This season’s premiere episode of Jersey Shore was only interesting for one reason.. MTV decided to surprise the cast by bringing the people they care about together for a surprise party.

That would have been all well & good, except for Nicole’s various sexual hookups with guys and girls that were invited to the same party. :D

Witnesses For The Prosecution

As I’ve previously stated, over the last couple of seasons, Nicole has hooked up with housemates Mike, Vinny, and Deena. The latest episodes between her and Vinny and her and Deena occurred while she was in Italy last season, which means it was during the time she was dating her current (according to the timeline of the released episodes) boyfriend. This is all on videotape. :D There’s no denying any of that.

What ISN’T on videotape is that Mike said Nicole blew him recently, which was also after the time that Nicole had claimed to her boyfriend that she was sexually committed to him… Well.. Mike’s SAYING IT is on tape.. The actual activity is not on tape, which led Nicole to initially attempt to deny it, rather unsuccessfully.

This is what made this surprise reunion interesting. There are only two eye-witnesses to Nicole blowing Mike. That would be Mike’s homeboy and Nicole’s homegirl, who were hooking up with each other at the time that Nicole did her thing with Mike.

Unfortunately for Nicole, both of these witnesses were invited to the party, so she was now outnumbered 3-1, as far as people who were going to claim that she never blew Mike.

I say this because Mike’s boy was DYING to tell what he knew, and Nicole’s girl was shutting the **** up. :D .. Had there been any question, or, rather, had it actually been a lie that Nicole did what Mike said she did, Nicole would have felt brave, because she had one more person to tell the truth for her, and Mike had one more person to lie for him, and the truth would have easily won out, or at least, there would have been sufficient reasonable doubt to have people remain undecided about what actually happened.

At first, it seemed like Nicole was up for the confrontation, because she was talking all kinds of yang to Mike’s friend that has the information on her.. However, in a previous episode, she had been talking all kinds of yang to ACTUAL POLICEMEN that were escorting her drunk ass off the boardwalk to a waiting police car, so we know she completely loses her mind when she drinks.

The most telling aspect of this situation is that the next day, when Nicole was sober, Mike stepped to her and told her she should apologize to his boy for saying mean things about him…. She actually did it.

She did it because she knew she had to do it or else dude was going to spill the beans, and a) her homegirl wasn’t going to back her “I didn’t do it” play, and b) she was the only person with something to lose in that situation, because her boyfriend was the only one that didn’t know the story.

Situational Amnesia

Another interesting aspect of that party was that as much as Nicole’s boyfriend DOESN’T know about Nicole’s various sexual escapades, there’s one thing that he knew for sure, since Nicole admitted it to him. He knew damned well that Vinny had ****** his girl. :D

We know he knows, because after Nicole tells him over the phone she hooked up with Vinny (and this was edited, so who knows how the actual conversation actually happened), her boyfriend replied “Tell Vinny he’s dead!”

I understand that that was an emotional reaction. I imagine that guys are going to feel upset and temporarily irrational when their girlfriend calls them up and informs them that within the 48 hours (probably 24 hours) that she had an argument with him, she spread her legs for the next man.

I understand that he didn’t mean dead dead.. He meant to say “I’m really upset with Vinny for ******* you”. In fact, it’s not Vinny’s problem. Dude should only be upset with his girl for giving up the ass, because he had a deal with HER, and not Vinny.

The funny part about all this is that Vinny had been ******* Nicole way way way before she even met this dude she’s dating now, so he really has nothing to be upset about. He started dating a girl that was already consistently ******* some other guy. It’s too bad for him that she didn’t say that. It’s too bad for him that she didn’t tell him that as soon as she gets drunk/horny, she throws sex at just about anything that moves.

Don’t get mad at the next man because he accepts the easy sex from “your” girl. Tighten your game up, playah. >:D

Anyway… This was very interesting, because the boyfriend ends up in the same room with the guy that ****** his girl.. The same guy that he claimed was “dead” (meaning he was upset with him), and according to MTV’s edit, he never had AAAAAAAAAANY kind of conversation with Vinny. o_O

Apparently, there was no escalation of the beef, no squashing of the beef, and no discussion of the beef, whatsoever.

Nothing. \o/

Dude seemed to have completely forgotten, or completely gotten over the fact that Vinny had rather recently dicked his girlfriend down.

I mean, it was like nothing had ever happened. Dude was all lovey-dovey to Nicole, kissing on her and asking her if she was feeling ok..

