I will actually be in DC for some or all of May (to be determined), but am certain of being around for April. April 3 is fine with me.
2: Not to despair, Sifu; Mutombo's Houston Rockets are on a West Coast swing that week.
I'll be moving there on the 25th of March. So I'll be around after that.
4: yes, but with the drought, and the budget... is this the time to try and sex Mutombo?
I'm on a West Coast swing that week too. Does 4 mean I should look for opportunities to sex Mutombo?
Oh, right, drought. Oh well. Some other time.
I'd love to be in on this, but my constraints are a bit divaish. I will leave DC, not to return (foreseeably),* on April 9th. I'll also be out of town the Friday through Sunday before that, possibly back Sunday afternoon.
*Going to India on a 3-month internship preceding grad school.
8: well, maybe it would be just the kind of counter-cyclical stimulus we need. Sex Mutombo... for Keynes!
To be clearer, the 3rd is one of the nights I'm out of town - though people only visiting should of course get priority.
PGD, since I imagine you'll be reading this thread: check your email, please.
counter-cyclical stimulus
That's my move!
Minivet and I seem to be leading equivalent but opposite lives.
Count me in. April 3 is fine, or 4.
Looking up thread it occurs to me that it might be a good idea to invite some of the gals.
We should have a West Coast meetup when Emerson returns to Portland. Sifu could come up, and he and John could have a get-acquainted session, maybe with a Q&A.
I've met Emerson. We got along fine, as far as I know. We bonded over not wanting to talk to McMegan. Then I went and talked to her.
Also Portland's really far away, and I don't want to answer questions. And Mutombo will be here.
Well, hell, for a second there I thought Jesus might be in DC, in which case I was going to declare that I was in, for sure.
Aw, you're sweet. You can come out to Portland anytime, you know, pars.
I do not dislike Sifu at all, based on our face-to-face, but there's a great gulf between us on everything political and a bunch of other things too, I think.
but there's a great gulf between us on everything political and a bunch of other things too, I think
I do not think this is as true as Emerson thinks, which may be paradoxical, come to think of it.
We bonded over not wanting to talk to McMegan. Then I went and talked to her.
I like to think that I had a hand in this.
I should note that at present I'm only planning on being in DC for a few hours on April 3, but I could certainly extend that a bit.
I am very interested but I am traveling right now with limited Internet! Hard to weigh in! No calendar!
I'm counting on the more actually-familiar-with-DC types to suggest locations. Unless, of course, everyone wants to drive two hours in a southwesterly direction.
Meetup at will's in Richmond!
BTW, April 3rd is supposed to be just about the peak for the cherry blossoms in DC. The festival runs from 28 March through 12 April.
I'll volunteer my place near the Capitol if people want to have it in a private place, and there are, say 10-12 or fewer attendees. (And the Flophouse people for some reason don't step forward).
If people came in on Tuesday-Thursday before there could be an Unfogged lobby day at the capitol. I could see that being pretty funny.
Subsidies for cock-jokes and German puns! Stimulus!
Montreal. August.
Or have it in the UK! The tea is better.
I'd be up for Montreal in August. I'm jealous. Anyone still in Boston interested in getting together sometime?
i'm in! shouldn't be a problem to find a suitable bar to hold us all.
I'm in. And this time I won't need to rent a hotel room - sorry, Pause Endlessly!
In fact, I'm in Arlington and someone is welcome to crash on my couch if they need to. Fair warning, though: I live in a house with three other guys, and we live down to the stereotype. And more seriously, we have cats.
We will be out of town April 3 through 12.
April 25th works best for us.
Or, we can have in in Richmond April 18th. I'll let you touch my monkeys.
I would be game for a Portland meetup in the fall. We could drink Jesus wine.
Or have it in the UK! The tea is better.
Yes, this.
Rah and I will either get to DC on Thursday or Friday, depending on whether we decide to spend Thursday night in Richmond to see some friends. Friday afternoon we're booked up but we should be free Friday evening for a bar or a party or something unless Rah identifies a performance he wants to see on Friday night.
And yes, that is supposed to be peak weekend for the cherry blossoms, which is part of why we're going to be there: Saturday we're going to the Japanese street festival in addition to doing other touristy stuff.
depending on whether we decide to spend Thursday night in Richmond to see some friends.
Is it us??? You are visiting us? Sweet.
B-b-but I'm leaving D.C. on the 3rd. (I arrive March 24.)
I was going to invite her to Richmond to help me plant some seeds.
I endorse any use of the appellation "bub". And its female equivalent, "toots".
45: My advice is to just spill them on the ground.
46: Actually, I was using "bub" as a verb in that sentence.
The 2nd or sometime in the weekend starting Friday the 27th would accommodate both Sir Kraab and myself, then.
41: It isn't you! But we love you anyway.
49:
We have recently been informed that we are failing my kids by not giving them gay godparents. Apparently, gay couples are bombarded with godparent requests by liberal straight parents. Is this true? Is it too late for my kids (17 and 13)?
Crap! It's the Smapbot of Sorrow!
50: We've never been asked to be anyone's godparents, but the concept of godparents is pretty uncommon in the South, at least in my experience. No one did that where I grew up and I had to ask what they were when I saw them pop up in fairy tales as a kid.
Also, neither of us are really eager to join the line of succession for parenthood so I doubt anyone would ask us anyway. I mean, I"m fine with other people's kids, I just don't want to inherit any of them or have any of my own.
On the 27th I'm going to see the Kodo Drummers at Constitution Hall, but other than that I can meet anybody anywhere.
And for shows to see, I will now plug the play my girlfriend is in, Ion, at the Shakespeare Theatre. I'd link to reviews, but press night was just last night and I don't think there are any yet.
the concept of godparents is pretty uncommon in the South
My experience as well. However, Roberta and I are on the hook for raising one more child if our friends P&M both die. Which is like being godparents, but with the promise that we *won't* raise their daughter Christian.
And for shows to see, I will now plug the play my fact that I have a girlfriend is in, Ion, at the Shakespeare Theatre.
(fedward, I don't even remember if you're one of the people who's lamented the sad state of the dating pool, but I thought I'd better mock you just in case.)
53: Awesome! I just emailed Rah the link to make sure he'd see it, as he's in charge of choosing any performances we might see.
the concept of godparents is pretty uncommon in the South
Isn't this just because Catholics are pretty uncommon in the South? At least it's my impression that most non-Anglican Protestant churches don't have godparents.
I thought 100% of Catholics and 0% of other people had godparents. Like confirmation.
not giving them gay godparents
Fairy godparents, will. Though your confusion is understandable.
0% of other people had godparents
50
Apparently, gay couples are bombarded with godparent requests by liberal straight parents.
Argh, I hope you're exagerrating or oversimplifying for comic effect. I mean, I'm sure some such people exist, but if it's actually enough for a bombardment, that makes SWPL look like... I don't know, NWA or something.
that makes SWPL look like... I don't know, NWA or something.
SWPL's first album, Straight Outta Crate and Barrel, was pretty tight.
I grew up in the South and have godparents, but we're carpetbaggers; our family religiosity is quite low, actually, with Congregationalist/Unitarian and Jewish heritage mixed, so I imagine it was just a tradition.
Best tracks:
Call Tha Police
If it Ain't KitchenAid
65: Don't you mean "American Express Yourself"?
Eh, that works, I just thought it was nice that it could sound somewhat SWPL with no change at all. (Plz redirect this comment to Standpipe's other blog.)
so wait, what date are we looking at here?
67: I hear you. But just leaving it as it is doesn't allow me to, um, express myself.
But I'm not particularly pleased with 66.
Other contenders:
"Espresso Yourself"
"Express Yourself, Just Not 2 Loudly"
"Repress Yourself"
"Invest Your Wealth"
Not that I'm like, obsessing over this or anything. Oh no.
Geez, catherine, we're trying to work here. Stop bothering us with on-topic stuff.
I grew up in the South and have godparents, but we're carpetbaggers; our family religiosity is quite low, actually, with Congregationalist/Unitarian and Jewish heritage mixed, so I imagine it was just a tradition.
We have the same exact pedigree. Except I don't have godparents.
Except I don't have godparents.
That you know of.
71: Poor heebie. It must have been tough to grow up a godorphan.
It must have been tough to grow up a godorphan.
We call ourselves Unitarians.
"Godpapa was a rolling stone . . . ."
Except I don't have godparents.
Or so the Unitarians would have you believe.
65: Don't you mean "American Express Yourself"?
Express Your Breastmilk
Sexist.
That you know of.
True godplayas have godspring all over the place that they don't pay godsupport for, or even know they exist, unless they get hauled to Jerry Springer Church for a Godpaternity test.
I had godparents when I was a child, but then one day I came home and they were gone. Apparently they had been sent to live on a nice farm with lots of fresh air and room to run around.
There's a nice symmetry that M/tch pwned me in 75 while I was pwning him in 74.
godorphan
Oooh, so close to being a googlorphan.
Are you suggesting that our friends are lying to us in order to become my kids godparents? Drats.
82: Such covert recruitment of children is, of course, the cornerstone of The Gay Agenda™.
"Impress Yourself"
"Supress Your Veldt"
so wait, what date are we looking at here?
It seems April 3rd has the votes right now. I'm getting a hazy number on headcount, though.
55 - Yes, but only in past tense. The difficulty of dating outranks the weather as a safe conversational topic in DC (if you bring up the weather, you risk exposing your carpetbagger status because the current weather never compares with the weather that happened before you moved here).
83: Next after that on the list is becoming godparents to box turtles.
Given the many votes for April 3, I assume something earlier with me and Sir Kraab would be in addition to, not instead of. Anyone else interested in such?
Nice Catholic girl that I am, I do have godparents (my oldest brother and one of my cousins). CA the Anglican does, too. But it seems that here in NYC there are a whole lot of folks with godchildren/godparents who are Jewish or Unitarian or no-name Protestant.
PS to Fedward: Hooray for Euripides in all of his forms!
85: April 3 works for me.
88: I'm flexible enough to accommodate an earlier shindig as well.
Woo! March meetup! Any night except April 1 will work for me. Do we need to schedule around the NCAA tournament? I don't care about it, but others might.
