WOMEN'S MOVEMENT LOST IN LADIES' ROOM!

I don’t know if women want men in their public bathrooms or not. I don’t think most men would care if women walked in on us, though. Heck, we might give you a show! Actually, that’s not true, and this whole mess about toilet access is turning into a form of hysteria that we need to flush out of our systems. The problem is, Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats and never the stain shall meet. What’s happened is that the country has suddenly grown up; it caught up with the rest of the world, and an entire segment of society wasn’t ready for it, wasn’t prepared and still isn’t. Damn Obama. I mean, could you imagine John Wayne donning a dress and lassoing a stall in the ladies’ room? “That’s mine, Pilgrim!”

Well, Caitlyn Jenner - a Republican - just used the ladies’ room at Trump International Hotel in New York City (with his blessings, sort of) and dangled a video in front of Ted Cruz’s nose, “Thank you, Donald, really appreciate it. And by the way, Ted, nobody got molested…”

(Oh, and, since this stinky mess infested the newswaves, I’ve been asking store owners, managers, and employees a simple question. One by one, they answered me, although, I did get a NO COMMENT or two.)

“Is it okay for me to use the ladies’ room if the mens’ room is occupied?” These weren’t single stall rooms that could be mistaken for unisex ones.

“Ummm.. Yeah, I guess so.” Could you imagine this response a few months ago? And that’s part of the problem. It’s all happening so fast, no one knows the law. They think men can surrepticiously use ladies’ rooms now.

§

Like a rocket ship soaring off the launchpad into space, the booster stage ignited when same-sex marriage became legal in the United States on June 26, 2015. Leading up to it and even today, the country is split over the Supreme Court decision. But all of a sudden, the booster separated and a massive force thrust the transgender toilet issue into the forefront. BAM! Like a phallic symbol, the rocket ship pierced through the stratosphere of society and it seems to be leaving conservatives and fundamentalists behind. Huh? Just like that, it’s a brave new world.

Sadly, all that the liberal progressives do is mock and laugh and denounce conservatives, calling them stupid, uneducated, dimwits, both racist and sexist in nature, plus a few more unsavory adjectives that, in my opinion, only show how stellar they aren’t, either. They want conservatives to roll over, play dead, and let them mold the country in their image. Of course, the conservatives fire back and here we are now, in a very uncivil war. Progressives v. Conservatives. Closed-minded v. Closed-minded. Who gets to use what public bathroom and why it should or shouldn’t matter any more.

§

In the 1980s, I worked with a nasty womens’ libber. She despised men. What I saw on the news was no prize, either. Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan were overtly militant and it turned many men off. How were we [men] supposed to answer their call when they made it clear they hated us? Eventually, they softened their tone and we did, too. Of course, women were always equal as far as I was concerned, I just didn’t appreciate the messengers early on. That’s what’s happening now. Oh, not me, but to many others, and I think it’s stupid, uneducated, and a few more adjectives, when the progressive side doesn’t see it for what it is: rubbing crap into the faces of people who don’t want to change so quickly. So the conservatives retaliate the only ways they can, like what happened in North Carolina.

Look, I have no problem with transgender people. Heck, I’ve probably whipped it out at a urinal while unsuspectingly standing next to a gay or transgender man. So what? No one ever thinks about that when they’re taking a leak. For that matter, there may have been a transdude sitting in the stall nearby. I don’t care. I go into a men’s room to do my business, finish my business, wash my hands, and get out. And so do they. That’s exactly the way it is in ladies’ rooms, too, and people like Caitlyn Jenner aren’t looking to molest anyone!

Here’s what I say. If you don’t like the new North Carolina law, boycott the state. If you don’t agree with Target’s policy on sharing bathrooms and fitting rooms with transgenders, just don’t shop there. Problem solved. Go to Walmart instead, well-known as a bastion of normalcy. As for states that have passed sex at birth anti-transgender laws, I’d like to know who is going to check birth certificates at the door. Who is going to look at the plumbing before entering, the Poo-Pee Police? Inspecker Clouseau? Spread your legs, I’m a cop! It’s a fabricated fear. Why? Because I’m more afraid of a Dennis Hastert-type guy than I am of anyone else.

§

Now that we’re drifting in orbit, are all systems really go? Is everything A-OK? No, not really. Remember, some guys don’t know any better now. While I don’t believe much of this type of scenario will take place – not yet – another problem arises, and it’s something that hardly anyone is taking into consideration. 

