

BUMP

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Your experts are money experts. I meant golf experts.

Aha...so the members of the Rules Committee of Augusta...and the agreeing officials of the USGA and PGA...are not golf experts.

No use even talking to you, Spendius.

5 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Where did your previous posting go, Frank?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

No use even talking to you, Spendius.

That's exhibiting the same cowardly nature that you decry the 'ignore' folks on, Frank.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

On the golf -
I've read several takes on the ruling (actually rulings, as the course people passed it by early). It was an unusually tricky situation relative to where to drop the ball, given the ball bounced out of the cup and then back downhill but not in the exact way it had gotten there as it was first hit - and, while at first I wondered why wonder boy didn't know where to drop it after all these years, I can now well see why, as a rule made for the incoming trajectory didn't fit in this case.

On debating JTT, who intrudes on countless threads against people's continuing enjoyment of life even after US depredations - I'm not interested. He or she knows I substantially agree with a lot of his takes.
I do strongly wish he would shut up on threads such as this one, about a convivial cafe, where people can discuss things without needing to upchuck breakfast.

3 Replies

@ossobuco,

relax, he is dead to us. He sleeps in the garbage with the rest of the garbage.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Aha...so the members of the Rules Committee of Augusta...and the agreeing officials of the USGA and PGA...are not golf experts.

Why does it not surprise me that you don't seem to be aware of conflict of interest, Frank.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

From the noted academic, the guy who says he is more than willing to look at the facts and address those facts before making up his mind.

Yes, Farmerman actually said that.

Go ahead and peek, Farmer. You can't do much more damage than you've already done to your creds.

Right, Osso?

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Quote:

On the golf -
I've read several takes on the ruling (actually rulings, as the course people passed it by early). It was an unusually tricky situation relative to where to drop the ball, given the ball bounced out of the cup and then back downhill but not in the exact way it had gotten there as it was first hit - and, while at first I wondered why wonder boy didn't know where to drop it after all these years, I can now well see why, as a rule made for the incoming trajectory didn't fit in this case.

There is absolutely no doubt but that Tiger made an error. He did violate a rule...and the fact that apparently he did so unknowingly does not mitigate the fact that he made the error.

But when he signed the card...he did it in good faith, thinking that the score on the card was correct. HE MADE AN ERROR.

The two stroke penalty was absolutely in order. Disqualification is NOT mandated...and the Rules Committee decided not to DQ him. He could have DQ'ed himself, but I see no reason for him to do so. That could go either way...some players would have DQ'ed themselves; some would not have. It is analogous to a recusal of a Justice or Judge. The decision is up to the person...and Tiger decided not to DQ himself. Totally allowed.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

That's the man izzy.

0 Replies

Lola at the Coffee House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know