AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2007 > September > 29 > Entry
Do we need stronger protections against ‘fleeting expletives’ on television?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Andrea Cornell Sarvady, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
One year ago, CBS aired a 9/11 special laced with expletives during the family hour. As many readers recall, I argued against the timing, not the special: It is still illegal to air explicit sex, violence or profanity over public airwaves (as opposed to paid cable) before 10:00 p.m., since kids could be watching. Despite that instance, I was still encouraged that the Federal Communications Commission was finally - by fining even “fleeting” network profanity - beginning to enforce the indecency laws.
Only months later, however, the crafty broadcasting industry successfully appealed their case to a NYC-based court, where two judges unbelievably overturned that FCC enforcement - basically ruling that the F-word and S-word can be aired on television at any time.
Why would broadcasters even want to air these so-called fleeting expletives? And why would it be so difficult to bleep them out? One might assume that the surge in live and taped reality shows would account for it - but one would be wrong. A recent study by the Parents’ Television Council (PTC) found 2245 instances of “objectionable violent, profane and sexual content” in just 180 hours of original television programming - and the scripted indecent content was three times higher than for unscripted and reality shows. In other words, real people have a far better sense for how to conduct themselves on-air; it is the broadcasters who are trying to ensure that any child in the room can hear and see sex, violence and profanity.
It is crazy that we have to even go to these lengths, but following the NYC court ruling Congress began considering legislation that would explicitly give the FCC the authority to fine “fleeting” instances of indecency. As the PTC’s Dan Isett recently exclaimed in an interview, “What profanity isn’t fleeting? The content by very nature is fleeting! But the F-bomb is an F-bomb no matter when you say it.”
Broadcasters disingenuously claim they respect decency laws, while legally pushing to gut them - and while purposely scripting most indecent content. Since broadcasters apparently actively want our kids to hear and see this stuff, both the courts and the congress need to take a firm hand to stop them.
Rebuttal
Fleeting expletives are on the mind when battling traffic. So on a recent drive I was musing about the FCC’s crackdown when my young teen asked, “Isn’t that, like, the government trying to be our parents?”
Right, honey. Now could you explain that to the grownups?
In the past few years it’s as though we’ve all been adopted by the FCC, that self-appointed arbiter of good taste and good art. Thus, Saving Private Ryan was aired with fleeting expletives outnumbering the flying bullets, while Martin Scorcese’s documentary The Blues didn’t pass muster. Soldiers can swear, blues musicians can’t. Cheney and Bush can, Nicole Richie and Bono can’t. Get the pattern? Of course, the FCC won’t give you warnings in case you don’t. Why, that would be censorship.
I think even “NYC-based” judges share my aversion to the junk on broadcast television. Yet I think they also share my confusion: if fleeting expletives are truly “harmful to minors,” shouldn’t hearing one from the president be more damaging than hearing one from a disgraced reality TV starlet? The courts didn’t order up a blitzkrieg of f-bombs; they simply called the FCC’s rulings “arbitrary and capricious”, even “unconstitutionally vague.” For now, paranoia prevails; some stations wouldn’t air documentaries on 9/11 and Marie Antoinette at all, fearing their content might land them in the “indecency” bulls eye.
Next up on the docket: giving the FCC more power over TV violence. It sounds helpful, until The Parents Television Council moves into overdrive. Then, the same watchdogs who took their kids to “The Passion of the Christ” will make sure we don’t see so much as a brandished gun during the sacred family hours.
Another approach to fighting dreck? Talk to kids about the issues they confront everyday. By advocating Media Literacy and critical thinking , we arm young people with both information and the same skills we prize as parents.
Yet if you’re still wondering how to keep your kids away from “fleeting expletives”, this simple plan might help: Turn off the TV. Monitor the computer. And, for friggin’ sakes, don’t let them drive with me during rush hour.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By dave
September 30, 2007 8:48 AM | Link to this
There is not one single child over the age of 10 that has not heard nearly every dirty word already at school or hanging out with their friends. Keeping them off of TV does nothing. It’s not the kids that are offended…it’s the puritans. Kids don’t but TV’s, they don’t spend their money on the advertisers products in the comercials. Adults do. Why do we need to censor so much of this world…our ADULT world for the sake of the kids…..It’s silly…and in all truth, does nothig to “protect” them at all.
By monteal
September 30, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
TV as a general rule is trash anymore there are a handful of shows I will watch and even they let me down sometimes, my solution get rid of the Tv,I refuse to let the moral fiber of my family be attacked by what someone else deems exceptable,sex language and gruesome violence and if its not the show that offends you the commercials will. I have no desire to watch such filth not to even mention my children
solution turn it off
Ive gone to watching my few clean shows on the network web sites the comercials are few and far between and clean
if enough of us do this than maybe they will get the hint and If not we will be better off anyway
By monteal
September 30, 2007 1:45 PM | Link to this
in regards to dave
the reason why the kids at school have such a vocabulary is because of what the see on tv, in music and a percentage of parents who think it is acceptable for them to talk this way and think its funny when they’re kids do it ( which is probably you dave )
as far as I’m concerned we need to change it for all society not just the kids
and yes being called a puritan would be a compliment I wonder if being called a God-hater or Godless would be a compliment to you
By GOB
September 30, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this
Is debate really any different than when the arbitors of morality thought the public couldnt handle the idea of a married couple sleeping in the same bed on Leave It To Beaver or Father Knows Best?
By Elidel free prescription next day online pharmacy
September 30, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this
Online pharmacy: 24/7 customer service, Tramadol 50 mg FedEx next day free prescription
By Vilyamdg
October 1, 2007 5:53 AM | Link to this
By Vilyamtt
October 1, 2007 5:53 AM | Link to this
By Vilyamlu
October 1, 2007 5:53 AM | Link to this
By Sandra-qc
October 1, 2007 6:42 AM | Link to this
By Sandra-pu
October 1, 2007 6:42 AM | Link to this
By Billy
October 1, 2007 8:21 AM | Link to this
monteal, I don’t find your spelling “exceptable”.
By Billy
October 1, 2007 9:08 AM | Link to this
Andrea makes a great point about Passion of the Christ. It’s a snuff film. And the Bible speaks of rape, stoning, and other forms of violence and contains incest and mass murder. God freakin’ exterminates the entire world population with the exception of a few of his chosen? Wipes out a couple of entire cities because he didn’t like their inhabitants’ lifestyle? Kills all of Egypt’s firstborn sons…executing babies to make a point? Kills a man’s family and completely destroys his life because the devil made a bet? If that’s God, then God is a sadistic b*******. And good luck finding a book that contains as many deaths as the Bible. Should we ban that, too?
By Chilao
October 1, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this
So not having a problem with what some called unacceptable speech translates you to being a God-Hater. Who knew? LOL
I never understood why it was acceptable to say Sexual intercourse but not acceptable to say the f-word.
Ditto on going to take a bowel movement being okay, but going to take a s-word was not. I grew up being taught that thing in the toilet was a BM. LOL Used to go round and round with my Mom on word-usage. Still don’t get it.
Who made up these (non)acceptable English-usage words anyway? Meaning how was it determined what was acceptable and what was not and why? as both say the same thing. Yes, I intentionally went overboard on the word acccepable. LMAO
By Say What!?!
October 1, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this
i was hoping that shaunti and the newbie had something more “political” to say this week. all this relevant stuff going on in the world; yet they choose to write about cursing on television. way to go.
By Anonymous
October 1, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this
Oh, I absolutely agree with Shaunti. All television should be appropriate for children, without exception. No matter what time of day or night, no matter what channel… EVERYTHING should be child-friendly, period.
If adults want to communicate or even entertain themselves, they should always do so in terms children are safe and comfortable hearing. And that applies to ALL forms of communication, in ALL media. Everything must be censored for the children. Won’t someone please think of the children???
By Zihtuvye
October 1, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this
By Sandra-nc
October 1, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
By Sandra-lz
October 1, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
By lozen
October 1, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this
I can see both sides in this debate. When you’re a parent 24/7 it’s so easy to let it slide and let the kids watch tv just so you can get a break. So people who say just turn off the tv are usually people who don’t have kids. I don’t think kids should be exposed to the frightening stories in the bible and to preachers either! No matter how hard a parent tries they can’t really keep the world away from their children. Parents can’t isolate their kids from the world whatever is going on. It seems like an excellent idea to talk with your kids about what they see and what they experience and let them know your values. They might choose your values when they grow up depending on your relationship with them!
By lozen
October 1, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this
SayWhat! I agree 100 percent. However, we all know women are interested in morality, children, religion, security and what to do about saggy pants. There are other blogs at AJC that deal with politics and business and other “important” topics.
By Jack
October 1, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this
NO. We need stronger protection against unwanted SPAM on our favorite blogs!!!!!!
By Jack
October 1, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this
TV was much better back in the 50’s and 60’s when the air was clean and sex was dirty.
By DebbieDoRight
October 1, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this
Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, I grew up in the Military. I’ve heard WAY worse words when a battallion went marching by singing cadence.
Lozen: LOL!!
By Eff the Censors
October 1, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this
Who the f#@%$&^%(&^&% CARES? Television is a weapon of mass distraction, the clear intent and purpose of which is to lower the IQs of the American people and keep us from caring about what our government is doing — in our name, with our money — to us and to the rest of the world.
Teach your kids to read, then get them reading some Vonnegut and other books with disturbing, meaningful content. Teach them how to THINK FOR THEMSELVES so they won’t become passive little SHEEP always looking for someone like Shaunti, the Bushies, MTV, or some hand-over-your-tithes preacher to tell them what to believe. Baaa-aaa-aaaaa!
By Archie
October 1, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
I am glad that Lozen can see both sides of this debate because I can too. I wish I could put in my answer to this topic months ago but I will simply say that the Fcc should enforce the rules already on the books and do as Andrea says turn off the TV or change the channel. My one word answer to the topic question is no.
By Hofneriy
October 1, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
By Hofnerhr
October 1, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
By Jack
October 1, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this
Eff the Censors. Ditto @ 11:13.
By lozen
October 1, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
Taken from The Consortium for Independent Journalism, Inc.
Robert Altemeyer, who spent much of his career as a psychologist studying right-wing authoritarianism, says it’s characterized by a high degree of submission to authorities who are perceived to be legitimate, and a general aggressiveness toward those perceived to be targeted for abuse by the established authorities.
The definition of the authoritarian personality, developed over years of testing and experimentation based on the scientific method, consists of three attitudinal clusters: “orientations to respond in the same general way toward certain classes of stimuli (namely, established authorities, targets for sanctioned aggression, and social conventions).”
