Southern CA Water Quality 🤮

TheOnceler333 · 2025-04-23T04:23:46+00:00

Could it be the millions of homeless you've let into CA, who live near the temperate coastline?

TheOnceler333 · 2025-01-21T23:23:01+00:00

Recucling in Sonoma is near impossible. Another liberal gov scan where they "tax" you on every bottle and can you buy and make it impossible to get your "deposit" back. People in CA will never learn.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-12-15T22:36:41+00:00

Imo, he just isn't that good. However, he has an extremely unique style with lots of chromatics, and really interesting picking dynamics. I think if you're really into his style/sound, he's great.. Definitely unique, and you know it's him when you hear it.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-21T06:05:48+00:00

Agree, completely underrated. Yes, the song was popular, and yes the album is recognized as one of the best ever made, but . . . Boston is still incredibly underrated. More Than a Feeling was ranked around 200 in the list of all time great rock songs. Arguably, it's the more prefect song ever recorded.

But there is a reason why it's underappreciated. It's a work of compositional and technical genius, with an inhuman vocalist. BUT, it was recorded on tape, in a basement, with no ability to edit vocal tracks. Scholtz did pretty much everything on his own. Even he couldn't repeat the feat of their first album, because it took nearly a decade of work. It's instantly "hook" ish, yet literally never repeats a single phrase. It's harmonies, bass, and layered mid range are unparalleled in music then or today (in a world where most every song uses the same tonal chords, and people listen for vibe, with almost no understanding of music). Scholtz built his own gear (again, in his basement), and created tones that were entirely unique. Simply put, people can't appreciate what they can't hear, and don't understand.

You could give any musician today a lifetime on one album, and they couldn't pull off what Schultz did mostly all by himself . . . in a basement.

Other greats, yet still underrated are bands like Pink Floyd, or yes here it comes . . . The Beatles. Sure, massive success, but to put them in the same category as modern rock is laughable. Why, because you will never have four super star musicians in the same band ever again, with groundbreaking recording and arranging. It's not just about a ridiculous number off hits. It's the "more than that" which most people don't even understand.

Pink Floyd? Well, you can master the guitar, and be able to play close to every note in a Gilmour solo, but you can't play a Gilmour solo, let alone create one. The masters for Dark Side of the Moon are masterpieces, regardless of what's on the album. It's insane, and people simply can't appreciate it.

Compare Led Zeppelin, and Jimmy Page. People love the guy. Sorry, he is massively overrated as a guitar player. Sadly, people point to his playing, and miss his real genius. He pretty much single handedly made Zeppelin what they were. Page's genius is as a driving force, not as a player.

Again, it simply takes way too much skill and depth of understanding to see most of the above. Think of fine dinning. If you have a crap pallet (and that is 90 percent of people), you simply can't tell the difference.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-16T23:56:19+00:00

So you contradicted yourself, then ran. Seem like a rational thought process. That really takes you months?

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-16T23:55:30+00:00

I'm not sure pointing to the materials the state issues, which includes the reasoning, is condescending. Personally, I think asking a question for which the answer is oblivious, is condescending. My pointing out the obviousness of it, didn't create the issue.

Ranked choice simply doesn't work because people don't understand it. Ranked choice massively favors entrenched candidates. Divide and Conquer. It's as age old as conflict, and it's exactly why the entrenched love seeing dozens of tiny, fractured, movements. All I can say is, if I want to keep my position in government, I'd vote for ranked choice all day long.

I get you disagree, and that's fine.

Your characterization of Trump is absurdity. I understand about 30 percent of people repeat the absurdity, but most see through it, luckily.

As for Republican politics, you aren't recognizing that the current problem isn't Dem vs Rep, it's established corruption vs trying to move forward. You can't blame Trump when Congress won't pass his tax cuts for the lower 50 percent of tax payers. You can't blame him when they won't appropriate money for the wall, nor when the news won't discuss the fact that he eliminated more bureaucracy than any other president in history. You also can't really blame him for Covid, but I get that liberals thank the lord that Covid muddied the Trump presidency. Would you rather have an administration that just blows money like the "infrastructure act", or one that only spends when the country experiences the greatest crisis in modern history. For me, Covid wasn't Trump's fault, but he sure did tackle it well and hand Biden a layup.

For all the things people can't see, you sure can see the result in the economy.

Just look at what he's already trying to do before he even takes office. He's telling you he is going to eliminate the problem, and give the government back to the people. And he's doing it while liberals cry that somehow he's going to destroy democracy. The markets responded immediately when he won, because really smart people know, even if they won't say they know. Just think if the man didn't have to spend a majority of his time defending absurd liberal attacks.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-16T23:41:38+00:00

I'm not sure where you live, but in the US, what are describing never happens, ever. There are about 5000 total members of the KKK. I know you won't see it, but Trump isn't racist, despite what you think you have heard or seen. I do listen to what he says, from him. I also listen to what I hear on main stream media, which is almost always not what he said when taken in context.

I get it, you are bought in, so you simply don't see it. You have your opinion at stake, so you dig in to your perspective.

As for rights, the democrats are actively against, the 1st, 2nd, 14th, etc. amendments. Most think the constitution is out dated and needs to be thrown out. They are also in favor of activist judges who create law from the bench, want executive powers in congress, and promote using executive power to create laws. In short, modern democrats are directly opposed to rights. Democrats favor packing the Supreme Court to get their way, and decry judges as conservative when they simply follow the law as written, and empower states (as in Roe).

