Tragedy came to Japan. The S.O. and I watched the "Arigatou concert" on NHK. 

This is not a good video-but I could not find a better one to embed. If you get NHK World on your TV and this comes on-watch it. I submit you will not come away dry eyed.

You Godless harlots.

John Cole has hit on the latest example of just how stupid a certain segment of America really is:

Here is the Republican Governor of PA sharing some advice with women who will be forced to have an unnecessary ultrasound before having an abortion:

Gov. Tom Corbett  reaffirmed this week that he supports the anti-abortion measure so long as it’s not obtrusive because women could simply close their eyes during the procedure:

 

QUESTION: Making them watch…does that go too far in your mind?

 

CORBETT: I’m not making anybody watch, OK. Because you just have to close your eyes. As long as it’s on the exterior and not the interior.

Critics say Corbett’s comments show he doesn’t understand how the bill would even work. While the Pennsylvania legislation has been amended to remove references to invasive transvaginal ultrasounds, the language suggests a transvaginal ultrasound could still be required if the embryo is too small. Patrick Murphy, a Democrat running for attorney general, called for Corbett to apologize for his statement. “It’s unthinkable that he would so casually dismiss this by advising women to just close their eyes,” Murphy said.

There is just something spectacularly wrong with these people.

And people wonder why other nations think the United States of America is losing its collective mind.

The next time you hear some douchebag  a GOP Presidential candidate use that term, it might be wise to remember who invented it. And he did not mean it in a good way:

Rick Santorum and the rest of GOP presidential gang all have a man-crush. Considering he was an outright intellectual elitist, a shaggy-haired liberal, and — horror of horrors — French, the object of their adoration seems a bit surprising, but the French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville and his 1835 United States travelogue, Democracy in America, have surged into national politics this campaign cycle — often linked to the nascent expression "American exceptionalism."

Across the nation, from Plano, Texas, to Keene, N.H., Santorum has brandished Tocqueville, lecturing on how America got revolution right while France didn't. Last year Gingrich published A Country Like No Other: Why American Exceptionalism Matters, a book overflowing with praise for the Parisian writer. Going further still, the former speaker narrated a 2011 documentary called City Upon a Hill, which is produced by Citizens United (yes, that Citizens United). If you guessed that it leads with Tocqueville, you're right.

The trailer opens like something out of Lord of the Rings: inspirational music, horses galloping through verdant terrain, and the soothing voice of the biggest hobbit of them all — Gingrich. "During his travels in 1831, French writer Alexis de Tocqueville observed that America was an exceptional nation with a special role to play in human history," he intones. "American exceptionalism has been at the center of our nation's experience for nearly 400 years."

There's only one problem with that: It's not strictly true. Although a superiority complex has long pervaded the national psyche, the expression "American exceptionalism" only became big a few years ago. (In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton called on Americans to "vindicate the honor of the human race.") What's more, Tocqueville didn't invent the term. Who did? Joseph Stalin.

Food for thought.

There is a post up over at the USNI blog that really kind of made me angry. It's a good post, well written-but it's based on a flawed premise. Here I will set out to explain why.

Ever since the Navy came out with its completely assinine policy about breathalyzers at the quarterdeck-there has been a subset of folks who have said that the fact the Navy has resorted to this-shows how the service is missing the point. Its not alcohol but a poor command screening process and "poor character development". That's a lot of, excuse me, bullshit.

So, according to Secretary Mabus and the cowardly sycophants who thought up this scheme, the problem is not that we have poor character development and command screening processes. Rather, the problem is that we can't possibly tell when people are drinking too much and displaying conduct which suggests they might not be fit for command. And breathalyzing every O-5 and O-6 on duty ensures that we will have the soberest bunch of moral coward commanders in the history of the naval force. The solution to commanding officers abusing their positions in alcohol related incidents isn't character development and rigorous screening. The solution is a breathalyzer. Oh. My. God. What have we become?

Having sat on a selection board and spent more than few days in command-I thoroughly disagree with the above proposition. The "moral character" of our force (whatever the hell that means) is just fine. 99% of our Sailors do the right thing-every time, all the time when it comes to the particulars of their profession. For the other 1% there are already sufficient remedies in place-there is absolutely  no reason to add to them. I agree that Secretary Mabus is a craven idiot and the uniformed leadership is guilty of incompetence and neglect to allow this policy to go into place-I do not agree with the idea that the Navy has a morals problem. 

