Random Musings

A few weeks back I saw a commercial for a mattress company saying you should replace your mattress every eight years or so. Carlos asked how long we’d had our mattress and I said, shocked, “I brought it with me from California …”

“How old is it?”

“Fourteen years … plus, maybe eight?”

Twenty-two years old! Oh for the love of the Baby Jeebus! So, we were out that next weekend looking for a new mattress and a new bed as well. And the first place we stopped we found one we liked; and we tried out mattresses, playing Goldilocks … This one is too hard … This one is too soft … This one is just right … and found one of those we wanted. So, we talked to a salesman and got a quote for the whole shebang.

A little high but … Then Carlos wanted to try another place … Rooms-To-Go … and though I loathe their furniture, off we went.

As we entered the store, the salesman bull chute opened and a bell rang and out came Sharon to lasso us into a sale.

“We’re just looking,” I said.

“For what?”

“Furniture.”

That stopped her, and she let us wander off with the obligatory, My name is Sharon, let me know if I can help you.

We wandered through the store looking at hideous bed after hideous bed; I rapped them each with a knuckle and called out “Plastic” to express my dismay at the particle-board furniture RTG sells. But, there at the back, was this beautiful Mission style King bed — a king bed for queens, oh the irony — and when I rapped on it with my knuckle …. Solid wood!

How in the hell did that get in this store. I looked around for Sharon, who’d been tracking us through the store like Mama Grizzly Bore™ hunting for relevance, hiding behind hideous armoires and plastic dining room tables and we talked bed. Of course she tried to get us to buy the whole set, but I shot that down … We don’t want the all-matchy room, thank you.

Next up was the mattress, so we walked the store with Sharon and tried the beds; too soft; way too soft; wait, this is good. Firm, but comfy. We both lay down on the bed and tried to out, feeling this was the one.

So, we got it; the bed and the mattress and box springs. It was to be delivered tomorrow, but Sharon said she could Express Deliver it on Monday if someone would home to accept it. Well, I’m home on Mondays so we went Express and were told to expect the bed sometime between 7AM and 10PM … seriously? The cable guy is clearer about when he’s coming.

But I was home, and the new bed arrived at 4PM, and was set up, and then given the Tuxedo seal of approval; he took one look at it, jumped up, and began rolling all over it, purring.

Tuxedo likee. Bob likee.

Carlos? Tuesday morning he said it was too hard and could we send it back.

I said, sweetly, as I do, at times, “We could … but they’ll charge for that, and then charge for a new mattress and charge for delivery and charge for being annoying.”

“It’s too hard.”

I said, sweetly gritting my teeth, “Maybe you should sleep on it more than 7 hours? I mean, we slept on lumpy, dumpy, ancient for fourteen years, Give this one more than one night …”

Oy. The bed stays.

I always thought judges were supposed to be impartial; apolitical.

Not so of Judge Sandra McLaughlin, a Kentucky judge, who belittled a man for wearing an Obama t-shirt in court. It seems the man, Darryl Broaddus, in court on drug charges, wore a shirt featuring President Barack Obama’s face. The shirt read ‘Let’s Do It Again,’ a reference to Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign and his attire didn’t suit McLaughlin who said on video that the shirt wasn’t helping Broaddus in her courtroom.

“He’s lucky to get out of here alive,” McLaughlin said; and twice she said his shirt was “not helping” his cause.

 “Did you see his t-shirt? Barack Obama, ‘Let’s Do It Again.’ That was a double whammy.”

No wonder that McLaughlin is the lowest-rated judge in Jefferson County “by a wide margin,” according to the Louisville Bar Association.

For example, last October, McLaughlin accused defendant Wesley Taylor of being “up here selling dope to little children.” That was false; he was not accused of selling drugs to anyone. And when burglary and drug defendant Ronnie Gravel appeared in court a week later, McLaughlin said: “He still needs to burglarize so he can maintain his drug habit. So everyone feels good and safe with him out in the public.”

Not only had Gravel not been convicted of either charge, the case was later dismissed.

Seriously, Kentucky, this is the best you can do?

A petition to repeal Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance [HERO] prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations has failed to gather the necessary signatures to appear on November's ballot.

Bam!

The petition needed at least 17,269 valid signatures from registered Houston voters to put a repeal of the ordinance before voters in November and it fell short.

But, opponents of HERO claimed they had over 30,000 valid signatures when they submitted the petition last month, though a review showed just 16,500 were actually valid.

And so now, rather than go out and collect the right number of valid signature, opponents have vowed to take the city to court.

Howsabout just doing it right the first time? If not, then just sit down and think about working against equality.

So … three TV hotties this week:

Goran Visnjic, who plays Halle Berry’s husband on Extant … and then Sergio Harford, who plays Halle Berry’s dead boyfriend who may have gotten her pregnant in space … after he died.

Then throw in Chad Carroll of Bravo’s Million Dollar Listing Miami. Sure, he’s kind of a big galoot, but he likes taking his clothes off and getting couple’s massages with an openly gay realtor.

Hot.

Last week Facebook crashed for millions of users in the US and folks went cray cray. And even though Facebook’s developer page immediately responded to the outage, and a #FacebookDown hashtag, people went nuts … at least in Los Angeles.

Several locals called a 9-1-1- emergency into the LA Sheriff’s Department, where Sgt. Burton Brink responded to their “emergency” of not being able to post cat pictures or tell folks what they had for lunch.

True story.

I prayed this wasn’t true but …

Mary’s Gourmet Diner in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, is offering a 15% "praying in public" discount to diners who openly pray before a meal. Owner Mary Haglund says she has been offering the rebate for four years, and it is not aligned with any singular religious affiliation, hasn't been advertised and is offered per the discretion of the waitstaff.

“[W]hen I see someone in a restaurant honoring their gratefulness at my table … it touches my heart. It’s just a moment or faithfulness about the plate of food. It’s not even a policy — it’s [something] we only do when we’re moved to do it.”—Mary Haglund

But the praying in public discount gained attention this week after a Christian radio station posted a photo of a customer's receipt to its Facebook page. After the receipt went viral on Facebook, Haglund dialed back the discount rules because, well, she isn’t quite so fond of prayers if it starts costing her money.

I decided I’d prefer a 100% discount at Mary’s Gourmet Diner and I can get it by never eating in an establishment like that.

What’s this? Target? What?

It seems that, after 2012’s year of being a gay-hating corporate giant, Target has filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in same-sex marriage lawsuits against the states of Wisconsin and Indiana.

I may have to rethink my Target boycott.

So, yesterday was the big marriage equality court case heard by the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, where the cases from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee were heard by two judges appointed by President George W. Bush and one by President Bill Clinton.

Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, one of the Bush appointees and a likely swing vote among the three, apparently asked why gay rights advocates wanted to use the courts to hasten an outcome they were gradually winning through elections and changes in attitude:

“I’d have thought the best way to get respect and dignity is through the democratic process.”

And here I always thought it unfair to let the majority vote on the civil rights of the minority.

What’s with these judges?