If it's a party, I'm there!

Except for political ones.  I'm a registered Independent and I think in the state of Missouri, that means I can't participate in primary elections.

But it doesn't matter because since I've been old enough to vote, I've only had choices between shitty and shittier.  Cynical but true.  Unless Gary Johnson runs in 2016, and then I am totez voting for him unless he picks a real fuckhead for veep.

Not yet have I known an individual in elected office who truly represented ME or wasn't ate up with fraud and stupid.

For the most part, I lean left.  I think a healthy society takes care of its members.  I want to be a member of a functioning, mostly peaceful, prospering group of people.  Don't you?

But...

There are some ways in which I'm 'on the right' and forever will be.  And I know it pisses off some of you but let me explain.

I saw this meme today.  What it says exactly isn't important but it shared some stats on 'unjustified homicides' and compared them to voter fraud.


I will say that recent headlines and general kerfuffle over 'voter fraud' (according to my own research, mind you, but if you're reading this, then you've got internet access same as me...) is a myth and there have not been, in my own searching, any significant events of voter fraud in decades.  Like... decades.  I'm no scientist but I can read.

However, there was a word in the meme that bothered me a bit.  "Unjustified homicides."  If it is indeed justified, it is self-defense, not homicide.  Just sayin'.  There's no such thing as 'justified homicide.'  Murder is murder and how do you define murder?  Killing someone who is not threatening your own life and/or killing someone with premeditated intent.  I think the latin term is mens rea.  Look it up if you don't know it.  You've got the extra three minutes if you're reading the crap I write.

And yes, I openly support the Second Amendment but I do agree there should be a screening process prior to ownership, however I don't know how I'd create an effective one.  But the impossibility of preventing every homicide is the problem.  Not the amendment itself.
(Thanks, law enforcement dad...  LoLz)

Most importantly I more than strongly encourage RESPONSIBLE ownership and feel that irresponsible acts, if caught and convicted, should be cause to remove one's 'right' to own a firearm.

Education in general needs to be required for the ability to own and operate certain, potentially dangerous things in addition to continued demonstration of safe use.  Removal from the legal public market will NOT eliminate guns.  (Need proof?  See history.  Google 'prohibition' and let me know how that worked out for liquor.)

Will a stricter screening process, pre-owership education and continuing education "prevent" all tragic deaths related to shooting?  No way.  Not even if everyone were perfect.  Humans will /always/ make mistakes.  Again, see history.  Google 'perfect human.'  Let me know how many examples you find.  Don't bother bringing up Jesus.  I'm talking about science, not religion.

And, in conclusion, may I please remind you that it does NOT say R.S.V.P on the Statue of Liberty!

The center of the onion.

worth1000.com

I'll do this with as few words as possible because everyone is over it.

There's a layer underneath the freedom of speech/First Amendment issue.

And that is Chick-fil-A donating millions of dollars to /anti/-gay groups that lobby lawmakers.

It's one thing to stand on the side of the pool and either wish I would drown or do nothing should I start to drown.

However, the financial support of these lobbying groups (they can say they're family associations or whatever, but we all know their purpose) is like putting your foot on my head and pushing me underwater until I stop fighting or stop breathing, whichever comes first.

And THAT is my problem with ALL religion.  Eventually, it becomes a way to determine and separate classes of humans, rating some above others for no other reason than a passage in someone's chosen holy book.

It does not matter what you believe.  You can worship Regina George and the Burn Book can be your bible if you want.  You have free will.  Go ahead and do it.  If you're American, you have a constitutional right to do it.

YOUR* beliefs can not and should not arbitrarily condemn what anyone does with other consenting adults behind closed doors.

*"Your" means every single human being on earth.  Clear?

And I'm done.  Back to kittens.

A sticky widget in my social media machine.

Shhh! I'm duckin' the fuzz.
If they ask, you haven't
seen me.

Is there a way to turn off or block 'suggested friends' on FB?  Some peeps I don't add because... well, I know I would offend them accidentally and these are good people, people I like.  I'd never want to hurt them.
I borderline on NC-17.  They're more PG.  Anyone else in this predicament?  What do I do?  To block would be inappropriate and rude but not to add also feels wrong.
Are there degrees of anonymous?  How can I be me without being totally witness protection program?  (Which is a little bit of the reason for certain things but unrelated to this particular topic.  Long story.  Tell you later.)

