Tuesday, July 17, 2007

The Roving Eye

The Roving Eye ---

He has been a staff at one of the top law firms in Midtown East for a couple of years. He is known as the roving eye staff attorney. He spends his billable time expressing his distrust of contract attorneys by physically guarding the temps (sitting and hanging out with them) or calling on the phone one of his boys to fully brief him on the environs and the in and outs of other temps. His pet friend---a tall lanky, and bitter middle aged player has been responsible for the firing of many good contract attorneys who have by some reason or another annoyed the pet friend or broken the rules by being on the phone too long, writing e-mails in front of him or being too frank about current events and political views. The pet friend, in return for longevity on the project will report every one including his so called friends.

At one point, roving eye became so arrogant and full of himself that he spent most of the day talking about a good looking woman stopping traffic along a known East Side Avenue. Forget being pc or creating a hostile work environment--he did not care, he was too excited throwing his status around. It has been rumored that he let go of a friend or did not call him back to work at this famous place because the former friend, made more money than him in investments and that pissed roving eye off. Wow, what fragile ego and what a power trip.

It is also common knowledge that roving eye and pet friend were let go of a gig because they acted in concert in eyeing women and creating an all boys club, frat house environment at a midtown firm. Anyone who knows about the actual event at this firm, will not make it at the new joint where roving eye is now a permanent employee. If you come across him, you will know who he is--his roving eye gives him away besides his gray temples. He will also use famous phrases in the form of rags:

1) do your work

2) show up on time

3) keep your head down


Anonymous said...

Dear Tom,

Since you don't tell us the particular policies at this firm, we don't know if writing an email is part of one's job or against the rules. If CA's are told not to use the Internet, a firing offense since the lowlife should be working, then no harm done.

Absent a violation of state or federal law, any employer has the right to fire someone just because they don't like them. I've done that in the past. This is America. We have capitalism, not Socialism: No one deserves their jobs absent a contract to the contrary. Ask an employment lawyer if you don't understand.

I don't know what rags are, in your post, but employees better 1)Do their work, 2)Get to work early, and 3)Shut the heck up if they want to keep their jobs. They are employees, not employers, and should know their place in the food chain.

This is not federal service so it is fine to fire someone if one does not like their political views, as well. The Hatch Act does not apply.

You are making it tougher for us to ask you to keep up the good work! Attorneys deserve no better treatment than those who perform oil changes on our cars. Let's try and keep some perspective, cool?

Best Regards.

Anonymous said...

"Attorneys deserve no better treatment than those who perform oil changes on our cars."

Wow...if you were a socialist, I'd say that you were making a plea for equality but since you pointed out that we are a capitalist society, I'm guessing this is meant to be more of a put-down.

Are you a recruiter?

Anonymous said...

I'm retired, but young, so I've been enjoying the flexibility and wondrous opportunities as a Contract Attorney. I don't have the ego many temps have here. Incredible. Did their parents over-do it in making them feel special.

Good Self Esteem is one thing. I've been a lawyer 19 years, so occasionally after doing so much for so long it takes Sunday Mass to ensure I stay humble.

It's just gotten a little weird here lately, that legal temps want some sort of special treatment. We should get fair, ethical treatment, and we should try and get as many benefits as we can. However, we are "no better than anyone else."

No one is "better than anyone else", so it is confusing when folks who complain about being poor decision-makers (choosing lots of student debt, choosing law, et.al.) write as if they are deserving, when they don't recognize the poor decisions they have made for their lives and that they might be held accountable for them.

After retirement, this document review has been great these last two years. Tom's blog really helped me integrate back into the lower ranks. But temping gives me total control: I choose which gigs, hours I work (usually), and with whom I work. Before retiring I had to toe the company line where I was General Counsel and had the same benefits as any other employee.

This is only a guess, but my guess is that the bulk of whiners here are children of middle class families who think that just because their parents worked hard to give them opportunities that they DESERVE wonderful law positions with large law firms and a better life than their parents. That does not happen for most people these days, sorry.

I'd hope we'd be happy being treated like human beings.

That's why I love Tom's blog, because he points out true inequities.

Best Regards!

Anonymous said...

Listen up, you old bastard...

While it might be nice for you to temp for shits and giggles because you're allegedly "young and retired", the rest of us having student loans to pay and actually went to law school because we wanted to do something BESIDES temporary document review.