M/tch, are you saying that my kids are box turtles??!?!?
I am interested in an earlier meet up.
(I'll grant you that April 1 is not, strictly speaking, in March.)
I don't care about it
Communist.
You know, some of us live in DC, and could even be consulted about planning this.
I think April might be bad for the Flophouse but we could always rent out a bar.
71: OK, I was wrong: my pedigree is not heebie-geebie-compliant. My Christian side of the family is not Congregational/Unitarian but actually Episcopalian, so it makes more sense that they'd do godparents if that's also a Catholic thing. (Though I know I have some ancestors who switched from Cong to Unitarian in the 18th century.)
(I'm a Viet Congregationalist!)
96: What, a front page post isn't enough for you? You want a monogrammed invitation?
Don't forget "Straight outta Crate and Barrel (extended Stand mixer)"
Their next album, "Fear of a Gap Planet", wasn't too bad either.
101 reminds me of another famous artist from the swp hop genre: Old Navy Bastard.
Ah yes, I remember the hit video for their unexpected crossover cover of "Bananaphone."
103: Wasn't that by Banana Republic Enemy?
Stand Mix-a-Lot's "Baby's Got Track (Lighting)" always gets the party started.
99: "monogrammed" s/b "engraved"
I want a stereogrammed invitation.
104: No, you're thinking of "MMMGap."
108: w-lfs-n needs to be sicced on nosflow.
I want a stereogrammed invitation.
You have to lick the stamp to get that effect.
I always liked that early all female group, Salt And Pepper.
96: I was figuring this event would be more of a slapdash, in-a-bar type of thing, below the level of full-on flophousery. But bar suggestions and your attendance would be great.
115: Full name was actually "Artisinal Sea Salt and Cracked Black Tellicherry Pepper".
Later on there was that rhythmless blues group "Three Anthonys!" that had a couple of hits.
118: You're one to talk.
But they intentionally misspelled it to appear more "avenue".
I've made mistakes. I admit that. And I'm not going glibly to suggest that they're all in my past, that I'm through with that part of my life—no. I'm all too aware that I could start making mistakes again, simple as anything. I've already corrected a few in typing this very comment. But I have changed, and one of the ways I've changed is that I'm now more sensitive to the mistakes I make—and concomitant with that sensitivity is another, not to be cleft from it, regarding the mistakes of others. These aren't really even different sensitivities, except insofar as the road up is different from the road down. Part and parcel of my reform of myself is my critique of others. So there's justice in your reproach, "you're one to talk". And yet and the end of the day, the sentence can as justly be read literally: I am one to talk, precisely because of my mistake-riddled history.
I'm sorry; I didn't mean to blather on. I apologize for the intrusion.
116: Who lives in the Flophouse these days? I think Becks does, but she's only commented once in this thread, and briefly. I ask because if she's the only one speaking up at the moment, we really shouldn't plan on doing something there, now should we.
And yet and the end of the day
I am unfamiliar with this phrase, good nosflow. What means?
I ask because if she's the only one speaking up at the moment, we really shouldn't plan on doing something there, now should we.
Actually, we should.
It means I didn't get enough sleep.
People totally ignoring the possibility in 31 is making me feel very unpopular.
I noticed, pgd. But I won't be there.
126: If you call that "living".
127: It's because you're selfish and twisted, PGD.
128: And being noticed by nosflow hardly counts in disproving unpopularity.
Your animus towards me seems to have been acting up lately, M/tch. Is Sir K. out of town?
Apostropher's stereogrammed invitation (NSFW, BSIYCSTT)
133 was me, as was 32, PGD. Not ignored, after all.
Bypassing the traditional party power structures in Washington, I've taken this party straight to the people. Having second thoughts about the wisdom of this move, I now worry for the safety of my as-yet unsmashed arms.
132: You are mistaken, nosflow. W-lfs-n is the only person at Unfogged I bear any animus towards. I find you delightful and am only teasing you because you are a noob. I'm afraid it's a necessary ritual before you are offered a fruit basket.
You do want to earn your fruit basket, don't you?
137: Excellent! I want you to kill ben w-lfs-n.
This will be worse than Catnarok.
W-lfs-n has had one of those controversial new identity transplants recently. You wouldn't recognize him. He won't talk to you any more unless you're a hott chick who wants him bad.
who wants him bad.
But w-lfs-n doesn't come any other way.
According to people who would know, w-lfs-n comes every which way.
The link in 133 actually is a stereogram, just in case you saw the url and declined. It's very schematic, which makes it less--and more--horrifying.
I would got to Portland.
Give me enough notice and I can arrange for distillery tours. Incidentally, Steve McCarthy (the Clear Creek guy) is posting at the NYT's alcohol blog (the one where teetotalers show up all the time to complain about people writing about alcohol), and his latest is mostly about his Doug fir eau de vie.
96, 127: Oy, what makes these D.C. people such whiners?
You know, some of us live in DC, and could even be consulted about planning this.
As do catherine, fedward, PGD, togolosh, eb, Minivet and I'm probably forgetting someone. So quit your caterwauling and suggest a plan.
People totally ignoring the possibility in 31 is making me feel very unpopular.
Will you be serving something with a bechamel sauce? Will you be wearing a smoking jacket and/or a peignoir? You can hardly expect us to make a decision without complete information.
his latest is mostly about his Doug fir eau de vie.
I'd love to have a bottle of this, in case anyone wasn't sure what to buy for me.
Have you had it, McQueen? Or anyone else here? How is it?
At Soma Chocolatier in Toronto, we had a Douglas Fir truffle. It could best be described as tasting the way a Christmas tree smells. I'm sure an eau de vie would have similar effect.
That sounds - and I in no way wish to impugn the sensibilities of anyone who might enjoy it - completely fucking nasty.
tasting the way a Christmas tree smells
Hmm. That's how I describe gin.
Like a yard sprinkler.
Of all the mental images to now have stuck in my head...
146.last: I suspect, but don't know, that PGD's place is well-appointed. He's a wine snob, you know. I bet you could get him to wear a smoking jacket as well as a peignoir! But I won't be there, so I'm one to talk.
149: Since you come from a foreign culture, I'm going to assume that by "completely fucking nasty" you merely mean "we have a simple disagreement in tastes".
It's delish, fresh and pleasantly bitter. I tasted some of his first batch long ago—he mentions in the post that he spent some 15 years figuring out how to make it—and it was frighteningly neon-green and Pine-Solish. The current version is a testament to perseverance.
On preview, no eau for McManlyPants.
151: Better a mental image stuck *in* your head than-- Oh, never mind.
On preview, no eau for McManlyPants.
Menos burros, mas helotes.
I recently bought a small bottle of Clear Creek's Calvadosalike and it's really really great.
How about Tunnicliff's Tavern near Eastern Market?
127 - I'll gladly PAAAAAR-TAY! at your pad, PGD. Can I wear my hat indoors?
159: You can wear your hat.
Only your hat though.
160: I believe the correct phrasing is, "You can leave your hat on."
And if W-lfs-n is coming, you'll *definitely* want to leave your hat on.
162: Umbrellas are also recommended.
154: I have had a bunch of the Reisetbauer eaux de vie (carrot, rowanberry, etc.) but I have never had Douglas fir. Hmm.
Unless otherwise noted, I assume people are talking about the April 3 meet-up.
Who's in for the earlier meet-up besides me, Minivet, and togolosh? Which night is best for y'all?
I went to school with Steve McCarthy the booze guy. He was very distinctly non-Reedy-ish and made no apologies for that.
Retsina tasted like it was brewed from 2x4s. The old fashioned wooden kind, not the newfangled metal kind. (Anyone know the history of metal studs, or the kind of metal? They look sort of galvanized from a distance but I've never wored with them.)
Retsina tasted like it was brewed from 2x4s.
I had retsina explained to me once as follows: "See, the Greeks put pine tar in their wine so the Turks wouldn't drink it. Then the Turks left, but the Greeks decided they liked it that way and kept doing it."
I have no idea if this is historically accurate.
163: Oh good. Now I have a dumb song stuck in my head right along with that mental image.
168: They figured that if they kept doing it, no one would ever conquer them again.
166.1: And now he's a trustee. Go figure.
Can I wear my hat indoors?
no, I don't think so, at least if you're a man. Let's think about the possible range of hats here. Baseball cap? Please. Fedora? Probably an unfortunate fashion choice in the first place. Stocking cap? No one else can relax if you're trying to look like a mugger. Giant Ignatius Reilly-type hat with ear flaps? Leads to disturbing speculation about your personal grooming habits. Lincolnesque top hat? May accidentally break an overhead bulb. It's hard for me to think of a really acceptable hat.
But if you're a woman there would be a greater range of cute and therefore acceptable hats.
167: You know what they say: where there's a will, there's a "go away".
It's hard for me to think of a really acceptable hat.
The ladies should all wear those ancient hats with the lace and artifical flowers.
165: As for a time and place, I'm super-duper flexible as long as it's not going to interfere with regular work hours. I'm not exactly a social butterfly, so choosing a place is probably better left to someone who has actually been to a social establishment in the last two years.
In a pinch, I suggest Zed's Ethiopian Restaurant, but that's because it's pretty much the only place I have direct experience with that's likely to fit the bill. Plus, you get to eat with your hands. Also there are bars within walking distance if that seems like a good idea.
174 was mean and in no way expresses my true feelings for will.
It's hard for me to think of a really acceptable hat.
For nosflow, perhaps a jimmy hat.
173: You're breaking my heart, PGD. Fortunately my hat is not one of the ones explicitly deprecated, so I hold out a sliver of hope.
172: Heh. No, that "Umbrella" song. "It's Raining Ben," however, is a welcome replacement.
121: I am delighted to hear the story of your error-policing ways. Does this mean I can expect to see more of my spelling corrected, or less?
167: I thought you were kidding, will. You're really coming up from Richmond?
If I cannot convince you guys to come to Richmond, we might drive up.
I am similarly flexible to togolosh wrt a time and place, except that I don't get off work until 6, and the place should be Metro-accessible. I am also unhelpful on places.
