Check Out My Butt

I am wearing a really nice pair of slacks today - they flow and swirl about elegantly. I was quite pleased with them... until someone pointed out that the circular patters all over them converge into a bullseye on my butt.

 

Note to self: Always look at your backside in the mirror before you leave the house. Or the department store.

Smells Like...

So my daughter and I are shopping in Yankee Candles, and we sniff this new fragrance called "Mountain Lodge." We turn to each other at the same time and say "Mmmm, smells like a man!"

Nothing like the smell of a clean guy.

Missing You

"I missed you," he said. "I grew desperate, and found myself re-reading
all those texts you sent me."

"Texts?" she said, utterly mystified. She couldn't remember sending him
any texts. "What did they say?"

"Happy Thanksgiving, Merry Christmas, Happy Easter..." he replied.

Census Phone Call Follow-Up

I got a call yesterday from the Census bureau. They wanted to follow up and ask additional questions. When they told me I HAD to take their call and it was part of the census, I grew infuriated.

As I pointed out, I'd read nothing about that and it certainly hadn't been mentioned on the census. I'm betting it's not illegal to refuse to answer any additional questions when you've already completely and accurately filled out the questionnaire and sent it in.

Besides, what a great con job it would be if someone called supposedly from the Census Bureau, and asked additional questions (such as your social security number, bank account number, etc.) I wonder how many people would fall for that?

I get a little antsy - I like my privacy. What can I say?

In the end, I chose not to stand on principle and I answered their questions.

What a sell-out!

Islamorada: The Florida Keys

The Lucrative Rewards for Curing No One

A friend of mine almost died of a drug overdose this weekend.

As I have a "no drug" policy, I have a very hard time feeling any sympathy for someone who makes the self-indulgent choices that I choose not to make. However, because I was the only one this addict could turn to at the time, I was the one who went to the hospital. Twice. Once to take him there for the O.D., and once to take him back during his detox as he was puking up blood.

Yeah, drugs are fun.

I called his best guy friend "Dan", who is a recovered alcoholic. During the weekend drama, Dan texted me saying "Oxys are what's killing everybody, just had an old friend die. He needs to go to rehab."

To which I replied "He's been thru rehab 3-4 times in the last year and a half. He could TEACH it. He needs to simply make up his mind."

Dan wrote "Well then, we will just watch him die, if he doesn't get help somewhere because what u c now is him making up his mind."

And what I said is completely true, given the quality of our rehab clinics. You see, rehab clinics get a ton of government money to conduct classes and therapy sessions for people who have been convicted of illegal drug use, or who qualify for a government program through other avenues.

These clinics can also anesthetize an addict who is going through withdrawal symptoms, so the addict is basically sedated as they come down. This only makes it easier for the addict to get on the stuff again, as there is no real punishment for it: The addict doesn't associate any real pain with the process, and in his opinion, the pain he causes others isn't important.

It also means the clinics get repeat customers, which is very important. After all, short of becoming dealers themselves, they need a constant influx of customers to justify the public funds they're dipping into.

There is one lone voice, crying in the wilderness, and his name is Dr. Stanton Peele. But Dr. Peele's clinic is too successful, in that it teaches self-control and stops the psychobabble which enables the addict. So, Dr. Peele's clients have a vastly lower recidivism rate than standard drug rehab facilities. That makes Dr. Peele a great threat to these clinics, and obviously they all keep hoping he'll just shut up and go away.

So our clinics in the Tampa Bay Area are worthless (and I assume most of them are). As long as they keep coddling our addicts and telling them that their choices are not their fault, they will never get better.

Which is exactly why there are no effective drug treatment centers here.

Dancing With the Harlots

I've written about sleezy kids' dance recitals before. It incensed me then, and still does. Interestingly, the parents at the studio that I wrote about must have thrown a complete fit, because I was dragged unwillingly to this year's dance recital and it was actually in good taste!

But this tendency toward making kids into adorable hooker look-a-likes continues.



