Last Commented Blogs (62,501)

The last time I was someone's type I gave blood lol

Sometimes choosing wrong words can create a rift in relationship.
Sometimes choosing wrong words can lead to war between two countries.
And sometimes choosing the correct words solves all the problems.

Your tongue is boneless but it can cause more damage than any weapon.

I'm on both sides of the fence when it comes to shoes on or off in the house. It wasn't an issue growing up in the 50's and 60's, I remember tile floors and shoes were optional. In the 70's most of the house had carpet. Vacuumed weekly and shampooed a few times a year. I was known to wear flip-flops or running shoes.

In the 80's I developed toenail fungus and a few treatments of Lamisil (at $200 each) reduced the severity, but never eradicated the fungus. Hint: The podiatrist said it was contacted from the many years I went without shoes.
Somewhere in the 90's I started wearing (light-weight) construction boots as I was a project manager and often I had to be on jobsites. I'd wear them all day, in or out.

One day while in the waiting room to see my doctor, an advertisement for Jublia came on the TV. It's a prescription strength anti-fungal liquid. I told my doctor, got the prescription and it actually worked. So 20+ years of chasing a cure for fungus was gone! I'm more careful about going without shoes, especially in areas of wet grass.

A girlfriend asked why I wore shoes in the house and my answer was simple. "FIRE... everybody out... FIRE!

Most of the people I know leave their shoes at the front door and walk around barefoot.

As a worker in clients houses, many insist my people remove their shoes. I have to remind them it's against OSHA safety regulations. If they were to get injured without safety shoes on, insurance would not cover the claim. I've asked if they want to sign a waiver to accept the cost of medical in the event someone would get hurt and not be wearing proper shoes.
Disposable booties/shoe covers were provided by the company.

Prior to booties becoming readily available, I've gone into clients houses and removed my shoes because they insisted. One family who professed their cleanliness had a dog. When I was done with the minimal visit of measuring and discussing the design, my socks were dirty AND collected dog hairs. Foolishly, I put my shoes on and right after, the bacteria contaminated my shoes that required me to dispose of them.

Fast forward... I come up the stairs, into my apartment, wipe my shoes on the mat, head to my studio and put my bag with job folders on the side table. If I plan to be in for a while, I'll remove my shoes and get into leather slippers.

There's a shoe storage box on the wall by the door that doesn't get used. When I go to my daughter's house they have a pile of shoes at the door and usually family/friends go barefoot or change to slippers as the upstairs rooms are carpeted. I keep my shoes on. If it's an issue, I'll wear booties.



Yahoo ran a story about shoes in the house and the opinions/experiences varied wildly.
The fear factor of lead based paint, bacteria and E. coli was over hyped.





Link:

List your favorite and if you want

Least favorite

And the reason why



Also if you can be bothered their best blog or comment

Stuck in South Park

There was this toddler that ran into the kitchen asking his mom the following question: Mummy why do grown ups go to heaven with their legs up in the air?
Mummy: Now that's not entirely true my dear.
Toddler: OH yes it's true Mummy, I just walked past aunty Millys bedroom window and aunt Milly was on her back with her legs in the air, screaming, "oh God I'm coming" but luckily uncle Bill was between her legs holding her down.



Oh it's a Saturday night and I ain't got no money....

This is a complicated subject and I'm having trouble wrapping my head around it.

US presidents definitely have a certain amount of legal immunity whilst carrying out the duties of their office and for good reason: if every Tom, d*ck and Harry were allowed to file civil suits against the president every time they disagreed with a statement, or decision, the president would not only be inhibited from free speech in the form of discussion and debate, but would soon be too bogged down with legal challenges to carry out their presidential duties.

Having said that, Article II, Section 4 provides: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The very existence of the impeachment provision surely means that presidential immunity is not absolute.

However, there appears to be some contention about when a president is and is not liable in criminal, or civil settings depending upon the action, the time of the action, statute of limitations, etc. Presidential immunty is relevant with respect to the civil and criminal cases currently faced by Donald Trump.

A civil suit was brought against Trump in 2021 by two police officers and about a dozen members of congress seeking damages for injury sustained during the January 6th breach of the Capitol. An appellate court consisting of a three judge panel has just unanimously ruled that Trump can be held civilly liable.

The ruling asserts that "The sole issue before us is whether President Trump has demonstrated an entitlement to official-act immunity for his actions leading up to and on January 6 as alleged in the complaints."

With this statement the appellate judges have bypassed any issue of actual liability, but have stated their ruling is only about the extent of presidential immunity.

The ruling went on to say, "We answer no, at least at this stage of proceedings." This means that their decision can be appealed, but if upheld these particular complainants may continue with their civil suit against Trump.

