"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:39:54 -0500, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 14/01/2013 10:38 AM, sf wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:45:11 -0500, Dave Smith
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Movies made from popular books can be disappointing. The exceptions
>> >> seem
>> >> to be those based on Cormac McCarthy novels, which tend to follow the
>> >> books very closely and whose characters are well cast.
>> >
>> > I had to look him up. He doesn't write the type of books I'd read and
>> > I've never heard of "No Country for Old Men", but I looked it up and
>> > it's not a movie I'd enjoy watching.
>> >
>>
>> A lot of people might find them offensive, very violent, but they are
>> pretty good books. No Country For Old Men is one where the book and the
>> movie are almost identical.
>>
>> You didn't watch All The Pretty Horses? or The Road? The latter was a
>> better to read than to watch, but, once again, the movie was very close
>> to the book.
>
> Nope. Never heard of them - not a big movie fan.

I did enjoy "No Country For Old Men" but I thought "The Road" was terrible.

Cheri

On 1/14/2013 8:51 AM, sf wrote:
> That's why I don't go to movies based on books I've enjoyed. They
> always butcher the casting.

IMHO, if you really enjoyed the book or books you'll almost always find
the film version a little lacking. Some books are difficult to condense
into a movie. Characters and entire chapters are cut. It makes the
films seem choppy if you're familiar with the book.

Casting may also be a problem. I didn't picture anyone like Tom Cruise
as 'Reacher' when I was reading the books. He's too "cutesy".

Jill

Dave Smith wrote:

> Movies made from popular books can be disappointing. The exceptions seem
> to be those based on Cormac McCarthy novels, which tend to follow the
> books very closely and whose characters are well cast.

Only one exception? Elmore Leonard and Larry Beinhart come to mind as well.
And that's without even thinking about it much.

Farm1 wrote:

> >> IMO, you'd have to be dead not to learn something new in any job.

> > Such as how much of a ******* or bitch you can become under pressure?
>
> I see you're not dead and have learned something. In your case I'm sure you
> learned that you didn't even need to be under pressure to find out that you
> were both of those things.

Ass-backwards again. What else could be expected from the Lummox of Oz.

Dave Smith wrote:

> I am not so sure about that. I have read a number of the novels, and I
> know that he is supposed to be like 6'5" and pretty massive, but, when
> reading, though his size is mentioned, it never really seems to matter.

How about the Batman effect? He never loses a hand-to-hand fight.

On 2013-01-14 16:34:50 +0000, Dave Smith said:

> In most businesses you should not be on the phone making personal calls
> on company time. I don't know why anyone would think it is acceptable
> to do it will cell phones, talking or texting.

Or anything else other than breathing. Call the cops! If there is a
negative way to view another human you seem to have it locked down.

> Don't ever believe what you read in polls. The only people who answer
> them are people who will bother to, like me, or those, like me
> sometimes, you will will not be honest.

Don't judge the rest of the world by measuring them against the lying
you do "sometimes".

You seem to have an amazing ability to find liars and cheat in every
facet of life. They are EVERYwhere, including you! Having worked in
polling for 30 years I can assure others you that the vast majority of
people one would call randomly on the phone are not inclined to stay on
the line so that can lie to you about a topic they don't care about.

I'm certain I can't assure you of anything but some unknown evil that
you hadn't already discovered in your investigations.

> I am not really in the 20-30 age group with a family income of over
> $500,000 per year. I do not own 4 homes and 6 cars. I do not spend
> $5000 per week dining out. If I did, I would have a servant to answer
> the phone for me.

A servant?! You'd have to spend every hour of the day monitoring them
to catch them talking/texting/snacking/thinking/cheating or lying. It
would quadruple your workload! Hardly worth the effort!

For reference only: You're such an incredible bummer I'll have to KFile
you. Otherwise I'd be have to dog your posts to find out what other
malevolence you're dispensing so I can counter it.

Sheesh!

On 1/14/2013 8:50 AM, Ophelia wrote:

> I know, but that is a lot different to going deliberately to hitch a
> lift. I bet you don't do that?
>
The last time I did that was in the 60s. A bunch of us had gone down to
Berwick for the weekend, and the owner of the car had been drinking. I
refused to ride with an inebriated driver, so my boyfriend and I hitched
back to Edinburgh in the middle of the night.