Seriously, fellaz.. If you know damned well that you’re going to develop amnesia after your girl steps to the left and gets some from the next man, skip making a major scene about it on the telephone, in person, or EVER, in fact.

Just don’t bring it up. Let it slide. Recognize that you’re the type of guy that’s going to stay with your girl regardless of how many other guys are screwing her.

There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s ok. You don’t have to act like you care so that people think you’re normal.

Take it like any other information. “How was your night?… oh.. You drank until you fell down for no apparent reason, because you were standing still when you buss your ass? o_O .. oh.. You made out with some chick you just met at the bar? o_O .. oh.. You hopped in bed with your male roommate and gave him a Happy Ending because you and I had an argument several hours before that? o_O .. Glad you had fun, dear. Talk to you tomorrow.”
–
Follow Bill via Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | Email Subscription | RSS Feed

Related Posts

• Why Women Are Better Liars Than Men
• How To Deny Allegations
• “Moral Failing” In Relationships
• Single.. But Not Really
• That’s Your Man’s Problem

I’ve had a couple of interesting conversations recently on the topic of men inviting women out for dates. Perhaps this is an indication that I should reevaluate the situation.

The way I see it, there’s no point in “asking a chick out”, unless a) you intend to hit it ASAP, or b) you’re looking for an actual girlfriend and you’re considering her for the job opening.

As I’ve been saying for years, The Kid doesn’t date. I hang out with chicks and whatever happens happens and whatever doesn’t happen doesn’t happen.

There’s no point in specifically designating a hangout with a chick as a date, because the same thing’s going to happen either way. There are dudes that get laid from hanging out with chicks, and there are dudes that DON’T get laid from going on dates with chicks! :D haha What’s the point? \o/

In fact, you’re making it worse for yourself if you frame it as a date, because she’s expecting you to press up on her. You’re telegraphing to her that you’re trying to hook up with her. You’re skewing her vision of your hangout from the giddyap.

OTOH, women (of course) clamor that by NOT framing your hangout as a “date”, you’re skewing her perception in the other direction. By not aggressively pursuing her, you have her thinking “He doesn’t want to screw me”, which colors her reaction to your invitation and makes her feel like you want to be “Just Friends” with her.

That’s actually irrelevant, because regardless of what she thinks, she’ll get the picture when you press up.

Also, if you frame it as a date and she accepts, then she’s going to put her best foot forward to look as good as she possibly can at this point in time. If you frame it as a hangout, she may very well show up looking like a bum, and then you know what you’re REALLY going to get if you continue to spend time with her.

Women think too much as it is, so you really don’t want to add to their troubles by putting them under the pressure of wondering how their date is going. How they’re doing. How they look. Whether you like her or not. Whether you’re ever going to “ask her out” again. Whether you’re going to stalk her Facebook page. Whether you’re going to dump her after sex. Whether you’re hooking up with any of her friends, sisters or aunts…

I live in New York City with literally MILLIONS of women. I meet new women every week. If I were pressed to do it, I could meet women every day of the year. There’s no shortage whatsoever of female company here. In fact, the ratio is something like 5:1 in my favor. Even if every single guy here isolated one chick, that still leaves 4 out of every 5 chicks for me, which is like hundreds of thousands of women, if not a couple million.

That’s assuming I never leave New York City.

It’s easier to want to go on dates and have girlfriends and stuff like that when you live in the sticks and your best bet in life is to hook up with and eventually marry Becky Sue.

I think that’s great! :D I’m happy for people that live and enjoy the simple life. :)

Perhaps it’s time to start unnecessarily inviting women out on dates for the experimental value. o_O

I really detest how women react completely differently to the exact same situation because of what you name it, such as ******* vs. “making love”… You tell a chick you want to make love to her and she’s falling all over herself in a romantic stupor. You tell a chick you want to **** her, which is exactly the same thing, and you get all kinds of obstacles and opposition! :D haha So Annoying! :D
–
Follow Bill via Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | Email Subscription | RSS Feed

Related Posts

• You’re Still Not Me
• He’s Lying To You [The Okey-Doke, Part 02]
• Who Is Bob?
• Makeup [The Okey-Doke, Part 01]
• Shocking Dating Advice!

My most recent opinion about the Republican candidates was that we were going to see a Brokered Convention this cycle, because nobody was going to get enough votes to actually win. Having now seen more of how the system works, I’ve changed my mind.

