I really wish it would've happened, or at least been given a chance. A strong manager might've saved them from themselves. But, I get the feeling a strong manager-type would've either resigned on his own or been fired. With their bad habits and personalities, the Beach Boys were not conducive to taking advice.

Yup. The Beach Boys would just over rule, argue, disagree for the sake of disagreeing and drive someone out the moment anything went wrong. If Mike liked an idea, Denny and Carl would fight it and vice versa, or whatever. Im sure there were windows of opportunity and good advice got implemented, but the 5-headed monster usually ate itself.

Take Holland.  The band was still pushing the boundaries of their music, and its a decent record, but it was a logistical nightmare. Moving to Holland to record?  Not going to Holland to record -- they all moved to Holland. Even when something was good, there was a freight train full of bad ideas in tow.

So yes, a good manager could have avoided all this, but the 5-headed monster was unstopable and would have simply eaten him. But it is an interesting question, that's for sure.

You can't imagine that invasion by a foreign country might lead someone to want to fight back? Strange, because it seems to me that you are saying we should fight back because of a foreign attack.

Absolutely, yes.  I would certainly imagine they'd want to fight back.  Unfortunately our leftist President thinks we can walk away -- and announce it.  I mean, yikes.

Hey! We have a tiny area of common ground!

   We all have A LOT of common ground.  It's what we disagree on, that is tiny.  Itty bitty difference.  Seriously.

That disagreement is only... who is better at getting rid of them.  I say it's my side.  Not even close.  I want annihilate them.  And anything, any person or any nation -- or TV Station that supports them.  Anything that even pretends to support them.  Annihilated.  But not before we waterboard them.  I'll have water shooting a thousand feet into the sky, with lights -- all sync'ed to the music of the 1812 overture.

It isn't about being PC, it's about actually thinking rather than reacting (or over-reacting) out of anger.

I don't know what the best solution is. If it were easy, it would've been done already. But I am pretty sure overly broad revenge campaigns will do more harm than good. Just as they always do.

 

Oh good gravy.  Captain.  You just articulated the next phase of the plan for them.  They said, almost verbatim, "You better not over-react... cuz that's what we want."    Really?

Guys, c'mon.  We're not dealing with a bunch of chess champions here.  Get in the game.

You can't imagine that invasion by a foreign country might lead someone to want to fight back? Strange, because it seems to me that you are saying we should fight back because of a foreign attack.

Absolutely, yes.  I would certainly imagine they'd want to fight back.  Unfortunately our leftist President thinks we can walk away -- and announce it.  I mean, yikes.

Each time you post you only reveal yourself. 

As caller-out of nonsense, bullshit, and hyperbolic bloviating. I agree. Thanks for noticing."

  Anytime!

[Psychotic. Raping. Murdering. Cowards.]

Holy hand-hockey... talk about rhetorical tricks.  

Ya'll need to write this sh-t down, cuz I'm about to drop some b-mbs!  

Psychotic.  Raping.  Murdering.  Cowards.
If you feel the need to assign them purpose, do so in the privacy of your own home, cuz that's some perverted sht.  And these people see it.  They walk into schools, Einsteins.  They burst into rock concerts... and just start blasting away.  And you feel a need to explain and broadcast their reasons for them?  Bravo!

When some loser drags a woman into his loser car and rapes her -- do you look for reason?  Probably not, because that would only celebrate it.  Likewise... terrorists.  People of this mindset are also looking for reasons -- and you're gonna broadcast that?

Some twisted psychotic creep walked up to a reporter and executed her, and posted it on YouTube.  His reasons were?  How about who the fck cares?  Know this... his reasons seemed more and more legit to him with each leftwing broadcast analysis of why people can, should and do act out like this.  

And no, there's not a damn reason for it.  So just stop it.  Stop.  You're not gonna crack the case.  You're not.  You're just not.  Because, there's not a damn thing ANYBODY EVER DOES to cause this.

