Octopus Overlords

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:17 pm**

I'd have gone with the Hurdal.

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:34 pm**

They're going in the kitchen, and cost $310 for all three. The Hurdal series is pine, and expensive.

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:03 pm**

Hey, I didn't know Hurdal was an actual thing. I thought they just made it up for Deadpool.

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:07 pm**

BAM!

Double BAM!

Posted: **Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:10 am**

The KLF’s plans for a reformation in 2017 include a collaboration with Alex Paterson of The Orb and building a huge pyramid somewhere in the north of England, it has been revealed.

i went to the Orb show a few months back. new album is good.

Posted: **Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:33 pm**

Now I know I'm old. I'm actually sitting here watching "The Lawrence Welk Show" on Public TV. Granted it's because I'm waiting for the new "Sherlock" episode, but I am watching it, nonetheless. Tonight's theme is "Transportation". I'm remembering most of the regulars from that show, so it must have made some sort of an impression.

Why am I watching this? Because it has been probably 30 to 40 years since I've last caught a glimpse of this, and memories of home in my high school days are flooding back. A little black and white television in the kitchen, because Dad would not allow a TV in the living room. We had like 2 channels (OTA, no cable at that time), and this was apparently the better of the two shows there was to choose from, because I do remember actually watching a few episodes, even though I did not care for it.

I hated this show back then. I was into arena rock and nothing else.
But now it's bringing back pleasant memories - of hating it I guess.
What a trip.

Edit: Holy shit! His dad spent a ton of money on him when he was a kid:

From his Wiki page:

They spent the cold North Dakota winter of their first year inside an upturned wagon covered in sod. Welk decided on a career in music and persuaded his father to buy a mail-order accordion for $400 (equivalent to $4,782 in 2016)

Posted: **Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:46 pm**

I too like watching The Lawrence Welk Show on occasion. It brings back pleasant nostalgia for me too.
I get a grin of the silliness of the Welk band and solos playing and singing the current "hip" songs of the day.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:13 am**

dbt1949 wrote:I too like watching The Lawrence Welk Show on occasion. It brings back pleasant nostalgia for me too.
I get a grin of the silliness of the Welk band and solos playing and singing the current "hip" songs of the day.

My grandfather, who was an EXTREMELY hard working farmer and proud of it would not watch TV at all as I recall except for Lawrence Welk. I knew on Sunday early evening that no matter what else was on (I think it came on at 6 or 7 PM) that was where the TV would be tuned. They only had that one TV in the living room.

Never imagined that as I grew older I would become so fond of some of that music. I actually have a huge mod for Silent Hunter so I can listen to all the old music and the news/radio shows as they happened. I frequently just float around the Pacific in real time listening to radio stations.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:06 am**

Yeah, I *hated* The Lawrence Welk Show when I was a kid, but I've developed a taste for at least some big band music over the years (Andrews Sisters

) so I might actually like at least some of Welk's stuff now if I gave it a shot. But the novelty stuff would still be corny as all get out (not that that's necessarily a bad thing).

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:11 am**

Your dad wouldn't allow a tv where it should be but had one where it shouldn't be? Ok thats kinda out there. Guess it was his quirk.

Anyways this is strange timing. Today Im listening to iHeartRadio and Casey Kasems American Top 40 and it was 1980 and he was playing older stuff than that and Lawrence Welk comes up. As a kid in the 70s my dad never missed Welk on the weekend. I dont know how much i saw that show..I hated it.....but it stuck with me. The "tiny bubbles" and all. Dad really really loved that stuff. I blocked it mostly out. So today I tried to listen to it for dad and old times sake but I couldn't and changed it lol. Some things just cant change.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:27 am**

Daehawk wrote:Your dad wouldn't allow a tv where it should be but had one where it shouldn't be? Ok thats kinda out there. Guess it was his quirk.