Now don't get me wrong-the "system" is failing the people who are in it. Its just that the failures are not in the command screening process or in the "moral development" of our CO's ( God I hate that phrase-just typing it made my head hurt). The problem that is getting CO's fired is three-fold. And they have to do with looking at the incidents for more than what you read in Navy Times.

1) Our people are not getting enough time in the cockpit or at the conn before screening for command.    There is no substitute for experience-the career path laid before our folks today does not put a premium on that. You have folks showing up to Department head tours with barely 1400 hours-when I went to my department head tour I had almost 2700 ( And yes its true I was a whore for flight time-if you were not flying, what was the point of being in the Navy after all?). Thanks to IA's, disassociated tours and other workarounds for nonexistent problems, quite simply you are not "saving" enough in the experience bank so that when people do assume command the don't have that experience to draw on. Don't believe me-go back and look at how many reliefs have occurred for shiphandling. Its more than a few.

Three tours of three years flying, floating or submerging should be the minimum-not the exception. One side benefit of that will be a great intangible : developing a community reputation-which I suspect has been less of a factor in recent screen boards than it should have. I'd rather see a board more focused on that than the skin color or gender of its selectees.

2) The world our CO's have to live in has changed-and not necessarily for the better. One of the things that amazes me is that the Navy creates , repeatedly, situations that set our folks up for failure and then is shocked, SHOCKED-when they give in to temptation. And yes, disgruntled commenter from January-that has to do with the presence of women on board. And ridiculous assumptions about what the rules should be-and should not be. People tend to forget that the average CO is a normal man or woman in their late 30's early 40's who are going through the normal progression of life. Many are married-some marry well, some not so well-but the burdens don't go away on them simply because they in the Navy. 13-of  20 incidents involved alcohol-but I submit the alcohol had NOTHING to do with the incident that got these folks fired. About half of those thirteen incidents are things that would not have gotten you fired 20 years ago. Counseling maybe-but not relief for cause. Then again cell phones, Twitter, and Facebook didn't exist either. Three CO's were relieved for things they didn't personally do-but that their Sailors did. Off the ship.  How crazy is that? Like it or not-Sailors are going to date, they are going to have sex and they are going to drink. "Wars and lechery-nothing else holds the fashion". Here's an unpopular notion: the problem is not that Sailors are dating, having sex or drinking. Its who they are dating, having sex with or drinking with.   

Sailors dating people in their chain of command is a problem. (I'll take it a step further and say in their command period) It is a problem for the Navy-even if its not a problem for the Sailor(s) in question. A Sailor dating a married woman who works out in town is a problem for the Sailor-but probably not a problem for the Navy. There is a difference-and when the Navy lost sight of that alone, it created a lot of the current issues it deals with. The Navy's focus should be on avoiding problems for the Navy-while encouraging Sailors to avoid problems for themselves. And yes Virginia, that will probably include the intermittent free-lancer at Impanema. Get over it.  Pass out the condoms ahead of time.

" What are you saying? That you should just encourage rampant immorality?" No. I am saying-fight the fights you can win. Scope the problem so that it is manageable. And try to remember that you are running a warfighting organization-not a convent. Which is also why we have chaplains. Incentivize the behavior you want-and treat Sailors like grown ups. When you treat them like adults they will behave like adults. Adults in our society get to make choices;  good ones and bad ones. So long as they show up to work on time, you can't influence much else.  Do away with the myriad of personnel policies you have right now that literally encourage Sailors to date other Sailors.

And as for that Sailor dating the married woman out in town? Well that usually carries its own punishment in terms of emotional pain and suffering. Much more free learning than the Navy could ever give him.  If it spills over into his work deal with it-otherwise it's his problem to deal with, not the Navy's.

Women are here to stay, I know that. However the Navy is refusing to deal with the issue in a rational fashion. Its not a "family friendly employer" and never will be. That won't stop people who really want to fly, float or submerge from signing up. Accept it and join the 21st century. To put it more crudely: when you have a Navy where a guy can fuck another guy in the ass with our blessing-but a guy can't fuck a woman with a condom without getting axed-you lost the moral high ground a long time ago.

