And Yes, it can happen again.
HISTORY REPEATS. WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Romance Impaled on Spike.
And you wonder why romance is dead.
These "girls" (I struggle not to say airheads) recommend, literally, that men be simultaneously nice and distant/inattentive/mean to women in order to gain their affection.
This is what youth relationships have become: a series of head games being played for the purpose of.....? I don't know what. For men, the answer is sex, for women...? They get sex followed by..... most likely a man's bitter post-coital rejection; because assholes DO NOT CARE about women's feelings and men who play games for sex can't wait to reject women post-sex.
And all this is done for.... women? You know dear reader, all of us "women haters" like me want to go back to a system that ultimately resolves to women being actually ROMANCED instead of being a one-night stand.
What is contained below is not COURTSHIP. So long as the drivel espoused in this video is true, YOU, WOMEN of the western world, WILL NEVER BE COURTED, EVER, EVER AGAIN. Period.
These "girls" (I struggle not to say airheads) recommend, literally, that men be simultaneously nice and distant/inattentive/mean to women in order to gain their affection.
This is what youth relationships have become: a series of head games being played for the purpose of.....? I don't know what. For men, the answer is sex, for women...? They get sex followed by..... most likely a man's bitter post-coital rejection; because assholes DO NOT CARE about women's feelings and men who play games for sex can't wait to reject women post-sex.
And all this is done for.... women? You know dear reader, all of us "women haters" like me want to go back to a system that ultimately resolves to women being actually ROMANCED instead of being a one-night stand.
What is contained below is not COURTSHIP. So long as the drivel espoused in this video is true, YOU, WOMEN of the western world, WILL NEVER BE COURTED, EVER, EVER AGAIN. Period.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Absurd
I hear men get blamed for this all the time, but frankly, I blame women. Really, Hollywood is to blame, but they're so shifty and corrupt, they're impossible to blame as they're not really a thing so much as they are a twisted, corrupt gathering of human kind's worst vices.
http://news.stylecaster.com/weight-loss-gone-bad-14-celebs-that-went-from-curvy-hot-stick-thin/
These were healthy, very attractive-looking women (Jennifer Connolly in particular) that randomly decided to lose 30 pounds for no reason. It all but emaciated their figures and rendered them unfeminine twigs.
As the article points out, the women's curves were wanted, desired, and admired BY MEN before the women themselves decided to become walking toothpicks.
So just for the record, ladies: MEN LOVE CURVES. Healthy does not always mean skinny and NEVER extremely skinny.
http://news.stylecaster.com/weight-loss-gone-bad-14-celebs-that-went-from-curvy-hot-stick-thin/
These were healthy, very attractive-looking women (Jennifer Connolly in particular) that randomly decided to lose 30 pounds for no reason. It all but emaciated their figures and rendered them unfeminine twigs.
As the article points out, the women's curves were wanted, desired, and admired BY MEN before the women themselves decided to become walking toothpicks.
So just for the record, ladies: MEN LOVE CURVES. Healthy does not always mean skinny and NEVER extremely skinny.
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
The Question Not Asked
The elephant in the room: WHY are women bringing children into the world when they know the father either 1) does not want them or 2) is not married to the mom, and never will be.
Women have the right to an abortion. These fatherless children are not here by accident. Only SOME of them came into the world with a father around and then the parents split up. But a very large and growing amount are brought into a world in which MOM KNEW AHEAD OF TIME the father would not be there.
SO WHY DO MOM'S INSIST ON HAVING KIDS THEY KNOW WILL BE FATHERLESS? Doesn't that put a large portion of the fatherless crisis on WOMEN'S shoulders/
No, of course. Because you can never blame a woman for anything, even when she is clearly the one to blame; truly the answer is to drag men to court and bankrupt them; the fact that the fatherless crisis has become WORSE over the duration of 3 decades of that INSANE policy WILL NEVER ENTER THE THICK-SKULLED CRANIUM OF a liberal or most other Americans.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/25/fathers-disappear-from-households-across-america/
Women have the right to an abortion. These fatherless children are not here by accident. Only SOME of them came into the world with a father around and then the parents split up. But a very large and growing amount are brought into a world in which MOM KNEW AHEAD OF TIME the father would not be there.