> Let's face it, if you are out for a walk it is usually for pleasure. If
> you actually want to go somewhere you will take your car/bus/train ...
> you won't rely on strangers.

"S Viemeister" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/14/2013 8:50 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>> I know, but that is a lot different to going deliberately to hitch a
>> lift. I bet you don't do that?
>>
> The last time I did that was in the 60s. A bunch of us had gone down to
> Berwick for the weekend, and the owner of the car had been drinking. I
> refused to ride with an inebriated driver, so my boyfriend and I hitched
> back to Edinburgh in the middle of the night.

Ahhh the 60s ) Another life eh?
--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/14/2013 8:51 AM, sf wrote:
>> That's why I don't go to movies based on books I've enjoyed. They
>> always butcher the casting.
>
> IMHO, if you really enjoyed the book or books you'll almost always find
> the film version a little lacking. Some books are difficult to condense
> into a movie. Characters and entire chapters are cut. It makes the films
> seem choppy if you're familiar with the book.
>
> Casting may also be a problem. I didn't picture anyone like Tom Cruise as
> 'Reacher' when I was reading the books. He's too "cutesy".
>
I can't understand anyone liking TC. He couldn't act his way out of a
parking ticket!

On 14/01/2013 12:12 PM, Cheri wrote:

>>> You didn't watch All The Pretty Horses? or The Road? The latter was a
>>> better to read than to watch, but, once again, the movie was very close
>>> to the book.
>>
>> Nope. Never heard of them - not a big movie fan.
>
> I did enjoy "No Country For Old Men" but I thought "The Road" was terrible.
>
>
I wouldn't say it was terrible. It was pretty depressing.... a man and
his son trying to find their way to a safe haven in a post apocalyptic
world. I was impressed with how they had managed to make everything
look so drab.

On 14/01/2013 1:19 PM, gtr wrote:


>> Don't ever believe what you read in polls. The only people who answer
>> them are people who will bother to, like me, or those, like me
>> sometimes, you will will not be honest.
>
> Don't judge the rest of the world by measuring them against the lying
> you do "sometimes".
>
> You seem to have an amazing ability to find liars and cheat in every
> facet of life. They are EVERYwhere, including you! Having worked in
> polling for 30 years I can assure others you that the vast majority of
> people one would call randomly on the phone are not inclined to stay on
> the line so that can lie to you about a topic they don't care about.


The truth is that I usually just didn't bother. Then I was talking to my
brother in law about the long form census that some of us used to have
to fill out for the government. Our current government wanted to do away
with it and I am glad they did because is was a major hassle. They
wanted to know how much you paid for groceries, electricity, heating
etch. To be accurate, you had to dig out your bills for the last year.
Nuts to that. Just make up numbers. If they knew, they wouldn't be
asking.

BiL worked for the census as a summer job. He used to go door to door
and ask the questions. He told me that he knew that most of them were
lying. He rejected the suggestion that government needed the information
on the long form census and that businesses used it, because so many
people lied about the information the data collected was useless.

Since you claim to have 30 years of working in the polling businesses,
you know that the information is being collected and used by people with
an agenda. They will commission a poll to get information on a topic,
and if they don't like the information collected they will look for
another source.

sf wrote:

> I've never heard of "No Country for Old Men", but I looked it up and
> it's not a movie I'd enjoy watching.

Of course not. That movie was never marketed to the humor-impaired.

Somebody's been at the booze at little early today.

> > Ass-backwards again. What else could be expected from the Lummox of Oz.
>
> It's so cute how you come up with all these pet names for everyone.
> You think you're doing to degrade people but it's really your
> subconscience expressing affection for those you pprtray to hate.

Say that again so normal people can understand it, then we can talk.

sqwishy tries to talk smart, but the result is the same old crap.

> > Somebody's been at the booze at little early today.

Lack of denial noted, drunkie.

> >>> Ass-backwards again. What else could be expected from the Lummox of Oz.
> >>
> >> It's so cute how you come up with all these pet names for everyone.
> >> You think you're doing to degrade people but it's really your
> >> subconscience expressing affection for those you pprtray to hate.
> >
> > Say that again so normal people can understand it, then we can talk.
>
> It figures you wouldn't be able to figure it out by context. So
> here's some clues:

It figures you are unwilling to take responsibility for your own incompetence.