3) Firing should be the last resort not the first.   There is a difference between being a Department Head and being in command. And people forget that for most of the O-5's in command it is their first time in that situation. No matter what the level of experience, there are situations that they will not have seen before. You have to hope their experience has given them a basis for a sound decision. Some rise to it-some do not-and may not be destined for another command as a result. But in my reading of the 21 firings last year-it seems clear that not all of them required a person to be fired. There are other more discrete ways of dealing with many of these problems. One side effect of the zero defect mentality that is prevalent now is that even CO's are reluctant to seek advice from their bosses. Bosses it seems,  are also reluctant to listen and hold things in confidence-and judge the  commanding officer in question on the balance of total performance, as an aviator and a commander. Not to be flippant, but the 7 of 7 block on the FITREP form is also there for a reason. Certainly its a lot more humane than a public shaming and public ruination. And for the most part,  accomplishes the same objective.

Now to be clear-there are redlines that cannot be crossed. A collision at sea can usually screw up your whole day. Violating NATOPS is never a wise choice ( well, almost never). Strangling your Sailors is going too far. Getting stopped by the local constabulary and having to walk in a straight line is not a good career move. Spending money you don't have -or on things you don't have the authority to buy is never smart.  But I I guarantee you something: not one of the CO's that has been fired this year woke up in the morning and said, " Hey, I think I will trash my whole life today because I think its a good idea".  Rather,  they generally made well intentioned decisions that blew up in their faces. There are requirements and there are things for which you cannot be forgiven. However just about everyone understands that and accepts it.  ( Those that don't -well as a I said earlier you already have ways to deal with that) What they can't stand is the gray areas that were once were handled through discrete counseling and private corrections- are somehow now public property.  

In summary I will close with a observation and a bit of a sea story. The observation: There is no moral crisis in the Navy.  The average naval officer or Sailor is getting up each morning and going to work on time, pays his bills, takes care of his family, serve his country-and maybe just maybe-desires to have a good time once in a while, while doing so. Its not an unreasonable expectation on his or her part.

The sea story: I owe my life to two pilots who personally could not have been more different. One was a devout religious man, a non drinker, who hated ready room movies because they had so much sex and violence. The other ( at the time) was something of a boozehound, was paying child support to a woman who was not his wife, and  had a boisterous and sometimes profane sense of humor. However they both knew how to fly a rather large aircraft when it found itself in extremis. The Navy I grew up in had room for the both of them. 

The Navy of today should have room for all kinds of people too.

<——————————————————————————————————————————————————————>

UPDATE: In rooting around to support some comments over at USNI-I found this comment I wrote back in 2010 at "I like the cut of his jib" about the abomination that is "intrusive leadership"- a term I thoroughly despise. The person who came up with it should be ashamed ( especially since I think it had its origins in the MCPON's office):

 

I hate that term intrusive leadership. It has lead to a whole host of abuses of our Sailors and is why the Navy has such boneheaded programs like liberty cards and curfews and all the other nonsense that has sprung up in the last decade.

Intrusive = abusive. The is a way to keep your finger on the pulse of your Sailors withoug demanding that they submit every detail of their private life to inspection. It requires a plugged in and empowered Chief's mess for one thing, and communication up and down the chain of command.

The statement: "Intrusive leaders maintain clear boundaries with their Sailors. They are neither the Sailor’s parent nor their best friend, but a professional whose job it is to foster independence while teaching the Sailor the ways of the Navy."- is redundant. That's good leadership not intrusive leadership.

Most of the current crop of Officers have not gotten past the "intrusive" part and its too the detriment of the Navy as a whole. This is just another legacy of Uncle Vern's five years of mis-mangement as CNO. 

However, since I am starting a long road trip-I am at home tonight. But tomorrow is another story.

And at the end of the evening-of course you need someone to drive home….er, drive you home.

Half Japanese, half Irish!

You block my site because it's "pornography".

Clearly you have never seen real pornography.  

Paul Ryan is an evil man. That's right-evil-because he does not care about the plight of a long standing large group of Americans. But he wants to make the rich, richer. Douchebag.

Paul Ryan proposes to solve the United States financial problems by putting the burden on the backs of the poor. And yet, somehow-as only rich Republicans can do-he tries to put a moral frame on his distinct lack of Christian Charity:

1) Ryan's original plan avoided raising taxes by implausibly promising to hold spending growth in Medicare and Medicaid to inflation. If costs in either program exceeded inflation, then the beneficiary, or some other actor, paid the difference. Ryan-Wyden aims for the strict, but more achievable, goal of holding spending growth to GDP+1%, at least in Medicare. If Ryan's budget adopts that goal, or something closer to it, a substantial portion of his long-term savings evaporate. So how does he handle that?

