Blindone's Blog

I apologize for the length....

The Big Three Bail out..

I don't know about anyone else, but why do we have to put up the money to bail out the likes of GM. Aren't they the ones who closed factories here and put Americans out of work. I guess it sounds good to be able to build your cars in another country for less so you can sell it here for more, one problem you put the people who buy your cars out of work so now they can't afford to buy your cars, but you want us to bail you out. Why don't they go to the heads of the other countries they built plants in and ask them for the money?

Car7858 says:

Blame the people that bought foreign for starters. Then some can seek blame with the Big 3 by noting all of those profitable years before. Where did all of this money go? It didn't go to the workers because also in recent past years the autoworkers have given in, like COLA, health benefits, pensions, and hours/shifts cut. The prices and quality are also an issue and I do agree that all Americans shouldn't have to foot the bill just because the Big 3 didn't save/spend wisely.

Stooltime counseling says:

When I was visiting family in Nevada this past July, I observed approximately 8 out of 10 cars were either Toyota's, Honda's or some other foreign equivalent. It was astounding.
What about the North American Fair Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? How did this impact American jobs?
What about when times were good for the big 3, a time when profit sharing checks were distributed to the big 3 employees?
An ebb and flow?
What about the greedy speculators on Wall street causing oil prices to sky rocket at a time the big 3 were not tooled to mass produce smaller cars?
The economy was not a serious problem about 14 months ago. Now that the economy has made a turn for the worse, based on much of the above, not only has Senator McCain (probably) lost his chance to be president-elect, but the big 3 is now challenged to take another look at how they do business.
Good luck. There's a time for profit sharing, and there's a time for sacrifice. Guess what time it is now?

Zoot_suit says:

We won't need a bail out if we cut the wages of the line workers by 40%, eighty-six the unions, cut the pay of middle management by 65%, and cut the pay of the executives by 90%. That way the people who build them could afford to buy them.
Problem solved and no bail out.

Longshot says:

Yes lets cut their wages 40% and get rid of the unions so slavery can start up again.

Unbelievable
You need mental help desperately zoot.

This is a no win situation. Big three go down, 9,000,000 jobs will disappear. You think the country is in trouble now, wait until this happens. Getting sick of bailing out corporations though. I'm still wondering where the home owners bail outs are at. If we can bail out everyone else, hell lets stop with the evictions effective immediately. Until some resolution can be came to, to save peoples homes.

Cutting peoples wages 40% like Cuckoo wants, would only put more out of their homes. This Republican way of thinking like zoot-suit is why they were crushed tonight. Thank God

Tall says:

The cost of the Union wages make's up like 7% of the cost. The real problem here is the Company's seem to think they don't have to keep up with the market. When you buy a steak, you buy the best one you can afford or do you buy the grisly one your friend raised? The Big Three have to quit crying and improve the product. Rather then spending their time making it impossible for a back yard mechanic to work on them, why not spend the time making it last longer and run cheaper.

Mrsray says:

I agree. Bailing them out certainly won't help Americans and bring back jobs! Go get the money from MEXICO! I do agree that union workers were over paid, however, don't discount the wages of the white collar force or the big dogs sucking out their big bonuses! If America were working and when we were, we put our money back into the very companies we worked for . Now no=body's working. HELLO, anyone out there get it yet? HOW MANY MEXICANS ARE BUYING NEW CARS????

Blindone says!

While most of you have a very small hint of correctness to your posts; you all are clueless!

Longshot YOU are the very Last one to be shooting arrows at ANYONE!  Of the two (or was that three?) posts of yours that I read this morning you used the word slave in both. I have read a great many of your sick twisted and politically incorrect posts, you are the one who 1) needs counseling, or 2) to crawl back under the rock that you squished out from under. You are a very sick individual.

Get off the slave thingy and get into the 21st century.

I will admit however, that your comments :

“This is a no win situation. Big three go down, 9,000,000 jobs will disappear. You think the country is in trouble now, wait until this happens. Getting sick of bailing out corporations though. I'm still wondering where the homeowners bail outs are at. If we can bail out everyone else, hell lets stop with the evictions effective immediately. Until some resolution can be came to, to save peoples homes.

Cutting peoples wages 40% like Cuckoo wants, would only put more out of their homes. This Republican way of thinking like zoot-suit is why they were crushed tonight. Thank God”

 

You are correct if the bail out doesn’t go through , or some kind of package agreed  upon the job loss as a result of Chrysler folding will make the job loss WITH the bail out seem trivial. I liked your comment about the homeowners as well; you were on a roll until you had to go and soil it by adding in the line about the Republican way of thinking!

 

Tall my friend, I usually side with you on most things, but this time I cannot. As with most people (in this matter) you do not know what you are talking about. You only know what you’ve been fed by the media and you do not know the whole story. The TRUTH is that American automakers DO make cars as good and Better than the foreign companies do!  The problem is that you never hear or read about them. Did you know that NO ONE makes as many models of cars that get 30 MPG or better-EPA estimated mileage- than ANY other automaker? Did you know that GM offers more choices in the form of Hybrids than ANY other automaker? Try looking up the stats on the Escalade Hybrid; 20 MPG in the city!

            “The hybrid will be a two-mode hybrid that supplements the 6.0 liter v-8 power engine with power from two electric motors. When the car is running at lower speeds it can run on battery power only, the engine only, or a combination of both. At increased speeds, another operating mode engages the electric motors and the cylinder deactivation system which produces a more efficient system of operations. The benefit of this system will be seen in decreased harmful emissions, and increased fuel economy. In appearance the vehicle will look similar to the standard Escalade, with the exception of a few changes to the front bumper and grille. The hybrid is expected to go on sale in April of 2008.” (taken from GM’s Cadillac website)

Your comments about lasting longer and running cheaper…..what’s wrong with 200, 000 miles? It used to be that after 100,000 the car was junk, now you’re able to run twice that and then some? That’s quite an improvement in my book. Your comment about not being able to work on them in your back yard was a hollow one at best. NO one builds cars that way any more; so don’t go there. Besides I’m willing to bet that 95% of the people who read this can’t or don’t change their own oil! Bet that the same percentage can’t or know how to change their own tires!  Change their own u-joint? HA!  I’ll leave it at that.