SO WHY DO MOM'S INSIST ON HAVING KIDS THEY KNOW WILL BE FATHERLESS? Doesn't that put a large portion of the fatherless crisis on WOMEN'S shoulders/
No, of course. Because you can never blame a woman for anything, even when she is clearly the one to blame; truly the answer is to drag men to court and bankrupt them; the fact that the fatherless crisis has become WORSE over the duration of 3 decades of that INSANE policy WILL NEVER ENTER THE THICK-SKULLED CRANIUM OF a liberal or most other Americans.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/25/fathers-disappear-from-households-across-america/
Saturday, December 22, 2012
The War on Image.
I publish this because single dads are likewise considered evil, menacing predators on helpless women, which is an insult to men and an even worse insult, in my opinion, to women.
http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/
http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/
Thursday, December 20, 2012
How Bad is Family Court?
This bad.
There is literally no law in family court. They just make things up. If this was done in criminal court, the jails would be teeming with innocent men and riots, like in a third world country, would erupt en masse.
The comment that ethical standards are low is absurd: there are no ethical standards to speak of, whatsoever. Most defendants can't afford to appeal and the Appellate court reaffirms all but the most heinous judgements from the lower courts anyway.
Detroit judge Wade McCree was hearing a child support suit involving a mother, Geniene La’Shay Mott and her ex-husband, Robert King. The only problem with that was that McCree and Mott entered into a serious and long-term sexual relationship during the legal case.
It seems that McCree and Mott regularly had sex in his judicial chambers. Apparently just to make sure he got caught, McCree sent Mott literally hundreds of emails and text messages affirming their affair. Those included sending photographs of himself, apparently nude, to her. Soon enough Mott was pregnant with McCree’s child, and, before anyone found out, he sought a divorce from his wife. But his wife got wind of the affair and the pregnancy and decided to make life hard on her husband. That made McCree nervous, so he tried to turn the tables on Mott, telling law enforcement officials she was stalking him.
I have to say that only a guy like McCree could possibly be that stupid. Here’s a woman with hundreds of texts and emails from McCree, plus a child who’s verifiably his inside her body, and he thinks he can convince someone that he’s a victim of her stalking? Into the bargain, she had a check McCree had written on his dead mother’s estate for a house they planned to buy and live in together. You can’t make this stuff up.
What his stalking claim of course did was to anger Mott who revealed all to the press. And by “revealed all,” I include the fact that, during their torrid affair, McCree allowed Mott to choose what penalty the court would order against Robert King for falling behind on his child support.
Perhaps the crowning glory to this buffoon’s antics came in yet another text he sent to Mott.
Now, I’m mindful of the fact that Detroit courts have some pretty unorthodox ideas about things like due process and judicial ethics. After all, it was in the case of Marianne Godboldo, a Detroit mother, that we learned that when child protective services wants an order taking a child from a parent, it not only writes the order itself, no evidence is required and the judge’s clerk will sign it for them. That’s exactly what happened in Godboldo’s case; an order to take her daughter from her was completely processed with no hearing, no evidence and no participation of any kind by any judge.
So, given that ethical landscape, maybe we can begin to see why McCree could actually believe that allowing a litigant with whom you’re having sex, to decide her own case, might be overlooked as simply how things are done.
This man is a disgrace to himself and to the legal profession. He must be and I suspect will be tossed off the bench and disbarred. But of course he’s just one judge. The same system that allowed him to believe that he could get away with all his countless wrongs is still firmly in place.
There is literally no law in family court. They just make things up. If this was done in criminal court, the jails would be teeming with innocent men and riots, like in a third world country, would erupt en masse.