Just the other day, a very dear female friend of mine stopped at a fast food restaurant. While there, she used the ladies’ room. It had two stalls. She finished and walked up to the sink to wash her hands and gaze into her bright, beautiful, sultry and seductive eyes… No, I’m going off-topic. Sorry. She was standing there when, all of a sudden, a man entered with his very elderly mother. The woman had a walker. My friend decided right away it was time to leave, and she did! No words were spoken.

This type of situation creates several problems. First off, I would have taken my 90-something-year-old mother into the men’s room. I’m a man. No guy would care if I took her there and into a stall. Neither would she. Secondly, I wouldn’t just barge into the opposite sex restroom unannounced. I’d declare myself. If people were in there, I’d allow them their personal space and wait for them to leave. To not do so is rude. What gave him the right to enter? It could be how the new rules are interpreted because no one is making them clear. To say this woman is beautiful is an understatement and there’s no way, as a heterosexual male, that I wouldn’t look at her ANYWHERE and not say to myself, “WHOA! What a looker!” Especially in such an exclusive setting. I’m certain he did the same thing. In any event, he was the real idiot. Or he was way smarter than we think?

When it comes to personal intimacy, on a scale of 1-10, what room comes directly after the boudoir for privacy? While, fortunately, he posed no danger or threat to her, is it okay if any masculine, heterosexual guy uses the ladies’ room because he thinks he can? What if my friend had pushed open the door and there he stood inside? She would have immediately turned around and left! A woman (or 12-year-old) shouldn’t be fearful when she needs to use a bathroom facility. That’s her right, not a man’s. Now, she says, she eyeballs women when she uses one. They all look each other over, and they’re not looking for transgender people. It’s the freaks and perverts. Welcome to the wonderful world of weirdos and the strangers who are going to pee on your seat. Splash down!

UH-MUSINGS, Part1

AMERICANS-IN-WAITING

That’s the term President Obama coined for the old, politically incorrect euphemism, illegal aliens. Yes, the president said so in his amnesty action, “Taking Action to Unlock the Economic Contributions of Americans-in-Waiting,” on Tuesday, February 24. Does this mean we cannot call them illegal aliens now, lest we have his PC Police come around to harass us for acting like disgruntled Americans? No, of course not.

Coming into the country is an easy free-for-all today; however, it’s not what I’m concerned with at the moment. It’s about one more aggravating notch in the realm of political correctness. Aggravating in the sense that “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander,” unless one disagrees politically. Trust me, it’s always about the politics!

First off, I’m not a gun owner and I will never be one. That’s my choice, but I do believe in the Second Amendment. That said, the president seriously wants gun control. To an extent, I agree with him, but this is too much of a mess. He can’t simply wave his hand by executive order and wish the problem away. So, for now, because of his new nomenclature for illegal aliens, I offer politically correct alternative terminology for gun owners.

While the president prefers AMERICANS-IN-WAITING, some may like the other politically correct term UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS over ILLEGAL ALIENS. Applying this very same politically correct logic, along with the ‘good for the goose and gander’ idiom, doesn’t it make perfect sense that legally purchased guns should be referred to as DOCUMENTED WEAPONS? They are, after all, documented. On the flip side, consider illegal guns. Shouldn’t they be called UNDOCUMENTED WEAPONS? Or, since the president likes the term AMERICANS-IN-WAITING, how about going first-class executive branch with FIREARMS-IN-WAITING?

Acerbic Redux: Absolute proof that Barack Obama was not born in Hawaii

When Barack Obama announced his candidacy over six years ago, a ruckus stirred over his birthplace. Was it in the USA or Kenya? At the time, I knew that Hawaii had been one of the fifty states, so anyone from there was an American citizen through and through. But was he actually born there??? My interest piqued, so I decided to do some investigative work. Initially, I had no idea what I’d uncover, but I never gave up, and true to my craft, it didn’t take very long.

The so-called “Birthers” went on and on for years, led by Mr. Donald “You’re Fired” Trump. No, he wasn’t born here, they emphatically stated. They still do. Very early on, I held the unwavering position that he had been properly vetted by federal services, as any legitimate candidate would have been. To think otherwise would be to proclaim the FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security, Secret Service and a multitude of other agencies complete farces and total failures in every worldwide arena. And remember who was president at the time. (No, I’m not looking for political critiques.)

In 2008, I decided to put an end to the speculation before it spread by proving that Obama was, in fact, NOT from either country. Sadly, I failed miserably, but I still have my proof. You can choose to believe it or not…

Here is a Moai statue of Baracku at Rano Raraku on the Polynesian island, Rapa Nui, better known as Easter Island, where they weren’t Muslims, either:

A Facebook Face-Off?