WWMMD?  (What would Miss Manners do?)

Shit. It happens.

Funny, sad and true.

Conservatives throw mud at "bleeding-heart" Liberals but when it comes to the plight of the unborn (insert dramatic face), Conservatives wrote the book on hearts that bleed.


Grab hold of your party-line politics and take a little walk with me down a very likely what-if lane.


Even when someone is responsible, established and does everything right, accidents can still happen.

Here's a slice of real life:

Imagine a 36-year-old married woman with a 50-year-old husband, both have full-time jobs and also two part-time sources of income which are heavily taxed since it’s considered self-employment.

Let's say the husband has an 18-year-old son from a previous marriage.  He pays over $500 a month in child support and his son lives with them approximately 50% of the time.  They're fortunate to have a smart kid who starts college at a top local university in the fall.

Even with multiple sources of income and financially conservative living, they barely make ends meet.  The husband had cancer nine years ago and they had no health insurance during the duration of his treatment.  They're in debt from medical bills and now about to pay for books and tuition in addition to paying the $500+ child support for another four years.  (In many cases, non-deadbeat fathers pay for the sins of the losers and are ordered to give money to the mothers until the child is 22 or 'emancipated' meaning not attending school.)

The shitty part of this story is where people must share their intimate details with lawmakers in order to make a point.  The married couple always uses birth control.  But birth control is NOT infallible.  It can and does fail, that’s why the manufacturers must disclose such on the packaging.


Now don't tell me you expect this struggling but happily-married couple to abstain.  Come on.  Totally unrealistic.  They're in love, attracted to each other, married (this is sooo important to you, right).  Are YOU going to abstain from having sex with your spouse?  No way and if you say yes, you're a damn liar.

So what happens should birth control fail, pro-life lawmakers?  If this woman cannot terminate an accidental pregnancy, what are her options?  Carry the child to term knowing it is high risk at her age?  Here's another detail about our wife, she's physically challenged (insert your own ailment, fibro, RA, lupus...).

Can you imagine how a pregnancy will impact her, a 36-year-old disabled woman who works 60-80 hours a week and already struggling to support her family?  Do you care?  No, you care about the unborn more than you care about someone who pays taxes, already has a step-child to support and a husband who is 50 and not interested in raising another child at his age.

Tell me how that makes sense.  Tell me why you would rather allow an unwanted pregnancy to destroy her life than let her have an abortion.  Tell me why you would rather this scenario for all women.

Assuming the pregnancy itself doesn't kill both the woman and the unborn child, are YOU going to adopt these babies?  No.  You’re not.


You would rather they end up on the streets with her little accident in her arms, having to beg and borrow just to feed the child.  Please tell me how that’s better than terminating a pregnancy.


And that is IF she has a healthy baby.  But if you factor in her age and the fact that she is disabled and already under a lot of stress, there's a strong likelihood she will have a child with special needs, she may have a premature child.  There's something she needs like a kick in the teeth, more stress.


Since conservative lawmakers are none too fond of government assistance programs, this disabled 36-year-old new mother with a special needs child who has lost her part-time income because there are only 24 hours in a day and perhaps lost her husband as well because the stress tore their marriage apart (oh, what about the FAMILY conservatives so dearly love to 'preserve'), where does she go now?


No, that's not the right question.


Where does she go now with her special needs child?


That's the right question.  One job that doesn't pay the bills, a child whose expenses are higher than average because of medical needs or challenges, no husband and no assistance programs...


Homeless shelter maybe?  A relative might let her stay there for a couple of months until she can find a shitty apartment and that will be their existence.  The child will eat a lot of ramen noodles, maybe get the occasional hot lunch at school (remember, no more assistance programs, no more reduced-cost lunches for low-income children), hopefully get a decent education, provided the child is not mentally challenged...


Can the mother take her child on a vacation to see the world, experience different places and people?  Don't make me laugh, that costs money.  The woman couldn't afford to take a vacation with her husband before she got pregnant.