He identifies one of the defining characteristics of authoritarians as their belief “that established authorities have an inherent right to decide for themselves what they may do,” which may include breaking the laws that they make for the rest of society.
While granting substantial leeway to established authorities, authoritarians generally reject the idea that regular people should develop their own ideas of what is moral and immoral, because the laws and social conventions have already been laid out.
Most of these tendencies can be seen in America today (right here on this blog!) and have risen to new heights over the past couple of weeks with events such as the MoveOn controversy and the vitriol surrounding Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York when compared to the free pass given to President Bush over his hypocrisy in his UN speech.
For years, Altemeyer has warned that based on his empirical research into the authoritarian personality, it is apparent that many ordinary people living in advanced democracies are psychologically disposed to embrace anti-democratic, fascist policies.
Because of this disposition, Altemeyer concludes that “a potential for the acceptance of right-wing totalitarian rule exists in the United States.”
This threat can be (was) exacerbated by a national crisis or emergency. In such a circumstance, Altemeyer notes, the fearful mood of a populace “can create a climate of public opinion that promotes totalitarian movements.” This state of mind “can intimidate politicians, journalists and religious leaders who might otherwise oppose repression.”
With the authoritarian foundations laid by the Bush administration and to a degree legitimized and legalized by the U.S. Congress – including elimination of habeas corpus rights, warrantless wiretaps, and military commissions run by the Executive Branch – it may not be long before this authoritarian specter becomes a reality.
By Gandalf, the White
October 1, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this
Once again the liberal missed the point, Liberalism truly is a mental disorder. If she wants to cuss in her car, let her. If she wants to have children and teach them to cuss, let her (although who would want to have kids with her is beyond me!). Just keep these words off the broadcast channels on television until after 10pm! You can keep you kids up that late if you want them to watch profanity laced shows, then they will sleep in school and won’t distract the well parented children as they attempt to learn in our schools. Isn’t a civil society much nicer than a crude, rude one? I am sure Ms. Liberal is listening to the B work to H word and the N word on her favorite Hip-Hop station while she is cussing at all the drivers as she drives (more than likely poorly) around our fair city.
By JokesOn
October 1, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this
Once again the liberal missed the point, Liberalism truly is a mental disorder. If she wants to cuss in her car, let her. If she wants to have children and teach them to cuss, let her (although who would want to have kids with her is beyond me!). Just keep these words off the broadcast channels on television until after 10pm!…
This coming from the person (granted, I am supposing) that posted, well before 10pm:
By Gandalf, the Gray
September 28, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this
Jokes on, go F@ck youself! You are such a piece of SH#T! But I will defend to the death your right to say what you want, as this is America, and I am a Patriot.
PS you S#ck Donkey D*cks!
And who has the Mental Disorder?
By Zihtuvrs
October 1, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this
By DebbieDoRight
October 1, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this
Gandalf the white, Gandalf the Grey, two different people? Or just one person with a massive hardon for blogging inanities?
By Jack
October 1, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this
talk about expletives! Bless your heart Gandalf. Take a chill pill. He laughs at you’re rants. Don’t give him the satisfaction.
By Archie
October 1, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this
I do agree with a lot what you wrote in 12:54 pm post Lozen because some folk seem to be in such denial when it comes to Bush and other political leaders and that’s why you have these guys that use the services of call girls yet tout family values and create laws that create an unfair advantage for big corporations that run adult type businesses such as those that create adult movies. Authoritarians use social conventions to embarrass regular people so that said authoritarian can continue breaking laws that they make for the rest of society. That was a good post Lozen and it is much better than the other ridiculous post by someone other you on this blog. You shouldn’t have to look far to know what I am talking about.
By lozen
October 1, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this
Gandalf the white, the gray, bruno, dog - whoever you are. Nobody cares what you think. Liberalism is a mental disorder? But wanting to bomb millions of innocent women, children and old ppl because they’re Muslim? IMHO, that’s the mental disorder! And shows the signs quoted above about totalitarians to perfection.
By Mara
October 1, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this
Gandalf the white, the gray, bruno, dog - whoever you are.
Goodgulf Grayteeth? Gimlet, son of Groin? Or perhaps “Gwanho the Wind Lord”…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boredofthe_Rings
By Jack
October 1, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this
That’s not Dog. Dog loves JokeOn just like Archie.
By JokesOn
October 1, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this
That’s not Dog. Dog loves JokeOn just like Archie.
An honest statement would read more like this: Archie, Dog and JokesOn have shown respect for each other, including the many times they have disagreed.
By Chilao
October 1, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this
Gwanho the Wind Lord
you calling him a farting ho?
Ever see the cartoon, Santa on the witness stand, caption reads “Santa’s sexual harassment lawsuit takes a turn for the worse” as a lawyer asks him “Did you not once, not twice, but three times call my client a ‘ho’”?
By Archie
October 1, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this
An honest statement would read more like this: Archie, Dog and JokesOn have shown respect for each other, including the many times they have disagreed.
That is so true and I was going to post we disagreed at times but yes I do respect JokesOn because he has defended me quite well.
By Jack
October 1, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this
Sounds better than mine but mine is just as honest.
By Jack
October 1, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.
By Just Being Me
October 1, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this
I’m so disenchanted with what this site has become…
I check every now and again…
And what I find is that when the topics ARE stimulating and worth responding to, I can’t get past all the spam.
But, more often than not… they’re just not stimulating anymore.
Sad.
I used to love this place.
Anyway, on a brighter note, HELLO FOLKS!!!! Good “seeing” ya Mara, Lozen, Archie, Jack, Chilao, GOB. Hope all is well!
By Archie
October 1, 2007 3:21 PM | Link to this
Just Being Me, Hello, Hello, I miss your honesty!!!
By Chilao
October 1, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this
Hi JBM, say HELLO to Renee for me.
By GaLiberal
October 1, 2007 3:30 PM | Link to this
Shaunti, you poor ignorant neocon Rethuglicon mouthpiece. You seem incapable of understanding that censorship, even disguised as protecting innocent children, is still censorship. If you don’t like what you’re watching DON’T WATCH IT!!!!! You do have the power to turn off the thing. This goes deeper than just networkings bleeping some words a few people find objectionable. At one time it was unacceptable to say ‘hell’ on tv. Jack Parr got fired for saying ‘water closet’ because people objected to the reference. Is that what you want? Then watch Andy Griffith and Leave It To Beaver reruns. Those shows probably fit your plastic view of the world. But, it’s not all Shaunti’s fault. The Rethuglicons have been very good at convincing everyone that there are anti-family anti-Christian messages everywhere. That Hollywood and mainstream media are run by a bunch of liberals who only want to destroy our society. Of course, it’s all a fabrication but as they say a lie oft repeated soon becomes the truth. Whenever you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests.
By Just Being Me
October 1, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this
Hi Archie! Thanks, it’s good to be missed.
Chilao, I just sent her an e-mail. She can’t really open W2W from her new job. Every time she tries, it freezes up her system. I think the last time she was on was when Diane passed.
~just thinking aloud~ It’s so funny that I met Renee on this site nearly two years ago, and today she’s just about the closest friend I have! :-)
By lozen
October 1, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this
Hey JBM, don’t go away. We can always change the topic to something worth talking about. We DO change the topic always by the second or third day. Yeah, the spam almost made me give up a few times too.
By Just Being Me
October 1, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this
Chilao
From Renee:
Awwww…tell my buddy I said hi!!
By Just Being Me
October 1, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
Well shucks, since I’m here… and posting… I may as well deposit my penny.
Do we need “stronger protection” against expletives on TV?
Please picture me rolling my eyes and shaking my head. Sure, we need “stronger protection.” And such “strong” “protection” should come from “strong, protective” parents who know how to turn the &$@# television off and play a board game, read a book, toss a ball, paint a room, or set the table for family dinner.
Geez. You gotta be kidding me, Shaunti.
~Still shaking my head~
By Jack
October 1, 2007 3:44 PM | Link to this
GaLiberal. Does your post apply to porn on TV? Should we be allowed to watch kiddie porn, bestiality, etc. on network television? I guess we could not watch it as you say but don’t you think children would “sneek” and try to watch that stuff if it were allowed? The Europeans have had nudity on their network television for years and they seem to handle it but a line must be drawn somewhere. Don’t you ageree?
By Mara
October 1, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this
YeaH!!!!! Hi Ya, JBM! And Renee if she’s lurking! I’m so glad you dropped by. It hasn’t been the same…
:^(
Chilao - too funny, but I can’t take credit. It’s all Harvard Lampoon!
By Just Being Me
October 1, 2007 4:11 PM | Link to this
Hi Mara!!!! I miss you!
Renee can’t even lurk… lol… but I’ll tell her you said hello! :-)
Hi Lozen!
By invowl
October 1, 2007 8:12 PM | Link to this
Using Kids As Props In SCHIP Debate? You Betcha
By Billy
October 2, 2007 8:15 AM | Link to this
That last bit of spam really offends me. The idea that I couldn’t find that on my own? The nerve!
By Billy
October 2, 2007 8:52 AM | Link to this
*By lozen
October 1, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this
Hey JBM, don’t go away. We can always change the topic to something worth talking about. We DO change the topic always by the second or third day.*
Yeah. To abortion. Zing!
By Billy
October 2, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this
Not you specifically, lozen. Usually one of the right-wing nutbags…
By Billy
October 2, 2007 9:35 AM | Link to this
Quiet in here…
By Mara
October 2, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this
hey Billy, lozen. It’s only Tuesday and already the tumbleweeds are a-tumblin’. :^)
since this particular topic is just a rehash of previous censorship questions, how about this instead…
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jVTk0RxEEvO0n78b2XK1H8vSPXiQD8S0L3FO1
“The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear a challenge to Alabama’s ban on the sale of sex toys, ending a nine-year legal battle and sending a warning to store owners to clean off their shelves”
“The law does not ban the possession of sex toys, and it doesn’t regulate other items, including condoms or virility drugs. Residents may legally purchase sex toys out of state for use in Alabama, or they may buy sexual devices in Alabama that have a “bona fide medical” purpose.”
so basically, in Alabama you have every right to own these products, you just can’t purchase them in Alabama. Now, does it seem right that there can be a ban on the sale of legal items? Could they include other products, like cigarettes, for instance? Or maybe this’s the loophole that states have been looking for to for gun-control…you can own one, but you can’t buy or sell them in that state.
By Chilao
October 2, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this
states have been looking for to for gun-control…you can own one, but you can’t buy or sell them in that state.
