Can you say whacky reality ?

(want to know what is wrong with society? Add this. Is Dr.Ruth in the house?)
Let me introduce this person who is a blogger. She must be first rate if she’s on HuffPo.

    “Featured as one of the Top 100 Sex Bloggers of 2012, Charlie N___ has been dishing out dating advice since middle school.”

    “In addition to writing and speaking, Charlie is a boutique sex and dating coach. She works with all kinds of clients, but specializes in those who have specific and often significant barriers to dating — she prefers to call it Extreme Dating!”

Fame and all ….

Okay, so she says she is a “sex and dating coach”. Now to the point, I read this column of hers. I know, why would I? Not sure, but the comments beneath it at least were rational, so there are sane, thinking people out there. But in her words in this column were some interestingly strange tidbits.

The tip-off is probably in the title, “Oops, I slept with your boyfriend“.

    “I think of myself as a woman of integrity, a lady of honor, an upstanding broad. If you had asked me when I was in high school if I’d ever sleep with a man I knew was otherwise entangled, I would have given a proud and emphatic “no way, sister.”

Well, she has integrity.. So far so good.

    “But as I got older, this view of relationships, among other things, got complicated. I’ve been married, separated, divorced, monogamous, polyamorous, celibate, and in recent years I’ve once in a while been the “other woman.” “

Okay, that begins it; just imagine similar rationalizations for ‘anything goes’ after that.

Then she makes a point to say she wants only consensual and intentional sex, without the pretense that “it just happened”. It must be deliberate. Ah, a hint of limits. (sigh)

Then, there is the 50 dollar statement at the end, after saying what all she does, did, or would do. She said, before you worry, her friends’ boyfriends are taboo — well sort of.
So there is the pretense that there are limits beyond which even she will not cross… or maybe not. Remember, she is a professional.

“I’m sure some women will read this and worry about being friends with me. Up until now I’ve never slept with one of my friend’s boyfriends. I can’t imagine a situation in which that would feel right in my body. There are a whole other set of promises and agreements between me and my friends.

Maybe we don’t have a promise to not f*** each other’s partners, but we do have promises around caring for each other and if I thought my friend would be upset, I suspect I wouldn’t be turned on.

But if for some reason I am there with my friend’s boyfriend, and we have a crazy intense connection and sleeping with him doesn’t feel wrong in my body, I might do it. I feel the need however to emphasize that despite an incredibly vivid imagination, I can’t actually imagine any scenario in which this would happen.”

Okay, this is not my normal thing to blog on but this one just rang the “gong bell” and did a drum roll. People wonder what is wrong with society? She is a professional sex coach. I’m sorry I cannot spell out all the irony there. It does, however, make you wonder who her clients are? Then she nails the rationalization box shut with this:

    “Relationships are complicated; and emotions and promises and sex and bodies are complicated. I don’t think it’s possible to make absolute rules.”

Well, now that we got the rule book out of the way…. I could have saved her a whole lot of time and all that self-absorbed, unnecessary excuse-making — especially the posturing about a pretense of limits when there are none — by just saying: “my view on sex is that there are no limits as long as you can rationalize it, just do it”.

So there you go, a glimpse into the culture we like to poke fun at and criticize. Que the Twilight Zone music. I really don’t want to know if she votes, based on her rationalizations. I’m not sure if she makes decisions, or only excuses. But a “sex coach”? She found her little niche in life, even if it includes ruining someone else’s life, or countless others’. This is a long way from “Dear Abby”. Possibly Bob Filner has a future as a sex coach?

Newtown horror, town loses its innocence

I’ve been searching for ways to talk about the unspeakable horror in Newtown, Ct. It’s tough to come to this point. Churchill said “Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing…after they have exhausted all other possibilities.”

In this case, the point may not be exhausting all other avenues but finding the words to express it. We’re told that it is important to talk about feelings. Liberals banter that philosophy around a lot. However, I don’t think it is important to talk about every little or large feeling one may have. Some of them may be better kept private between him/her and God.

But I’ll  say that, on something like this matter, thoughts should not be kept personal. On that I’d agree with liberals, though it doesn’t mean I agree with their methodology or conclusions. It was a horrible event causing personal and mass sadness. I’m offended by evil. I grieve for the victims, families and children. “Tragedy” does not do it justice.

