Disqus - Latest Comments for GeeDog

Re: Video Appears to Show Libertarian Activist Adam Kokesh Loading Shotgun in Freedom Plaza

G-Dog — Fri, 05 Jul 2013 01:31:38 -0000

Looks like he filmed this at dawn, when no one else is around. Looks like he's right by the street, too, where I'm sure his buddy had a car running so he can jump in and get the hell out of dodge before the cops showed up. If he really wanted to back up his words, he would've filmed this at noon, standing in the MIDDLE of Freedom Plaza. Sorry, Adam; next time, try harder.

Re: Local Cyclist Rides His Way to the Top

G-Dog — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:23:44 -0000

I can take him, no prob. Pretty sure I can beat him on my usual W&OD out-and-back ride from Shirlington to that Carolina Bros BBQ joint. Aww yeah...BRING IT ON!!

Re: Video Captures Police Shooting & Killing Man Armed With Metal Bar Outside Monterey Park Carl's Jr.

G-Dog — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:04:47 -0000

Whoever posted "shoot him in the leg or knee" above is a fucking moron who obviously know jack shit about using firearms to protect yourself. If someone is threatening your life with any kind of dangerous weapon, your NUMBER ONE priority is to stop the attacker. If he happens to die in the process, too fucking bad. This "shoot to injure" nonsense only exists in the movies, you idiot.

Re: http://heyguys.tumblr.com/post/709677779

G-Dog — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:05:19 -0000

yo imma pick up mad k-town honeyz in that beast. belee dat, SON.

Re: http://karms.tumblr.com/post/405213636

G-Dog — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:04:05 -0000

Their mother, who plays bass for them live, was in The Raincoats. Pretty awesome.

Re: http://karms.tumblr.com/post/369190607

G-Dog — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:45:02 -0000

"You're going to think what you want and give them the benefit of the doubt b/c you already have an opinion about this Tebow guy and all the "great" things he does so obviously there's no point in talking about it."

Why are you attacking me? I'm just trying to be fair to everyone involved. You're assuming that I'm coddling this guy, when all I'm really saying is I respect him for having the courage to say something, anything, in support of his beliefs, despite the fact that I disagree with them. And yeah, I do think it's a great thing for a 21 year old kid who has grown up a with the adulation of every football nerd around him, who will most likely be a multi-millionaire this time next year, and could easily take the easy way out and be a spoiled "golden boy", to still be willing to work in an orphanage in the middle of some jungle island every summer. It's more than I've ever done to directly help someone in need, that much I know.

Also, when one issues a dismissive "there's no point in talking about it", it's usually because he or she has encountered someone who is not willing to have a discussion about the validity of all the points involved. I am clearly not that person in this case.

Re: http://karms.tumblr.com/post/369190607

G-Dog — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:02:01 -0000

Sally Jenkins, the author, is pro-choice, as am I. The article isn't just about Tebow, nor is it a debate between pro- and anti-choice. You're also assuming that just because Pam Tebow made a choice to not terminate her pregnancy, even after doctors advised her that not doing so may endanger her life as well as that of her baby, she would not want other women to be able to make that choice themselves.

Granted, if I were to hazard a guess, the Tebows probably are against legal and safe abortions being made available to women, but I don't know that for sure, and neither of them has officially stated anything to that effect (that I know of). I think the whole point of the commercial is that it's supposed to offer at least one woman's experience with the subject, for anyone who cares to listen. To put a face to their side of the story. Yes, the organization which paid for the commercial has been accused of being homophobic, and probably helps fund anti-choice lobbyists and activists, and that is something I find reprehensible; but Jenkins' point is they still have the basic right to express their opinion, as much as we may disagree with it. She's disappointed by NOW's tendency to just shout down the opposition, because in her opinion it creates antagonism, muddies up the debate, and allows for no real discourse. Personally, I think these anti-choice nutjobs, like the ones who murder doctors, need to DIAF, but, at the very least, the anti-choice people who don't resort to those extremes still have the right to express their opinions.

I think the Planned Parenthood commercial you posted above is great, and it would awesome if they were able to air it right after Tebow's ad. I wouldn't be surprised if he supported PP's right to air it, and I have a feeling he does. But I could be wrong. Nevertheless, that ad is the perfect response to this whole situation, rather than merely protesting CBS's decision to air Tebow's ad, or blocking that organization's right to create it.

Re: http://karms.tumblr.com/post/369190607

G-Dog — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:43:32 -0000

I'm afraid people are going to vilify Tebow over this whole commercial, and it's unfortunate. He seems to be the real deal - a genuinely good person, regardless of what people think of his views on a number of hot-button topics. I've seen sideline interviews with him in which the first thing he says at the end, before he even thanks the reporter for talking with him, is "God bless you." I was really struck by that. He says it in a way that doesn't seem awkward or overbearing. I do think it's genuine. It caught me off guard and I think it's deserving of respect, especially considering how self-centered many athletes are. The guy spends several week every summer working at his father's orphanage in the Philippines, and he talks about these kids like they're family.