I think that won’t be a problem in Alabama, being able to purchase a gun at least..LMAO
You can kill someone, just as long as your wife has to be satisfied with perhaps less than full girth.
By comp133xi7y
October 2, 2007 10:22 AM | Link to this
I’m just happy to know that there’s still at least one state out there that’s still more backwards than Georgia.
But I bet you can buy alchohol on Sundays…
By Billy
October 2, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
Funny, since vibrators were basically invented by doctors as a supposedly medical device…
And since sexual satisfaction is healthy in itself…
By Lyrazel
October 2, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
Dear Shaunti, My comments are addressed to you the concerned parent. Perhaps if you completely removed the televisions from your home your children would never be exposed to pornography disguised as bra ads, excessive liquor advertising, toy and unwholesome food advertising nor would your family endure the indecent language of today’s media culture before the hour of 10pm.
The facts are well known. Children exposed to more than 2 hours of television become lethargic, tend toward obesity from lack of exercise, are dull in imagination and will use expletives in conversation if so exposed. There is a bevy of creative products such as musical instrument and crayons to oil paints, to board games and libraries that can be utilized by families desiring to make television unimportant to rentable movies. The fact you do not feel comfortable with your children in front of the TV should be incentive enough to turn it off. Rather than pretending you are saving the world’s children from such menace why not abandon the trend of television viewing altogether? One step at a time….or one house at a time. I am one of the few on this blog who remember a life without TV in the house. I am one of the few who seldom watches more than one hour a week because I also do not enjoy modern television advertisements and in-my-face insipid reality TV. There is no shrine to the TV at my house, there was no cable until 2 months ago…and now it is still dim most hours of day and night because I am busy with life. Shaunti, it is not for the rest of the world to protect your children. It is not for us to tell you how to raise them. what to watch, when to watch and why. This is the 3d time you have made TV obscenity a topic and in my opinion if you watched less TV you would discover there are a wealth of topics people would rather discuss—so if you ever get any original ideas—instead of recycling the words of better paid pundits of irrational beliefs—you would discover your web blog site has a plethora of discussions completely irrelevant to your topic—because, to be blunt, censorship in the name of high morality is @$%^^# boring. Yours Lyrazel
By Jack
October 2, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this
I would think that Alabama would sell all brands of fireworks.
By Archie
October 2, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this
I liked what you said Lyrazel but I question the facts of these studies about tv because I think kids get fat because parents don’t take the time to give them healthy food,i.e. apples instead potato chips. I have fussed about this at my house, I mean if the parent is stuck in a behavior pattern that does not include exercise, that will be passed on to the child. Children look for the easy way to do things many times. If both parents encourage the child in a positive way to play outside whether the tv is on or not won’t matter and also there a lot of good programs on tv such as the History channel,etc. My point is that tv is not to blame for our problems and my next point is that the rules on the books as far as tv should be enforced. I should not hear the “b” word on regular network tv before 10 pm. Lyrazel you are correct that the world cannot protect children from every little thing.
As for Alabama all I can say is that people have sex,kinky sex, and for those that are alone toys come in handy. For example listen to the song “Celibacy” done by Jill Scott on her new cd, I mean the woman tells you exactly what’s on her mind. It seems as if there’s a state more backwards that South Carolina.
By Gandalf, the White
October 2, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
JokesOn I am not this other person. Lozen what are you talking about?
By Mara
October 2, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this
comp133xi7y - yeah, when I moved down out here the ban on Sunday alcohol sales was a culture shock to me too. But, as you know, it helps you “manage your time better”, as Sonny says.
Lyrazel - Hear, HEAR!!!!
Jack, Chilao, Billy - I still haven’t figured out the rationale of the state in banning only the sale of the items.
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this
Eff the Censors—Which Vonnegut books did you enjoy? My favorite was The Sirens of Titan, followed by God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater and Breakfast of Champions.
Some other “provocative” books I read as a youth are Animal Farm, Catch-22, and of course, 1984.
I’m going to bet the farm that JokesOn was a Vonnegut fan growing up…..
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
You guys need to come out to some of the Wiccan festivals, if just to read the bumper stickers on the cars. The funniest one I saw last time was “Doing My Best to P** Off the Religious Right”
The last fest was put on by the “Grove of the Unicorn”, complete with a Wizard and several High Priestesses. Pretty crazy stuff. Very, very cool folks, though. They are enthusiastic about their beliefs, but don’t feel any need to pressure the guests to participate in the rituals.
By JokesOn
October 2, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
I tend to think of how many kids I knew growing up and although they all had TVs and the same channels, their TV habits mainly differed based on upbringing.
I may find certain words/actions offensive, yet that can clearly be attributed to what my parents taught me was offensive. Yeah, one may stray some to test the other waters, but the fear of some downward spiraling syndrome seems like a scapegoat for lack of parenting.
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this
I’m not a parent, and have no aspirations to become one, so my opinions about what is best for kids have little basis. Having said that, my guess would be that swear words are like dirt: Good health requires some exposure, but not too much.
The biggest problem that I find with overusing swear words is that they lose their impact when they become commonplace. Profane words should be reserved for profane events, not commonplace events. E.g. A lot of people use the word “rape” in business contexts, which I find offensive.
By JokesOn
October 2, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this
JokesOn I am not this other person.
Really kind of hard to believe, but if you say so. I guess that is why it might be better not to use random/various blog-names?
Vonnegut Fan,
I’m going to bet the farm that JokesOn was a Vonnegut fan growing up…
Yup. But admittedly, my reading was/is quite diversified yet in clumps - if that makes sense. Once I got into an author, I would read all his/her work, but there are large gaps in my library as well.
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this
What were your favorite TV shows as a kid, JokesOn? I personally enjoyed watching “Kung Fu”. In H.S., I used to REALLY enjoy both the Don Kirschner’ Rock Concerts along with the Midnight Specials with Wolfman Jack. They used to feature the top rock groups of the day, all live performances.
Anyone remember New Year’s Eve, 1973, when they featured Three Dog Night on Dick Clark’s show? A transcendent moment if there ever was one……
By Archie
October 2, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this
This is a topic question for Lozen because she has said many times that she is an older person or the perhaps the oldest on this blog so she has the experience. Lozen is there a change in women’s behavior around the time of menopause? Do you become more violent or paranoid? I ask this question because a teacher has told me once again that another teacher was threatened by a parent and 5 out of 6 times I was told about this behavior it was a woman. This is not a smart-a question but a legitimate one because I avoid certain folk at work because of their behavior and their behavior has been confirmed by other women. Anyway anyone can answer but Lozen has experience thus my question.
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this
JokesOn—I’m the same way with authors and music. About once a year I’ll get on a big Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd kick, and will play their entire collection from beginning to end. Must be part of that Obsessive/Compulsive disorder…..
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
Archie—You’re really asking for it today with your question to lozen. First, you identify her as being “old”, then ask her to draw upon her experience as a crazed post-menopausal woman. Jeez, and I get accused of being offensive. ; > }
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
My guess on the post-menopausal behavior is this, Archie: Rightly or wrongly, many, if not most women, feel that they had to take a lot of crap in their lives as younger women. Finally, at some point, they say F-it, and become “assertive”. Some do it with class, others don’t.
Just a theory.
By Vonnegut Fan
October 2, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this
Personally, I enjoy hanging out with the P/M women. Of course, once the brain comes together, then the a* goes.
Just kidding, ladies. ; > }
Have a blessed day, everyone.
By RP
October 2, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this
Guess what? Andrea isn’t arguing against keeping cuss words, violence, and sex off of network television before 10pm. She’s against the rules as they are written and enforced now. We don’t need stronger protections we need fair enforcement of fair laws.
it is the broadcasters who are trying to ensure that any child in the room can hear and see sex, violence and profanity.
It is ridiculous to assume that the goal of the networks is to expose children to sex, violence and profanity. The goal of the networks is to make money and they do that by targeting a young adult audience. They are not trying to “ensure” that eight year olds are watching the show 24. They do not “actively want our kids to hear and see this stuff”. What they want is money and if the people with the most disposable income prefer shows with with sex, violence and profanity then that’s what they’ll air.
By Archie
October 2, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this
This is exhibit A of people not reading properlyFirst, you identify her as being “old”, then ask her to draw upon her experience as a crazed post-menopausal woman.
My exact words “This is a topic question for Lozen because she has said many times that she is an older person or the perhaps the oldest on this blog so she has the experience.” Note the fact I said Lozen has said many times she is perhaps the oldest person on this blog so I didn’t identify her as anything, she did. Also I didn’t ask Lozen to draw upon her experience as a crazed anything but her experience as an older woman. The goal is to learn something!!!!
By Jack
October 2, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this
Archie. The Mrs. is P/M. Really Mid-P/M. Ask why are they crabby? Hot flashes, night sweats. She tells me that she now understands spontanious combustion, wakes up bathed in sweat. You would be crabby too.
By lovelyliz
October 2, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this
God save us from those who think that everything on television/mass media has to be child friendly.
Personally I think kids are better off watch as little television as possible.
By lozen
October 2, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this
Wow! So much to catch up on here….(They insist I work sometimes)! Nothing they could do in Alabama, Georgia, Miss., would surprise me Mara. We’ve never been known for our great education or high intellect in the south, ya know.
Lyrazel, your letter to Shaunti is so good! I didn’t realize it was the third time she’s reverted to this topic! D—n, they do seem to need some new blood on topics, don’t they? Archie, “Lozen is there a change in women’s behavior around the time of menopause? Do you become more violent or paranoid?” If there is, we don’t hear much about it do we? If there was a tendency at all for women to lose it when they go thru menopause, there would be ads on tv for the new drugs, don’t ya think? Speaking of drug ads, based on the number of ads on tv for Cialis and Viagra (not to mention the constant barrage of spam about how to make “it” bigger), I think the men in this country have a huge (should I say “little?”) problem. I never imagined it was so tough for you guys! So Archie since there’s little advertising for drugs to calm women down during menopause, I tend to think the answer to your question is, it’s something else. Personally, I did not become more violent or paranoid with menopause. I think, although I hate to say this, Dog may have something. Women do put up with a lot of s—t and some of us reach a point when we say, “No more.” We start paying more attention to how we feel than how others feel and wonder what we want instead of what everybody else wants. My mother was a doormat all her life, but she started to stand up to others some of the time and get angry when she should be angry in her 60’s. And RP is so right. The only thing tv management cares about is selling ads and making money. Everything they do is for that one reason. Sorry if I missed anybody… Where is Netbanker anyway?