I don’t think there’s a person in the world that doesn’t know a big election has been brewing in the United States. Perhaps there’s a handful who don’t know, but that’s not my point. What we have is a voting population that’s very split on the two presidential candidates, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Republicans and Democrats alike are extremely adamant about their man to a fault. Obama has the right ideas! No, Romney is best! It’s a real lesson in American civics; a true look into the theoretical and practical aspects of our citizenship. Each side is right, of course, and their constituents are convinced of it. The other side is dead wrong. That’s the problem with people. We tend to only see virtue in our candidate and vice in the other. 

If we look into the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin tragedy, it seems as if civilized society is divided the same way, like the parting of the Red Sea, and depending on which side of the fence we’re on, our guy was the victim. The other guy started it. As in politics, it’s a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world; only this one reeks of racism, gun rights and a sense of morality that’s unique to each of us. And as sure as the upcoming election, the truth is not somewhere in the middle. Someone is going to prevail; someone is going to be right, whether it’s the truth or not.

§

I arrived at the courthouse about a half-hour or so early on Friday. As I approached the entrance, an SUV with tinted windows was parked nearby and the media were standing close enough (with microphones and cameras in hand) in hopes that George Zimmerman would emerge. I glanced but continued to walk. Once inside, I passed through security and began the standard ritual of putting my belt back on and putting all my stuff back in the correct pockets. That’s when I looked up and, there, within inches, was George. As he walked by me, we looked into each other’s eyes, but it was for a mere second. As he continued to head toward the elevators, I turned and followed him with my eyes. My, my, I thought, George put on quite a few pounds.

Less than a minute later, I was ready to go up to the fifth floor courtroom. A local TV journalist accompanied me on the ride up. She asked if I had seen him. Yes, I responded, he just walked by me. She said he looked like he gained a hundred pounds! I figured he must be pretty lethargic these days, I told her; not being able to go anywhere for the most part. That, and all the pizza and Chinese takeout he probably eats. We both chuckled briefly, but then the door opened and we were ready for business.

Before you go into the courtroom, you must pass through another security check. Unlike the last hearing, this time we didn’t have to remove our belts and shoes — just what was inside our pockets. Moments later, I entered the double doors and took a seat near the back.

When court came to order, Judge Nelson got right down to business. I don’t want to give you a blow-by-blow account of what transpired during the next hour-and-a-half. After all, most of you watched it on TV, saw it on the news or, marginally, read about it on a Website. Right now, I’m more interested in the ramifications of some of the judge’s decisions. I will say that, from what I and most of you observed, Judge Nelson will be a perfect fit for this case. She’s quite adept and strict enough to keep both sides in check. No nonsense, in other words, but she’s not without a sense of humor, either, which is great for calming nerves and abating tense moments from legal disagreements.

I didn’t get the sense that any of the attorneys were all that familiar with her style. Certainly, with Bernie de la Rionda, I could understand, but Mark O’Mara and Donald West didn’t seem to feel right at home, either. One thing is clear, she will not allow her courtroom to veer off course one bit. When O’Mara and de la Rionda started to whine and snap at each other like yappy little dogs, she told them to heel, and heel they did. She wasn’t gentle, nor was she harsh. She just made it clear enough to let them know what she expects from them. It was exactly what I anticipated at the heat of the moment. She recognized how it could have easily gotten out of control and made an “adjustment.” West, on the other hand… he’s a pitbull, and even when the judge admonished him, he kept going. This guy has a chip on his shoulder and he makes O’Mara look like a saint, with de la Rionda somewhere in between. I am sure George would freak if West were working for the other side. Big Boi Don West.

§

With no fanfare or special order, here’s the way I saw the judge’s orders. She granted the State’s request for George’s medical records, but limited how much the prosecution would get. How much? O’Mara was willing to give them 30 days before the incident and 30 days after. However, he handed the court all documentation that was available to him. Judge Nelson said she would look at the logs and dates and decide what is appropriate based on privilege. Personally, I think the State should get everything, but it’s just my opinion.

I’m not going to bother with the phone call recording that Benjamin Crump turned over to the FBI. After a discussion, that one will be resolved, and most of the nitpicking issues over evidence will be cleared up, too, so I’m not going to write about them unless they become problematic down the road.

What was interesting was the motion filed by West asking for regularly scheduled hearings. In that motion, he also asked for a second judge; a senior judge to oversee docket soundings, but Judge Nelson never entertained the thought. I think, by that time, West knew better than to address it. She had pretty much made it clear at the docket hearing earlier in the week, which she reiterated, that her schedule would remain wide open for them, including weekends and holidays. She will do whatever it takes to move this case forward. 

