Let’s see……
Porter Goss- abruptly out of the CIA over the weekend
Now the #3 CIA guy and good friend of Goss- Dusty Foggo is out too.
But Scott McClellan just keeps hanging on. He and new press sec Tony Snow are now going to share duties.
And Goss’ replacement is a military man, Air Force General Michael Hayden, which puts an active military officer in charge of civilian intelligence. Great. Forget about personal liberties folks and welcome to the country formerly known as a democracy.
It’s a day ending in y- so I must write about sex. What can I say- it’s my favorite hobby (sex, not the writing about it).
This inane article at the Washington Post is:
A) The crappiest piece of investigative reporting ever
B) One more attempt to prove that girls who like sex are bad for boys
C) A really bad excuse to put Weezer lyrics in a newspaper article
D) All of the above.
Adam Skrodzki, a tall, redheaded senior at the University of Maryland, bench-presses a respectable 280 pounds. He fights fires in Howard County as a volunteer and plans to join the Secret Service in the fall. In short, he’s a man’s man.
Or so he thought until last fall, when he hooked up with a sophomore — at her urging.
But on this night, their first in bed, his body was telling him something else. She used every trick she knew, with no success. Adam panicked.
The author goes on to explain that studies of the number of young men who have erection difficulties are hard to come by, yet still seems to think that:
It seems that for a sizable number of young men, the fact that they can get sex whenever they want may have created a situation where, in fact, they’re unable to have sex. According to surveys, young women are now as likely as young men to have sex and by countless reports are also as likely to initiate sex, taking away from males the age-old, erotic power of the chase.
That’s right, us whoring hussies who like sex and are willing to say so diminish boys ability because boys no longer get the thrill of the chase.
Our insipid reporter does talk to a professional or two who say that stress, eating habits, health and increased awareness of drugs to help the problem may be adding to the numbers of young men who are seeking treatment, but then goes right back to blaming us girls.
One can argue that a young woman speaking her mind is a sign of equality. “That’s a good thing,” says Sawyer, father of four daughters. “But for some guys, it has come at a price. It’s turned into ED in men you normally wouldn’t think would have ED.”
And she’s not alone in blaming the girls.
Helen Czapary, the Maryland junior, has been in a couple of similar situations, and suspects she knows what Skrodzki’s partner thought: “It was my fault. Maybe I was, like, pressuring him.”
Skrodzki, the bench-pressing man’s man, let his partner of last fall think these things after his malfunction. He’s not particularly proud of that.
“She didn’t know what to do,” he recalls. “She said something like, ‘I can’t please you.’ I let her think that to conceal my reputation.”
Now, several successes later, with this girl and others, “I’ll take my share of the blame.”
Right- so after his hard-on returns he can actually admit it wasn’t the girl’s blow job skills that were lacking, but only after his pimpaliciousness had been restored.
I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that boys who can’t get it up with a girl because she expects to be satisfied and is able to express that probably don’t have enough maturity to be having sex with anyone. Any boy worth getting naked for knows there is more than one way to get a girl off and they don’t all involve the cock.
The New York Times Magazine has a fantastic piece on the forced-pregnancy folks and why they are actively trying to prevent access to birth control methods.
I think this just proves that they are not pro-life, but anti-sex.
Many Christians who are active in the evolving anti-birth-control arena
state frankly that what links their efforts is a religious commitment to altering the moral landscape of the country. In particular, and not to put too fine a point on it, they want to change the way Americans have sex.
But what are the ramifications of a society where pregnancy can be planned. Recent studies have shown that since the birth control pill became available the standard of living hasn’t just increased for women who could finish school and start a career before popping out rugrats- but also for the men who don’t have to drop out of school and get a job to support those rugrats.
And how is that a bad thing?
And then there are the creepy father-daughter purity balls. First- euwwwww. Come on people- the best way for a father to protect his daughter is to teach her that she has more value than her hymen. But let’s put this in a little bit of historical perspective. In the good old days girls matured later. Today the average age for a girl to get her period is 12.8, one hundred years ago it was 15.5. In 1890 the average age at which a girl got married was 22. Now it is 25.
So girls used to wait 6 t0 7 years to get married (and we assume lose their virginity). But now the sex for marriage only people expect girls to wait over 12 years between reaching sexual maturity and having sex for the first time. Young women are expected to go to college, get a degree, start a career and then find a nice young man to give their virginity to. We expect them to act like adults by getting an education supporting themselves through college, but they must remain child-like and pure regarding their own bodies. Is it any wonder that one third of all teenage girls get pregnant when we put this kind leash on them?
