Political enablers of sociopaths
PDF Lovefraud has been following the case of Vince Fumo, a former Pennsylvania state senator and Philadelphia power broker, who was found guilty of 137 counts of conspiracy, fraud, tax offenses and obstruction of justice. See:
Pennsylvania State Senator Vincent J. Fumo on trial for corruption
Finally, two sociopaths go to jail
In my opinion, this politician is a classic sociopath. Fumo lied, threatened, backstabbed and manipulated his way to power. He bullied big corporations into contributing millions of dollars to his favorite community organization, then treated its money as his personal ATM machine. He billed taxpayers for services such as having a private investigator follow his ex-girlfriend.
Fumo is due to be sentenced next week, and he could get 21 to 27 years. The guy is 66 years old and has heart problems, so if he gets the max, he could die in jail.
So what’s going on now? Hundreds of people have written letters to the judge asking for leniency. The governor of Pennsylvania, Ed Rendell, called Fumo “honest and forthright.” The former Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Stephen A. Zappala, who presided at Fumo’s second wedding, also vouched for him.
As I read the news coverage of the pleas for mercy in the newspaper this morning, I couldn’t help but think about Dr. Liane Leedom’s July 4th article, Enabling a sociopath is unpatriotic. Enabling a guy who abused the public trust—how much more unpatriotic can you get?
In opposing court papers, prosecutors point out that Fumo lied repeatedly on the witness stand. They cited 27 areas of “false testimony” and said he should be found guilty of perjury as well.
To read about the mercy/no mercy brouhaha in the Philadelphia Inquirer, click:
Dueling court papers praise, slam Fumo
While you’re at it, you may want to read about Fumo’s girlfriend. Over July 4th weekend, Fumo proposed. She said yes.
written by Donna Andersen • Permalink •
blueskies says:
(Oh cripes. Kathleen, I hope you know I wasn’t calling YOU a serial debater, I was just waffling on about my friend and pondering about PT and where he might be coming from. Your writing and insight have been such a strength and inspiration to me. I cant thank you enough!x )
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
No, as usual, I’m volunteering. I can relate to your annoying friend. There are times, as I mentioned in the earlier post, than I annoy other people with my insistence on factual correctness. (Fine in the office but, as you mention, a potential pain in the neck at a dinner party, unless you’re playing Trivial Pursuit.)
My real issue here is that I’m just trying to understand what’s going on. Because I don’t react the same way to this person as a lot of other people do. And I’m uncomfortable with it.
But I think I understand now.
(Report abusive comment)
breckgirl says:
I think I agree with Kathleen and Blueskies-
while I understand the concern that there is no background info from this person (heck I’m new here myself) …
The tone was neutral. I go back to the Triangle I read about on here (okay sorry I cannot remember who to attribute that wonderful piece too – is is Dr. Leedom?
This person – Passing Through – may just be low on empathy yet have high moral standards and good impulse control so the tone or style of communication may not be as warm as those of us with high empathy – I have to tell you and my thighs and rear end currently prove it – I have a bit of an impulse control issue but due to high empathy and strong moral basis I am not a predator…
Since I am so new – hope I have not offended by posting my $0.02 here….
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
Passing Through:
“As far as why I posted the correction: I am a scientist. The search for truth is part of who I am.”
I have an interest in science myself. It is refreshing to meet someone else who shares a common interest.
However, I am a little perplexed at such a glib, broad, and superficial statement regarding a subject (science) that encompasses so much depth and complexity.
If you are a scientist, then I am sure you are aware that science refers to a system of acquiring KNOWLEDGE, not truth.
It’s an easy mistake to make, but knowledge is not the same as truth. 2 different words with 2 different meanings.
In fact, the word science, comes from the Latin word “scientia”, meaning knowledge or having knowledge.
There are so many branches/fields of science: pure science vs. applied science/ natural science vs. social science.
I am curious to know what area you specialize in.
And, of course, we cannot engage in a discussion about science without discussing the Scientific Method.
I am sure you are familiar the Scientific Method, right? I know I am.
Anyway, Passing Through, welcome to LoveFraud.
I look forward to discussing our common interests in science together.
