I want to give my opinion about this latest scandal about Trump. I think America was fooled by him, his wife Melania was fooled by him, now the news is out, that his secret other wife, Pauline Turnbull will be moving into the Whitehouse. Trump has had to "please explain" and it's about time!
Well, is it really any wonder that the woman has finally had enough? To be augmented by Melania is one thing, but to be supplanted by his daughter is just taking it too far! So I can understand why Pauline is coming forward to take her rightful place, and it's big a me to say so.
I expect she will be taking positions of honour next to her spouse at functions, using the china she picked out:
and featuring her special menu:
Vetting the guest list to include only the top 1%,
I suppose she will be giving tours of the public rooms to dignitaries :
shopping for accessories down at the Free Market,
and last but not least, supervising the laundries, bleaching everything white.
WARNING, ADULT CONTENT, VIEWING FOR OVER 16 s ONLY.
The filter we put on the photos was deliberately chosen. It's called Thermal Imaging.
The subject is extra-marital affairs. Dalliances, romps, bits on the side.
" Passion is lightning and thunder of the soul, crashing waves of love, torrential lust, lava-hot kisses, body quaking, directed by storms of the heart. "
~Terri Guillemets, "Blank pages of an already filled journal," 2011
I have said it before on my blog : I am no saint. (I am a romantic. ) However, I will say two things I know for sure. The seven year itch is a real thing. Also the truth is that no matter how romantically you paint it, the outcome of affairs is always hurt , and guilt, for parties affected.
To compile this post, I read alot, including about twenty-first century dalliances that start on extramarital affair hookup sites. (By the way, that sounds more efficient and robotic than thrilling! Whatever happened to sideways looks across a crowded room? ) With all my research , however, I still believe what I said at the beginning - affairs are bad news, especially if you are a child of one of the participants. They are alot of fun, for the couple on heat, until they aren't .
There are s@xual affairs, emotional affairs, and ones with both. They are all just as devestating for the betrayed party, if /when they find out.
CAMILLA.
-------------
“well, there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded. " -Diana, Princess of Wales
― Cathy Lowne, Speeches that changed the world.
Camilla Parker -Bowles below, as a young woman. She was considered not virginal enough to marry Prince Charles, but that didn't stop her. She came from a family of unfaithful women, including a mistress of King Edward, and a mistress of Vita Sackville West. I suppose it was normal in her world.
Prince Charles' Pickup lines:
"Wanna hold the royal scepter?"
"If you think my ears are big..."
"Come upstairs with me and I'll make you the Princess of Wails."
"Let's put the bucking in Buckingham Palace."
"A man having an extra-marital affair has a mistress. What does a married woman, under the same (damaging) circumstances have?"
Jessie Churchill, East Providence, USA
"A mattress?"
Bruno Metz, Strasbourg, France
"
Not a matresss -since a mistress is something between a mister and a mattress! "
Ian Hymes, Chester, UK
taken from Guardian.com
How do you make your wife scream while having s@x? Call her and tell her.
ONE HOT AUSSIE SINGER:
------------------------------------
" How do you feel
I'm lonely What do you think Can't take it all What ya gonna do Gonna live my life
So slide over here And give me a moment Your moves are so raw I've got to let you know I've got to let you know You're one of my kind
I need you tonight 'Cause I'm not sleeping There's something about you girl That makes me sweat"
INXS
Michael Hutchence's
" private life was often reported in the Australian and international press, with a string of love affairs with prominent actresses, models and singers. Hutchence's relationship with UK television presenter Paula Yates began while she was married to musician and Live Aid organiser Bob Geldolf. They divorced in 1996. During July of the same year, Hutchence and Yates had a daughter, Heavenly Hiraani Tiger Lily.
On the morning of 22 November 1997, Hutchence was found dead in his hotel room in Sydney. His death was reported by the New South Wales Coroner to be the result of suicide. In 2000, Yates died of a heroin overdose. The couple's daughter was placed in Geldof's custody with her half-sisters." Wikipedia
Q.Why did Paula Yates leave Bob Geldof for Michael Hutchence?
