Archive for the 'Life's Lessons' Category

So very witty and… well… true. Keynes is universally celebrated, why Hayek is not as well known… or accepted.

I do love the “party at the Fed” as portrayed. Keynes all hungover… heh…

must be refreshed time to time by the blood of patriots and tyrants…

Hopefully it won’t be just the blood of Iranian patriots….

This is the kind of stuff that can enrage a populace to mass unrest… I think the mad mullahs might have overplayed their hand…

(NOTE: If this does turn into a revolution, that is successful especially, look to see that the left in this country will give the credit to “Hope N’ Change Inc.™”. Mark my words and gird your loins)

Hopefully you’ve already called your father and told ‘em how much you love ‘em. If you are a “Daddy”, thank the Good Lord above for giving you the privilege, and pray that you can live up to, or already have, the responsibility of your children.

When I first read stories about face transplants my first reaction was “Oh here we go…people not happy with their appearances seeking more surgery to make them perfect!”

Was I wrong. Kicking myself now….

CLEVELAND — When Connie Culp heard a little kid call her a monster because of the shotgun blast that left her face horribly disfigured, she pulled out her driver’s license to show the child what she used to look like. Years later, sporting the nation’s first surgically attached face, she’s stepped forward to show the rest of the world what she looks like now.

NOT that many years ago she was a pretty woman…with a beautiful smile and probing eyes.

Culp’s husband, Thomas, shot her in 2004, then turned the gun on himself. He went to prison for seven years. His wife was left clinging to life. The blast shattered her nose, cheeks, the roof of her mouth and an eye. Hundreds of fragments of shotgun pellet and bone splinters were embedded in her face. She needed a tube into her windpipe to breathe. Only her upper eyelids, forehead, lower lip and chin were left.

Not only did her destroy her appearance…but her ability to breath, eat, smell, taste…all those things we simply take for granted. Her vision remained unscathed, as was her mind. I cannot imagine what it’s been like for her- to see herself after the trauma and to live her life in such misery.

Then, on Dec. 10, in a 22-hour operation, Dr. Maria Siemionow led a team of doctors who replaced 80 percent of Culp’s face with bone, muscles, nerves, skin and blood vessels from another woman who had just died. It was the fourth face transplant in the world, though the others were not as extensive.

“Here I am, five years later. He did what he said — I got me my nose,” Culp said of Djohan, laughing.

In January, she was able to eat pizza, chicken and hamburgers for the first time in years. She loves to have cookies with a cup of coffee, Siemionow said.

I bet that coffee tasted VERY GOOD. Imagine that!

Going from not having a nose, to being able to SMELL again with a new one. God bless you Connie and the docs who did the operation. Initially the idea of surgically attaching a dead person’s facial tissue to another human being kind of grossed me out…gave me the illy willies…but now I’m over THAT.

The new “face” is still a work in progress. Connie will require more surgeries to trim it down, as the muscles grow and mature. Her current appearance will change; right now she is highly swollen and stiff, a normal post-surgery side effect.

Connie offers some advice to people:

“When somebody has a disfigurement and don’t look as pretty as you do, don’t judge them, because you never know what happened to them,” she said. “Don’t judge people who don’t look the same as you do. Because you never know. One day it might be all taken away.”

One of life’s lessons is right here folks.

Oh here we go again. Er, ok, here I go again.

Via Eternity Road: Male Attractiveness
The author links to an article Dr Helen posted, about women in Australia who seem to be a bit too picky with men…they tend to focus on appearance more than anything else. The author makes one good point: Once in a relationship, looks aren’t as important. For women, anyway.

The stench of the ole double standard once again permeates the air.

Read the rest of this entry »

I have long been familiar with the Darwin Awards, given to people who improve the human gene pool by removing themselves from it, but I only recently heard about the Stella Awards, named after Stella Liebeck, who achieved some notoriety by successfully suing McDonald’s, after burning herself with coffee purchased therefrom. From what I can tell, the Stella Awards go to whoever can do something stupid to harm themselves, but successfully sue to have the responsibility placed elsewhere.

Let’s Get This Right has the list of nominees. The first-place nominee was a woman in Oklahoma named Mrs. Merv Grazinski.
Read the rest of this entry »

Oh good grief. I might get into trouble for this post.

There’s a little buzz going on in the blogosphere about Dennis Prager’s column on married couples and sex..or the lack of it. It’s all about wives not being in the mood. He wrote two articles on this.

The subject is one of the most common problems that besets marriages: the wife who is “not in the mood” and the consequently frustrated and hurt husband.

There are marriages with the opposite problem — a wife who is frustrated and hurt because her husband is rarely in the mood. But, as important and as destructive as that problem is, it has different causes and different solutions, and is therefore not addressed here. What is addressed is the far more common problem of “He wants, she doesn’t want.”

There’s different kinds of sex. And different expectations. We have women who either like it, or they don’t. I blame the MAN when the woman doesn’t LIKE IT.