Sure, it's easy for you to talk about accountability because you already achieved your goals. You were in-house counsel, blabbidy blab.

I might not be any better than anybody else, but I do deserve better. My life is so fucking miserable because of the dismal job market and my student loans, I sometimes wish I'd just die. And I worked my fucking ass off in law school and graduated in the very top of my class so don't talk about accountability to me.

We all deserve better than this, and if anyone thinks differently, they apparently doesn't have crushing student loan debt.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Swear-man,

Of course I don't have crushing student debt, my loans from college and JD were paid years ago.

You really underscore the point I made that you attempt in halting prose ("they apparently doesn't).

1)You and your ilk say you deserve something better.
2)You should do something better.
3)You do not do anything better. You cannot write a cogent comment in a blog without using toilet language and poor English grammar

Thus, if you had what it takes to do better, you would do it.

You are not, so your choices were poor, and now you complain that your life is miserable. You do not have what it takes to succeed, or YOU WOULD BE SUCCEEDING.

Don't swear: Think! You cannot accomplish your goals, you say: I believe you. You have made life choices and now you are miserable: I believe you.

Do something successful with your life so we do not have to listen to losers whine to Daddy.

Best Regards!

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I know M. well and he really does like to look at boobies. I do too, but I have the good sense not to stare and make women feel uncomfortable.
He usually works with this dictatorial middle aged female associate who handles antitrust projects with set hours and no Internet access.
Seasoned Temp

Anonymous said...

Young and Retired suffers from the same lack of perspective as many in law. I have come to the law business later in life after reasonable success in other areas.
The job market is horrible for the newly admitted, and although many of us knew we would not be at the very top, we could not know after reasonable research that everything below was so lousy.
I'm sorry you feel the need to make people feel spoiled for expecting a decent career after 7 years of school. It was a common expectation up until quite recently and schools still endorse that line of thought. Most people that temp are on par as lawyers with most everyone else, we all know at this point that most of practice is mundane and does not require a superior legal mind. So, get off your high horse "young and retired" you walk in different shoes. Or you could just be trolling of course.

Anonymous said...

Thanks: Spoiled really does describe what I've been saying quite well!

People who got a "B" in one or more classes in law school should not expect a position in Biglaw or any Federal clerkships.That's the way it's always been. The future does not look brighter as these mediocre, crass, cynical folks don't go to their law school's career placement offices to see that for non 4.0 averages business and industry (or small niches such as doc review) are the best they will accomplish. If you did not get law review don't expect to be taken seriously.

Best Regards, and thanks for the word. They remind me of Woody Allen movies, where the New York Mother has coddled her son and the spoiled child thinks he will succeed. Woody Allen always got the girl because he was the writer/director. No one takes such nebbish geeks seriously in any industry.

Robert said...

There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around...a couple of decades ago, everyone was whining for a larger and better guaranteed federal student loan program. Well, be careful of what you wish for, because guaranteed loans were the beginning of the end for the legal profession. More people could go to law school, schools had the ability to raise tutition through the roof...now, unsurprisingly, you have tons of unneeded lawyers with tons of impossible debt. Making matters worse is that all of this debt is non-dischargable, which obviously is going to destroy a lot of people's lives. "Everyone should have the financial ability to become a lawyer if they want! The government should help!" Sure...we are living in he reality of that nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Point well made Robert!

You write well, and I appreciate your cogent summary that is much more easily digestible in this age when people are eager to feel rebuked at the slightest perceived slight. For younger folks it just doesn't seem politically correct, or something, to be reminded that they are not "God's Gift."

Sometimes, people really do get cut from a project first because they are creeps or not liked. We are all fungible, arguably. However, supervisors first get rid of the people they don't want or cannot use when told to start de-staffing a project.

Best Regards!

Kate said...

Several points:

1) You can do well in the legal profession without a degree from a top ten school and with a few Bs (and even a C or two) on your transcript. You probably won't get a job at a place like Skadden as a First Year but you can find a decent job often enough. The key is to position yourself correctly while still in law school. I've known many who sucessfully did that. They don't make $160K per year, but neither do they work 80 hours a week.

