O-bomber

AITOOW wonders if the president will redact his pejorative comments on the Patriot's Day bombing if he finds out it was planted by The Weather Underground or was detonated to advance the civil rights agenda? Has anyone asked his good friend Bill Ayer's what he thinks of the action? When will the calls for background checks and limits on pipes and nails begin?

Other things I was reminded of while watching the coverage - Money spent on prevention is a palliative. Cops have no clue (blow up dropped back packs), jump to conclusions (arrest a poor Saudi kid), only succeed if the public hands them evidence (cell phone video) or the criminal gives up or they experience dumb luck or arrest a patsy. Broadcast networks will milk this for all it's worth. They will also create some goofy graphic and theme song to market it. Newscasters will act like the cops they get their info from. Experts will speculate that every possibility is plausible because they don't (and couldn't) have any information at all. Politicians will use the opportunity to push forward their agenda items. People will accuse the most familiar perpetrators with crime because they don't know of many/any others.

It was a little weird that no one talked up the tax angle. It was one of two or three (hatred of US by outsiders, copy cat crime, hatred of paying taxes/hatred of US by insiders) plausible story lines. See if they involve the Iranians in it. Then we know it was a ploy to bomb them.

Ask And You Shall Receive

AITOOW think men stop asking questions when they receive the answer that satisfies them while women don't stop asking questions until they receive an answer they don't like? I believe the explanation may have to do with how we punish children. If a man is punished, the punishment sticks. If he takes any action to extricate himself from his punishment he is ignored or punished further. When a woman is punished, she plays on peoples sympathies and the punishment is either reduced or eliminated. Her actions allow her to associate attention, love, acceptance, gifts with (initially) negative events. She begins to seek out misery. Add to that that it also serves as an eye for an eye guilt ameliorant. Any bad acts she has committed or anticipates committing on the cross examinee can now be forgiven (in her own mind) if she uncovers a bad act committed against her. A guy (probably also encouraged by ego and a desire for peace and happiness) will just accept any answer that doesn't punish him (cause him discomfort).

Getting Into The Family Business

AITOOW thinks you can't marry a person with a mommy or daddy complex if yours is not dead? No matter how much older you are than them (even if you started out as the parental replacement figure), your mommy or daddy become that missing parent they desire and you are disintermediated. The misplaced attention (and respect possibly love/lust) is rerouted to the patriarch/matriarch. You become a sibling. One whom they are trying to supersede in the hierarchy of parental approval. There must be some crazy sexual/political dynamics going on when you insert one of these psychologically needy people into a household of one those cultures where the family all lives together.

Too Few Cooks In The Kitchen

AITOOW doesn't understand why cooks on these competitive cooking shows never use a thermometer for meats? They always over or under cook something. Why leave it to chance?

Because I Said So

AITOOW thinks that if you insert "because" in place of "if" you have the appropriate response to all those sorts of arguments? IE - If A does X then why should we do Y. BECAUSE A does X we should do Y. Real world example from a response in USA Today about Plan B - "Teens are having sex without parental consent, so WHY shouldn't they buy the pill without it? Because Teens (Y) are having sex (X) without parental consent AND SHOULDN'T (matter of opinion), they shouldn't be able to buy the pill without it too. I'm not saying I agree with the counter argument, but, it is a nice rhetorical trick.

Incest Is Best

AITOOW wants to know why - if love scenes are only "acting" and there is no "attraction" associated with the action - there have been no love scenes cast between actors who are related? If it is merely part of the "craft" and not a free pass to cheat, why won't they participate in these roles with family members?

Obanics

AITOOW longs for the days when black people just wanted to turn their gibberish (inability to master proper English vocabulary and grammar) into their own language (ebonics). Now they (actually at the behest of their white liberal overlords) are purposefully trying to redefine the language so words have no meaning. After already eroding the definition of unemployment by eliminating most of the cohort (long term unemployed) from the definition, they are now trying redefine unemployment as retirement. Not to say that some small percentage of the newly jobless did not "voluntarily" retire, but, I wager it was/is a de minimus number. The reality is that there has been little to no real change in the unemployment numbers since the '08 depression and no amount of sophistry will change that. I'm not even blaming that on Bambi, but, I am blaming him for misrepresenting the facts (to his benefit).