First, women need to recognize how a man understands a wife’s refusal to have sex with him: A husband knows that his wife loves him first and foremost by her willingness to give her body to him. This is rarely the case for women. Few women know their husband loves them because he gives her his body (the idea sounds almost funny).

Men want companionship and all that comes with it. This can be sex, talking, working out together at the gym, doing house errands, being with the kids…men aren’t just out for sex in spite of what they say. I know far more married guys who are unhappy because of the lack of companionship, and not because of a lack of sex. I sometimes think, men would be much happier if they could be married to one woman, and be “allowed” to sex it up with others. But I also know many women who would like the same.

This is a major reason many husbands clam up. A man whose wife frequently denies him sex will first be hurt, then sad, then angry, then quiet. And most men will never tell their wives why they have become quiet and distant. They are afraid to tell their wives. They are often made to feel ashamed of their male sexual nature, and they are humiliated (indeed emasculated) by feeling that they are reduced to having to beg for sex.

Men clam up cause they’re men. They have this ego thing going, all the time. When they clam up, they shut out their wives. We all know this. Men know, when they have to beg for sex, that they either suck at it, or they don’t want to put forth any effort. That’s tough on the ego. It doesn’t take a scientist to figure this all out.

One of life’s lessons I’ve learned:
Women who enjoy sex will want it. No matter what. In order for women to enjoy sex, men have to skilled lovers.

It’s that simple.

And that complicated. Women don’t always want to tell their husbands they are bored with sex….that it doesn’t feel good nor is pleasing…it indeed becomes a chore, a duty. Wives don’t want to hurt their husbands feelings, and, their ego.

…Compared to most women’s sexual nature, men’s sexual nature is far closer to that of animals. So what? That is the way he is made. Blame God and nature. Telling your husband to control it is a fine idea. But he already does. Every man who is sexually faithful to his wife already engages in daily heroic self-control. He has married knowing he will have to deny his sexual nature’s desire for variety for the rest of his life. To ask that he also regularly deny himself sex with the one woman in the world with whom he is permitted sex is asking far too much. Deny him enough times and he may try to fill this need with another woman. If he is too moral to ever do that, he will match your sexual withdrawal with emotional and other forms of withdrawal.

The threat of infidelity. It’s always there. And it’s a great way to keep a marriage together eh?
But it’s absolute non sense. This I know. I’ve seen first hand, what men will do for sex, and how much they will pay for it…the fantasy, the lure, the need for different women…the so called desire for young girls…virgins…I’ve seen married men cheat on their wives for no “reason” other than they want to. It’s not a need so much as it’s a right, to many men.

Men are animals. But so are women. Again, women who enjoy sex will want it, ask for it, expect it, and DO IT. Often. Without reserve. Without strings. Women who like sex see men differently than those who don’t. Every male is scrutinized for his sexual potential; his body gets more than a double glance; his presence sets off hormone production in women. The chemistry takes over and the attraction is there. Women have to fight these feelings and urges as well, if they’re sexually in tune with their bodies. Sure, they tend to see a romantic and lovey dovey side to men, but they also are capable to seeing the sexual object in them.

Could it be, God forbid, that she wants more than a four minute flat tumble in the sack, after which he turns over and fast falls asleep, snoring?? Might she be more apt to mood up, if she got something out of it? Might her needs be considered as well?

It’s funny how Prager refuses to examine this.

There’s a time and place for quickies, in every relationship. Yes, women often get little from these fast moving fun times. They work well when little kids’ bedtime isn’t for hours or when time alone isn’t possible…but they should always be part of a much bigger, longer lasting encounter that both know is coming…..and anticipating. And wanting. Desiring.

When these “married people-quickies” become the norm in a relationship though, boredom will quickly settle in. Most women have to work hard to get in the mood. Men don’t. It’s easy to get trapped into this sexual lifestyle. It seems to me Mr. Prager is promoting this selfish and unfulfilling “MarriedPeopleSex” lifestyle….it’s the wives duty to give her body to her husband no matter what. He tells women to ignore their moods and fulfill their obligations. Oh my.

Then he blames women’s lib movement- which is totally not relevant in the minds of modern women.

We have been nurtured in a culture of rights, not a culture of obligations. To many women, especially among the best educated, the notion that a woman owes her husband sex seems absurd, if not actually immoral. They have been taught that such a sense of obligation renders her “property.” Of course, the very fact that she can always say “no” — and that this “no” must be honored — renders the “property” argument absurd. A woman is not “property” when she feels she owes her husband conjugal relations. She is simply wise enough to recognize that marriages based on mutual obligations — as opposed to rights alone and certainly as opposed to moods — are likely to be the best marriages.

Mind over mood.
Sure. Is this a way to prevent wives from liking sex? So, they won’t ever KNOW what they’re missing? Let’s move women back to the 50’s when they knew where their place was, and what their duties were.