184: It's w-lfs-n you have to worry about, not nosflow. And I'm confident that nosflow will soon earn his fruit basket by ridding us of that meddlesome w-lfs-n.
That hat is superogatory, apo.
Or supererogatory, even.
I guess this is generational. There's a whole range of knit hats to be worn indoors as part of one's clothing. I don't get it-- but this guy is an example, generation no excuse. For extra fun, requiring either one of these hats OR an ironed shirt for menfolk, and one of suitably paired fashion antonyms for the women as well should help put all at ease.
this guy is an example
That guy is not invited.
173, 181: PGD, togolosh has recently admitted to being a perpetual wearer-of-his-hat. I'm not finding the thread, but it sounded like a kind of squashed on your head kind of hat (which reminded me of my dad's old golf hat, actually).
166: they are frequently galvanized steel. At least the ones I've dealt with sure seemd to be.
What's the consensus on Smokey Bear hats?
I am probably up for a PDX meetup in June, July, Sept., or Oct., maybe in Aug. Hopefully outside, but in a place where we can drink (not most parks, alas).
teofilo, you would look just fine in a Smokey the Bear hat.
I am one of those people who thinks all hats must be removed indoors excepting some very special circumstances. Rah is of the opinion that it's time to let that rule go. When I see men wearing hats inside, though, I want not just to tell them to do otherwise; I want to walk up and bat the hats off their heads with my hand.
Galvanized would be toxic if brewed into wine. You only need so much zinc.
Seeing my first galvanized 2x4 triggered one of my first realizations that the world had passed me by, around 1990-1995 I think. They're just wrong.
Retsina is a great solution to mediocre white wine, by the way, much better than "sangria" which is Welch's fruit medley+plonk unless prepared by a trusted friend. Retsina can be disgusting, but IME is pretty good in restaurants run by actual Greeks.
Retsina probably kills parasites too.
Concrete proposal; feel free to amend or counter: Friday, March 27th. Drinks @ 7 @ 'smasher's favorite (still?) bar which may or may not be called The Tavern and which is on U St., possibly between 9th & 10th. Very close to the U St. metro in any case. Sustenance available at the bar or at Zed's. (I can't get good Ethiopian in Austin, so I'm always game.)
PGD, I don't know if you were offering for April 3rd or (and) the earlier date.
teofilo, you would look just fine in a Smokey the Bear hat.
Good to hear.
I want to walk up and bat the hats off their heads with my hand
See, that never occurs to me (despite not being a wearer of hats), but I *do* have that urge any time I see somebody yammering into a cell phone pressed to the side of their head.
203: But apo, that's where they're supposed to press it! That is where their ear and mouth are, after all.
197: I want to walk up and bat the hats off their heads with my hand.
Dude, I think togolosh is coming to the DC meetup, so you're going to have to work this one out. He's from South Africa or something, I think, if that helps.
When I see men wearing hats inside, though, I want not just to tell them to do otherwise; I want to walk up and bat the hats off their heads with my hand.
Call him Ishmael.
it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people's hats off
204: I have an idea for an alternate pressing place.
Ditto to 177.1. Actually, I could recommend some places to meet up - yay me for getting out now and then - but I'm more familiar with Arlington than with DC itself, so it doesn't sound like what we're looking for. I haven't followed the link in 177.2, but the description of the place sounds good.
There hasn't been a whole thread at Unfogged dedicated to taking hats off indoors for at least a month. So we're probably overdue.
We've discussed retsina before. To sum up: there is delicious retsina, just as there is delicious feta. Both take some trouble to find.
209 cross-posted with 201. 201 sounds good to me. But my schedule is open, so don't let me overrule anyone who will only be in town for a limited time. I'm not familiar with either Zed's or The Tavern, which is a plus.
I second 201, pending confirmation of the bar, which I can't find offhand. Zed's seems to be in Georgetown? But Dukem is nearby and seems to be spoken highly of.
187: Metro access kills the Zed's idea, since it's in Georgetown and those assholes don't have a Metro stop. Dupont Circle does have a metro stop, and is close to many establishments suitable for meeting up. I don't know any of them, but there are people reading this who do.
Work related interruptions have let the thread evolve, so I'll endorse 201. I don't know the place, but Google tells me there's a Solly's U st Tavern at 11th and U - is that it?
192: Correct(ish). Truth be told, the hat is 5% fashion statement (specifically "fuck you, fashionistas!") and 95% security blanket.
214.last: 95% security blanket
Yep. Which makes me smile.
216: It's the only proper attire for a sausage party.
I'm not sure about the opera, though.
216: This hat makes me feel secure, okay, so shut up.
I presume the tavern is actually The Saloon. There's good Ethernopian food basically across the street from it, either at Dukem or down the street at Etete, to name but two.
If I cannot convince you guys to come to Richmond, we might drive up.
Woot! (I'd love to come to Richmond sometime, but I can't swing it on this trip.)
Is McCarth working on the galvanized retsina? You describe him as a very determined man.
Metro access kills the Zed's idea, since it's in Georgetown and those assholes don't have a Metro stop.
I was thinking of a place on U St. (the biggish one on the corner of U and 12th? 13th? Zed's sounded familiar, but clearly that's not the name.
As for the date, if it's the 27th I wouldn't be able to join until 10pm or later due to the aforementioned concert (men in diapers hitting very large drums with big sticks), but as that's my 'hood I could also plan to get there late and then stumble home when they kick us out. I have no time constraints on other dates.
The Saloon sounds like the bar SK is talking about. She's mentioning it for the meetup when I'm not going to be around, as I understand it, but it would work for the one I may or may not be around for as well.
166: re, studs
I've whored with both kinds. Ironically, the metal ones are lighter and thus easier to get upright than the woodies.
I think there's a typo in 227, but I don't care. It would still be funny if not.
Is LB around?
max
['Need eyes to check me.']
Yes, ma'am! Could I get you to read a small section of a loan contract (operating under NY law) and tell me if it says what I think it says?
max
['Public interest here.']
Also, metal studs are generally 100% post-consumer recycled material, plus the light weight means lower shipping resources. Plus, obvs., straighter than the wood studs available for the foreseeable future. Varying gauges to accommodate varying uses.
In short, pretty much better for all interior wall purposes (exterior walls you need to worry about thermal bridging; OK if you have a hefty insulating sheathing). That said, I've never workedwhored with them personally.
Oy. Um, I am not your attorney and anything I say is not legal advice. And for all you know, I'm not a lawyer, I'm a basset hound.
OTOH, if you emailed me at my hotmail address (linked from my name), I'd probably answer it.
Metal studs are wrong no matter how effing good they are. Let's not get all consequentialist about fundamental principles.
232: They're just not very satisfying to screw in(to). And while splinters are no fun, every time I've gotten a cut from one of those metal members, it was a big tear and took forever to heal.
Oy. Um, I am not your attorney and anything I say is not legal advice. And for all you know, I'm not a lawyer, I'm a basset hound.
Yes, I know that. I wouldn't ask that kind of question or for that kind of favor and wouldn't except in direst emergency. Doing so would be rude. I am actually asking for your basset hound services anyways.
max
['Mail sent!']
MAx, my legal advice is even freer than LB's and I won't quibble about all that legalistic shit she's always worrying her pretty head with.
234: Stud framed buildings are wrong on fundamental principles, regardless of material. Seriously, houses* today are made of spit. No BS, the design lifetime of some houses being built today is 30 years. They don't fall down in year 31, but there's a nasty knee in maintenance costs right around then. Brick buildings, OTOH, have endured for millennia.
[*] Yes, "houses" not "homes" - a home is a place you've lived in for some time, placed your personal stamp on both physically and emotionally. Anyone trying to sell a "home" is a huckster.
I think I mostly disagree with 239, though by no means vehemently, but I'd be interested in hearing JRoth's opinion on the matter.
Brick buildings shake apart in earthquakes.
Stud framed buildings are wrong on fundamental principles, regardless of material.
I'm not completely sure what's implied by the phrase "Stud framed buildings" but the building I live in was built using balloon framing , which appears to be a flavor of stud framing, and it is over ninety years old and completely solid.
||
My defense is tomorrow. I think I'm going to shower the audience in vomit, like a sprinkler.
||
I think Abodhi Nihilistrator would be a good handle
|>
every time I've gotten a cut from one of those metal members, it was a big tear and took forever to heal.
Good point. Even though I've never framed with them, I've handled them enough to get one of these cuts (I can't even recall - or imagine - the circumstance, but I remember the slice in the ham of my hand).
I get 239, but I don't actually agree (although I live in a house with solid brick exterior walls). There are wood frame houses in this country that are hundreds of years old. Hell, New England + NY probably contain half a million or more frame houses that are approaching 150+ years old. It has a lot more to do with the components - twisty studs with an EFIS exterior and 3/8" gyp board interior don't make for a long-lived house. But a well-built frame house will last indefinitely (wood only gets stronger with age, as anyone who's pulled nails from decades-old wood can tell you).
That said, 241 is true but silly. Most of the world isn't subject to earthquakes with enough regularity to make this a significant concern. It takes extra effort to make a frame structure earthquake-resistant as well.
243's formatting is too advanced for me to comprehend. Hitting pause more than once doesn't have much of an effect, but the block quote changes its meaning?
Just interjecting within my interjection.
true but silly
Hmmph. You say insignificant structural concern, I say deepseated childhood phobia, po-tay-to, po-tah-to.
238:Can I get freebies from other Unfoggedetarians?
From philosophasters:I am reading Schopenhauer.
Am I the Will?
And from literateurs:Who is right, and the "good guy" in Watchmen?
Thank you in advance.
242 - I just dislike stick houses. No objective assessment intended. The gripe about the crap design life of some contemporary houses is legit, though. My first house was a timber framed place built in 1888 and its still going strong. The houses I see going up (or used to, back in the days when people still built houses instead of living under bridges) will be lucky to last half that without major investment. Which is fine, I suppose, but there's something about semi-disposable houses that just sits wrong with me.
Who is right, and the "good guy" in Watchmen?
Reading Watchmen: ur doing it wrong.
My defense is tomorrow. I think I'm going to shower the audience in vomit, like a sprinkler.
You'll do great! The best defense is a good offense, so be sure to ask your committee members lots of hard questions.