The mothers are often the first to defend this poor choice because (obviously) it makes them look very, very bad. Also, they may be re-living their childhoods through their children - we've all seen the desperate mom who obsessively thrusts her kids into anything that she wanted to do when she was young.

But... what's the school's excuse?

One thing's for sure - a child molester can get a floor show cheap these days.

The Thrift Shop Find

Every other weekend is filled with teenagers now. Which is wonderful. I don't understand people who don't want children around... or, in this case, young adults. Whatever. A full home is a happy home.

So this weekend we loaded up and hit garage sales, thrift stores, and the beach. New clothes (and other assorted sundries) were acquired and, best of all, we discovered this carved wooden statue:


Perhaps I should've bought it. It could come in "hand"y.

The Russian (and other countries') Adoption Problem

The woman who sent her adoptive son back to Russia with a note stating that he was a sociopath is hardly a woman who snapped after singing "I'm a little teapot" one too many times.

She has done what so many parents who have adopted from Russia have been tempted to do. (To read more about this, go here and here).

The sad truth, and one that has been known for years, is that most children from Russia (or many other third world countries) come with problems. It's easy to see why. Here's the recipe:

1. Go to a third world country (and parts of Russia are just that)
2. Take one child being generally unwanted
3. Institutionalize that child for a long time
4. Couple that with him moving to another country and being forced to assimilate the culture

And voila! One freshly made (you choose):

A. Sociopath
B. Child with severe attachment disorder
C. Hell on wheels
D. All of the above

I've read of these cases for years, and I'm shocked that it's taken this long for anyone to take real notice of them.

What's amazing is that it took this one incident to put the spotlight on an issue that's been going on for a very long time. And truthfully, there's no solution. If you want a child desperately enough, you may want there to be a solution, but wishful thinking can't change facts.

Studies repeatedly show a child's personality is developed between 3 and 5 years of age. And these formative years are usually filled with trauma in the case of an unwanted child.

Now other sympathetic families are weighing in, telling of their miserable Russian adoptions. Some have rationalized, some have muddled through it all, but most speak of the toll it takes and the burdens they must carry due to the children they took on.

We are exporting other countries' problems when we take on their children, with rare exceptions.

Years ago I had acquaintances who chose to adopt from India because they felt specially attuned to that country (due to the whimsical fact that the husband played the Sitar). They went through a long and painful process, sending money to India, getting pictures, etc.

The baby was a girl. She had been raised since birth in an orphanage run by nuns, but the problem was that the orphanage had very little funding. Therefore, the children often didn't receive proper nutrition.

When this couple received the baby, she was about 8 months old, had been held rarely (so her head was somewhat deformed from being left in the crib so much), and she was severely thin and undernourished (she was the size of a newborn). As a result, their pediatrician warned them that there was likely to be brain damage or at least mental development issues.

The parents joyfully announced all this to us because, frankly, it was new. And any experience, when new, is something you think you can happily overcome, slogging through mountains and singing the theme from The Sound of Music. It was A Challenge, A Rite of Passage, A Chance To Show Off Parenting Skills.

But that child is now about 18 and I wonder how she fared. And if she lived. And whether or not the marriage survived. And when the bloom fell off the rose, did the Sitar playing husband leave or did he merely sink into despair? For usually it's the wife who takes on the true burden of raising a special needs child.

It is often very hard to bond with a child that is not your biological child, for the simple reason that hormones play a factor when a baby is born. Without your hormones singing that child's praises, it's much tougher to get past the bumps in the road, let alone the crevasses.

Thus, an adoptive child does not have the advantages that a biological child has. Over the years, I have had close friends who were adopted, and not one of them ever felt that bond. And, may I venture to add that it's because their parents apparently never felt that bond, either.

I am sure that there are exceptions: For instance, if a parent adopts a child right after the loss of a child, they may be able to transfer the bond. And there are parents who may truly believe that they are as close to that bond as they can be. One adoption site says that research shows that adoptive families bond as closely as biological ones. I'm not disputing that bonding occurs, but I question to what degree it occurs.

