Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) chat & forums.

Show ALL Forums

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Author

Thread: Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please)

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5637 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/6/2013 2:38:48 PM
What some of us see is Obama making an endrun by using the UN's international weapons ban, and IF that goes forward, you can expect some opposition. Sorry, but even the most basic search will tell 'ya that's just a bunch of paranoid RW nonsense which has been thoroughly disproven.... although as with most Glenn Beck-inspired nuttery, that still hasn't prevented wingnuts from repeating it ad infinitum anyway! http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp! As for our friend Matchlight, he'll likely still be tilting at windmills the next time I drop by a few years from now... when by that time all that remains of the already irrelevant Cali GOP, will be just a bunch of doddering old farts in places like Bakersfield and Riverside, still yammering on about ''illegals'', ''elites'' and ''socialist lib-ruls'', and reminiscing about the ''glory days'' of the once-great ''conservative standard bearers''.... like Dubya, Santorum, Romney, Bachmann, Gingrich, Ryan, Perry, Palin, et al. Because like their 'lay' counterparts (Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly, etc.), they could always talk up a good game for the ever-gullible ''base''. Although as far as the ultimate test, actually connecting with the mainstream voters and winning elections... unfortunately the GOP never quite got the hang of that part! Thanks, it's been fun chattin' with y'all!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5634 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/6/2013 7:29:18 AM
Hey, I'm a (former) Washingtonian too! So whatcha got against us soggy huddled masses from the PNW yearning for some sunshine (or is it just the ''lib-rul'' ones you object to... LOL)?! Am no cheerleader for the New Economy (or the Tech Singularity), which are major disruptive on every front, just like the invention of agriculture, cities, gunpowder, banking, computers, and every other technology before it. Every innovation always involves some major tradeoffs. But it is what it is, and obviously we either adapt or get left by the wayside. Except now we also have to contend with the global scale and a truly relentless pace of change on EVERY front (scientific, environmental, medical, cultural, political, religious, economic, moral... you name it)! BTW, which is also prompting rebellion from a lot of reactionary folks (aka, anti-Modernity) representing the status quo and the old guard... like the Taliban, christian Fundies, White Supremacists, Gay bashers, Right Wingers and the other regressives like our friend Matchlight here, who all wanna remain in the comfy womb of De Nile. But like the Flat Earthers, the Inquisition, Salem witchhunters, slavers, buggy whips, vacuum tubes (and horses & bayonets), we all know how that approach always ends... BTW, great book by Kevin Kelly, co-founder of Wired magazine, "What Technology Wants" (also available here as a pdf): http://www.scribd.com/doc/122950110/What-Technology-Wants-KEVIN-KELLY

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5632 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/5/2013 11:40:37 PM
“(William F.) Buckley felt that outlandish stances like the Birchers and today's Tea Party, discredited conservatism by making it seem “ridiculous and pathological.” He consistently maintained that conservatism was the “politics of reality.” Needless to say, it is not a keen grasp of reality that distinguishes the politics of the Tea Party. The many Tea Partiers who fail to distinguish between liberalism and socialism are only repeating the errors of the Birchers, whom Buckley criticized for their “neurotic oversimplifications.” Above all, Buckley wanted conservatism to be a responsible and effective governing philosophy. He recognized that a movement that delegitimizes its opponents as Communists and traitors is doomed to be irresponsible and ineffective. He warned against conservative triumphalism and refusal to compromise. To live, Buckley reminded conservatives, is to maneuver.” - Geoffrey Kabaservice, Editor for the New Republic, and author of “Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party, from Eisenhower to the Tea Party“. BTW, just as Buckley predicted, it's those same “neurotic oversimplifications” (among other things) that are making the GOP appear so “ridiculous and pathological” nowadays... which of course continues to drive voters right into the waiting arms of said ''commies'', ''leftists'' and ''socialists''! Or to quote the inimitable Dr. Phil... ''so how's that workin' for 'ya?'' ;-p

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 13 (view)

I need a good divorce attorney in Los Angeles. Any Help? Posted: 5/5/2013 12:56:15 PM
It's sorta like that Rod Stewart line.... ''next time instead of getting married, I'll just find a woman I don't like and give her a house!''

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5630 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/5/2013 11:56:47 AM
"The modern Republican Party as much as anything else is defined in opposition to Nelson Rockefeller," said Richard Norton Smith, a Rockefeller biographer and director of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum in Springfield. The Rockefeller wing of the party was also known as the "Eastern Establishment" and had strong tendencies toward looking down on Republican elements in the Midwest and West. The South didn't matter because it was as strongly Democratic then as it is Republican today. Rockefeller-style Republicans still win races down the ballot, for governor or the U.S. Senate, but they haven't had much of a chance at the White House nomination since 1964, a year when Rockefeller got his own comeuppance when he addressed the GOP convention. "If you want one of those rare historical moments when you can literally see the page being turned, you go back to the Cow Palace in 1964," Smith said. "It was Tuesday, July 14, in San Francisco. The convention managers managed even then to push Rockefeller back until midnight in the East. "He gets up for a five-minute speech in support of a resolution denouncing extremism, and specifically the Ku Klux Klan and the John Birch Society," Smith said. "He is almost booed out of the hall." In that year, Barry Goldwater of Arizona laid the ideological cornerstone for the conservative movement that has transformed the Republican Party. Two weeks before the convention, Smith noted, Republicans provided the decisive margin for passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Goldwater was one of only six Republicans to vote against it. Goldwater suffered a landslide defeat to President Lyndon Johnson, but his party began a journey that led to the election of Ronald Reagan and continues to shape the Party of George W. Bush with a strongly conservative orthodoxy." Or as I would prefer to call it, the once Grand Old Party now co-opted by RWNJ's, bigots and religious whackos... http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-08-31/news/0408310265_1_nelson-rockefeller-gop-convention-republican-national-convention