 

Car makes some very good points as well, however even he falls short. Yes those who purchased foreign cars didn’t help the American auto industry. But they don’t carry the whole blame. And while not all of the profit may not have gone to help fund the operating costs, a big chuck of it did. Research and development of new products and support of those new product launches doesn’t come cheap. However here’s were we disagree; yes “all of those profits did not go into the pockets of the workers” Those workers make plenty of money and with all of the overtime pay that they get most of them are making six figures or darn close to it; so I don’t feel too bad about them. Additionally they deserve to have to pay more out of their pockets for the goods and services that the companies provide. Why should they get a free ride when the salaried workers do not? The salaried side of the house has NOT been getting cola since 1985, and on the average we have had to pay more for our health care benefits than our “union brothers”. The union boys and girls have always gotten a solid pat on the back for signing the agreement for a new contract; in the form of gifts and bonus checks. That’s a bunch of hooey.

“The prices and quality are also an issue and I do agree that all Americans shouldn't have to foot the bill just because the Big 3 didn't save/spend wisely.’

Price and quality I won’t go over again…..”Just because the Big Three didn’t save / spend wisely”?!  Where in green acres did you come up with this one? Please, I don’t even know how to address this one, so I won’t.

 

Stooltime; you got the closest!

Nafta has a lot to do with the fall of American businesses. However it is not entirely a bad thing either, IF everyone else played fairly, which they don’t.  The biggest problem that we face isn’t the outsourcing of jobs to other countries; it’s the unfair trade between us and the other countries. It is the fact that our elected in congress (NOT the President) who have refused to step in and enforce fair trade that has more to do with the fall of American jobs. Some of the jobs that have gone overseas or across the border were done so because some countries demand that in order to sell our products there a certain percentage of that product be manufactured there by their own people! And they charge huge tariffs on our exported goods in their countries; we do not.

Yes some jobs went to Mexico because of costs here in the states. It was done because our competitors do not have the support costs that we Americans have placed on our own businesses.  Everyone wants the companies that they work for to provide them with all kinds of benefits, benefits that cost big bucks: who is supposed to pay for those benefits? The cost has to come from somewhere and go somewhere else- your pocket.

Another point that I get sick of hearing: ok, we’ll buy a Toyota because it’s built here in the US!  All that I can say is you’re a fool!  That Toyota was assembled here, not manufactured. All of its components were made overseas, shipped here and assembled in Tennessee. Yeah but they hired American workers to build them! So they get a small atta boy for doing a small part. All of the profits from that employment went back to China!

Greedy speculators, I am in total agreement with you there, but until someone steps up and changes things it will be business as usual.

 And please do ask me to comment on the whole “gas guzzler thing”, this will turn into a book!  All that I will say to that is have fun trying to carry home 13 sheets of drywall in your Prius!

 

 Zoot, you’re kidding right?! You really don’t mean this?!  Good joke, clown! Hint , this wasn’t funny…….

 

And just because I don’t want you to feel left out….mrsray……..get a life! You have no clue as to what you are talking about as far as the “over paid” white collar workers.  Yes I make a good wage working for GM, however, my pay has NOT kept up with the increased cost of living, and my benefits have steadily been cut, and my co-pays have been steadily been going up as well. Are there some “fat cats”? I believe so, but there have always been “fat cats” in big business. Eliminating them won’t change a thing. We need to change the way that business is done more so than how much they are getting paid. Your Mexican comments have a point but not in this arena, that is a whole different issue. The truth of the matter is that the perception is that most Mexicans buy what they want to and most of them buy used American cars!

DaQueen......

And before you go off on me, “Blindone” doesn’t mean that I’m blind, for in truth a blind man sees far more than we who can see do. Nor does the Pumpkin head refer to anything in particular; I just thought that it was cute.

Here’s a news flash for you, because something tells me that after reading this, if you do, that you’re going to fire back with all kinds of garbage. So allow me to dispel some of them before you waste my time.

I’m married, 52 and have four great kids, all four are believers but only three practice that belief. However that being said don’t ever try and cross the non practicing child; you would not like the out come: she can stand on her own two feet.

I do carry a burden of being prejudice; I am the product of the time that I grew up. I do not believe in being politically correct; it’s a waste of time and energy. What I am getting at is simply this; I know more white trash than I do black trash: trash is trash.

I do not condone homosexuality in any form; it is my position that it is wrong period. However, I do not hate those that profess an alternative choice: As long as they don’t try to rub my nose in it I’m ok. That includes open and public displays intended to promote their choice. Keep it to your selves I don’t want to be exposed to it. I know it exists, and that is good enough for me. You know it’s kinda like the thought of your parents having sex……………you know that it happens but it’s a private matter. I don’t need to march down main street shouting that I prefer women and I’m damn proud of it! Besides the wife would probably kill me, and I’d get arrested.

No am not professing to be a perfect person, not by a long shot; however I do not go around spewing the same kind of poison that you are. I am not trying to force my belief on others and getting them to conform to my choices. I drink occasionally, I swear too much, and yes even ogle women. I like to party, and poke fun at people too; especially those that annoy me. Does that make me a bad person, nope! Just human; with flaws. And I know that despite my flaws, others will not get hurt or offended.

You on the other hand are offensive, rude and mean spirited. You are one dangerous individual; you are the type of individual that I have little love for because you are the type that is always trying to control others with your beliefs. You are really no better than the very folks that you’re trying to “rid the world of”. The sad part is that while you may have good intentions, your delivery is all wrong and the result is less than acceptable.

 

You say accuse Charles and Fox of promoting homosexuality; by having Charles do his job?!? How freaking ridiculous is that? Come on fess up, you just have an ax to swing.

 

I can’t believe that I’m saying this..(sorta)

 

Does this look familiar? It should, you wrote it a month ago; and now you’re back spewing the same trash.

Why is Charles Pugh so freely allowed around our children?

Sep 02, 2008 | 12:01 PM PST

Category: News

Report This Post

Everyone knows about Charles Pugh why is he constantly allowed to be around our children?  I think parents should be aware when he is around children.  I have a right as a parent to know what my child is subjected too. I try hard to screen t.v, phone calls and internet access.  I'm not judging him, I could care less.  When it comes to our children parents should be aware. Not everyone condones his lifestyle.  I took 8 children to Elias Brothers for a  fundraiser where Charles Pugh attended. I was not aware he was there serving  food.  I left our donation and left.  When we returned to the school I contacted parents to let them know it was not my place to subject their children to that atmosphere.  Some people DO NOT CONDONE homosexuality.  Last year I worked in a booth for the African Festival with my kids.  Charles Pugh came to the booth with his partner.  My kids recognized him and asked him for an autograph while holding his partners hands.  As far as my son was concerned he didn't want the autograph, and seemed disappointed.  I'm just saying not everyone understands that lifestyle.  Homosexuality is being thrusted in our society, and some parents need to talk their children before they get the wrong impression.  Some parents were upset that they were not informed of his presence.  Fathers have a very strong feeling about here sons being subject to homosexual men.  Not saying Charles Pugh would do anything to children. I'm sure he loves kids.  The point is their our kids and we have the right  to know who, what, when and where with our kids.  I personally don't want any homosexual serving my children food. Call me what you want, but I still think your lifestyle is private, but when you flaunt it in public that's when I can speak my opinion.