A. Because Michael was well hung.
A SUCCESSFUL MISTRESS
-------------------------------------
Madame de Pompadour , mistress of Louis the 15 th of France was so smoking hot , cultured, and intelligent, she was an advisor to the king. She even featured in an episode of Dr Who, (SPOILER ALERT close your eyes , ) and he fell in love with her! Well, who wouldn't!
A husband and wife are laying in their bed...
Wife: If I die will you have another woman in this bed? Husband: Yeah. Wife: Will you marry her? Husband: Maybe. Wife: Will you let her use my golf clubs? Husband: Of course not. Wife: Why not? Husband: She's left-handed.
MONICA:
------------
Monica Lewinski 's potential was thwarted by one mistake. After it, she never had the successful career she should have had.
Monica had a famous affair with Bill Clinton in the Oval Office while he was President of the United States. There was a big media and official houha about it, even though other Presidents before him had been unfaithful, Jack Kennedy being an example. They do say power is a strong aphrodisiac.
Q. What was Lewinsky's position at the white house?
" Studies have found that men are more likely to engage in extramarital sex if they are unsatisfied sexually, while women are more likely to engage in (extramarital) sex if they are unsatisfied emotionally.
Kimmel and Van Der Veen found that sexual satisfaction may be more important to husbands and that wives are more concerned with compatibility with their partners. Studies suggest that individuals who can separate concepts of sex and love are more likely to accept situations where infidelity occurs. One study done by Roscoe, Cavanaugh, & Kennedy found that women indicated relationship dissatisfaction as the number one reason for infidelity, whereas men reported a lack of communication, understanding, and sexual incompatibility.
Glass & Wright also found that men and women who are involved in both sexual and emotional infidelities reported being the most dissatisfied in their relationships than those who engaged in either sexual or emotional infidelity alone. In general, marital dissatisfaction overall is the number one reason often reported for infidelity for both sexes.
It is important to note that there are many other factors that increase the likelihood of anyone engaging in infidelity. Individuals exhibiting sexually permissive attitudes and those who have had a high number of past sexual relationships are also more likely to engage in infidelity. Other factors such as being well educated, living in an urban centre, being less religious, having a liberal ideology and values, having more opportunities to meet potential partners, and being older affected the likelihood of one being involved in an extramarital affair. ". Wikipedia
Some serial philanderers should just never get married at all, if they can't control themselves.
ELIZABETH TAYLOR AND RICHARD BURTON - one of those office romances.
" Elizabeth and Richard’s affair caused a huge sensation. Both were already married – she to her fourth husband Eddie Fisher, who she had famously ‘stolen’ from Debbie Reynolds. The Vatican condemned their union, calling it ‘erotic vagrancy’, and the world’s press closely monitored their relationship from then on.
‘Richard and I had an incredible chemistry together. We couldn’t get enough of each other,’ Elizabeth once said. "
Francesca Rice. Marieclaire.co.uk
CONSEQUENCES:
------------------------
A wealthy man was having an affair with an Italian woman for a few years. One night, during one of their rendezvous, she confided in him that she was pregnant. To avoid divorce, he paid her a large sum of money if she would return to Italy to have the child. If she stayed in Italy, he would also provide child support until the child turned 18.
She agreed, but wondered how he would know when the baby was born. To keep it discrete, he told her to mail him a post card, and write "Spaghetti" on the back. He would then arrange for child support. One day, about 9 months later, he came home to his confused wife. "Honey," she said, "you received a very strange post card today." "Oh, just give it to me and I'll explain it later," he said. The wife obeyed, and watched as her husband read the card, turned white, and fainted.
On the card was written: "Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti. Two with meatballs, one without."
These last two songs come as a sordid pair. I put them last because so much romance seems to be missing from music these days. They say it how it is.
Warning, explicit language
THE WIFE REACTS (also explicit language):
--------------------------
"Aight, that's it, what's wrong? I'm tired, sick and tired of the same thing over and over again Come on, girlfriend, talk to me I'm takin' the Porche, I'm takin' the house, I'm takin' the kids He can have the Volvo but that damn Jag is mine Oh, sure, girlfriend, oh, sure, sure"
Lady Saw -Son of a b*tch, lyrics.
“Fish in another man's pond and you will catch crabs.”
The tragedy of 9/11 is still raw in many people's hearts and minds. Fizzfan, a regular blog reader, from Britain, has written this guest post regarding alternative theories as to who was to blame and how it was accomplished.