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5626 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/5/2013 9:17:55 AM
Believe it or not, I would actually prefer this country had a less ''dysfunctional'' GOP these days. We're never well-served whenever one party (any party), becomes too entrenched. And for what it's worth, am personally more along the lines of a Rockefeller Republican (remember them?)... socially liberal, yet fiscally conservative. Of course to the current crop of RWNJ's, neo-cons and other ideologues that have co-opted the GOP, those kinda folks are now considered RINOS (or worse)! But to speak to your points, IMHO we're witnessing firsthand the ravages of the new ''global economy'', driven largely by tech and ''outsourcing''. So while mom-and-pop storefronts are being boarded up, places like Silicon Valley are swimming in venture capital and new construction. And BTW, ''rust belt'' towns and industries were merely a preview of this ''New Economy''. So no matter how much we wanna blame ''illegals'', ''change'', ''taxes'', ''socialism'', ''lib-ruls'', "Muslim Kenyans", or whatever... the new reality is that any region or group which doesn't invest in innovation, education and technology is simply gonna get ''left behind''.... economically, socially, culturally, and politically. And once again, for better or worse, this state has become a bellwether for those trends.

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 111 (view)

Folks and their lists. Posted: 5/5/2013 7:14:11 AM
Long "shopping lists" and being overly "picky" are how some folks hide the fact (usually from themselves) that they're either emotionally unavailable, not that interested, or else they can't afford it to begin with. Kinda like the neighbor who nitpicks your new car, even though he's unemployed, drives a beater, and thinks a 'tranny' is a female impersonator! ;-p

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 2 (view)

profile review Posted: 5/4/2013 10:16:10 PM
Dunno about a woman's point of view, but the first thing I notice is that you have 7 nearly identical pics of yourself, all with more or less the same expression, and not even one cracking a smile. Same goes for your profile description, which might be helped if there were some little bitty clue there, that you also have a sense of humor, or occasionally might even like to have a little fun.... Good luck!!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 110 (view)

Women who take the initiative... Posted: 5/4/2013 9:58:51 PM
I keep hearing some men whine about how women never make the first move. So once again I find myself a bit curious... Do you really want a woman who is going to singlehandedly drive the bus in a relationship? What if women who make the first move, then go on to propose? How will you feel about that? Would that be acceptable? Or are you just too lazy to make the first move and want to sit around and wait, so you don't have to ever be rejected? Guess I don't understand why it's ever an issue to begin with, unless maybe some folks have certain "expectations" re: gender "roles". I mean regardless whether you're a a man or a woman, if you're actually interested in someone, then fer godssakes, why not just say ''Hi'' and introduce yourself (and why do we even need to have these unspoken "rules" ... duh)?!!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 271 (view)

whats up with all of the women? Posted: 5/4/2013 9:43:43 PM
It seems they talk to you for a litle bit and then all of a sudden "poof". they r gone. Yeah, no doubt the ''poofers'' have their reasons, but when folks are that ''fickle'' or ''skittish'', 'ya gotta wonder how serious they are in the first place (let alone that they never have a shred of inve$tment or accountability in the whole process)! So these days, rather than looking at most dating profiles as sorta the equivalent of ''For Sale By Owner'' ads, instead have come to regard the whole online dating scene as more like a bunch of fickle ''Kinda/Sorta/Maybe For Sale'' ads (aka, ''Dunno Whether I Really Wanna Sell, But Go Ahead And Make Me An Offer Anyway'')!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5623 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/4/2013 4:56:14 PM
Well, it's a free country, and just like the Fundies, Dittoheads, Flat Earthers, Bilderberger conspiracists, Birthers, "Obama is a Space Alien" believers, White Separatists, Preppers, Rapture buffs, paranoid gun "enthusiasts", tea baggers, and all the other raving fanatics... you're certainly welcome to believe whatever you wish, no matter how loony-tunes or bat-sh*t crazy it may sound. But fortunately politics is a team sport, and in case you missed the memo, the majority of Americans, let alone Californians, ain't supporting your ''team'' anymore (except maybe in places like the Inland Empire, and Possum Holler)! In which case I hope you and all the other extremists will accept my thanks ahead of time, for remaining steadfastly "dead Right" and for guaranteeing the GOP's continued irrelevancy! http://www.salon.com/2012/11/07/the_gops_horrible_california_nightmare/ "Republicans are having a bad day. But it’s going to get a lot worse when they look beyond the White House and U.S. Senate and fully absorb what just happened in California. The future of American politics — a majority-minority coalition handing complete political power over all branches of government to Democrats — is written here for anyone to see, in big, bold, rainbow-colored letters."