Somewhere on the web I saw this thought:

The time when all the politicians tell you “Today is not the day” is EXACTLY the day to start talking. You talk when the armies of lobbyists haven’t got their ground game down, you talk before the talking points are distributed, you talk when the public eye is focused like a laser onto those in power whose only goal should be making our lives better and our children safer but do neither in a quest for more personal gain. To not hold them accountable and do anything less is dereliction of duty. — unknown

Mourners gather for a vigil service for victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, at the St. Rose of Lima Roman Catholic Church in Newtown, Conn. Friday, Dec. 14, 2012.

Are we all talking about the same world? One where a video critical of Islam results in burning embassies; and a world where Liberals advocate sharing every feeling one has? Yet they slam you if you dare offend persons of a certain persuasion, while advocating attacks on their own political enemies. That world, in which liberals are judge and jury on free speech.

I found my voice and apparently so has the NRA in issuing a press statement that its several days of silence was “out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency.” Don’t count on mutual “respect” from media or the left. MSNBC went into political-mode almost immediately. Then Ibama, hijacking the memorial service to further politicize it, stepped it up.

Sorry about the rambling but there is a central theme to it all. It’s the same world where progressives want to make all the rules, “rules of the road”. Now they claim that everyone should be so offended by this event in Newtown that it should bring about “meaningful action and change”– defined by the left, of course. Obama says it calls for action. But their idea of action is one thing, what is truly called for is another.

Conservatives have long railed about the coarsening of culture, or the sickness of it. That criticism gets dismissed whenever they bring it up. Oh, the glories of enlightenment. But we have something like this happen and they clamour for action and legislation.    Would they want to crack down on violent video games and movies? No, they just want to blame guns for causing this horror. The gun didn’t pull the trigger, a madman did. Yet when we blame the culture and misplaced values it gets dismissed. “Sit down and shut up.”

They don’t want to deal with that aspect. Just do a few photo ops with clergy and family, then run to Washington asap to pass new laws and regulations. It doesn’t matter if they are right or not, just hurry up and do something to satisfy their feelings – the quicker the better. Strike while the iron is hot is their motto. Emotions rule.

In fact, they really don’t want to discuss” the issue, they want immediate action. Remember Pelosi saying “we have to pass a bill before you can find out what is in it”. That pretty much sums up their rush to legislate philosophy. Then we get a Casablanca moment, “shocked”. Don’t listen to their disingenuous, dishonest talk and calls for dialogue, look at what they do. Now, despite the tough reelection, Obama now claims another mandate for his arsenal — to legislate guns.

But cry out about government inaction over fast and furious or Libya? Not so much. They’ll drag their feet till the cows come home on those issues. And Obama will use executive power to halt the inquiry into F&F. Congress will stage a walkout. Mr. Zero-accountability will hide his failures behind executive privilege. But he’s right on point when it comes to attacking the 2nd amendment, and Congress can’t move fast enough for him to legislate. “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

They don’t want to merely act, they want to legislate by emotion. That’s nothing new for liberals, it’s what they do, even if bureaucrats are still writing it. Emotions rule, from Roe to the bench to the purse. When anyone mentions the coarsening culture of death, they don’t want to hear it. They staged a phony “war on women” and started a “war on religion” to create their self-fulfilling prophecy. They mocked any talk of “death panels” in ObamaCare, they ridicule pro-lifers, and defend murdering babies as a right. But the biggest problem is guns.(culture is giving that a run for their money) They don’t even want to recognize evil for what it is when staring it right in the face, or in the mirror.

There is as much potential harm in the legislative pen or executive order, as there is any gun. Both must be used responsibly.

There are two bodies in Congress, the Senate is known as the cooling saucer. But in this case — and never mind that the leader of the Senate is waging nuclear war on the filibuster — the Senate is moving at breakneck speed to get out a bill on gun control. The man who couldn’t get a budget through will suddenly find all kinds of ways to move this. Plus Obama has the executive pen which he promised to use in other circumstances. A scary thought when you think the second amendment is on the chopping block.

Especially considering if they sense support for more legislative controls, they will go as far as they can like they always do. If they have one chance, then grab as much as they possibly can while they can — just like with ObamaCare, the stimulus and the rest. “Take it to the limit”. Feinstein wants incremental controls, and then make it illegal to possess certain guns to top it off. And they will smile all the way to the scrap yards. That’s their plan and they’re sticking to it. They have useful MSM idiots who will push the issue.

So Manchin and Warner go wobbley on guns. Really, who would have predicted that? A Democrat turn coat. Remember Bart Stupak, Democrats for life and ObamaCare? That was the illusion of dissent. Then we saw DNC’s convention against God and Israel? — there was the real dissent.

Newtown lost its innocence and was violated. And innocence was lost in the public square… quite some time ago.