What field are you in?
Building shoddy, semi-disposable houses is a long American tradition. It doesn't have any particular connection to stud framing or any other construction technique, though.
The gripe about the crap design life of some contemporary houses is legit
Absolutely. The most maddening thing about the housing market of the past X years is that there was no longer any such thing as a well-built house: it was all just a question of square footage and cost of finishes. But they were all* built with the same crap materials and methods. Shacks of 100 years ago were at least built with better wood (because they were still busily destroying old/ancient growth forests). It was breathtaking to see people paying $750k for houses built with studs I wouldn't use for basement shelving.
* Or close enough
Building shoddy, semi-disposable houses is a long American tradition.
It'll be interesting to see how long the current generation survives unmaintained. Ordinary houses of 100 years ago are often still sound after 20+ years of malign neglect following on 20+ years of benign neglect. I have trouble believing that McMansions will do as well, but studs + 12d nails are surprisingly resilient....
If a charlatan writes a horoscope and noone reads it, is there a fraud?
I suppose theoretical astrology would be astronomy.
You feel completely prepared for tomorrow's big step -- even if you hadn't really seen it coming! You may need to help a friend or loved one come to terms with it, but that's what you're best at!
Isn't all astrology applied?
Not at all. I read my horoscope, but I never do anything with it.
New thread! May I suggest something along the lines of this, via EotAW, who are clearly trying to muscle in on our turf.
I liked the retsina I had in greece.
Good luck, Turgid Jacobian. You'll be awesome. My defense was surprisingly fun. And vomit-less. (But then again, I suspect that since we defend the project proposal, as opposed to the actual project, that things were quite different. And I'm weird, because I even liked my comprehensive exams).
Why do we need a new thread? This one seems to be doing fine. It hasn't even come close to adequately addressing the original topic, nor does it seem likely to.
Yeah, I doubt I'll actually vomit. Externally.
This thread has made me laugh audibly several times. Which I needed.
In an earlier thread I was about to point out that if the Romans build aqueducts that lasted 2,000 years, they were obviously not managing their material and labor resources at all wisely. I'm sure that they could have got the job done for a few centuries at a tenth the cost, by which time Rome would probably be gone anyway.
In fact, this sort of uneconomic use of resources, the fetish for "permanence" and large chunks of rock, is probably exactly why Rome fell. Ironically, if their aqueducts had been more shoddily built, Rome might have survived.
Qui Romam in media quaeris novus advena Roma,
Et Romae in Roma nil reperis media,
Aspice murorum moles, praeruptaque saxa,
Obrutaque horrenti vasta theatra situ:
Haec sunt Roma. Viden velut ipsa cadavera, tantae
Urbis adhuc spirent imperiosa minas.
Vicit ut haec mundum, nixa est se vincere; vicit,
A se non victum ne quid in orbe foret.
Nunc victa in Roma Roma illa invicta sepulta est,
Atque eadem victrix victaque Roma fuit.
Albula Romani restat nunc nominis index,
Quinetiam rapidis fertur in aequor aquis.
Disce hinc, quid possit fortuna; immota labascunt,
Et quae perpetuo sunt agitata manent.
263: And now I think that the name Douche-hat is even more appropriate. Asshole.
238: MAx, my legal advice is even freer than LB's and I won't quibble about all that legalistic shit she's always worrying her pretty head with.
Dude. Lemme try again. Concerned citizen A (that's me) was asking Concerned Citizen B (the one with the legal expertise in New York financial law) about a public contract entered into by a government-owned entity using government money (making it public business) and a private corporation in which I have absolutely no personal financial or fiduciary interest whatsoever, or any other kind of interest except that of a private citizen (journalist?) concerned with the conduct of government business. I think the equivalent would be if I posted a section of the constitution (or a public law) and asked, 'Does that say what I think it says?'
Again, I would ask for the other kinds that I should pay for for free, unless I was just desperate, in which case the question would be something like, 'Know any good lawyers in XXX?' But I probably couldn't ask such a question from jail.
max
['Damn. Now I feel bad.']
Oh, it's a wonderful, beautiful thread. It's just that I'm a believer in the two-thread approach. Also, apparently he won't do anything for love.
271: My opinion is that fraud was involved and that you should go medieval on their ass.
Next?
I missed that that anecdote meshed so beautifully with Douthat's nickname. "I'll do anything for love, but I won't have sex with a chunky girl who's on the pill".
I'm losing it. Senility. Damn.
273: but not on their ox or their manservant or their manservant.
Is that the servant's servant, John, or did you mean maidservant.
Just don't fuck with the servants or the oxen. I'm too senile to specify further.
268 was not a reply to 263, and the link in 263 produced one of the audible laughs. Let a million threads bloom! Pacing is for suckers!
Let a million threads bloom! Pacing is for suckers!
If only there were someone here with posting privileges.
I considered posting the link in 263, but having already derailed this thread with hat wearing and the inferiority of stud framing* I decided against it.
[*] stud framing really ought to be a mode of explication intended to emphasize the manliness of the protagonist. "I totally could have banged a Reese Witherspoon look-alike, but she wanted me to take off my hat, so I made up some shit about whiskey-dick and being gay" for example.
[*] stud framing really ought to be a mode of explication intended to emphasize the manliness of the protagonist.
So what you're saying is "Don't Think of an Elephant"?
If you don't like the top hat, you don't get the goods; that's my rule.
I think Unfogged should officially issue a call for Douthat to be fired.
We don't want to intrude on DeLong's territory.
Because the Washington Post has given me ample recent opportunity to learn that while writing angry letters and insisting that people get fired is not very productive, it is kind of fun.
287: He's falling down on the job on this one, though. And the comment thread about Douthat on his blog is kind of... unsavory.
289
And the comment thread about Douthat on his blog is kind of... unsavory.
How so? OK, I suppose calling Douthat gay is demeaning to gays, and assuming that any straight guy would have had sex in that situation reinforces patriarchal stereotypes, but those are both pretty small potatoes as unsavoriness in comment threads goes. Unless DeLong's threads are unusually well-mannered; I wouldn't know. And one commenter says basically that if the girl was ugly then his rudeness to her doesn't matter, but that commenter gets called out for it later. All things considered, the thread seems more civil than most about subjects like that.
Is the claim that "osculating" means "kissing" a big prank played by generations of Latin teachers?
Not off-topic, if you are genuinely committed to keeping up with the internet.
Douthat's won't-belong-to-a-club-that'll-have-me reaction is utterly unremarkable. It's his rudeness and shaming that are atrocious.
Plenty of men learn their desire for the attention of flirting before they comprehend their desire for sex, and find themselves backing away from a fire they've lit. Lord knows I used to do it that way.
Good grief. Douthat actually acquitted himself fairly well on Bill Moyers' show several months ago, a young conservative you might not have to hate. I don't envy DeLong's apparently self-appointed role as guardian of the gates of public opinion.
What's up with Standpipe? Never writes, never calls, and then it turns out s/he's all giving it up for free over at that copycat blog. Slut.
Plus, "chunkier Reese Witherspoon"? Stay classy, Ross Douchebag.
Read it again, Wrongshore. The critical moment where he definitively loses interest is when the woman tells him she's on the Pill. I'm guessing that you've never found that a particular turn-off.
296: not responsive to 291. And the oed seems to think osculate is to kiss or salute with the lips. So.
Wikipedia says, "Often it means 'to kiss', sometimes used in a 'tongue-in-cheek' fashion." So, like, French.
And the oed seems to think osculate is to kiss or salute with the lips.
Well that puts the phrase "nos morituri te salutamus" in a new light.
An osculating circle to a curve at a point is one that is tangent to the curve with the same radius of curvature.
Laydeez.
Nos morituri te osculamur.
The Latin textbook we used in my first year contained the dialogue "da mihi osculum!".
292: It is an awful thing that I will not pretend to find incomprehensible. But no, I haven't done that particular move.
You are young. You find yourself going through motions that you think are expected of you. You're not sure what awaits you. You're not sure how quickly sexual desire should play out, and you feel somewhat protected by the barriers that stand in the way of getting what you want.
You have a vague sense that the two of you are both equally in the dark, which will permit you to enact a masculine role of aggressor without actually hurting anyone. Then she speaks out of turn--basically steps on your line--and now you have to grow up very quickly, or not. Douthat does not.
You people are so gullible. If you learned some skepticism in Latin class, AIG never would have happened.
Hey nosflow --
da mi basia mille, deinde centum,
dein mille altera, dein secunda centum,
deinde usque altera mille, deinde centum.
. . . but don't tell W-lfs-n.
It's important to keep in mind that what we're reading in Douthat's excerpt is his version of the story from the perspective of a few years later, written for a book with a very definite purpose in how it presents his experiences at Harvard.
My greatest regret in life is that I missed multiple opportunities to have sex with a woman who could, conceivably, be called a chunkier Reese Witherspoon (she was even on the pill). And Catholicism even played into my poor decisionmaking! But I didn't do any fucking shaming about it, and have the decency to feel stupid about it years later.
Her version:
"He was holding something in his hand which could only be compared to a dead geoduck and looking at me with eyes full of terror. Whether it was from drunkenness or from the politeness and consideration which had been instilled in the ladies in my family for centuries I do not know, but I decided that the kindest thing to do was to go ahead with it. But no good deed goes unpunished, as I found out years later...."
305: I don't think that makes it any better, do you?
I think DeLong has shown himself to be a real mensch in the Douthat situation.
I don't think that makes it any better, do you?
No, I think it makes it worse.
Thank God my youthful, insufficiently distant autobiographical novel was not accepted by any of its professional readers.
I think Wrongshore's likely right about how the actual encounter went at the time, but then, given the opportunity to think about it for a few years and write it up for publication Douthat chose to focus above all else on his disdain for the girl. The choice to showcase her high opinion of him with the "Harvard man" quote at the same time strikes me as particularly cruel.
Although I bet that if it had a Conservative-at-Harvard angle my novel could've launched a protected-minority media career!
302
You have a vague sense that the two of you are both equally in the dark, which will permit you to enact a masculine role of aggressor without actually hurting anyone. Then she speaks out of turn--basically steps on your line--and now you have to grow up very quickly, or not. Douthat does not.