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5620 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/3/2013 7:17:33 PM
Yeah, I've been kinda curious just how long conservatives will continue to stay with the tired old ''the sky is falling'' routine, before they start to look even more ridiculous and ineffectual than they do already. In which case they'll likely revert to ''Excuse B'' (that ''things would have improved anyway''), which is what they started saying after the Clinton turnaround of Reagan's ''voodoo economics'', inherited and mismanaged by Bush Sr. (aka, ''it's the economy, stupid!''). Though in a way, I (almost) feel sorry for the mainstream GOP these days, which has unofficially become "the southern party" now, held captive by RWNJ's, the social conservative ''base'' and all the other raving ideologues (you know who you are)... who themselves have become truly addicted to FOX, Limbaugh, Coulter, ''talk radio'', Breitbart, the Blaze, Fundie preachers, and the rest of the RW paranoid "fever swamps"..... each of 'em with agenda$ of their own! And good luck with the mainstream GOP trying to ''manage'' that can-o-worms (...LOL)!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5611 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/3/2013 11:32:56 AM
In other words, because you happen to think it would be nice and wondrous to make same-sex marriage legal, that makes it a "personal freedom" guaranteed by the Constitution and places it outside the authority of any state to exclude same-sex partners from its marriage laws. And no doubt they used to say the same kinda thangs about slavery, womens suffrage and abortion rights (geez, the very idea of giving folks MORE rights instead of LESS... why that's, that's...."un-Amuriken", fer godssakes )!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5608 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/3/2013 4:51:31 AM
Besides, they can always station lookouts at the state borders.... "the gay couples are coming, the gay couples are coming!" ;-p

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5606 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/2/2013 9:56:38 PM
Well it seems to me that's the point, that we especially ought not to be deciding stuff like personal freedoms just on the basis of local and widely differing values & customs. And BTW, whatever happened to "keeping guvmint out of our private lives"? In fact am personally kinda hard-pressed to imagine anything where "States Rights" should ever be much of a deciding factor. Wanna trash the air, water and even the ground (aka, fracking)... that stuff doesn't stop just at city & state borders. Same goes for food, drug and product safety, regardless where they're made. And laws & regs governing firearms, which can easily cross state lines, same thing. In fact except for maybe local zoning, taxes, elected officials and traffic laws, what else is left that oughta be left up to individual ''States Rights'' (and why)?

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5603 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/2/2013 7:21:11 PM
As long as the keyword is "citizens" , you will have huge support :) Non-citizens , not so much. Again we are in agreement, though perhaps the GOP simply needs to fine tune their "messaging", which so far has only been giving the impression that "illegals" is just another one of their many "dog whistles" for xenophobia (aka, "you ain't from around here, are 'ya?''). In fact even many Republicans have complained they need to do a better job on that issue. Those have traditionally been matters for each state to decide through its laws. ...the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment became part of the Constitution in 1791. You keep contradicting yourself, just like you claim that conservatives have no desire to "throw out the baby with the bath water" (aka, ditch all our "imperfect" regulatory institutions), and then you go on to suggest doing just that to the EPA, OSHA and other federal watchdogs. Dunno about you, but no matter how 'imperfect' they may be, I'd still prefer the country doesn't start looking like China, with no oversight over our air, water, safety regs, food inspections, etc.! And then once again, you do exactly the same thing, one moment advocating the primacy of ''States Rights'' in matters that clearly vary according to individual racial, gender and religious beliefs, but yet you go on to say that the Constitutution should be the final arbiter... so which one is it (unless you wanna ''cherry pick'' which laws and freedoms should be ''locally'' decided)? 'Cuz maybe you're OK with a bunch of local bible thumpers dictating who folks can marry, deciding what kinda sex they can have, and meddling with their constitutionally protected freedoms like abortion rights... but I'm sure not! BTW, if we had simply left things up to ''States Rights'' and kept the Guvmint out of it, Jim Crow laws would still be alive and well, and most places like Little Rock would likely still be segregated (or maybe that's what you'd prefer)!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5599 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/2/2013 12:08:52 PM
Oh, I don't disagree re: the need to work ''smarter'', instead of ''harder'', which fer sure ain't exactly the bureaucrat's way. Though in fairness, we can thank the Bush administration for installing said ''nimrods'' in the wake of 9/11 ('cuz they were cheaper), rather than hiring experienced security professionals in the first place! And of course one can just as easily go too far in the opposite direction re: regs, and especially enforcement.... as we were reminded by that veritable ''champeen'' of the ''unrestricted Free Market”, Alan Greenspan, when he sheepishly admitted that he had “made a mistake” in trusting that free markets could regulate themselves! But candidly, my sense is that both parties are equally guilty of overspending our tax dollars... except they just choose different "priorities" and constituencies to spend it on. So we may differ, but if I gotta choose, would personally prefer to see the money "redistributed" back to the 99% of its citizens who will benefit the most (egads, Socialism!!), in the form of myriad programs for children, education, health, welfare, unemployment, research, our military personnel, law enforcement and the like... rather than on more corporate welfare, bloated defense budgets, offshoring more jobs.... and basically bigger tax breaks for the folks who need it least. And BTW, if those same heathen ''Socialists'' also wanna support more freedom for ALL our citizens (not just the WASP ones), along with less guvmint intrusion into stuff like our bedrooms, who folks can marry, or can serve in the military, or fer godssakes, even the right of women just to control their own bodies (!!)... then hey, I'm willing to be a little ''forgiving'' (especially compared to some of the scary RW & theocratic ''alternatives'' these days)!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5596 (view)

