There's nothing quite like it, eh?

RIYADH (AFP) - King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia pardoned a teenage girl sentenced to six months in jail and 200 lashes after being gang raped in a decision swiftly welcomed by Washington on Monday.

There was no immediate official announcement of the king's decision to overturn the sentence against the 19-year-old girl which had drawn criticism of the ultra-conservative Muslim kingdom from key ally President George W. Bush.

The king's decision was instead reported by the Riyadh daily Al-Jazirah but, like the rest of the Saudi press, the newspaper faithfully reflects the official line on all sensitive issues.

{...}The girl, who was 18 at the time she was raped, was attacked at knifepoint by seven men after she was found in a car with a male companion who was not a relative, in breach of strict Saudi law.

{...}In October 2006, a judge sentenced her to 90 lashes for being with the man -- a taboo in the conservative Muslim kingdom which imposes segregation of the sexes.

She appealed against the sentence but despite her ordeal the court ruled that her punishment should be increased to 200 lashes and a six-month jail term.

The judges decided to punish the girl further for "her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media," a court source told the English-language daily Arab News.

The rapists were initially sentenced to one to five years in jail, but those terms were also toughened in November to between two and nine years.

A rape conviction carries the death penalty in Saudi Arabia, but the court did not impose it due to the "lack of witnesses" and the "absence of confessions," the justice ministry said last month.

The court also revoked the licence of the girl's lawyer, who has been summoned by the justice ministry to appear before a disciplinary panel.

{...}A Saudi official, who declined to be named, told AFP on Monday that he was unhappy with the "ridiculous" furore over the court ruling that had damaged the kingdom's image both at home and abroad.{...}

So, get gang raped in Saudi Arabia; be charged with 90 lashes for being with a man who is not your relative; have that sentence increased to 200 hundred lashes and six months in prison for protesting; then be pardoned by the benevolent, all-knowing Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques---who, it appears doesn't care so very much about if the law itself is moral in that it hardly protects the victim, but rather because he's tired of taking shit over your case from international do-gooders.

Nice, huh?

Posted by: Kathy at 01:31 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 438 words, total size 3 kb.

For the love of all that is good, holy and decent in this world, no.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:20 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.

We've got a bunch of rocket scientists on the Pakistani police force:

UK officials demanded an inquiry yesterday into the escape of a British terrorism suspect in Pakistan, writes Bob Sherwood in London and Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad .

Rashid Rauf, 26, described by Pakistani authorities as a "key person" in last year's alleged plot to blow up airliners flying from London Heathrow, escaped from custody on Saturday after appearing in an Islamabad court, where his lawyers were fighting a UK extradition request.

Pakistan's security forces were searching in NorthWest Frontier Province. They fear he could cross into Afghanistan

Mr Rauf, who has dual UK-Pakistani citizenship, escaped without a shot being fired while he was surrounded by police guards. UK officials asked Pakistan for an explanation and were told an inquiry would be held.

{my emphasis}

But they're rich rocket scientists, no doubt.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, it's good to know that I've got the answers to some seriously pressing questions, eh?

I swear to God, the referral logs are a never ending source of amusement.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

Yep. You guessed it. It's Britney Spears. Who's looking suspiciously healthy after she claimed illness to get out of a deposition yesterday.

Back when VH1 used to have 'Behind the Music' on the schedule---a show I dearly loved---I was fond of claiming that I couldn't wait to see Britney's episode, because I was sure the meltdown would be fast, furious and glorious to watch. Now I'm not so sure. Anyone this stupid is bound to be boring as all hell. Her downfall has become tedious.

Can we just get it over with already?

Posted by: Kathy at 11:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.

So, if you hadn't already figured it out with my kvetching about bereavement fares, we've had a death in the family.