You left out the next part: then Douthat goes on to write about it as a self-serving, myopic morality play, maybe with enough detail to identify the girl in question.
You are young. You find yourself going through motions that you think are expected of you.
Oh man, I did this. I was going steady with G. in 6th or 7th grade, and then we went to a party where these older girls bullied us into kissing for them. And I was so grossed out and mortified that I ran away and hid behind a car until the party was over, and I didn't talk to the poor guy again until we managed somehow to break it off, maybe through a third party? It totally served me right when years later he turned up as a friend of a friend, drop-dead gorgeous and reputed to be modeling.
a Conservative-at-Harvard angle
Hmm. Are there any "liberal-at-Liberty" romans à clef?
No, they all get expelled for making eye babies
I've already been pwned by 312, but I don't care.
If you find yourself turned off because someone tells you they use birth control, you are mentally ill, and need either professional medical help, or PGDtopia the help of your friends and family.
If you then write it up in an autobiography, and don't write it up in such a way to communicate that in retrospect you realize you were a bastard, tnen you are a bastard now. And if you can't tell the story in such a way that you run the risk of humiliating the woman all over again, this time publicly, then you better take that story to your motherfucking grave.
I had a depressing experience much like Douthat's and somewhat the same age, but I came to rather different conclusions about it and didn't try to use the story to break into the bigtime winger agitprop biz, or any other biz. Years later (this is true) I saw the lady's photo in the National Geographic, where she had migrated to become a fisherwoman with her own boat. (The story of Reed's influence on the Alaskan fishing industry remains to be written.)
Even at the time I realized that the problem was with me or with the moment, and I never have said much if anything about it to anyone. It would have been like telling the world about an unfortunate youthful episode of drunken incontinence, not that I've ever had such a thing.
Douthat's mix of self-contempt, disdain for the woman, and pious meanness is really extremely creepy.
(All this seems like a weenie version of the several street preachers I've heard who began their spiels by explaining that They'd Been There, which they proved by listing all the various drugs and perversions they'd been involved with.
320: Let's not medicalize. I think that "creep" is the right term.
What terrified Douthat was his own lack of desire, as if his original sin had failed him.
I'm late coming to this. Do I have to read the entire thread to figure out if you all settled on dates? If one is planned, can there be a front-page post about it? I am in the mood to visit DC. As I am a procrastinating grad student riding out the recession, I can plan my visit around UnfoggeDCon. NY'ers better take that bus down. I'm talkin' to YOU, AWB.
320: I strongly agree with "if you then write it up, you are a bastard," but I understand how he could experience it that way. Desire is frightening, and it's frightening to find that someone's desire greatly outflanks your own.
Comity prevails that the greater crime was in writing it up hurtfully or at all, with no mature perspective.
I'm taking pains to empathize with Douthat in the situation because the "he must be gay to have bailed on sex" theme is rampant in the DeLong comments.
as if his original sin had failed him.
is even better than geoduck.
It's the contemptuous piety that's so maddening.
304—I ask you, how many will be enough?
As I am a procrastinating grad student riding out the recession, I can plan my visit around UnfoggeDCon.
Such a large-scale thing does not seem to be in the offing, though.
There's a genre of conservative writing where the narrator decides to experience what I guess is supposed to be a slice of the liberal modern life, which is then held in first-person contempt: "I went to an anti-war protest and was shocked to find people with puppets as props"; "I took a class in women's studies and was shocked to find feminism taken seriously"; and so on. This is in the same vein but much more personal and distasteful.
I suppose the idea is to show that if you can't actually stand athwart history and yell stop and expect things to stop, you can at least show yourself able to face all the temptations of the world we live in and remain yourself unchanged, with your values reaffirmed. Distant contempt just doesn't have the same impact.
I would actually prefer a smaller-scale meetup, but I'll go to whatever. I'm up for a late March meet-up too.
Oh, and if people are making suggestions for things to do, the WPA art exhibit at the American Art Museum is really pretty amazing (to my untrained eye, at least).
Has somebody linked to his column on how asian students totally don't suck up to him? That one was a winner.
I actually appreciate Wrongshore's efforts to be empathetic here, and I think we can generally comprehend being in at least an analogous situation. But both the details (the last straw being The Pill) and the telling (every bit of it) reflect so badly on Douthat that I find him beyond empathy. He's not telling a story about (his) human frailty - he's telling a story about how a nasty fat slut almost tricked him into giving up his manly essence.
Whom among us has not been young and uncertain with a masticating vixen in our arms? You feel psyched and daunted, shaky and like God is double daring you. You either do or you don't, but if you didn't, wouldn't you come up with some kind of rationale? I think this is how God makes Republicans.
I think that most guys, except Apo, have found the Old Adam letting them down now and then, and the early episodes of this are disturbing. But different guys deal with it differently.
It's not necessarily mpotence, either, just lack of enthusiasm and failure to project excitement. "She can tell I'm not having as much fun as guys are supposed to have".
334: Apo told me that it wasn't unusual, and that it happened to him all the time. *Lip quivers.*
Have we split into two groups yet?
March 28th in DC?
April 3 in DC?
You people should be going to Boston the weekend of April 3 to see the Rage Bunny show. Support mcmc!
I'm late coming to this. Do I have to read the entire thread to figure out if you all settled on dates?
No. You can rest assured that we have not. We've now moved on to discussing Ross Douthat's libido.
Desire is frightening, and it's frightening to find that someone's desire greatly outflanks your own.
No question.
I'm taking pains to empathize with Douthat in the situation because the "he must be gay to have bailed on sex" theme is rampant in the DeLong comments.
Good lord. Talk about missing the point. This is why I don't read comments outside of Greater Unfogged.
334: Sure, fair enough, I'll admit it not even presidentially. But even giving him the most charitable interpretation imaginable of the event he describes, blaming the girl for it and writing about it?
Good lord. Talk about missing the point. This is why I don't read comments outside of Greater Unfogged.
As I said somewhere above, the comment thread there is unsavory. In places it sort of degenerated into Fark-esque "Reese Witherspoon? I'd hit that!" comments.
323: Hee. I doubt I will be able to make it, as I'll have spent the weekend of 3/27 in Richmond at a conference. OH HAI! Anyone want to hang out in VA weekend after next? I have srs bzniss to do, but may be available for a little non-field-specific fun one night.
What?!?!? A weekend in Richmond? Call us.
309: DeLong isn't far left of center, but he seems to have more curiosity than any ten other economists put together. Even his syllabi look more like history than econ syllabi. Dialogue with his readers, including those who disagree, seems important to him.
He's been looking for an honest, intelligent conservative to dialogue with for years, and for the last six months I've been explaining to him that he is an honest, intelligent conservative.
And DeLong Jr. is a Reedy. Hope that works.
Have we split into two groups yet?
March 28th in DC?
April 3 in DC?
Looks that way, if it's not overly complicated. Looks like Sir Kraab has a proposal for 3/28 of semi-concreteness at 201 awaiting some confirmation. I'm re-reading the thread trying to figure out a tentative headcount for 4/3.
I almost forgot to mention that I might be able to make a Portland meetup in the fall. I'm almost certainly going to head through on my way further north, but I don't know if I'll be able to stop by on that trip.
Looks like Sir Kraab has a proposal for 3/28 of semi-concreteness at 201 awaiting some confirmation.
And I have a similar (if not identical) proposal for 4/3 at 225, although I'm still not sure if I'll actually be able to attend.
And DeLong Jr. is a Reedy
Ah, I was wondering where s'he'd end up. Seems like a good choice, based on my extremely limited knowledge.
All right, for 4/3, I have
teo?
eb
Turgid Jacobian
Charley Carp
PGD
Becks?
catherine?
Cyrus
Rah?
Robust?
togolosh
'smasher?
Frostbite?
fedward?
eekbeat
me!
With possible venues (now including teo's 225!) including The Saloon, PGD's (if it's a group of 10-12 or fewer), or some other bar, rented out, which I'm assuming catherine or 'Smasher might be able to help with.
Clarifications and additions solicited.
Since AWB is in Richmond, we might have a splinter group here now.
First, the 201 proposal was for 3/27, not 3/28, though I can do either.
Second, re: location, I just spoke with some knowledgeable locals, and they said although The Saloon is a fine place, it's quite crowded on Friday nights, and exacerbated by a policy of not letting people exist in the area unless they have seats.
FYI: The Mont Pelerin Society has pushed in front of the Trilateral Commission, Opus Dei, the Knights of Malta, the Grover Norquist Daisy Chain, The Family (behind the National Prayer Breakfast), et. al. on the list of actually-existing actually-conspiratorial villain groups.
The MP Society is 70 years old, but the wreckage you will be seeing (or are already seeing, if you're an Icelander) is their work. They really have ruled the world for 50 years.
Every goddamn place is crowded on Friday nights, children. And the whole east coast is crowded all the time, but more so in winter.
We cannot do 3/27 so we will stay in Richmond. Darn it. I was hoping minvet would teach me tamil.
I can attest that the Saloon is particularly bad, though, because they really do require people to sit at tables. And they don't have very many tables. If you can get a table, though, it's pretty nice.
You were going to learn Tamil in 3/27? Was minivet going to download into your head, Matrix-style?
351: Ooh, thanks for that clarification. I'm pretty much hoping to punt that event in Sir Kraab's general direction and hoping she doesn't resent me for it. She's just got such a go-getter attitude.
(Deal, Sir Kraab? I can front-page any updates you need posted.)
But it won't be winter anymore by the time the meetup happens!
I'm uncomfortable with the EOTW thread about Douthat as well. The first half of the comments are mostly "Hurr durr, he couldn't get it up, LOL", and "I use my psychological powers to diagnose his boorishness as arising from an attempt to rationalize his failure to get it up".
Turgid Jacobian comes with Bonsaisue (Mrs.TJ), and Soren (progeny ~1yr, don't worry about cursing, he's been hanging around graduate students since his birth)
360: Noted, thanks. I look forward to cursing in front of your child.
359: Eh? The first half of the comments there seem to me to be mostly complaints about his prose and random in-jokes, with just a little mockery of his inability to get it up.