Is that a response to me? It was my grandfather not my dad. I spent more time at my grandparents farm than with my dad. He didn't care about there being a TV, he just didn't watch it. Only Lawrence Welk. The only time he was ever in the living room was for that or reading the newspaper. Once those were done he was in bed. No later than 9PM. He was up by 4AM and worked other than 30 mins for each breakfast and lunch until dark then dinner and bed. Every day, never a vacation that I recall, just work pretty much 365 except for Xmas.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 2:04 am**

Rip wrote:
Daehawk wrote:Your dad wouldn't allow a tv where it should be but had one where it shouldn't be? Ok thats kinda out there. Guess it was his quirk.

Is that a response to me? It was my grandfather not my dad. I spent more time at my grandparents farm than with my dad. He didn't care about there being a TV, he just didn't watch it. Only Lawrence Welk. The only time he was ever in the living room was for that or reading the newspaper. Once those were done he was in bed. No later than 9PM. He was up by 4AM and worked other than 30 mins for each breakfast and lunch until dark then dinner and bed. Every day, never a vacation that I recall, just work pretty much 365 except for Xmas.

No was to Giles...thought I quoted it.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 2:11 am**

If my dad had his way (at the time - he changed later - he had just read a book called "10 Arguments for the Total Elimination of Television" or something like that, and he agreed with that philosophy for years), we wouldn't have had any television.

Anyway, he thought that the kitchen was a good compromise, as we tended to talk among ourselves with the TV on in the background. Whereas when the TV was in the living room, everyone focused on the TV, and we didn't have any conversation when it was on. By moving it to the kitchen, whenever we were in the living room, we had a lot more conversation there, which I guess was his point. He wanted more interaction among us, rather than everyone being glued to the TV screen.

So, in that respect, he was right, and his solution worked, and none of us really suffered. Mostly because a lot of the shows we could get were pretty crappy.

I do remember though that every Saturday night, most of us could be found gravitating to the kitchen to watch Saturday Night Live. Fond memories.

After a few years of that, he finally gave up on that whole thing and bought us a big color TV. But it was located in a separate TV room (our house had 27 rooms - a renovated "mansion" built in 1892, so it worked out great. It was a separate living room on the second floor). He even bought a second color TV for Mom and Dad's bedroom. And he eventually allowed cable TV as well, including HBO, as long as the kids all chipped in to pay for it.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:05 am**

TV has always had history I guess. I remember my granma saying her dad wouldn't allow them to change in front of a tv because people would see them

EDIT: Its very important on some words to add that n't in there.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:27 am**

Max Peck wrote:Yeah, I *hated* The Lawrence Welk Show when I was a kid, but I've developed a taste for at least some big band music over the years (Andrews Sisters )

That's actually the music I grew up with. My father was relatively old when I was born (42), meaning that he was born in 1931 and spent his formative years in the 40s. Most of my peers, on the other hand, had parents who grew up in the 60s. The way we moved around so much meant that I didn't spend much time with my peers and pop culture, but instead grew up with my father's 40s culture, film, and music. That started with big band and swing, and I later expanded that to include classic jazz (there are none greater than Louis Jordan!) Most of my favorite musicians growing up were dead before I was born, and it wasn't until I was 18 or so that I actually started listening to anything written in my own lifetime.

These days I listen to nearly every genre of music from the past five hundred years, save for contemporary country and a few subgenres here and there.

I am still not fond of Lawrence Welk, though.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:12 am**

My dad was born in 26 and had me in 69 so 43. He never seemed old to me though. But he did have those same musical tastes.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:50 am**

I've said it many times before but social promotion is one of the worst things to ever happen to education.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:06 pm**

Remus West wrote:I've said it many times before but social promotion is one of the worst things to ever happen to education.

Because their social growth and self esteem are so much more important than subject mastery, right?

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 pm**

Remus West wrote:I've said it many times before but social promotion is one of the worst things to ever happen to education.

the practice of promoting a child to the next grade level regardless of skill mastery in the belief that it will promote self-esteem.