> Add a "this" after "doing" and change 'pp' to 'po'. Kapish?

Let's see where that leads...

> >> You think you're doing [this] to degrade people but it's really your
> >> subconscience expressing affection for those you [po]rtray to hate.

I take it by "this", you're referring to "cutesy names".

Now explain what on earth "you portray to hate" means. In English this time,
if you don't mind.

> Now you can quit stalling and try and explain what possesses you do
> this.

<snicker>

You babble incoherently, I call you on your lunkheadedness, and that turns
into me "stalling". Does Queen Mary put up with this garbage when you tiff
with her?

On 1/14/2013 1:44 PM, Ophelia wrote:
> "S Viemeister" > wrote
>> On 1/14/2013 8:50 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>> I know, but that is a lot different to going deliberately to hitch a
>>> lift. I bet you don't do that?
>>>
>> The last time I did that was in the 60s. A bunch of us had gone down
>> to Berwick for the weekend, and the owner of the car had been
>> drinking. I refused to ride with an inebriated driver, so my boyfriend
>> and I hitched back to Edinburgh in the middle of the night.
>
> Ahhh the 60s ) Another life eh?

Indeed. Fortunately, there are no photos...

"S Viemeister" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/14/2013 1:44 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>> "S Viemeister" > wrote
>>> On 1/14/2013 8:50 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know, but that is a lot different to going deliberately to hitch a
>>>> lift. I bet you don't do that?
>>>>
>>> The last time I did that was in the 60s. A bunch of us had gone down
>>> to Berwick for the weekend, and the owner of the car had been
>>> drinking. I refused to ride with an inebriated driver, so my boyfriend
>>> and I hitched back to Edinburgh in the middle of the night.
>>
>> Ahhh the 60s ) Another life eh?
>
> Indeed. Fortunately, there are no photos...

lol who need photos when you have the memories ...

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

On 1/12/2013 3:21 PM, sf wrote:
> Please forgive me if you've already heard this parable...
> <clearing throat>
>
>
> On the first day, God created the dog and said, "Sit all day by the
> door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. For
> this, I will give you a life span of twenty years."
>
> The dog said, "That's a long time to be barking. How about only ten
> years and I'll give you back the other ten?"
>
> So God agreed......
>
> On the second day, God created the monkey and said, "Entertain people,
> do tricks, and make them laugh. For this, I'll give you a twenty-year
> life span."
>
> The monkey said, "Monkey tricks for twenty years? That's a pretty long
> time to perform. How about I give you back ten like the dog did?"
>
> And God agreed......
>
> On the third day, God created the cow and said, "You must go into the
> field with the farmer all day long and suffer under the sun, have
> calves and give milk to support the farmer's family. For this, I will
> give you a life span of sixty years."
>
> The cow said, "That's kind of a tough life you want me to live for
> sixty years. How about twenty and I'll give back the other forty?"
>
> And God agreed again......
>
> God created humans and said, "Eat, sleep, play, marry and enjoy your
> life. For this, I'll give you twenty years."
>
> But the human said, "Only twenty years? Could you possibly give me my
> twenty, the forty the cow gave back, the ten the monkey gave back, and
> the ten the dog gave back; that makes eighty, okay?"
>
> "Okay," said God. "You asked for it."
>
> So that is why for our first twenty years, we eat, sleep, play and
> enjoy ourselves. For the next forty years, we slave in the sun to
> support our family. For the next ten years, we do monkey tricks to
> entertain our grandchildren and the last ten years, we sit on the
> front porch and bark at everyone.
>
> Life has now been explained to you.
>
> There is no need to thank me for this valuable information. I'm doing
> it as a public service. If you are looking for me I will be on the
> front porch.

That's a heck of a goofy story. Thanks! I'm planning on dying early so
as to not have to sit on the porch and bark.