By Archie
October 2, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this
Jack,I had a conversation about P/M at home but I wanted an opinion from an older woman and someone had already suggested we change the topic so I tried to. I am wondering why do some women feel like they can say anything to anybody and be okay. SusieH and I had a blog conversation a few weeks ago about behavior but I want an older woman’s opinion because sometimes with experience comes wisdom.
Anyway Isaiah Thomas lost his case and I find that amazing since it seemed like a he said, she said.
By lozen
October 2, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this
Bless your heart Jack for being understanding while your wife goes thru it. It definitely isn’t fun. And my doctor says it can last for some women until they’re dead!
By lozen
October 2, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this
Surprising nobody but Madison Square Garden officials themselves, a jury just found Isiah Thomas and the Knicks organization (part of MSG) guilty of the sexual harassment of Anucha Brown Sanders. After weeks of embarrassing revelations and accusations, the jury decided that Thomas should not have to pay punitive damages, but that MSG and its head honcho, Jimmy Dolan, should. No numbers have been announced just yet, but after just about everyone from Dolan down revealed stunningly archaic attitudes about race and gender in the workplace, we’re guessing Browne Sanders’s compensation will be pricey enough to shock them into the new century. Or, at the very least, it’ll prevent them from wasting any more money on expensive players who don’t win titles. It’s a victory for everyone! Daily Intelligencer
By Archie
October 2, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
Thanks Lozen. I tend to think the answer to your question is, it’s something else. There were some weird behaviors occurring here at work such as slamming doors, bickering, some of ladies here suggested it was “female thing” and most of the people involved are over 45. Those male anatomy ads bother me too,Lozen. I am happy your mom gets angry when she should but most sista’s don’t have that problem, they need to calm down. Anyway you answered the question so I will have to find another topic.
By Monica
October 2, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this
Hi guys! Late to the party! I have more of a problem with the commercials that are shown during family shows than with language. For example, my children only watch shows that wouldn’t have foul language in them. When they are old enough to watch something with language, they will know nto to use that language. Commercials, however, come on during the family shows. One of my son’s favorite shows is Extreme Home Makeover. But the previews of Desperate Housewhores, er Housewives, that come on during that Makeover, are a bit risque for a 6 year old!
By Tray
October 2, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
It’s this simple: educate your kids on what to say and not to say. You can’t shield them from everything! I have a 3 year old and I have determined that as long as i inform him of good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, he should be ok. Every parent has slipped a ‘bad word’ or two areound their kids, I know i have. However, i also tell mine he can’t say that word, and i have no problems with it. He can watch what i watch on tv, and sometimes he’ll ask a question about what he sees. I answer truthfully and tell him whether he can do or say what he saw, and he knows. It’s the parents that take no active role in their kids lives who will have 6 year olds saying the f-word to other adults. Those parents need to wake up and realize something important:
YOU’RE A PARENT, DO SOME FRICKEN PARENTING!!
By Bryan
October 2, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
I agree with Monica. I can’t watch a football game on tv with my son without raunchy commercials bombarding us.
By Jack
October 2, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this
Thanks Lozen. I asked her how long it lasts. She said 10 years or more. Geez, how many more times will I hear,”Don’t touch me I’m about to burst into flames.”
By Archie
October 2, 2007 4:46 PM | Link to this
A female here at work disagrees with the verdict in the Isaiah Thomas case. This lady does not believe Ms Sanders and neither do I based on what I read. Isaiah may be prejudiced but you don’t pay out just because of that and I am really suspicious of her story but I was not there so maybe the papers left something out.
By Alexqxt
October 3, 2007 7:39 AM | Link to this
If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:
abuse-here@inbox.ru
thank you!
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2007 8:37 AM | Link to this
I think kids get fat because parents don’t take the time to give them healthy food,i.e. apples instead potato chips. I have fussed about this at my house, I mean if the parent is stuck in a behavior pattern that does not include exercise, that will be passed on to the child.
This is a day late and a dollar short, but I’d like to add my comments to this one by Archie. I’m divorced with 3 kids ages 5-10 and my kids and I do nature walks, (either on Stone Mountain or the Silver Comet), at least 3 times a week; but we also do “everyday” walks after dinner. If I’m too busy or too tired to do it, my kids cry and moan until I get up off my butt!! I don’t buy any junk food and the reason why is because my mother never bought any.
She always bought fruits for snacks and for our dessert after dinner — the only time we got pie or cake was at Thanksgiving! And the “nature walks” aren’t my idea either, it was passed down from my mother to me. She’d always go for a long walk or go skating after dinner and would take we kids along with her.
So what Archie is saying is very true, healthy habits, just like bad ones, can be passed down from one generation to the next.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this
Speaking of drug ads, based on the number of ads on tv for Cialis and Viagra (not to mention the constant barrage of spam about how to make “it” bigger), I think the men in this country have a huge (should I say “little?”) problem
Day late and dollar short again: Question for Archie — Why are we bombarded day and night with ads for male virility drugs? Is it a bigger problem physically or mentally then we, the public, even knew? And why in most of the ads there are always younger women that the old Ciallis guy is trying to mack on? And, I read somewhere, and if I searched enough I could probably find it again, that when a man, who has been impotent for years and receives help through virility drugs, he usually leaves his wife the first chance he gets. Why are virility drugs causing so much divorce?
Lots of crazy questions I know, but I’m in my “inquisitive” mood today!! :)
By JokesOn
October 3, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this
Why are virility drugs causing so much divorce?
I have not heard of such studies, but would attribute it to the same reasons women get divorces right before or after augmentation: these people now see themselves as a better catch and are looking to upgrade partners.
Lack of self-esteem causes a lot of people to get/stay in relationships that they would otherwise not bother with.
I think you can see this effect in many areas: Getting a higher degree, getting lots of money, recovery from ailments…
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2007 9:48 AM | Link to this
I am happy your mom gets angry when she should but most sista’s don’t have that problem, they need to calm down
Archie!!! You and I have had this conversation before!!! Shame on you!!! Yes, black women are VERY complex and sometimes hard to explain, HOWEVER when I’m dealing with any black woman I always use these guidelines:
a. How did this woman get here? I used to work with this girl who was soooo hard to deal with it, everything said to her was taken as a frontal assault to her self esteem; and she walked around with this gigantic chip on her shoulder; I’d avoid her as much as possible. We ended up having to do a project together, couldn’t avoid that, and that’s when I sat down and really talked to her. She, basically, raised herself and her two brothers because her parents were drug addicts and alcholics. When her father got paid on payday, she’d wait for him at the gate before he had a chance to cash his check, take enough money for rent and food and lights, so that her and her brothers wouldn’t starve. She and her brothers were called awful names in school because she could never get enough money from her parents to buy things like soap or laundry detergent or clothes; she used to go into the bathrooms at resteraunts and steal soap or steal the soap at school and use it to wash their clothes and their bodies with as best she could in their kitchen sink. When you encounter someone who is brimming with hostility and holding on to a lot of baggage, ask yourself “How did she get here?” That will make you better understand them — you may still not like them as a person, but at least you can understand them a little better.
b. What is she hiding? Black women hide a LOT of abuse, either from or to a parent, a family member, or someone they love. I used to witness my uncle beat my aunt like you’d beat a dog. He never put his hands on any of his kids, or anyone else; but he’d come home and beat my aunt down; taking all of his frustrations out on her. She stayed with him for 22 years, he ended up killing her and he got 15 years and was out in 5. I’m still bitter about that; and to this day I really don’t care for men that much.
c. What “rep” is she trying to uphold? Is she trying to live up to that “Strong Black Woman Who Can Stand On Her Own And Doesn’t Need Anyone” propaganda? We all know that that is a myth; however for some reason people are always looking to the Black Woman to be the strength in adversity. I believe this is one of the things that is pulling down black women’s psyche. Black women are single handedly, in most instances, upholding the WHOLE BLACK RACE on their backs. They are having children with partners or husbands, but are ending up raising them alone. No matter what job she has, or how hard she worked to get it, she’ll always be seen as “angry” or “hostile”, whether she is or not. Once, I was on a “Mike Vick Blog”, (don’t ask!!) and I was asking some of the bloggers why was race always mentioned in the South; when one of the bloggers accused me of being a “Welfare Queen”. This person didn’t even know me, but when I told them that I was a black female all of a sudden I was catapulted into the category of a welfare queen and what I said had no validity because I was just “out to get all I could from the government”.
I’m sure that the women you work with are as you say; but just try to stay clear of them until they realize that by carrying around all that baggage is just weighing them down and making their lives harder. It took me 3 years to finally rid myself of a LOT of anger towards men, and although I’m not there yet and I’m still a work in progress, I am getting better.
By Alexdbt
October 3, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:
abuse-here@inbox.ru
thank you!
By Alexdbt
October 3, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:
abuse-here@inbox.ru
thank you!
By NetBanker
October 3, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this
Hey kids! Sorry to have been ‘missing,’ but I was off visiting my parents for a long weekend and then had to play catch up yesterday at work and on the comments here. I see everyone has been in a lively debate on this old and tired topic. Lyrazel and Tray have pretty summed up my thoughts on this topic…you don’t like it, turn the darn thing off or write to the network with your complaint. “Art imitates life” so what do we expect to see on TV?
I’m going to venture a guess here on the ED drugs that are advertised so darn freely that they are waaaaay over prescribed to men who don’t necessarily have a problem getting it up, but who want to feel like a 17-year old between the legs of their 45+ year old body.
By Jack
October 3, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this
Hey Net. They want to feel like a 17 year old between the legs of their wife’s body. The wife my not like this after years of once a month, 60 second sex. Maybe that is why these meds can cause divorce.
By Archie
October 3, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
Thank you SusieH for responding so thoroughly to my posts I enjoy you, even when we disagree. Thanks for the information on how to deal with sista’s because I am around a lot of them all the time. There are also other races of women here at work and they bicker too but some of my lady friends here made comments about the atmosphere since females are in charge and I just asked some questions to get Lozen’s opinion and anyone else’s. There is this one particular black woman that speaks to me with a smile now so maybe I just have to bare the rudeness and keep going. I will post more later and I will reread your advice SusieH.
SusieH as for Viagra ads I have no idea other than a lot of men suffer from impotency and those drug companies are trying to make some money. I don’t have those health issues so the ads don’t mean anything to me.
Thanks SusieH for backing me up on passing down healthy habits.
By Nikki
October 3, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this
Hello! Site is best!
By Chilao
October 3, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this
And here I thought VIAGRA was for when you did not find the woman attractive, but needed to pretend to deliver anyway. And she won’t have to put any work into the arousal stage.
Okay, maybe that’s just me. LOL Not that I have ever SEEN such a pill, ima justa sayin’.