 

What is this person’s problem?! I didn’t know that Charles was Gay…….and so what if he is? Does that make him unapproachable? Does that make him someone to scorn? Does his choice of partners make him someone to shield your kids from? NO to all of the above!

You claim not to be in judgment of Charles; you’re a hypocrite! And a stupid one at that!

I do not support that Homosexual lifestyle, however your comments make me mad. You say that you are not judging folks, but you don’t want them serving you food? HUH? What do the two items got to do with one another? Nothing! Quit being so narrow minded. No one is asking you to give up your values (such that they are), and yes you do have the right AND the responsibility to properly educate your children: as long as you do not poison their minds with your overly protective and skewed views.

I have no problem with Charles, and would have no problem having him serve me a meal or even sharing a dinner with him. I draw the line on the politics of homosexuality; the disagreement of whether it’s right or wrong. We are each given the right to choose how we wish to live our lives and at some point in time we will all know the reality of that choice. Until then we are supposed to live as members of the same family.

What really gets my goat is the fact that you try to come off so holier than thou and attempt to make your opinion sound as harmless as you think it is. YOU do accuse Charles of being a threat to children, all children (not just yours). Throughout your whole article you make it sound as if it was Charles whole intent to try and sway children “to the dark side”.

Get real. You owe Charles and many others an apology for your poor behavior and attitude.

 

Ok Ms.. “I so perfect”. You claim that you work so hard at screening what your babies watch on T.V., look at on the internet, and phone calls (?). But what kinds of magazines do you have lying around the house, in your bathroom?  What kinds of books do you read? What kind of music do you listen to?

What am I getting at? What I’m asking is just how squeaky clean are you? Have you got any Cosmo’s sitting by the bed? Or how about that romance novel that you may have been reading? When was the last time that you blasted Aerosmith, Led Zeplin or (gasp) AC/DC?

“That’s not the same thing, you say!” Oh YES it is! It’s just a different type of poison. You’ll go to hell just as quickly for any of that as you would for being Homosexual.

(alright folks I am not opening up a can of worms here, just using the example put forth).

 You say that you are a concerned Parent, but I contend that you really haven’t got a clue what it means to be a concerned parent or a good parent for that matter. Insulting you am I, on the contrary, I am convicting you of your own bias. How to put this? You’re a sexual racist! You are doing the very same thing that our parents did with the blacks. Yeah they may (or may not) have made racial comments when you were around but they displayed them through their actions and behaviors. SO how did you learn them? By your parents example. THE VERY SAME WAY THAT YOU ARE TEACHING YOUR CHILDREN TO HATE PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT LIFE STYLES THAN YOUR OWN. You are poisoning your own children with your twisted, sick sexual politics. And if you read, listen to or profess anything other than anything Biblically directed or influenced, you are a hypocrite. Plain and simple. By your own actions anything less than Biblically correct thinking is wrong!

Truth of the matter is you’re right; but being Biblically correct means knowing and practicing all facets of The Word; no those that you choose. The Bible tells us to love the person, but hate the sin. You profess just simply hating the person period.

I seriously doubt that Charles is trying to sway anyone over to “the dark side”, and as such I have no problem with him serving food, meeting with or talking to any youngster. He IS NOT a pedophile; that I would have an issue with. And that I believe is the stance that Fox is taking.

Bottom line: Fox News and Charles are not your problem(s), you are. You need to get your head straighten out and figure out just which side of the fence you really ought to be worried about, then set about fixing those issues. Quit worrying so damn much about what Charles is doing and focus more on what you are doing and how best to educate your children. There is NOTHING wrong with our children being made aware of the existence of homosexuality, it exists period. What is important is how they deal with that information and how they are educated as to how it affects their lives. If you desire them to be religious all that you can do is lead them to the fountain; but you cannot make them drink. They will if and when they are ready to. True religion is a personal commitment not something that is forced upon you.

Here’s a question for you to ponder in closing………What would you do if one day one of your babies came home with that news? “I am gay?”

 

PS: here’s something else to ponder (about yourself) what kind of image does your screen name portray? “DaQueen”?  Is it a good image? Or otherwise? Be honest!

If you’re a guy…well enough said. A gal, I’m thinking BLEEP is more applicable.

 To   Keiser26100's  &  boe57's Blog

 

You’re both a couple putz! Keiser, How dare you attack “The White Collar Workers”  with your lame challenge of working long hours in the same environment that you do.  It goes both ways fool! I’ve worked both sides of that fence and each has its own hardships. Your argument that white collar workers couldn’t hack it in your shoes has no bearing on the issue that you are trying to point out. Your being a “blue collar” worker does not make you any better than anyone else; the same go for the office folks. We each have different skill sets, and truth be known a lot of white collar workers got their start on the floor; thus making your point even less effective.

As for you argument about the management being responsible for all of your woes; you obviously got a limited understanding of the economics of the situation. For years both the union and management were in “bed” with each other; allowing the “status quo” to become  what it currently stands.

 

Truth is most autoworkers are over paid for what they are doing. The cost of doing business is dictating (to management) where their operating costs should be. THAT is what management is basing their figures on; not necessarily how much the CEO is being paid.

Both you and boe57 feel that it would be far better for the white collar workers to take the cut in pay instead of you poor abused factory rats. Wake up and smell the coffee sons….Who do you think has been taking the brunt of the pay cuts for the past 25 years?!? I can guarantee that it hasn’t been the factory folks! The factory folks still get a cost of living adjustment – quarterly! Up until recently you did not have to a co-pay for your medical expenses, you get a bonus when you sign the contract (agreement), you get (or used to) cash vouchers to use at the company store toward the purchase of work clothes. PLUS you get paid for all of the overtime that you work; a lot of salaried folks do not. (Unless you work on the floor)

And what REALLY makes me mad is your reference to management people as being terrorists. You dope smoking, beer swilling crack head! Get your head outta your rearend and take a breath. They aren’t ruining the country, yes there are greedy folks out there that are; but they are your management people, that is a fact. The real dirty ones are those cooking the financial books: the financial folks. Banks and lending institutions are the big players in that realm.

