discussion comment
16 years ago
Yep, the future is androids. :) I was expecting more, but it was interesting.
discussion comment
16 years ago
I'd also heard about some young girls being arrested on child porn charges for taking pictures of themselves. That isn't as demented as the arrest of the activist who was attempting educate people NOT to have their young sons circumsized. According to the government bloody baby boy penises are child porn. Heck, even a cartoon can be child porn to the extremists.
Most people will happily march and believe whatever official propaganda is put forth. As a pre-teen and as a teenager the girl next door is responsible for bathing her baby brothers. I can just see some nitwits wanting to call the police--- yapping CHILD PORN and INCEST!!!
Yep, America is desperate for more prisoners. Now, if some prudish religious nuts or those suffering from gymnphobia wish to teach or impose such silliness on their children, then perhaps the government ought to come down on *them* with a heavy boot. After all, I doubt they'd have any qualms about siccing the government on others who don't share their rabbid convictions.
discussion comment
16 years ago
I definitely like the dancer who is pissed at her significant other. Some of the best GFE have been experienced under those circumstances, ime.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Correction: gymnophobes will actually have a little something to complain about.
discussion comment
16 years ago
It also isn't unusual that a parent would have NO problem with nudity as in case CNN was reporting on. But, of course government knows best.
I guess you wouldn't allow nudity of children at a nudist colony?
Next, we need to go off the deep end about women with uncovered faces. :) Don't worry with any luck the government will require co-ed showering starting in elementary school so these prudish religious nuts and gymbophobes will actually have a little something to complain about.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"OK, Thanks. I am going to just continue to figure out strippers."
The puzzles helped me understand her better. A little like if I gave her candies and took note of her reactions and preferences. Anyway, unless she has a lot of time to waste and is basically stuck, then I doubt that doing those puzzles is practical. I thought it would help her past the time (in jail they didn't allow any of the puzzles in----I guess there afraid of coded messages; and most of her mail from me wasn't delivered---puzzles or not) and also boost her self esteem.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Tribal culture.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Well, she said she had never done well in school, no matter how hard she tried. At first she was putting up a fight because it looked like math or school work to her and then I reminded her that she needed something to keep her mind busy.
Her reading skills are very poor. She was surfing the internet and it takes her a long time to read a screen. A very long time. A 100 times longer than me? I guess it isn't that bad, but it seems like it.
She doesn't seem to have any interest in drugs, but who knows about in her past. Drugs can do a lot of harm surprisingly quickly.
discussion comment
16 years ago
A messed up spelling of Sudoku. :) Here is a link that shows an image of a puzzle:
http://www.pogo.com/hotdeploy/us/promotions/marketing/landing/lp-sudoku.jsp?sourceid=sudoko_Free_GOO_C0001_A0500_LP0500
"Main Entry: Sudoku
Part of Speech: n
Definition: a puzzle consisting of a 3-by-3 grid of nine squares, each of which is similarly divided into nine smaller squares, some containing a number. The aim is to fill in numerals from 1 to 9 so that every horizontal and vertical line and every large 3-by-3 square contains only one instance of each number; also written sudoku" http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sudoku
discussion comment
16 years ago
I use to go sweaty and grimy. Was always in a foul mood. Thought nothing of telling a caring friendly dancer to drop dead.
Never thought to attribute it to just needing a bath. :) Thought it was (and still do) just the culture. Culture I prefer.
discussion comment
16 years ago
If it was fixable, then she'd probably be a very different person----maybe a traditionally successful unhappy person. She LOVES life. I've thought maybe she loves life because the bad sort of fades to nothingness very quick.
I had thought I was doing something good and fun for her. And, for a short time it worked. She was feeling really great that she could solve complex puzzles and teach others how to do it. On the positive side if she gets rid of the Su Duko books she'll probably forget how good she was at solving the puzzles. Not sure if that is how it works; just depressing how quickly she went from zenith to nadir.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Soft and sensual. The bouncing does hurt and too much speed equals a quick end.
I've also met too many girls who WON'T go S&S. It is too personal for them. Now extras? Not a biggie.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
I don't like fake titties either, but in a way I can imagine the mindset of such a woman being attractive. The mindset being she wants to be sexy sans clothing!
It just makes me think she likes and appreciates being a woman.