But, you know, public school, shitty apartment and maybe some hand-me-down books and toys will make for an enriching life.  When the mother isn't keeping her nose to the grind, trying to earn every penny she can until her body gives out and she can't work at all.  (Meanwhile she hopes her child will be able to live independently or with another sympathetic relative once the mother loses the shitty apartment - even slums cost money.)


Yes, that is SO MUCH BETTER for everyone than just terminating an unwanted pregnancy.  Right.  So much better for YOU, pro-lifer.  The struggling woman and her hungry child will sleep so much better at night knowing you're happy that she chose "life."

Note:

I am neither Republican nor Democrat.  I'm a registered Independent.

Here are a few of my independent positions:

I own guns and support the right to bear arms.

I am pro-gay.

I am pro-choice.

I am atheist and I support freedom of religion as long as there is separation of church and state.

I want lawmakers who are fiscally conservative, transparent and ethical.

I think our government has grown too large and needs to be dramatically reduced.

I support our military.

I support legalizing marijuana.

I think the welfare system needs reform, not elimination.
I vote my conscience.

I pester the ever-loving hell out of my elected officials and encourage all of you to do exactly the same.

An indication that you've had enough.

You're right. It's all Obama's fault. The economy, the war, illegal immigration, the environment, broken health care system. All him. He writes all the legislation on his own, and he passes it on his own and those 535 people we call "Congress" don't actually do anything except read scripts given to them by Obama. There were no other people in office prior to Obama who made mistakes either. He's the only one who has ever fucked up ever ever.

In fact, he lies awake at night, scheming on ways to destroy our country and take away our guns and make us all slave vegan Muslims.

We the people have zero responsibility in this. None of us have borrowed money we couldn't pay back and spent it on things we didn't need. None of us live beyond our means. We are all highly informed voters who base our decisions on issues instead of blindly following flawed party lines and we show up at the polls for elections on every level and we diligently communicate with our lawmakers both to express our needs and to monitor their actions, demanding ethical conduct. We get our information from trusted neutral sources like the Library of Congress and VoteSmart.org.

We never start frivolous lawsuits after doing stupid shit to ourselves and tie up the courts and waste tax dollars. Not us! We're all fully accountable for our actions and the actions of our children. We would never blame someone else for our own mistakes, indifference or neglect.

We never try to pass or support legislation based on religious bias or our own personal selfish agendas and all of us who are able to work do work and we never defraud the system. We never try to force our personal beliefs on those around us.

We the people are perfect and innocent and that evil man in the White House is completely to blame. Him and him alone. Oh no, we cannot place responsibility on any of our local, state or federal lawmakers or ourselves. We are all merely helpless pawns in Obama's grand plan to ruin the world.

And I would never have come to this liberating realization without all the endless forwarded emails I receive and never ever try to verify because I fully accept them as fact by reasoning that if it's good enough to press the "Fwd" button, the person who sent it clearly did their homework.

If there is a single person reading this blog right now who failed to immediately recognize all of the above as pure and bitter sarcasm, please click that little "X" up in the corner and you'll be promptly redirected to a website perfectly suited for your level of intelligence.

And so help me gawd if I receive this, my own message, in the future as a forwarded email framed to represent researched facts and edited to omit my disclosure, I will see to it that the current sender and all senders before them die in a mysterious fire. The headlines will say "Homo-loving pot-smoking meat-eating baby-killing freedom-hating psychotic fat atheist bitch locks dozens of respected bigots in local church and torches it!"

Wow. I feel a lot better now.

Is she really going /there/? Oh yes. I am SO going there.

I came across this Gallup article and my hide is so totally chapped.

Apparently now more Americans are "pro life" than "pro choice" for the first time. My question is WHY????
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-Pro-Choice-First-Time.aspx


Why are our choices being diminished so much? (Not that Roe v. Wade has been overturned yet, but I fear it could be within my lifetime and a shame that will be if it does happen.) What the hell is wrong with people? Why do they think they should be allowed to make certain decisions for OTHER people? That just pisses me off. Consenting adults, as long as ALL parties with whom they choose to involve themselves are consenting adults, should be allowed to do with their bodies as they please.