2) I think the beef most people have with doc. review is not that the work is boring or unpleasent. The problem is that you don't get treated with any basic respect. Let me have access to my email. Let me make a few personal phone calls. Let me go to the bathroom or take a break when I need to without you looking over my shoulder. I'm a professional. You can check and see how much work I'm doing and if it's not up to par then you can fire me. If you treat people like the professionals they are, most of them will act professionally. If you treat people as if they are the scum of the earth they will do anything they can to get away with whatever they can.

3) I can not fathum why someone would retire from the law after 19 years and go into doc review. First, there are enough high-level temp firms like Axiom where an attorney can work temp hours and do interesting substantive work. Second, doc. review really is dull. Third, I don't know which projects he's worked on but I have never found the doc review project I've worked on to be in any way flexible about time.

I am extremely fortunate to currently be in an in-house, substantive position working with people who both like and respect me. I understand how lucky I am. I don't understand why there are people on this site degrading other workers.

I have a question for TTT though, what would ideal working conditions be? You always point out the toilets and the mean people. Have you ever worked on a good doc review project? If not, what would it take to make a doc-review project good.

Anonymous said...

4:45 Hater:

If you read, I was General counsel for twenty years, as you purport to be.

I worked for twenty (19 w/retirement package since I did not use sick leave) years. That is enough.

Now I do as I please. www.axiom.com is some Automotive company. There is no Axiom legal agency here in Washington, D.C. My friend Paul Mandell started Clutch, and whenever there is an interesting temp assignment he tells me about it.

Some people work after retiring. I enjoy being around people, and having fun at work. What can I say?

Don't rain on other people's parades. I was just pointing out that some folks with JDs don't have parades and never should expect one if they ACCURATELY view their knowledge, skills, and abilities vis-a-vis today's employment market. Like I did, you work for a private corporation. You are not in the legal profession (working in a law firm) any more than I was, you are paid by a business and are an employee who happens to be an attorney. See my prior comment where I encourage these whiners to go into the business sector and work as in-house counsel as I did.

You're not too bright, Kate, or perhaps you just did not read all of my several comments to this entry. I guess that's why you take the same path as I took, in house counsel. Perhaps you are in the New York area, where people are more callous than in other parts of the country. You are certainly not respectful of senior members of your profession.

Best Regards!

Anonymous said...

"People who got a "B" in one or more classes in law school should not expect a position in Biglaw or any Federal clerkships.That's the way it's always been."

Your above statement is incorrect. I know people who graduated in the middle of their classes from lower schools and they got many offers, have good jobs and are no better than any other lawyer else. They simply graduated 10 years ago.

It's not rocket science, there is not that much of a difference between the top ten and everyone else but for the fact that those top ten are freakishly obsessed with being the perfect, always. Many top people don't have much as far as stellar credentials go. It's todays market so why do you like to taunt people? Your the type that likes to pull the legs of spiders. Now go home and beat your wife.

Anonymous said...

yeah, I know...sentence structure...it's a blog, not a paper

Anonymous said...

that "young and retired" atty who does doc review for fun deserves a beat-down.

i'd love to see him try to be smug with his teeth knocked out.

Anonymous said...

This old and retired attorney has enjoyed the half dozen doc reviews over the past two years. Extra cash during my retirement means I paid off our vacation home in far less than 15 years!

Never had any craving for violence, like 7:53pm Anonymous, above, wants.

No wonder that creep is trolling for work, unhappy with his lot in life: Time on his hands, worrying about other folks instead of his thugged-out life. Get a job.

Best Regards!

Anonymous said...

Dear 8:05 PM Asshole,

Are you as much of an asshole in real life? I'm going to guess yes. It takes a genuinely miserable excuse for a person to inhabit your online personality.

F___ Off.

Anonymous said...

actually have a job. a nice home. and a wonderful family. and i am not a thug. i just don't like smug, obnoxious people who think they are better than everybody else.

i dont crave violence either. but i can recognize when someone deserves to get lumped up. you qualify.

Anonymous said...

Hey 9:04pm:

Nobody here thinks they're better than anyone else. In fact, nobody thinks they deserve $160k a year, big law, etc. What people want is to be treated with respect not necessarily by temp agencies or big law. We get the drill. No, rather, we want the professional community as a whole to give us some deference, and stop pouting out the "put in your time and you can get successful," "work for little and get the experience" crap.

In fact, you're the one who's acting smug. You're so great, why don't you outline for us here how you got to where you could retire early? In fact, if you're retired, why the hell are doing doc review? Why not just do something better with your life? Oh, and great job taking up a spot for someone with high loans who needs to pay off those loans.