The reason I figured it might be a close race was because Gingrich had just been sanctioned by a Christian group. We know that Romney, as a Mormon, won’t be getting many votes in the South. I figured that if Gingrich could make it to the South without being too far behind, he could catch up to Romney at that point.

Unfortunately for Gingrich, he became a frontrunner when Cain dropped out of the race so nobody would delve any more into the story about that chick whose rent he had been paying without telling his wife, and that he supposedly wasn’t having sex with.

Once Gingrich went to the front, he became the subject of attack ads.

Gingrich had been able to get over up until now by getting the other candidates to agree to “The Eleventh Commandment”, which is “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.”

That was all well & good, so long as Gingrich didn’t stand a chance of winning anything, but suddenly, the kid gloves came off, and the other Republicans have been literally SMASHING HIM with attack ads. Everything from sitting with Nancy Pelosi to dumping multiple wives after cheating on them to policy stance changes.. They’ve just been kicking his ass up and down the block out there in Iowa.

Gingrich’s response to the ass-whipping he’s been taking has been to challenge people to debate him. *YAWN*

The reason he’s been doing that is that his campaign doesn’t have any money in it.

That means that while Romney and Paul have a barrage of attack ads playing all day and all night on Iowa television stations, Gingrich can’t do jack-**** other than get free air-time on talk shows and news programs. Unfortunately, most people don’t watch those programs. They watch regular television, where they get bombarded with negative ads about Gingrich all day:

YouTube Link => youtu.be/CWKTOCP45zY

YouTube Link => youtu.be/hRdqGKA782A

On top of that, even though he got endorsed by a religious group at that meeting they went to a while back, other religious groups are balking at backing him because of his past history, based on the usual “family values” objections. It’s not helping Gingrich to have his current wife at his side, because she was his side-piece before he ditched wife #2, and her being there only reminds people of that fact.

Also, I hadn’t anticipated how INSISTENT the Republican Establishment would be about making sure that Gingrich doesn’t get the nomination… It turns out that they’re concerned that if they send Gingrich, WILDIN’ OUT in the big dance, not only will he lose to Obama, but he’ll make Republicans look so bad that their chances of taking the 4 seats they need in order to gain control of the Senate will evaporate.

They honestly can’t afford for Gingrich to move forward to the next stage, so now, all the props he had gained from Cain’s exit are now flowing away to last-ditch-effort Santorum.

Santorum recently got the endorsement of Christian Conservative leaders instead of Gingrich:

Rick Santorum Gets Big Boost From Iowa Christian Conservative Leaders

URBANDALE, Iowa: Rick Santorum received a big Iowa endorsement Tuesday that should help rally the splintered Christian evangelical community here around him. A social conservative leader in the state, Bob Vander Plaats, backed the former Pennsylvania senator just two weeks before the caucuses here, calling him “the Huckabee in this race.”

“I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. House, I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. Senate. I saw him as a champion for the family on the campaign trail,” Vander Plaats said. “I believe Rick Santorum comes from us, just not to us, he comes from us.”

For some odd reason, the pundits don’t feel like talking about this, as this is the obvious reason he suddenly is in the double-digits in Iowa polls… Well.. I guess the reason isn’t odd… If they talk about Santorum getting a boost because Christians rallied behind him, they have to talk about how Romney’s *NOT* getting votes because of his Mormon faith.

So Romney stays the same, around 20%-25%, Gingrich is coming down, Santorum is going up.

Bachmann is still nowhere. More of her staffers have bounced from her campaign, including her Iowa campaign chief leaving to JOIN. RON. PAUL’S. CAMPAIGN!!!

In another news tidbit nobody wants to talk about, Bachmann was the flavor of the DAY, because she won the Iowa Straw Poll BARELY over Ron Paul (215 vote margin), and then the very next day, Perry entered the race and became the male version of Bachmann. They’re offering the exact same qualities. Bachmann went straight to ZERO when Perry joined, and she never returned. She only had props because she was the only anti-Romney vote at the time.

Bachmann should be scoring in the single-digits when the Iowa Republicans vote, and then that should be the end of her campaign.

I don’t know what Huntsman’s plan is, but he’d better do something SOON! :D

Perry, even though he’s proven himself to be mentally deficient, still has a lot of fans and a lot of money. Even if he gets trounced in Iowa, there’s no reason for him to quit, because he has a lot of religious support in the South and enough campaign cash to keep paying entry fees and buying television commercials.