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
breckgirl,
I’m still trying to work this out. And I think it has to do with the huge care we take with each other’s feelings here on LoveFraud. A lot of us are very raw. And we come here with from a situation in which there has been no personal validation at all, except what suits the sociopath in manipulating us. And we’re sensitive about issues of authority, because someone has been abusing authority in our lives.
I think that your comment about a lack of empathy on the part of passingthrough is insightful. I remember the first post that set some of us off so much. It was a very direct announcement that certain facts in the discussion were wrong, and a criticism of a comment that had been made. There wasn’t any acknowledgement that other people might feel differently, or that the person who made the comment (that passingthrough criticized) might have her own reasons for thinking that way.
In a blog with less sensitivities, it might just have been a comment of another person’s opinion, someone who disagreed with the original poster. And that person didn’t feel any need to defend his or her right to assert that opinion. Here, there was a lot of emotional reaction, because some people found it reminiscent of being bullied in their previous relationships.
I didn’t. In fact, I agreed with passingthrough’s comments. But then I don’t feel vulnerable to that kind of bullying. I could understand if the person who’s comment was criticized felt attacked. But it was really hard for me to watch the way the whole thing turned into a attack on passingthough, including implications that this person was a sociopath whose whole intention was to turn us against each other.
To my mind, we’re allowed to have opinions here and to disagree with each other. At the same time, we really need to be conscious that people here are in pain and healing. So being sensitive to each other’s feelings is paramount.
I think this is the fundamental issue here. For whatever reason, passingthrough takes a tone that seems to assume that this is more of an intellectual process than it is. What’s going on here is largely emotional interaction and emotional healing.
That doesn’t mean that it isn’t nice to get our facts straight, but it’s not the most important thing (unless perhaps those facts are being used to make judgments about us). The more important thing is emotional insight for healing and growth. And in that sense, passingthrough’s contribution was, at minimum, oddly expressed. He or she may not really understand what’s going on here.
So, I think I understand why some of us might feel threatened or attacked. But perhaps in this instance — since we don’t really know this person’s intentions, beyond the obvious interest in straightening out the facts — it might be useful to suggest that passingthrough read more of the block to understand what we’re here and what we’re actually doing here, before participating. Because his or her comments are upsetting to some of us.
Anyway, that’s my best thinking on it at this point. I’m trying to work this out for myself. Because, as I said, the response upset me more than passingthrough’s comments. And I’m still sorting out my own reactions.
I hope this doesn’t upset anyone. It’s me thinking out loud.
Kathy
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
On this subject, an dplease, NO ONE take offense at what I am going to point out and “{correct)—
QUOTE KATHY: I think what passingthrough was communicating was that Marianne Williams, a wonderful inspirational writer, was the author of that quote. And that she deserves the credit for it.
RESPONSE FROM OXY: Kathy, I think you meant to say “mariane WilliamSON.”
NOTE: Kathleen made a mistake when she said “Marianne Williams” it should be “Mariane WilliamSON”
BIG DEAL, she got a name wrong…she should NOT BE PUBLICLY HUMILIATED for such an error, or the entire message of her post be focused on THAT OVERSIGHT or mistatement.
Now, I pointed out Kathy’s “error” but you will note that I did NOT post a huge number of Internet references and links to UNDERSCORE that she was WRONG and I was RIGHT. I simply pointed out a MINOR OVERSIGHT on her part in a RESPECTFUL WAY.
Now, if anyone was “offended” at me correcting this oversight or “error” on her part I would not come back and justify myself by saying: Quote PT:
“As far as why I posted the correction: I am a scientist. The search for truth is part of who I am. ”
If someone was obviously offended by me “correcting” Kathy, and said something to that effect, I might publicly post, “I did not mean to in any way offend anyone by my correction of Kathy.” I would NOT list my “credentials” as a “scientist” (BTW, I’m with ROSA, what is a “scientist?”
While I realize that ANYONE Donna allows to post on HER SITE is able to post here, I am also like the people above who have noticed that this particular person has come here several times and “corrected” others, then DISAPPEARED, but has in no way that I can find SUPPORTED or ENCOURAGED others unless being the apparent self-appointed “judge of truth and statistics” on this site is “supportive.”