DECEPTION/CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND US?
From telling someone their 'Bum doesn't look big in that', to saying 'Well done' while you're secretly thinking 'Well that's a bit rubbish', how reliant are we on dishonesty, or perhaps should I say, not being entirely honest?
Probably rather a lot, but is that such a bad thing? Surely these little white lies just oil the cogs of life and makes it far more pleasant for all concerned. We all deceive a little and we all know we in turn are deceived a little too. Nothing wrong in that........
However, when it comes to much larger deceptions, how many of us continue this mode of conduct for fear of facing a truth that would have unnerving effects on our lives.......
So here's a very good example:-
Yesterday I came across a fact that I knew one colleague would be interested in, so I emailed it to him. Another colleague became interested and read it too.
Her reaction however was "Why are you interested in stuff like that?" and when I explained, her very quick conclusion was "Oh god, I'd rather not know thanks".
This is the picture in question:
So is my colleagues reaction of dismissive disinterest, typical of a large proportion of people if reality threatens to upset their security and indeed even troubles them to 'think' at all?
I have often wondered if 9/11 is in fact the greatest and most successful deception of all time simply because the consequences of it being unravelled are just too enormous and therefore better left to what some might deem, wild speculation?
It's clear that the evidence to support further investigation is VAST, very well documented and supported by thousands of extremely well qualified professionals, such as architects, demolition experts and scientists.
On top of this there is real time footage and commentary from the firemen and survivors that back up this mountain of evidence and seems to strongly suggest that the towers could only have fallen in the way they did because they were precision wired with very high grade military explosives. Indeed proof of that was found in many of the dust samples.
Even if I couldn't be convinced by that, when slowed down footage of the collapses is scrutinised, it's mystifying how anyone could believe anything else, or at the very least, wonder if their claims have merit.
Why was the metal from the debris taken away and shipped to China to be melted down before proper forensic studies could be done? It was an enormous crime scene and the most important evidence was disposed of.
PENNSYLVANIA?
Why was there was no jet fuel in the soil samples around the crater left by the 'plane', not to mention the almost complete lack of plane debris both here and at all the other crash sites.
THE PENTAGON?
How did a complete novice fly that plane in such a difficult manoeuvre with such pinpoint accuracy at speeds that ace pilots stated they themselves would have found nigh on impossible to control in order to hit that particular part of the building almost at ground level? And why? It would have been so much easier to just smash into the top of it not to mention far more damaging. As one ace pilot went on record as saying, "it would be like asking someone who could carve a turkey to make the leap to perform open heart surgery".
Why is there no clear CCTV film of the 'plane' smashing into the Pentagon? Why was all the footage from all the cameras in the whole area confiscated leaving only one that was seen fit to release to the public which was completely inconclusive as to what it actually was?
TRADE CENTRE 7? (probably the best or worst smoking gun of all.....)
HOW DID TOWER 7, a 47 STOREY BUILDING, COME DOWN AT FREE FALL SPEED @ 5.30pmthat day when all it had were a few low grade fires?
NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND HAS A STEEL STRUCTURED BUILDING COLLAPSED THROUGH FIRE ALONE BEFORE. NEVER!
There is a litany of other circumstantial evidence such as mysterious money trails on Wall Street. The rather curious failure of the best defence systems in the world going into total meltdown. The convenience of the military training missions that allegedly cobbled the responses to the attacks.
(Interestingly, switching to Britain briefly, Peter Power, head of a private security firm used by the British Government, was running an exercise almost perfectly simulating the 7/7 attacks in Britain on the 7/7! and wait for it, AT THE SAME STATIONS! There is also disquiet from some survivors, as they thought the bombs came from beneath the trains rather than from within?.......)
Getting back to 9/11.....the NIST report conducted by the Government totally ignoring witness accounts of bombs going off before the planes hit and before the buildings fell and the manufacturing of an explanation based on a computer collapse that has been universally ridiculed by experts. 'Building' work taking place on unoccupied floors of the towers for weeks before the attacks, along with an unprecedented security black out of electrical systems, security cameras and door locking systems for 3 days over the weekend preceding the attacks.