On 1/12/2013 9:54 PM, Gary wrote:
> sf wrote:
>>
>> Please forgive me if you've already heard this parable...
>> <clearing throat>
>>
>> On the first day, God created the dog and said, "Sit all day by the
>> door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. For
>> this, I will give you a life span of twenty years."
>
> <snip>
>
>
> LOL! That's a good one (never heard it before). :-D
>
Same here! Made me smile.

"sf" > wrote in message
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 00:29:47 +1100, "Farm1" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On 12/01/2013 6:12 PM, Farm1 wrote:
>> >
>> >>>> Yeah we've all read those Jack Reacher novels.
>> >>>>
>> >>> LOL! Except the Jack Reacher character is former military with some
>> >>> >
>> >>> rather interesting "skills".
>> >>
>> >> Yup. And they make a movie of of the BIG Jack Reacher using a little
>> >> squirt
>> >> like Tom Cruise as in the role of Jack!!! Totally unbeleivable
>> >> casting.
>> >
>> >
>> > I am not so sure about that. I have read a number of the novels, and I
>> > know that he is supposed to be like 6'5" and pretty massive, but, when
>> > reading, though his size is mentioned, it never really seems to matter.
>> > He
>> > is just cool very tough.
>>
>> I think his size is very important to the plots/themes. Big blokes get
>> targetted.
>>
>> It's the 'too much testorsterone' and 'too few brains' protagonists where
>> Jack become targetted that so frequently sets up the story. Pick on Jack
>> unfairly and the picker finds out what a mistake they've made.
>>
>>
> That's why I don't go to movies based on books I've enjoyed. They
> always butcher the casting.

LOL. I know what you mean. Especialy with the Lee Child, Jack Reacher
books. As soon as I heard that they'd cast the diminutive Tom Cruise in the
role I wondered if the film people had even read the books , and even if
they had, had understood the significance of Jack Reacher being such a big
man.

It's such an important premise of the books that Jack is BIG. He either
gets dragged into trouble simply because his size attracts the nutters who
need to take on a big man and prove they are better/tougher or he is taken
on to do things because of his size. AND he has nose spread all over his
face because it's been broken so many times. Tom Cruise's size and face
wouldn't stir a chihuahua into making a move against him because he's
(relatively) pretty and he's tiny.

"Janet" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, times says...
>>
>> "Janet" > wrote in message
>>
>> > I've been hitch-hiking ever since I was 14 and haven't stopped yet.
>> > Where I live hitching is still common and safe.
>>
>> Can you hitch a ride to the mainland or just round the island?
>
> Round the island. We live so close to the harbour I never do hitch to
> the ferry, but others do ... I don't know how easily they'd find a car
> heading for the same direction on the mainland, but it doesn't matter.
> All vehicles and the car deck have to be vacated during the crossing; so
> all drivers travel on the passenger decks. While onboard the ferry, it's
> easy for locals to arrange a mainland lift either by asking around, or
> getting the purser to broadcast a request on the PA. Which isn't
> hitching. There's zero chance of harbour/road-side hitching a lift from
> the line of vehicles driving nose to tail off the ferry.. they can't
> stop safely.
>
> Urbanites have little notion of the degree of free mutual help trust
> and co-operation operating in remote rural communities; tourists here >
> are constantly amazed when they encounter it.

That comment is so spot on!!!!

Whenever I go to Sydney people, I am bored in 3 days. It's all so vacuous.
I know my neighbours will turn out in any enmergency to lend a hand (asked
or unasked) and will brush off any attempt to thank them as they know that's
just what one does in the country.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message

> My father was a pretty smart guy, very competent and handy with many
> things, but not socially gifted. He was not much for conversation and used
> the phone only to give and to get information, not to chat. My wife used
> to know when my father called by the length of the call. Hello, yes, okay,
> sure, okay, bye. 10-15 seconds.

I really enjoy people like that. At all times, you know just where you
stand with them. If they talk to you, you are in their good books.

It's 'pleasant' people who I am far more wary of. They so often turn out to
not very decent people at all in the end. People like your Dad may not 'do'
the social niceites, but I've got a lot of friends and acquaintances who are
not socially skilled but by God do they give rich rewards for any time spent
with them.

"jmcquown" > wrote in message

> Casting may also be a problem. I didn't picture anyone like Tom Cruise as
> 'Reacher' when I was reading the books. He's too "cutesy".

