| Author |
Message |
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 121
|
 Posted: September 4, 2006 8:55 AM |
|
|
Clara Barton |
|
 |
Bookman
Posts: 3308
Reply: 122
|
| Posted: September 4, 2006 1:10 PM |
|
|
My George-Wilhelm answer wasn't great. But in my defense, what Wilhelm thought (that George intentionally had had Steinbrenner's card framed--a good thing, according to Wilhelm) and what George did (inadvertently sell Steinbrenner's card to a sports memorabilia dealer) is precisely the distinction your quote raised. I'm just saying. |
|
|
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 123
|
| Posted: September 4, 2006 3:06 PM |
|
|
I like to ride in the Park at others (perceived)expense. |
|
|
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 124
|
| Posted: September 4, 2006 6:55 PM |
|
|
Nope..expense represents a dollar amount
this person may have used to purchase
said ride (or perhaps not) 
|
|
|
donna chang
Posts: 154
Reply: 125
|
| Posted: September 4, 2006 9:52 PM |
|
|
Was it a certain high flying cashier??? |
|
|
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 126
|
| Posted: September 4, 2006 10:38 PM |
|
|
The Changster scores....
Ruthie Cohen, cashier, horsewoman and concerned public citzen 
|
|
|
J. Chiles
Posts: 5189
Reply: 127
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:27 AM |
|
|
So we're supposed to assume that Ruthie's equestrian dalliance was funded through the short-changing of George, which never occurred? |
|
|
Yev Kassem
Posts: 895
Reply: 128
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:41 AM |
|
|
I think I understand this. Ruthie Cohen is real. George being shortchanged is not. Now, you Jackie are real. Now the horse ride, which is real, does actually cost money, which George perceives that he is funding by way of being shortchanged and that it is on his dime that she is trotting around the park. Hence the Changster scoring. |
|
|
J. Chiles
Posts: 5189
Reply: 129
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:45 AM |
|
|
Well, that changes EVERYTHING. Or not. 
|
|
|
J. Chiles
Posts: 5189
Reply: 130
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:46 AM |
|
|
Well, that changes EVERYTHING. Or not.
|
|
|
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 131
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:03 PM |
|
|
Yep! |
|
|
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 132
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:11 PM |
|
|
We really need to get lives 
|
|
|
Todd Gak
Posts: 444
Reply: 133
|
| Posted: September 5, 2006 11:19 PM |
|
|
Donna still wins... |
|
|
donna chang
Posts: 154
Reply: 134
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 11:06 AM |
|
|
"I've always enjoyed George's antics around the office..." |
|
|
donna chang
Posts: 154
Reply: 135
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 11:07 AM |
|
|
"I've always enjoyed George's antics around the office..." |
|
|
J. Chiles
Posts: 5189
Reply: 136
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 11:07 AM |
|
|
Given that I am only a voyeur and occasional wisecrackah in this thread, as opposed to an actual participant, perhaps it is not my place to ask, but what is the statue of limitations regarding the time allowed for a follow-up “question†subsequent to a correct (albeit a borderline retarded) answer. |
|
|
donna chang
Posts: 154
Reply: 137
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 11:12 AM |
|
|
What the hell are you talking about?? |
|
|
J. Chiles
Posts: 5189
Reply: 138
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 11:33 AM |
|
|
Nothing, since you seem to have lobbed a softball at the same time of my query. |
|
|
Bookman
Posts: 3308
Reply: 139
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 12:11 PM |
|
|
Now don't you two see that you're in love with each other? |
|
|
J. Chiles
Posts: 5189
Reply: 140
|
| Posted: September 6, 2006 12:20 PM |
|
|
Sorely you joust! 
|
|
|