Adoption and assimilation of children is tough enough as it is, without adding other problems to the mix. Although we certainly don't have enough children to adopt within the USA (due to abortion and restrictive laws), going outside of the country isn't a better solution.

"Immediate Family Only" Policy is About to End

It's about time. Sometimes Obama gets it right, even if he has the wrong motives.

Barack Obama is ordering that nearly all hospitals allow patients to say who has visitation rights and who can help make medical decisions. But his reason is that he wants to pander to gays and give them equal rights when it comes to their partners.

This is a payoff for an earlier campaign promise Obama made in exchange for the gay vote. Not such an amazing reason, when there are so MANY varieties of reasons for this move. And not only gays will profit.

Couples who were living together have wanted this right for years. And in my case, the majority of my family no longer lives near me. In fact, my siblings all live overseas. So close friends and significant others have taken the place of family many years ago. And this is common in an America where people are constantly on the move. *I* am the mutant, having stayed in Florida for as long as I have.

Sadly, this change of policy is something that only a Democrat would have instituted, which shows how stagnant the Republican party has become.

Crist Makes Another Bad Decision

Despite my earlier belief that Crist couldn't possibly make another boneheaded move, he just vetoed a bill that would make teachers ... *gasp* ... work for their pay and demand job performance based raises.

Wow, that was close! Let's not get carried away! Good thing the unions got in the way, or we might have something in Florida resembling real education.

Fox News vs. Republicans

An interesting article in Newsweek today argues that the Republican establishment is rejecting Fox News.

This only makes sense, as the Republicans are part of the same good ole boy network that the Democrats are part of. I can't imagine rank-and-file politicians favoring any network that can stir up the masses.

I'm not a fan of Fox News (I never watch it). I've always found CNN to be relatively impartial until Lou Dobson left. Now I just glean my news from internet news sources. But I find this new twist on network news to be fascinating!

Oprah

It's about time someone tries to take Oprah Winfrey down a notch. For an accurate discussion of what Oprah believes, go to this article by a non-denominational Christian think tank. It's a pretty good assessment of what I've observed over the years.

Now Kitty Kelley, famous gossip hound and biographer, has taken on The Great O, and has found that many media outlets won't discuss the book with her, for fear of alienating Oprah.

Why?

Because Oprah has a large number of mindless, brain-dead fans who drool over every word she emits and follow her blindly. To anger Oprah is to anger her fans.

Kitty Kelley has done many biographies and angered many people. I've often heard the controversies, the arguments, and the denials. So, is she telling the truth?

The people who praised her biography of Ronald Reagan and were aghast when we questioned her facts cannot decry her now.

On the other hand, those of us who felt that she was full of crap to begin with may finally find some allies.

I won't buy the book, but you can bet that I'll rent it from our local library.

Dear Roger

Some of you may remember Roger, from When a Guy Can't Take a Hint. Well, he still hasn't taken the hint. Although he laid low for a while, he started annoying Cindy again. So, I helpfully composed a "Dear John" letter for her:

Dear Roger,

You are a putz.

For a guy who looks like he belongs in the geriatric version of The Village People, you really aren't all that virile, either. I wish I could say that you are a man that could fulfill my dreams, but you fulfill my nightmares.

If your personality were of any note, I would enjoy keeping you as a friend. But when a personality is as sour as old jockey shorts, there is little to recommend it.

Your sparkling wit and repartee... oh wait, you don't have that.

If I were to put together a list of all your virtues, you might make it into a fortune cookie slip.

Much love,
Cindy

If she has the guts to send this, I think it will solve the problem.

The Civil War from a Religious Perspective

The Christian "Roll Over" Argument

Obviously since people have devoted entire books to the topic of the American Civil War, I cannot possibly do it justice in a short amount of time. (For those of you who are interested in delving into it, I highly recommend William Safire's book "Freedom").

