BJean

Wow that was GREAT!!! I should go there more often. I kept thinking how lucky I'd been all these years, using my cell phone while pumping gas. I read the article about the girl getting burned because of a cell phone spark and I saw the sign go up at our pumps, and I have been warning everybody ever since. I even warned a guy who was doing it while I was pumping gas. I showed him the sign too. This is all too funny!

:heh: :heh: :heh: True story: My parents got a new 1955 Chevy and Dad sent off for those gosh awful plastic carseat covers and put them on the seats to protect whatever that carseat material was that they used back then. One morning in the dead of winter Dad slid out of the car to go to work. Mom slid across to drive home and Dad bent down and to give Mom a quick kiss goodby. Actual sparks were generated between their lips. Dad wasn't injured, but Mom sustained a burn about the size of a fever blister on her lip. Dad always said it wasn't the seat covers, it was his electrifying kiss. Mom wasn't amused. :tired

TOM: So the daughter of the gal in the news not too long ago who caught on fire happened because she left the car door open while she was pumping gas and her daughter slid across the seat and caused a spark? I thought they determined it was because her daughter was talking on her cell phone. She actually did leave the car door open and her daughter slid across the seat to get out. I am confused because it sparked (!) so much talk at the time about not using your cell phone while pumping gas.

karey: That is some very exciting stuff your kids have going on! You must be popping your buttons! I will definitely check out your daughter's website. Thanks for the info on Puddin's possible procedure. I'll see if I can track it down.

Green: I always enjoy reading your posts. I appreciate your personal bits a lot and I can really relate. Plus the humor is definitely a bonus! Like I said I do envy your ability to get and pay for the facelift. Have you ever seen one done? I have seen parts of it done but I kept my hands over my eyes during the more gruesome parts. It is amazing what they can do. If I were at my goal weight and had the dough lying around, I believe I would definitely do it. I had an 80 yr. old friend in Orlando and she told me once that she'd had 3 face lifts. She said that I should have one as soon as I felt ready. She never regretted having done any of her cosmetic surgery. She was a tennis nut and her exposure to the sun caused deep wrinkles very early on. Her bottom line on this was: you only live once and life flies by so fast that you should live every moment to the fullest. Reminds me of that Peggy Lee song, "Is That All There Is?" I didn't understand it when I was younger but now I sure do!

TOM: Previous post was done tongue in cheek. I think I have way too much time on my hands today. I completely agree that society should protect the rights of children.

EEEEEKKKK TOM. I hadn't thought about the religious fanatics with children. I guess that means that we have to step in if some of them start training their children on how to make bombs and on the use of an automatic weapon?

Carlene, help. Do we mean that warning labels are unwarranted? Actually TOM we don't mean that at all. My gasoline pump place, or filling station some would call it, has a large rectangle sign that tells you not to smoke or use a cell phone while pumping gas, and it also tells you to close your car door. All these are good operating tips. We all need them, even if we have a good education. We didn't invent the things so we need instructions. At least most of us do. My husband doesn't need instructions except as a last resort when putting a barstool together. But if you smoke while pumping gas, whether there's a posted sign or not, and you overpump the gas and it spurts out on your shoe where the amber from your cigarette has landed and you catch on fire, and in your shock the handle of the gas pump flies out of your hand with the little widget still on that keeps the gas pumping without pressure from your hand, and the gas flies all over your car and the car catches fire and the car blows up and catches all the other cars on fire in a chain reaction, that the gas company should be sued?

TOM: We would have done whatever was needed in the case of the twins being handicapped or sick. Just like we do now with every member of our family. The money would have come from somewhere. We would not have thought even for a second that the medical community owed it to us for "allowing" it to happen. The family with 7 children must have been the same ones you were talking about. Is there another family like that? If it is, the children were all born healthy, but developed handicaps later.

Green: I'm opting out on this one. Oh shoot, I can't. Here goes. I believe that if people have religious reasons for denying medical treatment for themselves and/or their children, it is their right. If someone declares that they have religious reasons for not wanting to kill someone in war, they have a right to serve their country in a non-combat role. Etc., etc. You get my point. Religion is a personal right. I believe in personal rights when they do not impinge on the laws or rights of others in society.

mjsafari: Dang girl! You caught me. I am actually not only sitting at my computer too much today, I got hungry and ate a piece of birthday cake. :kiss Old behavior is hard to change! Sure wish I had a nice cup of hot coffee with half 'n half to chase my cake with...