A breast enhancement that I'd love to see is one that makes 'em reactive e.g. slight caress results in noticeable firming.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Talk about stereotypes that fit. :) (Just joking to any Poles who might be offended.)
I love studies, but put a bag of salt with 'em. As I read more about the hand washing study it sounded like just more of the simple simon principle. Simple simon principle meaning the person is influenced greatly by the last thing his has heard. So, if he heard Muslims are terrorists that is the ticket. If he heard Muslims are God fearing that is the ticket. If he heard that they're jealous of our freedoms that is the ticket.
I would have thought cleanliness *at least as a trait* would be more associated with intolerance.
The lesson as applied to some strippers is to prime with the appropriate thoughts i.e. you love my manhood and can't wait to force yourself all over me. ;) Yep, could be that simple----just keep in mind the mnemonic KISS or perhaps not.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Hi Book Guy,
That is an interesting idea, but it seemed like more than a feeling in her case. I might feel that my math abilities have diminished, but that would keep me from solving problems that are put before me?
I don't know much about ADD----thinking it was like the person who can't hold a conversation because his mind wanders. When I speak with her, she seems very focused and can talk/listen for hours.
discussion comment
16 years ago
That is a sad book. Unfortunately, I've read it more than once--it is still a favorite with local schools.
I was thinking maybe peer pressure or customer pressure or maybe a mini-stroke. It was sombering to see her struggling with puzzles that were and should be simple for her. But, yeah her trajectory, at least as far as the Su Doku Puzzles, seemed similar to that story.
She has some interesting ideas that seemed so backward or counter-intuitive. For example, she has a high opinion of pimps *in general* because she believes the typical girl isn't capable of managing her own affairs. And, a girl needs a man and or strong woman who isn't a jealous type to keep her moving in a positive direction and to protect her from bad deals. I understood what she is saying, but I just haven't seen pimps like that---seems like pimps leave the girls in worse shape than they started. Of course, it isn't like I'm an expert on pimps. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
"He drops the names "ACORN" and CRA and thinks it's a convincing argument. Truly, those were relatively minor factor."
I'm sure there is a better term than "tipping-point." And, it isn't the "straw that broke the camel's back." Sometimes "minor" changes can precipitate much larger signifcant changes that may sometimes to the casual observer seem totally unrelated.
It *seems* like prior to the government using its muscle and threats (CRA et al) to FORCE banksters to change their lending practices, which were both conservative and discriminatory that banks of all institutions weren't "preying" or generally even lending to lower income people as far as homes. It also *seems* like there were vast tracts of Miami that were no-man's lands because loans weren't available in those "red-lined" areas. (For auto insurance purposes my home falls with in the "red-line" and the discrimination is or was of an in-your-face variety.) Once FORCED by government to deal those who the banks would rather shun the changes *seemed* to come where there was a recognition that gee money is to be made in these violent crime ridden areas that are filled with "undesirables."
Surprise, surprise. Either by cultural conditioning or plain business blindness or even "ethics" or some combination thereof the supposedly all knowing private businesses i.e. banks had failed to cash in on this massive untapped market until government came to the rescue. Well so far so good as long the banksters don't over milk the cows or shear the sheep too severly. But, hey if the powers-that-be (the banksters) have the hammer it shouldn't come as great surpise when they start using it.
The poor people can't afford it? Well, thanks to government, imo, the banksters were no longer thinking in terms of what a consumer could afford----that thinking was defenestrated. Besides the poor were shockingly able to generally shoulder heavy burdens that bankster didn't believe they were capable of i.e. a normal fair home loans, so why not push the envelope and rake in the real $$$? The poor can always do whatever it takes to make higher payments or refinance---either way the banksters win.
Was this new thinking that I've correctly or incorrectly surmised limitedly applied to just the poor? Initially, I think the answer was YES and then the "diseased" thinking spread to include ALL borrowers. Hey, corruption breeds more corruption and small tinkerings and lead to massive changes---both positive and negative.
In short, the CRA and the like may have ended-up being pocket change in the collapse so to speak, but that doesn't exculpate 'em from possibly "getting the ball rolling." IOWs,no government garbage such as CRA may equal no system wide financial collapse.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
I had the PERFECT example of FORCE given the nature of this form. I feel stupid for not thinking of it in a timely fashion. :)
I had a stripper living with me for a very short period of time and I didn't want her in my home and she really didn't want to be there.
