Friday, July 29, 2005


sue and i came to a truce over our home situation.

she asked me to not all her job stupid, because it's supported her for six years, and she found it insulting.

and then today she got laid off.

sprint is fucking stupid.

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

more on the paper

nobody commented of course, and the paper has undergone revision.

the interesting development, though, is that i found the author working at a law firm in new york, and he agreed to take a look at my criticism of his paper and give me his thoughts.

what i'm sending him is substantially revised from what i posted here. i'll re-post the paper when it's finalized.

Sunday, July 24, 2005

current revision of the paper

in my tuesday evening criminal justice class i'm required to find a "scholarly article" and comment upon it in a paper due at the end of the term in lieu of a final exam.

the paper i've written cites the article and gives a summary of its major points, and since it's copyrighted i can't reprint the article here. but if you have access to somewhere like westlaw or lexis you can find the article cited as 51 am. u.l. rev. 509 (2001). that is, volume 51 of the american university law review, page 509, published in 2001.

so here's the paper so far.


“Guilty and Gay: A Recipe for Execution in American Courtrooms: Sexual Orientation as a Tool for Prosecutorial Misconduct in Death Penalty Cases” (51 Am. U.L. Rev. 309, Michael B. Shortnancy) is a look at the possibility that criminal defendants are subject to courtroom bias on the basis of sexual orientation, and that this bias sometimes results in constitutionally suspect sentences of death for defendants convicted of capital crimes.

The article, written in 2001 and so not taking into account some relatively recent legal developments in laws surrounding homosexuality, argues that there is an under-studied bias against homosexuals in American courtrooms. It cites two studies, in California and Arizona, suggest that more than 50% of homosexual court users experienced “negative comments or action,” and that 20% of California court employees and more than 75% of Arizona court employees have heard “negative remarks” about gays and lesbians.

The article then goes on to cite specific cases where anti-gay bias seem to have motivated juries, at least in part, to choose execution, and suggests that these instances should amount to reversible prosecutorial misconduct. In the case of Wesley Neill, the prosecutor’s closing argument directly and deliberately highlighted the defendant’s homosexuality (Shortnancy at 339, “… I’d like to go through some things that to me depict the true person, what kind of person he is. He is a homosexual. … You’re deciding life or death on a person that’s a vowed [sic] homosexual … . But these are areas you consider whenever you determine the type of person you’re setting [sic] in judgement on … . The individual’s a homosexual.”).

To date, at least as far as my research has led me, the Supreme Court has not ruled directly on whether these kinds of hostile environments in courthouses might amount to a violation of the Constitution’s Due Process or Equal Protection Clauses. Even so, several Circuit Courts of Appeal have ruled on the admissibility and appropriateness of comments about a defendant’s homosexuality, and it seems that the Circuit Courts are applying a fundamental misreading of the case law.

In Neill v. Gibson (278 F.3d 1044), a case cited by Shortnancy, the 10th Circuit held on rehearing that, among other things, “(6) prosecution did not engage in misconduct, in penalty-phase arguments, by commenting on petitioner's homosexuality in challenging proffered mitigating factor that petitioner acted under extreme emotional disturbance in committing offenses; and (7) although prosecution's comments about petitioner's homosexuality were improper, they did not rise to level of due process violation.”

The Court in Neill considered whether the prosecutor’s statements rendered the entire trial unfair, and found that because the state had overwhelming evidence of Neill’s guilt and that much of that evidence was uncontested at trial, the prosecutor’s comments didn’t render the entire trial unfair, even though the prosecutor’s remarks were, indeed, improper.

This kind of reasoning is bogus on its face. A closing rebuttal is the last thing a jury hears before retiring to deliberate, and is something the jury is most likely to remember as it deliberates. There is no way to know with certainty whether or not the prosecutor’s remarks would have swayed the jury toward imposing a death sentence when, presented with an identical heterosexual defendant and crime, they might have imposed a life sentence. If prosecutorial misconduct is present, especially in the penalty phase, common standards of decency and justice demand reversal of the sentence and at the very least remanding the case for a new sentencing hearing before a new jury, if not outright reduction of the sentence without a remand.