Some would say, "oh, it's ohkay if she was raped or if it was incest." So a woman can cross those dirty rotten pro-life picket lines and say "I was raped" and they'll leave her alone? Really? Will she have to /prove/ she was raped? What if she doesn't WANT to press charges? What if she doesn't want to admit to incest? Why make her go through that to terminate an unwanted pregnancy?

How about the pro-life picketers mind their own business? How about the pro-life picketers line up at the orphanage to take care of those children? I mean, if it is really all about the children, then that would be very effective, wouldn't it? For the pro-life zealots to go take care of kids who NEED a parent... Oh... but that would mean putting up or shutting up and that is just not the zealot way.

Dear Governmental control freaks and Religious Right assholes, stay out of my business and I'll refrain from kicking you in the shins.

Best wishes,
~Buffie

PS... I am soooo tagging this as advice because if any zealot happens to read this, I want them to take mine!

So what if his face hasn’t fallen off his head? 23Sept08

First of all, why is it possible to change the date and time you post your blog? That's weird. This isn't a legal document or anything. What does it matter if you post at 3 am on Tuesday or if you post at 12 noon on Friday? Creepy.

Anyway, there's this movie out right now with Diane "Bland" Lane and Richard "Overrated" Gere. From the commercials, I'm deducing it takes place at some beach house in San Francisco and they spend time sighing, smiling, making cheesy innuendo, making out, having a little spat, then wandering off into the surf as the sun sets in the background. LLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEE.



Who makes this shit? Who spends money to produce this tripe? Who watches this? Gag me. 


Mr. Buffie says people probably like them because Richard Gere is still "good looking" for his age. To quote him, "At least his face hasn't fallen off his head."


Squishy romance movies (the few I've seen anyway) aren't particularly funny, not necessarily well-acted, not suspenseful, not exciting, not anything. They're a piece of stale white bread. 

Everyone talks about Ghost (remember that dreadful flick). Ohhh, it was sooo romantic. Ohhhh, Patrick Swishy. Ohhh, it was so hot. Swoon. Swoon. Sigh. The best thing about that movie was the crazy psychic lady part played by that woman with no eyebrows... Whoopie.

... Mmm... Uhh. Ohkay, so maybe that might have been the only "romantic" movie I've actually seen all the way through. So? If that's the best there is to offer, and a lot of people insist it is, then -barf-. No thanks. 

Pauly Shore may not be everyone's taste and his movies are not the most productive way to spend one's time, but at least they make most people grin like an idiot. Empty calories can be good for the soul. Screw chicken soup.



On to other things.

There's this weird mo-fo who buys space in local KC papers and writes these wacko rants about squirrels living under his hat and they whisper in his ears at night. They tell him things about local politics and conspiracy strangeness, apparently. Then at random moments during these several-paragraph-long episodes of babbling, he will say something like "For the best stump removal this side of the Mississippi, call Edgar at XXX-XXXX". 

Is that what LSD does to you when you get older? 

His name is Skip Sleez-something. I dunno. Google him. I bet someone has said something about him before. He probably has his own hat-dwelling-woodland-critter-babble website at this point.

I hear he's filthy rich, but that he lives in an apartment above an old mini-storage building with abandoned cars all around it or something like that. 



Speaking of hearing things about people---

I saw that Clay Aiken is "coming out". Like is that really necessary? Do I have to "come out" as a fat woman? Because that would be the exact same thing. People would look at me and say "duh, we already knew that". So Clay, good for you and everything, but ... duh, we already knew that.



Sorry I haven't been around a whole lot lately. I started playing water volley ball with a group of senior citizens 3 nights a week. 


No. I'm genuinely not kidding. 



Stop judging. They're wonderful people and it's fun. It's a good way to keep me strong and flexible. Some of the ladies don't like to get their hair wet and some of the other ladies kind of cheat and spike the ball because they know the ones who maintain dry hair won't dive for the save. I'm telling you, they don't just sit around in rocking chairs and bake cookies on Sunday. These chicks have a wee bit of attitude.


Moving right along.


I returned to Wal-Mart tonight and managed to go inside. 




