On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:09:19 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>sf wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>> to become sluts.
>>
>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>
>And tampons

And rock-n-roll music. It all turns us into bad people!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-8_GI4d2c

Louie Louie

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:24:28 -0400, blake murphy wrote:

> say what you want about mcdougal's, they do seem to be cleanliness
> fanatics. the food is still lousy, though.

The major fast food places seem to always get the highest inspection scores
here in Austin at least. I've seen them get 100% (clean, not dirty)
several times, which is almost unheard of.

I figured somebody was tipping them off on upcoming inspections. But their
processes are designed to allow very little room for uncleanliness.

-sw

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:24:28 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 07:09:27 -0400, George wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2010 11:16 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>> Certainly in this day of "undercover investigations" lots of
>>> enterprising recently graduated and can't find a real job waiters
>>> and cooks could make much better money filming these alleged
>>> atrocities.
>>>
>>> I've worked several food-service jobs and I would have no problem
>>> eating in these establishments today.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> I mentioned this before. My buddy has a commercial refrigeration
>> business so he gets to see a lot of places. He isn't prone to story
>> telling stories or exaggeration. He said lots of places (notably big box
>> chains that many think are wonderful because they must be good because
>> they tell you so) are seriously dirty or have poor practices with some
>> so bad his workers have called in and refused to work on something until
>> it was cleaned. He said the cleanest chain places are Wendys and
>> McDonalds.
>
>say what you want about mcdougal's, they do seem to be cleanliness
>fanatics.

Yes they are. In the middle of the night someone sneaks in and takes
the exhaust fan off the roof. While they are doing that someone else
is preparing the kitchen for the mess that will come down. They're in
and out in a very short period of time leaving a clean vent. I only
know this because the contractors do other jobs and they do sometime
mess up the sealtite feed to the motor and they need an electrician to
fix it. A fireman just dies here in a fire because the vent was
dirty. mCshitties is a clean operation.


> the food is still lousy, though.

yep. if you want to call it food

Lou

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:18:26 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:29:03 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 11:55:18 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:

>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>
>> Lou
>
>i guess it outstrips mine.

I actually like the rush. I can't believe how much weird shit I've
seen in a short period of time.

Lou

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:10:06 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:03:29 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:02:35 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:29:00 -0700, David Harmon >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:03:03 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Sqwertz
> wrote,
>>>>>Yeah - I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions - especially the non-chain
>>>>>mom and pop family enterprises. Especially the Asian restaurnats. They're
>>>>>always getting bad inspection scores.
>>>>
>>>>They are probably just too cheap to pay. I remember the news story when
>>>>the inspector here in Los Angeles was taking $200 to upgrade the rating
>>>>to an "A".
>>>
>>> That would never be allowed here in Chicago.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>i suppose anything less than $300 is insulting.
>
> I kinda figured you'd be the one to catch that.
>
> Lou

i'm poor but dishonest.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>> to become sluts.
>
> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?

any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets pregnant it's
god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask me).

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:22:56 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:09:19 -0400, Goomba >
> wrote:
>
>>sf wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>>> to become sluts.
>>>
>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>>
>>And tampons
>
> And rock-n-roll music. It all turns us into bad people!
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-8_GI4d2c
>
> Louie Louie

i knew there was a good reason to listen to that stuff.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:56:09 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:18:26 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:29:03 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 11:55:18 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>
>>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>i guess it outstrips mine.
>
> I actually like the rush. I can't believe how much weird shit I've
> seen in a short period of time.
>
> Lou

it's pretty close to the bone in those situations.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages
>>> twelve-year-old girls to become sluts.
>>
>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>
> any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets
> pregnant it's god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask
> me).
>
> your pal,
> blake

And lopsided, too.

On 8/13/2010 3:51 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:22:40 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2010 8:29 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>>> My new job is inspecting houses in bankruptcy or foreclosure to see if
>>> they bolted and the condition of the property.
>>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>
>> Survival 101--eyeball the property _before_ you file the lawsuit. If it
>> looks like the Unabomber lives there maybe the suit isn't such a good idea.
>
> Not even close. The bank doesn't care about that.

The bank doesn't care about its board of directors getting blown to Hell?

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:25:21 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> wrote:

>On 8/13/2010 3:51 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:22:40 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/10/2010 8:29 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>
>>>> My new job is inspecting houses in bankruptcy or foreclosure to see if
>>>> they bolted and the condition of the property.
>>>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>>
>>> Survival 101--eyeball the property _before_ you file the lawsuit. If it
>>> looks like the Unabomber lives there maybe the suit isn't such a good idea.
>>
>> Not even close. The bank doesn't care about that.
>
>The bank doesn't care about its board of directors getting blown to Hell?