We cannot do 3/27 so we will stay in Richmond.
I'm flexible if Saturday or Sunday would work, but now that you know AWB's going to be in Richmond . . . .
although The Saloon is a fine place, it's quite crowded on Friday nights
Yeah, I'm realizing that my visits to The Saloon have been on school nights.
And the whole east coast is crowded all the time, but more so in winter.
At least east coast crowds are made of people rather than carp.
Off the top of my head I can think of a couple bars that do room rentals based merely on a guaranteed minimum collective bar tab (friends have used DC9 and Larry's Lounge), but I honestly can't remember if that minimum tab is higher on a weekend. And I had forgotten the Saloon's "no standing" policy, which I think rules it right out for a big group on a weekend.
From personal experience I can say we could take over the booths at Playbill easily, but it's awkwardly positioned between Metro stops, which might make it harder to get to/from than people want. Tunnicliff's (mentioned upthread) has turned into a big actor hangout due to the late night food menu and has a big room in the back, making the size of the group less of an issue (in fact, many members of the cast and crew of Ion were headed there when we left the official opening night cast party tonight). It's also close to Metro.
My first bar visit in DC -- before I even thought of moving here -- was the Hawk and Dove (near Eastern Market, also the stop for Tunny's) so that's usually on my list for out-of-towners. But I'm also perfectly happy to leave all the heavy lifting to Catherine, since she's got the press connections. I'm just a guy who likes a good cocktail now and then.
271: My opinion is that fraud was involved and that you should go medieval on their ass.
Did not realize other thread had long discussion about AIG, which started about 2 minutes after I staggered off to bed. Oops. Sorry. Roughly: was asking LB question (unrelated to executive bonuses) about bailout contract. She concurred with my reading, so I explained entire tale to her. Otherwise gave up for day, and she may or may not have something to say about it. However: brief summary version of what I said is (if I am correct) that AIG has wired itself to the (analogy alert!) nuclear weapon it constructed, and has the weapon on deadman trigger. Making it actually dangerous to even consider going after actual contract mods. The weapon may not detonate if triggered, but it might work. Have strong suspicion that Obama does not quite understand the legal problem, because almost no one else seems to either. Except Geithner and FReserve.
Might be wrong tho, in several ways.
p.s. to PoMo: who said AIG:FPD London stopped writing CDS contracts? They have strong incentives to continue issuing them. Even if (possibly especially if) they will individually blow up. I didn't say they have done so, but have not found legal requirement that they stop.
max
['Tired, going to bed.']
368: As far as I'm concerned, the Hawk & Dove is for people who work in Washington (i.e., Hill staffers in rep ties), not people who live in the District.
370: So does the stuff flowing out of your nose.
Wait, it smells? Why wasn't I told?! Dang it, it better not be "paper mill".
Maybe we could just send hitmen after the principals and their heirs, and the Congressmen and media people who enabled them.
All the reasonable stuff about how the bad guys have rigged the system so that they can't lose doesn't make me more moderate or reasonable at all. Entirely the opposite, as you all might expect. But Americans, Democrats, liberals, and the Unfoggetariat are docile bodies, and I'm too fucking old to lead anything.
Nothing personal, of course.
371: The only time I've seen the rep tie crowd at the Hawk is on a Saturday afternoon during college football season. They're really loud, but my Dallas-native friend and I needed neutral ground to watch the Oklahoma-Texas game (as Brent Mushmouthberger likes to remind everybody, the Rrrrred Rrrrriver Rrrrrrivalry).
fedward,
your photos and blog are interesting. I remember the space shuttle in a slightly different way. I was in kindergarten, and crushed when I got up to watch it and saw the 'splosion.
I think that you should have brought egg-containers to the inauguration to sit upon.
i think if we get the early enough and there's not a terrible comedy act/live band/musician, the upstairs at solly's (on 11th and U St. NW off the U street green line metro station) would suffice. same with the terribly, awesomely divey townhouse tavern on 17th and R. for something nicer, we could try the upstairs at bourbon in adams morgan. i'd recommend against renting a room, i don't think it's necessary. all of my suggestions though are dependent on us getting there relatively early on a friday night to take over the space, cause no matter where we go it's probably going to get pretty crowded. 'smasher might have more suggestions.
I assume Catherine is talking about the 3rd, but the suggestions are helpful for the 27th/28th (I'm punting to Sir Kraab too re: date). Is there anyone in the earlier meetup who could snag a table early?
Brickskellar or whatever it was seemed to have a pretty good space at UDC2, but it might be woefully inconvenient or something and their Manhattan was not memorable. (It was wicked convenient for us, as we were staying around the corner, but this time we're staying closer to the WH/Mall area.)
I'm going to go ahead and commit us for Friday night, 3 April, as Rah may or may not have time/energy to weigh in anytime soon; he's sick and we're having mysterious cat sickness issues as well, so we are The House of No Good Sleep. If he wants us to see a performance of something it'll just have to be Saturday night.
I was hoping minvet would teach me tamil.
I'll teach you Tamil, will. When I am done with you, you'll be able to count to ten, ask to be given some more food, and say the words for arm, fart, and belly.
Thanks Blume!
Will you be teaching me how to say "Holy smokes! That is hot! Please pass the yogurt."?
381: that's phrased "Give me more belly, seven fart! Arm!"
I am not sure that Blume has been a good influence on Sifu.
383:How does one say "cherchez la femme" in Tamil?
will, my dear, would you please respond to 365 at your convenience? (I'm being pushy because I'm trying to made plans with a bunch other D.C. friends.)
Argh. I could actually switch my flight to April 4th (and it's Southwest, who wouldn't charge me) so I could see everyone and meet the unmet, but if the flight were delayed, I'd miss my brother's 50th birthday party. Cruel, cruel Fate.
374: Maybe we could just send hitmen after the principals and their heirs, and the Congressmen and media people who enabled them.
Dude. If I thought it would work, I'd go for it.
All the reasonable stuff about how the bad guys have rigged the system so that they can't lose doesn't make me more moderate or reasonable at all.
It makes me really angry, and when I get angry I start determinedly looking for avenues to victory.
Entirely the opposite, as you all might expect. But Americans, Democrats, liberals, and the Unfoggetariat are docile bodies, and I'm too fucking old to lead anything.
'Let George do it.'
Nothing personal, of course.
Wasn't taking it that way. I dislike sitting here taking it as much and maybe even more than you do.
Anyways, LB think I have the correct reading, but that it isn't important. Roughly, what I was on about is, is that neither the government nor the Federal Reserve owns any part of AIG except the 2% they took in November. That other 79.9% is not owned by anybody but AIG, but the Fed is holding them as collateral. Much more importantly (in my view), the government doesn't vote those equities.
(long pause) AIG management, by contract, votes those equities. So AIG is essentially operating (legally) as a private partnership company where the partners manage the company. As a consequence, the bailout contract made it easier (much easier in my opinion) for the company to decide to default, because the government can't act fast enough to prevent the board from voting to default. Thus they hold the potential danger of default over the head of Treasury and the Fed. The only control the government exercises is via a few small provisions about dividends and the like, unless AIG defaults, which is what the government is actually trying to avoid.
Neat, huh? So USG/T/FedR has no standing to interfere in AIG operations. People (journalists) keep assuming that AIG is owned by the government and therefore the government can simply control AIG if they wish, but they can't. The contract FRBNY signed prevents that from occurring. Hell, it effectively prevents owners of common stock from acting. I'm not sure if even Obama quite grasps this, but I betcha Geithner does.
Anyways, sorry to intrude on party planning.
max
['Boobytraps! Whee!']
386: Thanks! I have Frostbite, Rah, and Robust moved to "yep!". I defer to catherine, et. al. on the venue and the advice to arrive early. What time was everyone thinking anyhow, for 4/3? Is 8pm early enough to take over?
So am I correct in reading 388 to mean that Geithner his own self created this situation (as he WAS the FRBNY at the time)?
He has seemed problematic for awhile, but it's looking increasingly like he's actually the villain of the piece (I recognize that he's being set up this way; doesn't mean he isn't).
390: Yes. I guarantee you that AIG went back to him (in September) and said they would blow up the world if he didn't accept the form of bailout contract they wanted AND that they also made representations to him that he would be taken care of afterwards if he needed a job or something.
I can flip you what I sent LB if you want. Email under name.
max
['Do dah.']
Huh. I remember knowing that the government's equity interest in AIG would be non-voting back last fall -- there was a lot of loose talk about how incredibly damaging it would be for the government to actually run anything, rather than just hand out money. Let me go try to find a cite.
re: 392
Yes, in the UK it's been similar. The government owns a lot of the various banks but doesn't exercise full control. I'm vague on the exact details, though, and wiki doesn't really enlighten me as to the exact level of control the government can exercise over the various banks and through which methods.
Here's the NYT explaining the terms back last September:
Under the plan, the Fed will make a two-year loan to A.I.G. of up to $85 billion and, in return, will receive warrants that can be converted into common stock giving the government nearly 80 percent ownership of the insurer, if the existing shareholders approve.
The government only gets voting stock if the loan isn't paid back.
Okay, so: I will be in Montreal probably between the 3rd and the 19th of August, but extremely busy between 6th and 10th August. Anyone for a Montrealer breakfast some time?
But I still advocate for a UK UnfoggeDCon, over afternoon tea.
re: 395
I would be up for the UK one. I might agitate for the beer replacing tea option. Getting pissed is a great British tradition.
Come to think of it, NY's been short on the meetups lately. Anyone else interested in a no-special-reason bar night sometime soon, or are their any out-of-towners likely to be here in the near future to provide an excuse?
Here's the NYT explaining the terms back last September:
Yes. I read the exact same story. And then afterwards lots of people (Krugman, for one) said that AIG was effectively nationalized. There ain't no nationalization about it.
Under the plan, the Fed will make a two-year loan to A.I.G. of up to $85 billion and, in return, will receive warrants that can be converted into common stock giving the government nearly 80 percent ownership of the insurer, if the existing shareholders approve.
The NYT Today:
The tangle over bonuses highlighted a broader confusion over who actually controls the insurance conglomerate. The Treasury and the Federal Reserve have both pumped vast amounts of money into the company, but the two agencies have never made it clear which of them is in charge.