Anybody been watching Ken Burns’ THE WAR? They had Okinawa and Enola Gay on last night, the last episode. We traveled in Okinawa when we were kids, on vacation, my dad drove up into the hills and went for a walk, came back all upset. I never figured it out or even remembered that event until about three years ago. He was there way back then.
By Chilao
October 3, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
I have also been to Tinian Island where the Enola Gay was loaded for its flight, they have a plaque, and saw it a few years ago at the Smithsonian Aerospace Museum at Dulles.
By lozen
October 3, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this
SusieHomeMaker, fantastic post. Although it seems to be long out of vogue, attempting to walk in someone else’s moccasins at times (a little compassion) is a wonderful thing. Of course there’s always work place bickering and disagreement, unless you’re in a work situation run like a dictatorship. I’ve worked with difficult women; I’ve worked with difficult men. Part of the difference always seems to me to be that some employees criticize, question every decision, and put down a female employer much more than they do a male employer. So many of us still aren’t comfortable with a woman in authority. I think that’s why some ppl hate Hilary so much; just because she’s a woman who wants to be prez.
By NetBanker
October 3, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
Jack…or it could be that they’re just like a 17 year old all over again…quick across the finish line and ready to race again..just as quickly.
By 'Splain it to me
October 3, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this
Hey Lozen! I’m perplexed by why men hate Hillary so much. I mean, here’s a woman who did NOT hire the best divorce attorney money can buy, take her husband to the cleaners and destroy his life after he went elsewhere for his bee jay needs. After listening most of my adult life to men (married and divorced) whine and complain ad nauseum about their compassionless wives and merciless exes…. I wonder why they haven’t nominated this woman for SAINTHOOD! Hello????
By Jack
October 3, 2007 2:47 PM | Link to this
The only reason Hillary didn’t take Bill to the cleaners is that she is a power hungry ——-. We all see it. God help us all if she is elected.
By lozen
October 3, 2007 2:50 PM | Link to this
Chilao, I have been watching THE WAR. It’s my parents’ generation, but my father didn’t go; he was exempt for some reason my parents never talked about! When I hear the music from that era I almost remember it; it sounds so familiar. I esp. liked the line that went something like “American boys weren’t very good fighters at first. But they learned to overcome their training that killing was wrong and they became good soldiers.” I thought about that during a discussion the other day about why there are so many violent men in the U.S. compared to other European countries. But those other European men fought in that war also. Maybe it’s John Wayne ;- )
By Jack
October 3, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this
I am not opposed to a female prez. I just don’t think Hillary is the one. Lyrazel maybe.
By lozen
October 3, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this
Jack, can you please tell me the reasons why you believe Hilary Clinton is a power hungry __. Is she more or less power hungry than Obama, Bush, Edwards, Richardson, McCain, or any of the millions who want to run for prez?
By lozen
October 3, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this
Splain it to me, “My wife just does not understand me.” That’s been a constant refrain in my life also. Of course, I didn’t believe it for a fast minute. It’s an old, worn out line that doesn’t work anymore on any aware woman past 19 or 20. If she had divorced him and taken anything, she’d be a _. Since she didn’t she’s a _. I have to confess I don’t know a lot about her; I really don’t keep up with many politicians. I have read some of the many books about the Bush Dynasty and all I can say is Goddess help us, he was elected!!! Maybe….
By Scalia
October 3, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this
It seems that most men are still intimidated by a powerful, opinionated woman. It is fine when a woman is like Laura Bush, and stands quietly behind her man and doesn’t give an opinion. But the women that have an opinion, and express it, they are ridiculed. For examples, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi.
By Jack
October 3, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this
If she wasn’t she would have kicked Bill to the curb.
By 'Splain it to me
October 3, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this
God help us if Hillary is elected? DICK FREAKING CHENEY is running the country NOW! Hello? Surplus turns to debt, his buddies pockets are bulging over, Halli-B moved it’s HQ to Dubai to avoid American taxes while China owns our collective financial behinds, meanwhile habeus corpus and dozens of other civil rights go out the window in a culture of FEAR, we’re more divided than ever before, and the government now operates in SECRET when they decide something is classified, and executive privilege changes daily on the mans’ whims, and we ain’t NEVER getting out of Iraq!
You think we should be scared if Hillary is president? HECK, I’m scared sh-tless NOW!
By 'Splain it to me
October 3, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
If she wasn’t she would have kicked Bill to the curb.
Maybe she didn’t think getting a hummer was a divorceable offense. Kind of like you ENABLERS don’t think lying us into a war with a country that never attacked us, and emptying our treasury (present and future) into the unaudited pockets of their thugging, thieving, lying murdering friends, and giving them a tax break at the same time is an impeachable offense. Hillary should smack y’all senseless and send you to your rooms!
This IS your fault, enablers everywhere…
By Jack
October 3, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
and some men love strong opinionated women. Guilty.
By Scalia
October 3, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
Has a president’s wife ever left her husband? I don’t think that I have ever heard of a former president getting a divorce after leaving office.
By Jack
October 3, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this
I never said I liked Bush. In fact I’m very disappointed with him. I didn’t agree with the war either. The reason Bush went into Iraq is cause his daddy didn’t have the balls to do it in ‘91. You don’t know me so don’t call me an enabler.
By DebbieDoRight
October 3, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this
I like you Jack; however how can you be scared of Hillary, call her power hungry BUT say this about Dumbya: In fact I’m very disappointed with him.
Holy Moly Mama of baby Jesus!! What would it take for you to be incredibly p**, irrevocably angrered, down right disgusted, sick to your stomach, can’t stand his smug azz ANGRY with him!?!?
By Jack
October 3, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this
Hello Ms DoRight! Let’s just say I’m glad he won’t be re-elected.
By lozen
October 3, 2007 4:52 PM | Link to this
I will ask again since i didn’t get my answer Jack. Why do you say Hilary is a ______? Is it just because she didn’t kick him to the curb?
Bush vetoed legislation this morning (behind closed doors) to renew the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which would provide health care coverage for more than 10 million children. 81 % of Democrats, 69 % of independents and 61 % of Republicans support the $35 billion increase in the bill so more children get health coverage. Bush ignored them. They can override his veto so write to your representatives.
By Archie
October 3, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this
Jack, I also like opinionated women and I ask their opinions whenever I can and it’s why I like SusieHomemaker and SusieH understands what I deal with. I like the vast majority of folk I work with but I do applaud SusieH saying she is a work in progress because it shows awareness versus being defensive and I will take her advice because I have talked to many sistas that have been thru what she describes in point b of her post. I didn’t grow up around men who abused women verbally or physically or who were alcoholics and it’s hard for me to think Isaiah called someone a b..tch to her face because I have never done that. I did do that over the phone and that’s another story… I also like Hillary Clinton but then I have had a lot of female supervisors over the last 15 years so it doesn’t bother one bit if a woman becomes president.
By NetBanker
October 3, 2007 5:18 PM | Link to this
Scalia has it nailed! Most men and women in this country still view strong women as being a bi tch, but expect and praise the exact same behaviors when they come from a man. It’s a double standard that still exists.
I hear from my partner all the time that he hates Hillary and is scared of her and blah, blah, blah. We just can’t even discuss it because he gets p** when I try to poke holes in his statements or ask him to back up his claims with an actual example.
While I certainly think that Hillary could be a good President, I almost hope that the Dems do not select her for their candidate. I’m not anti-Hillary so take a breath and read on, please. My reason is that the first woman president is going to be scrutinized like nobody’s business and Hillary brings with her a huge legacy (the good, the bad, and the ugly) from her husband’s presidency. As a country we don’t need all that additional speculation and time wasted on questions of whether Bill is really running things behind the scenes or his role as 1st Gentleman.
By DeemsBok
October 3, 2007 6:05 PM | Link to this
Democrats Begin SCHIP Veto Override Campaign
By Billy
October 4, 2007 8:27 AM | Link to this
NetB, while I have no real dislike for her, I also hope Clinton isn’t the Democratic nominee, but for different reasons. First, she just strikes me as a politician. We don’t need politicians. We need statesmen (and women). Secondly, she is probably the figure most hated by most of the right. I see her as 2004’s gay marriage amendments. She will inadvertently mobilize the right to come out and vote like no other Democratic candidate would. Maybe a gay abortion doctor who says people should drive a Prius…
By Scalia
October 4, 2007 9:10 AM | Link to this
I agree, Hillary has too much baggage to be a Democratic nominee. I can just see the froth around Ann Coulter’s mouth as she goes into a vitrol filled diatribe about Hillary. Bill O’Reilly would be so angry his head would explode. It would be a very angry, bitter time everywhere.
By lozen
October 4, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this
In the debates I’ve seen Hillary is most realistic about what can and cannot be done in this country. She is a politician. I certainly don’t like the fact that she went along with the war but who didn’t? Is there anyone in the lineup who is a “statesman”? Not in my opinion. There’s a reason why she’s most hated by the right, no? I’d love to see Coulter frothing and O’Reilly exploding! Net As a country we don’t need all that additional speculation and time wasted on questions of whether Bill is really running things behind the scenes or his role as 1st Gentleman. At the very least maybe everyone would STFU about Brittany, Angelina and Brad, and Tom and Katy!
By Chilao
October 4, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this
The Democrats will probably do what they have done the last two Presidential elections, nominate someone who can not beat the Republican candidate. The country’s mood is right for Hillary to be President, IF she is the Democratic nominee, so who knows.
Anyone see Giuliani’s recent prediction of him taking like about 45 states if he were the GOP nominee against Hillary? I think Hillary’s camp was “yeah, only in your dreams, Rudi, but… I think she got Vermont and Massachusetts in his predictions. Big surprise there, Rudi. LOL
By Scalia
October 4, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this
I am beginning to despise the media. The only reason that they talk about Britney, Angelina and Brad, and Tom and Katie is because they want to distract people from the real issues that are affecting people. Why don’t they mention the war more? How about the good things that are happening in Iraq? What about the housing market? etc.
By Chilao
October 4, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this
Have been meaning to ask, do people really have Fleeting Expletives? Since mine tend to stick around, at least for a few minutes. LMAO
By lozen
October 4, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this
With mixed feelings: 225 young women made it into the Class of 2011 at West Point. That’s the highest number of female cadets in a single class since President Ford signed legislation in 1975 (under pressure from feminist organizations) opening the nation’s service academies to women applicants. SAT scores of 1200 are standard for entering West Point but 1300 and above is what high school students who want to enter the academy are told to aim for. They must also pass stringent medical tests and be physically fit. Once the women are in they have an added problem that the men don’t experience. A Pentagon task force in 2005 found that men at West Point and the Naval Academy treated women cadets inappropriately — including offers to trade academic favors for sexual acts, repeated and unwelcome propositions, and offensive comments. A West Point spokeswoman says things have improved since 2005.