There are words for this approach-namely worthless. . Ryan's budget puts all the burden on the poor -without proposing to raise any revenue. THAT DOES NOT WORK. Of course Ryan knows his budget has no prayer in hell of passing-but its a clever way to discredit the only budget he has any right to comment on-which is the President's budget. Ryan is a dick for trying to present his an alternative-its not.

Paul Ryan does not care one bit about that-by fucking over the poor he is trying to rest the blame all on them. It is not going to work,

You greasy bastards.

In the middle of a long business trip, on a mission and a professional sojurn in the Holy Land. I've been from north to south-and since I would rather spend what little time I have watching girls and drinking beer, something has to give. Sorry.

Israel is a fascinating nation. It reminds me of some ways of Japan-as a citizenry of insiders, who have been let in on some secret-that we foreigners only wish we could know.

That said-when I think of the "land of milk and honey" a place where the hills rise sharply and there are rock out croppings all over the place-does not come to mind. This is actually a tough land-but the people cling to it.

Pictures to follow.

That's the win, loss, tie record of the US in its wars. More if you count the Indian Wars and the other smaller skirmishes over the two centuries of the country's existence.

Stephen Walt has a great article up point out  again-how the US will ultimately end up the loser in Iraq, My only question is when we stop blaming ourselves and put much of the blame on the Iraqis-being Arabs after all and therefore worthless-instead of ourselves. Our problem was that we failed to recognize how worthless they really were.

But some people tried to tell us.

The tragedy of wasted lives and continuing damage to the land of my birth will live on for years to come.

Thanks George and Don-thanks a lot! Losing is still losing.

Only one day left in the month to get in a post on March Madness. Not basketball, but the Madness known as Women's History month. Yes, Yes, that oh so special time of the year when we get to celebrate the history that women want us to know about, while white washing the details they would rather just not see printed in the paper. Which is designed to be translated into its real meaning:

“Setting the bar for historical achievement so low-than any average everyday achievement for either a man or a woman becomes ‘historic’ if it is done by a woman”

You can quote me on that if you wish.

Oh and I guess after recent experience-we should get the usual disclaimers out the way first. I don't give a rat's ass if your daughter is a Naval Aviator, an engineer, CEO of a  multi-billion dollar firm, or for that matter the first woman to eventually walk on the moon. Nor do I care if your husband is supportive of what you want to do. These are my feelings and thoughts, these are issues that need to be discussed-not swept under the rug, and I'll write about them. If you think that gives you a carte blanche to go after me-I've got a message for you.

So, as is my custom in March- I intend to use this little missive to write about something that got me really peeved the moment I read it and heard it.The source of my anger? This little headline in Navy Times:

Getting Personal: Naval Air Forces plans character-building workshops.

(It appears the article is behind Navy Times firewall so I can't send you a link-but the article is on Page 18 of the April 02, 2012 issue.)

Starting this spring the Navy's  air wings, squadrons, and aircraft carriers will take a moment to stop and delve into some real life, but awkward scenarios in a move the top commander hopes will tamp down personal misconduct and misbehavior.

Naval Air Forces will roll out its new "Character and Integrity" program, developed by a contracted consultant and organized in the "train the trainer" format. Each training workshop will provide group discussions and include a video message from VADM Allen Myers.

" The real intent is to improve decision making skills  and give our people interventional strategies so that we do not adversely impact our readiness as war fighters because of character- related and integrity -related incidents, " said Cmdr Pauline Storum, a Naval Air Forces spokeswoman.. Top leaders "heard….we don't have a tool to help our people make better decisions."

I'll pause while you throw up now.

If that last paragraph, does not make naval veterans angry-very angry, then I think you have not been paying attention recently. Or have just given up, and acknowledged the fact that every thing the nay sayers said back in the bad old days about the great experiment has come true with a vengeance. 

So by implication, the generations of officers that fought the war in Vietnam, lived through 70's, gave rise to the 600 ship Navy and fought Desert Storm and Desert Shield were unprincipled, bastards with "no character?"-No character indeed because after a long at sea period they went ashore and got a little unwrapped, and part of that getting unwrapped might have included a tryst or two with the local female population? Bullshit!