The husband's grandfather, aged eighty-four, passed away last week. In many ways this is a blessing. Grandpa hadn't been doing so well lately, and had been moved into a nursing home. He received phenomenal care, not only from the nursing home, but from the hospice organization, which helped to organize his care. (Seriously, folks, if you are, sadly, in need of a hospice for one of your loved ones, we highly recommend Odyssey Hospice. The organization is located in several states and they have bent over backward to make Grandma comfortable when she passed away this spring (they even had a harpist in to play for the patients, because hearing is one of the last senses to go. This pleased my mother-in-law to no end and helped Grandma to find peace.) and to organize Grandpa's care, even on visits to their home in the DFW metroplex. They also sent a nurse with the in-laws while they were trying to find a nursing home for him, to answer questions and help them evaluate a situation about which they knew very little. They have our sincere gratitude for making a difficult year a little better. ) But Grandpa was missing his wife of sixty-five years terribly, and he finally decided it was time to go and be with her. While he was a cantankerous soul at times---well, who am I kidding? He wasn't exactly a cuddly sort---he will nevertheless be missed.

So, while Grandpa's passing is a blessing, the time that we've been dreading has come. It's time to divvy up the estate. Fortunately, the potential fraud that I alluded to in that post never showed up. That's fortunate, but the ghouls are already at it, and have been since before Grandpa's body went cold. They've been harping on about travel costs to the funeral, which is being held in Illinois, not Arizona, where Grandma and Grandma retired, and where the ghouls had settled, as well, presumably to be closer to the cash. Apparently, they thought they shouldn't have to fork out to travel to their own father's funeral. Then we have the added joy that one of the ghouls is, apparently, worried about taxes from his inheritance, because "he just doesn't have the money to pay them," working off the assumption that the payday was going to happen right after the funeral. Evidently, there have been plenty of other rude and presumptuous statements made, but the father-in-law has chosen not to share them for fear of upsetting the applecart.

I'll repeat: I just DO NOT GET THESE PEOPLE. The funeral is on Thursday and I'm not going, but I can only imagine what it will be like. The ghouls are crass people. They are uncouth and have no class whatsoever. Undoubtedly, at the funeral they will make statements along the lines of "I can't believe how much this costs"---even though the funeral arrangements were made and paid for long ago. Undoubtedly, they will also whine about the cost of the casket, and will wonder aloud why their father needed to be buried in such an expensive box. They will comment on who is there and who isn't there, and will make foul statements about them. They will whine about how much the trip is costing them and will try and freeload meals and rooms and rides from anyone they think is responsible for paying for it (i.e. my in-laws). I'm not exaggerating about this either. They are actually this crass. If, God forbid, there actually happens to be a meeting with the lawyer about the estate, they will want checks cut, right there and then, and will whine, volubly, when the wheels of the legal system do not move as quickly as they'd like. Their life's work has been waiting for their parents to pass away so they can cash in, and now that the moment's here, it's going to get ugly if they can't get their filthy paws on what they think is owed them right away. (Particularly because one of them is, I believe, counting on it for gas money for the trip back to Arizona.) God help us when they find out that the amount they think they should get is different than what it is in actuality.

The ugliness is at the doorstep, knocking on the door, and because of the way things work, the husband's family has no choice but to open said door and let it in. All we can hope for in the meantime is that, hopefully, the ugliness is survivable.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:02 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 786 words, total size 5 kb.

Toward the end, I was sincerely hoping her arm was going to be pulled right out of its socket. Because, it's apparent, she deserved some pain for inflicting that on the rest of us.

After watching that, the Guns-n-Roses' version is growing on me.

Posted by: Kathy at 10:12 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

For the love of Christ...

{ht: wwtdd}

Posted by: Kathy at 12:41 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

Particularly when you're a big lipped, fat assed dictator in Venezuela.

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Wednesday CNN may have been instigating his murder when the U.S. TV network showed a photograph of him with a label underneath that read "Who killed him?"

The caption appeared to be a production mistake -- confusing a Chavez news item with one on the death of a football star. The anchor said "take the image down" when he realized.