Since Shortnancy wrote his article in 2001, several cases have been decided in Texas and elsewhere that lend credence to the proposition that homosexuality is, or should be, a protected status in America’s courtrooms.

In Lawrence et al. v. Texas (539 U.S. 558, 2002) the United States Supreme Court held that Texas’s anti-homosexuality statute (V.T.C.A. Penal Code § 21.06) is unconstitutional, overruling the previous case on point, Bowers v. Hardwick (478 U.S. 186, 1986). Relying on a line of cases including Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479, 1965, invalidating a state law prohibiting the use of drugs or devices of contraception), Eisenstadt v. Baird (405 U.S. 438, 1972, invalidating a law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried persons), Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113, 1973, the famous abortion decision), and Carey v. Population Services Int’l (431 U.S. 678, 97 S.Ct. 2101 1977, invalidating a law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptive devices to persons under 16 years of age), the Court found that the Texas statute unconstitutionally restricted consensual private behavior between adults, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. And affirming a statement in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey ( 505 U.S. 833, 1992), the Court repeated that “[the Court’s] obligation is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code.” The Lawrence Court also cited Romer v. Evans (517 U.S. 620, 1996), in which the Court struck down a Colorado constitution provision that excluded homosexuals, lesbians, and bisexuals from the state’s anti-discrimination laws, also under the Equal Protection Clause.

These precedents suggest an evolving legal framework that prohibits discrimination against homosexuals in American courthouses under both Due Process and Equal Protection standards.

Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (798 N.E.2d 941, 2003, the “Massachusetts gay marriage” case), the Court wrote “that the core concept of common human dignity protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution precludes government intrusion into the deeply personal realms of consensual adult expressions of intimacy and one’s choice of an intimate partner” (Goodridge, supra at 948). If that is correct, then by extension, the government, represented by the prosecutor, may not inject homosexuality into a criminal proceeding in such a way as to promote bias against the defendant, any more than a prosecutor may suggest that execution is the only appropriate punishment because the defendant is black.

There are some situations where investigation of a defendant’s homosexuality is necessary to the conduct of a criminal case. It can shed light on a defendant’s motive to commit murder if, for example a defendant was blackmailed under threat that his homosexuality would be revealed, and he committed the murder to end the threat. Even so, an appropriately careful judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney can insure that these kinds of issues don’t improperly taint a jury. For example, careful questioning during voir dire can expose and eliminate jurors predisposed to vote for death on the basis of homosexuality, and appropriate jury instructions that homosexuality is neither an aggravating nor mitigating factor can also help juries understand the factors they should and should not consider. This is especially important because death-eligible juries are already stacked in favor of the prosecution, because it is routine to exclude any juror who would not, as a matter of conscience, impose a death sentence at all. Studies cited by Shortnancy and others indicate that these juries are predisposed to issue death sentences regardless of other issues, and the Supreme Court has upheld the jury selection methods that produce these juries.

Shortnancy’s conclusion, that there exists a courthouse bias against homosexuality that results in inappropriate convictions and sentences, is in need of further study, but if he’s correct (and it wouldn’t surprise me if it did, especially in the “Bible Belt”), recent case law suggests that despite the recent anti-homosexual backlash in wake of the Goodridge decision, such bias must be impermissible, and evidences of this bias in judicial, prosecutorial, and defense counsel decisions will amount to reversible error.

i haven't finished, but there it is.

dropped link

i removed sparkybear's place from my links. for a number of reasons, primarily that the blog is down and isn't coming back any time in the forseeable future. she didn't use the thing anyway, and when i migrated from hosting at home to hosting at laughing squid, i didn't move her stuff (because she told me to not bother).

