Sunday, July 31, 2005

A Fine Sunday

I met with some pals, where we discussed the thumpers; I love my pals, and the way they make me feel.

Then, I took Lucy to Victoria's Secret for a wee bit o' the shopping.

Then -- Jaimie and I cooked.

We made dal, and DAMN was it delicious!

I loved teaching her some of the things I learned in cooking school. But my favourtie part of the exercise was just watching her joyful embrace of a simple lesson -- the recipe is just a starting point; adjust to make it your own and make it the way you want it.

[that's a deep life lesson, for those of you who thought I was simply talking about cooking].

The Nats WON!

Friday, July 29, 2005

Please Please Me

Please leave a comment with your current favourite beatles song, and why.



I just need to know.


My current, for the last three minutes, is "And Your Bird Can Sing." Paul's silly, slightly overmixed harmony vocal on the last verse moves me. As do the guitars.

My Three Rappin, Street-Smart Broads





That would be Jaimie, my mother, and Lucy.


They are SO fly...

I'm So Damned Old-Fashioned

I pine for the days when only men were disgusting pigs,


and only men ejaculated.



Can't we keep a few things separate? I mean, I wanna sew, and I obviously have decided to horn in on the large breast department, but can't we leave it to men to gather and be inappropriate louts?


It's just a thought...

It's Good to Know

It's good to know that I can feel suicidal again without feeling like I want to drink alcohol.


Well, not really "suicidal"; just really, really . . .



shitty.




But I had a great time at the Potomac Nationals game last night with all the Davies clan and most of the Rogers clan and with my daughter Jaimie and her friend Desiree.

The Nats pulled it out. Too bad it was the wrong Nats.

I have to go select an office now [in the new building to be occupied next year]. Talk about a futile act ...

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Thank you, God





Damn. Damn, damn, damn.

I like the medium hair.

I like her bald.


Spell it any way you'd like ...

Roberts As A Man, Not a Martian

These have already been reported elsewhere, but Howie Kurtz's blog in the WashPost addresses and allays a growing concern that I've had -- that Judge Roberst is an alien planted here, without human feelings. A law review machine.

The snippy Roberts is almost like a real person. I particularly like his response to levitas' suggestion of a "power sharing conference" ...
godDAMNit.

Youth, 1990 [actually, probably early '91]

Youth, 1988 [painfully a youth]

Youth, 1949

Youth, 1988

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

DyNoMite for Chrissy

A Rolling Tab


$2,702.16 as of today.

That's strictly home consumption of Cuervo -- no calculation for wine at restaurants, etc.

Put Politics Back In The Process

You may have noticed a recurring theme in some of my posts -- the blithe assertion that some things are reduced to politics.

The assertions may be blithe, but my commitment to that idea isn't.

I think way too much time is spent trying to hide the political nature of our governers' actions [i mean all elected leaders, not the executive heads of the states]. "Political" referring to the battle for power through persuasion of the electorate for support.

Congressional investigations are fine, but they should be acknowledged as political battles, not necessarily the search for truth and justice. And, similarly, the confirmation process of judicial nominees.

Walter Dellinger, the former acting Solicitor General, had a nice op-ed piece in today's Washington Post. In it, he urged senators to ask Judge John Roberts his views on decisions and on the issues of the day.

I think senators should.

but they shouldn't dress it up as a search for the Holy Grail or the Smoking Gun -- the revelation of a disqualification for appointment to the Supreme court. Instead, it should be a political search for an understanding of what Roberts is likley to do, followed by a political decision to consent or not consent to his appointment. Followed by voters deciding what that means to them in the next election.

The senators, though, can best carry this out if they're transparent about how it works -- if they argue "my voters don't want this unwillingness to answer; I'm not asking you to prejudge a specific case, so answer." Of course, the senators need to know the voters DO care whether the question gets answered.

And there's the rub ...

So every question by both sides will be fraught with "gotcha" -- notwithstanding assurances to the contrary. Because I think senators who might oppose the nomination lack the confidence that their constituency will care about the failure to answer questions. And for some reason, the cats on the hill lack the persuasive power to make their argument about why it's important. Probably because there can be a real consequence if they truly try to persuade, and misjudge their constituency. So they'll play it safe, and folks will grumble, and down the road when they are appalled at some Roberts vote on a case, the electorate who were unhappy with his nomination will grumble and forget to blame their senators.

because there weren't enough politics in the process.


i can't make heads nor tails out of what I just wrote. how ... expected!

