wsc

I knew that the former VP with his horn and his damn little band would someday be the death of us all!!! You know - The Al Gore Rhythms. Sorry! I'll show myself out.

I've never experienced it myself, since it's been a long time since I've had a pet. But I've heard stories of cats or dogs seeing their "hooman" packing a suitcase, interpret it as a looming abandonment, and then pooping in a corner as a mark of disappointment and disapproval. These beautiful creatures are remarkably perceptive!

I saw Liberace perform twice, and he was indeed a talented and entertaining performer. But, OMG! While I'm sure that this seemed a good idea in flower-powered1968, it has not aged well, nor did Lee as the years wore on. Some of the male performers looked quite cute, though, and the male-to-female ratio seemed appropriate considering the star. I wonder how much Lee had to do with casting and if included any of his then-current favorites. Everything about the man seemed to scream, "I like my women somewhat taller, I think, and with broader shoulders and a bigger dick." I don't disagree.

Probably best viewed during a power outage.

In the words of that song about big spenders, "I don't pop my cork for every guy I see..." this young man looks to be a definite pop-corking keeper. Except for the now practically and sadly ubiquitous tattoos, he's gorgeous! Just call me the Weasel as I go pop, pop, pop!🥰

The first and clumsy attempt at resuscitation. "He's not a balloon," the others yelled. "Leave him alone," the victim pleaded.

I think his Twitter post was the joke since it had actually been five years since the pandemic, but some people on Facebook misunderstood, didn't get that joke, and accused him of being a vaccine denier, which from his other Twitter post he clearly isn't. My comment was addressing those Facebook critics, not Mr. Akers.

I bet that police visit made her head spin!

Thank you for the excellent clarification!

I think it's less a question of destruction of property and more one of obstruction of justice. If you flush the cocaine down a toilet, it is an act of destruction of property. But the police aren't after the cocaine for its own sake, but rather for its evidentiary value. Therefore, its destruction interferes with an investigation and in so doing obstructs justice. If instead of destroying the encryption keys the phone owner had locked the intact phone in a safe to keep it from the police, it is still an act intended to deny the police access to evidence of a possible crime and in that thwarts their investigation and obstructs justice. I think the agents were too heavy handed in their actions and the lack of due process (no court issued search warrant) horrendous. But I would be very reluctant to throw the baby out with the bathwater, meaning to dilute an important legal principle because of sloppy procedural issues.

Absolutely true! My first meet-up was a soiree at a funeral home to learn about casket options.

Do they even care?

Apparently, the vaccination did not enhance math skills nor offer protection from stupidity.

Maybe a handmaiden, but I suspect she's also God's hand puppet with his hand up her ass to make her mouth move. As a side note, some years ago, I and a friend were paying up at a bar at closing time. The only other patrons were a couple sitting at the bar. As I stood waiting for change, the woman looked toward me and asked, "Do you know Jesus?" I replied, "No, I'm an atheist." Her response was. "Well, then, fuck you!" which I thought was a novel approach to proselytizing. I then said to her, "No, I think I'd rather fuck you. How much for twenty minutes?" Did I mention I'd been drinking?

It's situational. You are free to erase your data from your phone when you want. But this isn't really about that. This is about when you're not free to erase it, as when the police are asking to see it. The parallel is: It's my cocaine and it's my toilet; I'll flush when I want. [Free legal advice: don't make that the cornerstone of your defense.] BTW - I agree with the warrant aspect of this as there doesn't seem to be anything exigent about the circumstances, as long as the authorities seize and hold the phone untampered until a judge has ruled. This is why I think the "not on our soil until granted admission" stance plays too fast and loose with due process and should be immediately abandoned. But the soonest that might happen would be late January of 2029.

Paul Lynde was asked on the Hollywood Squares, When is it a good time to put your pantyhose in the microwave for two minutes? His answer was, When the police have your house surrounded. If you flush cocaine down a toilet while police are breaking down the door, that's arrestable. If you swallow narcotics on a routine traffic stop to keep the cops from finding them, that's arrestable. If you give the police a false name to prevent them from correctly identifying you, that's arrestable. All these actions fall under the general heading of obstruction of justice, and all of them are criminal acts. If you're a suspect in a case of child sexual abuse and the police have been informed text messages on your iPhone contain incriminating evidence in the case and you erase the data as the police close in, that, too, is arrestable. Would the reasonable man want any of this to be different? The difference between these cases and the one here at bar are the broader search powers granted at ports of entry on the premise that you're not protected by constitutional rights until you're granted entry to the country and including situations which might otherwise constitute unreasonable search and seizure. The courts have ruled. I don't agree with the courts on these points since the Constitution has instances of the phrase "or subject to their (the government's) jurisdiction," which, in my view you clearly are if you are deemed arrestable, and I believe in the broadest possible interpretations and applications for the protection of peoples' rights under our Constitution whether on our soil or subject to our jurisdiction. This point needs more examination and judicial oversight, unlikely as that might end favorably to my views under the current Supreme Court. Perhaps this case could be used as a springboard to put it before that venue. We'll see. But for now, the law and its interpretation are what they are. I am, therefore, unusually and surprisingly. forced to agree with our in-house Clown, the inimitable BTC.

I didn't know I was misapproprating; mea culpa. But, with a name like that, it's likely to be about some kind of ring.

Ben Dover

I want to see him make an elephant shadow puppet without using his hands.

Yes! And I have that exact model from Walmart. Worked fine for shopping at a grocery store just about 1500 feet from home. However, although the trip home was fine (downhill), the trip uphill to the store, even with an empty cart, eventually became too much for me and I stopped using it. BTW, I worked on the construction of several nuclear power plants in my career and putting this cart together was the hardest thing I ever assembled. Good luck! (And let me know if you need the lexicon of swear words I developed during that assembly.)

What do you intend to do after you find him? Punch him again? Reason with him to return the money? Alert the authorities, presenting them with what evidence beyond just your word? Find someone who knows someone who knows a guy and put out a contract on him? These ships have sailed or sunk. Give it up. You had a bad experience; an awful and terrifying one. But you yourself said you ignored warning signs; learn from the experience and don't repeat mistakes of the past. I can see the attraction. He is a handsome and muscular man, with inches of appeal, although the neck tat would be a huge disincentive for me in spite of his other huge attributes. If you can't shed the anger and thirst for vengeance, - which will eventually consume you - seek a different kind of professional service and see a mental health professional. Oh, and don't pay up front.

You don't want to get stuffed?!?

A man went to see a doctor for a problem that was diagnosed as a prostate condition. The doctor told him the cause was a lack of proper irrigation and that the only way to get relief was through regular and frequent orgasms and told the man to see again in a month. At the next visit the doctor looked at lab results and saw only minor progress and asked the man about his sexual encounters. The man said he'd increased them from rarely to about twice a month. The doctor said that would not solve his problem and that he must increase his efforts. After another month the results were still unsatisfactory to the doctor even though the patient had said he had increased his encounters to once a week. The doctor scolded the man on the still too low frequency of his orgasms, sending him forth to do much better if he was serious about getting relief. In the next appointment the man reported he was now up to twice a week, and the doctor got visibly upset about his patient's lack of adequate care for his condition. The man then became annoyed with the doctor and told him. "I know you're trying to help and I appreciate that. But I truly am trying my very best. And for a priest in a small town, I think I'm doing remarkably well!"

Are you sure? If he's using fake pics, why would he pick those?

I want to turn galitzine into a verb and have him do it to me. Repeatedly.