But so many people are getting fired!

Yes they are. But as I pointed out before its as much about today's environment and the lack of consistency in application of standards that contributes to those firings-as well as an interconnected world that intrudes on things that quite simply: are none of Al Myers-or the rest of flag counterparts business.

I'll say it again: "The "moral character" of our force (whatever the hell that means) is just fine. 99% of our Sailors do the right thing-every time, all the time when it comes to the particulars of their profession. For the other 1% there are already sufficient remedies in place-there is absolutely no reason to add to them."    

And of course, later in the article-the familiar old canard of Tailhook gets trotted out. THAT Navy was killed a long time ago-by stupid Politically Correct actions like this one. ( And for what its worth-THAT Navy was a hell of lot more fun than this one.)  And just as full of "character"-where character had a clearly defined professional basis and less of a personal one. of course it was Tailhook that led the Navy down the path that made it think that its leadership had as much of right to tell you how to live your personal life as well your professional one. ( P.S." the true story behind the sensational Tailhook Scandal and how Paula Coughlin was anything but innocent"-but 8 million dollars works wonders.)

What should be an insult to anyone's "integrity" however-is that the Navy has to outsource this training to an outside firm, with several folks who just happen to be "friends of a friend of friend".  That should strike more than just me as odd and particularly insulting-the institution and to our Sailors.

But today's Sailors don't have the time.

Really? They don't have the time to do their central job as officers and chief petty officers? Lead their Sailors?   Yea-I think that would get in the way of all the diversity training that needs to be accomplished.  And it certainly would get in the way of IG's throwing people under the bus. Give me a fucking break. Hey Al-how much did this little ( probably non competitively bid) contract cost the US Navy? How much-probably a fair amount I think.

So what does all this have to do with Women's History month, you ask? Good question-and it really doesn't- save for one major thing. The primary argument against gender integration was the amount of problems it would create by having men and women live together in close quarters in a profession that prizes companionship to a  large degree. Add to that- long series of events that closed the doors on other more discrete and non threatening means of releasing that tension concurrently ensued-and you should not be surprised at the result.  The Star Trek Navy doesn't exist. And it never will. 

There is no moral crisis in the Navy. The average naval officer or Sailor is getting up each morning and going to work on time, pays his bills, takes care of his family, serve his country-and maybe just maybe-desires to have a good time once in a while, while doing so. Its not an unreasonable expectation on his or her part.

I wonder if there will be a module in the course about how its bad to stab your contemporaries in the back. That always denoted a certain lack of integrity-right Al?

Thankfully.

Of course, April 1st is always a good reason for some types of activities:

The residents are breathing a lot easier. The pesky "cockroaches" have been dealt a major setback in the Hong Kong courts:

A three-member panel of High Court judges overturned a September lower court ruling that would have allowed a Filipino maid to apply to settle permanently in the southern Chinese city after living here at least seven years, as other foreign residents can.

They unanimously rejected arguments by the maid's lawyers that an immigration provision barring domestic workers from permanent residency was unconstitutional. Lawyers for the maid said they would take the case to Hong Kong's top court.

The case has split the city, home to nearly 300,000 maids from mainly Southeast Asian countries. Some argue that barring maids from applying for residency amounts to ethnic discrimination. But other groups have raised fears that the case would result in a massive influx of maids' family members arriving in Hong Kong, straining the densely populated city's social services and health and education systems. Supporters of the maids say those fears are overblown.

Now , I have a special place in my heart for the Filipino maids-and I had hoped they would win this case. Having, over the course of the last 11 years met several of them-and that's all I will expound about that- I do know that the life they lead is not an easy one. They, on average, get one day a week off-are paid an inferior wage-and in the case of some of the more xenophobic of Hong Kong's Chinese residents, treated worse than they would treat their pets. Based on the wording of the Basic Law, they had a case. Not that it mattered to the Chinese-who, if they really did not want hordes of Filipinas in the SAR- would learn to do without their services.

Of course, if they did-it would make Sunday afternoons in Wanchai pretty boring.

What I do find interesting-is the fact that the government of the Philippines has not loudly protested the ruling. Probably since the fact that 300,000 women are having to work away from the homeland is a national disgrace to the Philippines.