You complain about the statement made by the CEO; saying that if you don’t come back to the table with your tail between your legs and pony up to the offer, he’ll pack up his company and move to greener pastures. Just how did you expect him to respond to your situation?

 

To: Longshot………..

 

Ok, someone had a little too much Johnny Walker for breakfast this morning…………..

“My friend” (and I use that term loosely) you really need to get a grip. First of all your display of mental thought patterns went out with the dinosaurs. This is NOT and issue of “Us against Them”, it’s an issue on a couple fronts. One being an economic front, AA says that it cannot continue to operate at a level that exceeds its competition  (wages) and expect to turn a profit. The union fights back saying that they can’t afford a 55% pay cut; an understandable argument.

This is where AA screwed up, they took their plan of attack from the example that GM and others used. But instead of following it to the letter, they twisted it into an insane idea. And no wonder people are ticked off; GM’s contract uses a lower pay scale for new hires, everyone else is status quo.

The second problem here is with the historical data; the hourly folks (formerly GM) are paid way too much: a situation that both the union and management agreed to. They created this pay monster and now they have to figure out a way to live with it in today’s market. Only problem is, is the fact that the union officials as well as the rank and file won’t stand for any kind of pay cut. However that exactly what needs to happen; although not to the extreme that the management at AA claims it needs. I think that unlike my “friend” here claims, there is a happy medium that could be struck by both sides, and they just need to find it.

 

Longshot, you have your transmission stuck in reverse and need to come back to reality.

 

This is not the 60’s and management is not out there to stick it to the rank and file. Your rant stinks of bias and venom against “the establishment”.  In light of the current economy and the competition between companies today, sacrifices need to be made by both sides. It is not all one sided as you claim.

What’s wrong with AA calling back the laid off workers? They are just trying to keep the flow of goods and services running to their customers. Now admittedly I do not understand the logic of this attempt because I do not understand how AA could do this-those workers on layoff are still union workers, do they really think that they would cross the picket lines? I don’t. I also do not understand how AA could threaten those same workers with termination if they don’t come back….. Why not terminate the striking workers first? Then they could offer those vacant positions to the laid off workers: IF then the laid off folks refuse to comply: terminate them as well.

Enough of this nonsense; here’s the bottom line kids……………..and yes I’m talking to all of you narrow minded knuckle draggers (geez and I thought that I was the only one) IF some kind of agreement IS NOT reached, all of your ranting and screaming “OFF WITH THEIR HEADS” will be just that: hot air. AA will close its doors, shut off it lights, and go somewhere else with their business. And all of you knuckle dragging union boys will have two choices, (1) go ask your Union Representatives for jobs, (yeah right) , and (2) unemployment. That’s it no more no less.

So go ahead and make all of those damn near communistic comments and damn the torpedoes speeches, but in the end it’s all about how badly you want to keep your jobs. Period.

Prove me wrong. Look at history my proof is written there. If I need to spell it out for you, just look no further than the former GM truck plant at Willowrun.

The next few “pages" came directly out of my journal; and as you can see from the date it’s been almost a year since I penned them. I am posting these I response to JoquanDaHooligan's Blog . Dude you are wrong, yes you have a right to say what you did. But the bottom line has nothing to do with wearing baggy pants, it’s the fact that having your rear end hang out is offensive. That's the real issue: what's offensive.

The only thing that’s racial (your reference to the KKK) about the whole issue is your comments: “I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA. OF COURSE IT'S AMERIKKKA WITH A BIG FAT K.” “YOU SIR ARE THE TERRORIST FOR THIS ACT OF TREASON AGAINST MICHIGAN'S YOUTH.”  These comments were not necessary; pure hatred.

YOU need to get a life ! All you’re trying to do is stir things up just for the sake of arguing.

02/28/07 & 03/01/07

Those once so popular cartoons of “Calvin” peeing on stuff offend me: whether it was a Ford, Chevy or Chrysler symbol. The similar cartoon of the “Calvin” grabbing his crouch and flipping you off offends me. I’m offended by the cartoon that depicts a bare assed man pointing to his bum (with a lip print on it) (no explanation should be necessary) or how ‘bout the ever popular “how’s my drivin? Call 1-800…….” I’m offended by those narrow minded knuckle dragging rednecks who find it necessary to hang a pair of “dingle berries” off their trailer hitch (on their 4x4 trucks). It offends me to see you lazy ass kids out there walking all over God’s green earth with you pants hanging half off your rear ends! How freakin stupid can you be?!?!?!? You can’t walk two steps w/o your pants falling down around your ankles…………..that’s why you have to hold them up with one of your hands! DUH! Fashion statement you say? Ok, how about this for a fashion statement: “I’m too stupid/lazy to buy or use a belt!” That’s a statement alright. Do you really think that anyone in their right mind wants to see your underwear? For years (still even) people have made fun of “plumber’s butt cracks”. However no one finds it funny when you’re too dense to understand how to properly dress yourself. Actually I kind of take that back; I find it sad to think that the youth of today think that this is an acceptable way to dress. I will admit that maybe it’s just the complete opposite of the tight pants that we used to wear when I was young, but at least our cheeks weren’t hanging out in the breeze! ‘Course you couldn’t breathe or sit down, because your pants were to damn tight to! But hey no butt cheeks!

Side bar: what’s up with kids these days paying upwards of $50 (or more) for jeans that look old, faded and ripped ? Now granted they have the right idea (sorta), but our jeans didn’t look that way until we made them that way; by then they were old friends! When you first got them they were DARK blue and really stiff; it was only after countless washing, and trashing that they started to show their worthiness. The wear was kind of like a badge of honor. And if you did rip them out, you patched them! Some of my favorite jeans had more material in patching than denim! Guess kids today are too impatient to earn their faded jeans!?

It offends me to be abused by the sound of your “music”. But lets be honest, that ain’t music; all it is, is noise! And should be not be heard ½ mile away!

Another sidebar: Have you heard any of the “music” that our youth of day listen too? Yeah, yeah, yeah, I hear it already; “our parents used to complain about our music too.” Yeah, but (eww a yeah but!) this is different; all I hear is screaming. I will admit that occasionally I hear some decent cords in the background, but the vocals are all screaming. Who can understand it? How can you appreciate it? It’s all noise! Doesn’t sound anything like “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas, or “On Broadway” by Genesis: actually the closest comparison that I can think of would be “Inagadadavida” by Iron Butterfly; but at least you can understand what is being said! I guess AC/DC “All Night Long” isn’t too far off either, “Hell’s Bells” even.

