Party in the Valley with Rawhide, April 25th @ the BigB Saloon in Mission chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: Party in the Valley with Rawhide, April 25th @ the BigB Saloon in Mission

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 8 (view)

Party in the Valley with Rawhide, April 25th @ the BigB Saloon in Mission Posted: 4/23/2008 1:07:06 PM
Hey there H&P, Looking forward to another night of country-fied music with the boys of Rawhide. My hat's off to you for arranging yet another POF Country Night at the Big B as well as the other valley events, for I know it takes a lot of your time to set these up. As usual I'll be there early in my western duds to close the place down both Friday and Saturday night so be sure to "swing" by my table to say "howdy!". Take care and we'll see you there! "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 21 (view)

MVA legal/moral obligation to report, or not? Posted: 1/22/2008 12:44:27 AM
Re: "Did you note that the driver has been charged but is still driving beause he is a tow truck driver for a living." Although a person may be "charged" they are still presumed innocent until proven guilty. In the interim a person is entitled to continue living their life as per usual, including driving, especially where their employment is concerned. We may not agree with this on a moral level but it is one that we are guaranteed by our laws, most especially the Charter of Rights and Freedoms contained in the Constitution Act of 1982, amendments thereto and going back even farther, the Bill Of Rights among other laws that apply in such circumstances. Imagine hanging a person for stealing your horse only to find out later that it was stolen by someone else and because there was more than one person in the area when you discovered your horse was stolen you caught one of the people who was in the vicinity at the time of the theft and "a s s u me'd" it was that person who stole your horse. Better to let out the rope and let the person hang themself as opposed to you hastily hanging the wrong person in error. Food for thought. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 20 (view)

MVA legal/moral obligation to report, or not? Posted: 1/22/2008 12:35:07 AM
What surprised me was a police spokesperson on a newscast stating that ALL 3 passengers/witnesses in the offending vehicle "had a clear view of the front of the vehicle." Thereby stating that they all could/should have seen the person who was alleged to have been struck by said vehicle and they could/should have allegedly questioned the driver as to the "bump" or noise as a result of an alleged collision with another "object." I don't know about you people but whenever I ride in the rear of a vehicle my view of the front end of the vehicle is obstructed by the usually cramped quarters (compliments of the auto manufacturers) and the driver's and front passenger's seats as well as their heads which usually rise above the "normally set" headrests. Furthermore they didn't give any height dimensions of the passengers so how do we know they, especially the one in the front passenger seat, could even see over the dash? As you can see from the above paragraph there are a number of factors that could easily render a passenger's view limited at best. As for hearing an unusual "noise" or feeling a "bump", how many times have you been in a vehicle when you've heard an "unusual noise" or felt a strange "bump" and it was easily explained this time of year as a pot hole or something that fell out of another vehicle and they failed to return to pick it up which in and of itself is an excellent example of people "hearing unusual noises but fail to stop" - those driving trucks who hear things but don't stop only to find when they arrive at their destination that some of their load is missing. Only then is it that they put two-and-two together. In this case the driver could have been looking left and so to the passenger in the front seat, if engaged in conversation with the driver would have been turned to the left as well or possibly turned to the back to converse with the passengers in the rear and if the person, as the police indicated, was struck on the front passenger side of the vehicle it is easy to understand how it is/was that no one saw them and by the time they turned to look the person was already down on the ground and in the dark they were not easily visible. The vehicle alleged to have struck the individual appeared on the newscast to have "minimal damage", as in the passenger front corner of the bumper guard was scuffed up, more in keeping with scraping it against a concrete post in a parking lot or possibly a parkade and could have been easily dismissed as such when observed at a later time by anyone, even you. I noted that although the police spokesperson didn't comment about the poor lighting at the accident scene the newscast certainly did. So where's the city's responsibility in properly lighting the intersection where this accident occurred? Statistically, is this the first time they've had a pedestrian accident at that location and if not how many and over how long a period of time have others occurred there? I do not offer any of the above as "outs" or "excuses" but merely wish to point out the fact that until you've walked a mile in the other person's shoes you truly do not know what they experienced. As you can see there remain many unanswered questions some of which will probably never be answered, unless the public push for those answers. It is entirely possible, from what I saw on the newscast, that no one in the alleged offending vehicle would have seen or heard anything that would have caused them to stop or question anything be it a bump or an unusual noise. I feel for the deceased and the family but I also need more information or should I say evidence before I would "hang" the driver and/or the passengers in that vehicle. One must first prove beyond any reasonable doubt that this was the vehicle that actually struck the person, then go from there. If the police can place the vehicle at the scene and confirm beyond any doubt that it was the vehicle that struck this person then they need to look at the driver's previous record and if they find that they have a history of DUI then they may have something but since time has passed and they are no longer able to get a true record of the driver's condition or state of mind at the time of the collision. And then when it comes to the passengers, good luck on confirming how they were all positioned in the vehicle at the time of the alleged collision, as stated above which way was everyone facing and if they were engaged in conversation(s) chances are they were not focused on the road ahead as it's the driver's responsibility to be focused on the road, not their passengers. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 17 (view)

MVA legal/moral obligation to report, or not? Posted: 1/20/2008 10:04:34 PM
Re: "Do you think the passengers should have the same legal obligation to report and failure to do so should be punishable?” As I work in the legal field I am compelled to state that the following is not intended as and ought not to be interpreted as “legal advice” nor is it intended to solicit any clients. Under our laws EVERYONE who witnesses a motor vehicle accident is obligated to report it, regardless of whether they are driving the vehicle, riding as a passenger, driving/riding in another vehicle or standing on the sidewalk/side of the road, looking out the window of a shop, etc. The reason the police tend not to charge passengers in the offending vehicle is usually because the passengers "claim" they didn't see and/or hear anything. If they all "stick together" they avoid being charged. Also Crown Counsel, not the police, is who determines whether or not someone will be charged. It's extremely rare for Crown Counsel to charge a "witness" for failing to report an accident. Why? Because it is much more difficult to get a conviction due to the degree of difficulty in "proving beyond a reasonable doubt" that the witness saw or heard anything whereas the driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to be driving their vehicle in a safe manner and keep a safe lookout for others, be they pedestrians or other vehicles on the road and any time their vehicle makes an unusual noise or comes into contact with another object, be it a person or some other "object" OR if they drive over "something" in the roadway where they know there is no known speed bump(s) they must get out and check things before leaving the scene. A side note to the above: Unlike in most US states here in Canada we enjoy the "Good Samaritan" Laws which protect those of us who stop to assist people who are injured in an accident be it a motor vehicle accident or some other sort of accident. For example: If you stop and render assistance at the scene of a car accident where a person is seriously injured and the car they are in is on fire you have two choices: 1) Let them burn to death or, 2) extricate (remove) them as safely and to the best of your ability under the circumstances as you can. If under the above circumstances the injured person was in need of a neck brace but none was available at the time they needed to be removed in order to save their life from the threat of fire and as a result of your removing them from the burning vehicle it is later discovered that your removing them as you did was a major factor in their being paralyzed (paraplegic or quadriplegic) they cannot sue YOU for the permanent paralysis. The law suit would still go against the driver and/or registered owner of the vehicle that hit them for the FULL extent of their injuries. I hope this helps to clarify things for everyone and will encourage you to stop and render first aid in the event, heaven forbid, that you ever come across a serious motor vehicle accident as I have. In closing: If you do stop to render assistance PLEASE make sure to move your own vehicle and your passengers well out of any potential harms way. In some instances it may be virtually impossible to do this but do your best to ensure there aren’t any more casualties for emergency services to assist. If you don’t carry flares in your vehicle pick some up – they’re fairing inexpensive and they actually DO save lives by warning approaching traffic, most especially those travelling in the same direction, something serious is up ahead and they best slow down. Most people see flares and think “Road Block/Cops” and will start dropping their speed right quick thereby avoiding additional crashes or other vehicles adding to the wreckage already in the roadway ahead. Place the flares first before assessing the vehicles/people damage – unless time is of the essence (vehicle(s) on fire and you need to get people out asap). Also keep the flares up hill, if possible, and definitely away from any “puddles” on the roadway lest they be fuel, or fuel floating on top of the water on the road if the road is wet. I know these things are “common sense” but you’ll be surprised at how much will slip your mind when you come upon an accident scene. In one instance I found my flares AFTER a second accidnet took place. FYI - I was directing traffic with an off duty police officer. We both narrowly escaped being run over by a driver that was driving without due care and attention. When she argued with the on duty officer who wrote her up as she caused a second collision, the off duty officer spoke up and identified himself and told her not to argue it as his statement and mine would confimr the fact taht she was speeding AND was busily chatting with her passenger to the point of actually facing her as she approached us. He also told her to consider herself lucky that no one was killed, especially the two of us. He literally LEAPT from the middle of two lanes to the gravel shoulder without touching the pavement in between and he landed well into the gravel shoulder. I took a good run before leaping ot the shoulder and out of her way myself. If this saves one life, especially yours, it was worth taking the time to write and you taking the time to read. :) Be safe everyone! "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 161 (view)