But it would not be the first time a court has made a political decision in spite of what the law says.

On the to the Court of Final Appeal!

James Fallows has been pelting the media about its need-in response to idiotic criticism from some pretty stupid people-about the "both sides do it mentality". In reality only one side is doing it to any great degree and that is the side which makes league with whores like Michelle Malkin and imbeciles like the late Andrew Breitbart. ( Whose successors have proven that they could take his particular form of lunacy to an entirely new level of stupidity.). One of the big areas that the deluded members of the Tea Party nation love to rail about is saving over 1.5 million American jobs with about 1/11th of the money it took to bail out greedy bastards like Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs and his contemporaries:

As Nocera points out, Fox News has repeatedly presented it that way. There was even a Volt-ish allusion in some of the argument against the Obama health care plan before the Supreme Court last week. If the government can force me to buy medical care, why shouldn't it force me to buy not just broccoli but also an electric car? After all, as former Solicitor General Paul Clement pointed out in his anti-Obamacare argument, other people's failure to buy electric cars makes their price higher, by eliminating economies of scale. Why isn't that just like people who decide not to buy health insurance?

You can go to the transcript to see how Justices Sotomayor and Breyer dealt with that analogy. But what's the truth about the Volt itself? Nocera could have said in his column: "Critics claim that the Volt is a governmental boondoggle that typifies an administration bent on imposing its do-good agenda on the nation. Administration spokesmen deny the charges." Here is what he actually says:

 

What is the connection between President Obama and the Volt? There is none. The car was the brainchild of Bob Lutz, a legendary auto executive who is about as liberal as the Koch brothers. The tax credit — which is part of the reason conservatives hate the car — became law during the Bush administration.(Emphasis mine-SS)

"It's nuts," said Lutz, when I spoke to him earlier in the week. "This is a significant achievement in the auto industry. There are so many legitimate things to criticize Obama about. It is inexplicable that the right would feel the need to tell lies about the Volt to attack the president."

 

It helps that Nocera was able to get the highly conservative Lutz — shown with his Volt, at right — to go on the record this way. But it is nice to see someone lay it out so plainly.

 

The simple truth of the matter is-that there is a sizeable chunk of America that wants to see the country fail-so long as it gives their fair haired conservative heroes a political advantage. The world needs alternatives in energy and in transportation, and places with good public transportation are a lot more liveable and better places to be than those with reliance on automobiles. ( Reason 537 why  I need to go back to Japan). The only way to keep these idiots from gaining the upper hand is to call them out on their lies each and every time. I can't tell you the chagrin with which I watch friends who should know better-parrot the stupid Fox line on Facebook. I just want to reach through the computer screen and shake them by the shoulders-hard.

In a proper world-and an evil man like Paul Ryan would have a horde of people hovering over him-all with Louisville Sluggers in hand threatening to teach him the real consequences of selfishness. Paul Ryan is not a reasonable man-he is a man who appears to be good,  but has made league with the worst forces. I agree with Paul Krugman when he writes:

What these people need is reasonable Republicans. And if such creatures don’t exist, they have to invent them. Hence the elevation of Ryan — who is, in fact, a garden-variety GOP extremist, but with a mild-mannered style — to icon of fiscal responsibility and honest argument, despite the reality that his proposals are both fiscally irresponsible and quite dishonest.

The North Koreans have to pay for missile launches somehow.

See this new add for North Korean "tourism". ( H/t to Fucked Gaijin!)

Think about it Pennsylvania voters! 

PORN STARS FOR SANTORUM! (mostly Safe For Work-but don't have your speakers up.)

(more…)

A rocket scientist in North Korea. Job security (and survivabilty) is probably not the best.

The Secretary of State wants to unwind a bit swigging some beer in a Columbian hot spot. And that's OK.

But a hard working member of the military or a Secret Service Agent wants to drink  a few beers and slice off a nice guilt free piece of Columbian tuna-and THAT's somehow a big deal.

Hillary only wishes she had tits and a bubble butt like this!

RIIIGHTTTTTTT!

Double f*cking standard if you ask me.

Moral of the story:

1) Chicks always get away with more than men.

2) ALWAYS pay the girl!

3) Don't go on liberty with the other guys.

4) Curfews suck!

5) The whole morality thing has gotten out of hand.