Both agencies have insisted that neither of them "owns" A.I.G., or controls its management decisions, even though the federal government owns almost 80 percent of the company. As a result, the Treasury and Fed officials have repeatedly resisted forcing the company to disclose more about how A.I.G. was spending taxpayer money.
It was only on Sunday, after Democratic lawmakers had criticized the Fed and Treasury for weeks for being too protective of the company, that A.I.G. released the names of the companies that it had repaid with money it received from the government.
At issue are retention bonuses for employees of AIG's financial-products division, whose credit default swaps brought AIG to the brink of collapse. The government controls AIG through an 80% equity stake and as a major lender and doesn't have legal authority to freeze payments on its own.
So the NYT insists that the government owns 80% of AIG when, in fact, they do not. The WSJ says the government controls 80% of AIG. The government doesn't own or control anything. They should own an 80% stake, but they don't. They should have written the contract to allow the government to exercise voting control, but they did not. They should have written a provision preventing AIG from going into default without government permission, but they did not (that I have seen). People keep talking and acting as though what should have been done was what was done. What was done was almost exactly the opposite of what should have been done.
The government only gets voting stock if the loan isn't paid back.
Even better, if AIG can make enough money, they can buy themselves out from under. So they need to sell some CDS insurance to make the cash to pay off the loan. (If the CDS insurance fails, well, that's what bailouts and defaults are for.) Oh, and before the bailout, going into default would've required a board meeting, which would've required rounding up enough shareholders via public announcement, with no guarantees that the vote would go the way management would want. Now management can call a board meeting involving just the CEO and one other person, and have a majority of voting shares present and ready to vote.
Also, it appears that the government could only force out the original CEO. Not the current one. It's a pretty nifty deal for AIG. I want the guy who negotiated the contract on my team, because he is a mean, evil fucker who will kill and eat the other lawyer in court.
max
['Literally.']
Sir Kraab:
I'd come up Saturday night if people were meeting. BR is thinking that she is a maybe since we are running a 10k that morning.
The greatest election ever: 1936, Minnesota's Eighth Congressional District (which later on was Bob Dylan's district). The moderate Democratic candidate was a Communist, and he defeated both the extremist Democrat and the incumbent Republican to become the district's representative in Congress.
Will you be teaching me how to say "Holy smokes! That is hot! Please pass the yogurt."?
Oh, I forgot! I know how to say "That is hot!" too.
Can you teach me how to say "How come Tamil porn is so very, very, very soft? I cannot get off on a man's hand lightly brushing a woman's shoulder, and that's Tamil XXXX."
399
... Oh, and before the bailout, going into default would've required a board meeting, ...
If they don't have enough money to pay they are going to default board meeting or no board meeting.
Blume:
I would also like to lean how to say, "Does your daughter like my son?"
A law school roommate's grandma only spoke Tamil. It seemed so melodic and totally impossible to understand or learn.
Anybody have PGD's email address? Send it to me at mypseud at geemail, if you would. Thanks.
Anyone else interested in a no-special-reason bar night sometime soon
Predictably, I think this is a great idea.
405
I would also like to lean how to say, "Does your daughter like my son?"
A law school roommate's grandma only spoke Tamil. It seemed so melodic and totally impossible to understand or learn.
That would be a very strange question to ask the grandmother of your roommate.
Tamil culture has extraordinarily complex courting rituals.
Tamil culture has extraordinarily complex courting rituals.
And a brush on the arm is their equivalent of having sex. If a man has wrongly brushed he arm, a Tamil woman cannot marry and must work forever at a call center troubleshooting booby-trapped Microsoft releases.
And a brush on the arm is their equivalent of having sex.
Tamils have over 36,000 different kinds of arm brushes.
388: Shit. If that's the case, the people at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York are retarded, and I wonder whether Geithner was the right choice for Treasury secretary.
At this point I wouldn't mind seeing an orca and a lion fighting over Geithner's body.
Ooh! I know: throw Summers into the lion's cage and Geithner into the orca's tank.
To make it fair, Summers gets to wear a diver's suit and Geithner is strapped into a Land Rover.
Hmm. I asked a finance-journalist friend about 388/399, and he didn't agree:
I think you're thinking of the warrants that AIG issued the Treasury on Nov. 25, 2008. The deal has been changed since; on March 4, AIG issued 100,000 shares of Series C Preferred Stock to the trust. These are voting shares, and "The holders of the Series C Preferred Stock have approximately 77.9 percent of the aggregate voting power of AIG's common stock." See their 8-K, issued March 5, and the 10-K of March 2 (section "Controlling Shareholder").
The government only gets voting stock if the loan isn't paid back.
This doesn't seem to follow from what's written here. There are restrictions on the government's exercise of the warrants?
max, you got a link to the relevant document? Or can you send something to my e-mail? Or offer some other illumination?
416: I could easily be confused or out-of-date; I haven't successfully kept on top of this one at all. (I haven't gotten to the point of sitting it out, but I'm not keeping up in detail either.)
Pardon moi. My apologies. Also, don't get mad at me, unfogged comment box.
Hmm. I asked a finance-journalist friend about 388/399, and he didn't agree:
They never do. Not until about six months later.
I think you're thinking of the warrants that AIG issued the Treasury on Nov. 25, 2008.
No.
The deal has been changed since; on March 4, AIG issued 100,000 shares of Series C Preferred Stock to the trust. These are voting shares, and "The holders of the Series C Preferred Stock have approximately 77.9 percent of the aggregate voting power of AIG's common stock." See their 8-K, issued March 5, and the 10-K of March 2 (section "Controlling Shareholder").
This is the 8-K filing for the original deal of 09/22/08.
Summary:
On September 22, 2008, American International Group, Inc. ("AIG") entered into an $85 billion revolving credit facility (the "Credit Facility") and a Guarantee and Pledge Agreement (the "Pledge Agreement") with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York ("NY Fed"). The Credit Facility has a two year term and bears interest at 3-month LIBOR plus 8.5%. The Credit Facility provides for an initial gross commitment fee of 2% of the total Credit Facility on the closing date. AIG will also pay a commitment fee on undrawn amounts at the rate of 8.5% per annum. Interest and the commitment fees are generally payable through an increase in the outstanding balance under the Credit Facility. Borrowings under the Credit Facility are conditioned on the NY Fed being reasonably satisfied with, among other things, AIG's corporate governance.
AIG is required to repay the Credit Facility from, among other things, the proceeds of certain asset sales and issuances of debt or equity securities. These mandatory repayments permanently reduce the amount available to be borrowed under the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including a requirement to maintain a minimum amount of liquidity and a requirement to use reasonable efforts to cause the composition of the Board of Directors of AIG to be satisfactory to the trust described below within 10 days after the establishment of the trust.
Under the agreement, AIG will issue a new series of perpetual, non-redeemable Convertible Participating Serial Preferred Stock (the "Preferred Stock") to a trust that will hold the Preferred Stock for the benefit of the United States Treasury. The Preferred Stock will, from issuance (i) be entitled to participate in any dividends paid on the common stock, with the payments attributable to the Preferred Stock being approximately, but not in excess of, 79.9% of the aggregate dividends paid on AIG's common stock, treating the Preferred Stock as if converted, and (ii) vote with AIG's common stock on all matters submitted to AIG's shareholders, and will hold approximately, but not in excess of, 79.9% of the aggregate voting power of the common stock, treating the Preferred Stock as if converted. The Preferred Stock will remain outstanding even if the Credit Facility is repaid in full or otherwise terminates.
Exhibit D from the Credit Agreement (around page ~1 billion):
Summary of Terms of Preferred Stock and Related Issues
Issuer - American International Group, Inc. ("AIG").
Purchaser - AIG Credit Facility Trust, a new trust established for the benefit of the United States Treasury ("Trust").
Securities - 100,000 shares of Convertible Participating Serial Preferred Stock ("Preferred Stock").
Voting rights - The Preferred Stock will vote with the common stock on all matters submitted to AIG's stockholders, and will be entitled to an aggregate number of votes equal to (i) the Initial Number of Shares (as defined below), as adjusted pursuant to the anti-dilution provisions, minus (ii) the votes, if any, attributable to shares of common stock previously issued on any partial conversion of the Preferred Stock; provided that the number of votes attributable to the Preferred Stock shall not exceed 79.9% of the aggregate number of votes of the Preferred Stock and the shares of common stock then outstanding.
Dividends - The Preferred Stock will be entitled to participate in any dividends paid on the common stock, and shall receive (i) the dividends attributable to the Initial Number of Shares, as adjusted pursuant to the anti-dilution provisions, minus (ii) the dividends, if any, paid with respect to shares of common stock previously issued on any partial conversion of the Preferred Stock; provided that the dividends attributable to the Preferred Stock shall not exceed 79.9% of the aggregate amount of dividends paid on the Preferred Stock and the shares of common stock then outstanding.
Conversion - Immediately after the stockholder vote, the Preferred Stock will be convertible into a number of shares of common stock (the "Initial Number of Shares") equal to 79.9% of that number plus the sum of the common stock then outstanding and the maximum number of shares then reserved for issuance with respect to AIG's Equity Units.
Anti-Dilution Provisions - The Preferred Stock will have customary anti-dilution provisions.
Equity issues - So long as the Trust's equity ownership, determined as the sum of its ownership of common stock and the number of shares of common stock underlying the Preferred Stock, shall equal or exceed 50% of the Initial Number of Shares (as adjusted pursuant to the anti-dilution provisions), AIG shall not issue any capital stock, or any or securities or instruments convertible or exchangeable into, or exercisable for, capital stock, without the written consent of the Trust other than (i)(x) issues of capital stock to satisfy any security or instrument existing on September 16, 2008 that is exercisable for, convertible into or exchangeable for common stock or (y) in respect of equity compensation awards issued in the ordinary course of business under AIG's Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Incentive Plan and (ii) subsequent to written notice from the Trust that AIG's corporate governance arrangements are satisfactory to the trustees (x) in respect of equity compensation awards issued under any equity compensation plan (including any material amendments thereto) approved by shareholders after September 16, 2008 in accordance with the shareholder approval requirements of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, (y) in respect of any tax-qualified plan approved in the ordinary course of business by the Board of Directors of AIG that meets the requirements of Sections 401(a) or 423 of the Internal Revenue Code or (z) in any one year, up to 0.5% of the outstanding shares of common stock pursuant to any other employee benefit plan, employment contract or similar arrangement that is approved by the Compensation and Management Resources Committee of the Board of Directors of AIG.