The Greatest





But *where'd* that bandana come from?!?!


And you'll notice all four staring down the Tiger -- except that in the film only three marched out there. Crapgame was injured [even though it was his idea] ["Make a deal. A *deal* deal. Maybe the guy's a Republican."]

So they took Crapgame schlepping the .50 Caliber and stuck him in there .. GahdBless'Em!!

Do Me A Favour

Send all your positive waves the Perky Parker way.


With so many positive waves, maybe we can't lose ...
goddamnit

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

The Home of Holmes




John Holmes would have enjoyed Ben's Chili Bowl. You should go there tout suite!!!!

We Love Our Baseball





RFK may suck, but it can still get fiery and shake like you wouldn't believe.

The Nats MUST buckle down and carve out some wins against the damnable Braves. Beginning tonight!!!


I, of course, will be unable to watch them on television....


Angelos = death.

Don't Shoot Me

I'm not Brazilian...

The Post

The Post's news coverage has been good, but I like the choices made by their blogger on the thoughts of the land re: the nomination.

There are some good links here...

Before I Tired of This Life

I Lied

I didn't really kick John Roberts's ass; he whupped up on mine.


That very case is before the Supreme Court right now [years after my interlude with Judge Roberts]. And I have writers' block.

They have some new appellate jock on their side -- perhaps I can lay a bet on whether he will be nominated to the Court some day.

Monday, July 25, 2005

Revisiting

I thought maybe my earlier posts about KRove were a bit simplistic. I reviewed -- and I'll stick with my earlier thoughts.

If I learn he either knowingly revealed the identity of a covert operator, or broke the law re: that identity, I want him prosecuted and put away.

If he's revealed to be a ruthless political operative, I ask -- this is news?

We knew what he was a long time ago.

I'll try to pay attention. Clemens blew my concentration ....

Gary's Creation

Since I've been asked to honour Gary Sinise, I thought I'd send you to his home.



Shuffle around in there...

John Roberts WithOUT the makeup












I kid; I kid.
















Oh, btw - FAIR USE! FAIR USE!! FAIR USE!!!

Roving targets

If Karl Rove lied to investigators, he should be charged, convicted, and do hard time. While he's not the highest law enforcement officer in the land, he is that person's senior advisor.

And anyone named "Scooter" should do time. Unless he was born "Francis." In which case, he should lighten up.

If Rove didn't lie, but was involved in dirty, scummy politics, I don't much care. As my description is redundant.
this is an audio post - click to play

More Roberts Bio Material

Aticle III Groupie, whom I lust after, has blogged a bit more Roberts bio material in the form of a quiz. It was presented in her delightful Underneath Their Robes blog.

She currently has him at 90% confirmation, guessing he'd be 99% if it weren't for the Rust brief...

On Second Thought

Seeing that photo, maybe they should.

btw, they're KILLING this guy!!!!

The Victorians Get A Bad Rap

You, know, the Victorians get blamed for a lot of the shame and "modesty" associated with sexuality in the English speaking world. But I think that's largely crap -- it goes back a lot longer than that particular queen...

For instance, I LOVE the word "pudendum." It is the descriptor for, according to the Yahoo dictionary [which has Houghton Mifflin behind it!] "the human external genital organs, especially of a woman." But one of the reasons I always loved it was its stupid etymology. Depending on whom you ask, it's derived from "that of which one is most ashamed," or -- again according to the Yahoo Houghton-Mifflin dudes and dudettes -- "Latin, neuter gerundive of pudre, to make or be ashamed." In any event, as you can see, the notion of shame associated with sexuality doesn't rest at the feet of Queen Victoria. Those "licentious" Romans were uptight bastards too!

To think -- all of this typing just because of Hubbell and "whisker biscuit."

Too bad I didn't make reference to some of his more PROVOCATIVE terms and phrases. Which, I'm sure, he was forced to hear while tied down at his construction sites by his coarse fellow workers.

Of course, he wasn't tied down when he offered them to ME...


but I digress.