However, there is a renewed interest in the Civil War at this time, due to the current Federal government's continual references to The Commerce Clause in the Constitution. There are rumors that states may, once again, try to secede.

I have heard some Christians cite scripture from the Bible, who say that it is our obligation to bow to the government, with little exception. (The exception would be if the government demanded we do something which is against what the Bible teaches).

But How Do You Define Government?

There were 13-16 states that defined the confederacy in 1861, out of a total of 33 states at that time. So it was a significant number of states (almost half) that decided to exert what they considered to be their state rights.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Kentucky Resolution:

"Resolved, that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that by compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force: That to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party....each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress."

Yeah, he was the master of the run-on sentence.

What It Boils Down To

But what it boils down to is that Jefferson (the third President of the USA) felt that the States called the shots and created the Federal government, thus the Federal government wasn't supposed to reign over the states, but was supposed to be ancillary to them.

Jefferson also wrote the famous "Separation Letter" which set the precedence for the separation of church and state, and contributed to a great deal of thought as to how government should work in the early stages of our republic, so let's not quickly dismiss him as a crackpot.

So, What Does it Mean?

So, is it truly rebellion if the states try to secede again? And if so, is it contrary to what a Christian should do? And, perhaps more importantly (as Christians are a minority), is it something that should be considered by a citizen of the USA?

Rebellion, like history, is in the eye of the beholder. It can certainly be slanted to justify whatever we might want. However, this is a topic which we need to begin to consider, as the Federal government continues to extend its powers via the excuse of the Commerce Clause.

Neal McDonough

Neal McDonough is a name I hadn't heard before, as I watch so little TV. I recognize him from his pictures, but I have no idea what I've seen him do.

But Neal McDonough is apparently the man with the big cahonas in Hollywood, and he chooses not to share them with everyone. Because of that, he was recently fired from a new TV series, as he wouldn't do a sex scene with sleazy co-star Virginia Madsen (who apparently has no qualms about it and couldn't be bothered to stick up for the guy).

Wow, an actor with morals! I don't think we've seen such a thing since Pat Boone.

One writer snarkily commented that morals didn't stop McDonough from playing a serial killer once, but let's face it: Playing a serial killer hardly compares to getting naked in front of a crew of people and being very intimate with a naked skank when you're a married man with children.

At a time when we keep hearing how skeevy Hollywood men can be (thanks to Tiger and Jesse), McDonough brings a breath of fresh air.

Bravo, Neal McDonough, Bravo!

April Fools' Day

In the grand tradition of April Fools' Day, Google has announced that they're changing their name to "Topeka". As Google is my homepage, I was met with this announcement immediately and, half awake, I read their explanation with growing bewilderment until it dawned on me that today is April Fools' Day.

You would think I would remember April Fools' Day. My grandmother was the patron saint of April Fools' Day. Forget about St. Patrick - no one can lay claim to a holiday like my grandmother could.

I don't know how the woman was able to find so much fake food in an era when there were no computers and we lived in Florida, for heavens' sake (there wasn't much shopping variety here in the 70s). But every April Fools' Day she delightedly fooled one of us into almost taking a bite from a sponge-and-rubber sandwich or a piece of angel food cake made from sponge. And that was just the opening round.

There was always a spectacular prank on April Fools' Day. We learned from an early age to be fully aware that April first was coming, but although we felt we were prepared, Grandma always was able to get at least one of us.

One year, fully knowing that it was April Fools' Day, I went running to answer the phone. "Saur!" my grandmother said excitedly, "Oh my goodness! Run outside and look real quick! There's a hot air balloon over your house and I can see it from here!"

What do you think I did? Yup, you guessed it. When I got back to the phone, Grandma was laughing hysterically.

Of course the apple didn't fall far from the tree, and I've been known to indulge in a prank or two myself.

One of my best friends, Pov, has a gorgeous collectible car that he's madly in love with. During the restoration process, he had become extremely annoying to all of us. We heard more about carburetors and paint jobs than any of us ever wanted to hear in our lives.