Saturday, July 23, 2005

employment ads

from the dallas morning news 7/24/05:

plant lovers
care for plants with top co. ft or pt. top wages. fax resume.

note lack of fax number.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

employment crap

sue has decided i need a job, el mucho pronto. fair enough i guess. she's also gone and gotten herself a second job.

she's also taken all my computer equipment to an undisclosed secure location, leaving me only my laptop (which i happened to have with me when she did this). she managed this while i was out doing the sell-your-blood thing.

i spent last night sleeping on the couch at the uta library. i got home today in time to do babysitting, something i wasn't sure i really wanted to do, and something i'm not sure i want to continue doing.

but she refuses to negotiate or further outline what she wants beyond a job that pays $1k/mo and works with her bullshit work schedule.

i asked if she wanted me to cancel my foot surgery, 8/11 which will knock me off my feet for a couple of weeks. "you decide." great motherfucking help.

every time i've gotten a job she's found a reason to hate it, so i asked her for a written list of the sorts of jobs she'd find acceptable. "you know what kind of jobs are okay." great help, that.

she has no suggestions on whether i should stay in school or quit, either.

she said she'd do counseling, but wouldn't even attempt to quit smoking, which has been a major beef of mine ever since she lied to me about it when ian was a newborn, and all through the twins' pregnancy.

at this point i'm so sick of her passive-aggressive-then-blow-up crap that i can't decide whether i should grope in the dark with no guidence about what will make her happy, whether i should pack what's left of my shit and leave, or whether i should just hang myself in the bedroom closet.

at the moment i'm leaning toward the closet and i can't really think of a good reason not to. ("your kids need you!" is bullshit. they won't notice and won't remember. they don't give a rats ass about me one way or the other, as long as i hand them their fucking cookies.) i've got the rig in the closet ready. i seriously doubt sue would miss me long; she'd be more pissed at the lost income and the funeral expense. and yall wouldn't miss me either. i'd be surprised if even cecily and tertia read regularly anyway, and i'm not even sure about them. in a few weeks the blog would disappear (cuz the hosting company would zap it for nonpayment), and that would be that.

so there you have it.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

a hard day's night

i suspect i may need the indulgence of my replacement wife a lot sooner than one might have expected. marko, no affront intended, but pack your shit because my wife stole mine.

Monday, July 18, 2005

harry potter 6

i managed to acquire a copy of the audiobook last night (such popular things propogate over the internet rather quickly; yes i'll eventually buy a copy).

i'm in the middle of chapter two. it is, as always, engrossing. if you're at all interested, it's worth the effort.

for those of you who've never read a harry potter book, please start from book 1. they are not independent books; it is a single, continuous story, and to properly comprehend it, you can't easily skip around.


Saturday, July 16, 2005

to be a republican

again, from maire's journal, but she credits it to liveperson.

Things You Have To Believe To Be A Republican Today

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's Daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness, and you need our prayers for your recovery.

You support states' rights, which means Attorney General John Ashcroft can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.

* If you don't send it to at least 10 other people, we're likely to be stuck with Bush for 4 more years.


all of this reminds me of the bumper sticker hanging on my fridge.

come the rapture, can i have your car?

my tarot card

a url gleaned from my best friend maire (moy-rah). i asked if i could link to her livejournal, and she gave me an ambiguous answer, so i've not done so. but i figured out how to subscribe to it via bloglines, so now i hope to keep better track of her cuz i love her very muchly. :)

The Moon Card
You are the Moon card. Entering the Moon we enter
the intuitive and psychic realms. This is the
stuff dreams are made on. And like dreams the
imagery we find here may inspire us or torment
us. Understanding the moon requires looking
within. Our own bodily rhythms are echoed in
this luminary that circles the earth every
month and reflects the sun in its progress.
Listening to those rhythms may produce visions
and lead you towards insight. The Moon is a
force that has legends attached to it. It
carries with it both romance and insanity.
Moonlight reveals itself as an illusion and it
is only those willing to work with the force of
dreams that are able to withstand this
reflective light. Image from: Stevee Postman.

Which Tarot Card Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Friday, July 15, 2005


so i've changed hosting providers. from me. to laughing squid. we'll see how they do. no contract, no promises from me. i'm just trying to transition my hosting away from my dsl line so i can cut costs.

hopefully the comment spambots won't kill my bandwidth here.