Having said that.. Both Perry and Gingrich *FAILED* to get the requisite 10,000 signatures in Virginia which would have placed them on the ballot. I think Perry just straight FAILED, and I saw videotape yesterday of Gingrich admitting that some dude that was getting signatures for him in Virginia got caught doing election fraud, so 1,500 votes got removed from Gingrich’s tally and he fell short.

Gingrich cites fraud in Virginia ballot failure

MASON CITY, Iowa (Reuters) – Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich said on Wednesday his failure to meet the requirements to take part in Virginia’s presidential nominating contest resulted from fraud by a worker hired by his campaign.

Gingrich, who lives in Virginia, scrambled to submit the petitions necessary to get on the ballot on time, but the state party said on Saturday a review process showed he did not have the required 10,000 verifiable signatures.

Gingrich’s campaign hired workers to gather those signatures, and the former speaker of the House of Representatives said at a campaign stop that one of those workers had committed fraud.

“We hired somebody who turned in false signatures. We turned in 11,100 – we needed 10,000 – 1,500 of them were by one guy who frankly committed fraud,” Gingrich said, according to CNN.

So, since Santorum’s not going anywhere, and neither is Bachmann, Cain is out already, Huntsman is still trying to get out of the mid-single-digits in polling, Perry won’t be winning but has enough money to stay in the race, and Gingrich is being torn down by his own party in the best interests of their self-preservation, that leaves Romney as Last Man Standing.

…

Except for Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is no spring chicken.

He ran for President in 1988.. TWENTY-FOUR YEARS AGO! :D

He ran again in 2008. He’s running again, now, in 2012.

How is it that perhaps a week ago, the pundits started reporting about racist comments in his newsletters from the 80s and 90s?

YouTube Link => youtu.be/1vMHuWQ_kfg

Didn’t they go over this in 2008?.. Didn’t they go over this in 1998? How is it that this stuff is supposed to become an issue *NOW*, when Ron Paul is about to win in Iowa?

It’s ridiculous. :D .. First of all, Ron Paul is as old as Moses. He was born in 1935, which means he was already THIRTY YEARS OLD before the USA even agreed to stop discriminating.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) was a landmark piece of legislation in the United States[1] that outlawed major forms of discrimination against African Americans and women, including racial segregation. It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (“public accommodations”).

Ron Paul was already a grown-ass man by the time stopping discriminating was determined publicly to be “the right thing to do”! :D You’re going to have to cut him some slack.

Also, the people that want to talk about it now should be ashamed of themselves for not talking about it from day 01, when he announced he was going to run for President.. AGAIN.

Regardless, Ron Paul is clearly unelectable in a general election. He says what he thinks, regardless of what people think or feel about it, which is extremely admirable, especially amongst politicians, but most people aren’t going to agree to return to the Every Man For Himself days of the Pony Express and O.K. Corral and whatever else Ron Paul is reminiscing about when he says what he says.

The other problem with the Republicans is that they have to make such incredibly assholeish statements in order to gain the respect and/or trust of their base that there’s no way any of them (other than Romney) are going to fare well AT ALL in a general election, where all the people they just finished verbally disrespecting are going to either vote for THEM or for President Obama.

Romney has a chance, because he doesn’t believe anything in particular. He just says anything that people want to hear so he can try to get elected.

Republicans see his infinitely changing stances on basic policies as a liability. It’s actually good for his general election chances, because he can run a lot of videotape of him saying moderate or centrist things and act like that’s how he’s been the whole time, setting himself up to be perceived as a replacement for Obama who has the same thoughts, but more business experience.

Also, the same thing that Romney did to Gingrich, flooding the networks with FACTS about Gingrich that people don’t like, that’s what’s going to happen to Romney as soon as he’s determined to be the Republican nominee.

So, The order in Iowa should be:

1. Paul
2. Romney
3. Gingrich
4. Santorum
5. Perry
6. Bachmann
7. Huntsman
8. Cain (Can people still vote for him, since he had already qualified for the ballot before he quit the race? o_O)

Paul and Santorum won’t be going anywhere after Iowa, so the important part is that Romney should get about 23% of the vote, and either Gingrich or Santorum should get 18% of the vote. This matters because the voting is proportional in Iowa, not winner-take-all, so, effectively, the outcome in Iowa shouldn’t have any effect on anything, because they’re going to have to split the delegates evenly.

