10.3.13 - The Cubs, and Dan, are cocky

Harry Seaward · **Joined:** Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:05 pm **Posts:** 1729

NearWessSideHussra wrote:

Jeez, help out a fellow poster with an avatar request and this place goes all CTE.

Dan Bern$tein wrote:

This is. Important. Radio. Stop having the guys wander around in lab coats! Let the players know the risks, full disclosure, and let me sit back and watch them slam into eachother.

Don Tiny · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:28 am

immessedup17 wrote:

Don Tiny wrote:

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Harry Seaward wrote:

The guy LOVES to comment on the bouncing breasts of various starlets etc....or talk HORRIBLY about the "fat fatty" that flew off the rollercoaster in Texas. But woah, fellas, don't you dare comment on a photo that he distributed FOR comment. Hypocrites!

I don't think it's hypocritical at all. I have no problem with anyone mocking bernstein's appearance. But why should his wife have to suffer further simply because she married a complete asswipe?

The thread has shown some folks for who they really are; no point in arguing with the purposefully ignorant as it won't go anywhere productive.

I think this level of character judgement is as low or lower than any negative comments made about Bernstein's wife's (or anyone's wife's) appearance.

Good for you.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Im sorry but Bernstein is literally ASKING PEOPLE TO LOOK

Dan Bernstein ‏@dan_bernstein 21h
I guess she actually went and did it. Check out the hot new 'do on @SQNevents! pic.twitter.com/h8hwEhAZ8h

Brandon ‏@Brando0337 15h
@dan_bernstein @SQNevents you guys look like brother/sister #JustSayin

That ends the discussion on this particular picture

And they DO look like brother and sister. Like Jerry and George's girlfriend

badrogue17 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:34 am

Wasnt it just last year that a picture of Dame Bernstein was posted here with her giving noted spousal abuser Bob Hull a big hug at the Blackhawks game? so because that was ironic funny nobody seemed to have an issue with the " hey man, no photos of families, thats over the line " policy? So just to be clear, is it supposed to be no photos period or no photos that might lead to judgmental comments?

Don Tiny · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:40 am

Behavorial Relativism ... the true sign of good character. :roll:

badrogue17 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:41 am

Don Tiny wrote:

Behavorial Relativism ... the true sign of the intelligent. :roll:

Ima have to look that up to see what it means and if youre applying that to me Don, brb.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Don Tiny wrote:

Behavorial Relativism ... the true sign of the intelligent. :roll:

Don, I pretty much agree with you on this in regards to most pictures, but dont you think there has to be an exception when he literally posts it in public asking people to "check it out"?

Scorehead · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:43 am

That picture is very scary.

Tad Queasy · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:44 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

She looks better in those pictures than she did in person

Good Lord, rpb, I cannot believe you have sunk so low as to have commented on the appearance of the wife of a local radio host. One who asked, no less. Your true character has been revealed, FOR I HAVE SEEN THE NIPPLE ON YOUR SOUL!

badrogue17 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:45 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

Don Tiny wrote:

Behavorial Relativism ... the true sign of the intelligent. :roll:

Don, I pretty much agree with you on this in regards to most pictures, but dont you think there has to be an exception when he literally posts it in public asking people to "check it out"?

I guess in this case we should be above it Bryan.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:46 am

Scorehead wrote:

That picture is very scary.

I'm sure certain people on this board would have a field day with your wife. Take that any way you'd like.

Tad Queasy · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:50 am

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

Scorehead wrote:

That picture is very scary.

I'm sure certain people on this board would have a field day with your wife. Take that any way you'd like.

Yikes. I think that's worse than anything anyone has said in this thread about Dan's wife.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:51 am

Tad Queasy wrote:

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

Scorehead wrote:

That picture is very scary.

I'm sure certain people on this board would have a field day with your wife. Take that any way you'd like.

Yikes. I think that's worse than anything anyone has said in this thread about Dan's wife.

It was.

EDIT: To clarify, I meant "I'm sure certain people on this board would have a field day with your wife's picture."

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

My wife has an inner ear infection

badrogue17 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:51 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

My wife has an inner ear infection

Pics?

Harry Seaward · **Joined:** Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:05 pm **Posts:** 1729

Keeping Score wrote:

Harry Seaward wrote:

Keeping Score wrote:

For the record, I thought the ratings were very fair on the first few pages of the NSFW thread and I stand by it.

By the way, it's Fur Taco Friday™ and I recommend checking it out when you have a moment to yourself.

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=65902&start=2850#p1825472

I don't understand that thread - is it you just displaying that you can click on the IMAGE tab of the Google home page - type a name - hit ENTER? Cool, we're like bros, as I thought I was the only one who had figured out that complex system.

It's a bunch of hot women that most men don't mind taking a gander at. Maybe you're a gay?

Maybe. Maybe not. If I am, certainly I'd be "one" that could still appreciate the female form. I I'm not, my confusion is probably related more to the absolute random shit storm of Google image results - I clicked in to see some old Tyra, some newer Tyra, some ridiculous photos, some photoshopped photos, no commentary or reference points....literally just a jumble of pictures that look almost identical to an image search results page. In fact, and let's assume I'm not "a gay" -- if I were ever so motivated to look at pictures of Tyra I'd much rather rely on my Google-fu skills than the jumble 'o crap compiled by you.