Uh, yeah - I'm surprised parents are behind that. I thought the 'real advantage' was in holding a kid back a year? This flies in the face of that... I don't get it.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:57 pm**

Unagi wrote:
Remus West wrote:I've said it many times before but social promotion is one of the worst things to ever happen to education.
the practice of promoting a child to the next grade level regardless of skill mastery in the belief that it will promote self-esteem.

Uh, yeah - I'm surprised parents are behind that. I thought the 'real advantage' was in holding a kid back a year? This flies in the face of that... I don't get it.

It's for the parents' self esteem, not the kids.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:04 pm**

Unagi wrote:Uh, yeah - I'm surprised parents are behind that. I thought the 'real advantage' was in holding a kid back a year?

Yeah, especially when you're initiating a parental "redshirt" so your kid has a sports advantage over his peers.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:22 pm**

Smoove_B wrote:
Unagi wrote:Uh, yeah - I'm surprised parents are behind that. I thought the 'real advantage' was in holding a kid back a year?
Yeah, especially when you're initiating a parental "redshirt" so your kid has a sports advantage over his peers.

I plan on trying to talk my wife into doing that with our daughter. Full ride athletic scholarship FTW.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:24 pm**

Unagi wrote:
Remus West wrote:I've said it many times before but social promotion is one of the worst things to ever happen to education.
the practice of promoting a child to the next grade level regardless of skill mastery in the belief that it will promote self-esteem.

Uh, yeah - I'm surprised parents are behind that. I thought the 'real advantage' was in holding a kid back a year? This flies in the face of that... I don't get it.

Not to mention it utterly fails to improve the kid's self esteem as it simply initiates a long pattern of failure due to not having the basics needed for success thus ensuring the kid feels just wonderful about their ability to fuck everything up more than anything else.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:37 pm**

Remus West wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Unagi wrote:Uh, yeah - I'm surprised parents are behind that. I thought the 'real advantage' was in holding a kid back a year?
Yeah, especially when you're initiating a parental "redshirt" so your kid has a sports advantage over his peers.
I plan on trying to talk my wife into doing that with our daughter. Full ride athletic scholarship FTW.

I've been subtly dropping this hint about the Wonder Twins 3.6. Mrs. Skinypupy responded with "only if you're willing to contract for a full-time nanny for that extra year they're home."

Still, it's tempting...

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:39 pm**

...au pair...

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:42 pm**

Isgrimnur wrote:...au pair...

Oh, I'm pretty sure she was looking for a full-time nanny and not an au pair.

The primary differences between a nanny and an au pair are as follows:

An au pair is typically between the ages of 18-26 with basic childcare experience, coming to stay with a family for a cultural exchange/childcare work experience for one year. Au pairs typically don't make a career out of childcare work as nannies do.

Many families and au pairs participate in government authorized au pair exchange programs where there are defined rules and requirements. See Family Requirements or Au Pair Requirements for more information. The relationship between a nanny and family is that of employer and employee, not governed by an exchange program, rather, governed by contractual law.

Nannies may be older and more mature than some au pairs, with several years of live-in childcare experience. Nannies are not necessarily seeking a cultural exchange, rather, it is the long-term career-building experience in child care they are seeking.

For detailed information on how much to pay your aupair or nanny, please see Au Pair & Nanny Salary

The pay for International au pairs working in the U.S. ranges from $195.75 per week up to $250 per week. Domestic nanny salaries may be higher: $300 up to $800 per week depending on your location, the candidates' experience and additional responsibilities: cooking, cleaning, household management, etc. It is not required to pay employee taxes for your International au pair, where it is required that employment taxes be paid for a nanny.

I did learn something today though...had no idea what the differences were.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:44 pm**

Think of au pairs as a post-HS exchange student versus a nanny that's a paid professional.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:05 pm**

18 and 26 you say?