One day, when he was over at my house, I had run to the store to grab a couple things. When I came back I walked by him casually and simply said "Where's your car, Pov?"

He ran outside quicker than I ran when I thought there was a hot air balloon waiting for me.

Etc.

Insurance is No Longer a Career: It's a Nightmare

I pity everyone who sells insurance for a living. As if it's not bleak enough, our local news channel 8 is blaring a breaking news story about scammers who bilk the elderly by pretending to be insurance agents.

I happen to know that the ONLY market for insurance right now is the supplemental Medicare market. When the elderly get spooked, that will close the final door in the insurance industry and agents will join the ranks of the unemployed everywhere.

The New Insurance Vista

Now that this botched Obama bill has passed, insurance will drastically change. For what I believe to be a very realistic look, go to this article in Investors Business Daily. It's an eye opener.

Jesse James

What a skank.

His third mistress has just "revealed" herself (pun intended) and at least one has said she's had unprotected sex with him. All of them are hardly the-girl-next-door types, unless you live next to a strip club.

Yuck.

The Sad-but-True Cost of the New Health Care Bill

I really had hoped for something more. But, as the saying goes, a camel is a horse made by committee.

The New York Times believes it "...would raise, not lower, federal deficits, by $562 billion."

What a nightmare.

Hoodlums & Scalawags

Our local newspaper, the St. Pete Times, tells of how a School Board member labeled disruptive jerks as "hoodlums".

The disruptive jerks were black, and the next thing you know, they took offense to the term.

If only they'd spend more time in the classroom and less time being hoodlums, they would've learned what it meant.

The reporter attempts to explain away their overreaction by this convoluted reasoning: The first half of the word "hoodlum" is "hood", as in "neighborhood", and since black thugs often refer to their home territory as "the hood", they own this term and it shouldn't be used in any other words about them.

I would suggest the term "scalawag", which was a favorite label my grandfather always used for hoodlums. But wait! It's fraught with meaning also! Apparently it was "...a moniker for southern whites who supported Reconstruction following the Civil War." Well, we wouldn't want to call black hoodlums "scalawags", then, would we?

How about "reprobate"? Nah - our hoodlums would probably think it has a sexual meaning (reproduction and masturbate) and we wouldn't want to confuse them any further. They can hardly be rocket scientists, after all, if they don't value schooling.

How about "delinquent"? Certainly not! Anyone who eats in a deli would be infuriated! Hold the mustard!

How about "hooligan" or "scofflaw"? Well honestly, could you take anyone seriously who used those terms? I know *I* couldn't.

"Avast ye hooligan! I demand redress for your knavish behavior! Yea verily, I shall smite thee!"

So...

How about just plain "jackasses"? As donkeys can't talk, it's safe to say they can't object.

Wolf Attack

Wow. The wolf experts are shocked. There's been a fatal wolf attack in Alaska.

They express surprise! "Wow," they say. "This is only the second documented fatality ever recorded!"

Yeah, ya think? Know why? Because it's hard to document something when you're dead and your intestines have taken up residence in a wolf's belly!

Only survivors have the chance to talk.

There are two reasons we're now hearing of these attacks. First, we have better modes of communication.

For instance, let's say a wolf attack happened in the 1800s. If there were any survivors, they might eventually get to "civilization" where they could tell the tale of the attack but there would be no real evidence, little interest in finding any, and the story would become "rumor". And how many average people wrote then, and if they could write, how many took the time to do so when there was a living to be made? And how much of their writing would survive to become "documentation"? Very little.

Secondly, our modern lives give us better reaction time and we have more ability to do research than ever before. Not only were the wolves that killed this woman tracked and killed, but they're also going to make sure that the right wolves were killed by matching their teeth to the bite marks. This concept would have been unheard of in the 1800s.

To sum it up: Wolf attacks are quite plausible. I have always been amused by how many "experts" maintain that wolves are lovable, harmless fuzzballs. Look at their teeth, for crying out loud! It's not like they chew cud.