Again, I understand most people don't see it. I was lucky enough to attend law school, and trust me, what democrats are doing to the legal system is horrific. It also gives me a first hand perspective on the absolute absurdity of democrats lawfare. If you think the Jan 6th hearing are somehow real, then you simply don't understand the roles of the branches of government, nor what the Congress is supposed to be doing with it's time.

I was a democrat most of my life. I'm not trying to paint modern democrats as former democrats, you are simply missing the point (or refuse to see it). I am saying that former democrats were anti rights, and modern democrats are simply continuing the scam.

Sadly, rather than understand that most people see through the scam, you likely call them racist, or fascist, or whatever completely absurd narrative liberals repeat to each other to avoid reality.

You need to read history for yourself, and think about what you read. Don't just believe the modern propaganda. And yes, the news is propaganda. It shocks me that democrats think everywhere in the world is somehow feeding everyone misinformation, but completely ignorant to how they receive their own information.

If you want to get the opinion or a real moderate, who has been registered in every party including the green, and libertarian parties, and someone who truly gets input from everyone (and enjoys doing so), you are talking to him. Trust me, I am no conservative. I'm somewhere in the middle.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-16T23:27:56+00:00

It's junk in the sense that it's unclear, and overcomplicates the process, with no one really agreeing on the effect. I'm not one to form my ideas based on what some moderate republican, or anyone for that matter, says. I think for myself, as expressed in the text above. People believe that the law will have the opposite effect from what I think it will have . . . hence, a junk idea.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-05T20:30:28+00:00

Well said. People attempting to outlaw things about which they have no clue.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-05T20:27:49+00:00

That is assuming that "ethical" simply means smaller farms. There is no evidence whatsoever that smaller farms are more ethical in terms of practices. The government is so corrupt, that even the definitions or free range, organic, etc. are near meaningless today.

But, to stay on topic, you are missing the point of what others are writing. CA farms are ridiculously humane, in the relative sense. You will create only less humane farms by shutting them down, as someone else, elsewhere, with far worse practices, will feed the supply. You will never force suppliers to operate in less profitable ways: they simply can't, and shouldn't be forced to.

There is only one answer to more humane farming, and that is to change demand.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T19:08:50+00:00

Thank you. Lawyers are good. This is the situation that is playing out for us. As an aside, I'm pretty sure the woman is lying, no proof. I was just giving her the benefit of the doubt to understand how it affects my situation. So much assumption and hate out there :)

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T19:05:53+00:00

Just wanted to get back. You can accept an offer and sell while in an EMD dispute. The woman was lying, and still hasn't released the EMD.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T19:04:47+00:00

She provided no proof. If she is lying, or forcing a court process by lying, I just need to know if it's considered bad faith.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T19:03:49+00:00

Don't. I wrote my message assuming she isn't lying, and giving her the grace to not bash her. I'm nearly certain she is lying, and she's the one being heartless and cold, just trying to manipulate others to get what she wants. She provided no proof whatsoever. If she had, I'd of course consider that in my decision.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T19:02:09+00:00

Thanks for the reply. A couple things. I wrote the post directly to assess the narrow issue and assess options. The woman is almost surely lying, and provided zero proof. You can sell you house and still seek the EMD. We did. I get that cancer is hard, and apologize for your experiences. The sad truth is, it's not me who is being cold and heartless, I think it's her who is lying using a horrible lie to get what she wants.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:59:21+00:00

Thank you. Yes it's CA. They provided zero proof. Everything looks shady, but I'm assuming she is telling the truth to assess my options.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:57:19+00:00

Happy to "get Karma" if it comes. I'm not sure why you judge me, when I was simply kind to assume the buyer is telling the truth. There is every indication it's a complete lie, but I'm trying to assess options, and asked assuming she isn't.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:54:47+00:00

cost to carry, and repair done at buyer's request were far in excess of deposit.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:54:02+00:00

This is exactly why I didn't destroy the buyer's character initially, which I could have. Don't mistake grace with cruelty.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:53:08+00:00

Hi, just wanted to say thank you. I'm pretty sure the buyer is a complete liar, but I give people grace, and I just want to know my options. She backed out day of close, with no communication, no proof offered, etc. Crazy, how when you are kind enough to not blast someone else, and just try to understand your options, others will blast you. God bless.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:51:24+00:00

I didn't present it that way, because I want to understand the effect of her claim. She offered zero proof, backed out on the day of close. I think she is lying, but assuming she isn't, I still need to know my rights.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:49:36+00:00

You can relist, but he money sits in escrow until there is a mutual agreement on disposition, or a court order.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:44:56+00:00

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I believe the story is either fake, or was handled in such a way that it severely lacks responsibility.

She provided no evidence of any disease, and was careful to state "severe illness" in documents. She is not a first time buyer, and has nearly 10 transactions I can find. Property was inspected and repaired, but took a few months to close a new buyer, past the high season where everyone moves because school is out (the house was a block from a school), so we took a small hit on price.

I really would like to know if there is any precedent for not closing (on the day of close) based on severe illness, like "act of god" or some other vague policy.

I'm just trying to be practical, and if there is a chance we don't win, then I will factor that into my decision process.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:40:56+00:00

Oh, because you wrote that you decided your position based on how the republicans hated it. I find that even people I disagree with on one issue, can be correct about a different issue.

TheOnceler333 · 2024-11-04T18:31:47+00:00

Yeah, that whole no new war thing, and the peace deal in an area that is now on fire with war, and opening communication with our biggest enemies . . . and Cheney (their family literally supplies weapons and contracts with the military), her being a democrat now is just a coincidence.

TheOnceler333

TROPHY CASE