LOL. My thoughts too on him in that role.

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
> Farm1 wrote:
>
>> >> IMO, you'd have to be dead not to learn something new in any job.
>
>> > Such as how much of a ******* or bitch you can become under pressure?
>>
>> I see you're not dead and have learned something. In your case I'm sure
>> you
>> learned that you didn't even need to be under pressure to find out that
>> you
>> were both of those things.
>
> Ass-backwards again. What else could be expected from the Lummox of Oz.

LOL. You do like to be a bitch George!

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> Somebody's been at the booze at little early today.

You should get some help to stop doing it.

On 14/01/2013 8:30 PM, Farm1 wrote:
> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
>
>> My father was a pretty smart guy, very competent and handy with many
>> things, but not socially gifted. He was not much for conversation and used
>> the phone only to give and to get information, not to chat. My wife used
>> to know when my father called by the length of the call. Hello, yes, okay,
>> sure, okay, bye. 10-15 seconds.
>
> I really enjoy people like that. At all times, you know just where you
> stand with them. If they talk to you, you are in their good books.
>
> It's 'pleasant' people who I am far more wary of. They so often turn out to
> not very decent people at all in the end. People like your Dad may not 'do'
> the social niceites, but I've got a lot of friends and acquaintances who are
> not socially skilled but by God do they give rich rewards for any time spent
> with them.

I have to admit that it drove me crazy sometimes. I had a summer job at
his plant and when I worked day shifts and had to car pool with him he
rarely said a word on the half mile drive each way.

I always envied a friend of mine whose father was so much friendlier and
outgoing. He always called me Buddy. I was naive. I didn't realize
until years later than the reason he called me Buddy was because he
never remembered my name.

On 1/14/2013 8:32 PM, Farm1 wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>
>> Casting may also be a problem. I didn't picture anyone like Tom Cruise as
>> 'Reacher' when I was reading the books. He's too "cutesy".
>
> LOL. My thoughts too on him in that role.
>
>
I've never understood his appeal.

On Jan 14, 11:15*am, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:

> Why would anyone stop for a stranger on a Turnpike or any road...
> could be an ax murderer. *The only time I ever hitchhiked was when I
> was in uniform, I used to occasionally hitch rides to and from the
> base on the Turnpike betwwen NY and Newport RI, wouldn't be five
> minutes someone would stop, and there were always 2-3 of us in
> uniform, we never hitchhiked alone. *But this was in the early '60s,
> I'm not sure it's wise for servicemen to hitchhike anymore, the world
> has changed. *Mostly I took the Greyhound, and most times when I was
> on line in uniform to purchase a ticket someone on line next to me
> would offer to pay, a few times a hot momma. *Back then in uniform my
> money was no good in a bar either.

> Why would anyone stop for a stranger on a Turnpike or any road...
> could be an ax murderer.


Like just because a guy is wearing a uniform he couldn't be an
axe murderer too? How do we know the guy driving the bus isn't in the
mood for committing suicide today? Listen, I don't blame people for
not hitch-hiking if that's their preference. I can even understand
it. But I hate when those same people who don't hitchhike or haven't
done it in 40 years go around saying it isn't done anymore. It is. I
have hitched from NC to PA and back several times in the past 20
years. Haven't been out of here in close to 10 or I'd still use the
thumb. People are living in fear (and I can't say I blame them), but
they're only making it worse by promoting non-truths about things they
know nothing about. I think it's great to know there are still people
who will pick you up hitch-hiking. Ok, so maybe one in a million of
them are out to kill you - maybe that same percentage exists
everywhere you go. Sounds a little phony from you there Brooklyn,
railing in a way against hitchhiking yet saying it was ok when you had
on a uniform. And never paying for a drink in a bar just because of
it. I hate when people pull that patriotic bullshit, especially the
ones who were drafted or the ones who joined for their own selfish
reasons, then come back all patriotic as if everyone owes them
something beyond what they signed up for. To hell with that crap man.

TJ

On Jan 14, 11:39*am, Dave Smith > wrote:

> * A lot of people might find them offensive, very violent, but they are
> pretty good books. No Country For Old Men is one where the book and the
> movie are almost identical.
>
> You didn't watch All The Pretty Horses? *or The Road? *The latter was a
> better to read than to watch, but, once again, the movie was very close
> to the book.