Santorum doesn’t have enough money to make it to the South, so Perry should pick up a lot of votes down there. Those won’t be enough to catch Romney, however.

So, it’s looking like it’s going to be Romney vs. Obama, which is what I said from the giddyap, because the rest of these people aren’t and weren’t viable candidates.

Romney will get smashed because of changing stances on policies as well as being associated with the Republican obstructionist tactics that have been going on in Congress.

Also just like I said.. Once the President started snitching on Boehner and Cantor for what they’ve been doing, his favorable ratings have been going up, up, and up.

I don’t even think the general election’s going to be close, and watching Romney try to debate Obama is going to be a laugh riot.

However.. Even if/when Obama wins, the Republicans are in position to take the four seats they need to gain control of the Senate, in which case, we can look forward to four more years of obstructionism, so you’d better figure out how to get a job on your own. Washington won’t be helping you out.

The funny thing is that some of the Republican positions make a lot of sense, such as decreasing the amount of money the government spends, which is why I find it strange, embarrassing for the USA, and disconcerting that they decided that their message, which may very well be the right answer for bringing back the American economy, should be delivered by this circular firing squad of circus clowns.
–
Follow Bill via Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | Email Subscription | RSS Feed

Related Posts

• Florida Republican Primary… Predictions?
• South Carolina 2012 Republican Primary Predictions
• 2012 Iowa Caucus Results
• 2012 New Hampshire Republican Primary Predictions
• Brokered Conventions

Reader “Sam” accused me of being biased on a topic. I think bias is worth discussing.

Of course, we’re all biased because of our personal experiences in life, how we grew up, who we were born to, everything that happens to us shapes our opinions.

There’s a difference between that and not being able or even WILLING to think about things from both sides of the situation.

So for instance, as far as politics, am I happy that Barack Obama was elected President of the United States of America? Hellz Yah! :D .. I was *VERY* happy about that when it occurred, and I’m still happy about it now.

Does that mean that I think his ideas for the direction for the USA are better than what the Republicans are suggesting? No. I have no idea. I’d like to understand more about why both sides have such ridiculously different ideas about how to successfully move forward.

However.. At this point, it’s the REPUBLICANS that are trying to come up with one person to challenge President Obama in the 2012 election. They’re presenting people and asking us to consider a world with one of their candidates in the most powerful job on the planet (in my BIASED, American opinion). It’s the REPUBLICANS that are auditioning right now, and most of them SUCK! :D

When I bring up the fact that these people suck, I’m accused of being biased as opposed to having objectively assessed them and having found them crucially mentally LACKING, as far as what it takes to be the leader of the free world.

Look at Rick Perry.. If you went to a driving school, and the so-called “teacher” said “THERE ARE THREE THINGS YOU *DEFINITELY* HAVE TO AVOID WHEN YOU’RE IN A CAR!!! :O .. The first is X, The second is Y, and the third is….. The third is…. Um.. I forgot. Oops. \o/” you would find that person incompetent and you wouldn’t hire that person to TEACH YOU how to drive.

It’s only common sense.

The problem isn’t forgetting things. I forget things all the time, like chicks’ names. >:D

The problem is that you were so excited about something that you swore was SO IMPORTANT, and then you couldn’t remember THREE THINGS?… That means you weren’t actually excited about them. That means that they’re not that important to you. That means you’re putting on an act. That means you’re disqualified as a candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America.

But.. If I say “Rick Perry isn’t smart enough to be the President”, I’m accused of Bias. :D

Look at Michele Bachmann. I said months ago that all she does is memorize and regurgitate information like a robot. I’d rather watch Siri in a debate, because at least Siri’s unpredictable:

YouTube Link => youtu.be/rNsrl86inpo

Bachmann listens to the question, you see her eyes rolling around in the back of her head, preparing her response, and then she says “What I’d like to say is..” and then repeats something you’ve heard her say in the past.

She’s good at that, but she’s not auditioning to be a parrot. She’s auditioning to be the President of the United States of America, and that’s not gonna cut it.

But when I say Bachmann isn’t a viable candidate, I’m accused of bias. :D

On top of that, I might also be accused of chauvinism. Someone might say I’m disrespecting her because she’s a female. No. I’m pointing out that she’s mentally not currently prepared to be the President of the United States of America. :) It’s the same thing I said about Palin four years ago. It’s the reason I knew Barack Obama was going to be President as soon as I found out the Republicans didn’t have anyone better than Palin to send as VP.