My point is simply this; where are the police concerning these violations?

A few years back a young man was fined and had to serve jail time for cussing while canoeing. Yet it is not uncommon for anyone to be exposed to any of these other examples: and nothing is done to these folks! Now I ask, does this make any sense? NO!

There was a T shirt vendor in the mall this past Christmas who displayed several shirts of very poor taste, and some of the locals got upset about it: did any of these same complainers say any thing (ever) about the above examples: I doubt it very much. So what’s the difference? Offensive is offensive, you shouldn’t be wishy washy about it

June 13th, 2007

It’s about stinking time! If you’re a regular reader, you already know my feelings about this sort of thing!

Saggy Britches………….

The Associated Press reports that in Delcambre, La if your britches are sagging; you’ll be hauling out some major greenbacks and / or spending time in the hoosegow. About time is what I say. It ought to be something repeated all over this country. I don’t have a problem with “kids” expressing themselves through their cloths; that’s been done forever. But this trend of wearing your pants damn near around your knees is not only dumb, but just plain tasteless. I don’t’ want to be looking at your shorts.

And if nothing else how stinking dumb do you having to walk around with one hand tied to the waist band of your pants; because otherwise the fall down around your ankle?! Matter of fact I saw just that happen the other day at the local grocery store. Some dumb butt walked right out of his pants because (1) they were too big, and (2) he wasn’t wearing a belt. When he went to open the door his pants fell down around his ankles! Oh I guess that I should mention that he DID hike them up ever so slightly as he approached the door; only just enough so that the belt line was high enough for him to hang on to.

Can’t say as I have ever seen anyone “jewels or parts” as it is described in the article; but then again I don’t go around looking either. This whole mentality of wearing (?) (more like hanging) pants that are so dang baggy that you can’t keep them up is beyond me. Furthermore the idea of having to walk around using one hand to keep them up just smacks of stupidity.

I spied a young gal at the high school last night: as I was waiting to retrieve my son from

football practice; who was wearing sweat pants down around the lower part of her hips. This practice also made it possible to see that she was also wearing boxers as well. Guess it was the daego T shirt that topped of her look; that was the killing stroke. Not a bad looking gal (from what I could tell) but to me her whole appearance screamed BLEEP. Aka, someone who had no concern about appearance: or the image that she was projecting. Ok, I’m an old fashioned kind of guy; but I don’t find this attractive or darn I say it? Ladylike. The image that I get is “easy”; you older folks know what I’m talking about. SO I’m wondering is this the type of message that she really wants to project?

Opps I strayed, sorry.

I can remember wearing pants so tight (back in my HS days) that you’d get nose bleeds. You couldn’t hardly sit down for fear that you’d split out the rear end. Then we got smarter and started to wear pants that were more reasonable, but kids today have gone too far. I think that its time that the fashion statement changed; at least when we wore baggy pants we used a belt, or suspenders!

AS I have said before, its not the pants, its the fact that we can see your underwear. You feel the need to wear "Fat Alberts" knock yourself out. Just don't be broadcasting your Foot of the looms in my direction. You don't want to see a 51 year old walking around with his bum hanging out, well I don't want to see yours. The offense goes both ways.

First off, please understand that this is meant as a tongue in cheek sorta thing. However, I am seriously asking where did these things come from?

To Paczki, or not to Punchski? This is the question!

 

Just what the heck is a “Punchski”?  How do you get Punchski out of Paczki?  Where did they come from, and where do they go after today?

I am told that they are an old world Polish tradition on “fat Tuesday”, or for those of us in the know the day before Lent. But George, I was born in Flint and lived for several years in Chicago, married a good little Catholic Polish gal. My mother in law’s parents came from the old country, as did my mothers parents; my point? They never heard of punchski’s. Would seem that if anyone would have, it’d have been dear old Grandma Parnow(ski); she was always baking some kind of goodies, seems like a Punchski would have been right up her alley.

Here’s another way to look at it: what’s the difference between a Paczki, and a jelly filled donut? All a paczki is, is a jelly donut with an over abundance of filling, is it not? Well yes and no, I believe the die hards (and they will) would have you believe that the difference goes much deeper than that; if for no other reason than the fact that a Paczki is fried and a jelly is not. However, let us not forget, Tradition!  Tradition!  (aka Fiddler on the Roof)

A Paczki is steeped in the stuff known as TRADITION, and all things scared to the Catholic church.

“Let’s all gorge ourselves before we have to give everything up for Lent”  Ba Hum bug!  Letting it all hang out just before packing it all away for 46 days (prior to Easter) really doesn’t make any sense. It’s not like you’re really being serious about all of the ceremony anyway. Your just making the moves and hoping that everyone else believes your show.

But hey, it’s fat Tuesday…..who cares? Lets’ have sex! Er, I mean party!!! Yeah!

Hey did anyone see this one?

Colorado Springs legislator labels unmarried teen parents 'sluts'

 

COLORADO SPRINGS — A state lawmaker used a derogatory term Wednesday to describe unmarried teen parents as sexually promiscuous and complained that society condones premarital sex.

“In my parents’ day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are,” Colorado Springs Republican Rep. Larry Liston said during a GOP legislative caucus meeting in Denver. “There was at least a sense of shame.

“There’s no sense of shame today," Liston continued, according to the The Gazette of Colorado Springs. "Society condones it. ... I think it’s wrong. They’re sluts. And I don’t mean just the women. I mean the men, too.”

 

I’m willing to bet that this clown in a legislator’s suit was all hormones and paws when he was 16! Teen age sex isn’t anything new, and to go as far as name calling, this guy is a whole bunch shy of being honest. He needs to be called out on the carpet and be made to openly apologize to everyone for his self righteous behavior.

I am in no way condoning sexual activity by unmarried anybody but I will not go as far as name calling those who do participate in this kind of activity. That would be plain hypocritical.

"Society condones it. ... I think it’s wrong. They’re sluts. And I don’t mean just the women. I mean the men, too.”

Well it’s like this “Larry”, I don’t necessarily agree with your statement that society condones this type of behavior, as much as it does very little to dissuade it. AND I think that the promotion of it lies more in the hands of advertising than that of society.