Does anybody remember the original Mr. Coffee coffee makers? They made horrid coffee. They were convenient as all get out, but the coffee was mediocre at best. I researched to find out why, because they were so much quicker than a percolator. Everywhere I turned, the answer was that in order for coffee grounds to yield a decent cup of coffee, very hot water is necessary. Have any of you used the first hot tea makers that were designed like a Mr. Coffee coffee maker? They made lousy tea. Same reason, except their water was even less hot than the Mr. Coffee coffee maker. However, I would like to note here that good tea leaves do not need boiling water to produce a good cup of tea. TOM, hot coffee is hot coffee. No one wants to be burned by hot coffee, no matter what. Therefore they must take the responsibilty to make sure that the hot coffee does not come in contact with parts of the body they are not intended for. Ok, I'll give you that McDonald's coffee was too hot. But sometimes my Starbucks coffee is way too hot. Even burnt once in a while. Exactly how far should the government go in regulating HOT coffee, for heaven's sakes? Am I going to have to start carrying a coffee thermometer to know if I should put my paper coffee cup between my legs?

TOM: Of course our kids would not have sued anyone if the boys were handicapped or had died. It was a chance they took. They knew of the risks and it was their decision to continue the pregnancy. I would like to ask the question of that couple (I can't remember their names) who used in vitro fertilization to become pregnant. They were very active members of a church that does not believe in abortion. When the doctors told them that she was carrying 7 children and told the couple that for the sake of some of the babies, they should reduce the number of fertilized eggs in her womb. They cried foul. They said they would never dream of interfering with God's plan. Yes, the babies are handicapped. To the community's credit, they are all pitching in to help the couple. However my question is why is it okay to interfere with God's plan for them not to have children by using medical intervention, but when the doctors tried to do something to help at least some of those unborn babies, they said it was interference in God's plan?

Bubble, your horrendous story (thank goodness you stuck by your guns and didn't give in to the heavy-handed tactics of the woman's attorney), reminds me of an event in our neighborhood in Orlando. One night after a special party at the clubhouse (I think it was after the last night of the Bay Hill Invitational Golf Tournament) one of the guys who was temporarily employed to help with the serving and who incidentally could not speak English, got turned around and wandered onto the golf course after the party was over. He walked a while and realized that he was lost and needed help finding his way out. He walked up onto the back patio of one of the homes on the 15th fairway. It was 2 o'clock in the morning. He started knocking on the patio door. He could see a faint light coming from inside the house so he thought someone was awake. No one came. He pounded harder, then harder and then started yelling for help. The homeowner heard all of the noise, crept into the darkened room on the inside at the patio and saw this person who was pounding and screaming trying to get into his house. He got his gun, went to the door and yelled at the guy to leave. The guy got all exasperated, screamed louder and kept hitting the glass door. The homeowner shot him and called the police. The foreign speaking lost guy was injured, but not killed. Before he was out of the hospital an attorney had filed a lawsuit on his behalf saying that the homeowner had no right to shoot his client. His client only needed help and was in no way a threat. Cool beans, huh?

laurend: I believe that in the case of negligence a company or person should be liable for damages caused by that negligence. I personally have never held a cup of hot java between my legs, or my breasts or on the top of my head, or when I was fatter on my shelf that was my butt. It doesn't belong in those places, wasn't designed for that and was designed to be held in one's hand, where if one is not asleep or drunk, one can sense the degree of heat that is being emitted from said cup. If what you're saying is true, then why not ban drive-thrus completely because they may promote or at least offer up for misuse, a cup of hot coffee. I think more like BubbleButt, that some of these lawsuits promote a serious absence of personal responsibility by consumers in this country. Just think how happy that makes all the attorneys. By the way, one valid reason why McDonald's was making their coffee so hot is because water that is not hot enough cannot produce a decent cup of coffee. They were probably losing sales because of their lousy coffee and decided to step up to the plate and do what it took to make better coffee. The fact that they didn't consider that some silly twit would try to drink her coffee from the wrong hole and burn herself in the process.