I don't know if you're a troll or not, but I concur with practically everyone else here. If you're for real, I seriously hope karma hits your way soon.

Anonymous said...

Dear Tom,

My comments have been friendly. Though I hate to quote a "Nazi" news station, I've been fair and balanced with praise, support, and gentle derision (of those who complain for no reason).

You know best, you may see IP addresses so you know who's posting what, but after today, above, I think there is not a "chicken or the egg" dilemma in Contract Attorney Land. The doomsayers are so full of profanity, lack of skills, in debt through every fault of their own (and thus stressed to the max), that I was right in my first comment (signature line shows when it's me). These behaviors exhibited in any workplace, legal or assembly line, would result in uneven treatment, contempt from superiors, and firings.

People who wish others ill will here in an anonymous blog, as the previous 9:42 Buddist who hopes "karma hits [my] way soon," are going to reflect their lack of integrity as a lack of professionalism in the office: 1)Not doing their work, 2) Not showing up on time, 3)Not minding their own business and keeping their heads down, working for their employer, assigned firm, and client.

I'm done being helpful for this bunch. People who don't go to temple or church here are seething hate, not wanting to get things done. See you!

Best Regards!

Anonymous said...

Hey Best Regards: I probably have more integrity coming out of my fecal matter than you've probably achieved in your long career. Most of us do follow your 3 golden rules outlined in your last post, but you know what, the times have changed. This is not 19 years ago when the market was probably better for new and young attorneys. Attorneys whose only crimes is that they just fell out of the top 10% at non-tier 1 schools, when it was practically guaranteed that they aren't judged by their talents, but rather by the fact they just forgot to write a couple words down on an answer for a final in the 1st year of law school.

Please do take a hike to church or temple and then stay there. You've been nothing but unhelpful here

Anonymous said...

"Your above statement is incorrect. I know people who graduated in the middle of their classes from lower schools and they got many offers, have good jobs and are no better than any other lawyer else. They simply graduated 10 years ago."

I think the job market 10 years ago was a bit of an aberation. The dot.com boom was in full swing and there was tremendous demand for attorneys. There weren't a lot of people in in any industry struggling to find work at the time.

I also think salary expectations have changed a lot since 1997. In the mid 90s, biglaw started out around 80K a year. I don't know what small and medium firms paid, but imagine it was in the 35k to 45k range.

A big difference in the last 10 years is that the price of tution has skyrocketed (along with the price of housing, oil ect). While biglaw has been able to raise its billing rates and salaries accordingly, law firms that specialize in lower-margin work probably haven't been able to (i.e. the small and medium firms that graduates from less elite schools have always gone to). I might be wrong, but I don't think the price of a divorce, criminal defense, or closing on a home has increased at anywhere near the same rate as tutition or biglaw salaries, and the same for medical malpractice and slip and fall verdicts. And when you combine that with the big upswing in law school enrollment after the bubble burst in 2001, you get a situation where salaries haven't moved much for lower margin work.

Starting at $40k ten years ago meant you had a decent job. You could get the experience you needed to command a higher billing rate and still be able to make your loan payments. A lot of the "good jobs" people were getting in 1997 are still out there, they just pay 1997 salaries. Anyone who takes one of these jobs today can barely make ends meet.

Anonymous said...

Kate's points were all valid. Though I did enjoy this gem from Best Regards:

"Some people work after retiring. I enjoy being around people, and having fun at work. What can I say?"

Document review is shitty work any way you slice it. I can understand being a little restless after retiring in your 40s or 50s and taking a couple temp assignments to make extra cash. But I can't imagine anyone doing doc review full-time, year-round and not getting depressed about it, especially if there aren't better prospects on the horizon.

I’m lucky enough to be gainfully employed. I work at a big firm and have the credentials to match. That said, I only went to law school after I graduated from an expensive private college with a ton of debt and no job. I majored in computer science and graduated right as the bubble burst. So instead of the high-paying programming job I thought I’d have, I spent a year temping for $10 an hour. I had to move back in with my parents, and if it wasn’t for law school I’d probably still be there. It sucked and there was nothing I could do about it. I certainly wouldn’t have wanted to listen to some self-righteous prick who made a fortune off the boom tell me how much he loved temping for $10 an hour just for shits and giggles.

