Last Commented Opinionated Blogs (1,911)

Let it not be said that I am ‘unteachable’ or that I cannot admit to my own mistakes.

Ok, this should clear up all the mess. This innovating self-installing applet will produce blogs to your order. Make your selection to customize the blog to your likings and click next.

The applet will scan all the blogs on CS for phrases relating to the category selected, which fall within the selected Language & Viciousness criteria and will use it to string together a blog that to satisfy the level of your reading skill.
Trade inquiries welcome. Copyright © Houwden Beck (2015).

Not working? Relax, I’m working on the problem. These teething problems can be expected during the first five years. I apologize for the inconvenience.

I’m sorry, I guess there won’t be a blog from me today. You may lodge your complaints in the usual way. The bright side is you don't have to read anything today.


May you have a prosperous day!

The member has chosen to disable the reading of this blog.

I never comment on blogs if they don’t allow comments. It is only fair to respect the wishes of the blog maker. In fact, I don't even bother reading them. If I cannot comment on a blog, I’m not really interested in the contents. Therefor I expect people to honor my wish by not reading this blog, but you may comment off the topic as usually.

I’ve been wondering if CS won’t see it fit to give us another button to prevent the reading of a blog. I’m sure some people will use it. I can imagine that it will drive some or our members crazy to know the contents of the blog if it cannot be read.

It could be a very handy feature if you want to vent an opinion that is so radical or so personal that you don’t want to splash it all over the blogs. It should not interfere with the comments in any significant way, as a large group of people doesn’t bother to read the blogs before they comment in any way. I mean, who needs a blog to comment? That is of course providing that it allows comments, but I cannot see much purpose in blocking both reading and commenting.

And maybe CS can give us another button on the blog list to filter out blogs that don’t allow reading and/or commenting. Then everybody can be happy. We cannot complain about what we don’t have to look at, can we? But then some people… Oh Catfoot, just shut up!

As an afterthought, maybe a ‘Critique’ category for blogs in that dropdown list when we post blogs. It appears to be a very popular topic at the present time.

Methinks if you criticize those who criticized somebody else, it makes you a hypocrite. Stealing from a thief does not make stealing noble and telling a lie to a liar does not amount to the truth. It is like adding two negative numbers. You end up deeper in the red. Two wrongs do not make a right.

Hmm, I think something in the previous paragraph defines me as a hypocrite as well. I have deleted it and I deny that it ever existed. But it does not matter anymore; you never saw it because this blog does not allow reading.


May you enjoy this day.

I have read some hilarious write-ups about the various uses of this poor abused word. When you walk in the street or watch a movie, you hear it in almost every second sentence, but it is seldom used for its real purpose.

When you disregard the actual meaning of the word, you can usually replace it with more acceptable words, like bloody, blooming, frigging, damn, hell, spoiled, broken, or something similar.

But when does a word become bad? If I say I want a bloody steak, it may mean that literally or I may simply be using strong language. So, the word per se is not bad, but rather the way we use it. But then again, if I call somebody a stupid fool, it is merely an insult and I will still get away with strong language if I call him a bloody fool, but if I should dare to replace stupid or bloody with the overworked F-Word, it is deemed as vulgar, and yet, I said the same thing in each instance.

We have an Afrikaans version of the word as well. It sounds very much the same but it does not have the same meaning of the (real) F-Word. We have another word for that, which causes even more confusion at times.

In my sixty-three years, I have never heard the word ‘fok’ being used in the s*xual context. It just does not have that meaning. Yet, it is an undesirable word and we teach out children not to use it.

I wonder what is so magic about the s*xual act that people are so fond of replacing dead normal words like broken or spoiled with it. Why would people take a normal sentence like ‘Who the heck broke my confounded watch?’ and replace three words in it with the F-Word?

Don’t they know other words to use in the stead? I’m sure that with all the English ‘strong’ words available, we can give our favorite F-word a well-deserved break.


A wonderful weekend to all of you.

Some of my friends believe that I eat my meat raw, but they are wrong. Generally my meat must be well done, especially if it is on a bone. If there is any redness against the bone, I stop eating it right there.

The only exception is rump steak. I’m talking about the beef variety now. Even kudu steaks must be well done. Not cremated or dry, just well done. But when it comes to a piece of rump steak, cut from a domesticated bovine creature, I eat it in a condition when a good veterinary surgeon will still be able to haul it through. I don’t mind if it moos at me when I put my fork into it. It must just not run away.

Do you like it the way I do?


Or do you also think as some of my friends do?


I don’t know why some of my friends believe that they are gods to demand that I bring them burned offerings.


Enjoy the day but don't burn your meat.

That is one of the basic laws of nature. That is why we plant seeds and why we breed animals. Providing food for ourselves is the largest industry on the planet. We don’t just harvest; we produce, we process, pack, and distribute food. We even preserve food for later use. This set us apart from other higher order animals.

But it is while producing food where we have the largest impact on nature. We need space to produce food and in the process, we deprive wild life of their natural habitat. And that brings us back to our basic law; eat or be eaten.

If we were to leave the animal population unchecked, we will soon be without food. Rodents and predators will spoil our harvest long before we can get to it.

Some animals are downright destructive. If a fox gets into a chicken pen, he does not catch one and leave. He will kill all before he leaves. A porcupine will not dig out one or two potatoes; he will ruin the potato field as far as he goes. A baboon in a cornfield is the worse nightmare to a farmer. He will leave hundreds of corn heads on the ground while he ate only one.

