MGTOW
November 30th, 2007 EggheadI just wanted to bring to everyone’s attention a collection of writings related to MGTOW. It’s a new content management system over at mgtow.net.
It’s located here, so update your bookmarks.
I just wanted to bring to everyone’s attention a collection of writings related to MGTOW. It’s a new content management system over at mgtow.net.
It’s located here, so update your bookmarks.
This post is about a bit of judicial misconduct. I thought it was kind of strange that I didn’t run across this in any domestic news source, but in a source from a foreign country. I found the story at The Telegraph’s website. The Telegraph is a British newspaper. A little odd, wouldn’t you say? What does this say about the state of affairs in the United States?
In any event, first check out the story. I’ll have a few comments located below the text of the article.
A US judge has been removed from the bench for jailing 46 people after none of them admitted responsibility for a ringing mobile phone in his courtroom.
A commission on judicial conduct recommended Judge Robert Restaino be struck off, saying he had “snapped” and “engaged in what can only be described as two hours of inexplicable madness” while hearing a domestic violence case at Niagara Falls city court in 2005.
The strange incident began when a mobile phone rang and an angry Mr Restaino demanded to know who it belonged to.
When no one owned up, Mr Restaino told the court: “Everyone is going to jail”.
“Every single person is gong to jail in this courtroom unless I get that instrument now.
“If anybody believes I’m kidding, ask some of the folks that have been here for a while. You are all going.”
Despite the threat, no one came forward and the judge ordered that the group be taken into custody.
The entire courtroom was taken to the city jail, where they were searched and jammed into crowded cells.
Fourteen people were unable to pay their bail money and were shackled and bussed to Niagara County Jail.
The judge released the defendants later that afternoon after the media began showing interest in the bizarre episode.
In defending his actions, Mr Restaino told the commission he had been under stress in his personal life.
I think the Founding Fathers dropped the ball on ensuring there were sufficient Checks and Balances against the Judicial Branch of our form of government. Or, alternately, that they are too slow in acting. Yes, the recommendation was to remove the offending judge, but it took two years from the time of the offense.
And about the offense itself. While it is undoubtedly true that Judge Restaino was feeling stress, and that this prompted his action, it is also undoubtedly true that he had been conditioned to believe that his action was, if not entirely appropriate, at least permissible to him. And what could possibly have conditioned that belief? My theory is that it was conditioned by his time on the bench having granted him unlimited power over other human beings. In a courtroom, what a judge says, goes. Who polices the judges? Why else has family law courts become so biased against men? Why else have debtor’s prisons returned, with the not-so-polite fiction that these debtors are in contempt of court, rather than unable to pay?
The United States isn’t ruled by the people or by the politicians. It is ruled by an oligarchy made up of a sect of black-robed priest-kings, whose words are (literally!) law.
Well, I tested theme after theme, before I was even relatively satisfied. I was looking for a 3-column, widget-ready, Wordpress theme that worked properly. I found a few, but I didn’t like the way they looked. And if I found one whose look I liked, I discovered that it either didn’t work properly or that it would require more editing than I was willing to do. Eventually, I just gave up, went with a 2-column theme, and moved all of my widgets over to a single sidebar. It will have to do, I guess.
I apologize for the theme confusion. The theme I was using, Misty Mellow, has gone even wonkier. It’s simply not displaying images correctly. So, I’ve gone back to the default Kubrick theme until I can get a new theme uploaded.
I was actually surprised that they published my letter to the editor. I was responding to this political cartoon, which appeared in my local paper on Monday:

I found it quite ironic that the headline “What is a ‘hate crime’”? by Clarence Page (Monday) was right next to a prime example of bigotry — the anti-male screed masquerading as a political cartoon by Jerry Holbert.
– Name withheld,
Springfield
I expect that I’ll either see some irate letters in response, or I’ll be ignored. Probably the latter. I did use big words, after all.
Update 28 January 2008: I was totally, completely ignored. No surprise there.
In this post, MarkyMark parsed Jacinta Tynan’s article entitled “Men, marriage, and ultimatums.” Below is a comment I left on MarkyMark’s blog.
I’m a bit older now. When I was younger, I would have agreed that finding “that special someone” was worth the hard work of looking. But, as I said, I’m a bit older now. My – ah – ardor has cooled off now, and I’ve become very comfortable in the life I’ve built for myself. Upsetting the apple cart by beginning a drama-filled relationship just doesn’t sound all that appealing anymore.
I once read a novel where one character (a woman playing matchmaker) said to another (a younger woman), “I’ve noticed that bachelorhood is habit-forming.” Whether the author of that novel realized it or not, there is a lot of truth in that statement. After having lived as a bachelor for a long time, I don’t feel any strong need to rush out and start a new relationship. So, if women want men to commit to them, they had better get these men while they’re young, because older gentlemen are a much harder fish to land. Unfortunately, young women these days seem to enjoy partying and being unencumbered, even though they plan to get married when they are “older.”
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that the above is a recipe for disaster, now, does it?
OK, I think I understand how this works. It has to do with the use of four-letter words, I think.
Read this story.
Now, the teacher was in the classroom, watching all this, right? The teacher let the stripper get down to her bra and panties? It wasn’t until the stripper asked the boy to rub cream into her, uh, cheeks that the teacher decided to call a halt to these shenanigans?
What the hell is wrong with that teacher? What made this teacher think that this was appropriate goings-on in the classroom? I would not have wanted my teenage son or daughter to have to watch that show, much less be on the receiving end. These are adult activities which should be reserved to adult audiences that can freely come and go. It is not something which should be imposed on minors who are, in effect, a captive audience.
I can understand that there was a mix-up at the agency. The staff should have caught it, but didn’t. That is forgivable. The stripper, on the other hand, should have realized something was wrong when she found out that it was a high school. But then, having a stripper’s morals, she probably didn’t consider such a thing wrong. The REAL fault lies with the teacher. A teacher stands in loco parentis. They are given responsibility over children in a position of trust. That trust was violated when the teacher allowed this act to go as far as it did. The teacher in question should lose her/his job, and be prevented from working with children ever again.
You are currently browsing the Egghead’s Observations weblog archives for November, 2007.