-inhale-----------

------------exhale-


Tuesday nights aren't so bad. It wasn't as crowded as a Saturday. But it was still bursting at the seams with creepies. Maybe I'm a creepy, too. I don't know. What I do know is that if there is something you need down a particular aisle and you know exactly where it is, that is when you will get behind the slowest walking party of 13 in the whole store. It will consist of one mom under age 22. At least 3 kids still in diapers. One auntie or grandma wearing high-waisted jeans, plain white Keds knock offs, and a teddy bear t-shirt.

Seriously, people are just oblivious. It must have something to do with mob mentality of sorts. Everyone dreads being there so badly that when they walk through the doors, their heads instantly go up their asses and they're swallowed up in a fog. They wander aimlessly with their carts, like a highway full of drivers all drinking, texting, smoking, and eating at the same time but in slow motion.

At least 3 or 4 times, I was nearly hit head-on by an oncoming cart driver who was looking every direction except the one in which they were walking.

IDIOTS!

In comparison to the parking lot, I would say one is less likely to get seriously injured INSIDE the store, but one is still just as susceptible to being driven upon, albeit by a cart as opposed to an automobile.



In case anyone is wondering, I am overflowing with rants and complaints about Sarah Palin's hypocrisy, Obama's iffy voting record, McCain's abundance of wealth, the AIG "crisis" and our government's nearly $2 TRILLION dollar bailout for the AIG failure as well as the housing market, Lehman Brothers, etc. $2 Trillion dollars of TAX PAYER MONEY. Who the fuck thought it was a good idea to privatize the profit but socialize the debt? Fuck that!!!

Are you people in DC listening to me? I write you letters all the time! I'm sick of your shit!!! Stop making bad decisions that make it harder for me to pay my bills!!!!

Local government people, I know you hear me... if you want to make it to The Hill, don't lose your ethics (if you have any) along the way. Remember we put you there and we will take you out.

To the rest of you --- VOTE!!!! Don't just vote on a single issue either. Get your ass in gear and do some reading. Turn off the TV. Put down the newspaper. Visit VoteSmart.org, visit their individual websites and know what they're really about.

Don't forget, if you're voting for someone because they want to smother the rights of others (for example those who are against gay rights or religious freedom); those same people will eventually turn on YOU too. A vote for freedom and equality for a person you may not necessarily like is STILL a vote for freedom and equality.

Wow. I wasn't expecting to get all preachy. Me so sorry. Won't happen again.



Watch for fall trends. I predict lots of jewel tones in fine gauge knits. Long A-line tunics, a revist to smocking and pin-tucks. The skinny jean silhouette will start showing up in cotton blend slacks, but leggings will be on the way out. Look for a major explosion in boots. Flat boots, heeled boots, leather, suede, patent, fringe, buckles, plain, knee high, short top... Boots galore. I think chunky jewelry is going to continue to stick around a while longer, and we will be wearing a little more of it. Handbags are going to sizzle in shimmery fabrics and metallic materials. Big bags are back, so make sure you're doing extra curls in the gym. Make up is going to be colorful, clean and blended. Deep rose tones on the eyes, neutral cheeks, liquid eyeliner, and a tawny lip. Extensions are out. Mia Farrow short is in.


Ohkay, gotta go. 

*poof*

Obscenity and the common pin up. 12Jun08

I posed a question at Dims... and would like to share it here, too... 

----- Who decides what is "obscene"? -----

I've been reading about Ira Isaacs' upcoming trial and it really bothers me.

I have not seen any of his films, but after reading about them, they sound like something I would never want to see. "Poo" porn isn't really my thing. In my own personal opinion it's gross, but I don't know if I would call it "obscene".

Who has the ultimate say in how "obscene" is defined anyway? 

Quote:
The prosecution is the first in Southern California by a U.S. Department of Justice task force formed in 2005 after Christian conservative groups appealed to the Bush administration to crack down on smut.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,4510463.story
:End Quote.

So what if it is smut? If the business is conducted legally with consenting adults, then in the United States, let them have their smut! 

What the fuck is wrong with someone watching legal porn in the privacy of their own home? Why does this "task force" even exist??? And to blame it on Christians? I'm not a Christian, but I'm surrounded by them and most of the ones I know don't give two hoots what someone does on their own time. 