This leads me to the meat of the hearing — Citing prior case law, the judge granted the defense motion seeking Trayvon’s Facebook and Twitter records. Since Zimmerman is mounting a self-defense claim, he has a right to see evidence that may support any aggressive and/or violent behavior by Trayvon. It will be tough, though, because they’ve got to go through Facebook and Twitter to get those records. Not an easy task.

Here’s where some of you may not agree with me. I think the defense has a right to see it and I will explain why. Just like in this heated election, we have a propensity to take sides. Not only do we take sides, we fervently believe our man is right and the other guy has got to lose. That’s all there is to it. Only it doesn’t work that way in a court of law. No matter how you feel, the way our system works, George is innocent until proven guilty. The law favors him, not Trayvon. Sad, but true. Florida law states:

90.404  Character evidence; when admissible.

(1)  CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.—Evidence of a person’s character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except:

(a)  Character of accused.—Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait.

(b)  Character of victim.—

1.  Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or

2.  Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor.

(c)  Character of witness.—Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in ss. 90.608-90.610.

O’Mara cited Dwyer v. State, 743 So. 2d 46, 48 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 5th Dist. 1999):

Generally, evidence of a victim’s character is inadmissible, but a defendant who alleges self-defense can show, through the testimony of another witness, that the alleged victim had a propensity for violence, thereby inferring that the alleged victim was the aggressor. Smith v. State, 606 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); see also Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 404.6 (1999 ed.); Graham, Handbook of Florida Evidence § 404.1 (1987).

A defendant’s prior knowledge of the victim’s reputation for violence is irrelevant, because the evidence is offered to show the conduct of the victim, rather than the defendant’s state of mind. Ehrhardt. Accordingly, evidence of one of the victim’s reputation for violence was not prohibited by Dwyer’s lack of prior knowledge of that victim’s character traits. 

Here’s where I am rather confident, though. Let the defense have at it. When I was 15-years-old, I called out a kid in school. He never showed. There was no fight and nothing was reported. Suppose we did fight. Would that be enough to render me a violent youth? A “gangsta” in today’s world? Would Mr. O’Mara use that against me? You bet he would. But the point is, I never got close to a fight again in my life, and that kid I called out has been my best friend ever since. You’d better believe that Mr. de la Rionda would be quick to point that out, too.

O’Mara said that videos exist showing Martin’s involvement in MMA (mixed martial arts) fighting. I say, let him find them. Trayvon’s parents will counter that their son never took MMA lessons. O’Mara will tell the court that Trayvon boasted of beating up other kids. I will tell you right now that male children and young adults readily tell their peers how tough they are, but does that make it true? They will boast about their manhood and brag about prouesses sexuelles, outstanding abilities in bed and incredible lasting power, not to mention a long list of nameless conquests — nameless because they don’t exist. I know, because I heard them all growing up. So did O’Mara, and if he plans to use this sort of thing to trash Trayvon, it would be a real disgrace. It’s braggadocio, and everyone does it. Besides, it doesn’t prove a thing.

O’Mara was also granted power to subpoena the Facebook and Twitter accounts of Trayvon’s girlfriend because he’s convinced her online posts will contest the story she gave police about being so devastated by his death that she couldn’t attend his funeral. Like she got over him in record time. Judge Nelson told de la Rionda that he can contest this part of the ruling in writing if he wishes.

Let me tell you, I have a friend with a 15-year-old daughter and she flits around hourly. Friends come and go on a mere whim. Adults forget the mind of a teenager, when hormones rage. Besides, people mourn in their own way. Put the girl’s mother on the stand and see what she’s got to say. While O’Mara shreds the children, why not look at what the Zimmermans told each other about being rich and famous while he sat in jail. “It’s gonna be a great life!”

Did Trayvon’s death bring her a great life?

I will say this. If Trayvon was such a tough and violent gangsta, how come no one has come forward? So far, I haven’t heard a peep out of anyone he went to school with. I think the defense is going down a dangerous and slippery slope; one that could backfire if handled improperly. You’d better be able to prove what you say, Mr. O’Mara, or your name will be sliding down an ugly and vicious path.

One final thought… I wouldn’t put it past ANY defense attorney to make their client look sickly and weak in court, hoping that the judge takes pity. Just look at the poor, poor boy and what he’s been through. Instead, I hope the judge keeps Trayvon’s memory alive. He’ll never have an opportunity to get fat, and by the time O’Mara gets into his character assassination mode, Trayvon is going to be transformed right before your eyes and ears — from a momma’s boy into a horrible monster. Just remember, monsters aren’t real. George is.

 

Cross posted on the Daily Kos