The comment that ethical standards are low is absurd: there are no ethical standards to speak of, whatsoever. Most defendants can't afford to appeal and the Appellate court reaffirms all but the most heinous judgements from the lower courts anyway.
Detroit Judge Allows Mom to Decide Dad’s Punishment in Child Support Case
December 14th, 2012 by Robert Franklin, Esq. Just in case you thought there was even a shred of integrity left in the family court system, let this story lay that misguided notion to rest for good (The Daily Caller, 12/8/12).Detroit judge Wade McCree was hearing a child support suit involving a mother, Geniene La’Shay Mott and her ex-husband, Robert King. The only problem with that was that McCree and Mott entered into a serious and long-term sexual relationship during the legal case.
“It went from being a summer fling and just something to do to falling in love, promises of marriage, me getting pregnant, us buying a house together, name it,” Mott told WJBK-TV.That all happened despite the fact that McCree was married. But mere marriage vows wouldn’t stop a man like McCree. Neither would ethical and legal restrictions on judges having sex with litigants in cases before them. And neither did common sense or any notion of personal dignity dissuade McCree from doing everything in his power to screw up his career, his marriage, the life of his unborn child and, most certainly that of Robert King.
It seems that McCree and Mott regularly had sex in his judicial chambers. Apparently just to make sure he got caught, McCree sent Mott literally hundreds of emails and text messages affirming their affair. Those included sending photographs of himself, apparently nude, to her. Soon enough Mott was pregnant with McCree’s child, and, before anyone found out, he sought a divorce from his wife. But his wife got wind of the affair and the pregnancy and decided to make life hard on her husband. That made McCree nervous, so he tried to turn the tables on Mott, telling law enforcement officials she was stalking him.
I have to say that only a guy like McCree could possibly be that stupid. Here’s a woman with hundreds of texts and emails from McCree, plus a child who’s verifiably his inside her body, and he thinks he can convince someone that he’s a victim of her stalking? Into the bargain, she had a check McCree had written on his dead mother’s estate for a house they planned to buy and live in together. You can’t make this stuff up.
What his stalking claim of course did was to anger Mott who revealed all to the press. And by “revealed all,” I include the fact that, during their torrid affair, McCree allowed Mott to choose what penalty the court would order against Robert King for falling behind on his child support.
“OK, SO LET’S GO WITH WHAT YOU PROPOSED… GO 2 JAIL (150 DAYS), RELEASE UPON PAYMENT OF $1,500,” the text message read.Having allowed a litigant in his court to decide the case against the other party, McCree retired to his judicial chambers and once again had sex with Mott.
“OR, GET A TETHER & BRING BACK W/N 30 DAYS $2500 OR SERVE 9 MONTHS! BONUS: PAY W/N 30 DAYS, REMOVE TETHER. NOW BACK 2 US… WHAT ARE WE DOIN AFTER COURT THURSDAY???”
Perhaps the crowning glory to this buffoon’s antics came in yet another text he sent to Mott.
“Naturally if it got out that we were seeing each other before your B.D.’s [baby daddy] case closed, everybody could be in deep (expletive). Why you want to spend time with a man like me remains a mystery, but if you’ll have me… then as Bill Withers said, ‘use me up!’ SMOOCHES.”Uh, Wade, if you can’t figure out why the mother in a case being heard by you would “want to spend time with a man like” you, then you’re too dumb to be left home alone, much less be a judge.
Ethical Standards in Family Courts Uniquely Low
Speaking of that, of course he won’t be a judge much longer if there’s any sanity left in the family court system. Admittedly, family court judges have set the judicial behavior bar about as low as it can get, but even at that, carrying on a lengthy sexual affair, in chambers with a female litigant and allowing her to play the role of judge in her own case, may just prove to be unacceptable even by Detroit standards.Now, I’m mindful of the fact that Detroit courts have some pretty unorthodox ideas about things like due process and judicial ethics. After all, it was in the case of Marianne Godboldo, a Detroit mother, that we learned that when child protective services wants an order taking a child from a parent, it not only writes the order itself, no evidence is required and the judge’s clerk will sign it for them. That’s exactly what happened in Godboldo’s case; an order to take her daughter from her was completely processed with no hearing, no evidence and no participation of any kind by any judge.