If my own opinion of this person’s ability to “stir up stuff” is wrong, someone please CORRECT ME. If others think that the corrections made by this person, and the subsequent discussions about their appropriateness to a victim’s support blog, then please chime in and let the rest of us know what those benefits are by engaging in further dialog with this blogger. If somone thinks that any of us who have objected in any way to the tone and content of this blogger’s posts are flaming, also let us know.
For ME, I WILL NO LONGER ENGAGE IN ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH OR ABOUT THIS BLOGGER. If any of you care to discuss her/him, I will be glad to read your posts, however, in case you may educate me on how beneficial this particular contributor has been.
(Report abusive comment)
blueskies says:
Go Oxy.(that’s my last too:)
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
This particular contributor has clarified some facts, and left links to show that it’s not simply his or her positon. I find that benign, though I understand the tone bothered some people. I don’t believe that it was a public humiliation of Betty, any more than I would have found Oxy’s post a public humiliation of me. It’s an objective fact, not a character assassination.
And thank Oxy, for clearing up my typo. I noticed it after I posted it, but didn’t think it was worth going back to correct, since I knew you all knew what I meant.
The people who were stirred up had their own reasons for being stirred up. I’m not arguing with that. Just saying that I became uncomfortable with it, and so I’m discussing the issue.
As far as reading or not reading my posts goes, or those of anyone else, fortunately we have free choice about these things. As I said, I don’t mean to upset anyone. I’m just trying to sort out my own reactions.
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
Kathy,
I didn’t expect that you would be “humiliated” by me “correcting” your typo—LOL–frankly I didn’t catch it til I happened to read your post the second or third time, and my own tendencies for typos and other things (I keep forgetting to run spell check before I post!) AND YOU ARE RIGHT, it wasn’t “worth correcting” I simply used it as an EXAMPLE of “correcting other’s posts.”
I’m not sure if Betty was offended or not, as she has “not been around” since then. Which is of concern to me. I have also observed others “clear off” the board for good when they are “corrected”—in even the most loving and caring way—I was NOT worried about you being offended in the least because I know that you are a long ways down the healing road and you and I have been ale to “agree to disagree” on several things, which I think is a good thing in any relationship.
As just about everyone here knows I have a “cyber skillet” that I sometimes use to jokingly and lovingly “boink” people with when they are getting into a pity party and getting stuck, or putting themselves down, but as far as I know NO ONE has ever been offended by this because they know that I am simply pointing out that even though they have a RIGHT to feel pity for themselves, that being stuck in that pity party is counter productive in the long run. I’be been there myself! So it has sort of become a LF “tradition” to even “borrow Oxy’s skillet” to remind someone to quit bashing themselves! Heck, I have even used the skillet on MYSELF from time to time. LOL
I am well aware of how PAINFUL it is to be attacked on this or any other blog, when emotions are raw…fortunately, there is VERY LITTLE of that goes on here at LF because DONNA keeps a “tight rein” on what goes on here, and I for ONE am very GRATEFUL that she does. Also, it seems that people who are contentious don’t stay here long.
I make no secret that I am a very opinionated old batt, but at the same time, I also am very understanding of others also being opinionated in their own right, even if I do not agree at all with their opinions. Opinions are like noses, we all have them. However, I also try to keep in mind that many if not most of the people posting on this sight have had psychopaths persecute and abuse them for having an opinion about anything! FACTS are NOT necessarily TRUTH! in my opinion. I also restate that it is much better sometimes to IGNORE FACTS if exposing the error of fact would offend someone. I know for a FACT that the attribution of certain quotes on the internet, and this is just ONE AMONG MANY is rampant. Yes, you CAN check out the FACTS of every “sweet quote” that comes your way, or you can simply say that the quote is ATYTRIBUTED TO XYZ in the e mail you received, but WHOEVER SAID IT, is NOT to me, the important point, the CONTENT of the quote is the INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT thing.
If it becomes IMPORTANT (and BTW what is “important” to me may not be “important” to you and vice versa,) then any correction or pointing out of error should be done in as unobtrusive a way as possible, and with the maximum of couertesy rather than the TONE OF SUPERIORITY in knowledge and IQ.