By lozen
October 4, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
Scalia I’ve had the same thought about the mass media distraction machine. However, having worked in the media I know it’s all about the money. That’s it. That’s all. People in the media also tend to have a very low opinion about the IQ of the American public (with good reason perhaps). That’s who they go for; the people who want to know about celebrities and talk about all the latest dirt, the people who buy People Magazine and watch the shows that give you all the gossip about celebrities. The result is to distract people but that’s not what they’re trying to do. At least in the places where I worked. (I’m not quite sure about the top people, owners like Murdoch, if money is their only goal.)
By Archie
October 4, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this
agree, Hillary has too much baggage to be a Democratic nominee. This is where I sound like Lozen. What baggage does she have that a man who has been married 3 times doesn’t have? Hillary has had one husband, one husband and running for president is politics, therefore she needs to be a politician. Every man that has been president was a politician in relation to their era. I think that’s why some ppl hate Hilary so much; just because she’s a woman who wants to be prez. I agree with the previous statement because if you don’t like her ideas fine but she didn’t marry her second cousin and if you don’t like her cleavage that’s fine but she’s a woman so get over that. The folk in this country are in denial about sexism and racism. I think I. Thomas lost his case for both of those reasons but I could be wrong!!! With Hillary let’s vote for or against her ideas not for or against her personally.
By Jack
October 4, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this
Hi Lozen. Several reasons. The way she views the miltary. She wants to tax us to death. She wants to destroy our healthcare system. She (like Bush) will increase the size of gov’t. She doesn’t believe in the individual. She (as all politicians) cater to special interests over what the people want.
and cause I don’t like her…..
By NetBanker
October 4, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this
Billy…I can’t agree with you more. That Hillary is a politician I think is my parnter’s biggest sticking point with her and he doesn’t trust politicians from either party. Funny that politician didn’t used to be a perjorative label, but it sure has become one since politicians began trying to be all things to all people instead of stating their positions and living up to their pledge to represent their consitutients collective position.
Scalia…I love those images of conservative talking heads exploding. The point you make, though, is very valid. I think Hillary as President would simply perpetuate, if not escalate, the partisanship occuring in the Federal Gov’t.
What I do find interesting is the conservative commentary on Hillary’s personal life with Bill is seemingly in conflict with what they profess to believe both religiously (given that most conservatives identify as Christians) and politically. What I mean is that the stated conservative platform is one that espouses personal responsibility and stand by your man family values while Christian belief espouses forgiveness of sins. Hillary and Bill went to counseling and she apparently forgave him. Why so much negative commentary that she’s stayed with him only for policital or power hunger reasons? IMO, if you’re not a personal friend or family member who has seen the Clintons in private and/or had personal conversations about the state of their marriage then you’re simply spouting BS! On top of that she/they should be receiving your support on a personal level rather than criticism since they’re living the family values you claim to be the defenders of.
It is my sincere wish that the Libertarian Party would get their act together and be able to field a viable candidate. They really do seem to represent the ‘middle’ of the road position of many Americans which IMO is fiscally conservative and less government instrustion into personal matters. My parents have been staunch Republicans for as long as I can remember, but even they have stated they’re tired of the fact that there is no longer a party that represents their values…which are decidely Libertarian. It is my impression that the Republicans have slid farther right while the Dems have moved farther left leaving most of us in the middle stranded with no active voice or representation in government.
By NetBanker
October 4, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this
What baggage does she have that a man who has been married 3 times doesn’t have? Well the baggage that their former spouse was a President. I think her additional challenge with Bill is one my mother touched on over the weekend. While she didn’t agree with many of his positions and certainly stated that his moral fiber doesn’t meet up with her values, she admitted that he has a presence when he speaks that still makes her think that he’s the kind of person that she’d really enjoy spending time with socially. Unfortunately, I don’t think that Hillary has this same warmth factor or engaging ‘stage’ persona or ‘it’ factor. Most people don’t, but it’s going to be harder for the spouse of someone who does and who was our leader to live up to that expectation.
By NetBanker
October 4, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this
She wants to destroy our healthcare system. Sorry, Jack, but I’m throwing the BS flag on that one. Her plan is not significantly different than any of the Republican plans and is shades of grey different than what Mitt Romney instituted in Massachusetts. Her plan doesn’t require mandatory coverage at all, but simply provides an option for people whose employers don’t offer health insurance to be able to obtain basic coverage. The catch 22 is that there are no controls in place to ensure that employers don’t drop their plans in favor of saving money and effectively dumping the employees into the government plan.
By Admit you're a wussie boy
October 4, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
Several reasons. The way she views the miltary. She wants to tax us to death. She wants to destroy our healthcare system. She (like Bush) will increase the size of gov’t. She doesn’t believe in the individual. She (as all politicians) cater to special interests over what the people want. and cause I don’t like her…..
This is a great example of how soundbites and the feeding of prejudice dominate what should be a process of thought and reason. “The way she views the military.” What does that mean? I listened to her speak about them numerous times. She said they’re doing a great job, and we should take better care of them, both within the scope of their mission and after they get back. I never heard her disparage them once. Ever. Have you? Please cite. She wants to destroy our healthcare system.” REALLY? How’s that? DESTROY something vital to survival, like health care? Something all Americans need but many cannot afford? Tweaking the system so more people can afford to be healthy is a form of DESTRUCTION? Can you explain how you came to this conclusion, Einstein? Or is that something Boortz said, and you repeat it like a monkey? “She doesn’t believe in the individual.” REALLY! Wow! You must know her pretty darned well to know in her heart she does not believe in individuals. She’s done a lot with her life as an individual, so I find that hard to imagine. But clearly, you’ve spent a lot of time with her over the years, and are qualified to say this, right? Please elaborate for us!
“And ‘cause I don’t like her.” No one says you have to get personal. The Republicans don’t have a single candidate I’d consider getting personal with. SO? Do you have any examples of anything she’s actually DONE to deserve your contempt? Have you ever listened to her, her consituents, or read her bills and voting record? Or do you base your opinion on what other people SAY about her? Bananas are healthy and affordable, and give you energy for swinging in trees.
By Lyrazel
October 4, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this
I wish people understood that the primary reason TV operates (and People mag too) is not for any other purpose than to sell advertising. TV is not about news, sports, weather, entertainment shows but about advertising, People Mag is not about celebrities but advertising. More viewers more cost of ads for that show; more subscriptions, more cost for ads in that magazine. I think the media distraction is mainly from people who view TV as an information source—and its just not. Consider national nightly news at 6. You have 30 minute show minus 7 minutes for special coverage and 10 minutes of ads leaving 7 minutes of news. All the news in 7 minutes? Following there is local station broadcast news plus weather and sports making their (additional) news in a program: 6 minutes of news, 3 minutes weather 3 minutes sports 3 special interest. You, the average viewer, who participate in watching natl. and local news have sat through 25 minutes of commercials in that one hour.
People mag’s founder once responded to criticism about their short articles by saying the articles are the length it takes the average person to take a (break) in a loo…
You can get my news facts by sitting with a stopwatch and taking count of how much news is reported, how long shows are, how long commercial breaks are. Its kind of fun if you like making yourself upset…lol…but it accounts for why I just do not watch TV much.
By Chilao
October 4, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this
Don’t forget all the time newscasters spend telling us what they will be telling us LATER in the same news broadcast; that is something I myself have wanted to get out a stop-watch to record. Geez, just tell us the news, not what you are GOING to tell us later.
of course when you read on-line news all day(My company likes to have well-informed and up-to-date-on-current-affairs employees wink wink), all TV news you see is old news by that time, sometimes it can be measured in DAYS Yeah, I read that news item on-line three days ago. Of course I realize many do not have that luxury.
By Archie
October 4, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
Netbanker thanks for at least addressing the baggage questions but I don’t consider her husband being an ex-president as baggage. It is what it is. I am in favor of universal healthcare and I said that numerous times on this blog so I am more interested in her ideas than her husband’s moral fiber(whatever that means). Hell, the president we have now was/is a drunk and I believe he lied to us(americans) so if someone likes libertarian,republican,etc. then vote that way but let’s not say bad things about her personally. Perhaps she should go one of the late night shows and play the guitar since it seems as if playing an instrument or drinking a beer is what’s important to the public.
By Archie
October 4, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
Netbanker thanks for at least addressing the baggage questions but I don’t consider her husband being an ex-president as baggage. It is what it is. I am in favor of universal healthcare and I said that numerous times on this blog so I am more interested in her ideas than her husband’s moral fiber(whatever that means). Hell, the president we have now was/is a drunk and I believe he lied to us(americans) so if someone likes libertarian,republican,etc. then vote that way but let’s not say bad things about her personally. Perhaps she should go one of the late night shows and play the guitar since it seems as if playing an instrument or drinking a beer is what’s important to the public.
By Jack
October 4, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
Admit you’re a wussie boy. Wow. I am sooooooo hurt. KMA. My opinion is just as valid as yours.
By Patty
October 4, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this
to women and girls who love “Beading”. Have found a store name “Organic Stones” has just opened and supplied all kinds of beads, finding, crystals, tools, etc with an excellent price. We may make something ver very special gifts to our lovers. For store hour and loacation check them out at (http://www.organicstones.com)
By Admit you got nothin'
October 4, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this
That’s right. It’s an opinion. You make perjorative statements about her as if they are facts, but when asked to back up these statements with facts or examples, your only answer is that it’s your opinion. You are entitled to it, and I’d be happy to listen and consider your opinion, if you actually had something meaningful or relevant to say. Basically, you don’t like the b—-, so you’ll repeat any lie that sounds good to you, in your opinion, ‘cause that’s your opinion. Don’t need no stinkin’ facts! That you use your opinion to trash someone’s qualifications and character indicates to me (in my opinion) that you have nothing valid with which to trash her — otherwise you’d use that instead.
By Professional
October 4, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
Careful, Jack, you’ll end up having some alchie bar-fly in some bizarre costume threatening to beat you up in front of some Little Five Points dive.
By Jack
October 4, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this
Looks like I got under somebody’s skin. I love it.
By chuck
October 4, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this
Come on Scalia. You didn’t really mean this did you?
It seems that most men are still intimidated by a powerful, opinionated woman. It is fine when a woman is like Laura Bush, and stands quietly behind her man and doesn’t give an opinion. But the women that have an opinion, and express it, they are ridiculed. For examples, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi.
There are plenty of outspoken women that men ADMIRE and respect. Condi Rice, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Kathy Cox (school super)here in Georgia, Karen Hughes, Lynne Cheney, Elizabeth Dole, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram and countless others. It’s the women who have STUPID OPINIONS who are “ridiculed” by right thinking men and women alike.
BTW, Reagan is the only President who experienced divorce and it was 30-40 years before his election. Every other president (except Buchanan, who never married) married and remained married to that wife until death parted them.
By Jack
October 4, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this
Lyrazel should run. You got my vote Hon. :)
By NetBanker
October 4, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this
It’s the women who have STUPID OPINIONS who are “ridiculed” by right thinking men and women alike. Given your list of ‘respected’ women who are all strictly conservative woemn let’s translate the above statement into what you are really implying…it’s only women with LIBERAL opinions or maybe non-conservative opinions that are ridiculed by conservatives.
Ann Coulter is not deserving of anyone’s respect when it comes to her treatment of others. She is mean, vindictive, and makes personal attacks on those whose positions she disagrees with without actually having a solid argument for her own position or against theirs. This is a classic Republican tactic…character assassination.
By Admit you got nothin'
October 4, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this
I am still waiting to see the intelligent men here explain with facts, examples, and logic, exactly why Senator Clinton (if you’re not her friend, her first name is not for your use unless you were indeed born in a barn) is unfit, unqualified, or generally a bad choice, among those we have, for the office of President. Perjorative generalizations, Limbaugh sound bites, and O’Reilly panic attacks do not qualify as meaningful examples. Your failure to produce meaningful facts or examples only strengthens my stance that you have nothing but your own personal uneasiness. That is a reasonable criteria for your vote, or lack thereof, but to present it as more than your own trembling fear of the c-word is disingenuous. Only valid arguments will dissuade the good readers here from our belief that your trembling has taken over your keen minds.
I gladly note, however, that one gracious gentleman has posted for us a short list of women who are worthy of admiration, and clear criteria for those who are not. Thank you sir for this enlightenment, as I was wondering which women to admire and whom to call “stupd c-words” today.
By Chilao
October 4, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this
Ann Coulter is not deserving of anyone’s respect when it comes to her treatment of others. She is mean, vindictive, and makes personal attacks on those whose positions she disagrees with without actually having a solid argument for her own position or against theirs.
thank you Net. I recently encountered someone who actually read her on-line everyday. Now I had made the decision PRIOR to learning that that this person, a woman, was not someone I needed in my life in any way shape or form. Major beech. So I was not surprised she drew inspiration from Coulter. LOL
By Jack
October 4, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this
That tactic works both ways Net. We should have listened to George Washington and have a 1 party system. The people are getting sick of all the partisan politics. Both parties have some good ideas but nothing gets done because of all the p!ssing contests.
By JokesOns
October 4, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this
Careful, Jack, you’ll end up having some alchie bar-fly in some bizarre costume threatening to beat you up in front of some Little Five Points dive.
Jack would have to start calling him sick crap regarding child porn (btw, you reference that too often to be healthy) first, state that he (jack) wants to meet to fight, and then not show up.
Get your facts straight.
By Chilao
October 4, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this
A judge in MN refused to let Senator Craig withdraw his guilty plea. Seems there IS meaning in reaching with your left arm, across your body to your right side, and running your hand UNDER the divider INTO the other person’s compartment, between bathroom stalls.
Actually that is not the LEGAL basis for the denial, Ima justa sayin’. LMAO
Now the foot-tappin, I could concede that could be merely nervous/high-strung energy, why even I have tapped my foot in the john, sitting, hearing music.
I mentioned these possibilities to a friend, he replied “Of course Craig is not gay, he’s just a bathroom pervert”.
By Jack
October 4, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this
Child porn? Don’t remember mentioning that. I think I said limp stick or something like that. Water under the bridge.
By JokesOn
October 4, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this
Water under the bridge.
Agreed - for us anyways.
By Jack
October 4, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
JokesOn. I don’t recall offering an apology for that exchange. Sometimes I let myself get too p**. Sorry.
By Lyrazel
October 4, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this
Chilao, Wondering just how many times I have extended my hand into the stall next to mine to chase a roll, to offer paper and have caught dropped things… I think the cost of police surveillance in airport bathrooms done in the name of security against terrorists is quite over-done. I would rather have the cops helping scan passengers through security than spend their shift sitting in a loo reading People magazine timing the articles…
By Scalia
October 4, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
Chuck, I stand by my statement. How many times has Condi Rice spoken out on the war, etc.? H-e-l-l, I haven’t seen or heard from her in months. She and Cheney have been absent.
And I agree with Net, the ones you named are conservative.
And Kathy Cox? Are you kidding me? Didn’t she steal money to get plastic surgery?
By lozen
October 4, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
What baggage does she have that a man who has been married 3 times doesn’t have? Well the baggage that their former spouse was a President. I wonder if she’ll ever be accused of starting a war to avenge a threat against Billy/daddy!
By Mara
October 4, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
since y’all were talking about candidates…statements like this one have me leaning Obama.
“The secret authorization of brutal interrogations is an outrageous betrayal of our core values, and a grave danger to our security. We must do whatever it takes to track down and capture or kill terrorists, but torture is not a part of the answer - it is a fundamental part of the problem with this administration’s approach. Torture is how you create enemies, not how you defeat them. Torture is how you get bad information, not good intelligence. Torture is how you set back America’s standing in the world, not how you strengthen it. It’s time to tell the world that America rejects torture without exception or equivocation. It’s time to stop telling the American people one thing in public while doing something else in the shadows. No more secret authorization of methods like simulated drowning. When I am president America will once again be the country that stands up to these deplorable tactics. When I am president we won’t work in secret to avoid honoring our laws and Constitution, we will be straight with the American people and true to our values,” - Barack Obama, in a statement released today.
By Chilao
October 4, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this
Lyrazel - well, I would never be reaching across into the next stall OR picking ANYTHING up from the floor that I myself did not drop there. But you can be sure I will be watching my foot stompin in a public restroom. Hope they are not piping in any Grand Funk Railroad but doubt that popular in Muzak anyway.
As far as a misuse of police resources, perhaps, but it seems the police there HAD had complaints from the public about that exact activity, so…
By JokesOn
October 4, 2007 4:02 PM | Link to this
JokesOn. I don’t recall offering an apology for that exchange. Sometimes I let myself get too p. Sorry.
Right back at ya. We both know that we do not get along or agree on most issues, but that is alright. It would be a very boring world if we all agreed on everything.
By Lyrazel
October 4, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this
Women have purses and bags that spill…but I am squeamish too, frequently airport-visiting women have children who throw mommy’s keys, cellphones or the roll of paper—but I suppose a men’s stall is his castle hence the invasion factor needs to be applied.
By NetBanker
October 4, 2007 5:21 PM | Link to this
That tactic works both ways Net. Yes, it does Jack. I’m still going with this being a GOP tactic, however due to the treatment of former memebers of the Administration or appointees who later spoke out against the administration. Every last one of them is attacked personally and it seems that was how the GOP has run their presidential campaigns. I freely admit that I’m pulling a “Well they did it first!” but in my observation that’s the truth and it’s not a behavior that I condone from either side.
By Alexrml
October 4, 2007 6:06 PM | Link to this
If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:
abuse-here@inbox.ru
thank you!
By Alexexq
October 4, 2007 6:20 PM | Link to this
If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:
abuse-here@inbox.ru
thank you!
By Alexexq
October 4, 2007 6:21 PM | Link to this
If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:
abuse-here@inbox.ru
thank you!
By NetBanker
October 5, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this
I couldn’t help, but giggle when I read this story….
Lawmaker’s child inserts nude in talk
By Julie Carr Smyth Associated Press
Published on: 10/05/07
Columbus, Ohio —- The image of a topless woman that popped up during a state legislator’s computer presentation to a high school class had been downloaded by a child of the lawmaker, a state House staffer said Thursday.
The image of a topless woman was projected after Rep. Michael Barrett inserted a data memory stick into the computer for a Tuesday lecture on how a bill becomes a law. He was speaking to an American government class of about 20 students in the northern Ohio city of Norwalk.
Barrett said he did not know at the time how the image had become intermingled with the graphics presentation he was there to show. He immediately shut down the computer and finished the presentation using paper handouts.
Preliminary results of a State Highway Patrol investigation found that one of Barrett’s four children downloaded the embarrassing image.
Though she stopped short of identifying the youngster, House Democratic Leader Joyce Beatty said in a statement: “This situation is a matter between him [Barrett], his teenaged son and his family.”
By Archie
October 5, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this
I am giggling too Netbanker but I tell you that teen will be subject to some capital-behind-whip punishment.
By Chilao
October 5, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this
Oh, they have tracked that down, I wondered, as it was possible his aide, who made up the stick for the presentation, had accidentally done it. Maybe the aide will now know to check the data contents existing before writing to it. I assume the lawmaker brought it from home for the aide to use for the presentation, with this newer knowledge. Not just plug it in and write to it.
I also thought it was rather hilarious. Can’t have those kiddies associating their respected elected officials with the visuals of woman’s breasts. LOL
We all notice the two columnists got fresher pics? I probably took a few days to catch it, myself.
By Chilao
October 5, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this
I must say that I DID feel sorry for the lawmaker, Rep. Michael Barrett. (assuming, which I did at the time, that it was not his pic) LOL
By chuck
October 5, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
Scalia, I’ve got to say my opinion of you has dropped a little bit the last couple of days. Condi Rice has been all over the news. She met just a couple of weeks ago with several mid-east leaders. She met with the Russians about sanctions for Iran, she’s meeting again in the middle east again next week. She testified before congress about a month ago about the progress of diplomacy in the region. Heck, just do a search for her on the AJC page. I bet there are dozens of hits in the past couple of months.
Your continued assertion that men don’t like Hilary because they are “intimidated” by outspoken women, is in a word, ridiculous. We like these other outspoken women. I doubt you would find ANY men other than perhaps Bill, who are intimidated by Hilary. I’m wondering if perhaps you are speaking from PERSONAL experience and whether that experience may have affected your lifestyle choices. I do not mean that as a slam,but rather just as an observation.
BTW, It was Linda Schrenko who stole money from the public for personal use and she is in PRISON now, where she belongs. Kathy Cox, the current superintendent of schools in Georgia is extremely ethical and also is doing a really good job. A much better super than Schrenko.