So, given that ethical landscape, maybe we can begin to see why McCree could actually believe that allowing a litigant with whom you’re having sex, to decide her own case, might be overlooked as simply how things are done.
This man is a disgrace to himself and to the legal profession. He must be and I suspect will be tossed off the bench and disbarred. But of course he’s just one judge. The same system that allowed him to believe that he could get away with all his countless wrongs is still firmly in place.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
This is Supposed to be Funny
But I can't laugh.
Why?
Because the results of all that Ms. Silverman is asking for are horrifying and they're getting worse.
First off, reproductive rights? Yes, women should have equal reproductive rights. This is America - equality for all. The problem is, Sarah, I buy MY OWN condoms. Why should I subsidize your birth control? You don't subsidize my condom purchases.
Also, two different angles on this:
1) We, the pubic, should subsidize women's birth control, especially poor women. Women are sleeping around like men and having kids out of wedlock like its no big deal. Regardless of who made the baby, WOMEN ARE CHOOSING TO KEEP IT and are NOT having abortions. This is blamed on the man currently and he is given a child support bill for 40% of his income for 23 years (in MA, yes, it is that long). Sorry, but FUCK YOU, women of America. You should not have that ability, it is reprehensible and absurd, so STOP HAVING CHILDREN. Period. Until balance and equality is restored.
Oh and remember, when women wouldn't sleep with a man until marriage, women had men over a barrel and men were romantic and chivalrous and ambitious; today men are the opposite and women are, rightfully, in an uproar. So the current arrangement may actually harm women more than men, pre-divorce, anyway.
2) No one's birth control problem should be another person's. Married, unmarried, young, old, I don't care. Pay for your own contraceptive and if you have a baby, #1, the man should be able to opt out entirely, and #2, at WORST, the man should pay no more than half of ONLY child expenses - WITH A HARD DOLLAR CAP. We don't get to sleep with the woman after we split up, so why does she get our money!?!?!?!
3) Women are clueless and out of control. While the libertarian in me wants to give them all the rights in the world, something needs to be done to STOP OUT OF WEDLOCK BIRTHS. And no one is doing a goddamn thing. Expecting young men to stop trying to have sex is like expecting birds to stop flying. Aim at women for some kind of control measures and shame the men or something, I don't even know. But STOP the destruction of the nuclear family. THE KIDS deserve better.
Why?
Because the results of all that Ms. Silverman is asking for are horrifying and they're getting worse.
First off, reproductive rights? Yes, women should have equal reproductive rights. This is America - equality for all. The problem is, Sarah, I buy MY OWN condoms. Why should I subsidize your birth control? You don't subsidize my condom purchases.
Also, two different angles on this:
1) We, the pubic, should subsidize women's birth control, especially poor women. Women are sleeping around like men and having kids out of wedlock like its no big deal. Regardless of who made the baby, WOMEN ARE CHOOSING TO KEEP IT and are NOT having abortions. This is blamed on the man currently and he is given a child support bill for 40% of his income for 23 years (in MA, yes, it is that long). Sorry, but FUCK YOU, women of America. You should not have that ability, it is reprehensible and absurd, so STOP HAVING CHILDREN. Period. Until balance and equality is restored.
Oh and remember, when women wouldn't sleep with a man until marriage, women had men over a barrel and men were romantic and chivalrous and ambitious; today men are the opposite and women are, rightfully, in an uproar. So the current arrangement may actually harm women more than men, pre-divorce, anyway.