What happened was she was in jail on a felony charge and the judge didn't want her released and in fact although she had briefly had the opportunity to post bond (if she had the money; she didn't) the judge revoked the opportunity for bond! Enter the public defender who fights valiantly to have her released and the judge just isn't buying it even a little bit. The public defender amazingly, imo, continues to battle on her behalf explaining that she has a child and blah, blah, blah. The judge seems like an immovable rock and these types of hearing are typically fast---not this one and I was very impressed a nobody could get a real hearing. That ain't the America I know.
Anyway, the public defender senses that the hearing has become too "public" and the judge had made it clear that there isn't going to be a release even with bond and definitely not without bond. So, the public defender asks for a sidebar and the judge basically relented, but said the answer is still NO! I can't believe how patient the judge has been---I'd had given up a long time ago if I was the attorney. The judge has been clear and forceful. On and on the public defender is fighting for release at sidebar---I can't hear what is being said, but the judge is definitely in the NO mood. This is getting absurd because a lot of cases need to be heard and most people don't get any time if they're poor.
What happened next STUNNED me. The public defender points me out of the crowd! I definitely DO NOT care for that---the judge knows me just a tiny bit, but has a sharp memory. Nothing too negative, but the judge had found me to be very unusual and I had even had polite words with her bailiff. Now, the judge's eyes open wide at me in what seemed like disbelief. Is the judge going to hold me in contempt??? Then the game changes completely and the judge is agreeing with the public defender!? I'm thinking what in the hell??? Court is way too stressful for me.
As the public defender is walking out of the court room she motions me to join her. She says I've got good news and bad news. I say let's hear it because all I've been hearing for longest time is bad news. She says well the good news is the judge is willing to release her. I say that is FANTASTIC!!! (and I'm all smiles, which extremely rare) What in the world could be the bad news? She well the judge insisted on an electronic bracelet. I say what is bad about that? She says it is real pain and that the a land line phone (i.e. a regular phone and not a cell phone) will be needed. I say and how is that a problem? In my ignorance I thought everyone had a land line phone. She explained that many poor people don't have a regular phone and that can be a real problem (for various reasons it was, btw; again I learn).
I'm thanking the public defender for excellent work and telling her how much I appreciate her not giving up. But, why in the world did she point me out of the crowd (I wasn't a witness)? The public defender said that she told the judge that I wanted the girl released. What??? This is beyond strange at this point. The public defender said she didn't want to do that, but didn't feel there was any alternative. I laugh and say, but I'm nothing. And, I'm not like buddy buddy with the court system. The public defender said well, the judge feels different about the situation. Then the public defender says are you sure you know what you're doing? I said what??? The public defender says that girl isn't all sugar and spice and that she hopes that I know what the hell I'm doing.
So, I call her brother with the fantastic news and told him all that is required is a landline. Blah, blah, blah, landlines are a real problem if you are a certain class of poor.
Default she ends up with living with me! Is she willing to put out? Well, in the past she'd always made it clear that her business stayed in the club. In fact, I'd done FREE OTC---but, she is this goody-two-shoes outside the club so it didn't benefit me except she is just a nice person. I just wished she was willing to put out even a little bit OTC. But, like she said that other girl doesn't exist outside the club.
So NO fun for me while she is staying with me. I asked if I made her stay conditional upon her putting out what would she do? She thought about it for a good pause and said she really wouldn't have much choice (i.e. put out for me or get sent back to jail to await trial), but to make me happy.
I see that as an example of FORCE because she doesn't have real freedom under those conditions. Let's say she wanted to stay with me just to get free room and board and wasn't under any government threat of FORCE (yes, I consider jail a threat of FORCE). In that case, I would see it more like her just making a business decision and I would require that she earn her keep.
I don't like taking adavantage of anyone who is being threatened like that so basically I was just one frustrated old man and I just wanted her gone----NO, I wouldn't kick her out and I treated her like I would a valued house guess. It wasn't any fun for her either. If she had had a *real choice*, then she wouldn't have chosen to live with me!