Check out this column by Sally Jenkins at the Washington Post, I think it's one of the better takes on the whole brouhaha over this ad:

"I'll spit this out quick, before the armies of feminism try to gag me and strap electrodes to my forehead: Tim Tebow is one of the better things to happen to young women in some time. I realize this stance won't endear me to the "Dwindling Organizations of Ladies in Lockstep," otherwise known as DOLL, but I'll try to pick up the shards of my shattered feminist credentials and go on.

As statements at Super Bowls go, I prefer the idea of Tebow's pro-life ad to, say, Jim McMahon dropping his pants, as the former Chicago Bears quarterback once did in response to a question. We're always harping on athletes to be more responsible and engaged in the issues of their day, and less concerned with just cashing checks. It therefore seems more than a little hypocritical to insist on it only if it means criticizing sneaker companies, and to stifle them when they take a stance that might make us uncomfortable.

I'm pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I've heard in the past week, I'll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the "National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time." For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us" to reveal something important about themselves: They aren't actually "pro-choice" so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn't be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn't.

There's not enough space in the sports pages for the serious weighing of values that constitutes this debate, but surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the "need" for abortions wasn't so great. Which is precisely why NOW is so wrong to take aim at Tebow's ad.

Here's what we do need a lot more of: Tebows. Collegians who are selfless enough to choose not to spend summers poolside, but travel to impoverished countries to dispense medical care to children, as Tebow has every summer of his career. Athletes who believe in something other than themselves, and are willing to put their backbone where their mouth is. Celebrities who are self-possessed and self-controlled enough to use their wattage to advertise commitment over decadence.

You know what we really need more of? Famous guys who aren't embarrassed to practice sexual restraint, and to say it out loud. If we had more of those, women might have fewer abortions. See, the best way to deal with unwanted pregnancy is to not get the sperm in the egg and the egg implanted to begin with, and that is an issue for men, too -- and they should step up to that.

"Are you saving yourself for marriage?" Tebow was asked last summer during an SEC media day.

"Yes, I am," he replied.

The room fell into a hush, followed by tittering: The best college football player in the country had just announced he was a virgin. As Tebow gauged the reaction from the reporters in the room, he burst out laughing. They were a lot more embarrassed than he was.

"I think y'all are stunned right now!" he said. "You can't even ask a question!"

That's how far we've come from any kind of sane viewpoint about star athletes and sex. Promiscuity is so the norm that if a stud isn't shagging everything in sight, we feel faintly ashamed for him.

Obviously Tebow can make people uncomfortable, whether it's for advertising his chastity, or for wearing his faith on his face via biblical citations painted in his eye-black. Hebrews 12:12, his cheekbones read during the Florida State game: "Therefore strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees." His critics find this intrusive, and say the Super Bowl is no place for an argument of this nature. "Pull the ad," NOW President Terry O'Neill said. "Let's focus on the game."

Trouble is, you can't focus on the game without focusing on the individuals who play it -- and that is the genius of Tebow's ad. The Super Bowl is not some reality-free escape zone. Tebow himself is an inescapable fact: Abortion doesn't just involve serious issues of life, but of potential lives, Heisman trophy winners, scientists, doctors, artists, inventors, Little Leaguers -- who would never come to be if their birth mothers had not wrestled with the stakes and chosen to carry those lives to term. And their stories are every bit as real and valid as the stories preferred by NOW.

Let me be clear again: I couldn't disagree with Tebow more. It's my own belief that the state has no business putting its hand under skirts. But I don't care that we differ. Some people will care that the ad is paid for by Focus on the Family, a group whose former spokesman, James Dobson, says loathsome things about gays. Some will care that Tebow is a creationist. Some will care that CBS has rejected a gay dating service ad. None of this is the point. CBS owns its broadcast and can run whatever advertising it wants, and Tebow has a right to express his beliefs publicly. Just as I have the right to reject or accept them after listening -- or think a little more deeply about the issues. If the pro-choice stance is so precarious that a story about someone who chose to carry a risky pregnancy to term undermines it, then CBS is not the problem.

Tebow's ad, by the way, never mentions abortion; like the player himself, it's apparently soft-spoken. It simply has the theme "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." This is what NOW has labeled "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning." But if there is any demeaning here, it's coming from NOW, via the suggestion that these aren't real questions, and that we as a Super Bowl audience are too stupid or too disinterested to handle them on game day."

Re: Hey Guys!

G-Dog — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:04:18 -0000

you're in paris again? weren't you just there a few months ago? noice!

Re: Hey Guys!

G-Dog — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:43:56 -0000

This pic makes me wonder. If the camera was set up on a timer to take a pic of the couple, wouldn't they be in focus, and not the squirrel?

I guess it must've been on one of those continuous auto focus modes or something.

Re: Hey Guys!

G-Dog — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:41:03 -0000

I thought they were from San Diego?