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

remembering warren

tuesday night i went to a memorial service for my friend warren norwood.

a lot of people talked about what he meant to them, and how they met him. family and friends and co-workers told silly stories about his writing, his love for the mountain dulcimer, his wit, his bhuddism, and generally, his attitude.

i didn't share my story about him at the microphone. instead, here it is.

in the late 80's my step-mother went to a writing course at tarrant county called "writing fiction for fun and profit," and the companion course "advanced fiction writing." warren was the instructor. during the first class, students turned in their writing to warren, and he critiqued it. during the second class, other students critiqued your work.

warren called the second class "hack 'n slash."

after the classes ended, she joined a group of other writers in her class to continue the constructive criticism. she'd bring home her pile of other members' manuscripts each week, and i'd make copies of some of them and read and critique them as well, as the local "ghost hacker." but i didn't go to the meetings and i wasn't a member of the group.

in time i decided i wanted to join the group. joining the group wasn't easy: you were invited to attend and participate in a series of group meetings, and then you were asked to not attend one. at the one you didn't attend, the members discussed whether or not to admit you as a full member of the group. admitted by the other members of the group only by unanimous consent.

but there was another qualification: you had to survive "warren's course," and you can bet they asked warren whether or not they should admit you.

about the time i decided i wanted to join, that group started to fall apart. but viqui agreed to let me take warren's course, and off i went to be hacked and slashed.

four or five weeks into the class i skipped a week of writing. warren noticed, of course. but he didn't say anything about it.

he just looked at me with a look that said, "you can do better than that."

in time, with warren's help, the group reformed, and i was one of the new members. it became the first place where i felt like i was a part of the group, where i was a member of what was going on. it hadn't happened before, and it didn't happen again until i'd spent several years in aa.

one of those members has now moved to arizona, and another to mexico, and i haven't attended in almost a decade. but the rest of the group still meets every other tuesday night at a restaurant in arlington for food, socializiation, and hack 'n slash.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

thanks, warren, for making me realize that, yes, i can do better.


i don't know really why the system has been down for two days. i know it has, and i know it's caused me no end of heartache.

if you can see this, though, it seems to be back up. i think i should just hit myself in the face with a brick a few times and be done with it.

Tuesday, July 12, 2005


i switched back to my older hand-done theme. i decided i like the white background better, and it has kyle's really cool photo on it. maybe someday i'll rig a deal like michelle and let the user choose which theme to use.

Monday, July 11, 2005

postness envy

i can't possibly imagine how my replacement wife can (usually) manage not one but two posts per day, when i'm lucky to get out two or maybe three posts per week. is it lack of attachment to the silly accomplishments of my kids (benjamin last night spent a good part of the evening coloring on the wall above the couch with a red crayon; samantha spend a good part of the evening last night crying; ian spent a good part of the evening last night starting at the television from the potty chair)? or is it just that my life is so fucking boring that i can't find anything useful to write about?

i was all excited to get to school this morning and get my laptop open so i could hit the school registration system and check my grade from the english history course, only once i got to the page i saw the little calendar. grades won't post until wednesday, so another two days of waiting. i still think i got a b, but no feedback from this instructor when we had an 8-person class discussion about how we'd all like feedback and he said yes sorta pisses me off. so much for the earl of palmer (as he calls himself).

the twins go in for their two-year checkup today. sue is meeting me at the doctors' office because the appointment is at 1030, but my class doesn't officially get out until 1000, so supposedly i'm rushing right out of there. in truth i expect i'll get out sometime around 900 like we did last thursday, and i'll beat her there. it happens. i don't expect him to tell us much except that they're speech-delayed (no surprise there; we have a family of can't-talk-kids).

why is it that all the college chicks in this class are either really cute and really snooty, or look like they've been hit by a mack truck and won't leave me alone? last thursday i thought the one sitting next to me was going to start fondling my thigh under the desk. you know the old joke: married, not dead.

somehow i feel like, after 11+ years sober, my life should be somewhat less fucked up than it is. does that feeling ever go away?

Thursday, July 7, 2005

business law 1 - day 2

i managed to set up my laptop in the classroom, so the instructor is now up at the lecturn stuttering away about the uniform commercial code.

i'm revising my suicide estimate: i'm thinking monday.

there is an upside, though: it's only a five week class. i'll just put the dude on my "ick" list and avoid him.