I find it interesting that some people think they know so intimately the motives and impulses driving people they've never interacted with even though, given tons of historical evidence, those are very unlikely to be the motives and impulses. It's an interesting projection and says a lot about human psychology.
If millions of people have behaved the same way in the past, why believe the motives and impulses of this particular set of people are different from those millions?
frankly, it's just dumb.

I agree Emily.  As you said: "why do people think they know so intimately the motives and impulses of people" etc.  Hopefully I made it clear in my post that I DO NOT GIVE A SH-T about their motives and impulses.  In fact, a preoccupation with that is only giving these turds further incentive.

You, before you edited it out of your quote above: "They are not attacking us because we annihilated Saddam Hussein's house of torture.  Or because we have a military base somewhere.  Get the fck outta here with that sht!  They are attacking us precisely because they see opportunity in weakness.  Clinton.  Obama.  YOUR weakness.  And no, there's not a damn reason for it.  So just stop it.  Stop.  You're not gonna crack the case.  You're not.  You're just not.  Because, there's not a damn thing ANYBODY EVER DOES to cause this."
This was you abscribing motives and impulses.
Show me evidence that their motives and impulses are different from those that drove the IRA. I can show you evidence that they're the same.

Ok, I see.  No, I edited my post to make sure my message of STOP GIVING A SH-T ABOUT THEIR MOTIVES was clear.  That's my whole point.  Who gives a sh-t what their motives are.  That's clear isn't it?

But the part about toppling Saddam and the Iraq war being among the terrorist's motives, that's what the LEFT keeps babbling about.  It was an example of how the Left sees everything as America's fault, for some cowardly, dopey reason.

I'm saying trying to justify any of this... no matter what you're intentions -- that's a moment of weakness.  And to say they're pouncing on the opportunity of this perceived weakness ... that's not a motive.  I'm not a criminal detective, but I gather there's a difference between motive and "moment of opportunity."

[Psychotic. Raping. Murdering. Cowards.]

Holy hand-hockey... talk about rhetorical tricks.  

Ya'll need to write this sh-t down, cuz I'm about to drop some b-mbs!  

Psychotic.  Raping.  Murdering.  Cowards.
If you feel the need to assign them purpose, do so in the privacy of your own home, cuz that's some perverted sht.  And these people see it.  They walk into schools, Einsteins.  They burst into rock concerts... and just start blasting away.  And you feel a need to explain and broadcast their reasons for them?  Bravo!

When some loser drags a woman into his loser car and rapes her -- do you look for reason?  Probably not, because that would only celebrate it.  Likewise... terrorists.  People of this mindset are also looking for reasons -- and you're gonna broadcast that?

Some twisted psychotic creep walked up to a reporter and executed her, and posted it on YouTube.  His reasons were?  How about who the fck cares?  Know this... his reasons seemed more and more legit to him with each leftwing broadcast analysis of why people can, should and do act out like this.  

And no, there's not a damn reason for it.  So just stop it.  Stop.  You're not gonna crack the case.  You're not.  You're just not.  Because, there's not a damn thing ANYBODY EVER DOES to cause this.

I find it interesting that some people think they know so intimately the motives and impulses driving people they've never interacted with even though, given tons of historical evidence, those are very unlikely to be the motives and impulses. It's an interesting projection and says a lot about human psychology.
If millions of people have behaved the same way in the past, why believe the motives and impulses of this particular set of people are different from those millions?
frankly, it's just dumb.

I agree Emily.  As you said: "why do people think they know so intimately the motives and impulses of people" etc.  Hopefully I made it clear in my post that I DO NOT GIVE A SH-T about their motives and impulses.  In fact, a preoccupation with that is only giving these turds further incentive.

We got this? Lol. It certainly went well under the neocons. (So far both parties have proven themselves entirely inept.) Inspiring stuff.

The tough talk remains adorable.

Each time you post you only reveal yourself.  Because, I think I was describing action.

[Psychotic. Raping. Murdering. Cowards.]

Holy hand-hockey... talk about rhetorical tricks.  