I'm just learning about this stuff but if a loan is government backed
it's inspected by law if it's late, in foreclosure, or they've filed
bankruptcy. The bank doesn't have anything to say about it.

Lou

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:50:14 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:10:06 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:03:29 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:02:35 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:29:00 -0700, David Harmon >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:03:03 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Sqwertz
> wrote,
>>>>>>Yeah - I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions - especially the non-chain
>>>>>>mom and pop family enterprises. Especially the Asian restaurnats. They're
>>>>>>always getting bad inspection scores.
>>>>>
>>>>>They are probably just too cheap to pay. I remember the news story when
>>>>>the inspector here in Los Angeles was taking $200 to upgrade the rating
>>>>>to an "A".
>>>>
>>>> That would never be allowed here in Chicago.
>>>>
>>>> Lou
>>>
>>>i suppose anything less than $300 is insulting.
>>
>> I kinda figured you'd be the one to catch that.
>>
>> Lou
>
>i'm poor but dishonest.

That must be why I like you.

Lou

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:52:17 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>> to become sluts.
>>
>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>
>any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets pregnant it's
>god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask me).


99% of religious stuff is twisted.

Lou

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:58:41 -0400, "Dora" > wrote:

>blake murphy wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages
>>>> twelve-year-old girls to become sluts.
>>>
>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>
>> any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets
>> pregnant it's god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask
>> me).
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>And lopsided, too.

No kidding. Being punished with a little bundle of joy.

Lou

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:42 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:50:14 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:10:06 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:03:29 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:02:35 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:29:00 -0700, David Harmon >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:03:03 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Sqwertz
> wrote,
>>>>>>>Yeah - I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions - especially the non-chain
>>>>>>>mom and pop family enterprises. Especially the Asian restaurnats. They're
>>>>>>>always getting bad inspection scores.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>They are probably just too cheap to pay. I remember the news story when
>>>>>>the inspector here in Los Angeles was taking $200 to upgrade the rating
>>>>>>to an "A".
>>>>>
>>>>> That would never be allowed here in Chicago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>>i suppose anything less than $300 is insulting.
>>>
>>> I kinda figured you'd be the one to catch that.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>i'm poor but dishonest.
>
> That must be why I like you.
>
> Lou

too bad there isn't a bar local to the both of us so we could meet to hatch
plots.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:58:41 -0400, Dora wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages
>>>> twelve-year-old girls to become sluts.
>>>
>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>
>> any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets
>> pregnant it's god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask
>> me).
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> And lopsided, too.

well, men get to skate. it's god's way.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:47 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:52:17 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>>> to become sluts.
>>>
>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>
>>any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets pregnant it's
>>god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask me).
>
> 99% of religious stuff is twisted.
>
> Lou

it's still a big seller, though.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:53:35 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:42 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

>>>>>i suppose anything less than $300 is insulting.
>>>>
>>>> I kinda figured you'd be the one to catch that.
>>>>
>>>> Lou
>>>
>>>i'm poor but dishonest.
>>
>> That must be why I like you.
>>
>> Lou
>
>too bad there isn't a bar local to the both of us so we could meet to hatch
>plots.

We'd have to overlook politics but that would be fun.

Lou

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:55:16 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:47 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:52:17 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>>>> to become sluts.
>>>>
>>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>>
>>>any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets pregnant it's
>>>god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask me).
>>
>> 99% of religious stuff is twisted.
>>
>> Lou
>
>it's still a big seller, though.

So were beanie babies at one time.

Lou

"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:25:21 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> > wrote:
>
>>On 8/13/2010 3:51 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:22:40 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/10/2010 8:29 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>
>>>>> My new job is inspecting houses in bankruptcy or foreclosure to see if
>>>>> they bolted and the condition of the property.
>>>>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>>>
>>>> Survival 101--eyeball the property _before_ you file the lawsuit. If
>>>> it
>>>> looks like the Unabomber lives there maybe the suit isn't such a good
>>>> idea.
>>>
>>> Not even close. The bank doesn't care about that.
>>
>>The bank doesn't care about its board of directors getting blown to Hell?
>
> I'm just learning about this stuff but if a loan is government backed
> it's inspected by law if it's late, in foreclosure, or they've filed
> bankruptcy. The bank doesn't have anything to say about it.