Our New President (This is California Residents Only Thread Please) Posted: 5/2/2013 8:14:00 AM
Hi there GT, how 'ya been! Say, do I misunderstand, or are you basically advocating the same "logic" as most ''Free Market" conservatives (and gun nuts) these days... namely that we oughta eliminate any and all laws or regulations that are deemed ''imperfect'' (and presumably also eliminate along with them, things like fire extinguishers, airbags, the EPA, OSHA, the criminal justice system, etc. that are similarly ''imperfect'')?

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 47 (view)

Caught off guard by a Narcissist Posted: 5/1/2013 5:42:29 PM
I just wanted to ask, mostly the ladies, if you have dated someone you met on this site and realize that they had a severe personality disorder? I ask because I had never met anyone like this prior to this person, and came to find that he was a narcissist. Not that I doubt your analysis, but would be curious how you came to be aware of the subject of Narcissism or personality disorders in the first place. Did you read a book, or an article on the subject, which BTW, seems to be a very popular topic these days in certain circles? Also some common Aspergers traits (like being empathy-challenged) are often confused with Narcissism. That said, I personally don't consider psychological terms to be the sole domain of the mental health professions, which as we all know, can be just as fallible as anyone else! And BTW, this is said from the experience of someone who (unknown at the time) lived for 12 years with an NPD/BPD woman (eventually clinically diagnosed), but which was only discovered after we went thru 7 successive, and very pricey, marriage counselors... with not a one of them ever suggesting even the possibility of mental health issues for either of us! Finally the 8th one suggested we take some tests, which referred us to a professional psychiatrist, who eventually formally diagnosed my ex-wife with BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder), co-morbid with symptoms of NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder). BTW, although NPD is thought to occur more frequently in males, there are a lot of folks who feel that BPD is simply the female version of NPD. In any case, I finally left not because of the diagnosis, but because it was clear she didn't want to seek any treatment or even acknowledge she had a problem. And NPD/BPD folks always famously deny any sort of accountability anyway, even when you have them dead-to-rights, because it's ALWAYS someone else's fault.... just like the CIA motto, “Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-accusations” (...LOL)! Incidentally, my own “takeaway” from the whole experience, and from having lived intimately with one, is that Narcissism is a sort of “spectrum” disorder, and that someone doesn't have to be a full-tilt, clinically-diagnosed NPD or BPD to still have enough symptoms to watch out for. And they're really not difficult to notice... yes, there's a certain charm and the ability to be whatever they think you want them to be, that naturally can be very attractive. But if you're paying attention, in very short order they also tend to control the conversation (which is always 'all about them'), they tend to act like they're ''special'' and ''entitled'', and they will often 'test your boundaries' with odd comments and behaviors. So bottom line is, that if the world is indeed a ''jungle'' out there, then Narcissists have simply become a surprisingly common modern-day ''predator'' to be aware of these days. And BTW, for all the self-help books now that "demonize" these kinda folks (who never really chose to be what they are), remember that it always still takes "two to tango"! Oh, and one more passing thought... IMHO, the internet and online dating sites in particular (where you can be whatever you wanna be, and there's no accountability) are just chock-a-block full of 'em... although fortunately they're also easy to spot!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 13 (view)

Attention Ladies: Define “Real Man” Posted: 2/3/2013 9:28:10 PM
Real man...makes me feel protected and loved. He takes care of his family -- financially and physically. Sounds like a recipe for a Sugar Daddy Lite. BTW, how do gals feel if a guy said he's looking for a REAL woman (and what do you think that means these days)...?