Now let's just all calm down a bit and put all thoughts of hot curling irons and where they might be inserted, far far out of our minds!!

Carlene: It might interest you to know that my daughter-in-law became pregnant with identical twins. She suffered from a malady known as Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome. She consulted with four doctors including 2 "specialists" on TTTS. All but one recommended that she and my son "START OVER"!!! The fourth doctor told her what her medical alternative was, serial amniocentesis (weekly withdrawal of amniotic fluid), which might save one or both babies. That procedure carried quite a lot of risk and could also have a possible outcome of one or both babies dying in utero, or if one or both survived to his 2nd year of life, would have a very good chance of developing Cerebral Palsy. My DH got online and researched and read everything he could find and learned that there were two doctors in the United States who do a procedure (surgery) that could actually cure the problem. Long story short, we flew to Milwaukee and had the doctor who has devoted his life to the research and development of the now relatively routine (for him) procedure. It was a 15 minute surgery that was captured on video and we all got to see. He did a small mid-line incision, went in and with a laser, cauterized the connecting blood vessels on the placenta so that they no longer allowed blood to circulate back and forth between the twins. Although she spent much of the remaining months of the pregnancy in bed, she delivered the boys by cesaerian and they are now rompin' stompin' healthy 4 year olds.

TOM: Your last sentence makes a good point in this argument. Carlene also explains in her posts why so many people are frustrated with our litigious approach to many things that are "accidents." Wheetsin shows us how all of this influences what doctors make and perhaps even who is willing to practice medicine these days. I believe we can all agree that the pendulum has swung too far in one direction and things need to swing back the other way a bit. Bubble asked me if I was saying that bartenders should be held responsible for serving an already intoxicated patron. She probably hadn't read my earlier posts. I do not feel that there should be laws compelling bartenders to enforce the law regarding public drunkenness or drunk drivers. If a bartender has coerced a patron to drink until they are legally drunk, or if a bartender has in some way been negligent, the patron who suffers damage due to the bartender's negligence, should be able to go through the court system in an effort to prove that the bartender was negligent - just the same as in any other case where an individual whose negligence has caused damage. I absolutely do not believe that a bartender should be compelled to enforce a law that says he or she may not serve an alcoholic beverage to someone who may have already had enough to drink. Like you, Bubble, I cannot fathom the argument that says we want our bartenders to be the beverage police. People need to be responsible for their own behavior. I totally understand the information TOM posted relating to the McDonald's hot coffee in her shorts case. However, I believe if I were on the jury I believe I would have voted to charge the idiot customer 80% at fault, not 20%.

lisa: In light of the dealings of this Presidency, the article you posted almost seems funny.

Wheetsin: You make my point, exactly. Now if we both can just learn to DUCK and COVER!

Carlene: I had the hot coffee incident in mind too. But wasn't it her vajayjay that was injured? Her Hoo-Hoo was the little chocholatey cupcake she was going to dunk in the coffee. Oh wait, that's Ho-Ho. My bad.

P.S. Wheetsin your lawsuit scenario that TOM pooh-poohed is not so far-fetched. Attorneys will sue anybody anytime, and I will defend their right to use the system. We definitely need those checks and balances! I believe that if somebody wants to hold the bartender accountable, it should be the individual who was served too many drinks and then allowed to walk out the door, keys in hand. The bartender should be sued in a civil court for damages by the drinker if he sustained damages due to the bartender's irresponsible behavior. In that lawsuit, in a court of law, the drinker must prove that the bartender was negligent and the bartender gets his day in court to prove that he was not. That's fair. But we have too many laws on the books right now that pass the buck down the line. We need to step up to the plate and take responsibility for our own actions!

No, of course not. Glad you follow my disjointed (oops) thinking, Wheet!

I'll bite lisa, what did Tony Snow have to say on the topic?

P.S. Actually TOM I'm a happy drunk. You'd probably like me better if I had a couple of stiff ones in me. Come to think of it, so would I. :faint: