Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Subdeacon Joe

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    57,905

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    681

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Subdeacon Joe

    Of Viands and Victuals

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Brock said:

    M experience is that 12 M eggs fit in a quart jar. 10 XL eggs fit in a quart jar. I'll guess that 11 L eggs fit in a quart jar.

     

    Yeah,  10 to 12. Depends if the eggs are on the small large or the large large. 

    I get 10 or 11 in a 21 oz olive jar. Those are about 3 cups.

    meme or wiki - which would you believe?

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

    Some memes are just bad jokes with illustrations.

     

    Some memes make fun of society and social conventions.

     

    Some memes are meant to teach. 

     

    The post mentioned in the OP of this thread has an exaggerated core of truth.  Exaggerated to teach social values. 

     

    Mostly they are harmless.  Does it really matter that the gentleman in that meme not instantly stop all work forever as implied,  but eased out of public life, and apparently did stop all work for a couple of years?

     

    The point of the meme is that he put family ahead of career. 

     

     

    • Like 1

    Of Viands and Victuals

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

     
    PICKLED EGGS
     
    12 hard boiled eggs 
    3 cups vinegar (I use apple cider vinegar)
    1/4 cup sugar
    1/2 tsp. peppercorns
    1 tsp. whole cloves
    1 TBSP. pickling spice
    1 tsp. mustard seed
    1 tsp. salt
    1 onion sliced
    1 small cinnamon stick (optional)
    1 garlic clove (optional)
     
    Place onion slices in a quart jar or larger, add garlic clove, if you use it, followed by the peeled hard boiled eggs. Bring to a boil the remaining ingredients and simmer for 10 minutes or so. Pour over eggs and seal. Store in the refrigerator
    • Like 1

    What happened to Rick Moranis

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Equanimous Phil said:

    That's really great of him. But on the other hand, I wonder how many fathers who are in a similar situation and would like to be there for their children can afford to quit their job? The ones I know who lost their wives may have reduced to part-time of 80%, but you still have to earn money to live.

     

    1 hour ago, DocWard said:

     

    You're right, but I think he can still set the example of not chasing fame and more money than you need in favor of family.

     

     

    I agree with both of you.  You do what you can.  But in our society that seems to venerate deadbeat "baby-daddies" who sire a half dozen get of 4 or 5 dams, it's good to see an example of a man,  not just a male, who walks away from fame and fortune for family.

     

     

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

    parents naming children

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted · Edited by Subdeacon Joe

    6 hours ago, Alpo said:

    Geary

     

    Would you call him Gary, or Jerry? Or something else?

     

    Neither.  As Seamus wrote,  it's Gear-ee.

     

    6 hours ago, Alpo said:

    High school kid. Mikel. The girl that is narrating the story says that she does not understand why his parents did not name him Michael

     

    Different cultural background.  I would suspect Jewish. Pronounced MEE-kel.

     

     

    • Like 1

    Canadian Wild Boar

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

    https://canadiangeographic.ca/articles/mapping-the-rapid-spread-of-invasive-feral-pigs-across-canada/

     

    A 2019 study headed by Ryan Brook, lead researcher for the Canadian Wild Pig Research Project, found the feral pigs had increased their range by nearly 90,000 square kilometres per year between 2011 and 2017. In July 2023, there was even a possible sighting in the Northwest Territories.

     

     Pig_OTM_17_FINAL_04-scaled.thumb.webp.6219d09f3e079a3113d425f4afbade73.webp

     

    Map Data: Pig sightings data courtesy Ryan Brook, Canadian Wild Pig Research Project; Global Geographic Range: Researchgate.net/figure/geographic-range-of-wild-pigs-across-their-native-and-non-native-global-distribution_FIG1_314394782; Predictive Mapping of population density; March 2017 Scientific reports 7(1), DOI:10.1038/SREP44152, License CC by 4.0 Lewis, J. Et. Al.

     

    While evidence suggests the presence of wild boars in North America as early as the 1600s, when colonizers introduced them, today’s surge is attributed to more recent miscalculations. In the 1980s and 1990s, wild pigs escaped — or were intentionally released from — farms in Ontario and the Prairies.

     

    As well as being destructive, the pigs carry diseases — including swine brucellosis, classical swine fever and the deadly African swine fever — that can be passed on to domestic pigs: an expensive risk for Canada’s $4-billion pork industry.

     

     

    https://www.wildpigs.ca/

    https://www.wildpigs.ca/whats-the-pig-deal/

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    • Thanks 1

    Wow. I've seen some strange stuff, but - wow

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

    49 minutes ago, Stump Water said:

    One pill makes you larger
    And one pill makes you small
    And the ones that mother gives you
    Don't do anything at all
    Go ask Alice
    When she's ten feet tall

    And if you go chasing rabbits
    And you know you're going to fall
    Tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar
    Has given you the call
    He called Alice
    When she was just small

    When the men on the chessboard
    Get up and tell you where to go
    And you've just had some kind of mushroom
    And your mind is moving low
    Go ask Alice
    I think she'll know

    When logic and proportion
    Have fallen sloppy dead
    And the White Knight is talking backwards
    And the Red Queen's off with her head
    Remember what the Dormouse said
    Feed your head
    Feed your head

     

     

     

     

    Iconic voice. 

     

     

     

    • Like 1

    Confederate Flag

    in SASS Wire Saloon

    Posted

    35 minutes ago, 9245 said:

    OK, after briefly scanning this thread, and just giving my broad thoughts in general, a few things need said.

     

    1: Most people, particularly liberals who are professionally offended to the point that they make up new things to be offended about, on other people’s behalf at that mind you, have no conception of what the confederate flag actually is, let alone what it looked like, they think the confederate flag is Lee’s battle flag, which it emphatically is not, hell Lee’s wasn’t even the only battle flag.  (They also don’t understand the actually very interesting, and completely non political, very practical reason why he designed that flag the way he did, or that that decision actually helped both sides)

     

    2: There is nothing even remotely offensive about the Confederate flag, or even Lee’s battle flag, it is not about race and never was, nor was the war in general.  To me it represents states rights and resistance to federal tyranny and over reach, and also a very important historical relic.

     

    3:  At this point, especially the way how everything is hyper polarized now, I take particular pleasure in twisting leftie’s hyper sensitive little nipples every chance that I get, just to piss them off.  I live on the salt of their tears, it is my morning coffee.  So if I can offend those little snow flakes with a mere flag, damn right I will fly it.

     

    4: States have the right to secede just as the US as a whole did from Britain in 1776, make whatever legal argument that you want, freedom is freedom, and if the government, supposedly of and by the people, not only does not represent you but actively represses and subjugates you for the political benefit or wants of others, you have the God given right to rebel and form your own government, please see the language of the Declaration of Independence for your legal theory behind that.  I don’t care what the politicians or courts say, I’m sure King George thought that the rebel colonists were breaking the law too.  Same concept.

     

    5: Here is the general political situation in 1860:

     

    A: The nation was hyper polarized, it was a political zero sum game, for one side to win the other must lose, there was no room in the middle for compromise, whichever side was not in power would see themselves as completely subjugated and powerless with no effective political representation or recourse.  (Does this seem familiar to anyone here?  Any modern parallels to be drawn perhaps?)

     

    B: The North was actively repressing and abusing the South.  The North was imposing punitive and coercive tariffs upon the South, in violation of the Constitution, and in direct breach of the understanding by which those states joined the Union in the first place, and as I mentioned there was no political or legal recourse available.  Further, Northern interests were taking advantage of the situation, buying Southern materials at a steal, then selling finished products back at an extreme markup, thus draining Southern wealth.  Kind of Sounds a lot like the British vs the American colonists doesn’t it?

     

    C Lincoln lost the election (at least from a pure numbers point of view).  Lincoln failed to receive a majority of electoral votes, yet was still president.  This was honestly the South’s fault due to a divided vote, but still, by the numbers he did fail to get a majority and he was distinctly anti Southern, see point A above.  For most of the South the election of Lincoln was the last straw and lead directly to their secession.

     

    The South had good reason for what they did.

     

    Also, for context:

     

    -Slavery as an institution was just as unpopular in the South, however it was an economic necessity, that was slowly changing, but it was still the reality.  Why?  Mostly due to Northern meddling the cost of slaves had risen so much that they were made an economic commodity as much as anything, there was significant capital and investment wrapped up in them, one slave had roughly the same value as a house, or to put it in to modern context, about $250,000 worth of modern money, give or take, and the abolitionists wanted to erase that without compensation.  Also, I seem to recall something in the Constitution about the seizure of property and the need to compensate for it.  I’m not justifying the practice here, just explaining the economics of it.  Which was where most of the South was, they did not like it conceptually or morally, but there you go.

     

    -Due to the extreme cost of slaves and the economic poverty and repression of the South, most were actually owned by Northern interests.  Most Southerners not only did not own one they did not like the concept either.

     

    -The North also had slavery.  The North had slave states, all through the war, and AFTER.

     

    -The fugitive slave act was still enforced through most of the war, escaped Southern slaves would be captured by the North and returned to their owners.

     

    -Northern generals personally owned slaves.

     

    -Lincoln, in his campaign, expressly said that he had no intention of ending slavery.

     

    -The emancipation proclamation was a wartime measure designed purely for propaganda, the war, prior to that, was incredibly unpopular in the North, most people in the North actually agreed with the South that they had a right to secede and thus a war to force them back in to the Union was wrong, thus Lincoln needed to refocus the war and make it about something unpopular in both the North and the South, slavery.  The president has no legal or constitutional power to declare royal style proclamations, nor to seize property without compensation.  Nor, obviously was the South even a member of the Union at that point and subject to his whims or decrees.  It had all the legal effect of a law saying that Cubans in Cuba cannot wear red on a Sunday.  It was pure propaganda.

     

    -Slavery did not end until well after the war with the passing of the 13th Amendment.

     

    So no, the war was never about slavery.

     

    Well said and well laid out, thank you. 

     

    Your last line, too many people conflate secession and the War of 1861. Slavery was the predominant reason (as in 51%), but not the only reason for secession. Mentioned in all the bills of secession. 

     

    But the war, per Lincoln's words*, was to keep southern dollars from imposts and duties flowing into federal coffers, and protect property belonging to the federal government.   That's about like England saying that the colonies were free to leave as long as they kept paying taxes to the Crown.

     

    I have to believe that when the founders scraped the Articles of Confederation with its perpetual and unbreakable union clause they intentionally did not put such a clause in the Constitution that replaced it.

     

    *"In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere."

     

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept