Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Archives
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Legal Guide
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
It all started with David Westerfield
re: #7: Mindy, the point is that unless you are flagrantly psychotic, and a danger to yourself and/or the general public, no one forces anything in this scenario. If you don't get what you want from one doctor, i.e., talk therapy instead of pills, you go to someone else for talk therapy. You go to an MFCC or a psychoanalyst, or a relational analyst, the list goes on and on. It is difficult to miss in a random google how many different kinds of talk therapy are out there, aside from medical treatment for depression. The point is that it is irresponsible to be so flip about medications that yes, have helped hundreds of thousands of people. Anti-rejection drugs are known to sometimes cause life-threatening lymphomas, but patients are supposed to self-educate enough to weigh a couple of risks, along with their doctors' help. You don't go around telling potential organ recipients to forget it and just die, because YOU got a lymphoma, or because you heard someone did. For some patients, there is no other choice. And for many people with lifelong, chronic, clinical depression, antidepressants are a lifesaver. "And I am with Tom Cruise. E-meters make as much sense as some of these meds do." Again, so flip about a serious issue. What do you mean by "some" of these meds, then? Are you again arguing against just the one or two drugs you tried, that didn't work for you? After going through what you hint at going through, it seems kind of selfish to insist in irrational and unsupported fashion that no one should take antidepressants, because they did not seem to work for you.— January 18, 2010 2:13 a.m.
We were all going to...DIE!!!
Oh, and don't worry so much about ageing and losing weight. True, it gets harder to do, but you're still young enough, and male. You can probably lose 5 or more a week just from cutting down on the booze alone. It is so, so worth it.— January 18, 2010 1:54 a.m.
We were all going to...DIE!!!
Pete claimed: "My New Year's restitution was not to be so much of an a**hole this year." Hey, if that were your 'restitution,' ya shoulda paid it to ME, dude. ;)— January 18, 2010 1:52 a.m.
Sorry, Citizen Journalist
With the exception of wayward wankers, further, what's wrong with any of those? :)— January 18, 2010 1:47 a.m.
I found Bigfoot above the San Diego River headwaters
"So I got on the phone with my agent in Los Angeles, and he said he'd call me back." ...And then I wrote this really kick-*ass poem about it. :) To ans34578900 of the constipatedly cramped numeral moniker: "LEvis?" Is that a shifting accident, a well-known brand of dungarees," or a slang term for "soul?" 'Cause, ah, I think Fred and I and a few others here need to be "harvested," and not by just anyone, tsk tsk...No, we need to be saved by YOU, my friend ;)— January 17, 2010 11:59 p.m.
We were all going to...DIE!!!
Take up sugarless candies and replace at least one meal a day with an Ensure. I recommend "butter pecan" flavored-Ensure. I have quit smoking in the past without gaining weight, just by strategically cutting down on calories, and going for the sugarless candies--just watch out for the latter, as some have sorbitol, which'll give you the runs beyond belief. Way to lose weight, sure, but who wants to do it that way?! I'm not saying that I am that great at quitting smoking, though. Much much better at losing weight ;)— January 17, 2010 11:51 p.m.
Bonus Blog: Goooooooo Chargers!
re: #6: I do, in a New Yawk accent. ;)— January 17, 2010 11:47 p.m.
Bonus Blog: Worst and Best Romance Movies
Oops, forgot to address your last point: I am not saying it is flawed; I'm saying it is conventional in approach and in its structural elements, the filmic devices used. That was the only point I ever had, but you two dolls keep bringin' it back to the content ;)— January 17, 2010 11:44 p.m.
Bonus Blog: Worst and Best Romance Movies
Yes, but remember, your words were: "...but star-crossed lovers who can't admit to anyone that they are lovers, and that is where they move into the unconventional," This was a requirement of the "unconventional," before you even got into the gender of the lovers, Cuddle, so that's how I responded. If these points now solely rest upon the queerness of the lovers, so that your content is unconventional, then I would simply say that all of the machinations of plot are still conventional. ;)— January 17, 2010 11:42 p.m.
No I.D., No Comment
Ahh, attacking me because you are missing your "bro," are you, rickey? Maybe you'll find a place you like better, too, then?— January 17, 2010 11:37 p.m.