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
Hi TUSCL_Brother,
I wouldn't feel as bad if the judge was just slow or uninformed, but I asked him to please put it in his order that there is NO DIFFERENCE between a Warranty Deed and a Quit Claim Deed, if he actually believed that. There was no way in hell he would put such complete nonsense in writing. He is a crook and he is above the law.
This one judge (nothing to do with my case) who had an excellent reputation (perhaps well deserved) had been relegated to special cases. First off, he seemed like a very nice guy who possessed intelligence and education, but he was suffering from some type of dementia. He shouldn't of been sitting on any cases except those that were totally unimportant because his mind wasn't there--it was sad to see. I didn't even believe he was a real judge at first and asked a clerk who confirmed his identity and said what a wonderful man he was. I asked is he still hearing "special cases"? The clerk nodded YES. I'm just shaking my head and the clerk says he is a really good man and he wasn't always like that. I'm thinking to myself what type of "special cases" could he possibly be trusted with? To my amazement he was in the news about 6 months or so later and he was handling a very important case involving alleged police brutality against protesters! According to The Miami Herald article he was known as law and order judge who had a lot of compassion and caring for people. I didn't know from speaking with him that he was law and order, but he did seem like a very caring person.
discussion comment
16 years ago
I'm somewhat guilty as far as hanging out in the "couch room" in a couple of clubs. The first reason is that it is quieter than the rest of the club as well as generally being more comfortable. The second reason is that it is just more convenient to stay there and get dances here and there.
I haven't noticed other patrons concerned about privacy, but in the couch room it shouldn't be expected. When you first walk in there is no telling what you'll see. Most clubs have private booths in lieu of a couch room.
Club Tweezy has some very fancy private rooms that I would describe as upscale. I don't know the prices. The music was so loud that the hair on my arms was going up and down with the beat. Yes, I have hairy arms. The dancers weren't working---11 PM apparently was too early. The other upscale black club is Club Diamonds and it also doesn't get moving until way past my bedtime.
I think it might have been at The Trap many years ago that a dancer asked me and my dancer for some privacy so she could be alone with her customer. Not a big deal because at the time The Trap was fairly relaxing so any place was good, however at any time people do walk in to the couch room. She just happened to have a very shy customer----most likely a tourist.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
I can't resist another example of government FORCE.
I was in this long drawn out court battle and lost. The ***judge*** wanted me to contest the "reasonable" attorneys' fees the other side was demanding. The problem is that if I litigate that $15,000 isn't "reasonable," then the judge can easily increase it $50,000. (I saw the predecessor judge do that at a different attorney fee hearing---what a complete fraud.) Or, any amount. It is fraud. BTW, the appellate court isn't too interested in lowering attorney fees----surprise, surprise.
In one case a dispute over a $100 bill resulted in the losing side getting hit with a $40,000 court judgment for attorneys' fees. The Third DCA (that is the state appellate court for my area) by a decision of 2-1 said *$40,000* wasn't reasonable for the $100 dispute especially since the lawyers had won almost identical cases on the same issue years earlier. The dispute, btw, is now clarified by new legislation where the old couple objecting to the $100 bill would have been in the right and the condo association in the wrong---anyway, it was 15 minute case and that is if the judge put a lot of work into.
So are you applauding the appellate court for stating $40,000 in attorneys' fees for a $100 simple dispute wasn't reasonable? Gee the same trial court may have ultimately awarded $39,000 in "reasonable" attorneys' fees. The court system is basically a huge government fraud to extort money and instill fear.
Bottom line was I FORCED to say the $15,000 was reasonable? Some people would say NO and other people would say YES. I sure as hell didn't want to see the judge increase it to $50,000 or more to show me that he had absolute power in most cases----the appellate court is as much or more of a joke than the trial court. In fact, if the "reasonable" attorney was $30,000, then I wouldn't fight that either because the court was way too corrupt.
If you know anything about real estate law, then you know there is a huge difference between a Quit Claim Deed and a Warranty Deed. Well, my corrupt judge openly and loudly declared there was NO DIFFERENCE between a Quit Claim Deed and Warranty Deed. I couldn't believe he didn't have an ounce of shame to spout such obvious nonsense. The cattle class support this filth so whatever-----I wouldn't support it with even a pin prick of my blood.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
Hi TUSCL_Brother,
It is like the gangster who came to my grandfather's grocery store and offered him a deal he couldn't refuse. Yes, you could correctly point out that my grandfather was "forced" to accept the gangster's offer. However, that isn't exactly correct. He could have gone to the police and hope for protection for himself and his family. He made a choice. Was it the the right choice? I don't know.