The official white paper stating that a new Pearl Harbour was needed to mobilise the publics support for going to war. The passport of the terrorist floating unscathed to the ground around the towers to be conveniently discovered soon after! PLEASE!!! And yet no black box? The FBI still not having any hard evidence that Osama Bin Laden was connected to the plots 5 years later, sorry, what was that?! Bush's family having very strong links to the the security company that operated at the Towers. Silverstein actually saying on record that Building 7 was 'pulled' (really? well how'd anyone have the time to rig the explosives in a few hours, impossible, so they were clearly already in place ready to be detonated is the only conclusion even remotely plausible, blah, blah, blah........
It's all out there on the internet, some of it fascinating, some of it too weird for me to take seriously, but among it all there's just too much smoke for this particular fire to ever really go out.
I'm in no doubt that a cover up is essential from a governmental viewpoint, but have less understanding when it comes to people being either very opposed to further investigation or indeed being completely disinterested.
Is it something called Cognitive Dissonance where an idea is so at odds with our fundamental belief structures that it is just too painful or difficult to comprehend, so we prefer to pour scorn on these alien notions rather than listen to information that might threaten our perceived security.
How much do we really know about our Governments decisions and the reasons behind them? If they're Top Secret, that will be NOTHING. Ever. Or at least not until enough time has passed to make the knowledge useless in any real sense.
And getting back to Philip Marshall who allegedly murdered his children and dog and then took his own life, well, he's one is several prominent activists hell bent on exposing 9/11 that are sadly no longer with us.
One of the first was called Bill Cooper a radio broadcaster, who actually went on record and predicted 9/11 a couple of months before it happened, also stating it would be blamed on Osama Bin Laden.
He was gunned down outside his home in a 'police misunderstanding' on the 6th November 2001.
We lap up Hollywood movies about governmental skullduggery all the time, so why do we have such a problem in considering it in real life? Perhaps it's because by the time the misgivings started to emerge we'd already given the thumbs up to an horrific war. We don't like being wrong and we like it even less when our own countries rhetoric has possibly royally duped us into believing them and then in some way we feel culpable too.
I have to admit that I'm a natural sceptic anyway, so tend to question just about everything, but the more I've discovered about that day, the more convinced I've become that we may very well have just been fantastically deceived.
Sadly I am also convinced that the world will never come to know anything else other than the official version because the aftermath of exposure would be more problematic than continuing to turn a blind eye, and let's be very honest here, who the hell would really make an independent investigation happen anyway?
Is deception so inextricably woven into the fabric of our lives and our need to protect our particular view of the world so strong, that those in power can weave just about any picture they like, particularly if the media is so willing to support them too?
Could just be, the more fantastic the illusion, the more likely they are to get away with it.
By Fizzfan
Editor note: Any comments , ask the author in the comments section. Sentiments expressed are those of the author, the editor wouldnt have a clue.
" Have you seen the old dear who walks the streets of London
Dirt in her hair and her clothes in rags She's no time for talking, she just keeps right on walking Carrying her home, in two carrier bags So how can you tell me you're lonely And say for you that the sun don't shine Let me take you by the hand and lead you through the streets of London I'll show you something to make you change your mind."
From Ralph McTell's -Streets of London
How should we deal with street persons? The homeless? This guest post written by Dan , in London, addresses that issue. Thanks, Dan, for sharing with us.
A CHOCOLATE SWIRL BRIOCHE
WHAT DO WE GIVE OUR HOMELESS?
by Dan
Outside every supermarket in London, there’s a homeless person. I get a lot of my groceries from supermarkets, so I’m always walking past those guys. What they usually do, as you’ll know from your own encounters, is ask for some change.
It’s understandable that some people give them cash because afterall, they’re presenting as homeless and not having a job, so if people don’t give them money to buy food and however many hot drinks they have (if I slept outside, I’d probably want twenty cups of soup a night) then won’t they, like, die, or something?
On the other hand, I read that three quarters of them are on drugs and probably have free access to food and shelter if they want it but all they want to do is buy substances that could eventually kill them and by giving them money, the drugs are pretty much the only thing you’re funding.