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 45 (view)

''Strong Women''... Posted: 1/21/2013 7:01:16 PM
Remember, there is a big difference between a strong, educated, intelligent, attractive, successful, self-sufficient woman and a pushy, opinionated, loud-mouthed, demanding, selfish, entitled, hyper-competititve, trainwreck. Some women are completely confused on this issue! There are truly "Strong Women" and then there are just "Difficult, Annoying Women". Amen to that! Whenever I hear that expression, am usually thinkin', ''uh-oh, somebody's got sumthin' to prove!'' 'Cuz the ones who are truly strong, independent, etc. don't have to 'broadcast' it, they just ''are''! BTW, under the ''what do men (or women) want / how are 'ya feeling'' category, here's a wild idea... maybe we could just ASK each other (instead of relying on 'telepathy')!! IMHO, actually being sincerely interested in how someone else feels, is such a rare occurrence these days, and I know it sure as heck gets my attention! ;-p

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 50 (view)

Which Dating Websites Have Good Results? Posted: 1/18/2013 9:08:35 PM
Match and eHarmony have the same problem... you never know if the people you're contacting are paid subscribers (aka, can answer you back)! And I recall reading somewhere that once you factored in all the non-paying members, no longer actives, etc., it actually works out to something like only 1-in-30 of the profiles they advertise is someone you can actually talk to! And that's not counting the fact that so many of eHarmony's ''recommendations'' often end up being too far away, and sometimes in the next state! Yeah, agreed you get what you pay for, but sometimes you can also end up buying some pretty expensive junk! On the flip side, I also have the suspicion that the ''success rate'' on each dating site is probably different depending on if you're a man or woman. For example, on a free site like POF, seems like there are a certain percentage of women who simply get a LOT of messages and that men generally have to 'compete' more and take most of the ''initiative'' here. Whereas on the ''pay'' sites, where everyone has an equal 'investment', gals generally seem to be more willing to 'express interest' as readily as the guys, and their 'intent' seems a little more serious too.

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 31 (view)

Strong Woman Posted: 1/18/2013 7:49:48 PM
Am gonna go out on a limb a bit here, but between your profile and your replies here, I'm thinking maybe you're the type who often lives a lot ''in their head'' and tends to be sorta ''analytical'', as in distanced from your real feelings. Which naturally leads to bad choices, at least the ''emotional'' kind. So if it's practical, I like ''entertaining's'' suggestion about finding a therapist, including to help learn about the proverbial ''getting in touch with your feelings'' (geez, I hate that expression... LOL)! Because even if you do find ''the one'', it would still be a real helpful skill in any relationship!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 19 (view)

What Do Women Want? Posted: 1/18/2013 9:31:53 AM
This subject kinda reminds me of the folks (men or women) who either have so many other "priorities" (like their "relationship" with their dog, their single mom daughter, their "close friends", caring for their maiden aunt, etc.), or else they paint some fantasy, like ''You'll make me laugh'' or ''We'll get our own fire wood - you chop, I’ll stack''. And I have to wonder, ''what the heck are you looking for... a relationship, or someone to cast in a supporting role for your "screenplay"?!''

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 52 (view)

The Word DRAMA Posted: 1/15/2013 7:56:01 PM
....Guys use this phrase more often than women. If so, why do you suppose that might be (and BTW, why do so many women in particular also seem so defensive about hearing it.... like for example the OP for this thread, and over a half dozen other threads just like it)?! ;-)

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 45 (view)

The Word DRAMA Posted: 1/14/2013 6:37:45 PM
"....communication, conflict resolution, listening, kindness, respect and encouragement"?! Gee, who ever heard of such a thing these days.... are 'ya sure you're not some kinda communist (...LOL)?!!!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 42 (view)

The Word DRAMA Posted: 1/13/2013 7:18:40 AM
Old thread, but yeah, I never really get the point of including stuff like "no drama, cheaters, gold diggers, whatever..." in someone's profile?! Like is that really gonna cause a cheater, drama queen (or king), etc., to go, "oops, guess I better pass that one up" (...LOL)!! And especially when they include ANY problems they wanna avoid from their previous relationships, like "I had too much drama in my last marriage", I'm usually thinkin'... gee, I really pity the next poor SOB you get involved with, who's gonna have to ''run the gauntlet'', just to prove they ain't anything like that!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 53 (view)

Observations on a decade of internet dating... Posted: 1/4/2013 12:46:25 PM
This tells me that there is something particular about online dating that does not reflect the real world. Is it the superficiality many have commented on? I'm not sure about that since we have a pretty wide selection of personalities in here. Maybe it has something to do with the technology? I don't know what it is but I do know this. I am way more inclined to want to get out and participate in life and hopefully meet interesting people as a direct result of NOT-dating online. I might have mentioned this already in another thread, but still pretty relevant. Awhile back I was doing a simple plumbing repair for a friend of a friend kinda thang. And while I was working on the bathroom sink, I could hear the owner (middle-aged single gal), looking at the computer in the adjoining bedroom, along with her 20-something daughter. And obviously they were both looking over a bunch of guys on POF. But their comments on each guy were very interesting, and probably not that uncommon, though I doubt they would ever behave or talk that way if they met any of those guys IRL (in real life)! "Oh, he looks like a mama's boy... ewww, what a nose... too short... too skinny... look at that cheap furniture in the background... etc., etc.!!''