Wednesday, July 6, 2005

business law 1 - day 1

so i survived the first day of business law 1.

impressions: the classroom is actually ... modern. each student seat shares a little in-desk pop-up ... thing ... that, when lifted, reveals two 110 volt ac plugs (can you say electricity?) and two rj-45 plugs (can you say network?). this means that every student in the class can have a laptop on-desk and plugged in, accessing the net if necessary.


the instructor, on the other hand, is not impressive. i think i'll be wanting to hang myself by about the middle of next week. but apparently he's also pretty easy on exams, so this will be another gut it and get through it things.

oh well.


Tuesday, July 5, 2005

current degree plan

so for my own records, i'm inputting the courses i still need to take for my degree plan. note one change: i've dropped one instance of "american judicial system" included by mistake, and replaced it with pols 4332 - us constitutional law: fundamental rights.

all the courses listed are required, except woms 2317, which is listed on my degree plan as an elective. the english history course i just finished could replace it, but i'm gonig to take the human sexuality course anyway, because i'm a perv who's interested in that kinda stuff. my wife isn't thrilled. :-)

--- --- ---

ints 2301 - interdisciplinary perspectives
ints 4391 - interdisciplinary capstone

blaw 3311 - business law 1

ccjo 4422 - legal aspects of evidence
crcj 3338 - juvenile justice system
crcj 4301 - american judicial system
crcj 4310 - advanced legal and technical writing

hist 2314 - history of england ii
hist 3317 - american legal and constitutional history 1
hist 3318 - american legal and constitutional history 2
hist 3320 - us civil liberties

geog 3355 - environmental history of the united states

geol 2401 - weather and science
geol 2402 - geoscience and genesis
geol 2406 - natural resources
geol 2408 - geology of national parks and monuments

pols 3331 - contemporary issues in civil liberties
pols 3334 - women and us law
pols 4332 - us constitutional law: fundamental rights
pols 4351 - energy policy and administration

woms 2317 - basic concepts of human sexuality
woms 3327 - marital and sexual lifestyles
woms 3366 - sex, gender, and culture
woms 3380 - ethnic and gender in criminal justice
woms 4301 - art and gender

more texas schools crap

i'll spare you the links but if you go to the local paper and look under legislature (and don't forget to log in using bugmenot's logins), you'll see the latest on the texas school funding nonsense.

as usual, the texas legislature is making a mockery of public good. while some legislators are predicting that the 30-day special session will fail (which wouldn't surprise me -- they haven't been able to unfuck this any time in the last 20 years, what's different this month?), and the ones who aren't doom and gloom are tinkering with the tax code.

so it works like this: property taxes, which affect only those of us who own property, go down. but sales taxes, which affect everyone in the state, go up, by a point. after local taxes are added on, most of the state would pay 9.25% sales tax on most items. new items would become taxable, including such things as car repairs.

the problem is that a hike in sales tax disproprotionately affects lower income residents. that's because someone living at or below subsistence (like me) is likely to spend every penny he makes on taxable items or bare necessities. a sales tax -- essentially a tax on consumption -- targets consumption, but the largest consumption as a percentage of income is done at the bottom of the income ladder.

they want to close loopholes in the texas corporate tax code that allow large companies whose names you'd recognize to avoid paying state corporate income tax, but that won't actually generate enough revenue.

so we'll see.

at the rate they're going, texas schools will close on october 1.

Monday, July 4, 2005

patriot act stupidity

crap like this makes one wonder what the real agenda is here.

from cnn:

Suburb cites Patriot Act to oust homeless
Anti-terrorism law part of lawsuit defense

Thursday, June 30, 2005; Posted: 2:45 p.m. EDT (18:45 GMT)

NEWARK, New Jersey (AP) -- The USA Patriot Act, in the name of fighting terrorism, allows the government to find out which books and Internet sites a person has seen. It lets investigators secretly search homes and monitor phone calls and e-mail.

Now, officials in the wealthy New York City suburb of Summit are using the law to justify forcing homeless people to leave a train station -- an action that sparked a $5 million federal lawsuit by a homeless man.

Richard Kreimer, who filed the lawsuit in March after being kicked out of the train station, said the Patriot Act defense makes no sense.