It has nothing to do with the fact that they’re women. Just listen to them speak. That’s all you need to do.

However, because they’re female and I’m not, someone can accuse me of chauvinism for pointing out their myriad deficiencies that disqualify them for the position the Republicans are presenting them for.

Same thing with Herman Cain. As soon as he starts getting accused of dick-slinging, it’s “because he’s black”.

All of a sudden, the same dude that swears up and down that his traction with Republicans shows that they’re not racists wants to say that the reason he’s being accused of feeling chicks up in cars and having a side piece of ass for the most recent 13 years out of his 49 years of marriage is because people are racially motivated to dis him.

No.. If Cain had been white, and he had been paying some chick’s rent without informing his wife, and that chick stepped up front and claimed she’s been giving him ***** for the past 13 years, I’d still pat him on the back and ask him how it was.

What about John Edwards? o_O .. He’s not black, and he got snagged for having a kid with that extra chick. Edwards didn’t get to play the white card, claiming that every time a baby of a side piece shows up, it’s blamed on the white guy.

But if I say Cain isn’t a real candidate, and he’s only selling books, I’m accused of bias. :D

Newt Gingrich is a jerk. It’s just that simple.

I’m a jerk too. It takes one to know one. Gingrich doesn’t give a flying **** about you, your family or anything else.

Put Gingrich’s finger on “the button” and he’ll cause more damage than that Montgomery Burns dude:

Nobody cares about what Santorum is saying.

Santorum finally got an endorsement yesterday, from ONE DUDE, who wouldn’t/couldn’t even say that his entire organization backed Santorum.. just him. :D Santorum will be off the stage soon.

Ron Paul says what he means and means what he says… This is why he will never be elected to be the President of the United States of America.

If you’re like “**** Vermont! :D haha They shouldn’t have built their houses on questionable land! :D haha Sucks to be THEM!!! >:D”, you need to stay in local and regional politics and stay off the nationwide stage.

Paul should either win Iowa or come in a close second, but once you exit “flyover states” (which, to my international friends that don’t live here, those are states that you never actually set foot in during your entire lifetime, but you might FLY OVER them on your way from New York City to Los Angeles, Miami, or Chicago), he’s not going to have any traction, because we realize we need to work together as a team, an united country. It matters what happens past the General Store and the High School Football Stadium. We’re all in this together.

Ron Paul’s ideas were forged around the time that the “Indians” were still being diseased and murdered out of existence, and it was “Every man for himself” in the wild west, like on “Bonanza”… People still live like that in the sticks, but those ideas don’t play in actual cities.

But if I say Ron Paul’s *TRIPPIN’*!!! :D haha I’ll be accued of being ageist or whatever. :D

So, The only chances Republicans have AT ALL is to send Romney or Huntsman against Obama.. Unless they introduce a brand new nominee at a Brokered Convention.

By pointing out how ridiculous their candidates are, I’m accused of bias. In fact, I’m just reporting actual facts that disqualify these people from currently being fit to win a general election against Barack Obama.

If you think they’re fit, leave a comment below, explaining why and HOW you came to that conclusion. If you convince me that you’re right, I’ll say so.

So, While I believe bias is real and affects all of us, if you’re intelligent, you only ride it so far.

If you like the concepts that Michele Bachmann stands for, you can’t look past the fact that she’s memorizing and regurgitating.

If you like the concepts that Ron Paul stands for, you can’t look past the prospect that if he had the power, he might dismantle the federal group that’s going to help you out when a tornado or flood hits your town, which his nowhere near where he happens to live, so **** you.

If you like the concepts that Herman Cain stands for, you can’t look past the possibility that he would be the one deciding whether or not to send our troops to attack a country he doesn’t know ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT.

So don’t accuse me of bias because I don’t subscribe to yours. >:D
–
Follow Bill via Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | Email Subscription | RSS Feed

Related Posts

• Your Girlfriend Is A Ho
• Asking Women Out On Dates
• You’re Still Not Me
• How To Deny Allegations
• Why Consensual Affairs Are More Damaging Than Sexual Harassment

Oh, Life..
Is bigger..
It’s bigger than you.
And you are not me.
~ R.E.M.

YouTube Link=> youtu.be/xwtdhWltSIg

Back in the day, when I used to play the relationship game, I had a few girlfriends..

simultaneously..

I didn’t think anything of it at the time. It’s easy to have multiple girlfriends by not giving them what they want.