child support in bc Posted: 1/20/2008 2:49:14 PM
To all those who wrote in reply to my previous posting (dissertation? lol) my sincerest apologies for not having responded sooner. I've been rather busy both with the holidays and family as well as my legal and music "lives". Again I also apologize for the excessive length of this posting however I am trying to cover all issues raised and/or clarify a few others. If I can share anything with all of you that will help you get through one of the worst situations you may ever experience in life, separation/divorce, it is this: Find a "release", that being something that can completely take your mind off your situation at least once a week if not more. This is not legal advice just "friendly advice" is all. Also as previously written this is not intended to solicit any clients nor should it be mistaken as being legal advice for it is not. The only "watchdog" for our Judges is themselves. Ok, now that you've blown a gasket welcome to the club. In the Superior Courts across Canada (Here in BC it's the Supreme Court and Appeal Court of BC) the Justices are "regulated" by what is called the "Judicial Council" located in Ottawa. The "Judicial Council" is made up of a handful of the Justices from the Supreme Court of Canada and is headed up by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Beverly McLachlin herself. She's a former Chief Justice of the BC Supreme Court. She was recommended for the job down east by her predecessor, the former Chief Justice of the BC Supreme Court Mr. Justice Esson who is now a "supernumerary" Justice in the BC Court of Appeal. (read "supernumerary" as part-time until retirement at age 75! This was in place before the recent changes to the laws that apply to us re mandatory retirement at age 65.) So if you have a complaint about a judge in one of the superior courts you MUST file it with the "Judiciary Council". I can tell you from firsthand experience (in my own case) that if you draft your complaint a certain way you may actually find specific legislation gets changed, albeit behind the scenes. For those who are interested in the details I'll give you the short version: The courts follow what is called the "Rules of Court" which are all numbered for obvious reasons. Rule 65 was a "Pilot Project" in the lower mainland district which includes the Supreme Courthouses in Vancouver, New Westminster and Chilliwack. Good old "Rule 65" was only applicable in these three courthouses. Rule 65 simply stated that a judge/justice could seize themselves of a file. What this meant was that if the first judge/justice hearing your very first application seized themselves of your file that was the ONLY judge you could appear before for any future applications. So what happens if you get a judge who doesn't like you for whatever reason? You're stuck. In my complaint about a specific judge, whom shall remain nameless at this time, I identified that Rule 65 was in violation of Section 15.1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as found in the Constitution of 1982 and amendments thereto. Section 15.1 deals with "equality rights". Why? The government must apply the "law" (read as Rule 65) equally to all BC'ers across the entire province, or in this case in all Supreme Courthouses or not at all. So they either apply that “Pilot Project” in all courthouses throughout the province or in none. Within a few months the Attorney General of BC was having "clandestine" (private) discussions with the Chief Judge of the Province (The Chief Judge of the Appeal Court of BC) and the government of the day rushed a "repeal" bill (a bill that declares the subject matter to be cancelled effective immeidately) regarding Rule 65 through the legislature in Victoria on in a "hush, hush" fashion. Three readings and it was “repealed” (cancelled). Why? The last thing the government wanted was for the people of the province to realize they've been wronged by the government and sue for damages. This all went down BEFORE I sought out a legal education, that being the one they want us all to get in order to work in the profession, not the one I already had, a “street legal education” - the one I never let go of and draw on daily for the work that I do in the field. Part of my complaint identified the very thing 'fishgoFish' was asking about "JUDGE SHOPPING". This is very much frowned upon however it does happen from time to time. Let's face it, when you're in a specific type of business you associate with your peers at various functions, luncheons etc so you get to know one another. Judges all schmooze together at such events/functions so if you piss one off they'll tell their friends about you and so on. Any wonder why a different judge still hammers you like the last one did? On the same subject as above, when you're appearing before various judges for a variety of cases as lawyers do they get to know which judge is soft on this issue or that, THIS is where your "judge shopping" occurs as the lawyers know to "adjourn" certain matters/issues when they get to court and find a "hanging judge" is sitting on your case that day. This is especially the case in provincial court criminal cases. Some "fools" demand their counsel plead guilty TODAY so they can get released from custody against their lawyer's advice of sit tight for a few more days as the judge sitting today will hammer you. If only they'd heed the advice they're paying for. More than a few have been given time where another judge would let them out with "conditions". Family law matters are no different. So one of the few ways you can book a "judge" is if that judge makes an order which contains a clause that any more applications on the issues they dealt with must come back before them. Also once you've had your trial, be it for custody, divorce, etc., any applications to vary (change) the trial orders regardless of the reason MUST go before the trial judge. It gets a little tricky if your trial judge retires before, or is deceased when, you make your application. I've also notice some incorrect statements or statements in other postings here that, to me, leave a misperception that I feel need to be clarified. No offence to those who posted them as I'm sure we all mean well in here and everyone's heart is in the right place - "Best Interests of the Children". Maintenance is not based on the custodial parent’s (“Payee’s”) income but rather on the "Payor's" GROSS INCOME! Where other government agencies/offices base things on your "NET" your ability to pay Child Support is based on your GROSS income. As previously mentioned, the figures contained in the Child Support Guidelines are, at best, skewd. As for the cost of a divorce, it can range from a few thousand dollars to hundreds of thousands. The average divorce more affectionately referred to by most in the general public as a "knockdown - drag out" divorce will range from $10k - $60k+. Those divorces that cost in excess of $60k are extreme and usually involve multiple millions in marital assets, possibly off shore investments and, so too, may require a private investigations team to locate hidden assets, and hence the bill goes up exponentially. To help people come to understand a legal bill (Statement of Account as it's called in the business) you should bear in mind that a lawyer has office/business expenses just like the companies you all work for. ie: A lease for office space which is usually "triple net (this includes the "pleasure" of paying for the PROPERTY TAX for the land owner for the portion of space they rent from said landlord as well as heat/light/air conditioning/parking/security/common areas, etc.). Then there’s the office furniture, staff wages/benefits/etc., telephone equipment, telephone lines, fax lines, internet (most case law research is now done online), various office equipment which must be serviced and/or replaced, toner for all those documents printed for your case, various filing/agent fees for filing your documents in the various courthouses and/or process serving the other side each time - all according to the Rules Of Court. If you can't locate the person to serve them then you may have to make an application to the court for an "alternative service" to be granted by a judge. All of these expenses are paid BEFORE your lawyer takes a pay cheque home. Most lawyers will bill you for their travel time to/from court as well. If anyone is considering hiring a lawyer I would urge them to take the time on their initial "free consultation" to ask the lawyer questions about how they bill their clients. Do you bill for travel time? Do you staff book you in court for more than one case at a time or will mine be the only one you deal with in court when it's scheduled to go before a judge? If a lawyer says your file will be the only one you need to know how much they'll bill you for on that day up front. Those that I know will schedule three or more cases for what are called "chambers applications" so as to "split" their billable time up over those files in an effort to reduce their clients' fees for that day. Some exceptions would be: 1) if it's a trial then you're there for only one thing - that client's trial, period; 2) Depending on the degree of difficulty and how much of a fight the other side is putting up then a lawyer may elect to limit the number of applications to just yours or your and one other that day. In these instances your billing will be more for obvious reasons. We all want our representatives to be on their best game when working for us. ie: No one wants their mechanic distracted when he's doing their brakes do they? For those who have lasted this long here's one way to reduce your legal bill: Get a mediator whenever/wherever possible. A "lawyer" can mediate between you and your former partner. The "key" is to "AGREE" on how to split up your assets. If you can come to an agreement on splitting assets then the only thing left is "sharing the kids" based on the kids’ needs, not yours or your partners. Yes your individual schedules will be a factor but if you always look at it from the position of "what is best for OUR (not hers or mine) kids" then you can't go too far wrong. Bury the hatchet between you and DON'T leave the handle sticking out. (Sorry couldn't resist the reference to an old country song "We buried the hatchet, but left the handle stickin' out" lol). Once you've got the assets settled, the custody/guardianship worked out the only thing left is filing for the "desk order" divorce, also known as a consent divorce or an "uncontested divorce". The latter term involves one of the parties filing and the other stating in writing that they do not oppose it. All of this can be done for a little as $5k ($2,500 each!) or perhaps less. If you can "agree" on disagreeing between yourselves on your relationship issues but agree on the division of assets, sharing the kids (if you have kids that is) and a desk order divorce you can maintain your accumulated wealth and advance on your respective investment lives. The other extreme, in a number of cases, is bankruptcy and starting over from scratch. Above everything PLEASE remember that the kids are half of you and half of your partner so if you refer to your former partner in a derogatory way within earshot of your kids it's harmful to your kids. I'm sure no one would want to do or say anything that would hurt their own children but I'll share this: I've spoken with a number of children over the years about their parents’ separation/divorce - by request I might add. The times when you think they can't hear you they do. The most hurtful and saddest thing I've ever heard in response to something an acquaintance had said out of frustration was this: "Great dad, mom says you’re an ahe too. So I’m half of a btch and half of a h**e. So what does that make me?" I instantly chastised my friend who was "speaking without thinking" and had a one-on-one with his son who was proving he was wise beyond his years with each minute he spoke. Although his dad was quick to apologize, complete with honest tears (yes real men do cry) but the damage had been done. If you want to make negative references about your former partners then find a place, preferably in private and do it there. Go to a bar with a sympathetic friend where there are no children allowed, unless of course your kids are 19+. And just before you start to spew out the garbage about your “ex” remember this: Once upon a time there was something about that person that made you feel like they hung the moon, they were the one that you called every day and couldn’t wait to see after work, hangout with on the weekends, party with, show off to all your friends, boast about all the wonderful things they did for you that made each moment you were with them so special. Something changed since those days, yes, but now all those special times have, in some cases, resulted in children, beautiful reflections of the love you once shared. Don't forget that if only for the sake of the children the two of you brought into this world. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 136 (view)