"Unless they've been smoking those funny cigarettes, I can't see how my civil lawsuit has anything to do with the Patriot Act," said Kreimer, 55, who is acting as his own attorney.

But Summit officials argue they are protected by a provision regarding "attacks and other violence against mass transportation systems." Town attorney Harry Yospin, who did not return calls seeking comment Tuesday and Wednesday, has used the law as one of more than a dozen defenses in the case.

Edward Barocas, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said the Patriot Act defense is weak: "Nothing in the Patriot Act lets them kick homeless people out of train stations."

The U.S. Justice Department also criticized Summit's use of the law.

"That represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Patriot Act is," spokesman Kevin Madden said Wednesday. "The Patriot Act is a law enforcement tool to identify and track terrorists and stop them from further attacks on America. To apply it to this case is, shall we say, an overreaching application of the law."
Questions in the case

Kreimer garnered national attention in 1991 after suing Morristown, the Morris Township public library and the police department over his treatment there. The library threw him out at least five times, claiming his body odor and the way he looked at library patrons offended them.

A federal judge ruled the library's rules on hygiene were unconstitutional -- a decision that was overturned, but not before Kreimer had been paid. Kreimer has said he spent the settlement on lawyers, living expenses and medical bills.

In the latest case, Kreimer is seeking at least $5 million in damages from the city of Summit, NJ Transit, nine police officers and several others, claiming he and other homeless people have been unlawfully thrown out of train stations since August.

He also wants a judge to decide whether transit stations are public or private property, and whether people who do not have train tickets have the right to be in them.

The state Attorney General's office, on behalf of NJ Transit, has called the lawsuit frivolous and a sham but did not cite the Patriot Act. City Administrator Christopher Cotter said the municipality does not comment on active litigation.

Since the lawsuit was filed, NJ Transit has announced plans to create "ticket-only" zones limiting areas of train and bus stations to passengers holding tickets.

Sunday, July 3, 2005

a behavioral guide

it is incumbent upon me to advise you of some subtle signs in my behavior that you should take note of.

when you find me standing on the kitchen counter, and i scream at you at the top of my voice to "get the fuck out of my house, cunt," that is not a invitation to rational discourse. i will not spend a half hour discussing the philosophy of kitchen maintenance, and you are not invited to offer your commentary on the state of my kitchen, my home in general, my school and grades, my employment, or my children.

you are, however, invited to head toward the door as fast as your short little legs will carry you.

should your short little legs fail to start moving, you should not be surprised if i proceed to offer a little additional motivation. i might, for example, be inclined to shove you out the door myself (since you've proven unwilling to do so yourself).

if you should do something so foolish as fall down, it is incumbent upon you to get back up. if you fail to do so, you might find yourself given additional motivation. the only problem is that it's difficult to get people who've fallen down to stand up again when they don't want to, so rather than do that, it's usually faster to simply grab you by one or both arms and/or legs and drag you toward the door.

as you are being dragged, you should be aware that comments like "ow ow that hurts!" are likely to get me to pull harder, since what i'm interested in is your removal from my home, not the protection of your person from harm.

there is a 2 inch drop out the front door of my home, and once i have your ass out there, it won't bother me in the slightest if you also hit your head on the way down. don't look to me for sympathy.

should you find yourself dragged out the door, don't ask to get back in. i've no doubt already locked the door, and had i intended you to come back in, i wouldn't have lugged your ass outside in the first place. however, continually ringing my doorbell is a fantastic way to induce me into calling the police and having you forcibly removed from the premisis.

just so you know.

[and no, it was not my wife.]

Friday, July 1, 2005

anti-spam crap

okay so i've got spam karma installed to help with all the bullshit blog spam i get. then i get an email that it sent a comment by tertia to spam karma hell.

she wrote in a comment:
It is I, your replace wife!! I am even more attracted to you now, not only are you G&D, you clean up poo as well, what an all round winner you are.

Big smooch


PS Looking SO forward to the projectile poo stage
the comment was zapped and her ip was banned.

so i've disabled spam karma, much to my chagrin. will try something else.

okay so as i was composing this post i found that there's a spamkarma upgrade available. am going to try it.