Anonymous said...

Uhh . . . does anyone honestly believe that a young retired attorney would leave substantive work to do doc review? Does that in any way make sense? I have to acknowledge it doesn't speak well for your reasoning skills if you can't detect such an obvious troll . . .

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

"does anyone honestly believe that a young retired attorney would leave substantive work to do doc review?"

Yeah. He may be a jerk but its plausible. People get burnt out and switch over to mindless work because they don't want to do anything else.

Anonymous said...

You're all so bitter.

Anonymous said...

How many years do you think it will take before the general public recognizes the fact that law profession is bullshit? Almost every non-lawyer I meet think that law career is a sure way to a respectable job and riches.

Anonymous said...

They will only know if we tell them. I tell everyone I can.

John Bungsolaphagus said...

"Best Regards" obviously became a lawyer in the "grand" era of law when it was more tightly restricted to a limited cadre of priviledged white men who now still think that the so-called "profession" of the "law" is a grand one indeed.

Clearly, like, many other older white male attorneys, he knows little or nothing of what it is to be a recently admitted attorney today. Everything is "la-di-da" in lawland for these types.

One guy posted the following:
Anonymous said...
How many years do you think it will take before the general public recognizes the fact that law profession is bullshit? Almost every non-lawyer I meet think that law career is a sure way to a respectable job and riches.

Anonymous....that perception by the non attorney is starting to change. More and more, regular folks have a relative or neighbor who starts to leak out the truth with stories of $40 attorney salaries. Sites like this one and JD Underground also are helping get the word out. There are now articles in somewhat mainstream media outlets. I detect an undercurrent that is starting to swell. The truth is starting to get out that the law is a B.S. profession.

Anonymous said...

"Almost every non-lawyer I meet think that law career is a sure way to a respectable job and riches."

People will always invariably believe this because the media conveys this message all the time. I anologize it to the way people think all novelists and other writers are super rich and famous. They think that if they write a novel, they will be super rich too. Look at all the wannabe writers on www.publishamerica.com. These folks believe that they are on their way to glamor and glory because the media feeds the line that writers are rich, interesting, and glamorous people. This is simply not true. Most novelists are midlisters. They don't may much money, remain fairly obscure, and have day jobs. This is phenomenon is also true of wannabe singers, reporters, etc.

Anonymous said...


It's exactly as you described. Law school in the early 1980's in Baltimore was all white males at University of Maryland. We were starting to get more women, and had a few minorities, a dozen out of hundreds for each of the three class years, and they were usually night students. I visited a big law firm in the 1990s here in the DC area and they were extremely proud how progressive they were: One hundred or more partners, and five of them were women. They were innovators, they felt. No minority partners.

That's one of the cool things about document review. I've heard of the late Johnny Cochran, and seen on TV Clarence Thomas. But it wasn't until after retirement in this decade, where I get to play with writing, playing with my grandchildren, and now toying with a month here and there at document review, that I met attorneys who were people of color. In the largely white county in the DC suburbs where I live, there is prejudice so as firms go races aggregate together. Most of my female classmates in our law school class at our twenty year reunion years ago had never done legal work, or had started after their children were grown.

John, I don't want to hear about the bitter people here envious of lawyers that are/were hightly paid. www.bls.gov gives some good statistics on lawyers across the country. If it is true that white male lawyers are only making $40k/year as someone suggested, do you have any books or credible sources where I can read on the state of law/lawyers today? I get the ABA Journal, but we are all highly paid there, as well the the Maryland Bar Journal. Incestuous whining websites like this are interesting, but filled with emotional outbursts, so they aren't good primary sources for ascertaining the veracity of statements that people who made law review and were in the top ten percent of their class and went into Biglaw are only making $40K per year. My wife makes more than that on eBay, net.


Best Regards.

Anonymous said...

"Best Regards", are a slow learner or something? Can you step out of your bubble and put yourself in other people's shoes for a while?

You talk about the fact how you are filled with pride seeing attorneys of color... DOING DOCUMENT REVIEW??? Do you understand the fact that document review is a dead end job? We all get it, you are retired and enjoying your golden years. You don't care that this is a dead end job. You achieved what you wanted to achieve and now all you are concerned about is your grandchildren, your bingo games, and your early bird specials. Most of the people here are in their 20s or late 30s. We do not want to try out recreational writing, or "toy around" with our jobs like you. We want a career. Do you have the ability to understand that? Or do you suffer from Asperger syndrome?