In many situations when “several people” are “stirred” up by one person about every time that person “enters the room” it might be that there is some validity in their perceptions. We are always advising each other to ‘go with your gut” and to be aware of red flags and the prickling of your skin when you are around certain people. BTW, there has been a research study about that very thing that I read about recently, where people actually DID HAVE physical symptoms when “interviewing” psychopaths. I thought that was a very interesting study. I will try to get an article together on it. The conclusion was that it may be our human equivalent of the instinct that says “there is a predator in the room.”
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
In my opinion, I don’t believe the intent is public humiliation of Betty or anyone else on this site. Never was.
I think the intent is to undermine the process here, and it worked.
This entire thread has become side-tracked.
I would suggest that we go back and re-read his response to OxDrover on Sunday, July 12, 2009 @ 10:03 p.m.
At first, he says Williamson deserves credit for the quote. But his reason for posting the correction is: “because I am a scientist and finding the truth is part of who I am.
So, did PT post the correction to give Williamson her due credit for the quote, or because he/she is a scientist and finding the truth is part of who he/she is? Very confusing.
Notice how he tries to seduce Oxy in this post, telling her things she wants to hear: “Women are far too often denied their due credit for their accomplishments.”
Finally, he/she addresses Donna (the owner of this site who has the POWER to yank him off) and speaks to her book.
Again, more flattery and seduction.
This individual had no problem addressing OxDrover on Sunday, but seems to have gone MIA since then.
These are just my own interpretations, and I could be way off.
Still, my own opinion here. I think this person who is “passing through” is a highly skilled, manipulative, and intelligent YOU KNOW WHAT!!!!!
(Report abusive comment)
JaneSmith says:
Whoa…Rosa has somebody’s number, memorized backwards and forwards! You go, woman!
I agree with all the responses from the LF members. I’ve read what PT has written and he/she isn’t really offering anything of substance, encouragement, support and/or appreciation for what I think is the primary focus, purpose of LF: to help educate former victims of predators. And educating in a humble, loving and compassionate way.
And, yeah, PT’s posts have irritated me and all of you but maybe that’s a good thing. That after learning what we need to protect ourselves, we are now becoming intolerant to exploitive behavior.
As the Lovely Rosa has deduced, even the most subtle forms of manipulation, exploitation can be more than mildly irritating and loathsome for us, the formidable survivors.
I like to see my kindred spirits giving righteous smack downs, even if the offending party (PT) disappears into the ether of cyberspace. Is good practice for meatspace.
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
Dear Rosa:
You have just been awarded the OxDrover Certification for translating P-speak into English.
I’m not sure how many of you remember my past “translation” of some one’s letter from their P.–Gosh, can’t remember who or when or what thread! CRS! LOL
But you know, that is what we have to do, is to TRANSLATE the WORDS that psychopaths and other manipulators say, into the “meaning” that they have for US.
All “language” is an agreement of what a particular sound means in terms of either an object, a description of that object, or a concept. We all know that “love” does not hold the same meaning to them as it does to us. As Dr. Robert Hare said (paraphrased) “they know the words to the song, but not the music” and trying to teach them to ‘sing” is like trying to teach a pig to sing….it pithes off the pig and frustrates the pig! Just as the pig can’t learn to sinig, the psychopath doesn’t have the capacity to LEARN the real meaning of words in OUR agreed upon interpretation of the sounds.
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
CORRECTION: That should have read “frustrates YOU,” not “the pig.”
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Kathleen, for your consideration as you sort out your own reactions, I think Oxy”s statement, “…that many if not most of the people posting on this sight [site] have had psychopaths persecute and abuse them for having an opinion about anything.” That “truth” is THE reason behind my discomfort with this poster, and definitely not due to being ” sensitive about issues of authority…”
Also, I remember distinctly pointing out to him the last time that as a former debater (academic not scientific) myself that one cardinal rule of any debate or speech is to “know your audience.”
It may be that he/she never saw this reminder because he/she had disappeared already? I don’t know.
As for me, I am grateful that I have regained my “voice.” I have a RIGHT to my own opinions even if no one else agrees with them or not. FREEDOM! Hurrah!