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5029 (view)

Our President (California Residents Only) Posted: 1/4/2013 12:15:03 PM
Well actually, I kinda figured Obama's re-election pretty much amounts to the Wingnuts Full EmploymentAct.... heck, just look at all the books, websites, cable tv and AM radio shows devoted to hating on the guy (aka, the uppity, muslim, socialist Kenyan POTUS... with Nazi tendencies)! In fact if he hadn't been re-elected, there'd probably be a helluva lot of conservatives wandering around aimlessly right now, suddenly trying to figure out how to get a life (... LOL)!!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5023 (view)

Our President (California Residents Only) Posted: 12/24/2012 2:07:12 AM
@GreenThumbz18 ... thanks, and Seasons Greetings! (or Merry Christmas, as the case may be for our social-conservative friends)! Understood re: the over-abundance of "lettuce pickers", and can't speak for the rest of the country, but locally my own experience has been that ''coincidentally'' 1) a lotta the folks doing the most complaining about ''illegals'', often tend to be the same ones who most depend on social services themselves (Welfare, Food Stamps, Section 8, SSI, Unemployment Ins., Disability, Workmans Comp, etc.). 2) somehow those folks don't seem to mind buying cheap, foreign-made stuff at places like Walmart, and yet they strongly object to ''foreign outsourcing'' (aka employing ''illegals'') for more and more of our menial, low-wage, labor-intensive work... which most Americans don't wanna do anyway. 3) and most of their current ''insecurities'' would be alleviated, if they simply went back to school and kicked their skills up a notch, so they become more competitive, and maybe feel less threatened, within the current job (Free-) market! BTW, and Happy Festivus y'all... may the ritual "Airing of Grievances" commence (...LOL)!! ;-)

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5020 (view)

Our President (California Residents Only) Posted: 12/23/2012 11:11:54 AM
We can prattle on all day about the evils of "illegals" (or lib-ruls), but Cali supplies over half the fruits, nuts and vegetables in the country. So maybe this has been covered before, but even if we could magically eliminate every illegal (aka, ''mez-kin'') in the state... just out of curiosity, who's gonna pick all those crops? There are already dozens of examples of farmers who've made specific attempts to hire ''locals'', even offering higher wages than usual ($10-15/hr.)... and over and over, they complain of few takers, or worse, that the "natives" work a few days (or often just a few hours), and quickly end up walking off the job! So if natives obviously ain't willing to do this kinda work, then who else is (and BTW, how would it impact the cost of CA produce, and our economy)?

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 32 (view)

Has anyone tried E Harmony or Match? Posted: 12/22/2012 9:34:15 AM
@ Stevefromupland..... thanks man, and glad to hear about you and your former co-worker (on-the-job romances being way too ''problematic'' IMHO)! And agreed that there's also a huge difference between the ''process'' of meeting online, vs in-person. BTW, dunno whether a lot of folks are aware, but eHarmony was started by an evangelical minister, Neil Clark Warren. And Salon once did a pretty interesting interview with him, "My date with Mr. eHarmony" (just Google if the link doesn't show up): http://www.salon.com/2005/06/10/warren_3/ The gal giving the interview was also single, tried out eHarmony and complained to Warren about her lack of success online. I thought what he told her was particularly fascinating: As for my romantic prospects, Warren had some grim news. He said that because I was bright, I “lose at least 95 percent of candidates because of IQ.” Great. Apparently, I also need someone articulate, ambitious and energetic. In short, as Warren said, I am “looking for a rare, rare, rare person.” @saddestangel7.... speaking of which, you sound like a bright, articulate woman yourself (among other things). And unless maybe Powerpoint presentations get some guys ''in the mood'', am surprised you don't express more of that side of yourself in your profile (instead of just lists and ''bullet points'')? ;-)

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 28 (view)

Has anyone tried E Harmony or Match? Posted: 12/21/2012 11:01:54 AM
IMHO, the whole online dating thang has become a mess and pretty much a waste of time... stick with ''real life'' instead. Online was probably fine early on, but now there's just way too many gals online who aren't looking for much more than some attention, or who kid themselves that they're just being ''picky''. Which probably ain't helped by all the guys who simply 'spam' nearly every dang gal out there, so that lots of women are often inundated, making them kinda like the employer who gets a ton of resumes for one job posting. Worse, it makes 'em less inclined to take any ''initiative'' themselves, and instead they just get ''pickier''. BTW, these are not particularly original observations, and there seems to be an increasing recognition among guys now of the ''realities'' (vs the promise) of online dating, and especially the ''math'' aspect. Geez, and that's before we even start about the ''quality'' issue! And BTW, just personally, I've run into some kinds of ''unusual'' women online, the likes of which I've NEVER encountered thru meeting in real life... and that ain't a good thang (...LOL)!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 19 (view)