child support in bc Posted: 12/13/2007 2:45:24 AM
I apologize up front for the length of this posting however I believe those who choose to read it will find it a worthy and interesting read. If it is too long for you please do not hesitate to scroll right past it. I more than understand the frustrations that not only DOOK but most, if not all of you, are expressing. I specialize in Family Law, among others. Disclaimer: This posting is by no means meant to solicit any clients nor should it be misconstrued as legal advice nor is this meant to be a political statement in any way. I am merely sharing my knowledge and understanding of the topic and related issues. The foundation of the issues is found in our laws, especially as they relate to families. They are far from perfect and a number of the judges whom apply the laws within our courts lack the proper training so as to apply them as they were meant to be applied while in other circumstances they DO apply them as they were written even if the law(s) was/were skewed (read as "screwed up") right from the start with the full knowledge of the government (both federal and provincial) . The Child Support Guidelines (CSG's) being one of them. (more on this below) Various judges interpret the same section of law differently and this results in a multitude of different orders as well as public confusion, frustration and disdain. In order to be a judge in Provincial Court you must have practiced law for a minimum of 5 years; A Supreme Court Justice must have practiced law for a minimum of 10 years in order to apply for an appointment to the respective courts. At the time the Child Support Guidelines (CSG's) were rushed through by the gov't of the day way back when they KNEW it was full of errors but they pushed it through anyway, claiming it could be "fixed later". Well it's been more than a decade since then and in the last few years they revised it but left the errors in place. Some may ask: Where did the CSG's come from? Answer: They were taken from the South Pacific, complete with the glaring errors. The currency references contained within the CSG's were changed from the "pound" to reflect the Canadian dollar. With respect to the lack of experience in some judges who deal with our family laws I mentioned above: Imagine if you will a Justice who practiced in the area of Land Title Issues for almost 20 years before becoming a Justice then within months of their appointment they're dealing with family law applications and making orders in family matters. An analogy would be this: Would you have your dentist work on your vehicle's engine and your mechanic work on your teeth? Obviously not. Naturally we would want a judge hearing our family law case to have a certain level of experience in family law. Unfortunatley we don't have a choice when it comes to the judge who hears our application or presides over our trial. Some would call this "judge shopping" which is frowned upon by the court although if the court registry were to assign the "qualified" family law judges to deal with the family law applications/trials the control would remain with the courts themselves. WOW, what a concept! But don't hold your breath. One would think that common sense would dictate that the courts would assign judges with experience in family law to preside over family law matters. Unfortunately our courts DO NOT operate on a "Common Sense" basis. This is yet another layer of problems people face in family court matters. Child Support goes far beyond the CSG's, it also involves the (provincial) Family Relations Act, the (provincial) Evidence Act, in some cases the (federal) Divorce Act Law, the Canada Criminal Code (in certain instances). There is no such thing as an age when child support will cease to be payable. So long as an adult child is attending a post secondary education facility, whether they stay at home with the custodial parent or if they live "on campus" the "payor" will be required to continue paying. A "patch" was worked out last year by the Supreme Court of Canada when they issued a definition of the term "extraordinary expenses". So long as a child is "excelling" in the activity, educational pursuit, extracurricular activity only then will it qualify as an "extraordinary expense" and the custodial parent can make an application for the additional monies to be paid by the other parent. The child must FIRST display an apptitude for the activity/course BEFORE the custodial parent can make such an application for the extraordinary expense(s). The Supreme Court of Canada did this to protect the "payors" from those custodial parents who will sign the kids up for anything and everything with the deliberate intent of hurting the payor. Don't think this is possible? Believe me, it has happened and it still goes on to this day. The Federal CSG's do not "go out the window" if you earn in excess of $150k per annum/year. There is a formula that is used to calculate the amount you must pay on earinings in excess of $150k per annum/year. If one were to compare the amount of child support paid by a "payor" earning in excess of $150k per annum/year on the basis of a percentage of their gross income to that paid by a middle income "payor" at say the $45k per annum/year level, they would find that in fact those "payors" end up paying LESS than the middle income "payor". How fair is that for Federal legislation, whether you are the "payor" OR the "payee"? One of the glaring errors in the CSG's that was identified prior to it being passed into legislation was the fact that the CSG's are based on a person's "gross income". Food for thought: Many people in divorce proceedings end up withdrawing their RSP's to pay for legal fees BUT just as important, if not more important, under the division of marital assets in a divorce situation where the division is ordered at a 50/50 split usually one of the parties must withdraw an RSP or two (three/four/five???) to pay the other party so as to satisfy the 50/50 asset division ordered by the court and in doing so the court order essentially increases that party's GROSS (taxable) income. So in the following year the party who withdrew their RSP('s) realizes a higher than normal gross (taxable) income and in turn their Child Support payments are then based on a falsely inflated gross income. Are there solutions that could be implemented by our gov'ts at both the federal and provincial levels? Definitely, but since it doesn't impact on them they lack interest in doing so. On another note, when was the last time you got a politician to listen to you never mind actually implement something you suggested? Did you know that our Family Maintenance Enforcement Program is being enforced contrary to our own Provincial laws or that it was being enforced by a "PRIVATE" company whose parent company is a USA company that was chatised by various state and federal gov'ts for their nefarious collection actions? They collected more money from the "payors" then they were legal suppose to. They were also discovered to be "cooking their books" claiming it cost the gov't less to ahve them do the enforcement than the gov't's own employees. When the U.S. state gov'ts called for an independent audit the private company insisted on using their own accountant for the 'independent audit". The gov't got THEIR WAY and that was when they discovered they were paying as much as FIVE TIMES the cost of having their own gov't employees do the collections work. The Director of Family Maintenance Enforcement in Baltimore Maryland blew the whistle on the private company HERSELF out of fear that the information would go public. Oh one more thing.... that USA owned company that is enforcing the support orders in most of Canada's provinces/territories is obligated under the USA "Homeland Security Laws" to disclose all of your personal information to the FBI, Homeland Security,CIA etc. Oh, did our provincial gov't forget to tell you about that? Gee, I wonder why, could it be because they don't want you to know that a private company, nevermind an American company, is enforcing the Family Maintenance Enforecment Act here in BC and is doing so contrary to the laws of this province?

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 236 (view)