But really- they keep saying it’s all about a culture of life, not at all about keeping those wanton hussies in check. We know that abstinence only programs not only don’t work, but make kids less likely to use protection when they do have sex and and therefore more likely to become unexpectedly pregnant. Having children that young interrupts education and leads to less earning potential, not good for babies or parents.
What is the gain from any of this except higher poverty rates and lower education levels? How is that a culture of life?
My friend, The Naughty Professor, and I are planning a trip to the Yucatan peninsula this summer and are thinking of a visit to a newly discovered archeological site in northern Guatemala.
I have this “uhm” problem with archeological sites. I get a little excited (man you should have seen how wiggly I got at the Roman Forum). Think of it like funeral sex. You are surrounded by decay and death and all your little brain can think of is defying the inevitable.
So the Naughty Professor has called me Miss Indiana Wetpanties. I am good with a whip, but I think that just makes me Laura Croft. I haven’t got the chest hair to be Indy- thank god.
So a few weeks ago there was a British study published that proved men make stupid choices after looking at pretty girls.
Is it any wonder then that prostitutes might make certain politicians more open to accepting bribes from contractors?
Stupid Republican boys. I can’t wait to see how this one plays out. Where do hookers and bribery fall into the whole Character Counts slogan? What does getting someone to pay someone who is not your wife to give you a blow job have to do with family values?
Dumasses.
Nothing but Girrrrrrl Rock today.
to the question “Do we really want the government controlling our healthcare? They screw up everything else”
Cause the private sector has done such a fantastic job with healthcare so far– uhuh. And the Easter Bunny really does pop out candy-colored eggs every spring.
Twenty-five Kaiser Permanente patients in Northern California were denied the chance for new kidneys that were nearly perfectly matched to them last year during the troubled start-up of the giant HMO’s kidney transplant program in San Francisco, a Times investigation has found.
The Times reported Wednesday that Kaiser patients were imperiled by the massive start-up of the HMO’s first kidney transplant program, which now has a waiting list of more than 2,000. Since Kaiser took over, the number of transplants has plummeted. Patients have complained of inexplicable delays. And paperwork snafus have left hundreds of patients stuck between programs with no hope of receiving a life-saving organ.
But the government would be worse? Really, how? Being denied a perfectly matched kidney because your insurance company couldn’t pull its head out of its ass is better than what?
Read this fantastic post over at Salon’s How the World Works
One year ago, in the run-up to the French referendum on a proposed
constitution of the European Union, much was made of the “specter” of “the Polish plumber.” In a Europe with ever-fewer restrictions on worker movement, so the theory went, a horde of cheap Polish plumbers would descend upon France (or England, or Germany) and wreak havoc on existing wage structures.This is one reason that after the accession of the so-called A8 central and eastern European countries in 2004, only three “old E.U.” nations, the U.K., Ireland, and Sweden, placed no restrictions at all on worker migration from the new E.U. members. But last week, four more, Greece, Finland, Spain and Portugal, possibly convinced by a fleet of studies opining that the economies of the U.K. and Ireland had benefited from the influx of new workers, if there was any visible effect at all, opened up their borders. Germany and Austria, which, not coincidentally, have historically been the most popular destinations for workers from eastern Europe, are still keeping a tight grip on inward migration.
For us, NAFTA and similar trade agreements we supposed to help us compete against the EU- whose population and GDP are quickly outpacing us. But NAFTA is only trade, not labor or social policy.
The main argument for both sides is that, historically speaking, every previous expansion of the E.U. has not resulted in an overwhelming rush of workers from poor to rich countries, because the benefits of membership have helped to boost
the economies of the new entrants so much that people find it more attractive to
stay home.
So maybe our real solution to immigration is to create a real alliance between Canada, Mexico and the US that includes immigration and social policy. Mexico would be required to create a less corrupt bureaucracy, the US would have to institute universal healthcare, and Canada could increase it’s population and tax base. I know I’m about to say something heretical- but maybe we should be the United States of North America. Each country would still retain it’s national identity (I think we can all acknowledge that the UK is not France) yet would benefit from a huge population and resource base. Mexico would increase its standard of living, which would increase the number of people who can afford to buy our products and decrease the number of people who need to come to this country to support their families.