But Chavez called for a probe in an interview on state television, where he repeatedly reviewed a tape of the broadcast, questioning why the unconnected photograph and wording were left on screen for several seconds.

"I want the state prosecutor to look into bringing a suit against CNN for instigating murder in Venezuela," he said. "... undoubtedly it is part of the psychological warfare."{...}

Yawn. God this is getting old.

Hey, Lippy McLipster, shut up already and be patient. We'll murder you when we're good and ready...and not a second before.

And we'd hardly let CNN do our advance work, ya dig?

Posted by: Kathy at 04:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

Hit play and watch. It won't take long, I promise you.

So, I ask you, my devoted Cake Eater readers, is bad credit a dealbreaker these days?

Seriously. I want to know.

Call me naive if you must, but when I got married, I took the "for better or worse" part rather seriously. Maybe I'm being a little too inclusive for modern tastes, but that would seem to mean that you took everything, whether or not it made for a catchy commerical or even a pleasant little bitch and moan festival. You seemingly loved this person you were marrying; you realized they were human and probably had made some mistakes in their life, but you were willing to take on said mistakes. Because you're human, too, and probably had made some mistakes yourself.

This commercial would seem to advocate checking your beloved's credit report before getting married. Because, you know, you wouldn't want to get married to them if they had---GASP!---bad credit. Because you know, there's nothing worse in this world than---GASP!---BAD CREDIT! And if your intended did have---GASP!---bad credit, well, then it would apparently be adequate grounds for dumping said intended.

And you could be a happy bachelor with a dog and a yard.

What say you, my devoted Cake Eater readers? Is bad credit a dealbreaker?

Posted by: Kathy at 11:17 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 220 words, total size 2 kb.

So, Barry Bonds was finally indicted Thursday, by a Federal grand jury, no less, with five felony counts of perjury and obstruction of justice.

{...}The 10-page indictment mainly consists of excerpts from Bonds' December 2003 testimony before a grand jury investigating the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, or BALCO. It cites 19 occasions in which Bonds allegedly lied under oath.

{...}Defense attorney Mike Rains said he spoke briefly with Bonds but did not describe his reaction. At an evening news conference, he read a statement accusing federal prosecutors of "unethical misconduct" and declined to take questions.

"Every American should worry about a Justice Department that doesn't know if waterboarding is torture and can't tell the difference between prosecution on the one hand and persecution on the other," Rains said.

{my emphasis}

{insert rolling of eyes here}

While I wouldn't necessarily equate waterboarding with perjury and obstruction of justice charges over alleged steroid use, Bonds' lawyers apparently have no issues with doing so.

Talk about having a big head.

Oh, wait, Bonds does happen to have a big head. A really big head. And not just in the figurative sense, either.

It's ironic that steroids, which are generally used to treat inflammation, can cause such inflamed use of language.

Looks like Hank Aaron's home run record might be safe after all. One can only hope Major League Baseball feels the same way.

Posted by: Kathy at 09:49 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.

Back when I worked at the Bou, the place was still run by the founders and the company was on the verge of either bankruptcy or great things---it just depended who you talked to. Kim and John Puckett, the founders, had brought in so many original investors, to get things up and running, and they wanted to be paid off handsomely. To achieve this end, Kim and John pretty much had the entire company running around like chickens with their heads cut off, implementing this or that new management technique brought in by this or that new manager.