But I don't want to distract you, Good Sir, from your work - I know it's gotta be cumbersome formatting links here to display in a fashion that would take anyone about 3 seconds to produce on their own. Lord's work, Sir. Lord's work.

Also, how dare you even hint that JohnKirk's wife isn't anything less than fashion model beautiful. I'm insulted for him/her...call the admin, STAT!

Don Tiny · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:58 am

badrogue17 wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Don Tiny wrote:

Behavorial Relativism ... the true sign of the intelligent. :roll:

Don, I pretty much agree with you on this in regards to most pictures, but dont you think there has to be an exception when he literally posts it in public asking people to "check it out"?

I guess in this case we should be above it Bryan.

Don't do it on my account; some of the folks in this thread I expect such choices from ... you two, however, I'm less than excited to see it as I figure you two (and some others) to be above that sort of thing.

I'll get over it, and I know for certain she couldn't give a shit what any asswipe here says ... doesn't justify it though ... and that's what bugs me, are the persons like IMU who think they're justified in acting like a low-class juvenile because of something someone else said or did ... completely low-class and low-intelligence, no matter how they want to dress it up ... I can say whatever I want because someone else made a stupid choice ... that's what people on no consequence tend to go with, so if the shoe fits I guess they'll have to wear it.

Harry Seaward · **Joined:** Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:05 pm **Posts:** 1729

DT: I still don't understand your point? How can you be so saddened by the behavior here when she is clearly aware that her husband put the photo out there for the masses to see? It seems like you chose a "holier than thou" attitude early on, and continue to stick by it just cuz.

Harry Seaward · **Joined:** Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:05 pm **Posts:** 1729

Woah, take it easy. I didn't mean for it to go THAT far, bro. We cool?

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Yeah, Don I agree overall, but its foolish to ignore the fact that he requested that people "check it out"

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:02 pm

One of the larger elephant-in-the-room points of this whole thing (and one I alluded to earlier), is the fact that this is only okay because of whose wife it is. Can we at least own up to that part of it?

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

One of the larger elephant-in-the-room points of this whole thing (and one I alluded to earlier), is the fact that this is only okay because of whose wife it is. Can we at least own up to that part of it?

No, that would be valid if he didnt literally REQUEST people to check it out

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:06 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

One of the larger elephant-in-the-room points of this whole thing (and one I alluded to earlier), is the fact that this is only okay because of whose wife it is. Can we at least own up to that part of it?

No, that would be valid if he didnt literally REQUEST people to check it out

I'm sure if it were McNeil, there would have been a flurry of "your wife looks great" or "you sure outkicked your coverage" posts. The only guy who would have made an inappropriate comment would have been Gloop, but that's his shtick anyway.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

One of the larger elephant-in-the-room points of this whole thing (and one I alluded to earlier), is the fact that this is only okay because of whose wife it is. Can we at least own up to that part of it?

No, that would be valid if he didnt literally REQUEST people to check it out

I'm sure if it were McNeil, there would have been a flurry of "your wife looks great" or "you sure outkicked your coverage" posts. The only guy who would have made an inappropriate comment would have been Gloop, but that's his shtick anyway.

I complimented her. I think there were a few positive comments.

Twitter had positive reactions. Outkick your coverage specifically was used

Don Tiny · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:08 pm

Harry Seaward wrote:

DT: I still don't understand your point?

Then learn to read and comprehend. It's in English.

Harry Seaward · **Joined:** Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:05 pm **Posts:** 1729

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

One of the larger elephant-in-the-room points of this whole thing (and one I alluded to earlier), is the fact that this is only okay because of whose wife it is. Can we at least own up to that part of it?

No, I don't agree. If drinky or Mac or Waddle or whomever posted in the same manner, same rules apply; what I think WOULD be the difference is the fact that the Morality Police probably wouldn't be as concerned about it?

Dan's a dickhead, but this has nothing to do with that fact....other than his a-holeness can be quickly referenced as a "really? really? We're worried about what's 'too far' with THIS guy?"

Harry Seaward · **Joined:** Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:05 pm **Posts:** 1729

Don Tiny wrote:

Harry Seaward wrote:

DT: I still don't understand your point?

Then learn to read and comprehend. It's in English.

Good move. You're following the playbook well ... take a stance, have others questions it, throw out a term or two, literally roll your eyes, then when asked for clarification or a direct response: insult and reference earlier posts where answers, at least for those with a brain, are easily found.

Well played, your Professor would be proud.

Don Tiny · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:10 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

Yeah, Don I agree overall, but its foolish to ignore the fact that he requested that people "check it out"

It's irrelevant. It means as much as noting what day he did it, as though there's something markedly informative about that.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:12 pm

I like Harry Seaward and Brogue. Good conversation here. I just happen to disagree with y'all.

Don Tiny · **Posted:** Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:13 pm

Harry Seaward wrote:

Don Tiny wrote:

Harry Seaward wrote:

DT: I still don't understand your point?

Then learn to read and comprehend. It's in English.

Good move. You're following the playbook well ... take a stance, have others questions it, throw out a term or two, literally roll your eyes, then when asked for clarification or a direct response: insult and reference earlier posts where answers, at least for those with a brain, are easily found.

Well played, your Professor would be proud.

What are you lost on? Big words? Big concepts?

I have no idea what your problem is other than you don't like my assessment ... too damned bad. It's not my job to shape my opinion to suit you.

10.3.13 - The Cubs, and Dan, are cocky

Who is online