If there Were a God in Heaven ...




[insert sound of gurgling, sighing, and weeping]

A National Treasure





I'm glad film captured a bit of this man.


Miles Kendig will live forever...



"That's Follett; he's an idiot. Probably no film in the camera...."

Sunday, July 24, 2005

Her Hair's Great

Why is it women seem so bothered by Kathryn Morris's 'do on "Cold Case"?

She looks fabulous, but every woman I know criticizes the hair.

What An Unproductive Weekend

Other than getting my cable reupped [let's see how springy *that* little check is, mon pals],

what an amazingly unproductive weekend.

At least my daughter loaned me her car. More importantly, her car's air conditioner -- mine's fritzola


Wow -- this blogging is gonna change the world.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Judicial Activism

Sharples turned me on to this link about Judicial Activism and made me ponder my thoughts on the subject.

I like the idea of the Court knocking down unconstitutional acts by Congress. I don't consider that activist at all -- at least since Marbury v. Madison [an amazing act of judicial activism!].

I decry the following activism -- creation of "Constitutional" terms or concepts not found in the Constitution. Leading to the obvious question "found in the Constitution exactly how, bub?" Which is difficult to answer, and I will address soon.

But I always thought that if somebody wanted a "Constitutional right" and it wasn't in the Constitution, rather than get five justices to look for it and create it, they oughta change people's hearts and minds, persuade people that the right should exist, and then amend the Constitution.

I think she's lovely ...





Of course, she's no Gary Sinise.

A fake astronaut who never got into the sky, even in character!

And now, a REAL astronaut.





and my date to the Eagles concert. And America.


She played the flute in a band with me.


MIT and the Space Shuttle; some broads'll do ANYthing to get away from me!

I'm just sayin'

For Lisa





btw, he's sure no Kathryn Morris ...


And yes, I am the administrator. the guitar player was me.

Just One more


Because I admire her so!

OHMIGOD!

Thursdays Bring Introspection

Well, Thursdays when your cable is cut off and you have no internet access at home. 'Cause you were driving around Massachusetts and North Carolina and just got too damned busy to pay the piper.

So, with no cable and no internet, I thought I'd look deep inside myself. Identify the true me.

I watched a DVD of "The Laughing Policeman," starring Walter Matthau. An early '70s, standard cop movie. May have been, or at least thought it was, cutting edge, because it touched briefly on weird sexuality, and homosexuality [I distinguish the two for my homo friends; I personally think that ALL sex is "weird." I mean, have you ever looked at the faces? but I digress....].

This was as deep as I got.

I'm not sure why anyone is opposing John Roberts. [unless something new turns up]. Why are the opposition groups doing it? When a party and an ideological bent win an election, they nominate their kinda guy or gal. That just happens. When he or she is decent, committed, *respectful of the law as an institution* [that is, doesn't believe the law is just a vehicle to achieve what he wants, but believes it has lasting effect and independent importance], I think the "opposition" should devote its resources to winning the next election, and winning the hearts and minds of the electorate, so that they can get *their* kinda judge on the Court. They don't have to love Roberts or say "we think he'll be cool," but why get fired, fired, fired up.

And what can they be getting fired up about?

I think.

I'm so stressed; the Nats have been losing, and it may rain on me and Parker and Katie-Bar-the-Door and Roger Clemens tomorrow night.

I can't think about judges.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Let's Rawk!

IMAGE REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR

I think the tag is misplaced ...

and where did the Saran Wrap come from?

Roberts Must Be Good

I think this should serve to make Roberts palatable to all: Ann Coulter doesn't want him.

Annie Baby's Opinion Coulter seems to think he's a "Souter in Roberts Clothing."

Since I think Coulter is an evil coynte in short-skirted, horse-faced leggy clothing, I think Roberts must be feeling pretty good right about now!

Confirmation Hearings

I have provided some links on the right to transcripts of the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts in 2003. Go read 'em, baby!

Word of warning, though -- the April .pdf is about 1236 pages. It's almost 40 meg [lotsa nominees in one book]. Lemme look for something a bit more manageable....