I was thinking you might be a troll, but I can't imagine someone putting so much effort into trolling. There is no nicer way of saying this: you are a pig happy to roll around in shit, and you can't for the life of you understand why somebody wouldn't want to be in the same position as you.

Anonymous said...

Whining Anonymous at 1:50pm:

Unless they prefer city life, instead of the DC suburbs, why would someone not want to be set for life.

YOU understand: Sure, no one wants to be old. I don't need Viagra yet but I certainly can't shoot hoops like I used to. However, both houses are paid for, no debt, and doc review is just "found money," with free lunch, two thousand dollars a week on the project I start tomorrow at $40 straight time. All on top of a lucrative pension from my General Counsel career.

But what moron is going to retire and sit home and watch television! Anybody my age might want to be in the same position, contrary to your assertion. There are already over a million millionaires in this country, but from your mouthing off, I don't think we belong to the same country club. Show respect to people who have accomplished something in life. No one likes a whiner. I get to enjoy Tom's helpful tips just as anyone else. Stop your ageist discriminitory attacks. You're just jealous and trying to feel self-important: You're no more special than any other mother's son.

Best Regards!

Anonymous said...


Take a bow, "Best Regards".

Best troll I've seen in a long while.

Anonymous said...

Best Regards, get the hell off this board. You said you were done many e-mails ago, but you keep coming back with more garbage. I do not believe anything you say; you just want attention. Temps: Ignore this fool and do not respond to his nonsense.
Let's get back to M, The Roving Eye.
Seasoned Temp

Anonymous said...

then stop the personal attacks

Anonymous said...

5:51PM:If you are not interested in personal attacks, why did you click on this article?
Come on does anybody have more anecdotes about The Roving Eye? Back and forth banter with that hard-on Best Regards is boring.

Anonymous said...

"People get burnt out and switch over to mindless work because they don't want to do anything else."

Though don't switch over to mindless UNPLEASANT work, which also causes burn out. What kind of sense would it make to quit an 80-hour a week job making $160k annually for a 60-hour a week job making $40@hr-tops-with no health insurance, sick pay, vacation, pension, etc.? That lump on top of your shoulders isn't just a hat stand.

Anonymous said...

"Though don't switch over to mindless UNPLEASANT work, which also causes burn out. What kind of sense would it make to quit an 80-hour a week job making $160k annually for a 60-hour a week job making $40@hr-tops-with no health insurance, sick pay, vacation, pension, etc.?"

It's not that crazy. If working doc review for 4 months a year would let me retire five years earlier I'd certainly consider it. Even if those 4 months are awful, you'd have 2/3rds of the year off. Outside of doc review, working 3-4 months a year isn't really an option.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Man/Babe!


Anonymous said...

Agreed Anon/regards is a troll. I am a recovering attorney who has switched to an executive business development role for an international corporation. I have options that should realistically allow me to retire without temping in 10 years or so. I also temped and it sucked. I also did toilet law - and it was better, better $, but no parade. I feel for you all, but do examine your options and try to think out of the box. You are on the whole, smart people with alot to offer. Pay your bills, yes, but keep your heads up and vow not to be doing doc review in your 50's.

Love and peace

Anonymous said...

Most of these people went to bad law schools and took out huge loans. They are hardly rocket scientists. They should do whatever job that makes them happy.

Anonymous said...

Or let such crazies go back to McDonalds, keep them away from us.

Anonymous said...

how about i take a bat to your fkin skull?

Anonymous said...

That kind of attitude, advocating violence, gives us brothers a bad name and lets the white man keep us down.

You deserve what you get. I tell my 8 year old nephew that he is responsible for the decisions he makes.

You chose law school when you were old enough to be responsible for the outcome of the decisions that you made, good or bad . You knew your poor attitude would preclude you from ever obtaining a job (law) with your betters.

Now you come here because you are on the fringe. With your swearing and advocacy of violence, why are we not surprised?

You deserve to enjoy the fruits of your decisions, with that attitude.

Anonymous said...

sometimes things need to be handled in a "more traditional way". the spoken word in ineffective to dimbulbs like you.

i bet you pee sitting down.

Anonymous said...

why is it an insult to tell someone they pee like a woman?

OHHHH, being a woman is inferior! i get it...