There are very few movies I have enjoyed over the past 30 years,
but I thought No Country for Old Men was very well done, and although
the theme was violent it was not gratuitous in any way, and there were
parts of the movie that bordered on the poetic. I enjoyed it. I
really like simplicity. I enjoyed the ending, the sight through the
window of the tree as Jones spoke in a dreamy droning voice.

TJ

On Jan 14, 7:25*pm, Sqwertz > wrote:

> And here I thought we'd have some sort of semi-intelligent
> conversation and all you can do is whine and make these childish
> comebacks.
>
> Now you can understand why my replies to you are few and far between.
> You're about as useful to RFC as Chemo the Fake Cancer Boy. *I notice
> you played the "I'm sick and dying card" too. *You two have a lot in
> common.


See, now this is the kind of flaming I enjoy. I don't have to be
involved or even know the names of those who are. Your comments could
have been directed at anybody, it would not have mattered. They were
funny. The "I'm sick and dying card" comment got an LOL from me.
Hell, by the time I'm through it may be the only card I have left to
play (if I have to play at all).

TJ

On Jan 14, 7:46*pm, Cheryl > wrote:
On 1/12/2013 9:54 PM, Gary wrote:> sf wrote:



> >> On the first day, God created the dog and said, "Sit all day by the
> >> door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. For
> >> this, I will give you a life span of twenty years."



> > LOL! *That's a good one (never heard it before). *:-D



> Same here! *Made me smile. *


I've taken a lot of walks in my time. Not enjoying them as much
as I once did. Anyway, when I used to walk the Hollywood Hills, just
about every place I passed had a dog. Sometimes I would not see the
dog, just a loud banging sound as the dutiful beast rampaged into the
wooden fence through which I could not see, giving my heart an even
greater workout than the walk alone could provide. But funniest of all
are the dogs you can see. Some of them don't want to bark, you can
tell. But it's their god-given duty. Sometimes they won't even look
up. Maybe you'll see the head stir a bit, maybe not - and the bark
that comes out is really feeble - a real half-assed effort - more
like, "Do I really have to do this?", just because somebody is walking
by - the same feeling I used to get in a nightclub when a jazz quartet
would play and they'd take turns playing their solos in in the same
old predictable, formulaic manner, and it would be our obligation to
applaud after each one. My hands would go up but my elbows would
remain on the table as my hands would feebly clap in much the same
"Must I really do this?" manner used by the lazy dog that doesn't want
to bark but must because it's his god-given duty.

TJ

On Jan 14, 5:25*pm, "Farm1" > wrote:
> "Janet" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article >, says...
>
> >> "Janet" > wrote in message
>
> >> > *I've been hitch-hiking ever since I was 14 and haven't stopped yet.

On Jan 14, 8:34*am, Dave Smith > wrote:

>
> My father was a pretty smart guy, very competent and handy with many
> things, but not socially gifted. He was not much for conversation and
> used the phone only to give and to get information, not to chat. *My
> wife used to know when my father called by the length of the call.
> Hello, yes, okay, sure, okay, bye. * * 10-15 seconds.

Can you hear that Garrison Keillor show where you live? He has a
running bit about an adult son who calls home to Lake Wobegon, and
talks to a father like yours, as well as to his chattier mother.

On 1/14/2013 11:34 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> I didn't say that I won't talk on the phone. I talk to my son almost
> every day, my SIL, weekly, my nieces and nephews frequently, out of town
> friends. If it is someone I see regularly I would rather talk face to
> face. I keep myself pretty busy around the house and if someone calls
> they are usually catching me in the middle of something.
>
I don't know about you but things simply don't change much from one day
to the next. Calling to ask me what I did today isn't going to get much
of a different answer than when we spoke yesterday. Hmmm. I cleaned
the bathroom (or the kitchen). Or, I did a load of laundry. Or, nice
weather so I sat on the patio and read a book. There is nothing
terribly interesting to talk about.

OB: I'm 95% sure the cashier replying to a text before handing Ed his
change wasn't responding to earth-shattering news. If she'd just found
out (e.g.) her kid was hit by a car she'd have dropped his change and
dashed out of the place.