Y'know Ira Isaacs might be a real slime bag. But isn't that his right as a free American? Isn't his art (however disgusting it may or may not be) protected under the First Amendment? 

I realize there are a lot of people in this country and in our government who would dearly love to restrict everything we see, read, write and create. I realize a lot of those people will claim those restrictions are in the name of "decency" and the protection of polite society. But what a slippery slope! Even when the PMRC came about some years ago with their censorship bent trying to damn the pop music industry, I never thought they'd get away with it. And mostly, they did not.

This one though, this one has me worried. What if they get away with it? Then what? What's next to go? Are they going to take away Comedy Central? South Park? Beavis and Butthead? Are they going to close down my own paysite? 

How did this happen? From where did this "task force" come? How do we make it go away?

(By the way, the task force who is prosecuting Ira Isaacs is NOT the same federal agency that deals with child porn. That's an ENTIRELY different ball of wax. We're talking about consenting adults and their First Amendment rights here.)

This guy stands a chance of going to jail, depending on the outcome of the jury's decision. If he's convicted, then in a roundabout way, I stand a chance of going to jail some day for flashing my boobies. It's a coin toss... he could get a very open-minded jury; there are no guarantees. 

Either scenario could totally happen. One of my relatives, whom I love very much, is 19 different varieties of uptight. If she ever knew about my website, I think she would be "offended" to the point that she would never speak to me again. No one is perfect, y'know. She's just one of those people with a very narrow mind and extremely conservative tendencies, but I still love her because she has a good soul. She's also the kind of person who might sit on a jury. And there are other people like her who might sit on a jury with her. It only takes twelve. Twelve people who are "offended" by boobs or BBWs could potentially put my porky butt in the pokey. 

But that's totally unlikely right? ... Or is it?

-I'm scared.-

----- ----- ------ ----- ------

Some pretty awesome folks responded and we have had a fun and interesting discussion.... but since I don't have their permission to post what they've written, I'll just share my end. If you want to see it all, visit Dims. You know the addy.

----- ----- ----- ----- -----

(The following is in response to someone saying the conservatives want to take away our porn while the liberals want to take away our un-green engines.)

Holy crap... I hadn't even thought about that AC. That's fucking perfect. I'll have no paysite AND no horsepower. Thanks US Government. Just kill me now.

----- ----- ----- ----- -----

(Later in the discussion, someone jokingly asked if my site had anything to do with beastiality or poo porn, since much of Ira Isaacs' material apparently covers those topics, ahem...)

Ha ha! Nope... no beastiality or poo porn for me, Risible. I can barely clean the occasional kitty hair ball without dry heaving. 

For the record, I think beastiality is unethical. Animals can't give their consent, so I think they should not be made to perform any sexual act with a human. I don't know if I would consider it malim in se or malim prohibitum, or even if it is a crime at all. But it is yuck-o, in my very humble opinion.

I fully agree with what you're saying about art being in the eye of the beholder, though. Example... my father-in-law has this effing polar bear sculpture. It's HORRIBLE. The ugliest thing ever ever ever. Stupid thing is also apparently worth quite a dime and my husband is most eager to inherit the forsaken paperweight. Thinking about that dreadful chunk of crap collecting dust on the mantle where visitors can see it makes me cringe. Absolute waves of horror shake me at my core. BUT... my father-in-law and his dingbat son think the friggin thing is art in the highest degree. A pièce de résistance to display with pride in the most high-traffic area of the house. If he could mount the son of a bitch on the hood of the car, he probably would. To me, it's heinous. Plain and simple. 

So which one of us would win in a court of law when it comes to the angry polar bear statue? I think that question is just as useless as the question of obscenity currently posed to Ira Isaacs' jury. 

(Someone else said "the post thickens" instead of saying "plot" in reference to recent information regarding the judge on the case and his personal website containing material that might be considered 'obscene'.)

Hee hee Les... the post thickens... in a way, that's appropos. LOL I thought you were being clever. I read about the judge's problems earlier today. What another slap in the face! Geezus. 