Sluts?!? Strong words from a narrow minded Representative. You are talking about individuals who at that age still haven’t figured out the consequences of this behavior. They are running full tilt on hormones that they don’t understand. Shoot I know some adults who still haven’t figured that part out. That doesn’t make those kids “sluts” as you are so quick to point out; it makes them human. Tell you what, when you have spent some quiet time by yourself and reflected back to when you were 16 and can prove beyond any doubt that you NEVER pawed, kissed or snuggled with a gal when you were 16 then you can come out and make statements like that. Otherwise Shut up. You do not have the experience, or authority to be making judgment calls like this, YOU OUGHT TO KEEP YOUR YAP SHUT.
What do you think?

Buyer beware!

Had this old saying thrown in my face last night………….Rick’s Christmas present arrived yesterday; from Hong Kong. If I had known then what I now know, I would NOT have made this purchase. However, I followed my heart and Rick’s information instead of digging a bit deeper into the website to find out the nitty gritty about this vendor. The package arrived all wrapped in unassuming green shipping paper; with no external markings as to place of origin. Hmmmmmmmmmm, the packing slip said that this package contained a TOY with no commercial value, but was valued at $30; a slight bit less than the $160 that I paid……..hmmmmm twice. (can you see this one coming?) I opened the wrap and found that the original package had been damaged and taped back together; upon further investigation I assumed that the reason that the package had been damaged was because it was not designed to hold the extra items that I’d ordered with the first item. (that makes 3 hmm’s) Ok now I’m less than cheerful, and closer to P.O.’d. Upon further (yet) inspection I realized that there is no battery charger included; even thought he packaging says that it is……..NOW I am mad. I dig out the packing slip to look for a phone number to give these clowns a call. Well that isn’t gonna happen, because I am not calling long distance to Hong Kong. HUH? Yeah, there is no State side rep for this fly by night operation. Great my only available option is to email these folks and inform them of my displeasure.

I did get a response this morning; it said that the reason that here wasn’t a charger include was because they only had the EU charger, but would see if they could find the 110volt one for it…………………..I’m still smokn! They can’t find the US charger?!?! Anyone with half a brain knows that most (not all) Air soft guns are made in China, Etc. AND they come with US chargers.

I’m not done yet………..I decide to go back to their website, where I find under the heading “terms and Policies”, the words “NO WARRENTY”. What did I get myself into?!?! Then I start to think about all of the little details of this whole event:

• The plain green wrapper with no indication of place of origin.
• The statement on the packing slip about no commercial value.
• The declared value @$30 US.
• No Stateside representation.
• The statement about the removal of any trade marks being US customs policy.
• The Orange tape (removable). Not painted or molded in orange.
• The funny made in China sticker that was half removed from the forestock of the gun.

All of which makes me very suspicious of the “legality” of the sale of this “toy” in the US, and the reputation of the company in general.

Bottom line here is that I can probably get around the charger issue, then the question of functionality comes into play.

If I can get the battery charged and installed, will the gun operate? And I suppose the next question would be for how long?! Truthfully I am not feeling too confident at the moment. If the whole thing blows up in my face, it pretty much looks like I am had by a bunch of no good nicks. Buyer beware….

University Requires Students Carry GPS Cellphones...

 

Apparently they can not do a better job of controlling crime on the campus, or it’s out of control, so they make it a requirement that each and every student carry a cell phone with GPS. That way while they may not be able to keep you from being raped or mugged, at least they can find you after the fact…………………..great planning folks!

And yet another one for the This is stupid file!

 

 BOSTON -- Lawmakers on Beacon Hill are set to consider a proposed ban on spanking children in the commonwealth.

If this proposal does become law and parents are caught hitting their children who are under the age of 18, they could be charged with abuse or neglect.

 

I’d like to know just how they really plan on enforcing this one? Dr. Spock would be proud of you morons!  Abuse I can almost understand, but how is smacking your kid for misbehavior neglectful?  Great thinking too, make it against the law to discipline your own child. Get throw in the pokey and let someone else do it for you !  (they call that day care don’t hey?)

“For months now we have heard the news about the products from China. Hellooooo. Anyone out there?

I think American shoppers have got to be some of the dumbest, most naive, most uneducated, most uncaring, most greedy, most materialistic.

When are you going to start reading labels? When are you going to actually 'look-up' and become concerned for your babies?”

Damn why don’t you just drop the other shoe and call everyone an idiot? Name calling isn’t going to get you anywhere! This attack on the intelligence of the American shopper kind of back fires on this individual, because I seriously doubt that they do not buy anything that is manufactured outside of the country. There are damn few things outside of food products that are made in the US today. And don’t try throwing cars at me, because they contain products that have been outsourced to foreign interests. And those like Honda, Toyota and the like that are built in the US, are not manufactured in the US; they are only assembled here: it’s no the same thing.

Besides it really isn’t a question of consumer intelligence, in as much as it’s the marketing people’s chase after the almighty profit. IF THEY weren’t so profit driven, then maybe they wouldn’t be so apt to go over seas to buy merchandise to stock their shelves.

P.S. go stuff a huge lump of dog poop in your Christmas stocking, because you deserve it! Plus I do not appreciate being called an idiot.

Actually, it’s more basic than what you have perceived it to be; the average individual regardless of who they are assumes that most other people would hold their products to the same standards of quality that they do. However, the sad truth of the matter is they other folks (i.e. Chinese manufacturer’s) do not. The labor ethic and manufacturing processes are much different over seas than they are here in America. In most cases this is partly the reason why things cost more to manufacture here in the US; it’s not JUST the labor issues that we’re all lead to believe.

So consequently when your average “Joe” goes shopping, instead of buying a brand name (which by the way doesn’t guarantee quality) he goes for the same product at the lower cost. Who can blame him? Especially in the market today with the economy taking the nose dive that it is.

For what ever reason foreign manufacturers are not held to the same standard they we are and for whatever reason, their governments do not inspect their exports as we would prior to shipping them to other countries. We have seen time and again how good s and services from foreign interests are getting out of the country of origin without being properly inspected for health and safety reasons. So who’s to blame? Certainly not the consumer and we cannot expect our customs people top become quality inspectors for everything that we import. That just isn’t going to happen.

Unlike you who blame the lack of intelligence on the consumer’s parts for the safety issues with foreign made products, I really do not see an easy cut and dried solution to this problem. Simply saying that we will not purchase foreign made goods isn’t going to work. However that is why the globalization of companies can be a good thing; maybe then a more homogeneous method of quality control standard scan be formed and put to use. Other wise, the best solution is consumer awareness and buyer beware.