Jill

On 1/15/2013 10:23 AM, Janet wrote:
>
>> On 1/14/2013 8:32 PM, Farm1 wrote:
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>>> Casting may also be a problem. I didn't picture anyone like Tom Cruise as
>>>> 'Reacher' when I was reading the books. He's too "cutesy".
>>>
>>> LOL. My thoughts too on him in that role.
>>>
>> I've never understood his appeal.
>
> Me neither. Or Leonardo di Caprio.
>
He always seemed very smart-alecky to me, no matter what role he was
playing.

On 1/14/2013 10:29 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> I find it hard not to answer the phone. Don't confuse that with enjoying
>> talking on the phone. I don't.
>
> I don't screen calls, when the phone rings I pick it up. It's pretty
> rare it's a telemarketer or a legitimate wrong number.. It's easy to
> say "I'm not interested" or "You misdialed". More often it's someone
> I know who simply forgot to release their number (*82), I often forget
> myself.
>
>> One of my brothers and his wife, OTOH, are notorious for calling
>> and not leaving messages. No matter how important it is, they (he
>> especially) do not leave messages. We have call display so I usually
>> call back.
>
>I phoned someone yesterday
> who hadn't cleaned out their answering machine for many months, it was
> full so their phone just rang and rang... finally I let it ring for a
> full ten minutes and they picked it up.

Was it *that* important you reach this person?!

I encountered a filled up answering machine in early 2008 after Mom
turned their taxes over to the "tax lady" my folks had used for years.
I don't know what kind of qualifications this person had but she never
answered the phone and her answering machine filled up. The April
deadline was approaching. I finally sent a registered letter demanding
all the paperwork back. A situation like that, it's important the
person answer the phone. Otherwise, not so much.

I've also discovered that
> some people don't like to talk on the phone, once someone tells me
> they don't like talking on the phone I never phone them again, far be
> it from me to bother them, I erase all their contact information
> including their email address.

That's rather harsh. Just write them off because they don't like having
protracted phone conversations. Unless there is something interesting
to relate, what is the point?

BTW, I always return phone calls if someone leaves a message. Might not
be within minutes, but I do return calls. I wouldn't have any idea who
called without them leaving a message.

Jill

On 1/14/2013 8:37 PM, Farm1 wrote:
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>
>> Somebody's been at the booze at little early today.
>
> You should get some help to stop doing it.
>
>
Or find some friends to do it *with* so as not to waste our time on rfc.

OB Food: perhaps I'll make lentil soup today. I haven't quite decided yet.

Jill

On 1/15/2013 10:23 AM, Janet wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>> On 1/14/2013 8:32 PM, Farm1 wrote:
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> Casting may also be a problem. I didn't picture anyone like Tom Cruise as
>>>> 'Reacher' when I was reading the books. He's too "cutesy".
>>>
>>> LOL. My thoughts too on him in that role.
>>>
>>>
>> I've never understood his appeal.
>
> Me neither. Or Leonardo di Caprio.
>
> Janet
>
I haven't seen any really recent Di Caprio films but he was really good
in 'Catch Me If You Can' with Tom Hanks and Christopher Walken, 2002.

It's even more interesting to look up the character he portrayed, Frank
Abignale, Jr. and notice the man bears a remarkable resemblance to (an
aged SNL's) Chevy Chase.

Jill

On 2013-01-15 15:17:22 +0000, jmcquown said:

> I'm 95% sure the cashier replying to a text before handing Ed his
> change wasn't responding to earth-shattering news.

95% or 2%; reality is not really a percentage. In this case it is an
off/on switch that is off: You don't know who she is, what she was
texting, or anything about her life other than her job. Even the
information that she was texting comes from a third party who admits he
lies to pollsters on the phone.

Tommy Joe wrote:

> > I notice you played the "I'm sick and dying card" too. *You two have a lot in
> > common.

> See, now this is the kind of flaming I enjoy.

Not me. sqwishy always resorts to outright lying when he's cornered.

S Viemeister wrote:

> >> Tom Cruise

> I've never understood his appeal.

Nobody needs to understand it, least of all the people who produce movies he's
in. All that matters is they can sell tickets and DVDs.