6-22-2004 Cry babies

As much as some might try to marginalize this film as a screed against President George Bush, "F9/11" — as we saw last night — is a tribute to patriotism, to the American sense of duty — and at the same time a indictment of stupidity and avarice.-- Roger Friedman

Ethel, come on, man. Who really gives a farg about Michael Moore? At what temperature will a windbag explode? He reminds me of those kids in gym class that just about cried when faced with the prospect of tackling the parallel bars while everyone else watched. Consider the perpetual torment this guy faced for years and years. While the other guys bonded, did what guys do with wiffle balls, or basketballs and then headed for the showers needling each other afterwards...he was most likely terrorized beyond words. "Take my jock off? In front of the other boys?" It's not anyone's fault, especially not Dubya's, that this guy was the butt of so many bra jokes during those formulative years. Yet another disjointed hero of the fractured left.

And then there's this from an avowed leftie: "The Unfairenheit 9/11"

Let's try a quick snippet, shall we?

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.



...refrain from posting on the forum and calling the Wilkes-Barre Fire Fighters anymore names. I'm sure they can hack it, but I don't think they need to hear too more much flak. I came home today to find them called "cry babies," and while we're all entitled to our varied opinions, I feel as if I have emboldened others to go to hacking on them, and that was never my intention.

The only reason I ever took issue with any of their comments in the forum was because I thought they could handle it coming from one of their biggest, loudest supporters. Sure, I sent a few less than flattering adjectives their way, but I thought they would remember that any of my observations or criticsms were coming from a supporter of theirs. And I still believe that to be the fact of the matter, once they (whomever they may be) calm down and take stock of things.

In it's current configuration, anyone can post just about anything on the forum page and we don't even know if it's the work of two, three, or even ten people. With that in mind, there's really no point in any further rancorous back-and-forth between folks still clinging to their anonymity.

Do I believe that marching en masse on City Hall and demanding that City Council give up their health bennies is the logical next step for city employees in any department that was cut-back? Not at all. It smacks of revenge and really wouldn't amount to too much as far as monetary savings are concerned. I think council should do that on their own as a sign of good faith and exemplary leadership. And I still maintain that going toe-to-toe with our elected officials every time some very tough, but unpopular decisions come down is totally counterproductive coming from those affected by said decisions as of this point in time. Many will beg to differ with that.

But with all of that said, and then considering that what we might be doing is responding to the same two or three anonymous blowhards over and over, maybe it's time we give it a rest.

After all of the "Nazi Stormtrooper, hysterical girls, and cry babies" comments have finally wafted back to Earth, the fact of the matter is we are heaping unearned insults on those sworn to protect us because of a few people that still lack enough testicle matter to stand behind their prolific and public comments. We're back to that, heyna? I wish I had never gotten this mostly unseemly ball rolling, but I also wish some others would think before they blindly rage on the internet.

Consider people like Ethel. She does her level best to be the Darth DemVader to my Luke RepSkyWalker, and yet, no one has forcibly entered her home and raped any member of her vast Slinky collection. We've also had a few fire fighters post their thoughts on the forum, and despite the safety from retribution that the anonymous folks cite as their need to remain nameless, not one of the folks with enough balls to use their name has been fired, or sent off to some distant corner of the city to repaint yet another repainted hydrant.

Maybe we do need a touch of censorship here. Rather than slugging it out with the mouthy nameless in the future, maybe I should just use one short keystroke and send them back to SAYSOVille, the original home of the phony brave that hope to sound intelligent and start some sort of scrum at the same time.

From that forum:

[> Re: INFO -- Capt. (Bro) Bill W-B FD, 11:01:07 06/21/04 Mon [1]

HOW DARE YOU!Your fire fighters are far from cry babies. We are trying to protect YOUR safety as wall as keep ourselves safe. When you go to work- do you know you are coming home? We don't. When you go to work do you have to see other peoples troubles and pain and suffering.Then try to deal with it. I hope to GOD you don't. When we try to keep those we protect safe as well as give OUR families some peace of mind DON'T YOU EVER CALL US CRY BABIES. It's people like you who cause these rifts.

10-4! He sounds much like I did a while back.

Anywho, any future rifts WILL be caused by those that are more than willing to post their names. Don't give me any further bullspit about the new mayor coming after you. I really don't want to hear it. As far as I'm concerned, it's now open season on internet anonymity. I, for one, will not get suckered into another stealthy brouhaha with folks, that for all we know, might not be who they say they are. It's high time we drew a line in the soot.

Cry babies?

Again, from that forum:

Maybe then we can see that there are real men on this dept. and not just a bunch of cry babies.

Right or wrong, while I reserve the right to tell any fire fighter in this city what I think of their performance, I know all too well that the term "real men" aptly describes the great majority of them.