My personal favorite was the "Labor Management Manual" which was, in theory, meant to help store managers like myself to recognize our peak hours and the adequate level of staffing necessary to maximize said peak hours. Filling out this manual meant going through a week's worth of hour-to-hour sales figures, checking the manual to see how many staff I was supposed to have on shift to cover said sales, and then reporting how many staff members I actually did have on hand. This had to be filled out and handed in with my P&L sheets, and it did me no good whatsoever in a tight labor market, when I couldn't find another person to work the morning shift to save my life. Besides, I didn't need a freakin' manual to tell me that I needed an extra person on staff to handle the morning rush---it would have been obvious to a blind man on a galloping horse. In essence, it was busy work. And it was an "innovation" that was brought in by a guy named Jay Willoughby, who took Boston Market public, and pretty much tanked the company in the process. The Boston Market IPO---and the management that led up to it---is now being taught at Harvard Business School as an example of what not to do. This is the guy who Kim and John hired to help pay off their original antsy investors---and he bailed as soon as it became obvious that he wasn't going to be promoted to CEO. They brought in some dude from McDonald's for that. He managed to get Caribou sold off to some Investment Dar in Dubai and then he bailed.

Then the board hired Michael Coles to take over and take the company public--- and now he's decided to leave the company.

{...}He issued a statement saying it was "time to step aside and let a new CEO take the company through its next phase of growth."{...}

Given that the share price has apparently dropped two-thirds of its value since its launch, I'm not surprised. What's better about Coles' leaving is that it's loaded with irony. You see, when Coles took over the company, a lot of old friends were either ignominiously shitcanned (as in the case of my dear old boss, Eliot, the man who famously advised us that, "You can put shit on a stick and sell it at the airport.") or quit, simply because Coles was intolerable and they didn't want to work for him. Some people waited until the company went public, finally got their stock options they'd worked so very hard for from the very beginning (and which you couldn't keep if you quit before the IPO), and got the fuck out of there with their sanity barely intact, but others who stuck around and disagreed with him were fired. He canned so many people, his nickname around the support center (aka company HQ) was "Willy Wonka" because "people just keep disappearing." It's laughable in the extreme that Willy Wonka has morphed into Veruca Salt.

It's even funnier when you take into account that he and his wife wrote a very touching (heh) children's book called "The Land of the Caring Bou" and it was sold in every single store.

One of the reasons I was so very glad to get the hell out of that company was because it had changed from when I started. Kim and John had been investment bankers in Manhattan, had become fed up with the daily grind, and, after an inspiring trip to Alaska, decided to start up a coffee shop with an Alaskan theme to it. It was a hit, and it rapidly expanded. It wasn't uncommon to find Kim and John actually working behind the counter at any given store. They liked it. They had managed to build it up, but in the process had brought in all that corporate nuttiness they'd eschewed from the very beginning so they could pay off investors. Caribou was the anti-Starbucks, until everyone came to the realization that the only way they were going to make this pay off was to turn into Charbucks. While I abhor their coffee, Charbucks is top dog for a reason, and Caribou will always be playing catch-up if they think that branded breakfast bars and drinks are the solution to the problem. It's completely possible that Caribou will never catch up to Starbucks. Starbucks built up its brand not by selling Frappacino drinks at 7-11, but by building stores. Only then did they they branch out into other marketing opportunities. Caribou thinks they can leapfrog this step---mainly because it's freakin' expensive to open new stores. If I'm remembering correctly, it's about a quarter mil per new store. And now they want to franchise, but instead of attracting franchisees, they want real estate developers instead. When I worked for the Bou, the word "franchise" was anathema. Now, it's apparently the way to go, but only for a select few who have "real estate development" experience. They're just doing everything wrong. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see this.

And never mind about the fact that many, many talented and successful store managers leave the company every day because they're promised advancement within the company, and are always passed over for a. men or b. ass kissers or c. ass kissers who happen to be men. None of that is, apparently, relevant.

Oh, and you can't buy pork sandwiches there, either.

It seems as if the company still hasn't learned its lesson, particularly when it comes to investment money, and I'm beginning to wonder if it ever will.

I hope it succeeds, even though I don't work there anymore, because, really and truly, they do have a superior product. I'm still a loyal customer. But I wonder how long that's going to last.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:56 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1079 words, total size 6 kb.

