10:40 PM yesterday
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Partners Still
@15. No physical relationship for five years--no sex, no affection--and you respond with thundering self-righteousness about honoring marriage vows?
I agree that this letter writer is frustrating, but I don't see how that translates into "therefore his marriage must never be ended."
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Over & Out
I'm on the letter writer's side, really. Being emotionally tortured for years--even when the torture is in some sense 'justified' by bad actions--is the essence of an abusive relationship. Fuck her fucking ex-husband.
But...her update leaves something to be desired. I wonder if Dan edited it? I hope he did. Because her praise of Dan's advice, and her joy about her sex-life aren't the only relevant details. How are the kids doing? How is the ex-husband doing? And other than the sex, how are things going with the fellow from her past?
I definitely support the dumping of the unforgiving asshole. But it is problematic that all she feels is worth mentioning is the awesome sex with the new/old guy.
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Model Behavior
Isn't this one of those situations where his inability to forgive is a key factor?
The LW, in his current state, is not relationship material. His expectations are excessive, his hectoring/nagging/niggling is excessive, and his ability to forgive/forget/move on is insufficient.
He is not in adequate emotional working order to be in a relationship.
commented on SL Letter of the Day: My Widow's Dog Collar
I think part of the reason this letter writer was so profoundly stupid (other than being born that way) is all the right wing nonsense about the goddamned 'death tax.' You die, and the IRS is gonna tax you up the ass. Boo!
The 2013 exclusion amount for the Estate tax is $5,250,000. Even a fucking solid gold collar is not going to approach that.
I blame the Republicans--a stupid letter writer made more stupid by the Republican meme of the Death Tax.
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Like, Say, DTMFA
Dan knocked this one out of the park.
I agree with schmacky that 'emotional tampon' isn't a new phrase, but it still might be new to Fnarf or others. It is appropriate to thank the person who makes a phrase stick in your mind, even if that person just used the phrase, and didn't invent the phrase.
And yeah, @40, moving in with family might be a viable option, but cut Dan some slack. He's in the problem-solving business, but that doesn't mean he is obliged to list every possible alternative solution. If family is a viable option for the letter writer, one hopes she's clever enough to think of that herself, as a quicker alternative to saving up the cash for a place of her own.
commented on SLLOTD: Did She Cheat?
He sounds unreasonably jealous and controlling: a dude with a serious bug up his butt.
And she sounds like a drunk with low self-esteem--or else why would she marry the bug up his butt dude?
As someone with little tolerance for petty drama, it sounds like a nightmare to me, but I acknowledge that some people prefer a relationship--even one filled with jealousy and bullshit--to being alone.
commented on Cut Social Security? Nope. Expand It.
Um, no. Providing no details on how to pay for this proposal, and glibly setting aside the political impossibility given the current make-up of congress renders this notion a total non-starter.
I can see having means-testing becoming a factor, and diverting some dollars from well-off seniors to poorer seniors--both in terms of Social Security benefits, and in terms of Medicare premiums.
But a big net increase, across the board, in benefits? No. The trend line in federal spending is already too heavily weighted toward seniors--the dollars that are being poured into programs for the elderly, at the cost of dollars for everything else the federal government needs money for, is out of whack even under current law. Exacerbating that imbalance is not smart.
Bang for buck federal spending are investments into the future productive capacity of the nation--education, health care for pregnant women and and for their infants and children, physical infrastructure, and basic research.
More bucks for seniors do not have the multiplier, long term investment impact that bucks spent on roads, bridges, and a healthy and well-educated younger generation provide.