Wow! It's February, with no indictments.
You really are desperate for something to post aren't you?
That specific link was uploaded to YouTube nearly three years ago and
is lousy quality.
With even a modest effort you could have posted this better link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlTr2GSVUGg
DR
Brian FFS I posted that months ago.
It was lame then, even lamer (more lame? Maybe Schatzi can play
grammar police?) now.
Fred
You know what they say about imitation.
What's really pathetic, the people in that audience who paid to be
there.
-ilan
Lafferty likes it because it so eloquently captures the spirit of what
he would like to say if he could only come up with the words.
DR
It's a little hard to believe that nobody ever brought it to your
attention in light of your perpetual and monotone theme.
You and your soulmate Anton need to coordinate a bit better.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/a06d7c682dd4973f?hl=en
DR
Couldn't agree more.
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
(DR I believe it was wrote):
> > It's a little hard to believe that nobody ever brought it to your
> > attention in light of your perpetual and monotone theme.
(BL replied):
> Difficult to believe, but still easier to believe than Armstrong not
> being a long term doper.
It might be somewhat ironic in this context that Carlin was, by his
own admission, a doper (long term? unknown) whose performance suffered
from use of PED's, also by his own admission.
No dispute on the "national treasure" deal; him and Richard Pryor,
both, many are standing on their shoulders, for better or worse.
--D-y
An admirer of the great arithmetician Fig Newton
Dope definitely enhanced Carlin - and his audience.
Perhaps you should watch LANCE[,] stoned.
It does make one wonder how he prepares for posting here. Hmmm, I
wonder if his posts would be any better.....
Oh, never mind.
DR
<http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59371>
"Not necessarily actually performance-enhancing" but certainly
affecting the affect of the performer.
I was referring to The George Carlin Show (1994 TV series) where he
played a cabbie. He came across as very... grouchy, shall we say, very
negative and not funny in the one or two episodes I saw; I believe I
saw a quote from George about "too much" IRT coke and maybe alcohol,
too.
Of course, too much orange juice probably isn't good for you, either.
--D-y
Carlin was a doper, he mixed wine with prescription vicodin and
probably a little cocaine and/or heroin, a comedian version of belgian
pot I guess. Early in his career the cocaine he snorted was
"performance enhancing" for sure.
That was why he was so funny up to the end, he was a junky,
compared to a relatively clean Steven Martin (who quit smoking weed in
the 70's), and hasn't been funny in fifteen years but did turn out a
decent novel, made into a mediocre movie. Nothing as good as King Tut,
but not too bad.
Armstrong continues to lie about his particular habit - blood doping -
but Carlin at least admitted his drug abuse, that's the difference.
Comedians are honest about their vices, it's a source of material.
I like a glass or two of wine, it makes reading the clipped and snarky
RBR posts much more amusing.
You have not reported your drug regimen yet.
--
Old Fritz