Ya'll need to write this sh-t down, cuz I'm about to drop some b-mbs!  

Psychotic.  Raping.  Murdering.  Cowards.
If you feel the need to assign them purpose, do so in the privacy of your own home, cuz that's some perverted sht.  And these people see it.  They walk into schools, Einsteins.  They burst into rock concerts... and just start blasting away.  And you feel a need to explain and broadcast their reasons for them?  Bravo!

When some loser drags a woman into his loser car and rapes her -- do you look for reason?  Probably not, because that would only celebrate it.  Likewise... terrorists.  People of this mindset are also looking for reasons -- and you're gonna broadcast that?

Some twisted psychotic creep walked up to a reporter and executed her, and posted it on YouTube.  His reasons were?  How about who the fck cares?  Know this... his reasons seemed more and more legit to him with each leftwing broadcast analysis of why people can, should and do act out like this.  It's the gun's fault.  It's society.  It's whitey.  It's oppression.  It's America.

Oy.  How about shut-the-fck-up and let us handle this?!  You lefties need to take a timeout.

They are not attacking us because we annihilated Saddam Hussein's house of torture.  Or because we have a military base somewhere.  Get the fck outta here with that sht!  They are attacking us precisely because they see opportunity in weakness.  Clinton.  Obama.  YOUR weakness.  And no, there's not a damn reason for it.  So just stop it.  Stop.  You're not gonna crack the case.  You're not.  You're just not.  Because, there's not a damn thing ANYBODY EVER DOES to cause this.

You can only tolerate and allow more of it.  Stop playing into their hands.




It's time for some serious soul searching, ya'll.  Please put the precious Left-wing ideology aside -- for 5 fcking minutes.  It'll be there when you come back -- trust me, nobody else wants it.  If not, you're only displaying and broadcasting to a world full of psychos, that you're weak, you have the inability to do anything about it, and in their minds -- it's their time to go all in.  They're not smart, we hold the cards.

Otherwise, you are only continuing to unleash great pain on the world.  It's time to unleash it on them.  We got this.  Sit this one out.  But that's NEVER gonna happen because liberals can never shut the fck up.

[Captain Beefheart]

Captain Beefheart - The Spotlight Kid

Victim blaming - awesome.

Nice, isn't it?  How much longer does the rest of polite, normal society have to pretend to tolerate this nonesnese. I think we've polite long enough.

Yeah! That's the kind of tough talk we need to make America great again. I say no more politeness. Rudeness from here on out. We'll fart at the dinner table, for starters.

I love you man! Hmm, i suppose that might work. If your goal was to sneak behind enemy lines, win their trust and gather intelligence. Should we let the Pentagon know?

I think it is important to condemn horrifying atrocities like this terrible crime in Paris, just as it is important to condemn the drone strikes that are killing innocent people: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147

Ay, caramba!

I do appreciate your honest candor and ease at delivering such reprehensible and morally ambigous perspectives, but the inability to understand right and wrong, good and evil -- when frankly the lines have never been clearer and easily understandable -- would, under normal circumstances, simply be dismissble in intelligent, decent society.  But given recent events, they're mostly just nauseating. Not just you of course, there's plenty of examples to choose from -- but I know you won't trouble me with a response. 

Victim blaming - awesome.

Nice, isn't it?  How much longer does the rest of polite, normal society have to pretend to tolerate this nonesnese. I think we've polite long enough.

When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and a cross.

Like a little bow on top.

Snooze-fest Dem debate last night, BTW.  Regarding national security, all we got was a lot of corporate-slogans --

"we need to better."
"we need to have better."
"we need to work with the world better."

Wow.  Inspiring.  I'd feel safe with one of those dunces calling the shots.




Here's my quick analysis...  
Bernie Sander:  I take back everything nice I'd ever about "The Bern." In your best Yogi Bear voice, just say "Climate Change" with your hands up in the air.  What a loon.
O'Mally:  Oh boy.  I'll just be nice and say "light weight."
Hillary:  With this competition, if I were her, I wouldn't get too comfortable.  Because there's a REAL good chance that Jeb isn't going to be your opponent.  I'll leave it at that.