A little list of getting to know you...newbies too..... Posted: 5/25/2007 8:50:55 PM
1. FIRST INITIAL?........"C" for "Chiv" of course! ;) 2. WERE YOU NAMED AFTER ANYONE? ......Yes but presently I cannot recall whom 3. WHEN DID YOU LAST CRY?........I truly cannot recall 4. DO YOU LIKE YOUR HANDWRITING?..... Yes & No (Does being a bit of a perfectionist at times mean anything to anyone?) 5. WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE LUNCH MEAT? ....As a child "chicken loaf" as an Adult, ANYTHING BUT CHICKEN LOAF! 6. IF YOU WERE ANOTHER PERSON WOULD YOU BE FRIENDS WITH YOU? HELL YA I rock - even when I'm totally into the country I still ROCK! 8. DO YOU HAVE A JOURNAL? ..... No ... it's all in my songs, at least the stuff I CAN write about and not be arrested for anyway. 9. DO YOU USE SARCASM A LOT? ....SARCASM? ME? lmao Surely you jest? ;) 10. DO YOU STILL HAVE YOUR TONSILS?..... no - do I get a prize? When they were removed I got lots of jello and ice cream. Hint, hint. hahaha 11. WOULD YOU BUNGEE JUMP?........ I once thought "yes" until I learned it has a nasty effect on one's spine - the cord attached to your legs is somewhat elastic but your spine is not. Years later I/my back will thank myself for saying "NO" to this one. Think of how your body reacts years after you were rear-ended. Things that make you go "hmmmm" 13. DO YOU UNTIE YOUR SHOES WHEN YOU TAKE THEM OFF?....Yes & No. Depends on my mood, time of day, etc. (He's not a perfectionist on everything in life. lol) 14. DO YOU THINK YOU ARE STRONG? ....Definitely, in every sense of the word 15. WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE ICE CREAM FLAVOR? ....Strawberry, it's AWESOME with all those B E R R I E S in it! A VERY CLOSE second is that peppermint stuff they use to only bring out at Christmas, then there was rainbow when I was a kid. These days I much prefer the frozen yogurt with raspberries or strawberries. YUM! It's better for you too! 16. SHOE SIZE? .....9/10 depending on which third world country sweat shop made them. 17. RED OR PINK? .....I would say "PINK" but then people would wonder as to my sexual persuasion and once they discovered I'm as straight as a "MAN" can be their minds would drift to a sexual connotation so I'll say "PINK" err, Red. lmao 18. WHAT IS THE LEAST FAVORITE THING ABOUT YOURSELF? ......that I have allowed people to take advantage of me/my good graces far too long before I took action. 19. WHO DO YOU MISS THE MOST? .........My kids, I miss them every minute they're away. 20. PEPSI OR COKE?....Coke, but the original version which actually DID quench your thirst. Must have had something to do with the cocaine they put in it, hence the name "COKE". As I recall the original version was somewhat addictive too. ;) 21. WHAT COLOR PANTS AND SHOES ARE YOU WEARING? .....Blue Jeans & White, "BUM" brand, leather sneakers. 22. WHAT IS THE LAST THING YOU ATE? A pear. 23. WHAT ARE YOU LISTENING TO RIGHT NOW? ..... M U S I C, What else? Joe Diffie's "Pick-Up Man" gotta love 107.1! Chorus: "You can set my truck on fire, and roll it down a hill and I still wouldn't trade it for a Coupe De-Ville. I got an 8-foot bed that never has to be made. You know if it weren't for trucks we wouldn't have tail-gates. I met all my wives in traffic jams cause there's just something women love about a pick-up man" 24 IF YOU WERE A CRAYON, WHAT COLOR WOULD YOU BE? ....All of them. You put them all together by the heater and they'll melt together cause I'm a "Heinz 57" kinda guy. ;) 25. FAVORITE SMELL? .....The scent of a woman. Ladies, you know what I mean. :) Guys, get your minds out of the gutter. 26.THE LAST PERSON YOU TALKED WITH ON THE PHONE? A booking agent for a major artist. 28. DO YOU LIKE YOUR SENSE OF HUMOUR?.......Do I have a choice? After all I was pretty much born with it. Of course I do it took years to perfect it into what it is today! Can you look in the mirror and laugh each morning? ;) 29. FAVORITE DRINK? .....Water, the "root" content of everything we consume in liquid form. :) 30. FAVORITE SPORT? ....Canadian Football second only to "Partner Chasing". Ladies, ask me about this after we get to know one another. ;) Guys, you figure it out on your own. hahaha 31. HAIR COLOR? ...albino platinum blonde as a child, dirty/sandy blonde these days though with the gel it "appears" to be dark brown/black. Go figure. 32. EYE COLOR? .....Blue , "melting blue" or so I've been told on more than one ocassion. I haven't seen anything melt yet but I'm keeping a close watch. ;) 33. DO YOU WEAR CONTACTS? .......No...but would love to try some. 34. FAVORITE FOOD? ....Why "FOOD" of course! Japanese, Chinese, Mexican, Thai, Indian, Western, French. As for the other "food groups" (ethnic foods) I've failed to mention: Ladies feel free to educate my palate with those foods I am unfamiliar with and "re-introduce" my palate to those I have tried and loved. :) I'll do the same for you. :) 35. SCARY MOVIES OR HAPPY ENDING? ......Depends on the company I'm keeping. If it's a lady then whatever she likes and if it makes her cuddle up (with me of course!) all the better. 36. LAST MOVIE YOU WATCHED?...I watched two back to back: Underworld - Evolution and Da Vinci Code. Ok, so my taste is somewhat twisted but they're both AWESOME MOVIES! Hot air popper anyone? But PULEEEEASE , "REAL" BUTTER ONLY! 37. WHAT COLOR UNDER GARMENTS ARE YOU WEARING?......Ummm, guys don't wear "undergarments". lol We wear "underwear" hahahaha Ok, now seriously if there are any guys out there wearing "undergarments" the term "cross-dresser" comes to mind. NOTE: reference #28 above re my comments here 38. SUMMER OR WINTER ....SPRINGUMMER! 39. HUGS OR KISSES? ....What about DEEP, PASSIONATE KISSES? Definitely kisses as they include hugs. 40. FAVORITE DESSERT?.......Actually it's a dessert I make myself. It consists of only "3" ingredients. The ladies will absolutely LOVE it as it's a dessert that does not require ANY gym time to burn off whatsoever and it's DELICIOUS TOO! Saying, "yes" to a second and third serving of this dessert is about all the energy it takes to burn off the first serving. Five minutes of kissing, the deep passionate kind that is, and all three servings worth of calories should be long gone so anymore kissing after that would be a bonus "workout". ;) The recipe is a closely guarded secret so the only way you'll get to know what the ingredients are is to be "invited" to a home cooked dinner, eventually that is as I don't invite just anyone over for dinner nor do my family members. :) 41. WHO IS MOST LIKELY TO CALL YOU THIS MORNING?.......my dad. Did I mention that I love my dad AND my mom? 42. FAVORITE SEXUAL POSITION?.......With a lady who can keep pace. Any fellow Scorp ladies out there? ;) 43. WHAT BOOKS ARE YOU READING? .....Vocal Power, Harnessing the Power Within 44. WHAT'S ON YOUR MOUSE PAD? ....Staples (give away - can't find my preferred race car mouse pad yet) 46. FAVORITE SOUNDS? .....Certain instruments in specific pieces of music; the angelic voice of a good lady; mom telling me she baked my "special b-day cake" for me :) Gotta love your mom when she bakes you that "SPECIAL" cake! 47. ROLLING STONES OR BEATLES?.....Depends on my preferences at the time and which songs are we talking about? They all pretty much grew up together, the only difference is the Beatles broke up and the Stones didn't. Hmmm, wonder if it has anything to do with Mick having a University Degree in "Economics"? 48. THE FURTHEST YOU'VE BEEN FROM HOME? ....Hawaii when I was a kid - grade 6 in fact. Time I went back to the beaches of Waikiki. :) 49. DO YOU HAVE A SPECIAL TALENT? ....Of course! We're ALL talented in different ways. I sing, write songs, write childrens' stories, write adult fiction/drama + movie manuscripts, wood working, networking,etc.... 50. WHEN AND WHERE WERE YOU BORN? ...when I finally decided that "butt first" was not an option for exiting my mother's womb it was morning and I was born in a hospital. Seriously! hahaha

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 16 (view)

MAY 12, 2007 8PM Karaoke with Big Steve - No Cover Charge! Posted: 5/11/2007 5:41:58 PM
My dear Mrs. Fish, I've got a previous engagement to attend out in the valley so once I'm done there I'll try to make it back to the "Downer" for at least one song before closing otherwise there's always next time. I loved the last Karaoke Night. It was filled with both great people and conversation as well as some exquisite talent in the "school" that attended too. So for all those reading this who didn't attend the last one and are "thinking" of attending this one, don't "think" about it, just DO IT! You won't regret it. It's a fun-for-all time and you do not have to sing if you do not want to. Like everything else here in POF, it's all about "RESPECT" and we totally respect those who merely want to come out and listen/enjoy the various talents in the room whilst chatting amongst the crowd. I suspect this event will be even beter than the last one. I truly hope to make it in before closing so Mrs. Fish be a dear and put a slip in for me with my nickname on it for "last song" would ya please? I'll let Big Steve know which song to spin when I arrive. ;) "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 27 (view)

Its over... how do you know? Posted: 4/22/2007 5:17:51 PM
When you catch her locking lips with another guy that she's been telling you all along is "just a family friend" and when caught in the act she tells you: "You didn't see what you think you saw." My response to that: "My eyes don't lie but your lips do.... and by the way, thanks for the song idea." I'm hoping to record the song some time this year. :) Every cloud does have a silver lining, we just have to look for it. But "ouch", it still hurts sometimes cause what we had was awesome until her act/s of infidelity happened/surfaced. My mom was extremely happy that this lady was out of my life, thought she was nothing but trouble since day one. Funny how our mothers can just "know" if a person, male or female, is good for us or not. And to this day mom doesn't know what happened, just that it was there one day and gone the next. She's never asked either. So there's another sign that it's over: "You know it's over when your mom doesn't like her/him too!" lmao Mom's are so EQUAL OPPORTUNITY for liking and/or disliking those we associate with. hahaha

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 37 (view)

APRIL 14, 2007 8PM Karaoke with Big Steve - No Cover Charge! Posted: 4/16/2007 2:11:17 AM
Though I cannot speak for the others, I myself would be open to doing this weekly however, as you were quick to point out last night when this very subject came up, to do an event like this on a weekly basis would cause people to tire of it in a short time and once the novelty, per say, wore off it would lose it's luster. With that in mind I would reiterate that which I suggested last night, a bi-weekly karaoke night as opposed to once a month, this way if people can't make it to one karaoke night they might be able to catch the next one without having to wait another month. Also we might try out different venues/pubs/bars every second Saturday, keeping the first event/gatehring of each month at the "Downer" as I know of a few otehr places that offer karaoke on Saturday nights. Just a thought is all, nothing etched in stone here. As for me, I'm out singing 6 or 7 nights a week regardless, though it is nice to have some familiar faces in the crowd. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 29 (view)