Females have this strange ability to really, really, REALLY want to physically hook up with you, but to find mentally-based excuses to withhold things from you that you never asked them for.. like fidelity.

Guys aren’t like that. When we’re sexually attracted to a woman, it propels us FORWARD in the relationship, not BACKWARD. The more a gal likes you, the more mental roadblocks she throws in her own way, blocking herself from purely enjoying her time with you because she’s so busy trying to figure out whether she looks like a slut, or whether she gave it up too soon, or whether she can get you to take her to dinner instead of just going to her house and hittin’ it whenever you get in the mood, and all other kinds of nonsense that guys never think about.

I mean, seriously.. Think about it. :) When was the last time a guy was concerned that he screwed a chick too soon and she had lost “respect” for him? haha Never.

When was the last time a guy was concerned about a gal taking him out to dinner instead of inviting him to her crib and immediately hoppin’ on tha dilznick? hah Never.

Nobody cares about these things. A gal looks good or she doesn’t. You want to hit it or you don’t. She’s down with it or she isn’t. You have a good time with her or you don’t. It’s all very simple, and it’s extremely funny, watching women mentally run all over creation to eventually arrive in the exact same place where you’ve been chillin’, waiting for her to stop bullshitting and act like a grown-ass woman that does what she wants to do when she wants to do it.

So, Anyway.. It’s easy to have multiple girlfriends, because they take themselves out of the game. THEY’RE the ones that are concerned about you committing to them, not the other way around, yet, if you deny them certain things, they get on some “SISTAHS ARE DOIN’ IT FOR THEMSELVES”, Equal Rights tip, and start trying to blackmail you with giving ***** to the next man if you don’t commit to them.

Meanwhile, you have three other chicks that are saying the exact same thing, so you can afford to have one or two or three go offline for a few months, because unless you’re down to ZERO WOMEN, you’re still 100% in the game.

In fact.. The more women that you know that go on strike, the *EASIER* is is for you to have multiple girlfriends, because there’s less maintenance involved. The more they front on you, the more time and energy you have to screw the next chick.

The reason I brought up the multiple-girlfriend scenario wasn’t merely yet another self-aggrandizing post about “The Kid”… I wanted to talk about poachers, schemers, potential cockblockers.

If you only have one girlfriend, obviously, there’s no way that your girlfriendS are going to have overlapping social circles.

As soon as you have two or more, you have to be concerned that any friend of one of them might also be a friend of another one.

If that happens, you have to have your hierarchy set up properly, or else the entire house of cards could crumble. You have to know what the order is.. Which chick you’re willing to lose if she finds out about the other one(s). That’s your only defense against cockblocking.. Preemptively informing the most important women about what’s actually going on.

This is bad enough when it only involves a chain of women. Once guys get involved, it turns into a different situation.

Women just say a bunch of hypothetical nonsense, like “GIRRRRLLLL???… I wouldn’t even STAND for that because BLAH BLAH BLAH” when they know damned well that as long as their boyfriend hits it properly, they STFU and take whatever he gives them.

All that does is cause temporary confusion for the affected girlfriend(s) until you set them straight with logic and they get their minds right.

When guys get involved with this process, it’s different, because the only reason they’re talking to your girlfriends in the first place is that they’re trying to have sex with them.

The way The Game is set up, guys pretend to be friends with women until they can figure out how to get them to spread their legs. It’s during this precarious time that your girlfriends are likely to be influenced by guys that they don’t believe have ulterior motives in cockblocking you. They think the guy is their “friend”, so he’s telling them something that will help them live their lives efficiently. In fact, he’s trying to get them to stop sexually focusing on YOU so they can get their foot in the door, or get their chocolate in her peanut butter, so to speak.

If you have a proper network of friends, and you have the proper relationships to your girlfriends, you’re informed of these insubordination attempts. You hear about who it was that tried to influence your girlfriend, what they said, where it happened, how they know each other, etc.

So it’s funny to hear about how guys attempt to undermine your relationship(s) by gathering information and snitching on you to chicks that they assume don’t know what’s going on. They know the rules of The Game, and they know your girlfriend knows the rules, so they stack up a list of your rules violations and attempt to sink your battleship.