As we cannot reason with them or prosecute them in our courts, we have to control their numbers in order to survive. And if the culling process can produce more meat at the same time, why not utilize it? Rodents, like rabbits and porcupines, make good meat and should not be wasted. They breed fast and will never be eradicated. Warthogs and other wild pigs cause massive damage to vegetable harvests while they are very edible.

And this affects you whether you eat meat or not. If animals are allowed to destroy our harvests, you will soon be without vegetables to eat. Animals have to die to put veggies on our tables. A lot of animals died to produce the corn flakes you had this morning; probably more than what it took to produce my bacon and eggs.

To those who object to an animal being killed quick and clean: Have you seen how they are killed in nature? Predators start eating their prey while they are still alive. Wild dogs does not even bother to kill their prey. They tear off chunks of flesh while the animal is still running. No, I fear humans kill their prey much more humanely.

Cruel as it may sound, and civilized as we are, we still have to eat or be eaten.


I wish you a grand day and try to keep your food down.

First impressions are never wrong, or so some people believe. I’m inclined to disagree, because we seldom get the opportunity to test our fist impressions and very often we confuse something else with first impressions.

It takes about one tenth of a second to form a first impression and it is formed when we lay eyes on a stranger for the first time. It is based on visual appearance only and is a simple like or a dislike. When you instantly dislike the person, it is because your brain associates his looks with something or somebody that you already dislike. The same applies to those that you take an immediate liking to.

More than often, the stranger will walk on and you may never see him again. Those first impressions based on a fleeting moment of sight will remain untested forever unless if you happen to meet again.

When you have the chance to observe a stranger for a while, your first impressions are vastly expanded and overridden with a new set of data. You will be able to process some of his properties like age, race, culture, language, gender, personality, facial expressions, body language, accent, posture, and voice (amongst others) to form a much more accurate image of the person.

But this is no longer first impressions. You had ample time to sum him up while observing his mannerism and interaction with other people. It is a calculated assessment of the person. The accuracy of such an assessment depends on the time you had to observe him and your ability to judge people, but it can be clouded by your instant like or dislike of the person, as formed when you first saw him.

Keep your mind open. Don’t allow first impressions, formed in a tenth of a second, to obscure the virtues and the flaws of a stranger. He may be completely different from what you first perceived.


Have a marvelous day.

So.. we're seeing rainbows everywhere. with the new law that the US government made, there must be pros and cons. I, myself, am againts the law. not that I have homophobic or whatsoever. I tolerate their condition. yes. I have some friends that are LGBTs. I don't mind with them as long as they don't overacting or too vulgar. Because basically, PDA is just disgusting.

What I disagree is the law of the marriage itself. For me, marriage is supposed to create another human being. it's about a man and a woman, attracted by something and they're married and have children of their own. or maybe they adopt kids and nurture the kids together.

Maybe I'm a conventional person. On my mund, a family consists of a father, a mother and a child (or children). There's no a mother and a mother or a father and a father.a child needs both genders to be able to grow. a girl needs a mother to be a role model of how a woman should be, to help her when she has her first menstruation and all the womens thingies. a daughter also needs a father to be a role model on how a man should treat his woman.

the same thing goes to the son. a son needs a father how to be a gentleman and how to treat a woman (in a good way). a son also needs a mother for him to see what kind of person that he wants from a lady.

when the parents are the same gender, a child wont be able to see the difference. maybe, you will say, well I can be a mother and a father. yes, maybe we can, some single parent does it. But there will ve something missing in the childs life.


and from what I read, most people that are againts the law, are not againts the people. the supporters will mention tolerance. We tolerate the individuals. we don't mind (at least I don't mind). but I disagree with the law. not the person.

another thing about this debates, all my friends, who are pro woth the law, act like we're judging them, they are full of hatred toward the cons. while the cons, just giving informations. not a single bullying word came out from them.


anyway.. what I want to say is.. we all have this freedom of speech. people are allowed to speak their mind. but when the ones that speak out are the ones that againts us, we burst out in anger.

so, where is the freedom of speech??

I'm not condemning you who are pro to the law. I'm just writing to speak out my opinions. the law has been legalised anyway (not only in america, but also in other countries).

Have a good day/evening!

The next time when you walk into some fat cat’s home to see the skin of a large antelope on the floor with the head mounted against the wall, complete with a few framed photographs of him posing with a hunting rifle, standing with one foot on the fallen animal, think again. He may have bought all of it.

While some of the people (from local and overseas) coming on a one-week hunting safari are experienced hunters, the majority of them have never hunted in their lives. All that they’re interested is having the trophies with tangible ‘proof’ that they shot the animal. Some of them even believe that hunting large antelopes is a cakewalk after having fired at humans with an automatic assault rifle in a combat situation.

But there is a vast difference between hunting kudu and hunting humans. Unlike humans, who drop to the ground when wounded, the kudu will run off. He’ll return with a wide arc and wait for you somewhere next to his own track. He knows that you will come after him and if you run into him unawares, he will kill you. At a close distance, a rifle is quite useless.

To protect them against their own stupidity, inexperienced hunters are not allowed to hunt alone. They are assigned to a guide who is an experienced hunter. When the rookie aims and fire, the guide shoots as well to make sure the target goes down. And often the carcass only has one bullet hole, guaranteed to have come from the guide and not the ‘hunter’.

All that remains is to take a few photos of the ‘hunter’ posing over his kill, and the next day he goes home while his trophies are being processed and readied for export. And a few months later, when you walk into his house, you can admire the results of his African safari on the floor and against the wall.

I’m not a trophy hunter, but it annoyed me to look on while two American tourists claimed my kills. Aw well, they paid for it and I got the meat, so I should not complain too much.

If this is not a racket, I don’t want my name.


Have a great day!

That jarred is so sick and very twisted person