APRIL 14, 2007 8PM Karaoke with Big Steve - No Cover Charge! Posted: 4/15/2007 2:08:20 AM
It was great to get out and meet some new people. Thanks to Mr. & Mrs. Fish for organizing this event. I look forward to the next one! "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 23 (view)

APRIL 14, 2007 8PM Karaoke with Big Steve - No Cover Charge! Posted: 4/14/2007 7:26:59 PM
Karaoke huh? Sounds like fun so count me in. Does this mean I have to sing? ;) "me,me,me,me...you,you,you,you" See you all at there! "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 22 (view)

Wow. You're WAY hotter in real life. Posted: 2/18/2007 11:53:37 PM
Addendum: You asked: "What's the social protocol in that situation?" A simple, "thank you, you're more beautiful in person too." would have sufficed however you could have expanded on this and offered to share a drink and chat with her once inside, but apparently you didn't do that. Could THIS have been your lost opportunity - nevermind your email being deleted without being read? Realistically, if she was attractive enough to email later why not approach her at the time she complimented you? Key words here "SHE COMPLIMENTED YOU". Did you miss the boat because you're mind was elsewhere? "Common Sense" comes to mind but one must be familiar with it's application in such circumstances, for just because we all possess it doesn't mean we're all verse in its application at times such as the one you described. Not wishing to sound rude but by the sheer fact that you're asking such questions in a thread combined with your admission of: "but got the common "unread/deleted" response" - tends to make a person wonder about your people skills in general. The later being a skill that is cultivated and developed over many years. Or is this merely designed to get you more attention OR are you looking for more material to use in your act? ;) I'll let the ladies decide.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 21 (view)

Wow. You're WAY hotter in real life. Posted: 2/18/2007 11:37:14 PM
What's the big deal? Regardless of whether a person comes from royal bloodlines, has careers in the spotlight, in front of cameras, walking red carpets, comes from a middle or low income family we should all be groomed at early ages with teachings of "humility" and what it means to be "humbled". I elected to post my professional photos in my profile for they depict me in the best "light" so to speak. Not unlike yourself I too have been told, politely and discreetly I might add, that I'm much better looking in person/my photos don't do me justice by some of the ladies I have met, though nothing resulted from those meetings - be it their choice or mine. Her decision could have been based on many things, but perhaps it was based on that night. Maybe she was there to meet someone else and hit it off fabulously with them or someone shortly thereafter, OR possibly she saw how you acted in person and decided that you were someone she couldn't tolerate in her world. Whatever her reason, it's “her reason, her choice”. The only person who has any right to question it is her, no one else. (Except maybe her mother. Lol) When it comes to emails being deleted without being read consider it a "fact of life" and, as you wrote, "move on". It happens to all of us regardless of our position/status in life for another person’s choice/decision in this regard knows no boundaries. Our status in society does not preclude us from such treatment and personally, I’m quite glad of it as there are far too many societal snobs who could learn from such experiences, if they’d only remove their heads from the clouds long enough to see the lesson. Respect the person's decision as being for whatever reason they felt compelled to do so. Do you explain yourself in such scenarios? I think not. Life's too short to sit wondering "why?" or "what if?" for to do that would be to waste precious minutes/hours/days that you could spend enjoying life with someone who wants to be with you for all sorts of other, more positive reasons. All the best to you and everyone else in their searches, as mine appears to be coming to a close and so too my profile. Fluffy, good to see your input on this one too. ;) Chat with you soon my friend!

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 21 (view)

Happy Valentine's Day take 2 Posted: 2/14/2007 7:59:33 PM
Re: my kids and I made pink pancakes for dinner and I gave them chocolates for breakfast - think that fullfills my Mummy obligations lol? Have a great evening. (((hugs))) to all. ~Meadow I WANT TO EAT BREAKFAST AND DINNER AT YOUR HOUSE! ;) Sounds like your kids have one of the most awesome mom's on the Island.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 20 (view)

Happy Valentine's Day take 2 Posted: 2/14/2007 7:48:39 PM
For you Roxy, and any others that can relate, let me share the second of my two special Valentine's with you, the first went to a very special lady while the second went to a good friend. My good friend, "Sharon" lost her mom to cancer 2 years ago today. I was remembering last night how devasted she was on this day last year so I decided to send her an e-card. In the e-card I explained how I knew this was a tough day for her and that of all days what better day for her mom to pass away on, a day of "LOVE". Always one to see the positive where others see negative I went on to suggest that she do something in honour of her mom, like listen to one of her mom's favourite cd's (Elvis or country - for "Sharon" it's YUK! as she doesn't like this music all that much), grab a bite to eat at her mom's favourite restaurant or just do something she enjoyed doing instead of mourning the loss of her mom on this day CELEBRATE her life, all that she was, the things she shared and the memories of good times spent with her. I closed the e-card by telling her I would call her through the day to see how she was doing. When I logged in to msn messenger this morning her headline read: "OMG...Chiv (she actually used the abbreviation of my real name) you are sooo sweet..thx buddy..you made me cry!" Dare I say reading her msn headline brought a tear to my eye. When we spoke on the phone she told me that the e-card totally turned her day around. So maybe by my sharing with you how I helped a friend's heart to heal you and/or some others in here might be able to heal a little in the same way by seeing beyond the pain of your loss/es and by celebrating the love that you have for those you are missing and the love that they still hold for you, for love knows no boundaries. And in case anyone's wondering, "Sharon" has a boyfriend - he and I get along fabulously as he knows his lady and I are just "friends" and always will be. Yes, a "hetro" guy can have female friends without any romantic inclinations. lol HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY EVERYONE!

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 210 (view)

Pofer's that love Mopar.... Posted: 12/11/2006 9:32:35 PM
Re: My grandma and I argued about me buying a truck. She says: A nice economical car, good on gas, you don't need a truck, you should buy newer. Just so you know dodgefreak my mom's a BIG truck fan. Dad got his Lincoln but mom got her F250 Supercab loaded to the hilt so she'd be right beside you on your decision to buy a truck! And on the road to wherever you're heading too cause she loves cruisin' in her rig. lol "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 209 (view)

Pofer's that love Mopar.... Posted: 12/11/2006 9:24:30 PM
Some days it's what I do, find loop holes in the law to get things done as they should be and are still "acceptable" to society, in whole or in part. Whenever I find a way to make the gov't, be it Provincial or Federal, eat some crow or even better, a more deserving "meal", I give it to them every chance I get. So far it's 2 - 0 in my favour. lol I had one law "repealed" (removed from the books) and in another instance I caused the Court of Appeal to order the Attorney General of B.C., good old Geoffy himself, to pay for a lawyer for an Appellant in the B.C. Court of Appeal due to the screw ups of the trial judge in the case. The only other "option" the Appeal Court Judge had was to make the appellant a lawyer. Seriously. Decisions, decisions......."Will that be white or black paint today your Lordship?" "White?" Good choice. lmao Let me know if you find any laws that "impede" your speed, err visions of Mopar/MUSCLE cars. I'm loathe to having legislation that restricts the "lawful use" of vehicles, especially those with some class and real nice lines to them. So far there's one that I DO agree with. It's a by-law in Richmond. They made it "illegal" in the City of Richmond to drive a vehicle that has anything, key word here "anything" sticking up out of or on your hood that impairs your vision. They claim that they had too many accidents involving pedestrians and vehicles with blowers, hood scoops, tach's, etc. They did "grandfather" it so as to allow for those of us with "true" MUSCLE cars with original factory hood scoops, blowers, tach's, what-have-you, to be "exempt" from this law so if you've got a classic beast you're supposed to be "safe". If anyone out there's got one of these beauties test them out for me and email me in here on what the RCMP say. ;) Some cops are nice about it and will give you a "first time warning" if it's not stock/factory original. If they pull this on you tell them "It's stock" and see what they say. But be absolutely certain it is stock/factory original or at least was an option for your vehicle's year and model and you've had it upgraded at some point ot match the factory option. If they ticket you, fight it and embarass the hell out of these young buck mounties by telling the judge, who's probably old enough to remember driving one himself/herself, that "it's stock" or even better "It's factory original" and watch them dismiss the case/ticket/fine in the face of the unsuspecting cop. If you don't believe me try cruising through Richmond especially with a killer blower sticking up high in the breeze. The Richmond RCMP are more than happy to hand you a fine for driving your "non-stock" rod through town. They leave you alone if you're on the 99 as it's a highway and the city has no real jurisdiction when it comes to a provincial/federal highway apssing through their area. They also look at it this way: if you're on the 99 chances are you're just passing through. Cheers to all and happy motoring, err MOPARing/MUSCLING !!!! "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 11 (view)

The latest car theft thing Posted: 12/11/2006 8:43:25 PM
Well if it's "true" that the dealers are cutting keys for people "on request" the dealers have an onus and "duty of care" to ensure they are cutting the keys for the "registered owner" of said vehicle/s otherwise they are liable. I can't honestly see a dealer cutting keys for just anyone without verifying who the registered owner is AND requesting picture identification on pick up and before releasing the keys to the "payor". But then again I'm only a Certified Paralegal so what do I know? lol For anyone who's interested I've got an Igloo for sale on Miami Beach. It comes complete with a built in sun roof and air conditioning. ;) A small legal lesson for all: 1) Don't believe everything you see or hear. 2) If it sounds too good to be true then most likely it is. 3) If something sounds legit/looks good take the "I'm from Missouri, show me" approach and see if they can prove what they're saying or selling. Chances are they won't be able to. The end result will be you'll have your pride in tact and, so too, your wallet. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 24 (view)

