…leads 22-year-old cheerleading assistant coach–who lists herself as ENGAGED–down the path to promiscuity.
While John Stossel does not get into some of the larger issues–such as the fact that we are footing the bill for the socialist medicine (including price controls for pharmaceuticals) in Canada and England–he does get it on fundamental issues related to insurance.
While I gave up pedestaling long ago, I still found this tidbit unpleasantly surprising.
Gentlemen….if she starts talking about taking a trip to the Caribbean–without you, of course–let’s just say that it’s a VERY BAD SIGN.
And to the ladies who are into this sort of thing….don’t kid yourselves. If there’s something instructive about this article, it’s that, while you may be getting the attention you crave, the locals over there have special names for you.
Yes, they’ll ravage your body and even take payment for their pleasure. Just remember, though: to them, you’re just an affluent slut. A “milk bottle”.
Over here, though, you are worse than a slut. If you pay for it, then you are as much of a loser as any man who pays for it.
HT: Vox Day.
This is another “Homeschool or Die” story.
A school bans SUNSCREEEN.
You gotta be [insert expletive of choice] kidding me!
A little-leaguer was helping a pitcher warm up in a bullpen. He misfired on a return throw, and the ball struck a woman in the face, causing multiple fractures.
She is claiming that he intentionally hit her.
Cubbie can correct me on this, but I think she’s going to have one heck of a hard time proving this in court.
At any rate, this kind of legal crap is going to destroy our society.
When a person can’t do something as simple as participate in a youth sporting event without the prospect of getting nailed with a 6-figure lawsuit if the slightest thing goes on, then what is the incentive to work hard and take risks, the very type of activity that we NEED for real economic growth?
Of course, to say that unions have quite the stranglehold in Michigan would be a gross understatement.
Still, if you think it is ok that the union extorts $778 out of your hide every year–demanding your credit card information for automatic payment–just so you can keep your job, then you have worse things wrong with you than your support of unions.
Yes, I am a State employee in Kentucky. I am “non-merit”. I belong to no union. I am not part of a public pension system. I can be fired for any–or no–reason.
I’m ok with that. It’s about free markets.
This had me in stitches.
The quote of the year:
There is only one fundamental rule of sexual attraction. No man can fake an erection. If he’s got one, you’ve still got it. Perhaps not quite as much as you once did, but it’s all you need.
NOTE: Armstrong, since retiring from cycling, has been doing half-Ironman races (1.2-mile swim/56-mile bike ride/13.1-mile run, for a total of 70.3 miles, which is half the total of a full Ironman race).
Being banned from such races–which are open to peeons like me–is quite the blow to Lance.
Like I’ve said, I sure hope he’s innocent. I have a couple of those yellow bracelets at home, and Lance has done a very fine job promoting fitness and cancer research. I don’t want him to be guilty.
But I just want the truth to come out, whatever it is.
If this charge holds, Lance may have to forfeit seven Tour De France titles.
I’ve long-maintained that either (a) he is as clean as an Eagle Scout, or (b) he is the most proficient cheater in the history of sports.
That said, the anti-doping regulators have become very advanced over the years. It used to be common knowledge that the Eastern Bloc athletes were doped with steroids, but were able to chemically deceive the drug tests.
Today, cheating the system has become quite difficult. And because many samples are stored for years, being able to cheat today is no guarantee that you won’t get caught a few more years down the road, as technology improves.
Disclosure: I have no axe to grind with Armstrong, and hope he is innocent.
But if he’s guilty, he needs to face the same music that others have had to face.
James Eldridge, the newest face at Boundless, admits the obvious:
Being the newbie on the Boundless team, I have a lot of things to learn before I will feel confident of my handle on things.
In honor of the “old baseball” approach of Phillies pitcher Cole Hamels, I hope to shorten your learning curve with a few inside fastballs.
One of the commenters, in an email exchange with our good friend Martha Krienke, opined (not without merit):
Too much consumption [of Boundless] will reveal a ‘men you’re bad, man up; women you’re hurt, we sympathize and help’ attitude.
That would be an understatement, especially given what other Boundless writers–like Glenn Stanton–have had the audacity to print:
…women left to themselves will develop into good women, more responsible women, just naturally, for various reasons and we could talk about that. But men have to be taught how to lead. They have to be encouraged how to lead. They have to be welcomed into leadership. And I don’t think we’re doing that today. We’re not taking young boys and saying, “OK, we need to make men out of you.” And I think that’s the large reason for the man problem today, is that we have to be very intentional about man-making, man-creating. And I can hear all the women saying, “Absolutely!” It doesn’t just naturally happen. It happens more naturally with women than it does with men.
Eldridge’s response to “Jeff”, shows a little bit of reality, tainted with Headship Theology. First, he starts out well:
I wish I could sit down and have a conversation with Jeff. “Jeff”, I’d say, “I completely understand where you are coming from.” I grew up in a church culture where the mindset seemed to be that men were the animals with the problems and all women had to do was not feed the beast inside the man. The women were the innocent victims of man’s inability to “live right.”
Then he proceeds to step in six feet of fresh manure:
I, however, don’t want to deny the truth that God created men to lead and take responsibility of their families. Therefore, changing men’s hearts and lives is the most effective way to shot block our culture’s high divorce rate.
Given that women are filing over two-thirds of the divorces, piling on the men here is very counterproductive.
Don’t tell me, “Well, it’s because the men are abusive, and aren’t leading well.” Fact is, there are abusive wives just as there are abusive husbands. Calling men to be better leaders–while valid–is only half the Biblical equation. In fact, Paul–in Ephesians 5–addressed BOTH husbands AND wives in the same passage, and even called on the wives to submit first.
Yes, men need to do a better job leading. That said, better leadership on the part of the husbands will barely put a dent in the divorce rate. This is because perfect love by the husband does not assure perfect submission by the wife.
This doesn’t even happen with respect to Christ and the Church, so how can one reasonably assume that it will happen between a husband and wife?