Talk about JV squad.

I find it interesting that the two leading Republican are the ones with the least amount of experience.

It is interesting, I agree.  And it is exactly the kind of experience they lack, that is giving them the lead.  Or so I believe.

Nothing new.  You saw it in 08, with the Turd, Al-Obama.  He brought the country unfettered radicalism of the Leftward Collegiate variety.  One of the worst strains, I've always believed.  And now, people hope, these two Republican leading candidates will offer something equally strong in the ANYTHING BUT direction.  There's very little patience for the big-money, heavily managed, empty suits types like Jeb.

From Michael Savage...
We’re facing something the West hasn’t had to deal with since the wars of religion in the 16th and 17th centuries. When those religious wars ended in one place, they began in another. They lasted for over one hundred years.

The same thing is happening right now. The radical Muslims are on the warpath and they are against everyone else. They are against Muslims who are not as fanatical. They are against the members of all other religions. They think they are going to take us back to some pristine religious period in human history that never actually occurred.

It’s all complete rubbish. These “faith warriors” live lower than the pigs they despise. They kidnap and rape 8-year-old girls and say the Quran authorizes it. They’re not purists. They’re killers. They’re Nazis in head scarfs. They aren’t leading a religious revival. They’re trying to take us back to a state of barbarism that has been extinct for 1,200 years.

This is a barbaric revolution, and we have a man in the White House who denies its existence. But whether he chooses to acknowledge it or not, it’s going to continue until someone puts a stop to it.

Jonathan Sacks called the fight against radical Islam the “defining conflict of the next generation.” He likened radical Islam to a starfish. When you cut off a spider’s head, it dies. But when you cut off the leg of a starfish, the starfish can regenerate it. Radical political Islam is a starfish. If you defeat ISIS or al-Qaeda, they will merely come back under another name.

Why would any government bring in unvetted Muslim immigrants at a time like this? It would seem that only an insane prince would do this to his country. But Obama is not insane. He’s stoned. He’s stoned on the orthodoxy of the progressive left. Obama and his supporters are drunk on their ideology. They think they’re going to create a progressive utopia by continuing their attack on all Western values.

This is precisely how great civilizations of the past declined and eventually fell. They rejected the values that made them great and degenerated into narcissism and selfishness. They kept on partying until they were too weak to defend themselves. Then, the unthinkable happened. They fell.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/a-dance-of-death-in-the-west/#BXTymOADjqfbyQ1X.99

I hope they find the French guy who made the video that pissed them off. Or the cartoonist that offended them. Something set these terrorists off -- and i hope they find whomever offended them and hold them responsible.

Right?  Of course i dont mean any of that nonesense. But can u imagine if people really thought like that?  Sadly, many of the World's "Leaders" do. We have one running for President right now. They're dangerous fakes and fools.

All free nations must close their borders. Rats are getting in.  Lock the doors to the free world, eradicate the communities and cultures producing these psychos.

We know who they are, what they believe, and where they come from.  They're not coming from outer space.  Or from some portal at an undisclosed location on the bottom of he sea.  And because of the fakes and fools running the world, these rats all throughout the house.

We pick our leaders. Wake. The. F-ck up. World!

Ted Cruz



The very mention of Lincoln's name -- sorry, Cruz's name -- causes the owning-class to shriek in terror.  Ted Cruz has been a tough candidate, and his stock is only rising.  The Republican Party just can't get rid of him.  And the Left... well, they're hoping to hell they don't have to.  They're hoping Jeb's Republicans can keep him sidelined just a little longer.

Like me (I'm only guessing, never met him) but Ted loves to be hated.  Well, by that I mean it's vindication that he's on the right track.  Like the old adage -- I want to be judged by who my enemies are.  You know... there's very little guidance in this world... 'cept from your enemies.

Anyway... Ted Cruz continues to have a lot of big debate moments.  Tee-hee.