A woman who actually likes sex changes things. And might even be a threat. Because she can seek sex elsewhere, as well, when she is bored with the Sex’n'Snore routine Mr. Prager is recommending.

Did the 60’s show women that sex is good? That it feels awesome? That the right skills from the right man, at the right time, is something worth striving for?

I dunno. I wasn’t part of that movement, as it’s called. I do know that sex is good; that I expect it to be a mutually satisfying experience and that this is the obligation of both husbands and wives- men and women living together– towards each other. Not just one way.

Newsflash:::::
WOMEN HAVE HAD A FEW REALLY GOOD ORGASMS. We know what we want. We know we might have to teach our men some new tricks…to get what we want. WE’RE NOT going to ever stop wanting (and expecting) good sex. Sorry guys. The female animal was unleashed and she’s too strong and independent now to go back to captivity.

Many contemporary women have an almost exclusively romantic notion of sex: It should always be mutually desired and equally satisfying or one should not engage in it. Therefore, if a couple engages in sexual relations when he wants it and she does not, the act is “dehumanizing” and “mechanical.”

Damn right. Why should women give up their orgasms for a man? And, I have to ask, what man would ASK his woman to do that??????

Moods notwithstanding…did it ever occur to Mr. Prager that changing that mood might be worth it? Oh wait…that might require some work on the mans’ part. Can’t have that now can we??

It’s gotta be tough to be a man, isn’t it Dennis? It’s tough to know you’re expected to do more than ask, or as you like to say, beg. It’s gotta be tough to know that women have some expectations; that we don’t want to just spread the legs and let you go at it…all the time, with nothing in it for us. That a quick romp isn’t good enough, for some of us. That some effort might be called for, to please us.

When a man provides an awesome sexual experience for a woman, you can bet your ass she will pony up and ride irregardless of her moods!

I don’t like to bash men. I love men, and I think I know a little more about them then most people realize. Smart men know they have to create the mood; that they have to put aside their own needs, at first, in order to get their women to satisfy THOSE NEEDS. Smart men know that really good, really hot sex takes TWO- and they respect the fact that a sexually aroused woman is the biggest turn on of them all. Not the woman who is simply doing her duty.

I love Brad Paisley’s music. I had fallen out of loving country music when I got out of high school. But there are still a few artists out there in country music land, like Brad, that bring me back to my roots.

Anyways, I love one of his latest songs, Letter to Me. I think it is a hit because I think all of us can relate to being 17, and not being able to look past Friday night. The future was so wide open. And with my little girls, I see it happening all over again. Ofcourse they’re so young that they can’t see past the evening meal.

oh. and before I forget… I love this one too..

Yesterday, my blogging friend Pat Hickey over at his blog …With Both Hands posted a most thoughtful and reflective essay on Mumbai and its juxtaposition with the beginning of Advent titled Watch – Mumbai is Kankakee, Chicago, or Anywhere..

His identifying a worship of will as a driving force behind Mumbai (and naming its enablers and co-conspirators here in the U.S.) was quite insightful, but what I found particularly inspired was his comments about nuance and the way it paralyzes the modern secular mind:

There are devotees of WILL here in the United States ready to parse and dissemble the root cause of the Monsters with backpacks loaded with weapons in Mumbai. Ramsey Clark is no doubt ready to board a plane and take up the cause of the Monsters (one of the miserable bastards survived and whined to security forces “put me on saline”); Noam Chomsky and Billy Ayers have no doubt penned a clever contrarian essay on the massacre and its radical implications for Identity politics here in America.

The balance of us must be watchful. Advent calls to mind the Promise of Arrival. At Sacred Heart Mission on 116th & Church Street here on the south side of Chicago, Father Gallagher, a retired but active priest, explained the Gospel today. Words and thoughts that would be lost on a smug dissembler like Ramsey Clark, or a Noam Chomsky, or a Billy Ayers. We, the rest of us, must humble ourselves in order to be vigilant enough for the Coming of Christ and all the other expectations that living demands of us. Tough call.

We do not want someone telling us what to watch out for . . . especially during the Holidays. Modern thought depends upon the clever parser’s rule to nuance -Who’s to say? Jesus, I hate that expression of nuanced smugness. With those words the Nuanced act to Isolate people and then they can collect them all into their Will The Disciples of WILL appreciate the slaughter of the innocents in Mumbai as it Reifies Will!

Folks, We must put Will on the back burner. It starts with yours truly, here. I take a back seat to no one where stubborn Pride is concerned.

There’s something about the exposure of monstrous evil that directs us back to our roots, therein renewing our spirits. I encountered this on 9/11, where I clearly saw the undeniable face of evil. Pat has alerted us to the most recent manifestation of the face of evil.

Read the whole piece.

Looks like the Twentieth Century Motor Company for the 21st Century (which I talked about here) is going to close after all. Color me not surprised.