The Guarantee and Pledge Agreement, page 26 says:
Section 9. Right to Vote Securities. (a) Unless an Event of Default shall have occurred and be continuing, each Pledgor will have the right, from time to time, to vote and to give consents, ratifications and waivers with respect to any Pledged Security owned by it and the Financial Asset underlying any Pledged Security Entitlement owned by it, and the Secured Party will, upon receiving a written request from such Pledgor, deliver to such Pledgor or as specified in such request such proxies, powers of attorney, consents, ratifications and waivers in respect of any such Pledged Security that is registered in the name of the Secured Party or its nominee or any such Pledged Securities Entitlement as to which the Secured Party or its nominee is the Entitlement Holder, in each case as shall be specified in such request and be in form and substance satisfactory to the Secured Party. Unless an Event of Default shall have occurred and be continuing, the Secured Party will have no right to take any action which the owner of a Pledged Partnership Interest or Pledged LLC Interest is entitled to take with respect thereto, except the right to receive payments and other distributions to the extent provided herein.
(b) If an Event of Default shall have occurred and be continuing, the Secured Party will have the exclusive right to the extent permitted by law (and, in the case of a Pledged Partnership Interest or Pledged LLC Interest, by the relevant partnership agreement, limited liability company agreement, operating agreement or other governing document) to vote, to give consents, ratifications and waivers and to take any other action with respect to the Collateral, with the same force and effect as if the Secured Party were the absolute and sole owner thereof, and each Pledgor will take all such action as the Secured Party may reasonably request from time to time to give effect to such right; provided that the Secured Party will not have the right to vote, to give consents, ratifications or waivers or to take any other action with respect to the Equity Interest in any Regulated Subsidiary, in each case to the extent that such action would require any notice to, filing with or the taking of any other action by a Governmental Authority, unless such notice, filing or action shall have been made, granted or approved.
So, AIG pledged the all the subsidiaries and all the properties of the company as collateral (that is, a transaction lien was placed on the properties). That collateral is held in a trust run by the FRBNY. The trust is run for the benefit of the Treasury, but FRB runs it, and AIG owns the property, unless they default. Further, AIG created the Preferred, gave it the power to vote as equivalent of 79.9% of the company (the number doesn't matter, it's 79.9% no matter what) and placed it in trust, and then was and is required to turn around and grant the effective voting proxy for those shares back to AIG. Those shares either vote the same way as the winner in a vote conducted amoung the owners of the common stock, or AIG management votes it as 80% of shares. I think it's the latter but I'm not sure. (If AIG management controls, for voting purposes, 80% 50% of the common equities, either becuse someone gave management the proxies, or they just like the way management's butts smell, there's no effective difference.)
The 03/04/2009 8-K filing is here and it says:
Item 3.02. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities. On March 4, 2009, American International Group, Inc. (AIG) issued and sold to the AIG Credit Facility Trust (the Trust), a trust established for the sole benefit of the United States Treasury, 100,000 shares of AIG's Series C Perpetual, Convertible, Participating Preferred Stock, par value $5.00 per share and an initial liquidation preference of $5.00 per share (the Series C Preferred Stock), for an aggregate purchase price of $500,000 (the Transaction), with an understanding that additional and independently sufficient consideration was also furnished to AIG by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (the FRBNY) in the form of its lending commitment (the Credit Facility) under the Credit Agreement, dated as of September 22, 2008, between AIG and the FRBNY. The issuance and sale of the Series C Preferred Stock was exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.
Item 3.03. Material Modification to Rights of Security Holders. The holders of the Series C Preferred Stock have preferential liquidation rights over the holders of AIG's common stock, par value $2.50 per share, and, to the extent permitted by law, vote with AIG's common stock on all matters submitted to AIG's shareholders. The holders of the Series C Preferred Stock have approximately 77.9 percent of the aggregate voting power of AIG's common stock and are entitled to approximately 77.9 percent of all dividends paid on AIG's common stock, in each case treating the Series C Preferred Stock as if converted. The Series C Preferred Stock will remain outstanding even if the Credit Facility is repaid in full or otherwise terminates. The Series C Perpetual, Convertible, Participating Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2009 (the Purchase Agreement), between AIG and the Trust restricts AIG's ability to issue or grant capital stock without the consent of the Trust, with certain limited exclusions. The applicable terms and preferences attached to the Series C Preferred Stock and the restrictions imposed by the Purchase Agreement are more fully described in AIG's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Annual Report). The form of Certificate of Designations of the Series C Preferred Stock and the Purchase Agreement are incorporated into this Current Report on Form 8-K by reference to Exhibits 3.I.F and 10.91, respectively, of the Annual Report.
The 03/04 8-K did not cough up the contract though. That was the 03/11/2009 8-K here with the actual contract here.
I'm not going to quote because that fucker is even more obtuse and opaque than the original credit agreement. However, while it appears that they're issuing new preferred, it also appears that this contract doesn't alter section 9 of the 9/22 contract. Except possibly section 6.2 on page 6. Fuck. Nearly inpenetrable:
6.2. Shareholder Vote.
(a) The Trust shall have the right, in its sole discretion, by giving a notice in accordance with Section 8.3, to cause the Board of Directors, without regard to any subsequent determination made by the Board of Directors concerning the Special Meeting Shareholder Proposals, to call, give notice of and hold a special meeting of the holders of the Company's capital stock or, if so elected by the Trust in the notice from the Trust, direct that the Special Meeting Shareholder Proposals be considered at the next annual meeting of the holders of the Company's capital stock following such notice from the Trust, as applicable (provided, that the notice for a special meeting or annual meeting described in this clause (a) shall not be given until at least 60 days after the Company's 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders), with the holders of the Common Stock voting as a separate class in the case of the Common Stock Amendment Proposal and, if applicable, the holders of the Company's Serial Preferred Stock voting as a separate class in the case of the Serial Preferred Stock Amendment Proposal and, if applicable, the holders of the Series C Preferred Stock voting as a separate class in the case of the Series C Preferred Stock Amendment Proposal, to vote on, among other things, (i) the Common Stock Amendment Proposal, (ii) Serial Preferred Stock Amendment Proposal and (iii) the Series C Preferred Stock Amendment Proposal; provided, that a vote on the Serial Preferred Stock Amendment Proposal and the Series C Preferred Stock Amendment Proposal will only be effective if the Common Stock Amendment Proposal is not approved by the holders of the Common Stock. The Board of Directors shall recommend to the Company's shareholders that they vote in favor of the Special Meeting Shareholder Proposals. In the event that the approval of all or any portion of the Special Meeting Shareholder Proposals is not obtained at such special shareholders' meeting, the Trust shall have the right to direct the Company to include a proposal to approve (and the Board of Directors shall recommend approval of) all or such portion of the Special Meeting Shareholder Proposals as the Trust may designate at the next annual meeting of its shareholders and at each subsequent annual meeting of its shareholders until such approval is obtained.
The U.S. government apparently added "covenants" to its deal with AIG to cede some of its rights as the majority owner of the company, Frank said, adding in plain English: "It's time to act as the owner." Frank declined to elaborate further on the nature of the limits that were set "restraining [the government's] influence" over AIG, but he said he'd be taking the issue up further with the Obama administration later today.
max
['So. Groovy excitment.']
I realize the Douthat horse up and died a while back, but IOZ had a good bit that somehow the brain trust here never lit upon.
I hereby decree that the earlier D.C. meet-up will be on Saturday, March 28th, since it means will can be there and fedward can be there before the rest of us are so drunk we won't be able to recall what he looks like.
Solly's or Saint-Ex might work. Or isn't there a new-ish 80-gazillion beer place somewhere, maybe at Gallery Place?
I direct all potential attendees back to the main post for updates of these upcoming and exciting events.
421: Comity! Since it's Saturday rather than Friday, I can try to come early and snag a table. What time are we thinking of for agglomeration - 6? 7?
So where is 3.1? 3.2 is Solly's?
Given the choice between R.F.D. and Saint Ex, I'd probably pick Saint Ex. I used to love R.F.D. and defend it when people talked about the horrible service they got there, but then I got the same horrible service a few times in a row. Plus I hear that they've painted over the quotations in the bathrooms ("You're not drunk if you can lie on the ground without holding on" - Dean Martin, I think). Plus R.F.D. has the same problem as Brickskeller in that the menu claims a very large number of beers but on any given night they're out of most of them.
R.F.D. has the distinct advantage of being half a block from the Metro, though. Anybody else have an opinion?
RFD and Brickskeller are owned or run by the same group. I vote for St-Ex as well.
I can make it to the 3/28 thing on time, but I'll be late for the 4/3 shindig.
The groundswell for Saint-Ex is good enough for me for 3/28. I checked some reviews for RFD, and crappy service does seem to be the reigning theme.
What time are we thinking of for agglomeration - 6? 7?
I'm completely flexible on time.
Cafe St-Ex
www.saint-ex.com
1847 14th St NW (corner of 14th & T)
Attendees AFAIK:
fedward
eb
Minivet
Frostbite
togolosh
will
CharleyCarp?
possibly PGD
Sir Kraab
Cool.
If folks who are planning to come on the 28th want my cell number to avoid any wacky sitcom mix-ups, e-mail me at mypseud at gee mail.
Having learned of a long-time friend's death tonight, I suspect I will in fact be drinking quite heavily and thus be even more colorful than might otherwise be normal for me.
Sir Kraab: you'll have email from my pseud at that same email service once I'm sober enough to remember to send it. Or you could just email me instead in case I forget on account of tonight's sorrow-drowning.
It is on the 28th now after all? I didnt realize that. hmmmm I'll need to see what I can do.
434: Yeah, I posted it in a couple of places, but sorry to missed you.