Sacrifice Posted: 12/10/2006 3:29:46 AM
How much would I sacrifice for love? First some background: I once had a female friend with whom, over time, I became VERY close. She was/is the daughter of a former runway model, blonde, brown/green eyed and every bit as gorgeous. Looks are an attraction for any man when it comes to this lady but it’s the person on the inside where the true attraction is/was for me. Her external looks were merely a bonus. That said, this very subject of “sacrifice” came up in conversation one day over lunch when we were just "friends" and I was assisting her with a legal matter "pro bono". I told her I would put my life on the line for her and I meant it. She on the other hand told me that she couldn't do the same for me as she had two daughters to consider. This with the full knowledge that I had kids too. She actually asked me how I could say that without hesitation. I asked her this: "If a child was in danger would you risk your own life to save the child or would you think first of your own girls and possibly cost that child its life?" She replied: "I wouldn't think twice about it, I would save the child." I then asked: "So what makes my life any different than that of the child?" She replied with: "Well you're an adult, it's different." We parted company for a number of months due to specific circumstances that I won’t get into. Months later, on a Sunday morning, she tagged me in msn and asked for a meeting that afternoon. At the end of that meeting I nailed her with our first kiss. (Oops, is that kissing and telling? Oh no it's not as I didn't identify her by name or photo - lol, sorry peeps) A few weeks later we were having lunch and, out of the blue, she brings the subject up again about “sacrificing one’s life” saying: "Remember when we had that discussion when you said you'd put your life on the line for me?" I said "Yes". She said "Me too." I looked at her somewhat puzzled, laughed and said: “I’m glad you’d put your own life on the line for yourself.” She laughed and explained herself this way: "I didn't realize what you were saying back then and since that time it's been weighing heavily on my mind. I've given it considerable thought and came to realize that I have missed you so much and I came to understand myself better in this regard so that if your life was ever in danger I would risk my own to save yours without hesitation." I asked her "What about your girls?" She said "They'll be well looked after by my family one way or another and I know that if you survived you'd be there with them every step of the way." Amazing how time will change a person's view of things. God bless her wherever she is in life as we had a falling out a few months after and things between us were never the same again. I continued to help her with her legal matter though our relationship was strained and six months after that it was completed, and so too was our friendship/relationship. Would I put my life on the line for her today? Without a doubt, yes. I'd put it on the line for anyone in danger, as it's the right thing to do regardless of any relationship or connection to the individual in danger/at risk. This would even include my ex-wife not because I still have feelings for her for truly I do not. Why then? Because she's the mother of our children and regardless of our personal differences that connection between us will never change. I would do it for our children over and above any other reason, as they would expect nothing less of me as their father. "Chiv" P.S. My ex was/is no competition for my former model quality g/f when it comes to looks/appearance and I say this with the utmost respect to both of them. The point I'm trying to make is this: When it comes to saving a life it's not based on one's looks/appearance but rather on the facts: someone's in danger and needs help, period, and "tag" I'm it. It's about the love (respect) of/for your fellow man/person/human being's life, not a specific person that you're in a relationship with, it's the ultimate sacrifice that we all hope we never have to make but we read/hear about people in the news every day who have given up their life in saving another's.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 27 (view)

How long is your list? Posted: 12/10/2006 1:55:36 AM
I believe that no matter how long a persons list may be everything is "optional" on the level or degree of importance that they place on each "requirement". Do not take the above as meaning that some requirements will be overlooked or dismissed as I highly doubt anyone would go quite that far with their respective lists, however if they find one quality to be higher than expected on their preference scale while another is lower than they might normally accept, the higher rated quality might balance out the lower rated one. Cheers! P.S. I have found some "prerequisites" on some of the ladies profiles to be bordering on outrageous, though if there are guys out there who do not know what proper hygene is I don't blame the poor ladies for posting the "deodorant" or "personal hygene" requirements as a MUST. P.P.S. I have a good female friend (no, not a F.W.B. or a B.C.) who once dated a guy who literally tried everything from every deodorant on the market to colognes/after shaves, you name it to cover up his nasty B.O. and NOTHING, I mean NOTHING worked. I felt sorry for him as it was the downfall of their relationship per her sharing with me. Throughout the issue I encouraged her to keep trying/working with him. She did but eventually she couldn't take it anymore and she broke up with him over it. Everything else in their relationship was going great, including the intimacy, or so she said. So for those ladies out there who run into this sort of issue be prepared, it's actually a medical condition and these people, men and women, are struggling with it just as the scientists are in trying to find a cure of some sort for it.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 37 (view)

how to de-ice your car .... Posted: 12/10/2006 1:43:33 AM
Yes, you're right about the water temperature. You must be VERY CAREFUL not to have the water too hot otherwise you'll crack if not shatter your windshield or side windows for that matter. Best NOT to use water though as it will find its way into areas you didn't dream of and will result in frozen locks if you use it on the door glass. If your locks freeze up there are a variety of products you can buy but I've always found the best one is a good old fashioned lighter. Use the lighter to heat up your key then plug your key into the key hole and let it sit there for about thirty seconds. try to turn the key but do not force it. If it doesn't move heat the key once more and try again, but do not force the key. If you do force it you could very easily break the key off in the lock then you're trouble increases dramatically. Ask my high school buddies about this one. Boy were they pissed when their keys broke but mine didn't. Keep up with the heat and try as described above until the lock turns. The beauty of this is it heats up the frozen moisture and actually melts it and gravity takes it down into the door panel where it can eventually drain out so the next time your lock's less likely to freeze up on you. Now I must give my mom credit for teaching me this trick. When I was a kid I watched her do this trick with matches. I brought it into the "next generation" by using a lighter, even though I was and still am a non-smoker. I used to always carry one with me for work purposes and lighting the ladies cigarettes. For several years now I've had no need, that is until our recent snow/cold snap. My locks froze up on me. lol I went into a store for a few things came out and that was all it took. So back into the store I went in search of a cheap pack of two lighters. $1.49, taxes and three tries later the lock opened up, a bit begrudgingly mind you but open it did. The other nice thing is "power door locks". LOL, that reminds me of a lady who came into a friend's restaurant asking for help as her car locks were "frozen" and her key wouldn't turn. At one patron's direction she was about to pour "warm" water on the roof and let it make its way down her side windows and eventually/hopefully thaw her frozen locks. Another customer asked if he could see her keys for a minute before she began to pour the water. Once in his hand he hit the remote keyless entry button once to open the driver's door then twice and "click" all the door locks "magically" popped up. roflmao! Was she ever embarassed. She commented on how "small" she felt at that point. She swore she could never tell her husband about this incident as he got her the remote keyless entry system as a courtesy so she wouldn't have any problems getting into her car when her hands were full of packages, especially in the rain/snow, and she had completely forgotten about this "lovely option" he insisted on as she was so use to her old car. We all promised we'd never tell him either. Red faced she smiled and sheepishly said, "thank you."

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 59 (view)

Identity of POF at Events-You vote!!! Posted: 12/10/2006 1:16:18 AM
How about: 9) A secret password 10) A secret hand shake lol Go for it people, you only live once! And Fishfancy you're right, it's nice for the newbies to feel more comfortable when attending for the first few times to be able to identify who's who in the zoo, err which fishies are POF fishies as opposed to the others in the bar/pond that might cause someone to get "hooked" for trying to "net" someone else's date, especially if everyone's drinking like fish. lol

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 207 (view)

Pofer's that love Mopar.... Posted: 12/10/2006 12:48:29 AM
Though I'm a Ford/Chev man myself I do have a great deal of respect for the good old "HEMI", as for the "new and improved Hemi", it can't possibly compare to it's daddy! Ford for it's body styling of the 30's through the 60's and some of the 70's. The same for Chev but with one or two exceptions: The all aluminum block 327 pushing a stock, 375 horses! And Chev's big block 454, LS7 which was slotted for the 1970 Camaros and Vettes but was literally "legislated" off the roads/highways before it went into production models (Oops, a few slipped through before the gov't banned them. lmao) as the US government was afraid it would result in too much carnage on the highways and by-ways. You could, however, order the motor separately through your local dealer and they would "arrange" for a local shop to swap out the factory motor for the LS7 for you per the factory design since the legislated ban included dealers so they were not allowed to do this. Just goes to show you there's more than one way to get around the law in certain circumstances! MOPAR on people, MOPAR on! It's all good - it's all "MUSCLE"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 27 (view)