By lozen
October 5, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
HUMOR FOR LEXOPHILES: I wondered why the baseball was getting bigger. Then it hit me. Police were called to a day care where a three-year-old was resisting a rest. Did you hear about the guy whose whole left side was cut off? He’s all right now. The roundest knight at King Arthur’s round table was Sir Cumference. The butcher backed up into the meat grinder and got a little behind in his Work. To write with a broken pencil is pointless. When fish are in schools they sometimes take debate. The short fortune teller who escaped from prison was a small medium at large. A thief who stole a calendar got twelve months. A thief fell and broke his leg in wet cement. He became a hardened criminal. Thieves who steal corn from a garden could be charged with stalking. We’ll never run out of math teachers because they always multiply. When the smog lifts in Los Angeles , U.C.L.A. The math professor went crazy with the blackboard. He did a number on it. The professor discovered that her theory of earthquakes was on shaky ground. The dead batteries were given out free of charge. If you take a laptop computer for a run you could jog your memory. A dentist and a manicurist fought tooth and nail. A bicycle can’t stand alone; it is two tired. A will is a dead giveaway. Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana. A backward poet writes inverse.
By lozen
October 5, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this
How did he know? Poet W. H. Auden knew about George Bush long ago.
The Ogre does what ogres can, Deeds quite impossible for Man, But one prize is beyond his reach: The Ogre cannot master speech. About a subjugated plain, Among it’s desperate and slain, The Ogre stalks with hands on hips, While drivel gushes from his lips.
—W.H. Auden, “August, 1968”
By lozen
October 5, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this
Here’s one point of view about Ahmadinejad from ZNet:
Turning Ahmadinejad Into Public Enemy No. 1
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=67&ItemID=13872
By chuck
October 5, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this
Auden also understood the relationship between Bill and Hilary:
Evil is unspectacular and always human, And shares our bed and eats at our own table. W. H. Auden
By chuck
October 5, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this
BTW Lozen, thanks for reminding me of Auden. I hadn’t read him since college. He has a unique way of using language to get exactly to the point. I love some of his quotes. This is one of my favorites:
It takes little talent to see clearly what lies under one’s nose, a good deal of it to know in which direction to point that organ. W. H. Auden
By Chilao
October 5, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this
Thanks, Lozen; that commentator’s book, Napoleon’s Egypt: Invading the Middle East, sounds like it would be a good read.
By lozen
October 5, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this
Reported incidents of men in the military committing rape, sexual assault, and harassment against military women have skyrocketed by over 75 percent since 2004. Reports of military sexual assaults in 2004 were 1,700, and in 2006, they hit nearly 3,000. The Dept of Defense also reports action was taken against 780 men, from court martials and discharges to other administrative remedies. However, the Denver Post found that in 2003 approximately 5,000 men accused of military sex offenses had avoided prosecution since 1992.
The DOD insists that its program to address male violence against women in the military is a success.
By Scalia
October 5, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
Chuck, no slam taken. And be honest, there are a lot of men that are intimidated by outspoken women. I have met a few. I have had friends tell me that they would not date a woman that was outspoken because they would feel intimidated.
As for me, I love outspoken women. I have dated some, and find their opinions refreshing.
By lozen
October 5, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this
Scalia, what are these easily intimidated men afraid an outspoken woman will say/do? Do these men want women who don’t say anything? Are some subjects okay but others taboo? What would an inspoken woman be? Is an outspoken woman considered the opposite of a feminine woman? Is it the thinking the woman does, or just the speaking about it they are afraid of? I really am curious about this.
By Iranian Board of International Terrorism
October 5, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the plug, lozen. We think “Ahmy” is pretty terrific also.
Of course, that opinion may not be shared by the citizens of Iran who are now experiencing a 20% unemployment rate and still have to live with the fear of the dreaded “knock on the door in the middle of the night”. Also, despite having incredible reserves of crude oil, Iran is dependent upon imported energy. No wonder all the intelligent, educated people are leaving as fast as they can.
By So Tired
October 5, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this
Let me break it down for you, lozen:
Assertive—no prob.
Willing to speak up—no prob.
Forming your own opinions—no prob.
Being an unhappy, b*** woman who never has anything good to say about anyone or anything—that’s a problem.
By chuck
October 5, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this
Scalia, I am a teacher, so I am around outspoken women all the time. Being somewhat outspoken myself, it makes for some interesting conversations around the water cooler. Maybe it’s just the crowd that I hang out with, but we are all pretty much of the outspoken variety. We all listen to each other and respect each other, but we have a huge range of opinions on major issues and none of us is afraid to speak his or her mind.
I did have a principal one time who really didn’t know what to do with one particularly outspoken woman. I wouldn’t say that he was intimidated as much as stymied.
By Hopeful
October 5, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this
Wish me luck, all. I have a date tonight with my ex. She’s still p** that I treated her badly a few times, but misses all the excitement.
Thank God all the HSV test came back negative…..
By NetBanker
October 5, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this
Also, despite having incredible reserves of crude oil, Iran is dependent upon imported energy. I’m not sure this is exactly true. I understand that they are reliant on imported gasoline. Which makes me wonder why they’ve never built their own refineries so they could produce their own gas and diesel.
By Curious
October 5, 2007 1:59 PM | Link to this
chuck—Serious question for you: How do you put up with hanging around kids all day? I love learning and knowledge, but can’t stand kids. What outlook do you take to avoid burning out?
By Sandra-ev
October 5, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this
http://index52.jolajus.cn >sql server 2000 installation checklist http://index7.kudyzut.cn >sacks and stacks http://index2.fisipax.cn >phone numbers http://index9.fisipax.cn >mcleodcenter http://index52.fisipax.cn >arizona salt river tubing http://index35.jolajus.cn >revelde photos http://index37.wahuvas.cn >superior court of new jersey on line small claims http://index10.wahuvas.cn >beef ribs http://index29.jolajus.cn >swft swimmers training center http://index5.jolajus.cn >tens units replacement electrods
By Hopeful
October 5, 2007 2:10 PM | Link to this
NetB—Outside of a few tiny countries like the United Arab Emirates, none of the Arabs have developed a viable economy which doesn’t depend on the influx of huge oil profits. Both throughout the Middle East and down in Venezuala, they aren’t even technologically capable enough to pump and refine their own crude oil, so have had to split the profits with the Brits and Americans over the years. Initially, they signed away up to 75% of the profits, but have now whittled that down to around 10% or less I believe.
I’m not 100% sure, but believe the Iranians also lag in the production of domestic electricity, thus the push for nuclear energy.
By chuck
October 5, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this
Well Brudog, it’s like this. First you have to be secure in who you are. You can’t be a phony and you have to understand that you can’t fool the kids all the time. The kids will respect you if you keep it real. Second, it helps if you are a little bit of an adolescent yourself. You can’t be the kind of person who is too rigid about behavior. You have to relate well to kids who aren’t going to be perfect all of the time. You have to learn what battles are worth fighting and which ones are just energy sappers. In other words you have to have a little common sense.
By NetBanker
October 5, 2007 2:40 PM | Link to this
One would think that with all that money flowing into the area, that more Arab countries as well as Iran (which is Persian) would have educated citizens so that they could run their own operations and build refineries. Then again, actually doing work doesn’t seem to be as big a part of Arab culture as it is in other parts of the world. I believe that I read that in the UAE there are a larger number of foreign workers than nationals.
By chuck
October 5, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this
Hey NetB. You were right on point:
The Middle East ‘s poor economic and social performance today has also prompted some to argue there is a malignancy in the prevailing culture. Such views are fuelled by the inexcusably poor performance of Arab nations. In the last two decades, no region besides sub-Saharan Africa has seen income per person grow as slowly as the Middle East . At the current rate, it will take the average Arab living there 140 years to double his or her income. Asians, Europeans and North Americans are expected to double their incomes in the next 10 years. The total economic output - including oil - of all Arab countries is less than that of Spain , and the Middle East ‘s unemployment rates are the highest in the developing world while its literacy rates rank near the bottom.
For the full article:
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=16870
By lozen
October 5, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this
No wonder all the intelligent, educated people are leaving (Iran)as fast as they can. Not nearly as fast as people are leaving Iraq!
By lozen
October 5, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this
Being an unhappy, b woman who never has anything good to say about anyone or anything—that’s a problem.* That sounds like someone you would call an unhappy, b* woman, not an outspoken woman.
By lozen
October 5, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
By Iranian Board of International Terrorism (AKA DOGS-IT) Thanks for the plug, lozen. We think “Ahmy” is pretty terrific also.
Too da— bad we live with a bunch of ignorant jingoists who think if you want to know all sides of a story you’re a traitor! You just keep sucking up to GW and ignore the rest of the world but don’t expect educated, inquisitive people to do the same.
By lozen
October 5, 2007 4:26 PM | Link to this
Pastor John Hagee, leader of the politically powerful group Christians United for Israel (CUFI) says “It is time for America to…consider a military preemptive strike against Iran to prevent a nuclear holocaust in Israel and a nuclear attack in America.”
The End of Faith: Religion, Terrorism, and the Future of Reason, Sam Harris has written a book about the clash of faith and reason in today’s world. Harris offers a vivid historical tour of mankind’s willingness to suspend reason in favor of religious beliefs, even when those beliefs are used to justify harmful behavior and sometimes heinous crimes. He asserts that in the shadow of weapons of mass destruction, we can no longer tolerate views that pit one true god against another. Most controversially, he argues that we cannot afford moderate lip service to religion—an accommodation that only blinds us to the real perils of fundamentalism. While warning against the encroachment of organized religion into world politics, Harris also draws on new evidence from neuroscience and insights from philosophy to explore spirituality as a biological, brain-based need. He calls on us to invoke that need in taking a secular humanistic approach to solving the problems of this world.
By NetBanker
October 5, 2007 4:46 PM | Link to this
Too da— bad we live with a bunch of ignorant jingoists who think if you want to know all sides of a story you’re a traitor! You just keep sucking up to GW and ignore the rest of the world but don’t expect educated, inquisitive people to do the same. Go Lozen!! I do find it frustrating that too many people don’t accept exploring other facets of the same issue to flesh out a full understanding of a problem, issue, or situation. In a court of law we expect to hear from both the prosecution and the defense, but when it comes to foreign policy or U.S. government positions too many simply accept the statements without question or looking at the other side. There’s an adage that states “There are two sides to every story” for a reason.
By NetBanker
October 5, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this
Have a great weekend everyone!! And a hip-hip-hooray for Christopher Columbus for those of us who are off work on Monday to celebrate his discovery.
By btzgymd nkzsphi
October 5, 2007 6:59 PM | Link to this
bqtjvskmi iamjptsw ayvmqgx shzq ziqljoagr bcgtdxze kfwusjry