You wouldn't think that the Chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil would be a bit of a whiner, would you, particularly not when his company is making billions of dollars, in pure profit, per quarter. But apparently he, somehow, finds the time:

{...}Mr Tillerson was strongly critical of the drive in the US for independence in energy supplies, arguing that US imports could be curbed by increasing energy efficiency and boosting oil production by allowing companies access to restricted areas. “Regardless, no conceivable combination of demand moderation or domestic supply development can realistically close the gap and eliminate Americans’ need for imports,” he said.

He warned that pursuing energy independence “can have a chilling effect on existing trading relations”, and quoted a report by the US National Petroleum Council warning that policies intended to foster it “may create considerable uncertainty among international trading partners and hinder investment in international energy supply development”.{...}

Go read the whole thing. It's interesting and I do agree with most of it, but...you have to laugh. What did he think was going to happen with oil at $95 a barrel? That we were simply going to bend over and take it forever? Methinks he's more concerned about the price dropping than he is about trade relations. Which would make Exxon Mobil's shareholders, who have been raking it in, a bit testy. Of course, you should not pay attention to the fact that if we became more energy independent, Exxon Mobil, which has laid out billions of dollars to invest in oil fields world wide, would take a big hit---that's beside the point. Mr. Tillerson is worried about trade relations. Really he is.

{Insert rolling of eyes here}

The US's energy problems stem, mainly, from the fact that we're beholden to oil imports from countries who a. have issues with democracy, b. suck up most of the profits so they can plate their toilets in gold, and/or are determined to nationalize the oil industries to give power back to the people (!) (thy name is Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad) and c. will do what's best for them, not anyone else. We're at their mercy because they control supply. We've gotten sucked into many an international political snafu because of our dependence on oil. The solution to this problem, a rational person would think, is to decrease our dependence on oil imports. You don't have to be a bra-burning hippie to think that life would be a bit easier if we were more energy independent; that's just common sense. While he's right in that we're never going to be able to eliminate imports, it just doesn't strike me as if he's coming from a standpoint of pure philanthropy, with our interests nearest and dearest to his heart, ya dig?

Once upon a time people used to say what was good for GM was good for the country. Are we now supposed to believe that what's good for Exxon Mobil is good for our country?

I think that's a wee bit of a stretch.

Posted by: Kathy at 10:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 511 words, total size 3 kb.

That's just not right.

What up, Jewel? Are you too poor to hire a competent plastic surgeon?

You can't possibly be.

I had to suffer through that damn "You Were Meant For Me" song the other day when I was getting my Pet Scan. Talk about "Nowhere to run to, nowhere to hide." Oy. I couldn't move a muscle or the scan would have been ruined. I had to suffer through your music, as it played on the stereo, in a misguided effort to make the process more relaxing.

If I have to listen to the shit, you can at least spend the royalties responsibly, eh?

Update: And get your teeth fixed, too, while you're at it.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:47 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

Wow. Just freakin' wow.

STELLA McCartney is fighting back against her evil ex-stepmonster, Heather Mills.

{...) {T}he fashion designer has created a jewelry line, and her first effort is a necklace featuring a single-leg pendant. The bauble costs $500 - a lot less than the $100 million Mills is looking to get from Paul.

You have to respect someone who follows through. Not generally a big fan of Stella McCartney, or her PETA activities, but apparently this chick is willing to put her money where her mouth is.

That I can respect.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.

...Jack Aubrey would think of this monstrosity.

I saw this on 60 Minutes last night, when they profiled the owner, venture capitalist, Tom Perkins. (The footage isn't up on You Tube yet, so you're getting this instead.) And, while I watched, I simply wondered what Lucky Jack would think of a sailboat that he alone could sail. I mean, fer chrissakes, that thing is bigger than anything the Royal Navy had going at the time of the Napoleonic Wars---and you can pretty much sail it yourself. No sailors are required to hoist and unfurl the sails. No one has to climb up the rat lines to do this task...they simply unfurl from inside the masts, where they're stored. There's no wheel on the bridge, but rather a dial, which directs a computer program to do all sorts of sailor-y things. It's made of carbon-fiber, so it's light and scoots through the water like a hot knife through butter. It's amazing.

