Raf

Plain old Star Trek No bloody Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager OR Enterprise.

Finally decided I was going to tell my wife who's the boss. "Honey," I said, proudly, "I've read the Bible and I'm going to assert myself as the head of this household. That's right, I'm the head of this house and you will submit to me!" Well, I didn't see her for a week. After that, I could see her a little bit out of my right eye...

Nice. Nice. Those are the only three categories listed. The Media Other [presumably non-Way] Christians Disgruntled former followers How about this for a category, JAL: Former followers. Not disgruntled. Shun the judgmental adjective. You have NO RIGHT to refer to me or anyone else as disgruntled, a word you use to dismiss the valid complaints being made by those who have every right to stand up to treachery of VPW.

$5 a pack: 5 packs a week... 52 weeks a year... $1,300. A year. That's a mortgage payment. (No, they're not up to $5 a pack, but some weeks are more than 5 packs, so it balances out).

An amazing thing just happened. I read this over and over again, and the more I read it, the less I cared. Look, it just happened again! Wow. No matter how many times I read it, I find that I COULD care less, and I instantly do!

Awesome pic choices!

Day 5. Actually thinking less about it, except that the pill does cause a tiny bit of nausea (I'm supposed to take it on a full stomach and I never do) and the quitting causes... well, you don't need to hear that. Let's just say I have extra reading time and leave it at that. I'm still "tasting" that residue in my mouth. Looking forward to being rid of that. No actual cravings, although I do get "habit cravings," the desire to smoke as something to do: the absence of a desire for an actual cigarette negates this craving rather effectively.

Whew, that's a lotta questions. I live in Fort Lauderdale, about a half hour north of Miami. If you're coming after October 15 and you want to try some really good seafood, I suggest Joe's Stone Crab. Stone crabs can only be harvested from Oct. 15 to May 15, so if you go on the 10/16 or later, you're guaranteed fresh (not frozen) stuff. If you get the babysitter: Because I don't know your age, I can't tell you whether South Beach would be any fun. I haven't been there in a long time: it's not fun for me anymore. Call me old. With the family, try to carve out some time to visit the Miami Seaquarium. Think of it as a low-rent SeaWorld, without the ride gimmicks. There's also the MetroZoo and (a kid-favorite) Parrot Jungle Island. And, of course, you've got the Everglades nearby, too. One thing I haven't done in a long time is a bicycle tour of Shark Valley (deceptively named: you won't see sharks). You basically ride along a 15-mile paved path through the Everglades. It is lovely. One warning (and it's a big one): if there's an actual alligator in your path, you miiiiight want to just wait until it decides it's good and ready to move. Or you might just want to turn back. They usually stay away from the path, though. I have never heard of an alligator attack incident in Shark Valley, and I've been here nine years. It pretty much doesn't happen. But you do end up seeing them from a couple of hundred yeards, and I once saw one sprinting (not toward me), which was a real hoot. Hmm. I was going to direct you to the famous "Calle Ocho," but after that, I honestly wouldn't know what to tell you. I don't eat much in Miami. Three, three-and-a-half or so. And that last leg seems endless. But there's fun to be had along the way. Stop off at Pennekamp State Park, the original Tiki Bar, or the Islamorada (pronounced "eye-la-more-ah-da") Fish Company for fun, drink and food (in that order). You may also want to pay us a visit in Fort Lauderdale: we've got a fun little science museum kids love, a family-friendly beach and a nice shopping strip on Las Olas Blvd. Speaking of shopping, be sure to check out the mammoth Sawgrass Mills Mall and, for bargains, the Swap Shop. Hope so. Look me up while you're here. We'll grab foodstuffs.

Well, I can't speak for the laws in those states, as I am not familiar with them. The AP Stylebook and Libel Manual (1992) states: But that's old. So I looked for a more recent AP Stylebook. In it, I find no mention of libeling the dead. But I'd rather move away from that argument anyway, as it would justify saying ANYTHING about VPW, whether true or knowingly false (e.g., VPW raped pigs while teaching). The real issue being asked here seems to be: Is it libel to call VPW a rapist? Let's assume VPW is alive, if only because we all agree the matter of whether he is breathing at this time has no bearing on our moral obligation to be truthful and/or to make our statements/opinions in good faith. In order to prevail in a libel suit, the plaintiff has to prove five things (according to the AP Stylebook 2007): If I were counsel for the defense, I would: Concede item [1]. Argue that under item [2], the statement is a legal opinion based on the testimony of witnesses. Call the witnesses to prove the statement is true under item [3]. Concede item [4]. Argue under item [5] that because I firmly believe the accounts of the witnesses who testified for item [3], even if I may be wrong about item [3] and the court may disagree with me on item [2], I made the statement in good faith. Thus there was no "actual malice," which in legal terms means the statement was not made with the knowledge that it was false. I'm not a judge, so I can't tell you whether my "defense" would prevail, or whether that would vary state to state. Context is also key. By itself, the statement "VPW is a rapist" would probably be libelous. However, this board can be considered, in many ways, an ongoing conversation, so it's perfectly fair for the person who makes the statement to defend himself by citing the information that led him to this conclusion. Thus, even though the words "VPW is a rapist" were used, the full meaning of the statement in the ongoing conversation is "I believe VPW is a rapist based on the previously discussed 'testimony' of a witness I trust." Now, if VPW were alive, he could sue over the statement that he is a rapist. But if he were to do so, he would subject himself to cross-examination from the witnesses who've now come forward. They, in turn, would need to drop their anonymity (most media would not run their names anyway). The person who made the statement "VPW is a rapist" would need to prove to a jury either that the statement is true or that he had compelling reason to believe the statement is true. I don't know if this post answers anything, but at least it gives some perspective from someone who writes about people's alleged criminal behavior all the time.