Unfortunately.. That only works against people that were following the rules to begin with. I never followed rules because I don’t have to. I don’t have to promise chicks things to get them to hook up with me. They want to do it or they don’t. If they don’t want to, I can convince them that THEY DO, or I can’t. >:D

I was editing a video yesterday, and this guy’s girlfriend was on the screen, and she’s a model, really cute, etc, but all I was thinking of the entire time was “This is the chick that this guy has promised not to have sex with ANY other females on the planet for? :D”.

It doesn’t make any sense. :) I guess I’m the Ron Paul of relationships. Free Will. Free Agency. I’m not offering you jack-**** in exchange for hooking up with me. Do it if you feel like it. If you don’t, do something else. Nobody cares. We enjoy our time with each other or we don’t.

If that’s how you met chicks from the giddyap, and they finally figured out that you were serious and not just writing controversial ish to increase your blog post readership, your relationship gels and solidifies in a different way from dudes that promise fidelity and then get caught cheating.

Since guys don’t actually know you and can’t possibly fathom the depth of your relationship to your girlfriends (or THEIR girlfriends), they think they can undermine you by informing chicks that you’re dating that you’re dating other chicks.

Being that any chick I’m messing with can KICK ROCKS if she doesn’t enjoy our time together, I’m always amused by hearing about these feeble attempts at peeling my girlfriends.

The ensuing conversation goes essentially like this:

1. Her: Some dude told me XYZ
2. Me: ok.. What are you going to do about it?
3. Her: ….. What do you mean “What am I going to do?”
4. Me: I mean, you’re going to stop messing with me, or what?
5. Her: Well.. No.. But..
6. Me: So why are we talking about this?
7. Her: …………

Basically, Ladies… If your FUNCTIONALITY in a relationship isn’t going to change because of a situation, the situation isn’t worth discussing.

If you’re going to feel differently, or talk differently about me to your friends, or roll your eyes to the left instead of to the right from now on, nobody cares, if it doesn’t functionally affect my relationship to you.

I don’t give a damn what women are doing with the next man while I’m doing my own things that don’t concern them. It’s like DADC.. Don’t Ask, Don’t Care.

So, While these dudes probably succeeded in getting laid a bunch of times with chicks I was currently messing with, they never got what they actually wanted, which was to gain full control over the female.

This is because, at the end of the day, I’m me and they aren’t.

They can offer fidelity all day (they’re probably lying, BTW), but they’re offering faithfulness from an inferior male.

You can’t do what I do, because you have no idea what I do. All you know is what YOU do and what you’ve seen on television and the movies and the information you’ve gleaned from your similarly-unsuccessful homeboys.

You can’t come anywhere near to having the relationship to her that I currently have to her. If I decided to play her and tell her I was exclusive with her, you’d get shut out, immediately. Today. Right this minute. Phone. Email. Text. You’re done.

You can’t do that to me because I’m not playing by the rules.

I know your limitations and you don’t know mine.

If you were me, you’d actually have a chance, but you’re not, so you don’t.

Conversely.. I’m not interested in blocking you from getting what you want from any female you find attractive.

I don’t have time (or interest, frankly) to do all the stuff you’re claiming you’re going to do for her, so take her out on dates, take her on vacations (oh.. I’ll veto it if you try to take one of my chicks to Aruba), buy her clothes and jewelry, give her titles like “girlfriend” and “fiancee”, marry her, have kids with her, do whatever you want to do with her. More power to ya! Good luck with that! :D

Just be aware that so long as she’s still physically attractive, The Kid is still on the case. >:D haha Just because you feel like you got over on me and stole one of my chicks doesn’t mean that’s what actually happened.

She may have been lent to you, or perhaps even rented. o_O

She might never have been “with” me to begin with, but was just spending time with me until someone felt like sweeping her off her feat and subsidizing her lifestyle.

Either way, the only way to remove the next man from the equation is to bring the same thing he’s bringing to the table and then more, which is why I don’t bother.

Women are Free Agents just as much as men are. Once you realize that, you’ll learn to get what you can get from them and let that be that. The concept of locking a chick down or putting her in “deep check” is for amateurs.

All you can do is be the best man you can be for her and offer her as much of what she tells you she wants as you can… What you CAN’T do is be ME, just like I can’t be you.

Stop focusing on *MY* relationship to your girlfriend and concentrate on your own.
–
Follow Bill via Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | Email Subscription | RSS Feed

Related Posts

• Asking Women Out On Dates
• He’s Lying To You [The Okey-Doke, Part 02]
• Who Is Bob?
• Makeup [The Okey-Doke, Part 01]
• Shocking Dating Advice!