The boat's cool, don't get me wrong. Have I mentioned that it can unfurl its own sails? What's not to like? I'll bet you can make some pretty good soused hog's face in that galley, too.

But damn. I have to think that Lucky Jack, who was fond of coin, make no bones about it, and would only rarely begrudge someone their money, and only with good reason, would think it an expensive, ostentatious and, ultimately, deeply heretical ship.

Discuss.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:29 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.

You know, sometimes I just don't get people.

It's one thing to look at the actions of someone like, say, Pol Pot or Hitler or Stalin and to realize that you're never going to wrap your head around their actions; that what they've done is just so beyond the pale of normal moral human behavior that there is no possible way to understand it. So you hold these things in your memory as an example of the extraordinary, so that when another totalitarian, genocidal madman takes charge in another part of the world, you'll at least have some yardstick to measure their behavior.

But for everyday, average immorality by people you thought you knew? How, precisely, do you measure that? What sort of yardstick do you use? Can you compare them to a criminal written up in the newspaper? Is their crime better or worse than some random individual you don't know? Can you judge them the same? Should you?

I don't know.

The problem is this: there's an estate at stake---and it belongs to the husband's grandfather. Grandpa's estate now includes Grandma's estate, because she passed on earlier this year. This estate might be substantial, but we have no way of knowing---and we, meaning the husband and myself, don't really care. It's none of our business. In any case, it's probably less substantial than certain potential beneficiaries think it is, just because they've had their whole lives to work it up in their minds. They seem to be of the opinion they'll have it made in the shade when they receive their inheritance, but the reality is that they probably won't. There will be a windfall, yes, but it won't be what they think it will be. Grandpa is ill, and is now being moved to a long-term care facility, because he can no longer care for himself. Grandpa has been ill for some time and hasn't been himself since Grandma died in April. His colon cancer has reappeared, and he's refused treatment. He also has a very bad case of aspergillus, which is a fungal infection that affects his breathing. The doctors gave him six months to live in January. We've known for a long time that the vultures, aka certain potential beneficiaries of the estate, have moved in and are circling. Given their behavior, you would have to be extremely naive to think otherwise. They've tried to manipulate an eldery, ill man, who just lost his wife of sixty years, who has been fortunate that at least some of his family is looking out for his best interests and have thwarted these manuevers.

What's surprising us today---if such a thing is possible, given the circumstances---is that, if everything is as it seems, the vultures might have already moved in to feast on a still-living Grandpa.

There was an emergency this week that required Grandpa to be hospitalized and the in-laws drove over from their residence in Texas to be with him. In the course of their visit, the father-in-law came across a piece of paper in Grandpa's house with Grandpa's signature on every line, like someone was practicing how to forge it, the forgery getting better and more "legitimate" with every line. The first question that comes to mind when confronted with this is, "why would they need to do this?" Is the electricity on the verge of being shut off because Grandpa forgot to pay the bill and a check needs to be written because he's too weak to do it? Nope. Grandpa, even in his debilitated state, would rather die than let an electric bill go unpaid, hence he's set it up so that the mother-in-law has durable power of attorney and she pays the bills when she visits, which is often. It's pretty obvious that Grandpa wouldn't bother practicing his signature, either, even if he feels he might be "losing himself" and would try to regain that by the simple act of signing his name over and over again---he's simply not the type for that kind of rumination; it would never occur to him. There's only one possible, and reasonable, conclusion one could come to: that someone was getting ready to commit fraud.

