ArtieShaw
My brother ate a Snausage for the low low price of one US dollar. There was a whole negotiation process beforehand (Snausage, milk bone, kennel ration biscuit and dog chow were all on the table). He had regrets. I’ll admit that I drove a hard bargain, but he was old enough to know better.
For myself? No. Some of my cats’ shredded chicken in “gravy” looks and smells OK. Still no.
The veterinary sales rep I used to work with said, “their taste buds are very different from ours.” I’ll trust him
To add on. Some of the trust fund babies I knew in college shoplifted Wet ‘n’ Wild cosmetics. For context, these were lipsticks and nail polishes that cost $1 each. It wasn’t so much the financial aspect of it as it was the allure of petty illegality. I guess?
Oh - and if RFK was whining about “crystals growing” inside that straw, he was smoking that cocaine.
I like the mnemonics of c (copy), v (get in there), x (snip-snip), and z (bad idea) as much as I like the similar ones for bold and italics.
text you’ve already typed and change the format. Control (shift) + F3 used to do that in MS word. Highlight your text and Toggle Through The POSSIBILITIES.
I’m not sure this is true. Current US federal food and drug law has been in effect since the 1970s (for specifics, I’m thinking 21 CFR 211, which was codified 1979-ish) and it hasn’t really been repealed so much as it was never very explicit and rarely enforced, in part because of the difficulty of enforcing something so vague.
Example: The law clearly says, “you must have a written procedure in place to prevent contamination,” But it leaves it up to the manufacturer to determine what that procedure should be. In contrast, some of the EU legislation (EUDRALEX) is much more prescriptive: “you must do X, Y, and Z to prevent contamination in a multi-purpose facility.”
What little legislation was in place as US law before 21 CFR 211 was worse.
It’s also worth noting that much of the US’s regulation via agencies like the FDA is actually released as “guidance for industry.” Or to paraphrase, “don’t be a freaking idiot about things, but we can’t legally prosecute you for it if you don’t.” That’s a big loophole.
Consider the legal fiasco that was the trial of the owners and “quality manager” of that peanut company that caused multiple salmonella deaths about 10-15 years ago. Their QA manager’s legal defense was literally: I’m not qualified to do my job and should never been hired. 21 CFR says that “employees should be qualified to perform their jobs.” What does that mean? Should she have a degree in biology or chemistry? A degree in early childhood learning and k-12 education? On the job training on the day to day of the peanut factory and what to do if you have in infestation of birds? Beyond that, who is in charge of making sure she’s qualified? The regulations are unclear, and in the system that’s been in place for 40 years, all of those questions will be hammered out in the randomness of court and in the worst way possible. Like so.
I’m sorry - I could write a whole freaking book about this.
Honest question from someone who has never owned either, but who once went camping with someone with an AWD Subaru and who, in turn, managed to get us stuck as fuck. Isn’t the difference not so much the drive as it is the clearance of the vehicle? The Subaru was a glorified station wagon and just wasn’t built to go through rugged terrain, regardless of how the wheels worked.
I was just thinking about “quirky” because my sister-in-law recently used it to describe her daughter. Her contrasting word (for her son) was “straightforward.”
Personally, I fit the former even though I’ve learned to “pass for normal.” NOT my words. That was a direct quote and it was meant as a compliment. Weird is definitely meant as an insult in the US Midwest.
I thought there was a tangential reference to that recent question about whether there’s a critical mass of water to corpses that people find objectionable.
The example: There are plenty of corpses in the ocean, but people will swim in it. If there were one corpse in a pool, most people would decline the invite that particular pool party.
Mixed with that very recognizable graphic of Saddam in his hiding hole. And balls, for reasons that escape me.
edit: my friend is also a little confused.
Internment was a bit complicated, but my understanding is that the US army wouldn’t turn away young Japanese-American men who were willing to fight in Europe.
There was also a secret program where second generation men served as translators for US naval intelligence in the Pacific. They translated intercepted messages and assisted with prisoner interrogations. They were also in very real danger of being mistaken by the enemy by US or allied troops. The existence of this program was only revealed in the 1980s. If anyone is interested, google “Nisei linguists” or check out these references
https://www.nps.gov/goga/blogs/nisei-linguists-in-world-war-ii.htm
https://history.army.mil/html/books/nisei_linguists/CMH_70-99-1.pdf