Anyone know where the letter went? I don't see it anywhere.

Then why haven't we gotten into trouble? By the way, you can express a legal opinion, even as fact, so long as you are not doing so under a veneer of "objectivity." For example, I can say "O.J. Simpson killed two people and got away with it." He can't sue me for that. But if I wrote it as a journalist in a non-opinion story, I could get sued.

Legally, you cannot libel the dead, so the discussion pretty durned well ends there. TWI has no legal standing to sue to protect Wierwille's reputation because, legally, Wierwille HAS no reputation. Reputation, in the law, expires on the same date as the person who has the reputation. Legacy has no legal standing. That said, I feel perfectly confident in calling VPW a smooth-talking snake oil salesman who abused his position as a minister and twisted the plain meaning of scripture in order to satisfy his lust for sex, money and power. Sue away!

As I said, I don't think I need to break the habit while I'm OUT of my routine. I've shown that I can do that. Unless I can break the habit IN my routine, I won't succeed. I need to stop smoking while I drive. I need to stop take smoke breaks during work hours. I need to stop smoking outside my front door in the morning (mission accomplished there because I get up too early to get to work anyway). The thought of a cigarette right now digusts me, and that's new. If this drug works as advertized, I'm definitely feeling it. If it doesn't, then my mind has convinced me it does. Same effect. Right now, I don't WANT to smoke. And that's progress.

I do wonder if my lack of desire to smoke these last few days is real (a physical change due to taking Chantix) or psychological (my will power kicked in, just as it always COULD have whether or not I was taking a drug). I don't know for sure. I do know that I have not wanted a cigarette since Friday morning. Yesterday, for the first time in ages, I worked a full day without taking a puff. I think that's the key that's missing. The last time I was successful at quitting for a short time was about a year ago, when the family went to Georgia for a week's vacation. It was hard, and I craved, but I managed about 10 days. Then I got back to work, and puff! It's (relatively) easy to quit when I deviate from my routine. I need to quit when I'm IN my routine. Cigars, in the meantime, are a guilty pleasure I enjoy about once a year, if that.

Correct. I was afraid someone would put dumb and dumber, but I don't know many people who hate Clinton who think he's dumb. I would also have accepted Liar LIAR!!!!!!! or, LIARRRRRRRRR Liar.

So, looks like I tried to quit in 2005. For the record, I failed. Big time. Got much worse for a while there. Now I'm trying again. I have a wife and two stepdaughters to worry about (among other things). I've got a sister dying of an incurable disease and a best friend facing the end of his life due to esophagal cancer. He's in his 30s! I only started smoking about 5 years ago. Bad, I know. But supposedly that will make it easier to quit. Visited a doctor for a routine physical the other day, and he read me the anti-smoking riot act. Name it, he said it. "You stink." "You have ashtray breath." And much worse. He prescribed Chantix. I had my last cigarette at 11 a.m. Friday. I took my first pill at 11:05. I have not wanted one since. Still, I'm reading some things about this product that worry me. And my doc claims to have a 100% success rate, which I think is horseradish. I don't see any dispute about how it works: Nicotine attaches itself to receptors in your brain that release a small amount of dopamine. Chantix blocks those receptors, thus breaking the physical nicotine addiction. Behavioral addiction, on the other hand, needs to be addressed by the patient. And it looks like there are some danged troublesome side effects in a tiny minority of users. "Stop using if you have thoughts of suicide." WHAT?!?!?! So I'm being real careful and alerting my wife of things to look out for. If my behavior changes, the drug goes. I tried cold turkey. I failed. I tried gum. I failed. I tried the patch. I failed. I don't blame the methods. I lacked the will power. So here we go again: Round 500 in the I'm-going-to-quit-and-I-mean-it-this-time marathon. Will it work? Well, three days without so much as a craving is a good sign. If it's the drug, great - for now. If it's psychological, even BETTER! I still taste the tobacco residue in my mouth, even after three days. Here's hoping that goes away soon. DMiller, did you have more success than I did?

Sorry, yes, George was right. I'm lost ont he Sinestro quote, though. :)

A little bipartisan fun here. I think this has been done, but what the heck.

"Are you ready to begin?" "I-I can barely stand..." "Death does not wait for you to be ready! Death is not considerate, or fair! And make no mistake: here, you face Death."

Tequila Yam Debbie. Akilah and the Bee

Charlie's Angels

It's not that I prefer weather underground: it's just that the pic links work there. I can't get the NHC's to work.

That's more like it. :)

This has got "it's coming right for us" written all over it.

Been a nice season so far. No one wants to ruin it.