Pictures with or without my dog? Posted: 12/21/2012 10:38:16 AM
Any time I see this phrase - "Must love __________, "I hit the delete button. It might be dogs, cats, animals, Italian food, dancing, whatever. All it means is that this person is broadcasting their narrow-mindedness, because although you love dogs, if you don't love HER dog, then you are toast. If you love Italian food, but you don't love HER favorite Italian dish. you are toast. If you love opera, but not HER favorite opera, you are toast. etc. No thanks. ^ ^ This!! If you ''MUST'' love the same things they do, then it ain't even about ''loving animals, Jee-zus, Harleys, whatever''.... it's basically just a warning that everything has gotta be 'their-way-or-the-highway' (regardless whether you decide to post pics of your own pet or not)!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 190 (view)

Date sites and self esteem Posted: 12/19/2012 8:01:47 AM
Now that online dating has become so commonplace, many folks are starting to notice certain ''patterns'', and there's been a growing bunch of stuff written lately about how little the online dating scene resembles ''real life''. As ever the simple fact is that men still 'pursue' and women 'pick'.... except that online, women get way more to pick from, which of course makes them even ''pickier'' (duh)! Plus some guys use the ''shotgun'' approach, pinging almost any and all women online. The net result is that a lot of gals simply receive LOTS of attention (like the one above who just started, and already gets at least 10 messages a week)! Throw in the fact that many gals often have no real interest in dating, let alone a relationship, and simply post a profile just to receive all that attention for a sort of ''self-esteem boost'' (aka, ''see, I still got it!''). Plus the fact that any reasonably attractive woman regularly gets hit on in real life... often A LOT (so what's it say when they come here)? And yeah, there are the occasional few who do ''beat the odds'' (kinda like winning the lottery), but realistically it pretty quickly becomes obvious that at least for most men, online dating ain't all it's cracked up to be. Far better chances (and better choices) going ''old school'', meeting folks thru friends, work, church, classes, volunteering, even bars!! But hey, just keep on with all those Meet Me's and Flirts... a lotta gals still love the attention!!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 515 (view)

3 Strikes - out. No more widowers ! Posted: 12/10/2012 7:31:02 PM
^ ^ So, do you think that ''men, including widowers'', are the only ones to ever do that? Although if that's the only thing that y'all can ever find to talk about, sounds like there are much larger issues between the both of you, than just your (respective) ''ex-es''!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 492 (view)

3 Strikes - out. No more widowers ! Posted: 12/8/2012 7:03:02 AM
Have dated both and folks are gonna have baggage either way. Although in some ways, I often find widowed gals (and presumably not too recently widowed), to be generally less prone to "issues" left over from divorces and previous bad relationships. And if they're widowed, at least you know they're already capable of having a decent relationship!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 28 (view)

Observations on a decade of internet dating... Posted: 7/2/2012 9:01:53 AM
Something has changed in here and it isn't just me. People are different...women are different. Interesting thread... thanks! And I agree that things aren't quite as they appear to be re: the "promise" of online dating. But seldom mentioned is the very nature of the internet... the anonymity, the lack of accountability, the "remoteness"... and how these qualities may actually be "attracting" certain kinds of people you normally wouldn't encounter IRL ("in real life")! And what sorta folks might those be, but the very people who don't do well with human relationships in the first place?! Except here they try to "disguise" it (often from themselves as well), usually by going on about the importance of things like their "relationship" with their pet (who's also their "best friend"), or else they emphasize their need for "independence", "space", "just dating- nothing serious", "I am who I am", "confirmed in my singleness", etc., etc.. Which is fine, but if you're seeking someone who's "emotionally available" or has any interest in "partnership" or genuine "intimacy"... not so much. And that also seems to be true even for many of the ones who claim they're seeking "true romance" or "the last great love of their life", etc.... except until you read between the lines of even their profile, and it's clear they're not seeking a "partner", they really only want a clone or a glorified 'roommate'! No doubt there are "exceptions" and folks who've been "successful" with online dating, but I suspect those are pretty few and far between (or else they've finally found that ideal "roommate" or someone who just makes a good "pet", and doesn't expect much)! So if one is looking for reasonably "whole" and "emotionally available" singles to date, these days IMO it's still best to stick to "IRL" (volunteer groups, church & political groups, friends, special interests, etc.). On the other hand, if you're the type who thinks a bar is a good place to find a mate, then probably online dating will also work just fine... ;-p

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 219 (view)

How Would You Fix CA? Posted: 1/29/2012 5:03:28 PM
The one Mexican I did hire when I was a contractor was my clue.... After several years on my payroll... I finally confronted him and asked him if he was here legally. He confessed that he wasn’t. Yes, we know about your "no authority", etc..... although apparently you did have suspicions, and yet you still never bothered to "confront him" until AFTER you had the benefit of his presumably cheaper labor "for several years", in fact you said nothing until after he had finally moved on... isn't that right?! So how are you any different from any other employer that simply pleads "ignorance"? And seems to me that instead of somehow being "harmed" by "illegals", you've actually personally benefited!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 33 (view)

Love Posted: 1/29/2012 11:51:54 AM
...in my case iv'e had the worst of luck. it's been like this for a very long time. then again, im the type of person that believes in black and white and i hate sugar coating things. that might be my downfall. i don't know. im just always wondering when will i meet that special person. Understood, and no offense, but do you think that profile pic featuring you being kissed by some gal, might have anything to do with it...?