Hey! I just read this.. you have a job!!!!!!!! Cool! Well done)
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:13:11 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:55:16 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:47 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:52:17 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>>>>> to become sluts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>>>
>>>>any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets pregnant it's
>>>>god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask me).
>>>
>>> 99% of religious stuff is twisted.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>it's still a big seller, though.
>
> So were beanie babies at one time.
>
> Lou

at least the beanie baby battles didn't escalate too badly.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:13:06 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:53:35 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:42 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>>>>>>i suppose anything less than $300 is insulting.
>>>>>
>>>>> I kinda figured you'd be the one to catch that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>>i'm poor but dishonest.
>>>
>>> That must be why I like you.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>too bad there isn't a bar local to the both of us so we could meet to hatch
>>plots.
>
> We'd have to overlook politics but that would be fun.
>
> Lou

i think we could even discuss politics without getting too het up.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 10:41:36 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>
>
>"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:25:21 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On 8/13/2010 3:51 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:22:40 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/10/2010 8:29 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> My new job is inspecting houses in bankruptcy or foreclosure to see if
>>>>>> they bolted and the condition of the property.
>>>>>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>>>>
>>>>> Survival 101--eyeball the property _before_ you file the lawsuit. If
>>>>> it
>>>>> looks like the Unabomber lives there maybe the suit isn't such a good
>>>>> idea.
>>>>
>>>> Not even close. The bank doesn't care about that.
>>>
>>>The bank doesn't care about its board of directors getting blown to Hell?
>>
>> I'm just learning about this stuff but if a loan is government backed
>> it's inspected by law if it's late, in foreclosure, or they've filed
>> bankruptcy. The bank doesn't have anything to say about it.
>
>Hey! I just read this.. you have a job!!!!!!!! Cool! Well done)

Thanks. That's why I was gone for a few weeks. A carrier change in
your 50's is a challenge but it seems I'm going to pull this off. I've
had a few days to catch my breath, get organized and even cook a
little. Starting tomorrow I'll be jammin and won't be around here
much for a couple weeks and then I'll be back. I'm real lucky to have
this job.

Lou

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 13:24:59 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:13:11 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:55:16 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:43:47 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:52:17 -0400, blake murphy
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:16:42 -0700, sf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:11 -0400, blake murphy
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the people who are against this believe it encourages twelve-year-old girls
>>>>>>> to become sluts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wasn't that the argument against "the pill" too?
>>>>>
>>>>>any contraception, really. if the girl fools around and gets pregnant it's
>>>>>god's punishment (which is pretty twisted if you ask me).
>>>>
>>>> 99% of religious stuff is twisted.
>>>>
>>>> Lou
>>>
>>>it's still a big seller, though.
>>
>> So were beanie babies at one time.
>>
>> Lou
>
>at least the beanie baby battles didn't escalate too badly.


LOL

"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 10:41:36 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:25:21 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 8/13/2010 3:51 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:22:40 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/10/2010 8:29 PM, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> My new job is inspecting houses in bankruptcy or foreclosure to see
>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>> they bolted and the condition of the property.
>>>>>>> Still want to know about my sense of adventure?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Survival 101--eyeball the property _before_ you file the lawsuit. If
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> looks like the Unabomber lives there maybe the suit isn't such a good
>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not even close. The bank doesn't care about that.
>>>>
>>>>The bank doesn't care about its board of directors getting blown to
>>>>Hell?
>>>
>>> I'm just learning about this stuff but if a loan is government backed
>>> it's inspected by law if it's late, in foreclosure, or they've filed
>>> bankruptcy. The bank doesn't have anything to say about it.
>>
>>Hey! I just read this.. you have a job!!!!!!!! Cool! Well done)
>
> Thanks. That's why I was gone for a few weeks. A carrier change in
> your 50's is a challenge but it seems I'm going to pull this off. I've
> had a few days to catch my breath, get organized and even cook a
> little. Starting tomorrow I'll be jammin and won't be around here
> much for a couple weeks and then I'll be back. I'm real lucky to have
> this job.

I am so pleased for you)

--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 15:45:19 -0400, "Dora" > wrote:

>Lou Decruss wrote:
>> Thanks. That's why I was gone for a few weeks. A carrier change in
>> your 50's is a challenge but it seems I'm going to pull this off.
>> I've
>> had a few days to catch my breath, get organized and even cook a
>> little. Starting tomorrow I'll be jammin and won't be around here
>> much for a couple weeks and then I'll be back. I'm real lucky to
>> have
>> this job.
>>
>> Lou
>
>That's great, Lou. I'd like to think you would be able to keep the
>second house you like so much.

Thanks for the kind words Dora but that's not in the plan. Yes I do
like it there but times were different when I bought it.

Lou