Have you seen the report in the news recently about the HS kids in Belleville who were expelled because of pictures that they posted on MySpace?

Unless there were details that were not released to the public; no threats to the school were made or inferred; yet the superintendent felt that it was necessary to take action against he students: because the schools handbook says that he can. HUH?! The pictures were taken off campus, not posted using school property and yet the super felt that he had the jurisdiction and authority to take action against these students.

The guns, "drugs' and money were assumed to be real (by the super). Because the handbook says that even if the students are caught with a "toy" gun resembling the real thing they can be expelled.

My take on this rule, is that if they are caught in the possession while on campus. Not in the private sector. As reported, this event did not occur on campus and as far as I’m concerned outside of any “authority” that the super has. In my opinion this is what I would call being a vigilante. And that is wrong.

Here’s the other side to this point: what would be the difference if my son showed similar pictures of he and his friends having an Air soft fight? Would they fall under the same vigilante justice? I can guarantee that he and his friends pose an awesome sight when they are all dressed up for battle. They take their fights quite seriously and enjoy a safe and eventful time. (of course I get stuck with plastic bb’s all over my yard)

You can bet that if such an event were to cross my path: them getting expelled for being in possession of something resembling a gun; that this school system would be encountering one very rabid father.

I wholly understand the need for vigilance when it comes to the threat of gun violence in the school arena (and outside of that for that matter). But lets get focused here, a school superintendent does not have the authority to make law based judgment calls outside of the school system. That is why we have police and a proper justice system.

If a threat was made against the school then fine, otherwise the police should shoulder the responsibility of handling the investigation and prosecution; not the school system.

What do you think?

Ok ,here's a point to ponder. It's something that I wrote about in my journal a ways back and has come back to haunt me.

SO here's my question to you: Is it just me or is the term and or definition of what porn is a two way street? Or is it all  one sided?

“Books and Magazines” (and not necessarily in that order)

When was the last time you browsed the magazine rack at the store? Next time that you do notice how many of the car magazines have women posing on them. Just what the hell do they have to do with the performance of the car? Not a damn thing; but they’re still there. Do I read those magazines? No actually I do not mainly because they deal with low riders and rice burners; neither of which hold any interest for me. The argument comes forth, but beautiful women and cars go together, and it’s been that way for years. I can’t argue that, I suppose; but that doesn’t make it right. You could always compromise, go ahead and put the women in there, but have them dressed in something other than a thong and a bra. (aka swim suit)

Then there are books. Most (not all) books written and targeted toward men, have some sort of sex and/or violence in them, and that’s why they’re men’s books. That’s why men read them, for the “action” content. I can read, say a Star Wars novel, there won’t be any sex and not any real graphic violence, but there’ll be action. That works for me. Or I can read a Richard Marcinko book and get all the gritty shoot ‘em up rompin’ stompin action that I can handle. (and loving it!)  My point is that unless I’m reading blank pages, (cause even the Bible has sex and violence), there’s no avoiding it. It really boils down to what and how much is acceptable.

But now that I think about it, I remember another issue that I have with the topic of books.

 

 

Now books written for “men” are called porno, smut, “ADULT “: however books written for women are called “romance novels”. 

 

Now re-read that last statement. Does that make any sense to you?!?!? Basically the same damn content and yet they are classified in two different ways. AND society sees them differently as well.  Women’s “Romance” novels are ok, shoot you can buy them darn near anywhere: and that’s ok. But place some “men’s” Romance novel next to it and look out!  Now granted to do that you’d have to clean up the title and cover a bit, but not the content.

Ok I’ll grant you that the typical men’s “romance” novel is a bit more graphic, but I’ve read a few of those women’s books; they don’t leave a whole lot to the imagination either.

SO why is it that the women’s books are ok and the men’s not? Having sex is having sex regardless how, or who it is written for.  AND most of those women’s books are about the same adulterous, cheating, shameless hussies that the men’s books are written about. So what’s the difference? 

 

Now I bet that got some of you turned up!?  I couldn’t resist the temptation to put that in.  But my question still stands: what is it about the women’s books that make them so much better than the men’s? If the answer is social pressure (and I suspect that it is), then that’s just plain wrong; because we are using a double standard to “judge a book by its content”.  Unacceptable is unacceptable, and who the content is written for doesn’t change that.

Women’s Magazines……………..

There are a zillion different kinds of magazines out there, and I’m not going to attack all of them; matter of fact I’ll barely scratch the surface. But I have to throw this one out there too; especially since I just filled your head with my feelings about books: male vs. female.

I touched briefly on the subject of car magazines, but like books there’s the whole genre of women’s magazines. And they aren’t hard to spot; every cotton pickin’ cash register has them piled all around them.  And this one includes magazines written for…..TEENAGERS ! Yikes !!!!

 

Piles and piles of magazines that come out weekly, monthly with smiling beauties (with their boobs have exposed) plastered all over the cover. With articles on everything from the latest way to drive your lover into a sexual frenzy, or how to tell if he’s really being true to you (or not), to the latest fall fashions, and everything in between.

Now if you take out the nude pictures from a typical Playboy, there isn’t much difference between the two, is there? That’s my point, the only real difference is the pictures and if they weren’t there, why would anyone have a problem?  I would and should, because the rest of the magazine is all geared toward sex in some form or fashion. And yet this is acceptable in the public’s eye. 

I mentioned teenagers, take a good look at the typical Seventeen magazine: a whole lot of articles are written with the intention of telling young gals, just what it takes to “bag” a guy. How to get “the look” just right. What’s hot (sexy) at the beach this summer, the latest and greatest make-up, and the world’s best advice on dating. Basically they (the magazines) are telling our teenage daughters what’s “hot” and what’s not. My question is what makes them the “experts”? Who are they to be telling my girls what’s right and wrong? DO you get my point? And I’ll take it one step further; why aren’t there any such magazines for teenage boys? Because that would be wrong………………prolly.

Now enter the world of the “new men’s magazines”……………they’re right on par with the Cosmo’s, and Glamour magazines. And it seems that just in the last couple of years there have been a dozen or so titles popping up. You won’t see fully naked women, but close and that makes them ok for the magazine racks. Again, as with the book issue, wrong is wrong; sugar coating it or dressing it up differently doesn’t change it one bit.