Madison Weighs in [Again]


Bruce’s History Lessons: Madison Weighs In (Again)

Memo to: Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, principal author of the majority decision in Kelo v. New London.
From: James Madison (deceased), principal author of the Constitution and Bill of Rights
Re: Your Constitutional reasoning

Dear Justice Stevens: I’m spinning in my grave again. In Kelo v. New London you stretch the definition of “public use” beyond anything I intended when I created the Bill of Rights.

To review: In New London’s Fort Trumbull neighborhood, Susan Kelo and the other families who live there own modest, but well-kept, unblighted homes — many having owned those homes for generations — and now they are to be evicted because you ruled that the 5th Amendment’s “takings” clause, which says, “…nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation,” allows New London to “take” those homes. And to what “public use” are these homes to be sacrificed? So that developers can build a riverfront hotel, private offices, a conference center, a health spa, and luxury townhouses and condominiums.

And how is that a public use? Because the rich fat cats who buy the luxury residences and use the upscale facilities will pay more taxes than Susan Kelo and her neighbors, thereby putting more money in the coffers of New London’s municipal government.

Um, read my lips. ”[It] is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.”

It’s one thing to take property for real “public use” — things the public actually uses — such as highways, parks and even courthouses. That has been the purpose of the “takings” clause of the 5th Amendment — my 5th Amendment — since its establishment. We Founders recognized that sometimes the public good takes precedence over private interests, and when that happens those private interests must be fairly compensated. But “taking” from the less affluent and giving to the more affluent — which in light of your ruling will be the case 99.9999 percent of the time — violates every principle we held dear in 1791.

Indeed, have you read my Bill of Rights lately? If so, you may have noticed two other amendments besides the 5th. The 3rd Amendment says no outsiders can be quartered in people’s homes without their consent. The 4th says the people have a right to be secure in their homes against unreasonable searches and seizures. We were really big on protecting property rights in my day because we had so much experience with governments trying to take them away.

Which brings up one final question. If Susan Kelo can lose her property simply because someone else can put it to more productive economic use, what is to prevent some rich Washington, D.C.-based developer from doing the same thing to yours?


© Kauffmann 2005


Bruce Kauffmann's weekly column on American and world history, Bruce’s History Lessons, is syndicated in newspapers nationwide. He can be reached at bruce@historylessons.net


The column is not to be re-printed or used in any other form without the author's express permission, which he graciously granted me. Please contact Mr. Kauffmann.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Here is a bio of Judge Roberts

Mr. Roberts is the head of Hogan & Hartson’s Appellate Practice Group. He graduated from Harvard College, summa cum laude, in 1976, and received his law degree, magna cum laude, in 1979 from the Harvard Law School, where he was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review. Following graduation he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the following year for then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist.

Following his clerkship experience, Mr. Roberts served as Special Assistant to United States Attorney General William French Smith. In 1982 President Reagan appointed Mr. Roberts to the White House Staff as Associate Counsel to the President, a position in which he served until joining Hogan & Hartson in 1986. Mr. Roberts’ responsibilities as Associate Counsel to the President included counseling on the President’s constitutional powers and responsibilities, as well as other legal issues affecting the executive branch.

At Hogan & Hartson, Mr. Roberts developed a civil litigation practice, with an emphasis on appellate matters. He personally argued before the United States Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, participating in a wide variety of matters on behalf of corporate clients, trade associations, governments, and individuals.

Mr. Roberts left the firm in 1989 to accept appointment as Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, a position in which he served until returning to the firm in 1993. In that capacity he personally argued before the Supreme Court and the federal courts of appeals on behalf of the United States, and participated in formulating the litigation position of the government and determining when the government would appeal adverse decisions. Mr. Roberts had general substantive responsibility within the Office of the Solicitor General for cases arising from the Civil and Civil Rights Divisions of the Justice Department, as well as from a variety of independent agencies.

Mr. Roberts has presented oral arguments before the Supreme Court in more than thirty cases, covering the full range of the Court’s jurisdiction, including admiralty, antitrust, arbitration, environmental law, First Amendment, health care law, Indian law, bankruptcy, tax, regulation of financial institutions, administrative law, labor law, federal jurisdiction and procedure, interstate commerce, civil rights, and criminal law.