Here's another example. I knew a young woman who supposedly was the daughter of a local politician---a politician who I happened to detest based on what little I knew about him. Anyway, the politician strongly believed that you always have a choice as long as there is another option. AND, that compliance with the law is always voluntary. So if a woman is given the option of having sex with 30 men or having her hands cut off and she decides sex with 30 men is better than losing her hands, she according to *their* belief system made a voluntary choice. She chose the best option under the circumstances.
Similarly, many of these borrowers made the best choice available----if there was hyper-inflation courtesy of the government's printing presses then said borrower would look pretty smart. So a working class nobody sees the following: Rising prices with the government lying about inflation (Example: it isn't inflation despite the much higher price because the product is better). What to do about these rising prices? Especially the damn ever rising rent for a dump of a living space. Well, a second job might be the answer. Or, moving into a friend's home or garage. Those are choices. And, if hyper-inflation arrives whatever savings the person had are effectively gone and worse the person might not even be able to pay the bills even with a good friend or second job. Hyper-inflation is to be feared if you're struggling to pay the bills.
Enter wonderful government program/mandate: A NO MONEY DOWN opportunity to own a home and not have to worry about ever rising rents. Plus build wealth as you pay off the loan! Sounds too good to be true, but the alternate is fairly bleak to say the least. I saw the tenement a couple of strippers were living in and I commented that they must be able to do better. I had a mini-heart attack when I was told the rent. Sure enough the outrageous rent was considered "normal." I had no idea the rentals had become so expensive. I guess they could have move somewhere where living is cheaper, but then they lose what little support system they have.
So I guess it is how you define FORCE. I've watch the government FORCE people to admit to crimes they didn't commit. How does the government do this? Well, I'm watching case after case after case. Every case it seems like no matter the supposed crime the person is facing a minimum 20 years in prison. Or, cut a deal and get time served or probation. I have friends who defiantly state they'd risk the 20 years and put their faith in a jury trial. Well, that is another issue. My neighbor who can barely understand English was forced by the government to serve on a jury. He voted guilty he says because he didn't understand the case (NO translations for him) and just wanted to follow the leader.
Yes, I see the government as FORCING people to grab whatever tiny bit of hope is available. Many of these people that are losing everything wouldn't of had anything if they just kept paying more expensive rents; anyhow.
Now, in a free market I wouldn't have a whole lot of sympathy for people accepting these loans because hard work and very basic intelligence would, imo, bring rewards. It would just be a question of saving the pennies the way my grandparents did. That free market is long since dead and with its death the government needs to step to the plate as it did with the CRA. The CRA helped---when done properly--- put the house more in balance so that working class and other folks have a chance at financial security.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
Correction:
Anyway, I was disgusted when I learned of the bankster's ARMs.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
BTW, I *believe* the government's CRA helped a lot of people BIG TIME in the beginning. People who now own homes and who can thank the government for providing them the opportunity to borrow from the banksters. I say *believe* and perhaps that isn't the case. Perhaps very few people were truly helped.
Anyone, I was disgusted when I learned of the bankster's ARMs. I couldn't believe the government would approve of that filth, but that seems to be the case and perhaps it was the way the politics worked out. Better for poor people often times to get a nasty loan than NO loan---it all depends on the alternatives which are often much bleaker.
To those who say they shouldn't have borrowed the money that sounds like modern version of "Let 'Em Eat Cake!"
discussion comment
16 years ago
At one time I could sit and talk with dancers for hours (a good reason for clubs too keep the music loud). I paid very little because I had very little. Now, when a real customer came in then I'd insist that they try and make a sale to earn some real money. Some had to be pushed away because they were afraid of hurting my feelings. I told 'em you're at work and I don't pay enough for you to be wasting your valuable time.
Some appreciated my pushing them to go get the money and others weren't too concerned about money. I sure as hell felt guilty about a dancer wasting her time with me *IF* a paying customer was around or arrived.
I have friends that I love to talk with, but not at work if it is costing me money. A dancer should expect a cheap customer or poor paying customer to learn that real customers come first and foremost.