Do you understand the bias toward men’s reading: although not wholly unwarranted, it’s still slanted unfairly. Am I wrong here? Have I missed some important piece of the pie?  All things being equal; removing the obvious nudie pictures, there isn’t a lot of difference between the two: other than the fact that society sees men’s magazine as unholy trash to be hated and reviled. Don’t get me wrong, I am not necessarily supporting that kind of reading: my point being, as I have said the same stuff is sold to women and it’s ok. NO it’s not!!!  So why doesn’t anyone else see this? Why aren’t the same people who make all the noise about too much sex on TV and such making a peep about this side of the issue?

Geez, Have I beat this horse enough?!? I’m not sure; I may have to come back to it again: when I think of something else to add.

This is a tip that was sent to me by a fellow Christian friend; So I thought that I would pass it alon g to everyone here:

To All,

 

This is about the new children's movie 'Golden Compass' which is about to be released starring Nicole Kidman. The movie is from a trilogy of books written by an atheist with the intent of persuading young children into believing in his anti-religious views. I understand that in the end of the trilogy, the children kill God and everyone can then do as they please.

 

I know of no other film or books more worthy of boycotting. I have included the Snopes site address so you can read where they verify it as the truth.

 

I thought you might find the following article from snopes.com

interesting:

http://snopes.com/politics/religion/compass.as
p

Hey y’all!

 

I heard about the most recent shoot spree at yet another high school and I must admit that it must have been laying heavy on my mind; because I think that I figured out what’s going on. The scary part is that I can oh so well identify with the actions of these kids: now that’s an eye opener!

Huh, what?!? Yeah I understand, or have figured it out. Ok so maybe I’m slow or just maybe I’ve stumbled on to some thing that some of you may not have considered. Either way it kind of scared me.

Ok so what am I talking about? It all starts with an innocent prank, a joke on a friend or someone that you know. Only thing is, is that it gets out of hand and now more people have joined in on the “fun”. To you and everyone else this is just poking fun at some poor soul: “it’s just a joke”, “we didn’t mean anything by it”. Yeah well kids allow me to clue you in on the truth; contrary to popular believe that stick and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me logic: that’s not true. Yeah physically that may hold true, however the damage done mentally can be over whelming. Unless you are the one who exposed to daily teasing, being picked on etc, you have no idea the pain and suffering that a person goes thru because of your jokes.

And just like a cornered animal, that person will get to a point where they cannot deal with your cruel insensitivity any longer. Now they just want an out. And that can be any number of destructive moves: they can become extremely anti social and with drawn, or they could become abusive to themselves (why not no one else loves me) or something else (like animals), they could decide that the best way to “deal” with the problem is to simply make it go away.

Do you see where I am going with this? Making it go away could be killing those who are the antagonists, get rid of them and the problem stops; only it doesn’t solve the problem completely. You see now I have to deal with the responsibility of my actions; that has created a whole new set of disastrous issues. Ok, so how can I make them go away; I know I’ll kill myself!  Not the ideal solution, but certainly an option. Because while it doesn’t cure the complication, at least I won’t have to clean up my mess And the ones who were making sport of me won’t be harming anyone else anymore.

Point is, is that I just justified their actions by explaining to you how they got to that point. So nice theory you say; how do I figure that this is a viable path? What do I possess that allows me to come to these conclusions?

Simple my friends; I’m a victim. I’m 51 years old and for as long as I can remember I have been teased, picked on and made fun of. I currently work with a 20 something kid who has taken it upon himself to bully me! If he were one of my own, I’d have laid his rear end out. And done it repeatedly if that’s what it took to get it thru his head that he cannot talk to his father like that: either that or he can leave the house. My point being that someone who is 30 odd years my junior has got no business treating me (or anyone else for that matter) with disrespect. I didn’t do it to my Dad; he did do it to his etc. Respecting your elders. Novel concept? New idea? No just one that most kids don’t bother with these days.

And honestly to a point I understand the rebellion. “Stupid adults think they know everything, they treat us like we’re the stupid ones” Sound familiar? I bet it does, and I’d be lying if I said that I never thought those things myself. BUT, I’ve grown up and realize just how wrong I was. Those stupid adults really did know what they were talking about after all. Wow !

So what does all of this got to do with the High School kids killing each other and etc? The answer, everything. The root cause is the harassment that goes on everyday in the hallways, and classrooms. The teasing that occurs out on the playground, the looks, and sneers. It’s all got to stop. We have to come to some understanding that this kind of terrorism cannot be tolerated. Yeah I hear you, “but kids will be kids”. And you are exactly correct, however, where did they learn that behavior? YOU! As parents are the roll models for them as they grow up. If you expose them to the “harsh reality of life” by constantly teasing and taunting others, then what do you think that they’re going to do when they get older?  If you expose them daily to the trash talk and related garbage on TV and in the movies, then again what do you think that they are going to do?

Wait a minute! Now you’re sounding an awful lot like a bible thumper…………Ya think?!? Does that bother you? It shouldn’t, because if nothing else if you treat someone the way that you’d want to be treated then guess what? Nine times outta ten the chances are that they will treat you that way. “Course there is still that 1% that’s just plain ol’ rotten. Can’t change them no how.

And don’t go off on me calling me a Bible thumping wimp, (1) that’s just not being nice and (2) I ain’t no Bible thumper. However if you back me into a corner I will come out thumping: you!

Here’s another thing to consider; some people can roll with the punches, others cannot. For some unknown reason they just don’t know how to be thick skinned enough to avoid being hurt by your sense of humor. We don’t have the ability to go toe to toe with you folks who seem to get off on ripping each other. Oh sure we try and join in on the “fun” but usually end up being the target of your “playing.” So how do we respond? The only way that we know how to, we attack. And for me anyway (although I would hazard a guess that many others feel the same way) I get no pleasure from this tactic, because it only seems to escalate the ripping. So in the end it has only made me feel even worse for having opened my mouth. This is also the time when things are said in anger that really weren’t meant, but got said because we didn’t know what else to say/do.

Walking away is really the correct thing to do, but that’s not an acceptable option; because then that opens one to the feeling of being a wimp.

There’s GOT TO BE a better solution. And certainly one that doesn’t include a gun or worse. Fighting never solves anything, it just heightens the anxiety.

I needed to let off some steam and maybe cry on someone’s shoulder. I am tired of the daily grind and want to bring an awareness to everyone about how damaging this type of behavior can be. To those whom I have offended over the years with my attempts at having sport with you, I am sorry. I will try to hold my tongue in the future….as long as you’re not driving in front of me! LOL!!!!

 

I’m pooped and it’s way past my bedtime.

Good night and God bless!