It's like we all have to live underground. No jokes, no laughing, no porn, no fast cars with big engines, no nothing. You get up in the morning, pray, go to work, come home, pray, eat, pray, shower, pray, go to bed, repeat until Saturday, get up, pray, shower, pray, read religious books and political propaganda, pray, eat, pray, go to bed, get up, pray, go to church, pray, sing, pray, secretly judge the person sitting in front of you, pray, stand up, pretend to pray while the guy up on the podium talks about how you'll rot in hell if you think about the woman at your office with the extremely nice ass, sit down, put some money in the plate, pray, go home, pray, eat, pray, got to bed, start over from the top, repeat weekly and pay taxes annually and never question what those in authority tell you to do. Is that what the government actually wants? Do our representatives and legislators actually think that is POSSIBLE, let alone practical?

I'm in Missouri and my community seems to be undecided on how "conservative" or "liberal" they want to be. There's a church on every corner but there's also a topless bar or adult-magazine shop within about 5 or 10 miles of anywhere you'd go in the Kansas City area. As for laws, my website is not breaking any laws, state or federal. I am of legal age; I pay taxes on my income; and don't do anything that would constitute indecent exposure. 

While I don't really lose any sleep over being personally prosecuted on obscenity charges, since I read about this case, I now realize it IS possible that I *could* be.... however unlikely. Then I think, y'know what, it may not be as unlikely as I would let myself believe. That's why I gave the example of my super-uptight relative. If she were on my jury she would definitely vote to convict me. She does think all porn should be illegal. My point is... she is NOT alone. She's not even that much of a minority. Her husband is of a very similar mindset. It only takes 12 jurors to seal one's fate and finding 12 people like her and her husband would not be a difficult task. So I oscillate between thinking it's wildly impossible that a no-core pin up model like myself would be prosecuted; and thinking it is not only possible but could be probable if the current trend continues.

The whole situation is just junk. Honestly, leave the porn guy alone. Leave the judge alone. Leave everyone alone! Let's go after those who are really causing a problem... serial killers, anyone? Child molesters? Repeat offender drunk drivers? After we get rid of all of those, then maybe if we just have nothing better to do, I suppose we can start picking on innocent people to pass the time.

Sorry for prattling on so long, but obvsiously my mind hasn't had enough to occupy itself the past day or so. LOL

Let me also say I'm so glad to see that there are people here who would not throw me or others like me under a bus for flashing a little leg. I do appreciate that and find real comfort in it. Thanks you guys.

... Now back to your regularly scheduled programming ...

----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Your thoughts? Am I "obscene"? ... Yes. But foul language aside, all other things considered where consenting adults and legal business are concerned, where do we draw the line?

I soooo DO NOT -heart- Huckabee! 09Jan08

Huckabee scares me.

1 - Don't like his name. Don't know why, but I hate his name. It doesn't sound like a real name. It sounds like some shitty restaurant chain.

2 - Don't like anyone with any sort of "anti" agenda where people's appearance is concerned. He has an anti-fat agenda. (See: BMI listed on kid's grade cards in Arkansas.) I would still hate him if he had an anti-short agenda or an anti-big feet agenda. Americans are permitted to look however they want. If he's president, does that mean I'll have to hide in the house all the time, lest I'm caught and arrested for public fatted-ness? Why does no one seem to mention he had WEIGHT LOSS SURGERY to get thinner? Yeah, Fuckerbee, it's an easy ride when you have a doctor slice up your guts so you can't eat. Not everyone has that option. Not everyone WANTS that option. Some of us are just fine the way we currently live. Leave those kids alone! Geezus. 

3 - He doesn't drink. Who, from Arkansas, doesn't drink? Who wants to be around a stone cold sober Arkansasanianan? Not me. Sounds like he's trying to deny his Arky roots. I don't like fakers.

4 - He has what is known as "crazy white boy stare". It's a common condition among all stupid people, actually... not just crazy white boys. Usually occurs when they're asked a question they don't understand or can't answer. Caused when the 3 active brain cells jam up with the 19 inactive ones.