Great debate Tuesday night.  Bad day for the opposition, cuz we actually got to learn about Republican Candidates -- rather than the Mediacrat opinion of Republican Candidates.

To not have to sit through a liberal-media gang-bang (with Democrats pretending to be moderators) was a refreshing change for the adults.  Adults discussing big, grown-up issues and solutions -- rather than the tween'er tabloid, BS-playdough the Left doodles around with.  Put the kids to bed, fix a drink(s) and be an adult for a bit.  If only for a bit...

This photo is a good example of why I've always found articles/sources that cited "Brian reached 300 pounds!" to be potentially *way* off. Considering he's a guy on the taller side as well, I'd say at his heaviest around the era of this photo, he could have easily been at 350 and maybe closer to 400 than 300.

I guess people can carry weight different ways, and some look lighter or heavier than they actually are. I've just known people who are 300 pounds who are shorter and *look* less heavy than Brian does in that picture.

Obviously not an issue of huge importance, but that little biographical detail I've often seen in books and articles when they hit that 1982 time period always seemed to be off.

I always thought the same thing.  While 300lbs is certainly heavy for a tall guy -- I always thought he looked bigger than 3 bills.

But that photo -- good grief.  I think he looks BLOATED.  Swollen.  I'm no expert, but drugs do that to your body.  His face looks extremely bloated, puffed up and swollen.  He looks sick, not "overweight."

It's not the government's job to take care of anyone.  Only because they can't.  Neither one of those statements are opinion.  It's reality.  And it's being proven.

For example.. if I save someone's life, by pushing them out of the way of a moving car -- but I get injured as a result, am I owed something?  Was that why I did it?  I did it out of duty -- I acted without thinking, most likely... not an expectation of reward.

Food for thought.

I guess the government's job is whatever we define it to be. My definition differs from yours.

While true, I would NOT give government a "job" they cannot do.  Not one as important as caring for our Vets.

It's not the government's job to take care of anyone.  Only because they can't.  Neither one of those statements are opinion.  It's reality.  And it's being proven.

For example.. if I save someone's life, by pushing them out of the way of a moving car -- but I get injured as a result, am I owed something?  Was that why I did it?  I did it out of duty -- I acted without thinking, most likely... not an expectation of reward.

Food for thought.

Bean Bag - lifetime medical care part of a "benefits package" is an "inducement" for signing up for the military. It is a contract.  You put life and limb in harms way to defend the country, and if you get hurt, they have a duty to care for your medical needs.  The VA should not have to be shamed into doing their job.  They contracted to care for vets when they signed up to join the military.  It is the cost of doing business for the defense of the country.  

It is their job to provide medical care.  And, if you "change the variables" and compared being injured in the military to being injured in the workplace, you would get worker's compensation to provide care for injuries that "arose in the course of employment." Employers pay workers comp premiums.  It is the cost of doing business.

And, if you are a Good Samaritan, and get injured, our public policy finds a way of taking care of you if you have no coverage.  It is because we live in a compassionate society.  It isn't winning a vacation, it is caring for a person in need.  We are not barbarians.      

Exactly, we are not barbarians.  We're the greatest, most compassionate nation to ever exist, despite Hillary's shrugging off of the whole debacle that is the VA.  The VA has been a debacle for generations.

Hillary's shrugging off is the point, though.  Only a barbarian would put their veteran's care in the hands of these people.  Haven't they suffered enough?

And I don't think the correct answer is to simply wait for a more compassionate politician to come along and fix it, and make it better.  Government, by the very Laws of Nature, cannot care for it's people.

It's not the government's job to take care of anyone.  Only because they can't.  Neither one of those statements are opinion.  It's reality.  And it's being proven.

For example.. if I save someone's life, by pushing them out of the way of a moving car -- but I get injured as a result, am I owed something?  Was that why I did it?  I did it out of duty -- I acted without thinking, most likely... not an expectation of reward.

Food for thought.

   Who is qualified Bubbles?  Tell me.  Who.