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
I got sidetracked with work, and am just checking back in.
I’ll guess I’ll just have to be a minority of one. I don’t see evidence that this person intended to belittle Betty, or derail our process. I don’t think our process is derailed. I actually think this is a good discussion of what we consider important in our dialog here.
I don’t see any evidence of bad intent with this person either. Or manipulative language. I think that he or she was very straightforward about what she thought and wanted to say. Facts and opinion.
I just think that he or she was insensitive to what is going on here. It’s an unusual situation for us. Until now, the only time I remember non-participants dropping in is when it has been visiting sociopaths, either trolling or looking to disrupt things. But they’re obvious in one or two posts. Self-justifying outrageous behavior, asking open-ended questions as invitations for off-line conversations, and offering great confusing rationales for their philosophy of life.
I don’t find this situation obvious. I still don’t. I respect the reactions and opinions of those who find this person obnoxious or disruptive. At the moment, I don’t share them. I could have my mind changed, if passingthrough returns and expresses some bad intent. But I think I’m just as likely to find out that this person is interested in educating people about the dangers of sociopaths, but either doesn’t identify as a victim or wants to maintain privacy.
The actual input that came from passingthough in terms of facts and opinions speaks well of his or her interests and ethics. Interested in STDs. Familiar with Marianne Williamson. Concerned about misogyny. The first two could be that he or she grabbed the opportunity to quickly find errors by looking something up that someone else said. But the speed of response suggests otherwise. And the last concern is something that wouldn’t even be considered by someone who wasn’t interested in fairness and humane concerns.
I’m not arguing with anyone. I’m just explaining why I feel the way I do. Reasonable people can disagree.
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
ANewLily, forgive me. I sometimes get too abstract. By “sensitive to issues of authority,” I meant exactly what you’re saying. I didn’t mean legitimate authority. I means when someone attempts to exert authority over us, or we feel like that’s what they’re doing.
I know that I’m hyper-sensitive to that. I don’t like people telling me what to do or think. I have a tendency to react too fast to these situations, because of being abused in the way you describe.
So I call this authority issues, because I tend to view these situations as someone attempting to exert authority. The problem, at least in my life, is that they often are not. They’re just adding their opinion to the discussion or adding some relevant factual information. If they go so far as to offer unasked for advice (outside of this forum), they may get their heads bitten off.
I’m working on this, because it’s been a major problem in my life. It’s one of the reasons I work for myself, rather than having a corporate career. passingthrough just didn’t happen to trigger that with me, because his or her tone is very similar to mine in certain situations. But I could understand why it triggered other people.
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
Correction on that last comment.
I THOUGHT I could understand how other people felt about it. I don’t want to be disrespectful. I can imagine, but I can’t really walk in another person’s shoes.
(Report abusive comment)
breckgirl says:
Kathleen – you are not a “minority of one” as I think / feel like you do from what I have read here on this thread – but again I am new here and still working my way through the archives so I’m not even sure I should be saying anything…
I also regularly post on other boards having nothing to do with this subject and it can seem to get ugly or it in fact does get ugly – so I have learned a lot from that.
Quite often minus the body language it is easy to add positive or negative intent to a neutral post where there was no intent either way or the intent was the opposite of what was perceived.
Given people here are sensitive to the manipulation and intent of anonymous readers etc…due to the common shared trauma from our respective N/P/S’s it might be a good conversation to have about when you are triggered by something differentiating between an actual
threat versus a PTSD reaction to something that is not in reality a threat.
I am personally one of those people who when I get a forwarded e-mail for the 8th time from someone who really ought to be checking on SNOPES to see if this child has in fact been abducted (sometimes the same child over 3 years time forwarded to me from the same person several times) I do tend to send a reply asking them to check their facts and here is the link blah blah blah – I have tried to be gentle about it but to overlook it constantly when people mindlessly forward nonsense does not seem right either – I do want to know when I have spinach in my teeth…or attribute something incorrectly.
I also believe :
“Truth without love is brutality, and love without truth is hypocrisy.”