Broken Bones Posted: 12/10/2006 12:37:17 AM
Have you tried glucosomine? I’ve heard that it aids in the healing of bones, cartilage and joint pain. I used it for a while myself for tendonitis though it didn’t seem to do much for my issue. Mind you, I like the suggestion above re the 2 cups of Epsom salts in a nice hot bath but I would recommend that you add candles, a glass of wine, a fruit/cheese platter, a good book and tell your man to leave you alone for a few hours (no back washing required. lol), except for his periodically coming in to replenish your wine glass of course! Personally, I prefer the homeopathic remedies but there is one prescription drug I will swear by and it was drug #5 of 5 prescribed for a nasty bought of bronchitis I suffered with in the winter of /96. It’s a cough syrup that’s so loaded to the hilt that after taking 2 teaspoons you’ve got about 30 minutes before something as simple as negotiating stairs becomes “dangerous”. This stuff knocks you flat on your keester so you can sleep instead of coughing up your lungs and chest. Whenever I feel a case of bronchitis coming on I take it and crash. So far I’ve been fortunate enough not to have a recurrence of that /96 bought, thank God.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 12 (view)

Xmas shopping? Posted: 12/9/2006 10:52:47 PM
I'm pretty much done with the exception of about three items. I usually have most of my shopping "wrapped" up by September so all that's left is the wrapping itself which I usually do the evening of the 24th. lol DAMN! That's why I get to bed at 4:00 a.m. Christmas Day and wake up at 2 p.m.! Oops, was that suppose to be "December 25th" instead of "Bleepmas Day" so as to be "politically correct"? If people in society can't accept the word "Christmas" or terms like "the reason for the season" or the fact that we have celebrated "Christmas" here in Canada for more than a century "perhaps" they need to return to their own little world wherever that may be as my holiday greetings for December are "Merry Christmas" NOT "Happy Holidays" and my "Christmas" includes "Christ", as I do not say "Merry Bleepmas". Check out Brad Paisley's new "Christmas" cd, it's a hoot on this rant! Let's get "Christmas" back as a seasonal standard in public AND in our schools!

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 349 (view)

what did your last ex teach you? Posted: 12/9/2006 10:20:54 PM
Ditto Hotrod, Ditto.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 13 (view)

Plenty of Fish People to do Shooters in Maple Ridge! Dec 15 2006 Posted: 12/9/2006 10:19:07 PM
+ = a pond for Enjoy!

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 12 (view)

Plenty of Fish People to do Shooters in Maple Ridge! Dec 15 2006 Posted: 12/9/2006 10:17:16 PM
Hey Scorp my old college buddette, I just might attend this one too! ;) Stay "tuned", I don't want you to be out of key.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 14 (view)

Home Remedy? Posted: 6/28/2006 11:50:55 PM
LOL, ok SIS, enjoy! ;)

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 19 (view)

the age of consent Posted: 6/28/2006 11:29:34 PM
Preamble: I apologize for the lengthy post however I feel once you read it you’ll understand why it is as long as it is. Be advised I did condense it considerably while trying to keep it as simple as possible so everyone, regardless of his or her level of understanding, can grasp what I’ve written. First, I should tell you that I’m a Certified Paralegal specializing in several sections of law, most especially Family & Constitutional law. I offer this information so those of you reading this post can understand that I “speak” from a position of knowledge and by no means do I profess to be an expert on the subject matter. This particular law has been one that I have had my eye on for quite some time. As the father of four, two girls and two boys, I am, and have been, concerned about this particular legislation for many years. My concerns are not only for the welfare of my four children, but that of other Canadian children also. "Disclaimer": This post is merely an expression of my thoughts as guaranteed all persons within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as found in the Constitution Act of 1982 and Amendments thereto. Some background on this particular legislation is, I believe, needed here for everyone to fully understand just what it’s “intended purpose” was/is for it was not solely created nor passed for the purpose of sexual relations. This is a VERY brief/condensed explanation if you will of the so-called “intention” of the legislation. First, it is not just about what age a person must attain so as to “consent” to having intimate/sexual relations with another person. It goes far beyond that. It deals with other matters such as marriage, other contracts as they pertain to the individual, decisions in the young person’s life that they can make themselves, just to name a few. Please note that the “consent” of a parent or guardian is required to get married based on our provincial law (Family Relations Act) which, conspicuous by its absence, fails to require the same regarding sexual relations with another person. Hmmm, now how/why was that one missed? Try asking your MLA this one and see what kind of a response you get. You may, or may not, be surprised. lol If one were to do the research, as we Paralegals do from time to time, they would be able to “read between the lines” of such legislation so as to find how and why this legislation was created and passed by the politicians of yester-year. Would it surprise any of us to know that some of those politicians who created and/or passed this legislation and/or some of their friends where caught in the “company” of young children, specifically but not limited to under age girls? What better way to protect themselves and/or their friends from prosecution than to pass legislation that “allows” for a young “person” to have sexual relations with another, so long as the other person is at least 14 years of age or older? All under the guise of “age of consent” legislation incorporating much more than just the sexual relations component so as not to be TOO obvious. What other reason could there possibly be for such legislation? In the late 1800's it was not uncommon for a girl to be married off at a very early age, for if a "woman" was not married by the age of 17 she was considered to be destined to live out her life as a "spinster". At best, it is my belief that the issue in and around raising the age from 14 to 16 is nothing more than a feeble attempt by our government of the day to garner votes in the next federal election by pleasing most of the people with something that no one should theoretically take offence to. By raising the age of consent to 16 the current government "conveniently" avoids offending many potential voters as they would if they were to raise it to the age of 18, based on the federal age for the right to vote in a federal election. The opposition, in our present coalition government, is caught up in a quandary. If they oppose it they run the risk of being viewed poorly by the majority of the public (read as voters) who could one day restore their party to a position of power. On the other hand, if they agree with the legislation they essentially neutralize the efforts of the parties in power to substantially increase their number of votes in a future election. On another point, if the opposition pushes for the age limit to be raised to a number greater than 16 THEY run the risk of offending potential voters. So is it really about protecting our children from “sexual predators” or is it about influencing voters for a pending election by “modifying” or “revising” an old statute that most, if not all, Canadians would prefer to have the age limit raised within? It's deemed in political circles as a near non-contentious (non alarming to the majority of the public) issue that can increase one party's popularity over other parties. In closing, it is not my intention for this to be viewed in any way as supporting one political party over another and with this in mind I offer you this thought: Campaign Contribution = Legal term for a bribe. Nobody supports your cause, especially financially, without expecting something in return. ;)

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 4 (view)

Home Remedy? Posted: 6/28/2006 9:13:14 PM
Try "Cold FX", according to a number of my friends it works great. Otherwise, try a "screwdriver" (vodka & o.j.) or an "orange blossom" (rum & o.j.) The alcohol takes your mind off the cold while the vitamin C attacks the cold bug since the alcohol causes the cold virus to lower its guard. lol If nothing else it can't hurt!

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 45 (view)

Shirt n Hat Party - Richmond/Steveston - Sat July 8th Posted: 6/28/2006 9:08:13 PM
Ok so I'm thinking..........why not? lol

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 59 (view)

POF PARTY @ SHARK CLUB LANGLEY FRI 30th & SAT JULY 1st Posted: 6/28/2006 9:03:50 PM
Count me in. See you all there!

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 34 (view)

Do victims become abusers?? Posted: 5/24/2006 10:21:07 PM
As this is what I understand your question/post to be about: '...if a child is abused do they come out of it an abuser or not?' (Paraphrased) Believe it or not the majority of abused people come out of it in one of two ways: 1) They themselves become abusers as it was what they grew up knowing life as, or 2) They become "Protectors" of those at risk. The unfortunate thing is, that in most cases, both are to extremes due to the 'conditioning' they suffered as children. Mind you can anyone "over protect" another person? In some ways yes, but in other ways what with the way society is these days it's probably a blessing. I base my comments on the research I did a number of years ago when my ex became violent, which was later identified as being part of her mental illness. Her violent rages were not present when we were living together nor were they in the first 9 of our 11 years of marriage. She was "conditioned" and it came out when her mental illness surfaced as a direct result of her horrific childhood. Sad but true, we live what we learn. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 74 (view)