Since Grandpa has very few visitors, there are two potential suspects in this potential caper. One, however, is too lazy to plan anything of the sort, let alone actually muster the will to follow through---they'd rather play golf. The other stands out because they've gotten very greedy in recent months; they've borrowed things, like trucks, and then didn't return them; but, mostly, it's that they're desperate for money. They're always desperate for money, and they have a spouse whose family has committed a lot of unseemly, and criminal, actions. This person isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, so it's not surprising that they'd leave the sheet there, for all and sundry to see, making the very stupid assumption that people always practice their own signature, many times, on a single sheet of paper and leave it lying around their house. Really. This would be a perfectly rational conclusion for this person. They're a dolt, and thankfully, that works in our favor. There have been other indicators, but this is the first piece of potentially damning evidence that would seem to point to the potential planning of outright fraud on the behalf of this individual. There might be a perfectly reasonable explanation for this sheet of paper, but I doubt it.

The person I'm referring to here, to put it bluntly, is a ghoul, and that's been clear for a very long time. But it's up in the air as to whether or not they have committed fraud. Nothing seems out of place, so it seems as if the in-laws might have been tipped off before anything actually happened, but we're not sure about that. Nonetheless, defensive manuevers are being taken as I write this. What's surprising is that we always knew that it was going to be a free-for-all when the grandparents passed, we just didn't think it was going to start before that time and that someone might commit fraud to get a leg up on the competition.

I just don't get these people. I really don't. They have acted for a very long time as if they are due something. In every aspect of their life, it is about what is due to them, just for the fine act of breathing the air, rather than what they can contribute. They're takers. And now it's possible that they're trying to take even more than what they were due. Just because they think they're due.

My family has never been big on inheritances. There was nothing when my grandparents died, other than treasured keepsakes---and very few of those, to be sure. There will be nothing when my parents die because my mother, who fully realizes she's not immortal, is making a concerted effort to give everything away before they pass on, because they don't want anyone fighting over their stuff when they do pass on. We've put our names on the bottom of the furniture that we want, because she's asked us to, so that we'll get it when that unhappy event comes to pass. It is my mother's dearest wish that her children not turn into a pack of dogs, fighting over the scraps, when she goes, so she's doing her best to make sure that doesn't happen. She's seen this happen before, with people she's known, so she's doing her best to short circuit it ever happening. Given this, I just don't get the whole inheritance thing. I really don't. I have to think that I'll be like my mother when my time comes. But it's apparent that not everyone is like that. They want their children and grandchildren to inherit the proceeds of their lifetime's work. I suppose that's fine, but why would you do that when it's readily apparent that it'll never be enough for those people? That they will simply not appreciate whatever you give them and that they'll always want more.

Jeez. I just re-read this entry and it all seems so much worse when it's written out. {insert shudder here} It's one thing to shake your head when the latest story of ghoulish, yet harmless, behavior is repeated to you, but it's completely another when it appears that one of those ghouls might have crossed the line in a big and bad way.

I'd appreciate it if, you've had a similar situation in your extended relations, you could pass along any helpful hints for dealing with this sort of thing that we might not have thought of. I don't think anyone's planning on calling the police until there's certain evidence of fraud, and even then they might not do it because it's something you'd prefer not to advertise to the world. I don't know. I can only guess at what I would do in such a circumstance, and that would not be what my in-laws would do. But if you've got any helpful information you'd like to pass along, we'd be happy to receive it.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:42 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 1534 words, total size 9 kb.

Do you wake up in the middle of the night, my devoted Cake Eater readers, longing for the days when you could walk over to the tee vee and pretend to smooth down Leonid Brezhnev's eyebrows, thinking he wouldn't be so damn bad if he just gave those hairy caterpillars a trim? Or do you miss the days when Uncle Joe talked about breaking some eggs to make an omelet while he still had crumbs from breakfast in that mustache of his? Or for Khruschev to pound his shoe on the podium at the UN? What about Gorby's birthmark? Have you found yourself missing that as well?