I could care less if the forum page dries up and blows away into some cyber-net for wayward forums. But the time has now come for some above board back-and-forth, rather than what we've become accustomed to lately. And if I somehow facilitated that rapid slide towards mediocrity, I am regretful.

And to whomever, thanks for throwing my words back at me:

Here, here! BANG! The mayor can vilify the hose dudes all he wants for his own political benefit. The fact of the matter is, when the grandkids are trapped in a burning building, nobody calls the mayor. When some proud senior citizen who’s body is slipping a tad falls and breaks something and lies crying on the street and are totally ashamed by their age-induced vulnerability, they don’t want to see the mayor. When the cars collide, or roll over, nobody dials 821-8111. When somebody that thinks they’ve had enough of life’s trials and tribulations jumps off of a bridge, the mayor doesn’t get wet when the water rescue ensues. When a heart stops, the mayor doesn’t get paged. He doesn’t have to respond to a 10-45 call and remove a body that was a person only minutes, or hours before they were called. When the worst thing imaginable happens to you, or your family, “who ya’ gonna’ call?”

The Wilkes-Barre Fire Department.

Despite the non-stop abuse the mayor shovels onto them every chance he gets, they are only a 911 phone call and four minutes away. They are the “real world.”

Now, how do we get those freakin' engines put back into service? How do we arrive at the per-shift staffing levels that will be acceptable to almost everyone involved? This is just my educated guess, but I'd estimate that there are two, maybe three people currently employed by this city that can make that happen. Who will step forward and make that happen?

Yikes! This is the first time I received an e-mail for Father's Day:

*******haPpPy fathers day daddy.. im too poor this year.. and i feel bad!!!! :( u rock.. i love ya!!! hehe..*******

Don't be fooled by that. She's loaded! Actually, she's saving her money and then some. I'll be fine without those Cincinnati Bengals underwear I had my heart set on. No electronic Risk! this year. No ties ugly enough to make even Dan Flood's outlandish mustache seem palatable to most. No Joe Nardone's gift certificates. Whoa! I'm beginning to get a bit pissed here. Nah, just kidding. If my kids end up with ten times more than I ever dreamed of having, that'd suit me just fine. But don't be fooled in the least. She's freakin' loaded.

What's wrong with this picture? A man in his thirties carries on a sexual relationship with a boy aged 15 for ten years. Yukkie, but whatever. The fling ended earlier this year, but the older guy wants to rekindle (Yuk!) things. The younger guy says no to any further anal probes. The older guy then threatens to "out" the former boy toy.

At that point, if you're the former pushee, what would you do? I'm thinking something along the lines of siccing the cops on the older guy that never realized exactly what a black hole actually was. Forget that. The kid reaches for his rifle and goes Clint Eastwood on the long-time predator. So, I'm following this story and I'm thinking the kid would have been better served if he threatened the perve with the cops.

So I got home from work yesterday and the phone rang. It was my son. He proceeded to tell me that one of his close friends brought the shooter to his house a while back to, as always, jam on the guitars. According to my kid, this guy had only four beers and he was running into walls and appliances. In his words, "He was sh*t-faced on only four beers." He told his good buddy to never, ever bring this goof to his home again. So what?

From what the media is reporting, these two guys were splitting a case of beer when all hell broke loose and resulted in a homicide. So I'm thinking, if only four beers had my kid just about ready to kick this kid's ass out of his house, let alone off of the planet; how in the hell does he split a case of beer with anyone and still maintain his faculties?

I'm certainly no wannabe defense attorney, so I'm asking if there is some legal difference between killing some persistent pervert when one is well beyond legally drunk, or when one is completely sober. Could that result in a lesser charge? Or a lesser sentence?

You tell me, man. I just read the papers.

From the e-mail inbox:

Cowboys? What would Michael Moore have to say about cowboys?


People in Texas have trouble with all those shalts and shalt nots in the 10 Commandments. Folks there just ain't used to talkin' in those terms. So, some folks out in west Texas got together and translated the "King James" into "King Ranch" language.

(Ten Commandments cowboy style, The Cowboy's Ten Commandments posted on the wall at Cross Trails Church in Fairlie, Texas).

(1) Just one God.
(2) Honor yer Ma & Pa.
(3) No telling tales or gossipin'.
(4) Git yourself to Sunday meeting.
(5) Put nothin' before God.
(6) No foolin' around with another feller's gal (or another gal's feller).
(7) No killin'.
(8) Watch yer mouth.
(9) Don't take what ain't yers.
(10) Don't be hankerin' after yer buddy's stuff.

Now that's kinda plain an' simple don't ya think? Y'all have a good Day.
Ya hear?