So what’s the big deal? Just give them small amounts of money occasioanally. I call it uncertainty-adjusted behaviour. This approach might be viewed as inhumane and overly simplistic though because surely one must take a look at each specific homeless person. Use your eyes. Use your gut. Read some articles. Talk to people and become wise in the ways of charitable donation. Surely. Life is busy for many people though and making time to learn about such specific topics isn’t always top of the list.
Giving food always seems like a good balance. For most people this is probably sensible. I eat so much cr@p though that I do find myself wondering, did that guy really need that chocolate swirl brioche? I mean my diet just about keeps me alive enough to sit around at room temperature, trudge back and forth to a desk job and write sh*t on the internet. Homeless people spend all their time outside in the cold. They need to be on army rations.
Imagine if supermarkets had a section dedicated to those sleeping rough and customers could donate at the point of sale to give them the things that would help them most. The supermarket could even be blatant about it and write “help get rid of the person sitting outside our store” and customers could leave small donations. Then when the donations reach a certain level, the person could be carted off to a hostel and given therapy and noodles and stuff.
I’m not saying that you can fix every problem with therapy and noodles, I just wonder if the supermarkets could be more “in your face” about what they’re doing.
Editor note:
Dan can be found at his blog, that is a good read:
This post has adult themes , music and language. Recommended for ages 16+.
Leggings are an interest of mine. I think they are comfy and warm, but don't leave much to the imagination. Many are not much more modest than a pair of tights. I was telling a couple of friends recently that I was walking along the Main Street behind a woman with grey leggings so opaque, that I could tell her underpants had a pink and red pattern on them. Others are not see through, but show every nuance, front and back.
Dormtainment - Leggings Song Lyrics
"rock them in the day,
or wear them at night.
they cutting off your circulation but they looking right.
They showing off your prints,
they showing off your butt,
and I can't even lie, they make me want to (ooh).
Rock them leggings girl, go on rock them leggings.
(them kneecaps sweaty)
Rock them leggings girl, go on rock them leggings.
(booty look heavy)
Rock them leggings girl, go on rock them leggings."
And it gets more explicit from there, but I think it's at least being honest about the man's point of view. Meaning of print, is the imprint of genitals seen through tight garments.
My daughter did dance for years. Because of male parents and teen male siblings of students, waiting in the room for class to finish, I always tried to cover her butt and crotch with a skirt or stretchy shorts. It was fun finding different coverups. If she did occasionally go with leotard only, I got her to cover up on the walk home. The same with a swimming costume.
Woman exercising, from Pexels.
Why? Well I watch the media, listen to music, and the s@xual focus these days in the Western World seems to be the butt, alot more than it was in the past. I think this is because of the normalisation process going on re @nal s@x, through the influence of the internet, flowing on then to mainstream media.
The song illustrates my point. Body parts words and explicit word.
I don't want people looking at my daughter in that way. I want them to notice her smile (pre braces, now she smiles with closed lips more), her smarts, and her joie de vivre. She gets annoyed that I insist she wear shorts or a skirt/dress over her leggings.
It works two ways. My kids used to tell me off if I wore my stretch bike pants (close fitting and not padded ), around the streets, when I rode everywhere. So I started wearing skirts and they all got ruined in the spokes of the bike. ( I couldn't figure out how the actresses in those French Resistance movies did it while carrying a baguette and a contraband radio in their bike basket, and didn't have to stop every few meters to untangle their dress. )
Or if I was kneeling gardening and the waist band of my pants slipped down, my kids would say something, especially at school working bees! Higher waist bands being in fashion now make that less of a problem, but we all wear our oldest pants gardening, am I right?
The song that inspired this funny parody, (must see unless you're offended by s@x and the odd bad word), is called Work from Home, and on mainstream media, accessible to young kids. If you like eye candy, of course watch the original too. I chose it because of the Twerking in the original. This song has something to say about that:
I read an article today describing how united airlines allegedly asked two girls to cover their leggings with a dress. It is company policy for employees and their families to have to do it, apparently. I'd like my readers to read the (safe) link and tell me your opinions on modesty of dress. I'd like male opinions as well as female , or trans gender etc persons are also welcome. Be as opinionated as you like and can be anonymous.
NB: Blogger doesn't allow swearing, pedophile language or attacks on other posters , however. Adult content is allowed if preceded by a warning, as per top of this post. Please disguise explicit words and stay on topic.