Mr. Roberts is a member of the American Law Institute and the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, and has also received the Edmund J. Randolph Award for outstanding service to the Department of Justice. He is a member of the Bars of the District of Columbia, the United States Supreme Court, and various federal Courts of Appeals.

Judge Roberts became a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2003.





Judge ROberts was "our" deputy SG [the deputy for the FDIC] until he left in late '92 - '93. He litigated against us in 2000. Everyone who ever met him [and spoke to me about it] liked him immensely....

Let the Record Show . . .

that I kicked John Roberts' ass in my one argument against him!


Well, he won the case.

And he looked better.

He's a good dude.

Or so I hear; he was in a friend's wedding. One of his best friends is a political opposite, and married to my friend. And he dresses well...

Apparently

my sources can kiss my ass ...

Futility

Just a quick thought on the futility of trying to predict how a judge will decide cases if appointed to the Supreme Court.

A lot talk right now about (a) choosing a politician rather than a judge, or (b) choosing an appellate judge with a lot of experience so that you can parse his/her decisions and know how he/she will decide cases.

You can't know how they'll decide; you can barely get a clue. An appellate judge is bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court. An appellate judge is bound by the prior decisions of his circuit. And an appellate judge is only one of three, and can't determine the outcome of a case without persuading another judge -- which is very difficult if you're departing from the norm and putting "your stamp" on a case.

Once elevated, such a judge, as Associate Justice, is bound by nothing. His or her respect for prior decisions will determine whether he or she will be bound by prior decisions of the Supreme Court, but that's a personal decision. Justice Thomas has made it clear he will not be ruled by stare decisis...

More importantly, a court of appeals judge is NOT the last defender of the gate. Nor is he the decider of the fate of all similar cases across the nation, whose decisions are published on the front page of the Times and the Post. Once confronted with that, the judge may make very different decisions. And, having lived with the skewed results of his decisions, he may change over the years.

So let's hope Edith, if it is indeed her, is a good, honest judge. That's all I'd ask for.

It Looks Like Edith Brown Clement

My sources suggest she will be nominated tomorrow, perhaps as early as this afternoon:

Edith B. Clement
Biography
Judge Clement was sworn in as a United States District Judge in 1991 and is presently serving as Chief Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana. She was a maritime attorney in the New Orleans firm of Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere & Denegre from 1975 - 1991.

Judge Clement received her undergraduate degree from the University of Alabama in 1969 and her J.D. from Tulane Law School in 1973, and served as law clerk to the late U.S. District Judge Herbert W. Christenberry. She is a member of the Maritime Law Association of the United States, the Federal Bar Association, the American Law Institute, the Federalist Society, the Tulane Law School's Inn of Court, the Committee on the Administrative Office of the Judicial Conference of the United States, and she serves as the Eastern District of Louisiana Representative on the Fifth Circuit Judicial Council.

She is married and has two children.


I chose a neutral bio.

I'll let you know what I think of the pick. But I'm going to offer some impromptu thoughts on prediction of judges' decisions next.

Monday, July 18, 2005

Hubba Hubba

pick One

Which of the two dudes pictured below would you rather hang out with?


Who would you rather have a beer with?



*I can't believe you would make that comment around an alcoholic .....

pick One

pick One

1979 Was a Helluva Good Year





I was an embarrassment, but I think I was an embarrassment faithful to the man I have become.


What the hell does that mean?

God II

The Weekend's News

I found the news emerging this weekend about Karl Rove to be more than a little interesting -- I was again struck by how little people care about the obvious, and how preoccupied people become with the unimportant [esp. if they smell blood].

From what I can discern, the "Karl Rove" escapade has now revealed that Rove did confirm with certain reporters links between "Wilson's wife" and the CIA. The info I heard kept painting a picture of Rove as a political operative working very hard to distance the Wilson trip from the VP's office [while someone else led the more overt campaign against Wilson, and likely gave more info about VPlame to the world].

Was it idiotic and embarrassing and stupid and laughably lamentable that McLellan came out and said KR was in no way involved? Yes. Is it a giant scandal? I don't think so.

The giant scandal is and has been known. The [you pick which] (a) collossal wrongness or (b) lying from the VP on the weapons programs, part. nuclear, and the CRice overstatements -- let's be more blunt -- the orchestrated campaign to oversell the WMD threat, was a lot closer to a scandal.