The appellate judges argued in their ruling, "When a first term president opts to seek a second term, his campaign to win re-election is not an offical presidential act. The Office of the Presidency as an institution is agnostic about who will occupy it next. And campaigning to gain that office is not an official act of that office."

This ruling perhaps has wider implications with respect to Trump's other suits, namely his criminal indictments in Washinton DC where he stands accused of conspiracy to overturn the results of the 2020 presdential election. Trump's defense currently centers upon his presidential immunity, but if his actions are deemed a part of his campaign, that defense becomes moot.

Why not negotiate a truce before more innocent lives are destroyed?

Ukrainian soldier admits some of the marines trying to defend a key river against Russian attack 'can't even swim'
December 4th 2023, 2:48:10 pm

A Ukrainian soldier told the BBC that soldiers sent to help defend recent Ukrainian advances on the Dnipro river were so inexperienced they couldnt even swim.



"Several brigades were supposed to be posted here, not individual companies — we just don't have enough men," said the soldier.

"There are a lot of young guys among us. We need people, but trained people, not the green ones we have there now. There are guys who had spent just three weeks in training and only managed to shoot a few times," he said.

"Everyone who wanted to volunteer for war came a long time ago — it's too hard now to tempt people with money. Now we're getting those who didn't manage to escape the draft. You'll laugh at this, but some of our marines can't even swim," the soldier added.

As the war with Russia approaches its second year, Ukraine is experiencing serious manpower problems and concerns that international support for its resistance to the invasion may be beginning to fade.

In the wake of the invasion, thousands of Ukrainians enlisted in the military. But amid steep casualty figures, these figures are believed to have dropped. Ukraine does not publish recruitment and enlistment figures.

Surely the puppet Zelensky has made enough money by now? He should have free and fair elections instead of jumping to the tune of his puppet masters.

In 1955, American musician Richard Berry wrote a song called Louie Louie about a Jamaican sailor returning home to see his lover. It was the B-side of the 45 record and didn't get much play until the Kingsmen released it in 1957, making it a rock and roll hit!

If you were a musician during that time, Louie Louie may have been the most requested song on your list. Sometimes, it was sometimes pronounced Louie Lou-eye and always there was a misinterpretation to the lyrics as the vocals weren't clear and nearly everyone said the lyrics were suggestive in nature... enough to have the song banned in a few parts of America. I remember rumors that the FBI were investigating the Kingsmen trying to decipher the supposed s*xual nature of the lyrics. True? I cannot say.

*** published LYRICS ***
{intro}
Louie Louie, oh no, you take me where ya gotta go
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, baby
Louie Louie, oh baby, take me where ya gotta go

A fine little girl, she waits for me
Me catch the ship across the sea
Me sailed that ship all alone
Me never think I'll make it home

Louie Louie, oh no no no, we gotta go
Oh no
Said Louie Louie, oh baby, me gotta go

Three nights and days I sailed the sea
Me think of girl constantly
On that ship, I dream she there
I smell the rose in her hair

Louie Louie, oh no, me gotta go
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, baby
Louie Louie, oh baby, said we gotta go
Okay, let's give it to 'em right now

{guitar solo}

Me see
Me see Jamaica, the moon above
It won't be long me see me love
Me take her in my arms and then
I tell her I'll never leave again

Louie Louie, oh no, we gotta go
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, baby
Louie Louie, oh baby, said we gotta go
I said we gotta go now
Let's hustle on out of here
Let's go


Sure, I played it and recall the Miami version...
My little girl is waiting for me, she gets her thrills on top of me...

I post stuff here to help expose what I think is wrong about Globalization. I believe in borders. If you wish to debate anything I post discuss it amongst yourselves or if no one else wants to engage your debate then discuss it among your inner voices. Feel free to post anything btw.

..... here we go

Speaking at the WEF, former head of the IMF's China division, Eswar Prasad: CBDC will be programmable, in a way that will enable governments to dictate how, when, where, on what and by whom they can be spent, including the imposition of expiry dates.

CBDCs are a totalitarian's wet dream, and would enable governments to centrally enforce tyrannical policies on an industrial scale—at the flick of a switch—without the need for human enforcement agents.

Not "up to date" with your injections? Exceeded your weekly carbon allowance? Ventured outside of your designated '15 minute' district? Oops, no money for you!

Source: youtube.com/watch?v=gyANVm…

Subscribe to us on Telegram: t.me/realwideawakem…

For more content like this, visit: wide-awake-media.com


And cash is not here to stay..... as the ECBDC wants everyone to believe.