But most of all, are you, perhaps, in a general sort of way, nostalgic for the days when the US and the USSR were bound and determined not to blow each other to smithereens, even though the size of their arsenals said otherwise? Is the ennui of containment missing from your life?

Well, here's your opportunity, my devoted Cake Eater readers, to spend some of your hard earned cash on something that will truly take you back to the heyday of MAD.

Ahem.

You could own your very own Titan I Missile Base.

Where you could play out the opening scenes from WarGames to your heart's content.

Don't say I never did anything for you, my devoted Cake Eater readers.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:10 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 1 kb.

1 The hubby brought this to my attention and suggested that we buy this place instead of adding on to our current home!!! Don't think so - too much concrete, not enough windows and well the location sucks!!!

Posted by: The Lovely Janis from Winterset at October 14, 2007 09:06 PM (Zsocj)

2 The hubby brought this to my attention and suggested that we buy this place instead of adding on to our current home!!! Don't think so - too much concrete, not enough windows and well the location sucks!!!

Posted by: The Lovely Janis from Winterset at October 14, 2007 09:08 PM (Zsocj)

3 I'll have to ask the Spousal Unit, but I think that there's one of them right over thar in our necko da woods. I do know for sure I've heard the firefighters refer to "the old missle site" for a rendezvous point to get water refills. *cough* Would you like to play a game? LOLLL

Posted by: Margi at October 15, 2007 12:18 AM (wSEpS)

4 I didn't know there were pictures! Holy crap! I think I know where that is! ROFL! I will fwd linkage to Hubby for confirmation - but dude - if you bought that? I believe we'd be sorta-kinda-neighbors. Aheh.

Posted by: Margi at October 15, 2007 12:20 AM (wSEpS)

5 We're pretty sure we know exactly where that is. Too cool. I wish I had a millyun dollars.

Posted by: Margi at October 15, 2007 09:17 PM (wSEpS)

6 There are times when I do miss the Cold War. Those times make me feel dirty and uncomfortable, but I still have them. I miss the parades and the ole geezers standing in the cold on Lenin's tomb. They sure could throw a parade...

Posted by: The Maximum Leader at October 16, 2007 09:00 AM (ruviy)

7 ..... I agree with The Maximum Leader to an extent..... but wow, I sure would love to have me one of those Titan missiles.... and the coordinates of where Steve Spurrier is going to be this weekend....

Posted by: Eric at October 17, 2007 08:12 PM (g02Hg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I haven't been really paying too much attention to the whole Britney debacle, but I did make the mistake of clicking on one article about Britney's ex-bodyguard offering testimony in her custody case.

The ex-bodyguard hired Gloria Allred to represent him and here's the bit that I don't understand.

{...}Tony Barretto, 28, arrived with a lawyer but Family Court Commissioner Scott M. Gordon held only a brief open session before clearing the courtroom of everyone but attorneys for Spears and Federline to privately discuss unsealing documents in the ongoing case.

Outside court, Barretto's attorney Gloria Allred issued a statement calling him a "key and secret witness."

{my emphasis}

So, if this Baretto character is a "key and secret witness" why is his attorney announcing his presence to the world?

Seriously. I don't know why anyone hires Gloria Allred to represent them when it's patently obvious that the only person she actually cares to represent is herself.

Posted by: Kathy at 09:37 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 166 words, total size 1 kb.

Since I'm sure that you, my devoted Cake Eater readers, are not only devoted, but are also some savvy web surfers, I'm sure you've already seen the inaugural ad-campaign for Tom Ford for Men.

In case you haven't and for once I'm much savvier than you, well, take the jump. I will warn people now (AND YES, MOM, THIS MEANS YOU!) that it could be construed as not really all that arty-farty but actually fairly offensive. If not altogether pr0nographic. If you're of the faint of heart, DON'T TAKE THE FREAKIN' JUMP, EH?

And, more importantly, don't say I didn't warn you. more...

Posted by: Kathy at 03:49 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 3 kb.