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 212 (view)

How Would You Fix CA? Posted: 1/29/2012 11:42:34 AM
Since you don't know WHY illegal immigration is being ENCOURAGED by the establishment- I will advise you. It is for VOTES. So "illegals" can vote now?! Hey, that's a new one!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 35 (view)

Spoiled Posted: 1/28/2012 9:21:23 AM
Well, perhaps what we're really talking about, is the difference between the folks who are seeking a "peer" and just wanna make sure they can both hold up "their end".... and the "other" kind, who are simply looking for an opportunity "to live in the style to which they'd like to become accustomed"!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 199 (view)

How Would You Fix CA? Posted: 1/28/2012 8:06:40 AM
Having dealt with the department of health, irs, edd and state fund insurance. Jumping through hoops n back again to comply with all the rules and regulations conditions of participation, audits, surveys etc . Only for the state to go against their own nurse practice act and pay for unlicensed unskilled caregivers (mostly illegals). Fuk em all I aint sittin on my keister cuz im lazy Im sittin on my big ass Nalgas in contempt and protest! (That was my little rant in whats goin on with the Home Health Industry) No, actually I hear 'ya, having come from a completely different industry (and locale) before retiring and relocating to Cali once again. LOTS of retirees around my neck of the woods here, so plenty of local demand for Home Health Care, and being fairly active & healthy myself, I started doing some volunteer work. Wow, what an eye-opener that's been, and on so many levels... economic, professional, social, racial, and cultural... and all within the ever-tightening vise of a down economy in a mostly rural & Ag region, that was never that wealthy even on a good day! Throw in being a local landlord, and let's just say, it's all been very "educational", and that the "realities" are often complicated, and sometimes even counter-intuitive, compared to the easy, knee-jerk "blame-game".

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 32 (view)

Spoiled Posted: 1/28/2012 7:53:02 AM
Maybe neither of us is totally wrong and the 'better' (non-materialistic) women simply do not frequent sites like this and yahoo personals? Perhaps the men they seek are not here. There's probably a lot of truth to that observation, just like the old adage that "you get what you pay for". Or like the difference in "clientele" between Nordstrom's and let's say, Walmart!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 5 (view)

IS NURSES THE NUMBER ONE PROFESSION ON PLENTYOFFISH Posted: 1/28/2012 7:42:12 AM
OMG, that sounds incredible (and she's a good church-going gal too!)... hmm, I wonder if she ever makes "house calls"?!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 3 (view)

IS NURSES THE NUMBER ONE PROFESSION ON PLENTYOFFISH Posted: 1/27/2012 8:52:34 PM
Good observation, and might have something to do with the fact that among the professions, the divorce rate for nursing is fairly high (in the top 10)! Oh, and apparently massage therapists don't do so well either! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/16/AR2010091607509.html

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 189 (view)

How Would You Fix CA? Posted: 1/27/2012 4:32:49 PM
For those just joining us, welcome to the “How to Fix California” thread (aka, “I’m feeling angry, broke, unloved & unemployed, but let’s just blame it all on the Mez-kins & Libruls, ‘cuz I’m too lazy to get off my keister and actually do anything about it”)!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 18 (view)

Not single but on POF Posted: 1/27/2012 9:16:45 AM
I took my glasses, make up and earings off rolled up my sleeves im ready to rock n roll! Whoah, slow down girl, you know how we "librul" types feel about "defense" issues (LOL!).... although that's still a nice look either way!

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 163 (view)

How Would You Fix CA? Posted: 1/26/2012 2:37:39 PM
You should read up about this stuff before you bray. So in other words, as a "native", you feel "entitled" to receive a job here, just like you feel "entitled" to insult anyone who disagrees with you (and they wonder why no one wants to hire 'em... LOL)?! Look, if you look deeper into these issues, it has to do with social engineering from the top down. The same people who push feminism/abortion, multiculturalism and anti-white bigotry, open borders and massive third world immigration....are the same people who are gloating that whites will soon be a minority.... So OK, then just continue to support the "other" side, you know, those swell folks who wanna "Chinafy" the U.S. for their corporate pals, by reducing your pay, making you work longer hours without compensation, take away your social security, health care, social safety net, job protections, bargaining rights, clean air, food and water... then give the rich another tax cut, and ultimately send your job overseas! Hey great idea, let's all vote GOP (but at least they'll always give us someone else to blame... illegals, feminists, gays, "white bigots", etc.)! Or as the story goes, a rich man sits down at a table, along with a poor white guy and a poor black guy (or "immigrant" in this case). There's a plate of cookies on the table, so the rich guy immediately takes all the cookies but one, and says to the white guy, "you better hurry up and get that last cookie before that other guy takes it from you!"

mateo45

Joined: 1/17/2008

Msg: 14 (view)

Not single but on POF Posted: 1/26/2012 1:56:05 PM
Sorry, but that's not the sorta "contact sport" I usually prefer.... especially if they're wearing, um, "glasses" (and stylish ones too)!

Show ALL Forums