Uhh anyways I learned about car relays.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:10 pm**

Isgrimnur wrote:Think of au pairs as a post-HS exchange student versus a nanny that's a paid professional.

Nope, I think of au pairs as highly competent professionals. The best ones even supply their own moppets.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:17 pm**

Giles Habibula wrote:
Edit: Holy shit! His dad spent a ton of money on him when he was a kid:

From his Wiki page:

They spent the cold North Dakota winter of their first year inside an upturned wagon covered in sod. Welk decided on a career in music and persuaded his father to buy a mail-order accordion for $400 (equivalent to $4,782 in 2016)

Sheesh, I get despondent when netflix menus seem slow. I can't imagine what I would be like in an honest to God rough life. They don't make 'em like that anymore, that's for sure.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:28 am**

Dogs decide I need to be awake to take them outside at 2:30. Can't get back to sleep. So at 4, might as well get up and go to work early. Today's going to be a 5:30-2 shift.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:41 am**

Yuck.

I work to keep the dogs on my schedule, but that means last pee break at 10:30 at night, and it lasts them until 5:30am.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:48 am**

Oh, that didn't stop them from leaving one spot of each type to clean when we came back in. The dogs aren't really house-trained, and our varying schedules means that the MIL is 'in charge' for 9-10 hours per day, which means nothing remotely regarding a schedule or enforcement. We won't crate train the dogs, partially because there's no guarantee that MIL would actually follow our direction.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:08 am**

Our dog is an asshole. I mean he is great and sweet and we love him but he is a devious little sob. He uses papers and pads. He is great with them...UNLESS we leave the room. If we go to the kitchen and he stays...or even if he goes with us he will run back....and pee OFF the pad...on purpose...every time. Without fail. If we are busy near his pad the guy will look around and at us to see if we are watching.....he is a plotter that one.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:10 am**

Everywhere in the common areas is tile or previous-owner-dogs destroyed wood flooring. When we leave for work, all of the carpeted bedrooms except MIL's are closed to the dogs, so at least we aren't having to shampoo the floor every week. We do go through paper towels and Clorox wipes like they're going out of style, however.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:35 am**

16 year old Rotty. With severe spinal arthritis that has effectively removed her control over her hind end. We could possibly give you a run for your money on the clorox wipes.

Edit: Oh, and not that that has prevented at least 5 UTIs since last Jan.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:51 pm**

We've been really struggling with house training as well. She does fine in her crate at night and will go potty when we let her out every couple hours during the day. Problem is, she never gives any indication of when she needs to go, so we'll often come across random puddles on the floor. Any time she's out of sight for 5 minutes, I start to get nervous.

I never actually catch her in the act, so I'm not sure how best to discipline her. We try to keep her constrained to certain areas of the house, but with the typical chaos of three kids, she will sometimes sneak off around the corner into the dining room while we're cooking dinner, or something like that. It's so damn frustrating.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:35 pm**

This may sound girly but I fit in older jeans! hahah ya that did sound feminine I guess.

See I used to be in shape. Swimming, biking, hard work At 17 I was 6' and 186 all muscle. And though at 47 Im still tall I got bigger I guess would be the word. I got up to 214 . Im now down to about 190...hardly muscle Id call it. BUT back then I wore 32 waist pants. I got up to 40 or even 42. But thanks to cutting out a lot of food over time Ive lost weight.

Ive had no idea my size because Ive just kept wearing my old pants. Baggy and ugly but comfortable. Especially with kidney stones. So today while out I tried on jeans to see what size Im going to need. I got into size 34! F me. Tight and uncomfortable but I did it and could move. So time for 35 or 36 I guess. Im so surprised and happy though. Got in 34 pants. My god.

Ok I gotta find who I let hold my man card to post this.

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:43 pm**

Your ass looked fat in those jeans... just so you know

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:54 pm**

Skinypupy wrote:discipline her.

Dammit! Now I have Discipline Daddy stuck in my head again!

Octopus Overlords

Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness

Re: Random randomness