But the scandal for all to know and see is the execution: waging a war on the cheap with few troops, led by someone smarter than all of us who was dying to prove it. DR was not a neoCon; he just saw an opportunity to prove his theories about a modern military. EVEN if he could have been overwhelmingly successful the old-fashioned way.

This strikes me as scandalous.

But we'll hear more about the KR "scandal" because, since no one has given a shit about the obvious, known debacles, politics demands trying to see if this one will somehow stick.

Lemme know what you think, pals o' mine.

The LIST lives!!!

God





YOU PAIN IN THE ASS -- I DON'T WANT YOU HERE!






btw, I don't give a hoot how long it takes to load this photo -- it'
s worth it!

Can't Go Wrong With This





I know, I know -- laughing at this is childish.



DUH!

Bye Bye Mama

I dropped my mom at the airport, she's going to Springfield.


Sounds like a song.

i dropped the old lady off at DCA for a flight back. She stayed about ten days, and they were good ones.

Mid-to-late 90s, I let the old bag know what a shitty job she did raising me.

She responded by telling me what a shitty job I was doing in my adulthood.

This forged a decent bond that has grown ever since.

I like the old bat...

Saturday, July 16, 2005

Charlie

"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is a brilliant homage to drugtaking.


I choose "homage" deliberately. It's neither an endorsement, nor an attempted recreation. Just a special show of respect for the activity...

Friday, July 15, 2005

Mendoza is in jeopardy

Christian Guzman is hitting .198


Fucker

Harrathon mp3s are out there

If you visit the John Sharples website [there's a link somewhere on the right column of this blog], he and Matt Dolingo have just added mp3s of most of the performances from February's charity Harrathon.

I'm sad to say that our performances were captured, and are available. Between my gawdawful singing and a recording making the band a little backing track, I can't profess much love for them.

But they are real.

They really happened.

Unlike "Survivor."

It Adds Up


$2,401.92.

That's the amount, conservatively, that I have not spent on Jose Cuervo since I stopped drinking.

I wish I could say that was the amount of money I've saved in that time, but let's not get carried away...


I just dropped a ton of money on Lucy's brakes.

This is funny, since I don't have a ton of money.

In fact, I didn't have the money to pay for my prescriptions.

Hers, btw, is silver. Or blue. I think all those years next to the crash cymbal left me colour-blind...

I Was A Bit Slow


I thought up the "Harry Potter" books. After I read the third one, I conceived an idea of a magical place [I called it "Hogwarts," although that was actually a drunken response to an STD. But I digress ....] where wizards could learn of their heritage and their skills.

So I thought it up.

1978 -- The Future of the Legal Profession

I Wonder

I wonder how much HumVee armour we could have purchased had every cent spent on those yellow "Support Our Troops" magnets been devoted to armour enhancement?

Of course, to collect that money, it would have been "taxed." And that's a no-no.

Thanks, Johnny

John Hubbell taught me some important things in life. Use of the phrase "whisker biscuit" to describe a woman's pudendum, for instance ...

Thursday, July 14, 2005

Current Events


I guess I should have written about the potential Supreme Court nominees, or Rove's conversations with reporters about Joe Wilson. Well, fuck that; i can't change any of that.

But I CAN bitch about my ex, and I can also take potshits at that crappy Bruce Spingsteen.

So can you...

Anyway, here's a reason to keep on living. The man himself.

When my mood improves, I'll bring some sunshine into your life...

I liked this one ...

Times Are Tough

Goddamnit, times are tough.

I wonder if I'd feel that way if I'd made all the right choices. Like pursuing the highest-paying job, searching for the "one true woman" I would love all my life, marrying her, sticking with her through thick and thin, avoiding the demon rum, sinking my wnkle into as many thoughtless women as I could, and buying a Bruce Springsteen record.

This was the plan to be followed.

The "winning way."

I didn't get the memo.

Anyway, today I feel like times are tough. My ex-wife remains in all my business, even though I no longer bang her. And wasn't that the reason she was allowed to be in my business at all -- she was available as sweet poon.

there to service me.

And to do lesbian shit if I asked nicely?

Well, if I don't get that, why should she be in my business?

Oh yeah; "the kids"!