would your opinion change? Posted: 5/24/2006 10:31:37 AM
Hey Fluffy, I respect your thoughts on my post however it may (or may not) help you and others to know that the "person" I was referring to was my ex. She had a horrific childhood which is in fact what caused her to fragment mentally. If not for that she would not have suffered such a mental illness and, most likely, we would still be "happily" married if not for this illness. And for the record, I do not blame her for the dissolution of our marriage. Things happen for a reason and here I am posting, meeting new people, making new friends. My post was more pointed at how the so-called "officials" put out such a commercial to cause people to "THINK" about a specific subject and yet they're the one's who turn you away if you go to them for help with a Mental Illness if you don't satisfy their little questionaires and their "personal opinion" of whether or not you are suffering from something. Hence I felt that particular commercial was grossly unfair to any person with a mental illness for it "implied" that the baby MIGHT be in danger. This is why I stated I would want more information from the creator of the commercial as, in my humble opinion, they left out too much information. They should have gone into more detail about how a person with any mental illness can cope with it and lead a regular life in any situation, including hold their child or that of a friend. I use the reference "regular life" as their commercial deliberately implied that a person with a mental illness cannot have a regular life. I think the applicable term for this commerical is "sensationalism". It let people down who might find themselves facing a mental illness either within themself or with a loved one. My firsthand experience in dealing with a mental illness caused me to think this way (and I still do): A person with any, and I stress "ANY", mental illness is not a bad person. They have an illness, albeit not like a cold or flu that will be gone in a few days/weeks, it's something they will have to live with the rest of their lives. In some instances it can be treated but at the same time most cases of mental illness are treated to a large degree "experimentally" with various drugs. In short, mental illness is "treated" not cured. When a psychiatrist prescribed specific medications my ex refused to take them. I eventually learned she told her psychiatrist that she thought she might be pregnant. This couldn't be futher from the truth. "She" told me that she wouldn't be "controlled" by drugs or people who don't understand "them" referring to her many personalities. It wasn't the woman I married that was speaking, it was one of her many personalities. When she left she had seven personalities. When she first went to the Mental Health office for help and was turned away she only had five. We documented it, complete with in-home video where and when I could. That said, I truly believe that for every one in the Mental Health field that let a person/family down by dismissing a mental illness as "suspect", there are a many more who don't. I'm glad in some respects that they posted such a commercial for at the very least it's a start. My thoughts on this subject are jsut that "mine". I do not think of myself as being superior to anyone nor do I think I am right or wrong. I am merely expressing my thoughts on a subject that was and still is near and dear to me as it now relates to my children. You see my ex made a big deal to our daughters about the home videotape that I have of her admitting to and displaying her multiple personalities. So much so that our daughters have asked several times to see it. I declined their requests before speaking with professionals in the field. The professionals agreed that "perhaps" when they are older and can better understand what it is they would be viewing I may let them watch it. One doesn't want their own children thinking that this is a hereditary disease taht one day they may suffer from for in the case of our children it is not. If any readers here work within the Mental Health Ministry please know that I am not attacking the Ministry or the mental health field, I'm merely expressing how another one fell through the cracks that ought not to have. Although I am dissapointed in what happened in my family's case I maintain the utmost respect for those of you who work in the field as it's a thankless job and an exhausting one at that, both mentally and physically. No pun intended for those of you who know my twisted sense of humour. Thanks to all for reading and understanding. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 61 (view)

would your opinion change? Posted: 5/23/2006 5:57:21 PM
Let me open by saying my opinion wouldn't change though I would have some serious "concerns" because they only give you a small part of the equation/story. I would want more information from the person/s generating the commercial as to the person's treatment of said mental illness. they are implying things that ought not be implied. That commercial was designed to evoke thought and communication on this very subject. So it obviously worked. :) There have been a lot of interesting posts on this subject, unfortunately I lack sufficient time to read all of them in detail however, I did give some a cursory review. I, by no means am an expert in the fields of psyschiatry or psychology but I do have some firsthand experience in dealing with a person suffering from a mental illness. I ended up doing some extensive research that some professionals were impressed with. Too bad they didn't act on it or their own credentials. Mental Health has, in one instance, dismissed a mental illness as being "suspect" because, according to them, a mentally ill person cannot identify their own mental illness (MPD/DID - Multiple Personality Disorder/Dissociative Identity Disorder) nor name each of their personalities. They declined to see the home videotape in which the person not only admitted to MPD but also displayed it. Believe me, they were not acting. One professional, lacking sufficient credentials to do anythig stated: "If they're acting take them to Hollywood. NO ONE CAN ACT THAT GOOD!" The individual was scared of themself for specific reasons that I won't get into. In these situations you can't see the forest for the trees. Hindsight's always 20/20 - If anyone can relate to this GET PROFESSIONAL HELP NOW! You don't know what you're dealing with and you CANNOT handle it on your own. And if you run into the same typical "dismissed as being suspect", dare I say Ministry "mentality", don't give up. Keep knocking on doors, making phone calls, etc especially your MLA's or MP's offices. They may not be qualified in the field but they can cause specific doors to open that were once closed to you or slammed in your face. It's no different from what prisoners of war suffered, most notably but not limited to the Vietnam War. A person is subjected to extreme abuse and threatened with death before and after each "session". the end result is the person "fragments' mentally in a self-preservation defence mode. The mental illness I refer to above is is only one of many mental illnesses that people suffer from. I believe the one that started this thread was szchizophrenia or bi-polar. The bottom line is, there are a number of mental illnesses and they know no societarial boundaries and just because someone has a mental illness doesn't mean they can't live a "normal" life as society dictates. We all know at least two people who suffer from some sort of mental illness and we don't even know it. Best regards to all. "Chiv"

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 19 (view)

What triggers your memories? Posted: 5/23/2006 4:37:54 PM
For sure Fluffy. For me it's a variety of things. Touch, scents, a word or phrase, a song, a scene, certain people I haven't seen in a while, an "occurence", the list goes on. The most memorable ones are: When my "older" sisters and I get together. I'll recall everything from our childhood days right down to the phone numbers we had when I was 6 years old. This usually results in a brief verbal argument between my sisters who eventually end up agreeing with my recall of just what those phone numbers were. At these get togethers they also request that I do a little "antic" of sorts that I use to do when I was about 6 or 7. I use to "spoofed" the Cheetos Bandito commercial. (for those who remember it) lmao This ALWAYS gets them howling for extended periods of time. roflmao This next one's for you Fluffy (and anyone else who can relate): The other one is an "occurence". It happens periodically but most notably on the anniversary of my last telephone contact with my dear departed mentor and, in keeping with his "precision", it's on the anniversary right down to the last minute of when we ended our call which was just a few hours before he passed away. A light will turn itself on and burn super bright like it's going to burn out. It's his way of letting me know he's still around and watching over me. It all ties in with his twisted sense of humour as he had a German surname that was pronounced "Lights" and whenever we'd pull up in front of his place he'd say: "Hey look the lights are on but I'm not home." He also knew about my "intuitive abilities" hence he's staying in "contact". So you see Fluffy, your dad is identifying with the one thing that you wold make no mistake about associating with your last contact with him, something he knew you would instantly identify with. He uses it to let you know he's still around and watching over you. It's all good. Let me know if you'd like more insight in this regard as I'd be happy to assist you with an intuitive reading, no charge. Sorry it's so long for those who take issue with such things. I don't post very often but if I get back into it I'll trim them down considerably. :)

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 21 (view)

which one are you? Posted: 6/13/2005 10:08:31 PM
I know your dog NRK. lol So when are you gonna bring it over for another visit? ;) Small world now isn't it? lol

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 81 (view)

hmm Posted: 6/13/2005 10:06:24 PM
Hey Dream, Ok, so I take it you read what I wrote above before posting this. lmao.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 80 (view)

hmm Posted: 6/13/2005 10:05:30 PM
Night Jamie

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 24 (view)

PoF Pregnancy & STD Bulletin Board Posted: 6/13/2005 10:04:05 PM
Well people it was bound to get out sooner or later. I can't keep this a secret any longer. My, ummm, well you know how the world is these days and things get spread a lot easier and more frequently nowadays, so, ummm, it finally happened. My pc got an S.T.D. A "System Transmitted Disease" , but don't despair. My nephew, being the tech wizard that he is, is an "S.T.D. Specialist" He can dispose of an S.T.D. in a matter of minutes. So my pc's free to roam at will as a "free range" pc. Going wherever it's BIG hard drive desires without any worries of being diseased the rest of it's life nor any fear of needing/having to use an anti-static bag for protection.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 77 (view)

hmm Posted: 6/13/2005 9:56:36 PM
So is our 3some at the BBQ with Fluffy still on Dream? ;)

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 419 (view)

BBQ at Cheetah's house... Posted: 6/13/2005 9:42:15 PM
back tracking a little...... Well Meeka, if Pin's "stealing" them then they're obviously not REAL MEN. lol

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 30 (view)

Interracial Dating? Posted: 6/10/2005 2:17:21 AM
No offence taken. :)

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 16 (view)

anybody not look or feel their age? Posted: 6/10/2005 2:03:33 AM
lmao, try enough to buy a Franchise or two. The last I heard the "little" ones start at about $5 million. lmao NOW I'M B.S.' g in case you didn't see that! lol Seriously, I could almost retire. lol

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 15 (view)

anybody not look or feel their age? Posted: 6/10/2005 2:00:21 AM
Hey Neill, LMAO! Boot up my a***? Not likely as I don't let anyone/thing get that close-up behind me. hahahaha I do appreciate your interpretation/s of my scribing however, I believe it's more of my legal vocabulary than anything else that you're picking up on. Hell, and I thought I had relaxed it for ya'll. lol All kidding aside, I'm looking forward to meeting you and the others too. I think it'll be a blast. Cheers! Chiv.

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 28 (view)

Interracial Dating? Posted: 6/10/2005 1:41:28 AM
Depends, would you be editing the "comeback" or "barely"? ;) lmao

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 26 (view)

Interracial Dating? Posted: 6/10/2005 12:58:57 AM
Oh? I've been elevated to "baby" status and you barely know me. hmmmm Now how do I know there's going to be a "comeback" to that "barely" statement? I wonder. lol

chivalristic1

Joined: 12/30/2004

Msg: 9 (view)

anybody not look or feel their age? Posted: 6/10/2005 12:54:55 AM
On the contrary Fluffy, just enjoying a good "old" memory is all. roflmao

Show ALL Forums