— Warren Wiersbe
I think Oxy has it right when she says – if a posters behaviour – attitude bothers her then in a sense she goes No Contact – because ignoring someone instead of responding tends to take the wind out of their sails anyway. (Boy I am the analogy queen today!)
(Report abusive comment)
Kathleen Hawk says:
breckgirl, thanks for this. I love the quote.
Regarding the ending, I’d go No Contact, because I don’t want to pay attention to something that isn’t good for me. How they feel about it is secondary. Though, as both you and Oxy note, if they can’t get you involved in their game, then it tends to discourage them. Which is a very good thing.
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Did anyone see the outcome of Fumo’s sentencing? I just now read the article under the headline of “Ex Pa. Sen. Fumo gets less than 5 yrs. for corruption; feds call him ‘drunk with power’:
It was an AP article but I can’t give the URL because the article came in my private email. I’m sure it will be on the evening news. It was interesting to read that many are upset with the short length of the punishment, but the judge mentioned Fumo’s good works that “offset” his corruption.
I don’t think even God gives us credit for our good works if they aren’t accompanied by faith in Him.
Oh, well, such as it is –
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Hmmmm. I can’t help but notice that PT’s comments and some of our reactions — and defenses of him — took up more than a day of postings on this topic.
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
ANewLily:
Don’t even get me started again. I said he totally side-tracked the whole thread!!
And I am sure he was sitting somewhere in his “science lab” watching us go back and forth getting his narcissistic supply.
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Oh, my Dear Rosa, I surely didn’t want to “get you started again.” I should have left off the 2nd posting. SORRY! My bad!
I am upset by the content of the article about Fumo’s sentencing. He was “expected” to get up to 27 years emprisonment — but only got 4 years and 8 months! Much “political enabling” going on, for sure/
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
ANewLily:
4 years 8 months. Great. That means he will be out in 18 months or something like that.
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
I guess that means if you rob 3 banks and give the money from two of the robberies to charity that should make your sentence shorter! sheesh! Don’t get ME started guys!
BTW Rosa, I think you and I would make a good team, I will ride Fat Ass and you can ride Hairy Ass and we will start out in the NE and ride the range all the way to California swinging our skillets and BOINKING these political crooks and the judges that enable them!!! What a pair we would make! LOL
We’d invite you Lily, but don’t want to take a chance on reinjuring your broken hip! LOL Besides since I got read of the X-BF, I only have 2 jack asses!
(Report abusive comment)
Tilly says:
I’m coming to – on my kangaroo with my boomerang! xoxo
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
Oxy/Tilly:
Actually, ass-riding to California sounds refreshing to me right about now.
I could use a diversion.
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Oxy, Tilly and Rosa,
Thanks for the laughs. How I needed those today.
And thanks, Oxy, for consideration of my broken hip!! You can be assured that I’d be along in “spirit” on your trek across the nation with your weapons! Just wish it wasn’t a fantasy and could actually be done!!!!
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
ANewLily:
I would be willing to buy you a Vespa (scooter). You could ride along on that.
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Rosa, thanks! I’ll take you up on your offer. I don’t want to be left out as you guys whip the nation into shape and cognizant of the harm sociopaths do!! I want to do my part, too.
I’ll have to think of a weapon. I have my Bible but for 2000 years that has been discounted by sociopaths. Got any ideas for me?
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
ANewLily:
Since I will be on the ass, I will be saving A LOT on gas money.
Also, a Vespa can hold 2 people. That way, when my ass gets sore from being on the ass, I can hop on with you.
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
Can you just picture this group on the 6:00 O’clock news? LOL We will be the NEW CRUSADERS FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE! Just have to be careful not to joust with any of those new “wind farms” that line the highways out west! LOL Yea, sometimes we need some humor and mirth in our lives!!!! (((hugs))))
(Report abusive comment)
blueskies says:
Oh I love the idea of a LF reader raleigh across America! And yes I can just picture it on the 6.00 o’clock news!:)x Thanks for the giggle guys! I need it.I am picturing myself in a side car with Wallace and Gromit style goggles:)x
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
Dear Blueskies,
We will have to figure out a way to attach your side car to one of the asses, wouldn’t that be a PICTURE!!!! LOL
Yes, a giggle and some ridiculous ideas sometimes are fun to think about. A while back a group of us here decided on the “outfits” we would wear at a LF convention, they were hip wadder boots, black and yellow bumble-bee tu-tus and felt hats with donkey ears!!! We would do a chorus line singing some “he done me wrong” songs along with a dance routine!