2) No one's birth control problem should be another person's. Married, unmarried, young, old, I don't care. Pay for your own contraceptive and if you have a baby, #1, the man should be able to opt out entirely, and #2, at WORST, the man should pay no more than half of ONLY child expenses - WITH A HARD DOLLAR CAP. We don't get to sleep with the woman after we split up, so why does she get our money!?!?!?!
3) Women are clueless and out of control. While the libertarian in me wants to give them all the rights in the world, something needs to be done to STOP OUT OF WEDLOCK BIRTHS. And no one is doing a goddamn thing. Expecting young men to stop trying to have sex is like expecting birds to stop flying. Aim at women for some kind of control measures and shame the men or something, I don't even know. But STOP the destruction of the nuclear family. THE KIDS deserve better.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Over a Stupid Game...
The negotiations are enough to make tough men "sick to their stomachs."
Now imagine fighting over the right to visit you own child a few times a week and keep a little of the money you bust your ass making all week.
Trust me, A MUCH UGLIER FIGHT.
But don't worry; the woman and her lawyer are always as pure as driven snow. Which is like saying the NHL or NHLPA below is the "Holy and Pure" side, while the opposite side is Pure Evil.....
TROY, MI -- Detroit Red Wings teammates Danny Cleary and Jimmy Howard were at a Spitfires game last night promoting Saturday's charity game in Windsor when the NHL's CBA negotiations imploded.
They found a television at the arena to watch the news conferences that alerted the hockey world that things had gone horribly sideways. Negotiations were over. Offers were off the table. The optimism that had grown during the week was completely wiped out.
"It kind of made me sick to my stomach. It really did," Howard said. "This emotional roller coaster of getting excited, getting amped up -- it feels like the wind getting knocked out of you."
The NHL and NHL Players' Association couldn't come to a resolution in labor negotiations on Thursday, but the talks did provide high drama, writes Scott Burnside. 
What should have been a fairly doable mathematical adjustment last summer has transformed into the perhaps most ridiculous labor impasse in the history of pro sports, writes Pierre LeBrun. 
Cleary was getting text message updates from Oilers forward Shawn Horcoff, one of the group of players in New York trying to finalize a deal. Even those updates didn't prepare him for the unraveling that played out on the television screen in front of him.
"I was blown away. Everybody was, trust me," Cleary said. "The fans must be going insane. If you're a fan watching this unfold for the last 72 hours -- especially yesterday. What's going on here? Last night, the drama that unfolded was soap opera-ish."
A day to cool off isn't enough. The emotions still bubbled up with Cleary, who stopped several times during a chat following a Friday practice to gather his thoughts.
"I don't want to get going here," he said.
For Cleary and some of his teammates, it's still hard to figure out where it went wrong, and why there aren't negotiations still happening right now in New York to try and save what's left of a season.
Instead, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and deputy commissioner Bill Daly made it clear that the offer the movement made this week toward the players in the make-whole provision and other key elements is off the table. The logical next step is more canceled games.
With the league pulling its offer, how concerned are the players that all of the progress from this week is wiped out?
"That's a good question," Howard said. "I don't really know how to answer that for you. Hopefully it's just one more of Gary's ploys to see how we are as a union, to see if we're going to crack."
There's been speculation that some players wanted a chance to vote on the NHL's offer made this week, that some players are unhappy with the decision to instead wait and try to sweeten the deal. Nobody denied that it's at least a possibility. The NHLPA has more than 700 members, so even if a large majority are on board, that still leaves a group of unhappy players eager to play now.
"Let's be honest here. We all want to play," Howard said. "But we've got to do it for the right reasons."
If the events in New York were an attempt to insert a wedge in the union, every player who stopped to chat with the media following this practice in suburban Detroit -- including forward Cleary, defensemen Niklas Kronwall and Ian White, and goalie Howard -- said it didn't work. All reiterated their overwhelming support of NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr.
"We need to step back here a few days, take the weekend and hope cooler heads prevail," Cleary said. "This is too close to burn a season."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