5 - Wants to over-turn Roe v. Wade. Probably wants to deny women the right to vote and drive, too... FUCK THAT NOISE. Would I personally ever have an abortion? Probably not. Depends on the circumstances. But, who am I to say someone else shouldn't have the option??? Am I going to adopt their unwanted baby? Nope. So I had better leave them alone and stay out of their business. Is Fuckerbee and his sober dowdy wife going to adopt these babies and let them eat off the $10,000 china and crystal place settings in the AR Gov'ners mansion? Doubt it! Highly doubt it. Where does that fucktard get off wanting to deny a woman a choice? We can't stop hos from being hos and we can't stop rapists from being rapists and we can't stop dangerous pregnancies from happening, so let's just leave the choice up to the INDIVIDUAL... unless we're going to stand in line and personally be accountable for these children we've forced into the world... That's all I'm sayin.

6 - Is opposed to stem-cell research. Yes... let's all die skinny and sober, in church, while trying to feed masses of unwanted babies with $10,000 china.

7 - Opposes the right for gay couples to marry. Too bad we can't figure out if an embryo is gay or not... because then he would probably allow gay abortion, just so there aren't as many homos running around, trying to get married and shit. Such a shame my gay friends actually have things to do and money to spend, otherwise I'd get a gang of them together to come kick his ass. 

8 - Isn't down with separation of church and state. Wants to bring his Christian faith to work with him. Um... 'scuse me, but I know a WHOLE BUNCH of Americans who might not be cool with that. Let's see... Jewish people. Buddhist people. Hindu people. Agnostic or atheist people. Muslim people. Just to name a few... 

Gag me gag me gag me GAG ME! His website is awful! Just overflowing with bile and spew and garbage! This man is an IDIOT. No, seriously, he's not bright and he's not bright enough to know he's not bright. He thinks he's fine and dandy. 

Huckabee = Yucky Pee.

Larry Flynt said... 14Oct07

''The United States is the strongest country not because it's the biggest or richest, but because it's the freest.'' 

My question is... how long will it stay that way?

I'm so effing glad the current administration is on the way out. But how disappointed will I be come election time when I'm forced to make a choice, yet again, between bad and worse? Do I want conservative assholes mis-spending my hard-earned tax dollars and giving themselves and their wealthy friends tax breaks or do I want liberal weirdos giving my hard-earned tax dollars to welfare leeches and socialist health care plans? Do I want to be fucked in the ass OR fucked in the ass? Hmmm... tough call... 

Part of me has a great deal of pity for the person who comes along behind Bush and tries to clean up his mess. If I were you, I'd burn it down and start over... figuratively speaking, of course. Don't go pulling a Britney haircut on the White House or anything like that crazy pants. 

Then again, why feel sorry for someone who INTENTIONALLY walks into the sleazy disgusting world of politics??? And people rip on ME for being a dirty porn star! HA! I'm not the dirty one, folks. Those old white men in suits who are full of hot gas and sit around on their higher-than-thou asses dictating policy and shit... THOSE are the dirty mother fuckers. Those guys are the ones who have made a mess of life in the US. Sure, they aren't all white and they aren't all men, but majority rules, and the majority of them are stuffy old white assholes in stuffy black and grey suits. Watch any hearing online, you'll see what I mean. They're goddamned DUMB, too, some of them. Honestly. They sit on various committees to discuss this and that and some of them don't have the first DAMN clue what the hell is going on. All they know is how to argue, bullshit and ACT informed by throwing around vague statements infused with verbose language meant to look specific and thought-through. It's SO SAD. A big vocabulary does not equal a great ability for trouble shooting and problem solving.

Again, it's a lack of diversity. I really think that's part of the problem. The federal goverment is drawing from the life experiences of only a small representation of the US population. Mostly privileged, educated, white, upper class, straight men with either Christian or Jewish backgrounds. That is the majority of our goverment and perhaps that is the 'majority' of our country... but that isn't me and those aren't my friends and it isn't what I want to be and it's not where I want to live. 

Where are the hot fat chicks? Where are the awesome OUT gay men? Where are the black women (Condi, sorry... you're almost a white man), where are the American Indians or the Buddhists or the Asians or lesbian middle class single moms??? All those people pay taxes and all those people deserve to have a voice in our government. But they seem to be ignored and I don't know why. 

Is the world diversity-phobic?