I still giggle about that one with the picture in my head of that chorus line! Some days that giggle is all I need to bring me out of the dumps! (((hugs))))
(Report abusive comment)
blueskies says:
LOL!! I remember that thread! Bumble bee tutus and waders!:) It all sounds wonderful… like some kind of Socio Survivor ‘Pride’ Celebration!
I was invited to a festival by a girl I met recently (its not a rave thing but a sort of hippy family affair) and on the last day of the weekend everyone dresses up… IF I go, shall we dress up as bee’s with waders?! We can send the photos in to LF!:)xxxx thanks for the hugs:) Backatcha.
(Report abusive comment)
ANewLily says:
Maybe blueskies can attach her sidecar to the scooter? And there would still be the second seat on the scooter for Rosa or Oxy when they get tired of riding asses.
Be it known, though, I will not be wearing a bee tutu and widers? I will be enraged about the injustice socios do their victims and I want us to be taken SERIOUSLY!
(Report abusive comment)
henry says:
I still like the ideal of a bus ( Prissila Queen of the Desert) with Oxy on top sitting on that big high heel shoe throwing kisses and condoms to onlookers….
(Report abusive comment)
blueskies says:
Good point Newlily:) I needed a bit of blog ‘light’ last night, but you are absolutely right:)x
(Report abusive comment)
Tilly says:
There’s room for two more in my kangaroos pouch ( hes a big fella!), and i can hook any p’s that are up ahead with my boomerang and post them to our P pig farm! lol! xoxoxo gottaluvyu!
(Report abusive comment)
nottakingitanymore says:
This is an uphill battle, but it must be won. Think about how difficult it is to get people who have not been directly involved with sociopaths to believe the true stories of what they have done. The things that they do are so far outside the norm, that those who have not experienced it think that the victims must be lying or exaggerating. This further victimizes the victim.
In addition, the sociopath is often charming and likable on the surface (part of why he is so successful as a sociopath). The victim, as a result of her dealings with him, is often angry or bitter. Which person is the public, a judge, or a jury going to side with? Not the angry person, but the charmer.
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
Yes, Henry, I think we are going to need a LARGE BUS to transport all the righteously angry suvivors….or, instead of riding Fat Ass and Hairy Ass I can have them pull the replica Conestoga wagon my son and I built for them for the living history groups and we can all ride in the wagon except Tilly and she can ride on her ‘roo!
(Report abusive comment)
Rosa says:
What?!?! Cameras??? 6:00 News????
We need a hair & make-up van!!!
We want to be in full hair & make-up regalia when we attack the media journalists (Erin B. style) for their dominant role in blaming the victims of sociopaths in the media, and their uneducated, almost ignorant, account of sociopathy in their reporting.
A “tussle” with the media could be bad for Donna’s book. I say we wait until AFTER Donna puts her book out.
Then, I say we go after the media PETA-style. Everyone thinks PETA members are crazy, but they always seem to get the national spotlight (have you noticed?). PETA members are crazy LIKE FOXES, as far as I am concerned.
(Report abusive comment)
Tilly says:
Nottakinitanymore:
Especially when the biggest psychopath in the room IS THE JUDGE!
Rosa:
What book is Donna putting out? Do we get shares??
(Report abusive comment)
OxDrover says:
Tilly, I don’t think we can get “shares,” but I do know we will want to BUY a copy!
Yea, you are right, about the Judge!!! Politics is crooked the world around, not just in US or Aussies….it is UNIVERSAL.
(Report abusive comment)
Tilly says:
If it was Narcissist Oprah she would GIVE us all a copy because she is such a kind and caring person…HA HA!!! lol!!!
(Report abusive comment)
Tood says:
What sort of book? Personal story, like “Dance With the Devil?” A recovery how-to?
I hope you get a book tour, Donna. Much continued success to you and all the other LF authors, to boot.
(Report abusive comment)